9/29/2012

Obama and the Evil Empire threaten war against Iran

Obama uses UN speech to threaten war against Iran
By Bill Van Auken
26 September 2012
President Barack Obama postured before the United Nations Tuesday as the champion of peace and democracy, while threatening war against Iran and demanding a crackdown against the wave of anti-US demonstrations that have swept the Middle East.
This, Obama’s fourth address to an opening session of the UN General Assembly since taking office in 2009, was saturated with hypocritical invocations of “American values” and lies about Washington’s actions on the world stage.
The US president delivered an unmistakable threat that the US is preparing to launch yet another war of aggression, this time against Iran, with potentially far bloodier consequences than those it has carried out in Afghanistan and Iraq over the last decade.
“Make no mistake: a nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained,” Obama declared. “It would threaten the elimination of Israel, the security of Gulf nations, and the stability of the global economy. It risks triggering a nuclear arms race in the region and the unraveling of the non-proliferation treaty. That is why… the United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”
Asserting that there is “still time” for the US to force Iran to cede to its demands by means of diplomacy, he added, “that time is not unlimited.”
The facts are that international inspectors have found no evidence that Iran has embarked on a nuclear weapons program or is doing anything other than developing nuclear power for peaceful purposes. Israel, which is supposedly threatened with “elimination,” has built some 400 atomic weapons while refusing to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and categorically rejecting any inspection of its secret nuclear program. If there is a threat of an arms race in the region and a breakdown of the non-proliferation agreement, this Israeli nuclear stockpile is its source.
Obama’s speech came one day after the US Treasury Department claimed to have uncovered links between Iran’s state oil company and the country’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, providing a pretext for escalating its unilateral sanctions against banks doing business with the company.
Meanwhile, the US has assembled its largest ever armada in the Persian Gulf, including two aircraft carrier battle groups, a new “forward staging base” vessel, and half of the US Navy’s mine-sweeping fleet, all of which are participating in joint exercises with warships from over 30 countries.
Much of the US president’s 30-minute speech was dedicated to the recent upheavals that swept the Middle East and predominantly Muslim countries in South Asia and Africa, with crowds attacking US embassies in over a dozen capitals. Describing the protests as “mindless violence,” Obama lumped them together with the September 11 attack by an Islamist militia on the US consulate and a CIA headquarters in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi that killed US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.
Obama declared these events “an assault on the very ideals upon which the United Nations was founded—the notion that people can resolve their differences peacefully; that diplomacy can take the place of war.”
What insolence! After a decade of US wars that have claimed the lives of over a million Iraqis and Afghans, the US president is the last person to lecture the people of the Middle East on how to “resolve their differences peacefully” and the advantages of diplomacy over war.
Obama added, “If we are serious about these ideals, we must speak honestly about the deeper causes of this crisis.” However, he did no such thing. Instead, he treated the anger against the US as merely the product of the crude anti-Islamic video “Innocence of the Muslims” and of those who promote “hatred of America, or the West, or Israel.”
There was nothing in the speech about Washington’s wars, its unconditional support for Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians, or its reliance on dictatorial regimes and absolute monarchs to secure semi-colonial control over the region and its energy resources.
Obama went on to present a potted history of US reaction to the so-called “Arab Spring” that began with working class uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt early last year. Washington, he claimed, had “supported the forces of change,” had been “inspired by the Tunisian protests,” had “insisted on change in Egypt,” and had “supported a transition in Yemen, because the interests of the people were not being served by a corrupt status quo.”
Anyone familiar with the recent history of the region knows that the American president is lying. The US government was so “inspired” by the revolt in Tunisia that it approved a $12 million military aid package to the dictatorial regime of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali to help it beat and shoot the demonstrators into submission.
It pursued the same policy in Egypt, seeking to the bitter end to prop up Hosni Mubarak, whose regime had been kept in power with US military aid and political support for three decades. Only after it was clear that the two dictators could no longer cling to power did the US shift policy, working to salvage as much as it could of the old regimes.
As for Yemen, the US-backed “transition” has kept in power a regime that is virtually identical to the old one, with the dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh replaced by his vice president, and with the US carrying out far more intense military intervention, with dozens of drone assassinations and special forces raids.
Obama presented the US-NATO war for regime-change in Libya as well as the attempt by Washington and its allies to topple the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria as a continuation of this “Arab Spring.”
In Libya, he claimed, the US intervened under a UN mandate to protect civilians. In reality, it brazenly violated this mandate, waging an aggressive war that led to the deaths of tens of thousands of Libyans. The proxy forces it supported on the ground included the same Islamist militia elements that killed the US ambassador in Benghazi. Its aims, as in Iraq, were not humanitarian or democratic, but predatory—principally to assert US hegemony over Libyan oil reserves, while denying control to its rivals, particularly China.
Obama repeated his demand for regime-change in Syria while expressing concern that the current civil war “not end in a cycle of sectarian violence.” In reality, the US has done everything it can to stoke sectarian warfare as part of its scheme to mobilize the Sunni monarchies of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, as well as Al Qaeda-linked militias, in a campaign to bring down the Syrian government and thereby weaken Washington’s main regional rival, Iran.
The US president offered no proposal whatsoever on the Israel-Palestine question. Instead, he called for the region to “leave behind those who thrive on conflict, and those who reject the right of Israel to exist.” This amounts to a blanket endorsement of Israel’s illegal occupation and its continuous expansion of settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Echoing the bellicose rhetoric of his predecessor, Obama spoke three times in his address about “bringing to justice” those who attacked Americans abroad. It was a not-so-subtle reminder of the US president’s status as “assassin-in-chief,” holding weekly meetings at the White House to choose targets for execution by US drone attacks.
The hollow rhetoric, hypocritical sermonizing and bullying threats received a tepid response from the assembled delegates. The US president had not a single new initiative or original conception to offer. The speech only made clear that his administration will continue to employ military aggression, economic pressure and CIA destabilization to secure US control over the Middle East and its energy wealth, all the while posing as the patron of “democracy.”


The whole world should rise with one voice against the Evil Empire , USA and destroy it before it destroys the world.

Southernglory1

Brain dead 死脑




A dead brain is a Chinese expression of the inability to think out of the box. One track mind, cannot think of anything else, or any new solution, a mental block. Are our top leaders having this problem that the only way forward for economic growth is by increasing the population? All our policies and policy statements are anchored around more people in the island. Funny they forgot to build more housing and increase the infrastructure in the island. Perhaps not. How can super talents failed to see this correlation, more people means more of everything, including problems. It is not only benefits.

Now why do we want so many people in such a small place that is having the highest density in the whole world, and all the signs of strains in the system are showing? Why do we need more people here to buy more flats, to buy more mobile phones, to buy more ipads, to build more shopping centres and more food courts?

Are these the reason for our existence as a country, to consume more goods and services so that we can put on paper, economic growth? So that our properties prices can go up higher, so that we can convert more land into buildings, so that we can tear down more old or not so old buildings to rebuild more buildings? Or so that we find ourselves unable to provide the basic essentials like water and electricity and giving us a good reason to go nuclear, and some jokers can then say, we must go nuclear as it is a necessity?

What the f is happening? We are at a phase of importing more people for the sake of importing more people because we must have more people for more growth. Can our policies be to promote economic growth without having to bring in more people, without having to waste our precious little land left to build more buildings to house more people? Can there be ways for economic growth minus the pressure on land and resources and the acute pressure for living space? Economic growth through more people that will eventually destroy the lives of the citizens is like digging a big hole to bury ourselves in it. Can we see that? How can, when the brain is dead.

We need growth policies that are sustainable and not for self destruction in the long run. And we need growth to provide a better quality of life for the people, not for useless economic activities like more consumers to buy more hand phones or computer gadgets or more people to patronize the food courts and shopping centres or to buy up more HDB flats and to use up all our available land.
I am sure they are not that daft. What is the truth? What is going on?

9/28/2012

Diaoyu and Liuchiu Islands(Senkaku and Ryukyus) belong to China

The most vocal journalist with the most critical view against China has spoken. Ching Cheong, arrested and detained by China for several years, for spying against China, has said, with historical records, that both Diaoyu and the Ryukyu chain of islands belong to China. He also quoted the views of the American and Russian leaders at the Cairo Declaration in 1943 and the Potsdam Declaration in 1945, all acknowledging that the islands should be returned to China. And the Japanese liars are still shouting that the islands are integral parts of Japan historically.

All the islands and land grabbed by Japan before the war should be returned to their owners. The Cairo Declaration, ‘Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese such as Manchuria, Formosa and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China. Japan shall be expelled from all other territories which she has taken by violence or by greed….Most World War II historians agreed that the “territories” in the last sentence referred to the Ryukyus.’



On Feb 2, 1946, ‘US General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, issued a statement limiting Japanese territories to the four major islands and about 1,000 small islands situated north of the 30 deg latitude.’ Ryukyus and Diaoyu lie below the 30 deg latitude and no longer were Japanese territories.

When China and Japan reestablished diplomatic relations in 1972, they signed a Joint Statement agreeing to abide by the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Declaration. How could the Japanese, including their PM Noda, openly declare at the UN that Diaoyu Island was an integral part of Japan! The Japanese are lying with their eyes wide opened. Who is talking about Japanese having honour and dignity?

Now that the Japanese are adamant on hanging on to Chinese territories, China should go ahead and take back Diaoyu and the Ryukyus as well. There is no reason to be nice to the lying Japanese anymore. And the scheming Americans, tell them to go to hell. If the Americans think that it justifies their interest under their treaty obligation with Japan to protect a wrong they helped created, let it be. It will be MAD, both blowing each other out of this world for a wrong committed by the Americans and to protect a nation of liars.

Why is it unjustified for China to take back its territories but perfectly justified for Japan to keep the loot it seized from China?

We are so sorry


We are so sorry that we have messed up the public housing programme and many people have suffered because of the bad decisions. Our biggest mistake was to sell off the 10,000 excess units when we knew that the number of new immigrants coming in was so huge that the stocks would not even be enough. We knew, and please, don’t ever think that we did not know. Our system was so efficient and we had all the top scholars in all the departments and it was ludicrous to think that several hundred thousands of new migrants were arriving on our shore and we did not know, that we could be sleeping!

Yes, we made a very serious mistake by deciding to get rid of the stocks in double quick time. And yes, we compounded the problem by not building new flats and insisting that new building programmes would only be launched when the order book was full. And we were too arrogant, ruthless and uncaring to dictate that ‘take it or leave it’, the new flats would only be ready in 4/5 years time. The people who could not wait, it was their problem, not ours.

And the confluence of events and data, we had all the statistics, influx of new immigrants, young people coming of age and getting married, number of pubic housing needed and how long it would take to build, and how many units must be built every year to meet the demand. But we did not do the necessary. We did the reverse. Please don’t ask why. We cannot tell.

We are very sorry that many people are badly affected, financially affected by our ill conceived housing policies and regulations. We know that many are still not able to buy a flat direct from the HDB. And if they do, the prices would have gone up several folds and it would be very hard on them. We also are very sorry to those that were kicked out of the public housing system and now presumably too rich to buy HDB but too poor to buy private properties and hanging between the devil and the deep blue sea. And we know that they would not have the chance to ever buy a public flat as their income would have exceeded the ceiling determined by HDB. Even as we ramp up the building from 25,000 to a record 27,000 this year, nothing will change the fate of these people.

And no, we are not responsible for the shit they are in now. We will not admit any mistake on our part. How can we do that? We are incapable of making this kind of silly mistakes that cannot be made even by a 18 year old kid. Too embarrassing if we were to say so and it is not possible to unwind the situation now, and to bring down the high property prices. We know the prices were not affordable but we insisted that they were. What can you do about it?

You losers would just have to live with it and for those who fell victims, well, it is water under the bridge. Don’t call us. We know but we are not going to do anything about it. Neither would we apologise for it. We are sorry? You must be joking.

The apologetic part and the ‘we are sorry’ part, are all my imagination. Nothing of this sort will happen. Saying sorry is not a practice here. I stand corrected if anyone can contradict my statement and say yes, so and so said sorry for creating the big mess and hurting so many people, not only financially, but their whole lives, to spend more time working and saving and ended no time to get married, to have babies or start a family.

Actually there was no mistake at all, and no big mess. Everything happened the way it was supposed to be, very well executed by the best talents available. That is why there is no need to say sorry. No mistake how to say sorry? And if I am not mistaken, the policy makers could be duly rewarded for doing an excellent job, maybe even awarded with public service medals.

Now 27,000 units and the problem is getting worst, the prices are going higher. Just pretend to cry over spilt milk without meaning it. We are an inclusive country. But for those that were screwed by the bad housing policies, the inclusivity does not apply. Even if they are first timers, it will not apply to them too and they will not be allowed to buy direct from HDB. It is their faults.

9/27/2012

Foreigners help created good jobs for Singaporeans



Hsien Loong was quoted to have said foreigners help created good jobs for Singaporeans. Or is it the other way? Singaporeans create good jobs for foreigners…and ended up with no jobs or shitty jobs for themselves.

And many Sinkies have to retrain themselves to take on jobs at lower level and lower pay.

Which is the truth when some have quoted that of the new jobs created, 70% gone to foreigners.

Which is the truth? I think the best gauge is to ask who is happier here, Sinkies or foreigners. The happier ones must be getting the better jobs. Right? Wrong?

Sinkies must be sick or insane to be so unhappy with the foreigners when the latter are helping to create good jobs for them.