dodaj komentar 2 komentara

1. mare29.03.2011. 11:32#1
   ni Irak nije bio Irak, i uvjek je 'u interesu naroda'
2. RACCOON31.03.2011. 14:32#2
   Kao i uvijek gdje nema slobodne americke pljacke nema slobode i demokracije. Obama jasno pokazuje da za fasistu nije bitna boja koze, vec samo mijenjas kosulje. Amerikanci su kroz zadnjih pola stoljeca uspjeli u razvoju Adolfove ideologije kroz Bush-evu doktrinu “New World Order” koja kao duhovni krik izlazi iz “groba” Adolfa Hitlera. Nacional-americki-socijalizam sa desecima miliona mrtvih od drugog rata naovamo, siri smrad miliona civilnih leseva svijetom. Za smradom se siri nacional-demokracija iz Adolfove ropotarnice. Postoji tu i direktna veza Bush djed fasist, Bus otac u duhovnom kontaktu sa Hitlerom – New World Order i Bush sin provodi u djelo misao djeda i oca. Obama da bi ukazao na rasnu i intelektualnu ravnopravnost u Americi nastavlja provoditi potpuno istu politiku. Americki narod kao i Njemacki u drugom ratu nikako da vide vezu politike i stvarnosti.
   
   Osim toga vidi se jasno koliko je Nobelova nagradna prljava i zalivena krvlju nevinih zrtava nobelovog borca za mir.
   
   http://www.warandpeace.ru/en/exclusive/view/56696/
   
   Gaddafis real crime
   Unlike Tunisia or Egypt where a halfway credible argument could be made that the population was suffering from exploding food prices and a vast wealth gap, Gaddafis Libya, officially called Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, is very different.
   There, according to Africans I have spoken to with direct knowledge, Libyans enjoyed the highest living standard on the Continent. Gaddafi did not stay on top for 42 years without ensuring that his population had little room to complain. Most health services, education and fuel was state-subsidized. Gaddafis Libya had the lowest infant mortality rate and highest life expectancy of all Africa. When he siezed power from ailing King Idris four decades ago literacy was below 10% of the population. Today it is above 90%, hardly the footprint of your typical tyrant. Less than 5% of the population is undernourished, a figure lower than in the United States. In response to the rising food prices of recent months, Gaddafi took care to abolish all taxes on food. And a lower percentage of people lived below the poverty line than in the Netherlands. Gaddafi calls his model a form of Islamic socialism. It is secular and not theocratic, despite its overwhelmingly Sunni base in the population. 1
   Why is the United States so opposed to Gadaffi? Clearly because he is simply "not with the program." Gaddafi has shown repeatedly and not without grounds that he deeply distrusts Washington. He has constantly tried to forge an independent voice for an Africa that is increasingly being usurped by the Pentagons AFRICOM. In 1999 he initiated creation of the African Union, based in Addis Abbaba, to strengthen the international voice of Africas former colonial states. At a pan-African summit in 2009 he appealed for creation of a United States of Africa to combine the economic strengths of what is perhaps the worlds richest continent in terms of unexploited mineral and agricultural potentials.
   Granted Gaddafi doesnt have the best Western PR agencies like Saatchi & Saatchi of Hill & Knowlton to give his message the pretty touches that politicians like Barack Obama or David Cameron or Nikolas Sarkozy have. Nor is he photogenic like his Washington counterpart, making his grisly face easy to demonize in the media as a kind of new Hitler.
   Gaddafi is a thorn in Washingtons side for other reasons though. He says that the 9/11 hijackers were trained in the US, yet he also urged Libyans to donate blood to Americans after 9/11. Gaddafi has been working for decades to build an independent voice for African states not controlled by either the US or former European colonial powers, his United States of Africa.
   When all the Western media demonizing is stripped away, Gaddafi is the last of a generation of moderate socialist pan-Arabists still in power, after Egypts Nasser and Iraqs Saddam Hussein have been eliminated, and Syria has aligned with Iran.2
   So long as he remains, Libya poses an embarrassing economic alternative to Washingtons free market globalization template which it is now desperate to impose on the one billion peoples of the Islamic world from Morocco across Africa and the Middle East to Afghanistan. For the powers driving this spreading war, it is a question of survival of the American Century, or what the quaint neo-conservatives called the New American Century, of the future survival of a sole American Superpower through spreading war and chaos as its own economy disintegrates more by the day.