Film de la semaine: Or noir au Tchad

2 02 2008


or noir tchad 90 mn
envoyé par sur_vivantL’armée française et la force européenne sont super bien bien implantés au Tchad. Les rebelles n’aurraient jamais puent prendre la capitale sans la bénédiction de la France. Total essaie-t-elle de reprendre le pétrole à Exxon, Rebels interposés?



Film de la semaine: Quand le FMI fabrique la misère

27 01 2008


Mondialisation Quand le FMI fabrique la misère - kewego
Bogoso Gold Limited (BGL)/Gold Star est une compagnie minière canadienne comme beaucoup de ces compagnies.Gold Star est listée sur la bourse de Toronto et a la CIBC pour banquier.



Film de la semaine: Sibel Edmonds: Kill the Messanger

18 01 2008

Désolé mais la version française semble avoir été censurée par google: Sibel Edmonds – Une femme à abattre

Mais il y a toute même cette bande annonce sous-titrée:



Film de la semaine

5 01 2008

What I’ve Learned About U.S. Foreign Policy – The War Against The Third World



Film de la semaine: Confessions of an Economic Hitman

29 12 2007

PART I:

PART II:



Film de la semaine: La Couronne cherche-t-elle à nous faire la guerre?

22 12 2007



Film de la semaine: Kanehsatake – 270 ans de résistance

15 12 2007

Note:
Le projet d’agrandissement du terrain de golf fût finalement abandonné.



Film de la semaine: Sur la télévision – Pierre Bourdieu

8 12 2007

Pierre Bourdieu, Sur la télévision (1996)

Le collège de France, le CNRS audiovisuel et Arts et Education présentent : RECHERCHES AU COLLEGE DE FRANCE, “Sur la télévision” Avec Pierre Bourdieu, titulaire de la chaire de sociologie au collège de France.




Thomas Sankara et la Françafrique

7 12 2007



Léopold II: Génocide au Congo

5 12 2007


genocide_congo
Uploaded by caidland
Il est à noter qu’Arte peut se permettre ce film car cela fait une centaine d’années que Léopold II est mort mais le génocide au Congo ne s’est pas arrêté avec la mort de Léopold II. Enviant à la Belgique les richesses du Congo, le Canada, les États-Unis, la France, le Royaume Uni, l’Allemagne, la Chine, Israël, le Liban, l’Australie etc. se sont mis de la partie et participent actuellement au génocide lucratif en RDC [voir 1 2 3 4] (en fait c’est la communauté internationale toute entière qui viole le Congo), génocide qui de par son envergure éclipse même l’Holocauste de la Seconde Guerre et le Génocide rwandais: depuis 1998 seulement, entre 3 millions et 5 millions de personnes sont mortes des conflits au Congo, plus de 17 000 enfants soldats ont été recrutés et le viole des femmes est devenu systématique. Voici un extrait de congopanorama à ce sujet:

Rape has become a defining characteristic of the five-year war in the DRC, according to Anneke Van Woudenberg, the Congo specialist for Human Rights Watch. So, too, has mutilation of the victims.

“Last year, I was stunned when a 30-year-old woman in North Kivu had her lips and ears cut off and eyes gouged out after she was raped, so she couldn’t identify or testify against her attackers. Now, we are seeing more and more such cases,” she says.

As the troops of coccupation from Rwanda and Uganda constantly sought new ways to terrorize, their barbarity became more frenzied.

I, too, was sickened by what I saw and heard. In three decades of covering war, I had never before come across the cases described to me by Congolese doctors, such as gang-rape victims having their labia pierced and then padlocked.

“They usually die of massive infection,” I was told.

Based on personal testimonies collected by Human Rights Watch, it is estimated that as many as 30 percent of rape victims are sexually tortured and mutilated during the assaults, usually with spears, machetes, sticks or gun barrels thrust into their vaginas.

Increasingly, the trigger is being pulled. About 40 percent of rape victims, usually the younger ones, aged 8 to 19, are abducted and forced to become sex slaves.

“The country is in an utter state of lawlessness; it’s complete anarchy,” says Woudenberg. “In this culture of impunity, people know they can get away with anything. Every armed group is equally culpable.”

In the Congo, rape is a cheaper weapon of war than bullets. Experts estimate that some 60 percent of all combatants in the DRC are infected with HIV/AIDS. As women rarely have access to expensive antiretroviral drugs, sexual assaults all too often become automatic death sentences.

Médecins Sans Frontières operates five health clinics offering antiretrovirals in the conflict zone of northeastern DRC, but many women don’t know about the drugs and cannot travel safely to the centers. Moreover, according to Helen O’Neill, a nurse who set up MSF’s sexual-violence treatment program, such drugs must be taken within forty-eight to seventy-two hours of the rape to prevent infection.

If a woman has been exposed to the virus, the treatment is 80 percent effective. But in the Congo, rape victims who are not captive sex slaves must walk for days or weeks, often with massive injuries, and risk new capture by roving rebel bands, before reaching assistance.



Film de la semaine: Crimes économiques dans les Grands Lacs Africains

24 11 2007


Notes:

  • Gécamine est la plus grosse société minière d’État du Congo
  • La MIBA est la société minière d’État du Congo pour le diamant
  • Phelps Dodge est une filière de Freeport-McMoran Copper and Gold
  • Sengamine est détenue à 85% par First African Diamonds Ltd qui a, par la suite, changé son nom en Entreprise Minière du Kasaï-Oriental SARL ou EMIKOR, c’est une société appartenant à Mike Nunn (anciennement chez De Beers) qui détient aussi Afgem, Amari Holdings, Xceldiam et Tanzanite One.

Voici des explications de Congolite:

Mines : des milliards de boni pour le “quatrième pillage”

25 juillet 2006 – Au lendemain de la ratification par le gouvernement de Transition du contrat controversé de Kinross Forrest Limited (KFL) sur les riches installations de la Gécamines à Kamoto, George Forrest prit l’ avion pour le Canada. Il avait créé spécialement KFL, basée aux Iles Vierges Britanniques pour négocier en montrant comme partenaire principal la Kinross Gold où oeuvrait Arthur Ditto. Il se produisit alors une chose extraordinaire. Kinross Gold ne fit pas état de cet important contrat, mais la firme aurait découvert subitement que le projet minier congolais portait sur le cuivre et le cobalt et lui était incompatible parce qu’elle était spécialisée dans l’or. Instantanément, KFL fut revendue à Balloch Resources, une minuscule société d’exploration minière qui avait l’avantage d’être cotée à la bourse de Toronto. Balloch changera son nom en Katanga Mining Limited (KML) et remplacera complètement Kinross Forrest Limited comme partenaire de la Gecamines dans la joint venture Kamoto Copper Company (KCC). Le titre en bourse de KML se mit à grimper vertigineusement, et il fut décidé d’allouer à KFL le bénéfice de 570 millions de dollars en représentation de la valeur de KFL dans le projet de KCC.Cette transaction a été achevée au moment de la remise et reprise des mines et installations par la Gécamines. Indication : les nouveaux investisseurs, ou “mining jackers”, n’ arrachent pas uniquement des contrats déséquilibrés qui leur assurent jusqu’à 75 % de bénéfices plantureux sur des dizaines d’années, une situation que Colette Braeckman a qualifiée de « troisième pillage ». Ces affairistes réalisent de plantureux profits immédiats en boursicotant leur portefeuille garni presque exclusivement par les apports gratuits de la Gécamines ou de la Miba. Ceci est clairement illustré par la similitude des courbes des cotations en bourse des sociétés qui n’ont même pas encore commencé à opérer sur le terrain. Il y a même des OPA hostiles. Il existait des soupçons sur les intentions réelles du “mining jacking”, voilà que les chartes boursières et le volume des transactions financières dévoilent cette course à la spéculation et à l’enrichissement. Ce qui est bonifié, c’est la perspective de la bonne affaire et le gouffre abyssal entre la dépense d’investissement et la rémunération exceptionnelle. Tout se passe comme si le Congo était comme un vulgaire tableau ramassé à bas prix au marché aux puces pour être revendu dans les galeries d’art à sa véritable valeur d’une toile de maître. Le Congo est l’ objet d’ un capitalisme sauvage et victime consentante d’un “quatrième pillage”.

Katanga Mining Limited

Le « premier pillage » avait été réalisé sous Mobutu. Monsieur Robert Crem l’a évoqué en ces termes : « j’ estime que le préjudice subi par la GECAMINES, de 1967 à 1984, s’ est chiffré entre 3 et 4 milliards de dollars américains au profit des sociétés du groupe de la Société Générale de Belgique et entre 4 et 5 milliards de dollars américains prélevés par le Pouvoir, par toutes sortes de ponctions et de commissions occultes. En un mot, le groupe SGB et le Pouvoir s’ étaient partagés la « bête »!!! un terme utilisé par un administrateur belge ». En février 1990, Mobutu et la bande à Kengo Wa Ndondo s’ emparèrent de 500 millions de dollars américains des réserves financières de la Gécamines en échange de la démocratisation.

Anvil Mining Limited

Le « second pillage » a été l’oeuvre de Laurent Désiré Kabila qui inaugura le système de rémunération des factures et primes de guerre en ressources naturelles et autres formes de richesses. Il a littéralement vendu le pays et pavé le chemin pour le Rwanda, l’Ouganda et toutes les hordes de pilleurs qui ont déferlé sur le pays depuis 1997. C’ est sur ce second pillage que le Panel de l’ ONU s’était penché. Le rapport de 2002 en a fait une évaluation en ces termes : « le réseau d’élite congolais et zimbabwéen ayant des intérêts politiques, militaires et commerciaux cherche à garder la mainmise sur les principales ressources naturelles– les diamants, le cobalt, le cuivre et le germanium – se trouvant dans la zone tenue par le Gouvernement. Au cours des trois dernières années, ce réseau a transféré des actifs représentant au moins 5 milliards de dollars du secteur minier public à des entreprises privées qu’il contrôle, sans verser aucune indemnité ni prestation au Trésor public de la République Démocratique du Congo ».

Rubicon Minerals

Le « troisième pillage », dénoncé notamment par les ONG et Le Monde Diplomatique, a porté sur les nouveaux contrats signés à la hâte en cours de période de Transition. Ces conventions ont engagé les avoirs miniers de la Miba (diamant) et de la Gécamines (cuivre, cobalt, cassitérite, germanium, zinc, etc.). Rien qu’à la Gécamines, on a bradé 55 % de ses gisements à Kolwezi (Kamoto, Kov, Dima, Dikuluwe, Ruwe, etc.) valant 176 milliards de dollars, ses 31 % à Tenke et Fungurume pour la valeur de 95 milliards, sans oublier des joyaux importants du restant de se 14 % des mines à Likasi, Lubumbashi et Kipushi et évalués à 44 milliards de dollars américains. A ces réserves minérales, qui auraient dû être négociées pour 300 milliards de dollars, s’ajoutent les valeurs des installations industrielles, des infrastructures, fonds de commerce technique, etc. L’ addition est lourde. Le ” troisième pillage” est profond et fondamental.

Nikanor

Côté congolais, les “mining jackers”, ou prétendus investisseurs et arracheurs de contrats, ont soutenu que Miba et Gécamines n’avaient pas d’ argent. Mais ils ont avoué qu’ ils en étaient également dépourvu, en promettant qu’ ils rechercheraient les fonds nécessaires. L’ incapacité financière des Miba et Gécamines était momentanée, car il aurait suffi d’une meilleure gestion pour réaliser des auto-financements ou emprunter auprès de Bailleurs de fonds des capitaux modestes qui se remboursent en moins de cinq années. De plus, les partenaires étrangers ont soutenu que les gisements non exploités n’ ont aucune valeur négociable, ce qui a convaincu les autorités de la Transition à les remettre quasi gratuitement. Les mêmes ont aussitôt étalé ces mêmes ressources minières pour obtenir et garantir des prêts, attirer des acheteurs de leurs droits d’ exploitation et encaisser des plus values colossales. Ce faisant, ils ont bel et bien négocié à l’extérieur les valeurs minérales congolaises. Car ce sont TOUS les bénéficiaires des contrats qui les ont immédiatement revendus. Et de bien entendu, ces cessions des valeurs congolaises n’ ont pas été gratuites. Mais ni Miba, ni Gécamines propriétaires des avoirs négociés n’ont encaissé un penny.

Adastra Minerals

La zimbabwéenne Oryx Natural Resources, agissant par sa filiale African Mining Investment Ltd. (AMIL), a revendu ses 80 % dans la Sengamines au Sud-Africain Mike Nunn, à travers First African Diamonds Ltd. Depuis, Sengamines est devenue « EMIKOR » (Entreprise Minière de Kasai Oriental SARL). La Miba qui avait été dépouillée de la concession kimberlitique n’ a rien touché de la revente de sa concession de 800 KM2 et que Oryx avait évaluée à 2 milliards de dollars US. Deux autres zimbabwéens ont revendu leurs acquisitions congolaises gratuites. 64 % de Shaford Capital de Billy Rautenbach ont été vendus à CAMEC (Central African Mining & Exploration Company) pour 80 millions de dollars au nez et à la barbe de la Gécamines partenaire à 20 % dans Boss Mining. Tremalt Limited de John Bredenkamp a été rachetée par Dan Gertler International (DGI) avec la particularité que le zimbabwéen n’ a jamais investi véritablement, tandis que la Gécamines maintenue à 20 % dans Kababankola Mining Company n’a même jamais touché de dividendes. On retrouve Dan Gertler avec 75 % dans le contrat DRC Copper Project (DCP) pour la fameuse mine KOV de la Gécalmines. Gertler a aussitôt évaluée la mine à 2 milliards de dollars américains permettant à la société NIKANOR de lever 400 millions de dollars à la bourse AIM de Londres et d’ obtenir la capitalisation boursière la plus importante avec un poids de 1,2 milliards de dollars US. La Gécamines avec ses 25 % n’ a pas bénéficié du moindre sou, alors que cette flambée des valeurs lui est due entièrement et pleinement.

Lundin Mining

Lundin Holdings Limited avait vendu à Phelps Dodge ses 55 % dans Tenke Fungurume Mining (TFM) en empochant une valeur boursière multipliée par 7. Mais, en prime, Lundin s’est vu octroyer par le gouvernement de Transition une rallonge de 24,75 % prélevés sur la participation de la Gécamines qui a été réduite de 45 à 12,5 % du capital de TFM. De la jungle des affaires a surgi Tiger Resources, associée à Orgaman de Damseaux qui a rachète les 60 % de l’ association avec la Gécamines dans la Société Minière de Kabolela et de Kipese (SMKK) et les 60 % dans SEK (Société d’ Exploitation de Kipoi). La société Demourra a vendu les 80 % de participation dans Société Minière de Kolwezi (SMK) à Anvil Mining pour la mine souterraine et à Chemaf pour la partie supérieure sans retombées sur la Gecamines, généreuse donatrice maintenue à 20 % du capital. Africo Resources Ltd a racheté 75 % de la joint venture Société d’ Exploitation des Gisements de Kalukundi (SWANMINES) ce qui a porté sa capitalisation boursière à 94.797.392 de dollars canadiens, sans rémunération pour la Gécamines qui n’ a obtenu que 25 % du capital pour 100 % des apports. De son côté First Quantum a réalisé une OPA hostile et pris le contrôle de Adastra Minerals avec 275 millions de C $ pour contrôler 87,5 % de KMT (Kingamiambo Musonoi Tailings) laissant la Gécamines sur le carreau avec 12,5 %. Le groupe Forrest a revendu à la Copper Resources Corporation ses 75 % dans la Minière de Musoshi et Kinsenda SARL (MMK), au nez et à la barde de Sodimico.

Tenke Mining

Cette liste des affaires juteuses avec le patrimoine de l’Etat reste exemplative. Mais on peut évaluer toutes ses transactions en milliards de dollars américains au cours de la dernière année de la Transition. Mais les valeurs boursières vont grimper en flèche lorsque les projets commenceront à produire et à distribuer des dividendes. Ces manipulations posent le problème philosophique et moral du capitalisme sauvage. Il y aurait des émotions, même dans les pays les plus libéraux. La France reste vigilante sur toute prise de contrôle de ses fleurons industriels par des étrangers. La bourse allemande Deutsche Börse, qui gère la place de Francfort a résisté à rejoindre Euronext (Paris, Bruxelles, Amsterdam et Lisbonne) lors de leur rachat par la Bourse de New York. Même les Etats Unis ont fait de la résistance à la société Dubai Ports World qui proposait 6,8 milliards de dollars pour racheter les grands terminaux portuaires basés à New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, La Nouvelle-Orléans, Miami et Philadelphie. Au Congo-même, le capitalisme sauvage avait été placé sous contrôle par Léopold II, en soumettant les sociétés par actions à des autorisations par décrets. En 1966, Mobutu avait imposé la domiciliation au Congo des opérations d’exploitation, ce qui emportait leur domiciliation fiscale congolaise. Ainsi, les deux dirigeants autocrates et réputés prédateurs étaient de fervents nationalistes.

First Quantum Minerals

Voilà qu’au XXIème siècle, un gouvernement de Transition livre à des spéculateurs toutes les richesses minérales substantielles du pays. C’est le Congo qui est désormais à la merci des humeurs des bourses. Cela pose un problème sérieux de souveraineté dans la mesure où la maîtrise des ressources naturelles est un attribut de cette souveraineté. De plus, les ” mining jackers” confirment que les titres miniers ont de la valeur et servent de garanties pour leurs financements et profits privés. La République n’a plus de gisements ou de participations financières consistantes qui pourraient lui servir de garanties dans ses propres dossiers de financements internationaux et à long terme. La République est nue pour avoir rhabillé l’ étranger. La République reste au biberon de la communauté internationale alors qu’ au même moment des milliards de dollars sont échangés et spéculés. La Transition a lancé le « quatrième pillage » qui se porte bien. Il n’ y a encore personne pour l’ arrêter. Pas encore.

Nestor Kisenga



Film de la semaine: S.A.I.C.

17 11 2007

Effet_papillon_saic
Uploaded by figaromuz

Chose intéressante, le vidéo promotionnel de la SAIC que vous pouvez voir ci-bas, montre dans sa section «Homeland Security» deux personnes en train d’analyser une carte de l’Iran:



Film de la semaine: ZEITGEIST

10 11 2007

english con subtítulos en español

Et voici une adaptation française de la première partie faite par James:


Notes:

It is not the «central banking system» which is a problem as such but the fractional reserve banking system. The USA is a notable exception but most countries’ central bank (including the UK now) is owned by the governement and redistributes its profites to the governement.

Warburg = Warburg Pincus + M.M. Warburg&Co + UBS

Rockefeller = Exxon (ex-Standard Oil) + JP Morgan Chase

John Pierpont Morgan = JP Morgan Chase + Morgan Stanley + Deutsche Bank +USX (ex US-Steel)

I.G. Farben = Agfa+BASF+Bayer+Aventis

Washington Post= 18% Berkshire Hathaway, 7% JP Morgan, Barclay’s 2% etc.

New York Times Co. = 22% T. Rowe Price, 7% Morgan Stanley, 10% Fidelity Inv., 5% Barclay’s, etc.

Time magazine = Time Warner

The complete interview with Aaron Russo can be found here: http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=5420753830426590918

Clarifications from the makers of the film:

15:25-15:27
The December 25th birthday denoted to Jesus Christ, as stated by the narration, is not written in the Bible, although it is practiced traditionally. However, this date, known in the Pagan world for the birth of the ‘Sun God’ at the Winter Solstice, is in fact implied by the astronomical symbolism during the birth sequence.
More on this point is addressed in the Interactive Transcript.

53:56-53:59
The text reads:
["Collapse Characteristics of World T. Center 1, 2 & 7 fit the Controlled Demolition Model Exactly"]
-WTC 7 fits the C.D. model exactly, however Towers 1 and 2 were, in fact, EXPLOSIONS rather than implosions. The means of the demolition of Towers 1 and 2 would be considered “unconventional”. The free fall speed; collapse “into its own footprint” and other such goals of controlled demolition, are however confluent.

1:04:09 -1:04:16
The video here is of the Madrid Bombings of 2004, not the London Bombings of 2005.
It is used as a creative expression and example.

1:09:22- 1:11:05
These extracts from the JFK speech entitled “The President and the Press” from April 27, 1961,
are used as a dramatized introduction to Part 3, and are not exactly in context with the original intent
of JFK’s speech. Though President Kennedy does indeed address the peril of secrecy, denouncing

“secret societies”, “secret oaths” and “secret proceedings” in his statements, the latter section is
related to his views on Communism and not these societies.

1:17:14-1:17:20:
The narration states regarding W.Wilson and the Federal Reserve Act:
“Years Later Woodrow Wilson wrote in regret…”
- The notion of “years later” is incorrect. The quote is taken from his book
“The New Freedom” and it was written the same year he signed the Federal Reserve Act.

1:23:35 -1:23:38
There are 2 errors stated in the narration, one computational, the other technical.
1) It should say: (correction in italics) “Roughly 25% of the average worker’s income is taken via this tax”
[According the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average US salary is about $36,000
which translates to a 25% Federal Income Tax. * 35% is the high tax bracket ]

2) This 25% is not a flat tax against the entire income of that single person for the year.
Rather, the tax is “graduated”. In other words, it is a generalization to say “25% is taxed”, where as there are 2 tax rate brackets under this one, and income is taxed based on each bracket combined, in a graduated manner. Consequently, the statement “you work 3 months out of the year…” is not accurate as it would be less than that in light of the “graduated” nature.

1:27.35-1:27:40:
There is a statement error in the narration. It should say: (correction in italics)
-”J.D. Rockefeller made 200 million dollars off of it [WWI]. That’s about 1.9 Billion by today’s standards”
[It was stated as "1.9 Trillion", which was misspoken and intended to have been read "Billion", not "Trillion".
Note: Based on the Consumer Price Index (not the GDP used initially), this conversion can also be figured
at about 3 Billion dollars]



Film de la semaine: Where the US gets its info on Iran

3 11 2007

Trouvé et plagié de l’information clearinghouse:

 

Gunning for Iran

 

Exposed : Where The U.S. gets its
“intelligence” about Iran’s nuclear program

You must’ve heard the howls of protest from the International
Atomic Energy Agency after the release of a US House of
Representatives report on Iran’s nuclear program. The IAEA
branded the American report “outrageous and dishonest” for
asserting that Tehran’s nuclear plans were geared towards
weapons. This, of course, was just the latest flare-up in the
running debate over Iran’s supposed nuclear ambitions. So where
is Washington getting its information?

Try an Iranian opposition group known as the Mujahedin-e-Khalq -
MeK for short. Given the debacle over Saddam’s non-existent WMDs
in Iraq, you’d reckon there’d have to be a touch of caution
where Iranian exiles peddling nuclear secrets are concerned. But
as Bronwyn Adcock tells it, when the MeK speaks, Washington
hardliners listen.

Broadcast 11/04/06-

Dateline
-
Australia – Runtime 27 Minutes

Reporter – Bronwyn Adcock

Click Play To View

 

 



 

You may need to update / download
Free Real Player to view this video. Click on this link to
download.
http://snipurl.com/a75b

Click below to read or post comments on this article

|

TRANSCRIPT Three weeks ago in
New York, journalists were summoned to this hotel for a
press conference. It has been organised by this man -
Alireza Jafarzadeh, an Iranian exile who regularly
reveals what he claims is inside information on Iran’s
nuclear program.
ALIREZA JAFARZADEH, MUJAHEDIN-E-KHALQ LOBBYIST: I
would like to share with you today the information I’ve
gotten from the very same sources that have proven
accurate in the past.
Today, Jafarzadeh announces he’s discovered an
apparently sinister new development.

ALIREZA JAFARZADEH: A very important aspect of the
Iran regime’s nuclear weapons program is actually laser
enrichment, and the information I’ve gotten from my
sources today suggests that Iran is heavily involved in
laser enrichment program.

As always, the information is incredibly detailed,
with maps, names and addresses. Since 2002, Jafarzadeh
and the Iranian opposition group he’s connected to, the
Mujahedin-e-Khalq, or MeK, have made nearly 20
intelligence revelations, in press conferences from
Paris to New York, Washington and London.

ALIREZA JAFARZADEH: And they are scheduled to be
able to get the bomb by 2005.

The MeK revelations have had an extraordinary
impact, sparking inspections in Iran by the nuclear
watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.
According to the MeK, Iran is building a nuclear bomb,
and the world should be very afraid.

ALIREZA JAFARZADEH: I think the world has to take
the Iranian regime’s threat very, very seriously. These
ayatollahs believe in what they say, believe that they
can eliminate Israel off the map, they can eliminate the
superpowers.

According to this Iranian opposition group, there
is only one solution.

ALIREZA JAFARZADEH: You need to slay the dragon.
This is the solution. You need to slay the dragon, which
means regime change.

The MeK is playing a key role in what’s shaping up
as one of the critical contests of our time – the
stand-off between the US and Iran, played out here at
the United Nations General Assembly two weeks ago.

PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH AT UN: Iran must abandon its
nuclear weapons ambitions.

AHMADINEJAD, IRAN PRESIDENT AT UN, (Translation): All
our nuclear activities are transparent and peaceful and
fully overseen by the IAEA

CROWD: Down with terrorist! Ahmadinejad terrorist!
Down with terrorist!

Outside the United Nations that day Alireza
Jafarzadeh and the Mujahedin-e-Khalq, are again trying
to get their opinion heard.

ALIREZA JAFARZADEH: Obtaining the bomb, the
nuclear bomb would unquestionably give Tehran the upper
hand in the region.

And some powerful forces in the West are
listening. The MeK’s main backer in Washington is a
newly formed think tank called the Iran Policy
Committee, headed by a former Reagan White House
official, Professor Raymond Tanter.

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER, IRAN POLICY COMMITTEE:
The regime change clock has to start. Right now, the
regime change clock is not even ticking.

In the Iran Policy Committee, Professor Tanter has
created a powerful grouping of former CIA, Pentagon and
White House officials. At forums like this briefing on
Capitol Hill, the group is trying to convince the
American Government that the MeK can help them achieve
the goal of regime change.

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER: We didn’t choose the
Mujahedin-e-Khalq. The data hit us between the eyes. The
analysis passes what I call ‘the interocular test’ – it
hits you right between the eyes. I invented that phrase.

CROWD (Translation): Ahmadinejad terrorist!
Ahmadinejad terrorist! Down with the terrorist!

But for some, the sight of exile groups bearing
gifts of intelligence for the West just brings back bad
memories.

PROFESSOR GARY SICK, COLOMBIA UNIVERSITY: In the
past, on Iraq, we were fed a lot of false information to
try to get our attention and to get us to do what we
did. We bought it, and I have a very hard time
understanding how anybody can maintain a straight face
and say, “Again,” we should do the same thing all over
again.

Professor Gary Sick has served on the National
Security Council under three presidents. He was the
principle White House aide for Iran during the Iranian
revolution and hostage crisis, and has followed the
country closely ever since. He’s extremely sceptical
about the MeK.

PROFESSOR GARY SICK: When people get enthusiastic
about this, I just have to look at the history of the
organisation, the way it’s behaved, the way it’s done
all of the things that it’s done, and I simply can’t see
it, I really can’t see it. I find it very difficult to
explain why people would get so enthusiastic about this
group.

The MeK does have an extraordinary history. A
militant left-wing movement, it participated in the 1979
Iranian revolution that overthrew the Shah. But
afterwards, when the ayatollahs took power, the MeK
began fighting the new regime.

It carried out bombings that killed senior Islamic
leaders, and many of its members were executed.

In the 1980s it moved its military base to Saddam
Hussein’s Iraq. From here at Camp Ashraf it launched
attacks across the border, and successfully carried out
assassinations and bombings within Iran. The MeK’s
military heyday has long since passed. Less than 3,000
fighters remain in a camp now guarded by Americans.
What’s more, the group’s often violent past has left it
officially listed as a terrorist organisation in the
United States, the European Union and Australia.

The real action for the MeK now is in the West, where a
bevy of lobbyists is operating, including Ali Safavi
here in London. Safavi has devoted most of his adult
life to the MeK struggle. Now he’s working to get the
group taken off the terrorist list. His office located
around the corner from parliament.

ALI SAFAVI, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF RESISTANCE OF
IRAN: And obviously the office is very close so that it
would be more convenient, both for us and for them.

Being listed as a terrorist organisation stands
between the MeK and real political credibility. Safavi
claims the group was only put on the list by governments
trying to win favour with Iran.

ALI SAFAVI: It has nothing to do with the nature,
with the conduct, or the activities of the Mujahedin. It
is basically a bargaining chip.

Ali Safavi is trying to convince the West of the
apparently impressive democratic credentials of the MeK
and its political wing, the NCRI.

ALI SAFAVI: The NCRI basically advocates a
secular, democratic form of government, a government
that is based on the separation of church and the state
or mosque and state, if you will.

Leading the concerted charm offensive is the
group’s leader, Maryam Rajavi, who’s based in Paris.
She’s offering up an enticing proposition to the West.

MARYAM RAJAVI, (Translation): Today I’ve come to
tell you that the international community doesn’t have
to choose between mullahs with an atomic bomb and war. A
third way exists. A democratic change by the Iranian
people and organised resistance.

Maryam Rajavi says if the MeK is just taken off
the terrorist list, it will be a sign for the people of
Iran to rise up and overthrow their government. It’s
this proposition that’s winning support with the Iran
Policy Committee in Washington and in parliaments around
the West.

Here at the European Parliament, British Conservative MP
Brian Binley tells a group of MeK supporters that the
majority of the House of Commons and 130 members in the
House of Lords are behind the group.

BRIAN BINLEY, BRITISH CONSERVATIVE MP: Because
they are the antithesis of the dictatorial
fundamentalists that rule in modern-day Iran today, and,
indeed, the very antithesis of a regime that I believe
poses the greatest threat to global security that we
face as a global people.

Binlay was converted to the cause after being
approached by an MeK supporter in the halls of
Parliament.

BRIAN BINLEY: I met with a gentleman called
Nasser, who is a supporter of the National Council, and
we talked. And he works in and around the House, as a
lobbyist, I suppose you would say. And we talked, and I
liked what he had to say, and, more importantly, what he
had to say seemed credible in the way that I’ve just
explained.

PROFESSOR GARY SICK: These are people who really
believe that Iran…the regime should be changed, that
this regime of mullahs should be done away with. And you
look around, and you don’t see any other place where you
can put a lever. And I must say for the Mujahedin, to
give them full credit, they are very good at their
propaganda.

According to Gary Sick, the MeK’s origins at the
time of the revolution were anything but democratic.

PROFESSOR GARY SICK: There, too, they weren’t
talking about democracy, they were talking about power,
and who took over. And there was certainly no sign from
where I sat in the White House that these people were in
any way trying to bring democracy to Iran. They were
trying to get rid of the group that had taken over and
install themselves in power. And I think that pretty
well describes what they’ve been doing ever since.

Massoud Khodabeanedeh says that the MeK is not
only undemocratic but that internally, it operates like
a cult. Now living in the United Kingdom, Khodabeanedeh
was a high-level member for more than 15 years.

MASSOUD KHODABEANEDEH, FORMER MEK MEMBER: They
have a charismatic leader, they use psychological
methods to convince people and keep people. Their wealth
is always serving the leader, not the people. They try
to get the money out of the people and keep it. They cut
people from their past, their family. They are very
restrictive in that way. There is Maryam and Massoud and
me, as his bodyguard.

Khodabeanedeh worked as security for the MeK’s
leadership in Iraq but left after becoming disenchanted.
He is now one of the most outspoken critics of the
organisation.

MASSOUD KHODABEANEDEH: Later on it came to these
sessions of self-confession, which again, is a cult…
every cult has got it – which you have to come, and
every day come to the meeting, explain what you have
been thinking about, or what even you have been dreaming
about, and even if you don’t have, they will hint that
you have to lie, you have to make up something. So the
collective pressure would be on you and they purify you.

REPORTER: So all women wore headscarves?

ANNE: Yeah. It was a part of the uniform. It was
actually the uniform.

Massoud Khodabanedeh’s wife, Anne, was also a
member for seven years, inspired to join by an Iranian
boyfriend and an interest in Islam.

ANNE: I became full-time in 1990. After going on
hunger strike for two weeks, I was on a real high and I
devoted myself to them. And that devotion was
encouraged, and I was told at some point fairly early on
that all you have to do is choose your leader and follow
that leader. And you don’t have to make any decisions.
And that leader, of course, was Maryam Rajavi.

Both Anne and Massoud say that in order to
encourage devotion to the leadership family
relationships were discouraged.

ANNE: When it actually comes to being a liberating
movement for women, I would say just the opposite
pertains, that they forced women to separate from their
children, forced women to divorce their spouse, they
forced them to give up any thought of having a normal
family life and family relationship. Even relationships
with their siblings in the same organisation are, well,
banned really. You might meet them but you can’t be a
sibling, you can’t show more closeness to them you would
show to Maryam Rajavi.

The MeK leadership totally rejects these
allegations and accuses Massoud Khodabanedeh of being on
the payroll of Iranian intelligence. A charge he in turn
denies. An even more serious allegation, though,
concerns the group’s relationship with Saddam Hussein
during its 15 years in Iraq. This recently revealed
footage shows Massoud Rajavi, the husband of Maryam and
co-leader of the MeK, with the former Iraqi dictator.

ALI SAFAVI: The Mujahedin were forced to relocate
in Iraq, and in the years they were in Iraq, from 1986
onwards, they were completely independent of their host,
both in political terms, in ideological terms, in
organisational terms and in military terms.

REPORTER: So there was no collaboration between
the Mujahedin and Saddam?

ALI SAFAVI: Absolutely not.

However, many sources, including the US State
Department dispute this, saying Iraq supplied the MeK
with weapons and received military assistance from the
Iranian exiles. Former member Massoud Khodabanedeh says
that after the first Gulf War in 1991 Saddam’s security
chief, Taha Yassin Ramadan, asked the MeK to help
suppress the Kurds.

MASSOUD KHODABEANEDEH: The way that it was done, I
remember that in the meetings with Taha Yassin Ramadan,
who was in favour of Mujahedin, and who very much
praised the Mujahedin for their loyalty. He divided the
forces because he didn’t have much forces after the war
in ‘91, so he had only enough to suppress the uprising
in the south, so he left the north in hands of Rajavi.

Massoud says he saw first-hand a Kurdish village
that had been destroyed by the Mujahedin.

REPORTER: What happened to the village?

MASSOUD KHODABEANEDEH: It was just flattened down,
the whole village. Villages in Iraq are small villages,
and with say 20 tanks, you can see what damage can be
done. But it was deliberately flattened.

REPORTER: And this was done by the Mujahedin?

MASSOUD KHODABEANEDEH: By the Mujahedin. They were
there when I was passing the tanks and victoriously
celebrating.

Massoud also says that during his time with the
MeK its members were fed a diet of anti-imperialist and
anti-American propaganda. He believes now they’re trying
to reinvent themselves for a new, Western benefactor.

MASSOUD KHODABEANEDEH: Especially when they went
to Iraq, they didn’t see that one day Saddam would fall
so they have openly been anti-Western all the years that
they were there relying on Saddam. Any democratic face
that they put is a false face.

REPORTER: Why do you think they are putting on
this false face now?

MASSOUD KHODABEANEDEH: There is no other choice.
After Saddam falls, there is no other choice.

The MeK denies this aspect of its past. It says
that anyone making such allegations is being either
directly or indirectly influenced by Iranian
intelligence.

ALI SAFAVI: It is far more than a bit of a
propaganda campaign. In fact the Iranian regime has
spent hundreds of millions of dollars engaging in
propaganda.

In Washington, the MeK’s main American backers
also reject any criticism.

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER: We are familiar with all
the allegations and we have looked at all these
allegations and we have found them to be baseless. And
we’re smart, we’re not idiots. I’m a professor at the
University of Michigan and Georgetown University and I
think I can tell whether a person is saying something to
dupe me. And Human Rights Watch and various others who
say the MeK and NCRI are changing their face in order to
appeal to groups like the Iran Policy Committee haven’t
done their research.

While the MeK and their supporters say they’ve
nothing in its history to be ashamed of, experts say
that’s not how it’s viewed in its homeland.

PROFESSOR GARY SICK: They are certainly despised,
there’s no two ways about that. They are seen as
turncoats, they are seen as traitors, people who joined
Iran’s enemies to try to overthrow the government.

For a group claiming it can make the Iranian
population rise up and overthrow the government, this
apparent lack of internal legitimacy is a major problem.

REPORTER: How much support do you have in Iran, in
numbers?

ALI SAFAVI: Well, you know that our movement from
day one has called for free elections under UN
supervision. I think if such an election were held,
without question… our movement would get most of the
votes.

DOHKI FASSIHIAN: The claim that the MeK would
actually win any support or win any elections inside
Iran is really preposterous.

Dokhi Fassihian is the former executive director
of the National Iranian American Council, a non-partisan
group. She spent much of the 1990s in Iran and knows the
political scene well.

DOHKI FASSIHIAN: In fact they are hated and
detested in Iran because of their role in siding with
the Iraqis in the very, very long and bloody Iran-Iraq
war. And so, I would say that even more so than Iranian
Americans, Iranians inside Iran really do hate the MeK
and really don’t understand why some governments and
some officials abroad can support such an undemocratic
group and such a violent group.

Political credentials aside, the strongest claim
the MeK has on Western attention is its intelligence on
Iran’s nuclear program.

REPORTER: How good are your sources, your
intelligence from Iran?

ALIREZA JAFARZADEH: Well, the intelligence is the
best that exists anywhere. The best track record in
terms of intelligence regarding Iran comes from the
sources of the Mujahedin-e-Khalq and the NCRI. It wasn’t
the intelligence community of the US, or Britain, or
other Western countries that discovered Natanz.

The MeK’s biggest claim to fame has been its
revelation in 2002 that Iran had a secret nuclear site
at a place called Natanz. After the announcement, the
International Atomic Energy Agency confronted Iran and
Iran opened the site for inspection.

DAVID ALBRIGHT, INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY: So I think the Iranian
opposition group, what they did, their real contribution
was to start a chain of events where Iran had to admit
that it had its secret gas centrifuge program and other
secret nuclear programs, and help get the IAEA into Iran
to start uncovering a whole set of misleading statements
or hidden facilities in Iran. This building was sized to
hold 1,000 centrifuges, but could actually hold more.

David Albright is a physicist and president of the
Institute for Science and International Security in
Washington DC. He’s an expert on secret nuclear weapons
programs throughout the world. While he credits the MeK
with bringing Natanz to the world’s attention, the site
was not in breech of the Non-Proliferation treaty.
Albright also says later revelations have not proven as
useful.

DAVID ALBRIGHT: Since then, their record has been
a lot more mixed and a lot of revelations about things
going on, related to making nuclear weapons. IAEA went
to one place and found nothing. There was some equipment
that was imported, they said it was related to nuclear
weapons. It turned out on analysis it wasn’t even
suitable for use on a nuclear weapons program. So I
think that you have to read beyond the detail and try to
make sense out of it, and often it doesn’t make any, or
it’s just speculation.

Dateline also understands that the IAEA has
examined much of the intelligence provided by the MeK
and its political wing, the NCRI, and while it agrees
several early claims were on target, the rest have been
unreliable.

REPORTER: All their revelations paint a picture of
Iran having an incredibly advanced nuclear weapons
program. Would you agree with that assessment?

DAVID ALBRIGHT: It’s relative to what? I mean,
compared to Iraq, which had nothing, yeah, it’s quite
advanced. Are they close to building a bomb? Most
assessments, including our own, are that no, they are
not.

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER: No-one knows whether the
revelations are true so how can one make a statement
that the NCRI-MeK revelations are off? Intelligence
people say this, but they don’t back it up. Because
journalists don’t do a good job in querying them. “What
is your evidence?” “Oh, I can’t say.” Hello, that’s not
right.

REPORTER: But by the same token, if the NCRI holds
a press conference saying, “Look we’ve got these
documents, we know this information,” and there’s
nothing else to back it up, how can you be sure that’s
true?

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER: Look, intelligence is an
art. What you need is to use the NCRI-MeK allegations as
lead information, which you compare with info you
acquire independently.

REPORTER: But if revelations are being made, and
they’re not proven, and they’re put out there in the
media and put out there as a case for regime change, and
they’re not actually substantiated, isn’t that alarmist?

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER: How do you prove
revelations with a totalitarian Islamist fascist regime?

The MeK knows that hardliners in Washington are
desperate for any information that will confirm their
suspicions of Iran.

PROFESSOR GARY SICK: So if the MeK is trying to
get credibility as a group that the US should cooperate
with in trying to overthrow the regime, focusing on the
nuclear side is an absolutely logical place for them to
focus, so I don’t blame them for doing that. I think
that’s an area that is going to attract attention, it’s
going to get them a following, and it will attract the
attention of people in Washington.

According to former member Massoud Khodabanedeh,
the MeK is just trying to stay alive.

MASSOUD KHODABEANEDEH: They want to survive. They
are saying, “Take us off.” The end game is “Take us off
the list of terrorism and use us.”

And in a clear convergence of interests, Professor
Tanter from the Iran Policy Committee is happy to help.

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER: I am not a lobbyist for
the MeK and the NCRI, I’m a lobbyist for America, which
is different. You keep asking me questions which imply
that I am trying to push the MeK on to people.

REPORTER: But you are promoting their cause,
you’re trying to get them off…

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER: I am not promoting their
cause, I am promoting American interests. There is a
difference.

REPORTER: You’re not suggesting they are
necessarily a good replacement government, you are
saying rather they are a good tool for Western
interests?

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER: That’s what you asked
me, they are a tool for Western interests, yes. They are
accused of being a tool of Western interests by the
regime. It’s true!

REPORTER: And they are a tool for Western
interests?

PROFESSOR RAYMOND TANTER: Yes! They want to be a
part of the West.

 

 

(In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit
to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with
the originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)



Film de la semaine: The Drugging of our Children

20 10 2007




Catégories

Archives

Syndication


RSS2 Feed
Le feed du Blogue


RSS2 Feed
Le feed des commentaires

Communauté



Mohawk Nation News - Daily News from the Mohawk Nation CentPapiers - média citoyen
TopBlogues profile
Blogue Parade - L'annuaire des blogues francophones - BlogueParade.com
Les-Blogs.info
Add to Technorati Favorites
iopBlogs.com, The World's Blog Aggregator
Listed in LS Blogs
Netpolitique, le site des phénomènes politiques sur Internet et par Internet
annuaire blogcreer blog gratuit
Politics Blogs - Blog Flare
Politics blogs
Top Blogs
Politics Blogs
Blog Catalog Blog Directory
Politics blogs
Conspirateur GCG
BlogRankers.com

Sonde de mesure
Classement de sites - Inscrivez le vôtre!
meilleur site politique annuaire
pour comprendre le monde Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites BlogoMetrie 2.0

Zone pur tester des widgets