Conflicts in the Middle East & Northern Africa

[Brian]

Just when you thought it was over Pro-Gadaffi supporters are still fighting it out. I don't like their chances unless they get extra help - good on them anyway. The current interim government is nothing more than Al Qaeda, which of course is a known CIA tool. Let's remember over half the Libyan population were not against Gadaffi.

Gaddafi supporters seize control of Libyan town

http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/20177/53/

Tuesday, 24 January 2012
Fighters loyal to Libya's overthrown leader Muammar Gaddafi took control of a town south-east of the capital on Monday, flying their green flags in defiance of the country's fragile new government.

The fightback by Gaddafi supporters defeated in Libya's NATO influenced war, though unlikely to spread elsewhere, added to the problems besetting a government which in the past week has been reeling from one crisis to another. Gaddafi himself was captured and killed in October after weeks on the run.

Accounts from the town of Bani Walid, about 200 km (120 miles) from Tripoli, described armed Gaddafi supporters attacking the barracks of the pro-government militia in the town and then forcing them to fall back.

"They control the town now. They are roaming the town," said a fighter with the 28th May militia, loyal to Libya's ruling National Transitional Council (NTC), which came under attack.

The fighter told Reuters the loyalists were flying "brand new green flags" from the centre of town. The flags were symbols of Gaddafi's 42-year rule.

A resident said four people were killed and 20 wounded in the fighting, during which the sides used heavy weapons.

Bani Walid, base of the powerful Warfallah tribe, was one of the last towns to surrender to the anti-Gaddafi rebellion last year. Many people there oppose the new leadership.

A Libyan air force official said war planes were being mobilized to fly to Bani Walid. A spokesman for the military council in Zawiyah, near Tripoli, said a 1,500-strong force, drawn from militias across western Libya, was on stand-by.

"If the situation in Bani Walid is still complicated , we will go there," the spokesman, Ayad Laaroussi, said.

But it was not immediately clear what the government in Tripoli could do. It has yet to demonstrate that it has an effective fighting force under its command and Bani Walid, protected behind a deep valley, is difficult to attack.

[Vangelovski]

Brian, you are such a pathetic worm. The only reason the Warfalla tribe oppose the central government is because they historically always have. In the last 40 years, they enjoyed special privileges under Gaddafi and that's why they temporarily accepted his rule. In fact, they turned against him in 1993 and these latest events are nothing more then the Warfalla acting our their instinctive drive for self-rule.

I guarantee you, if you had to live under the conditions of the Gaddafi regime for just one day, you would return crying in a snotty mess!

[Brian]

A bit late for Gadaffi but signs of countries stepping in his vission - dump the 'USA Oil Dollar'.
So far Russia, China, Japan, Iran and now India are dumping the USA dollar with Turkey teetering.

Gold for Oil: India and Iran 'Ditch Dollar'

http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/20174/52/

Tuesday, 24 January 2012
According to a new and yet unconfirmed report, India bought oil from Iran using gold. India certainly has the gold resources to fund the oil, while Iran is under pressure by the West, due the continuation of its nuclear program.

There were reports that officials have been floating this idea for some time, and now, as the EU finally decided upon an oil embargo on Iran, more details became available, yet still pend confirmation.

Oil is priced in US dollars, and bypassing the greenback posed challenges for both parties. Two banks are reportedly involved in this deal: India’s state owned UCO Bank and Turkey’s state owned Halkbank.

Rest of article in Link.

[Big Bad Sven]

Gulf states pull observers out of Syria

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/24/gulf-states-pull-observers-out-of-syria/

looks like the gulf countries did not like the observers report. Turns out Assad isn't out in the streets cutting peoples heads off!

I feel sorry for Al-Qaeda and their supporters Saudi Arabia, Al-JJazeera and certain western nations. Their dream of spreading fanatical islam has been put on hold

Dont worry muslim brotherhood, you still have time to fabricate lies and stories about the syrian government and feed your bs stories to fanatical gulf arabs and the dumbos in america and australia

[Vangelovski]

BBS, what are you talking about. The Arab League observers, even according to the article you have posted, have confirmed that Assad is killing his own people.

[Risto the Great]

Team America needs to sort this shit out.
Team America World Police Intro - YouTube

[Brian]

LOL.
I saw the whole movie some time ago on TV.
It's hard to tell one 'towel-head' from another, kind of like some people can't distinguish Al Qaeda causing trouble from the real locals and being killed.

Maybe that's the plan, RtG?

[Brian]

We know Pearl Harbour was a staged false flag. With the USS Enterprise, an ageing 'clunker' due to be decommissioned soon, being sent to the Gulf one has to wonder is the USA is setting up another false flag to start a war with Iran. I know I wouldn't be happy if I were one of the 4000 odd crew on the USS Enterprise.

If you see on the news the USS Enterprise has been sunk you'll know it was the USA to blame.

USS Enterprise False Flag!! - YouTube


Next False Flag Israel Bombs USS Enterprise ? (24-Jan-12)(GLOBAL POLITICS series) - YouTube

[Brian]

A great article why Saddam and Gaddafi had to go and why now Iran is on the hit list - the USA petrodollar. It's funny how the true motives make sense and the lies made no sense yet were pushed by all the media eg General Powell telling the UN Saddam had WMDs that could reach Europe in 20 minutes yet the USA took 3 months to build up for the attack and eventual occupation of Iraq. If they knew he could kill them in 20 minutes do you think jets, bombers and missiles should have been flying the moment the USA/Europe knew instead of 3 months later? Were not they afraid the build-up would freak Saddam out to think that if he's going down for sure then F'em and take down as many as he could with him? LOL.

Petrodollar pumping US policy on Iran, backfire looms

http://rt.com/news/iran-attack-us-allegations-243/

01 February, 2012
As tensions between the US and Iran heat up, author Michael T. Winter believes the main reason behind America’s harsh stance is Tehran’s move to seek an alternative to the dollar as an oil currency
.
Economic sanctions, spearheaded by the US and, less willingly, the EU could have a disastrous effect on both of their respective economies. If Iran cannot sell their oil to Europe, there are plenty of customers waiting in the wings, and if they come bearing not petrodollars, but gold and sovereign currencies, then all the better for Iran. These sanctions, if enforced, will in effect place a serious dent in the power of the petrodollar.

Any rhetoric regarding Iran’s nuclear program and the insistence on crippling it is nothing more than a US attempt to force regime change for one more receptive to maintaining the hegemony of the petrodollar.

The world now knows the truth about the US and how they conduct their affairs. US hostilities toward Iran have nothing to do with nuclear weapons development. If that were the case, then North Korea and Pakistan would be facing similar sanctions and threats, but they aren’t. The difference of course is in what lies beneath the ground – oil. Iran has it and the other guys don’t.

At the heart of the issue is not Iran’s dubious attempt to build nuclear weapons, or even oil, but how that oil is paid for. In 1973, Richard Nixon promised King Faisal of Saudi Arabia that the US would protect Saudi Arabian oilfields from any and all interested parties seeking to forcefully wrest them from the House of Saud. It’s important to remember that in 1973, Saudi Arabia didn’t have a fraction of the military and ground forces it possesses today (almost exclusively US manufactured weapons) and the USSR was very much a threat.
In return Saudi Arabia, and by extension OPEC, agreed to sell their oil in US dollars only. As if that weren’t sweet enough, as part of the deal, they were required to invest their profits in US treasuries, bonds and bills. The real zinger is that all countries purchasing oil from OPEC had to do so in US dollars, or ‘petrodollars’.

This strengthened the US dollar, resulting in a steady US economic growth cycle throughout the 80’s and 90’s. Countries purchasing OPEC oil started buying US treasury bills, bonds and securities to ensure they could continue purchasing OPEC oil. This worked fine for the US until 2001.

No plan, however well formulated, functions smoothly indefinitely.
2001, enter Saddam Hussein. He floated a plan to sell oil for European currencies in lieu of petrodollars. Shortly after Iraq was ‘suddenly’ found to be seeking and stockpiling weapons of mass destruction – allegations spearheaded by the US. The world knows what happened, suffice it to say that Saddam is dead and Iraq is ‘back on track’, selling its oil for petrodollars once again.

Muammar Gaddafi harbored the Lockerbie Bombers and allowed various terrorist organizations establish training camps in Libya. He tried to buy a nuke from China in 1972. In 1977, he approached Pakistan, then India. He sought nerve gas from Thailand. In spite of well over fifty failed assassination attempts on Gaddafi by Israel, the US and the UK, Libya was left to its own devices for the most part. Seeking nukes and harboring terrorists is one thing, but threatening the petrodollar is quite another. Gaddafi made a fatal error when he decided to move away from the petrodollar in favor of other currencies. This simply was not tolerated by the US. Having already played the WMD card in Iraq, something new was pulled from the US ‘regime change’ grab bag. Within a year, ‘internal’ elements rose up in rebellion against Gaddafi and now he is dead. Long live the petrodollar.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), suggested last year that the Euro would be a more suitable oil reserve currency than the US Dollar. Within three months of that statement, allegations of rape ruined his career, derailing his bid for the French Presidency in the process. Soon thereafter, all charges were dropped, but of course, le dommage était fait – the damage was done. Christine Lagarde, DSK’s replacement as head of the IMF sees no reason to change the current arrangement, naturellement.

The Iran situation is a little trickier. The US has sought to dismantle Iran’s regime ever since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, so this round of hostilities, while not new, reflects a new level of intensity. Why, after thirty years of hostility, has the US ratcheted up its rhetoric? As Obama stated in his recent State of the Union address, when it comes to Iran and the insistence they dismantle their nuclear program, “no options are off the table”. By stating ‘no options’ this would include nuclear deployment as a deterrent.

The answer of course is that Iran is now seeking to disengage itself from the petrodollar dynamic. In 2005, Iran sought to create an Iranian Oil Exchange, thus bypassing the US controlled petrodollar. Fear that western powers would freeze accounts in European and London banks put an end to that plan.

But that was not the end of their attempts, and Iran sought other ways to get around the petrodollar noose. There are rumors that India, which imports 12% of their oil from Iran, has agreed to purchase oil for gold. Energy trade with China, importing 15% of its oil and natural gas from Iran may be settled in gold, yuan, and rial. South Korea plans to buy 10% of their oil from Iran in 2012, and unless Seoul sides with American and European sanctions, it is likely to use gold or their sovereign currency to pay for it. Also, Iran is already dumping the dollar in its trade with Russia in favor of rials and rubles.

Iran is breaking the back of the petrodollar. Others have tried, but Iran is succeeding. To understand how disastrous this is for the US, one must have a basic understanding of how critical a role the petrodollar plays in the economic health of the US.

Through King Faisal, Nixon elevated the US to supreme economic ascendency, not unlike Damocles in his desire to rule. Sitting on the (economic) throne of the world is great, but Nixon was either unaware of the sword dangling over the US economic system, or chose to ignore it in favor of reaping the rewards of the moment.
By creating the petrodollar paradigm, the US economy soared, as all countries of the world were required to amass US currency to purchase oil from OPEC nations. Sales of T-bills, securities and US bonds soared. US coffers fattened. With the US dollar as the world’s oil currency reserve, economic fortune favored the US. But with great reward comes great risk. While other countries exchanged their currency for the dollar, (forfeiting value in the process) the US simply printed more money to match their needs and purchase their oil – essentially for free. The best example is that while gasoline in the US cost $3.00 per gallon, in Europe that same gallon costs $6.00 or more.

Herein lies the danger. If Iran is successful in its bid to set up their own bourse, or oil exchange, then what need does the world have for all those US dollars? The answer is none at all. As Iran creating gold and sovereign currency partnerships with India, China, South Korea and Russia, the hegemony of the petrodollar will be destroyed.
The resulting sell-off of US dollars, T-bills, securities, bonds and assets will flood the already swollen world economy with even more useless dollars, ultimately devaluing it into a position where hyper-inflation becomes a risk.

So, while the US government sabre-rattles and prattles on and on about nuclear weapons and the threat Iran poses to the Middle East, the thin veneer of lies spouted by the elite controlled media is being stripped away, revealing the truth of their warmongering rhetoric.
The US, by their foolish insistence on enforcing embargoes and sanctions against Iran, is hastening the end of the petrodollar and ushering in the age of US dollar hyper-inflation. A practical example: One loaf of bread in a healthy economy is $1.00. In an inflationary economy it’s $1.75. In a hyper-inflationary economy, $500.00.
Bullies may be large and dangerous, but rarely are they intelligent.
Damocles wisely vacated the throne of Dionysius before the sword fell upon his head, but the US is foolishly refusing to step down from their economic dais in spite of the catastrophic effect current policy direction will mean for US citizens and the world economy.

[George S.]

ever since the saudis gave the us it's marching orders ,the us has allways been on the lookout for more oil.So i'm not surprised that they are going into iran there is a lot of oil there.

[Vangelovski]

While there are a few minimal benefits to a gold standard, here are some reasons by Brian is an idiot:

• The total amount of gold that has ever been mined has been estimated at around 142,000 metric tons and arguments have been made that this amount is too small to serve as a monetary base. The value of this amount of gold is over 6 trillion dollars while the monetary base of the US, with a roughly 20% share of the world economy, stands at $2.7 trillion at the end of 2011.
• The unequal distribution of gold as a natural resource makes the gold standard much more advantageous in terms of cost and international economic empowerment for those countries that produce gold. In 2010 the largest producers of gold, in order, are China, followed by Australia, the US, South Africa and Russia. The country with the largest reserves is Australia.
• The gold standard acts as a limit on economic growth. “As an economy’s productive capacity grows, then so should its money supply. Because a gold standard requires that money be backed in the metal, then the scarcity of the metal constrains the ability of the economy to produce more capital and grow.”
• Mainstream economists believe that economic recessions can be largely mitigated by increasing money supply during economic downturns. Following a gold standard would mean that the amount of money would be determined by the supply of gold, and hence monetary policy could no longer be used to stabilize the economy in times of economic recession. Such reason is often employed to partially blame the gold standard for the Great Depression, citing that the Federal Reserve couldn't expand credit enough to offset the deflationary forces at work in the market.
• Although the gold standard has brought long-run price stability, it has also historically been associated with high short-run price volatility. It has been argued by, among others, Anna Schwartz, that this kind of instability in short-term price levels can lead to financial instability as lenders and borrowers become uncertain about the value of debt.
• Deflation punishes debtors. Real debt burdens therefore rise, causing borrowers to cut spending to service their debts or to default. Lenders become wealthier, but may choose to save some of their additional wealth rather than spending it all. The overall amount of expenditure is therefore likely to fall.
• Monetary policy would essentially be determined by the rate of gold production. Fluctuations in the amount of gold that is mined could cause inflation if there is an increase, or deflation if there is a decrease. Some hold the view that this contributed to the severity and length of the Great Depression as the gold standard forced the central banks to keep monetary policy too tight, creating deflation.
• James Hamilton contended that the gold standard may be susceptible to speculative attacks when a government's financial position appears weak, although others contend that this very threat discourages governments' engaging in risky policy (see Moral Hazard). For example, some believe that the United States was forced to contract the money supply and raise interest rates in September 1931 to defend the dollar after speculators forced Great Britain off the gold standard
• If a country wanted to devalue its currency, a gold standard would generally produce sharper changes than the smooth declines seen in fiat currencies, depending on the method of devaluation.
• Most economists favor a low, positive rate of inflation. Partly this reflects fear of deflationary shocks, but primarily because they believe that central banks still have some role to play in dampening fluctuations in output and unemployment. Central banks can more safely play that role when a positive rate of inflation gives them room to tighten money growth without inducing price declines.
• It is difficult to manipulate a gold standard to tailor to an economy’s demand for money, providing practical constraints against the measures that central banks might otherwise use to respond to economic crises. The demand for money always equals the supply of money. Creation of new money reduces interest rates and thereby increases demand for new lower cost debt, raising the demand for money.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_standard#Differing_definitions

[Brian]

While there are a few minimal benefits to a gold standard, here are some reasons by Brian is an idiot:

LOL.

Wow, you went to a lot of trouble looking all that up and then let yourself down by posting your above quote ie "...reasons BY Brian..." I gave no reasons (should have been) "WHY" I am an idiot.

Just poking some fun. I think I can understand your post so I should address it's meaning even though it didn't get typed out correctly.

1st point - Gaddafi and the rest tried to get some kind of gold standard going. I didn't say I was advocating it, just that it was what got them into trouble.

2nd point - My point was that the article concurs my previous posts and sentiments that Saddam, Gaddafi, and the rest, and now Iran has nothing to do with the USA's supposed abundance of human compassion or self proclaimed beacon of truth an justice in the world but instead her greed, deceit, treachery and self interest above all else including sacrificing her own people to create false flags and to maintain her lies in her attempt to pillage and plunder the world.

So I wont LOL at the typing (well, at least not too much) but I will LOL at missing the real point completely and spending a lot of time creating a big post to prove a point noone was arguing.

(Off topic - By the way, I was totally stumped by that X-Mass statement/question I heard from someone. If you can shed any light on it would be nice. Religion is definitely not my strong point and it's really puzzling.)

[Vangelovski]

Brian, you've been promoting the gold standard through your Ron Paul support for a while now. Trying to back-flip won't help you - you're still a jackarse.

Further, you've still are unable to explain why the US looking out for its own interests is necessarily a 'bad' thing. What else to you expect from them or others?

[Brian]

Brian, you've been promoting the gold standard through your Ron Paul support for a while now. Trying to back-flip won't help you - you're still a jackarse.

Further, you've still are unable to explain why the US looking out for its own interests is necessarily a 'bad' thing. What else to you expect from them or others?

Not really. Anyone would realise there cannot be enough gold in the world for every currency to be based on a gold standard. The other value is the 'earning capacity/future tax revenue' of the currency and with the USA near bankrupt it does not deserve to be the world standard, that's why China, Russia, Japan, India, South Korea and others are moving away from it. They are choosing gold or each others currency in preference to the USA Dollar and maybe wisely so give the current uncertainty - they can't all be wrong.

Hows that go again Vangelovski - 'ihh ohh'.

Looking out for ones own interest is one of Man's primary instincts but if done by holding your ground and driving a hard bargain and proclaiming your virtues is one thing, but by raiding, murdering and raping on mass and pillaging is totally another and the hight of hypocrisy to the proclaim your virtues and chastise/punish others for doing the same.
Further it is a vulgarity to insult the intelligence of thinking people to stage and play act simple scenarios to make you look like the good guy. Seeing you are such an advocate for the USA and 'self interest' maybe you can explain to everyone why every country on earth has laws against murder, rape, seizure of possessions/property by force (eg house invasion/car jacking/mugging) and why lying about such crimes to avoid punishment is also against the law? Isn't that just self interest - the jails are just full of people who thought so.

That cave you have been hiding in and posting from to miss common knowledge things wouldn't happen to be 4 foot X 6 foot would it?

Still trying to defend the indefensible.

You know, people say tenacity (a favoured trait) is fighting the hard fight while there is a point, and beyond that is sheer stubbornness.

What happened to individual/personal/inalienable rights you keep championing? Are they just for some or just for those 'furthering their interests'?

Do you want grass with that 'ihh ohh'?

[Vangelovski]

Retard (Brian/fyrOM),

I was referring to the gold standard, not any one specific currency.

Actually, I just reread the irrelevant crap about 'raping, pillaging and all the rest'. WTF are you on about? When has the US engaged in that, and on the rare occasion it has happened, who has gone without being prosecuted?

fyrOM, you wouldn't have the slightest clue about inalienable rights and I'm starting to tire of your garbage (again).