China warns US against war with Pakistan

China has officially put the United States on notice that Washington’s planned attack on Pakistan will be interpreted as an act of aggression against Beijing. This blunt warning represents the first known strategic ultimatum received by the United States in half a century, going back to Soviet warnings during the Berlin crisis of 1958-1961, and indicates the grave danger of general war growing out of the US-Pakistan confrontation.

Responding to reports that China has asked the US to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty in the aftermath of the Bin Laden operation, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu used a May 19 press briefing to state Beijing’s categorical demand that the “sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan must be respected.” According to Pakistani diplomatic sources cited by the Times of India, China has “warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China.” This ultimatum was reportedly delivered at the May 9 China-US strategic dialogue and economic talks in Washington, where the Chinese delegation was led by Vice Prime Minister Wang Qishan and State Councilor Dai Bingguo.1 Chinese warnings are implicitly backed up by that nation’s nuclear missiles, including an estimated 66 ICBMs, some capable of striking the United States, plus 118 intermediate-range missiles, 36 submarine-launched missiles, and numerous shorter-range systems.

Support from China is seen by regional observers as critically important for Pakistan, which is otherwise caught in a pincers between the US and India: “If US and Indian pressure continues, Pakistan can say ‘China is behind us. Don’t think we are isolated, we have a potential superpower with us,’” Talat Masood, a political analyst and retired Pakistani general, told AFP.2

The Chinese ultimatum came during the visit of Pakistani Prime Minister Gilani in Beijing, during which the host government announced the transfer of 50 state-of-the-art JF-17 fighter jets to Pakistan, immediately and without cost.3 Before his departure, Gilani had stressed the importance of the Pakistan-China alliance, proclaiming: “We are proud to have China as our best and most trusted friend. And China will always find Pakistan standing beside it at all times….When we speak of this friendship as being taller than the Himalayas and deeper than the oceans it truly captures the essence of our relationship.”4 These remarks were greeted by whining from US spokesmen, including Idaho Republican Senator Risch.

The simmering strategic crisis between the United States and Pakistan exploded with full force on May 1, with the unilateral and unauthorized US commando raid alleged to have killed the phantomatic Osama bin Laden in a compound at Abottabad, a flagrant violation of Pakistan’s national sovereignty. The timing of this military stunt designed to inflame tensions between the two countries had nothing to do with any alleged Global War on Terror, and everything to do with the late March visit to Pakistan of Prince Bandar, the Saudi Arabian National Security Council chief. This visit had resulted in a de facto alliance between Islamabad and Riyadh, with Pakistan promising troops to put down any US-backed color revolution in the kingdom, while extending nuclear protection to the Saudis, thus making them less vulnerable to US extortion threats to abandon the oil-rich monarchy to the tender mercies of Tehran. A joint move by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to break out of the US empire, whatever one may think of these regimes, would represent a fatal blow for the fading US empire in South Asia.

As for the US claims concerning the supposed Bin Laden raid of May 1, they are a mass of hopeless contradictions which changes from day to day. An analysis of this story is best left to literary critics and writers of theatrical reviews. The only solid and uncontestable fact which emerges is that Pakistan is the leading US target — thus intensifying the anti-Pakistan US policy which has been in place since Obama’s infamous December 2009 West Point speech.

~ more... ~

Bilderberg-Meeting 2011: Swiss National Councillors letter to the Government

As posted on We Are Change:

We thank Swiss National Counsellor Dominique Baettig, for having chosen us to broadcast his letter to the Swiss Government to impeach the anti-democratic 9 – 12.06.2011 Bilderberg Meeting in Sankt-Moritz.

Reminder. His last letters contributed to the No Show of “Bush Jr” in Geneva !

Original letter in French ENGLISH TRANSLATION : © www.WeAreChange.ch

We took the liberty to add few (XYZ) info for a better understanding in English.

---

Dominique Baettig
National Counsellor
Voignous 152800
DELEMONT

Mrs. Federal Counsellor
Simonetta Sommaruga
DFJP
(Federal Department of Justice & Police)
3000 BERN

Delémont, May 1rst, 2011

Concerns : St-Moritz in June 2011, a discreet Meeting with high risks

Mrs. Federal Counsellor,

I wish to draw your attention to a Meeting held in June 2011 – according to usually well informed sources – of the discreet, but influential Bilderberg Group in a Hotel in Sankt-Moritz.

This Group unites a kind of European and global elite of Bankers, Industrialists, Diplomats, US and European NATO Brass, crowned heads, Media groups, their Moguls and Editors, as well as Heads of States, whether retired or not, which coordinates, exchanges, organizes and structures, out of all democratic control, the major guidelines towards economic globalization.

Considering that the notions of sovereignty and independence are obsolete, if not hindrances to an open Market, this discreet Group develops an ultra-liberal, Free Trade society model, with a (unique) world currency and the IMF as Treasurer.

On the industrial level, it contributes to promote technological and agro-alimentary excesses, which contradict with alimentary sovereignty (GMOs : Genetically Modified Organisms, bio fuels, intensive use of fertilizers and pesticides, hydroponics), and an ever growing emancipation from natural and bodily contingencies (assisted procreation, nanotechnologies, genetic manipulations, technological industrial medicine, sex changes, blurring of the limits between living creatures and technologies to induce dependencies).

The definitions of illness criteria by Experts related to (their) Pharmaceutical companies (“Pandemics” such as the A(H1N1) and of mental depressions and high cholesterol levels), lead to the massive commercialization of vaccines and drugs, by the same people who produce them and define the spectrum of their application.

Playing with globalized fears, they enhance them with (their) Media using (see Naomi Klein) “Shock Strategies”, with startling effects generating feelings of helplessness.

Independence, Private Property and the Private Sphere are reduced by the usage of electronic virtual money and by the development of the control of (all) individuals in a biometric (global) Gulag (under the pretext of the fight against terrorism or the hunt against Tax evasion). Higher debts of the Countries are encouraged or minimized and they become the debtors of supranational Private Banks.

Military and Police tasks are privatized and military actions to dismantle independent States are planned and coordinated (Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, tomorrow Iran and Syria).

The worst being the fact that they prepare the programmed end of traditional Democracy, with a power shift from all States to the benefit of non elected governance entities (UN and UE Experts, CEOs, Media and Pharmaceutical Moguls, etc.), discreetly working in (and for occult) networks.

I especially “fear” after consulting the (Bilderberg) Participants’ Lists of the last years, the undesirable presence (in Switzerland) of “personalities” (H. Kissinger, D. Cheney, G. W. Bush, Daniel Pearl), implicated in wars, war crimes, extraordinary restitutions (sic!), torture and who are under investigation by the Courts in Den Hague, etc. Are your services informed of the Participants’ identities ?

As NATO is actually engaged in war actions (Libya, Afghanistan, targeted assassinations), the participation of NATO Brass, their deciding Experts and NATO Members’ Heads of States does represent a major risk of a terrorist action in Sankt-Moritz and, therefore, a serious danger for its inhabitants and neighbours. Not mentioning the discredit and image loss for a sovereign and democratic Nation, which stands for an armed and integral Neutrality in the Homeland of the International Red Cross (Conventions) and Human Rights (both in Geneva).

What are the security costs of this Private Meeting (Cantonal Police, fedpol : Federal Police) for the Tax Payers ? Who is the (real) Organizer ?

Then does the participation of Swiss Citizens not represent a major risk of loss of credibility and legitimacy of our Neutrality and national Sovereignty ? Does the implication of Politicians, Businessmen and Media Group owners sharing (globalist) motivations contrary to our Sovereignty not represent Crimes against the State (Art.266.1, Art.266 bis, Art 267.1), plus undermine the independence of the (Swiss) Confederation with diplomatic Treason ?

Mrs. Federal Counsellor, I do know that a State respecting its own Laws (criminal and Constitution), Neutrality and Independence are important values for you and that you will know how to prevent a serious damage to the image of our Country, by taking all adequate steps and indispensable legal measures.

I impatiently wait for your answers and reflexions.

Be assured of my distinguished consideration and best democratic greetings.

Dominique Baettig National Counsellor Delémont

Copy : Mr. Beyeler State Prosecutor of the (Swiss) Confederation

Third Reportback from a Santa Cruz Anarchist in Athens

Athens has been especially tense for the last ten days. Social and political conflict is escalating. Ten days ago at the general strike, riot police beat an anarchist demonstrator into a coma and hospitalized dozens more. When repressive governments feel that they are losing control, when they fear the spread of an idea, they resort to brutal repression. One only needs to look to Syria right now to see this at its extreme. As the ruling class clings to power in times of crisis, intimidation becomes the weapon of choice to assert dominance. After the unprovoked attack by the police on the tail end of the general strike demonstration, protesters responded to the police onslaught with a barrage of rocks, powerful fireworks, and molotov cocktails. Running street battles flared throughout downtown Athens, migrating towards the friendly streets of Exarchia. Dumpsters again burned in the streets to block the movement of riot police. Dozens of young anarchists carried out hit and run attacks on riot police from the Polytechnic University, a place police are forbidden to enter. Hundreds more occupied Exarchia square and the streets surrounding it. Firefighters arrived when police could clear an area long enough for them to extinguish the burning dumpsters and barricades. The march started at 11 am, and the street fighting didn't end that night until 8 pm.

That night an assembly was called to figure out an appropriate response. The plan was to have it at the usual venue for anarchist assemblies, the Architectural campus of the Polytechnic. Unfortunately the school was surrounded by riot cops, and the meeting had to be moved to the nearby Economics campus. Despite the change, about a hundred people showed up. One person introduced the topic and demonstrators discussed it for the next three hours. The meeting had neither a facilitator nor a formal process. When one person was finished talking, someone else on the other side of the room would pick up and offer up their opinion. The meeting was full of people who were constantly rubbing their eyes and sneezing as the smell of tear gas saturated into peoples clothes wafted out. By midnight, they had decided that the next morning at 8:00 AM they would occupy the campus that was closest to downtown. There was going to be a demonstration against the police later that day, and holding that space was key to having a base to fight from.

~ more... ~