disrupt the Space Weapon Conference!

Celebrating 50 years in Space and Missile Defense

The 10th Annual Space and Missile Defense Conference and Exhibition will take place Aug. 13-16, 2007, at the Von Braun Center. (Huntsville, Alabama). The theme for this year's event is "Celebrating 50 Years in Space and Missile Defense."

The SMD Conference is widely attended by professionals and individuals from throughout the United States and our allies around the world. Event sponsors include the National Defense Industrial Association-Tennessee Valley Chapter (NDIA-TVC), Air Space and Missile Defense Association (ASMDA), and the Air Defense Artillery Association-Huntsville Chapter (ADAA). Conference highlights include presentations from internationally recognized experts in the areas of global ballistic missile defense systems development and operation, as well as integration, synchronization, and capability development to meet new threats. The conference also will include a training and technology track focused on emerging technologies. Sessions will also cover space support to the warfighter, homeland defense, and the integration of cruise missile defense. Confirmed speakers include Gen. James E. Cartwright, commander, U.S. Strategic Command***: Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, commander, Air Force Space Command; Lt. Gen. Henry A. "Trey" Obering III, director, Missile Defense Agency; LTG Kevin T. Campbell, commanding general, SMDC/ARSTRAT; Lt. Gen. Michael A. Hamel, commander, Space and Missile Systems Center, Air Force Space Command; Lt. Gen. (R ) Ed Anderson, former vice commander of NORAD; Lt. Gen. (R) James A. Abrahamson, first director of the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization; Lt. Gen. (R) Thomas Stafford, former astronaut; and many more. There will be exhibit displays throughout the entire VBC and daily attractions in each hall, including celebrity authors, the Liberty Bike, and-displayed for the first time in a public forum-the Liberty Guitar. The conference will also have a technology trek, a scavenger hunt, and a theater projection of the Army's video game. Many of these attractions, along with the viewing of all exhibits, are free and open to the general public.

http://www.waff.com/Global/story.asp?S=6812159

Criminalize nuclear weapons!
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2007/06/chomsky-eliminate-nuclear-weapons.html


*** USSTRATCOM provides a broad range of strategic capabilities and options for the President and Secretary of Defense. Command mission areas include full-spectrum global strike, space operations, computer network operations, Department of Defense information operations, strategic warning, integrated missile defense, and global C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance), and specialized expertise to the joint warfighter.

================

Missile Defense poses a clear danger to Russia's national security. It integrates the United States entire nuclear capability (including space-based operations) with systems that are inside Russia's traditional sphere of influence.

Putin summed it up like this in a press conference at the G-8 meetings: "For the first time in history, there are elements of the US nuclear capability on the European continent. It simply changes the whole configuration of international security . . . Of course, we have to respond to that."

The Bush administration is trying to achieve what nuclear weapons specialist Francis A. Boyle calls the "longstanding US policy of nuclear first-strike against Russia." By placing weapons systems and radar on Russia's borders the US will have a critical advantage that will disrupt the essential balance of power. This is forcing Putin to restart the arms race.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com

==============================================

Kissinger’s Secret Meeting With Putin

Mike Whitney

July 18, 2007

"RAF fighter jets were scrambled to intercept two Russian strategic bombers heading for British airspace yesterday, as the spirit of the Cold War returned to the North Atlantic once again. The incident, described as rare by the RAF, served as a telling metaphor for the stand-off between London and Moscow over the murder of Alexander Litvinenko." (Times Online, Richard Beeston; "RAF scrambles to intercept Russian bombers, 7-18-07)

"Men are always wicked at bottom unless they are made good by some compulsion." Niccoló Macchiavelli

When a political heavyweight, like Henry Kissinger, jets-off on a secret mission to Moscow; it usually shows up in the news.

Not this time.

This time the media completely ignored---or should we say censored—Kissinger’s trip to Russia and his meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin. In fact, apart from a few short blurps in the Moscow Times and one measly article in the UK Guardian, no major news organization even covered the story. There hasn’t been as much as a peep out of anyone in the American media.

Nothing. That means the meetings were probably arranged by Dick Cheney. The secretive Veep doesn’t like anyone knowing what he’s up to.

Kissinger was accompanied on his junket by a delegation of high-powered political and corporate big-wigs including former Secretary of State George Schultz, former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, former Special Representative for Arms Control, Nonproliferation and Disarmament Ambassador Thomas Graham Jr., former Senator Sam Nunn and Chevron Chairman and Chief Executive Officer David O'Reilly.

Wow. Now, there’s an impressive line up.

The group was (presumably) sent to carry out official government business as discreetly as possible. The media obviously complied with White House requests and kept their mouths shut.

Isn’t the First amendment great?

The array of talent in Kissinger’s delegation suggests that the US and Russia are engaged in sensitive, high-level talks on issues ranging from nonproliferation and Missile Defense, to energy exploration and development, to the Iranian "enrichment" program and partitioning of Serbia (Kosovo), to the falling dollar and the massive US current account deficit. The US and Russia are at loggerheads on many of these issues and relations between the two countries has steadily deteriorated.

No one really knows what took place at the meetings, but judging by Kissinger’s parting remarks; things did not go smoothly. He said to one reporter, ``We appreciate the time that President Putin gave us and the frank manner in which he explained his point of view."

In diplomatic phraseology, "frank" usually means that there were many areas of strong disagreement. Presumably, the main "bone of contention" is Putin’s insistence on a "multi-polar" world in which the sovereign rights of other nations is safeguarded under international law. Putin is ferociously nationalistic and he will not compromise Russia’s independence to be integrated into Kissinger and Co.’s wacky the new world order.

The Empire Strikes Back

Less than 48 hours after the "Russia-USA: A View on the Future" conference had ended, British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband announced that the British government "would expel four diplomats from the Russian Embassy in London in response to Russia’s refusal to extradite Andrei K. Lugovoi, whom the British prosecutors accused of using radioactive Polonium 210 to poison a Kremlin critic and former K.G.B. agent, Alexander Litvinenko, last fall." (New York Times)

The expulsion of the diplomats is a clear indication that Bush ordered his "new poodle" Gordon Brown to begin a campaign of harassment against Russia.

The British action is unprecedented and outlandish. The Russian Foreign Ministry was evidently thunderstruck by the move. After all, Britain has refused to honor 21 requests from Russia to extradite gangster-oligarch Boris Berezovsky and the Chechen rebel leader Akhmed Zakayev, who currently live in London. As Deputy foreign minister Alexander V. Grushko said, "If Russia used the same formula, the British embassy would be short about 80 diplomats now." The hypocrisy is shocking to say the least.

Besides, who is going to believe that the British government has taken a sudden interest in the death of a former-KGB agent? Heck, the Brits kill more Iraqis in a day around Basra then anyone in the Kremlin kills in a year. The whole thing stinks of political opportunism much like the investigation of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

Russia is presently exploring its options for retaliation, but the implications of unexpected clash are obvious; the US and Britain have placed Russia on their "enemies list" and are planning to execute a guerilla war of harassment, slander, and covert operations intended to deepen the divisions between Europe and Russia. Naturally, Putin will continue to be demonized in the western media as a looming threat to democratic values.

Ultimately, the goal is to pit Europe against Russia while the Pentagon, the CIA, and M-15 settle on a long-term strategy for gaining access to vital petroleum and natural gas supplies in Central Asia and the Caspian Basin. That is still the main objective and both Putin and Kissinger know it.

So far, Putin appears to have the upper-hand in this regard because he has skillfully strengthened alliances with his regional allies--under the rubric of the Commonwealth of Independent States---and because most of the natural gas from Eurasia is pumped through Russian pipelines. An article in "Today’s Zaman" gives a good snapshot of Russia’s position vis a vis natural resources in the region:

"As far as natural resources are concerned Russia's hand is very strong: It holds 6.6 percent of the worlds proven oil reserves and 26 percent of the world's gas reserves. In addition, it currently accounts for 12 percent of world oil and 21 of recent world gas production. In May 2007, Russia was the world's largest oil and gas producer.

As for national champions, Putin has strengthened and prepared Gazprom (the state-controlled gas company), Transneft (oil pipeline monopoly) and Rosneft (the state-owned oil giant). That is why in 2006 Gazprom retained full ownership in the giant Shtokman gas field (7) and took a controlling stake in the Sakhalin-2 natural gas project. In June 2007, it took back BP's Kovytka gas field and now is behind Total's Kharyaga oil and gas field." ("Vladimir Putin’s Energystan and the Caspian" Today’s Zaman)

Putin--the black belt Judo-master--has proved to be as adept at geopolitics as he is at "deal-making". He has collaborated with the Austrian government on a huge natural gas depot in Austria which will facilitate the transport of gas to southern Europe. He has joined forces with German industry to build an underwater pipeline through the Baltic to Germany (which could provide 80% of Germany’s gas requirements) He has selected France’s Total to assist Gazprom in the development of the massive Shtokman gas field. And he is setting up pipeline corridors to provide gas to Turkey and the Balkans. Putin has very deliberately spread Russia’s influence evenly throughout Europe with the intention of severing the Transatlantic Alliance and, eventually, loosening America’s vice-like grip on the continent.

Putin’s overtures to Germany’s Merkel and France’s Sarkozy are calculated to weaken the resolve of Bush’s neocon-"Trojan Horses" in the EU and put them in Russia’s corner. Putin is also attracting considerable foreign investment to Russian markets and has adopted "a 'new model of cooperation’ in the energy sector that would 'allow foreign partners to share in the economic benefits of the project, share the management, and take on a share of the industrial, commercial and financial risks’". (M K Bhadrakumar "Russia plays the Shtokman card", Asia Times) All of these are intended to strengthen ties between Europe and Russia and make it harder for the Bush administration to isolate Moscow.

The CFE and the impending Missile Defense Crisis

Last week Russia announced the suspension the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE) in retaliation for Bush’s plans to put missile defense system into Poland and Czechoslovakia. The United States had never really complied with the provisions of the treaty anyway, but that hasn’t stopped Europeans from reacting with genuine concern. Russia is now free to redeploy its troops and heavy weaponry to its western-most borders. This is bound to cause a stir among the former-Soviet states in Eastern Europe. The move does nothing to enhance Russian security, but it does raise awareness of how Bush’s provocative Missile Defense is putting Europe on the firing-line. Missile Defense is a "lose-lose" situation for everyone involved; it greatly increases the likelihood of a slip up which could end in a nuclear exchange. Still, the expansion of NATO is a crucial part of the neocon plan for controlling the world’s dwindling resources; so we can expect that the present stand-off will only intensify as the warring parties jockey for position. The sudden appearance of Kissinger, Schultz, Rubin and Nunn suggests that the situation has gotten so worrisome that the Masters of the Empire are actually emerging from the shadows and getting directly involved. They have dropped the silly pretense that our celluloid-figurehead president is actually directing foreign policy at all. He isn’t.

But what can they do?

It is true that NATO has pushed itself into Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania. But to what advantage? Putin will never allow NATO in Ukraine or Georgia---even if it means turning off the gas spigot and letting Europe freeze to death in the dark.

Cheney calls this blackmail.

Maybe. But to others it looks like a straightforward way of telling people that there's a price to pay for bad behavior. If that’s blackmail---let them hire an attorney.

Kosovo: "The chances of independence are nothing"

Russia and the US are bitterly divided on the issue of Kosovo independence. "Kosovo independence" is a nothing more than a catchy moniker that was cooked up in a far-right think tank to express the geopolitical objectives of its advocates. It’s also a way of minimizing the US-generated ethnic cleansing which has made "partition" seem palatable. Its supporters are the usual assortment of western busybodies, neocons and globalists. Their dream is to weaken Serbia by splitting it up and making it more accessible to foreign interests.

Pro-American Secretary General Ban Ki Moon tried to quickly push through a resolution on independence at the UN Security Council this week, but Russian diplomats stopped him in his tracks.

No dice, Ban.

"I am deeply concerned about the lack of progress," Ban muttered apologetically. "Any further delay is not desirable for the Balkan States or the European countries."

Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin was uncharacteristically outspoken in his rejection of the proposed resolution. When he was asked by a reporter about the likelihood of the Kosovo independence", Churkin growled, "The chances of that are nothing."

Well said, Vitaly.

Kosovo is an interesting case that sheds a bit of light on the maneuverings of the globalist-claque and their plans for world domination. Chaos and death follow their every move. Their modus operandi is "divide and rule" through the indiscriminate violence and massive clandestine operations.

Russia deserves credit for not buckling under US pressure. Putin is opposed to rewarding "separatist" movements or of letting the United Nations dissect sovereign nations according to the whims of its main contributors. This angers the scheming globalists, but it is a sensible position. The UN’s mandate is to prevent wars of aggression---not redraw national borders. Just ask the Palestinians how well it worked out last time the UN got involved in the "nation-inventing" business.

Irina Lebedeva reveals the real motives behind Kosovo independence in her article "USA-Russia: Hitting the same Gate, or playing the same game?"

"The North Atlantic alliance documents indicate that the bloc aims at the "Balkanization" of the post-Soviet space by way of overtaking influence in the territories of the currently frozen conflicts and their follow-up internalization along the Yugoslavian lines are set down in black and white. For example, a special report titled "The New North Atlantic Strategy for the Black Sea Region", prepared by the German Marshall Fund of the United States on the occasion of the NATO summit, already refers to Black Sea and South Caucasus (Transcaucasia) as a "new Euro-Atlantic borderland plagued by Soviet-legacy conflicts." And the "region of frozen conflicts is evolving into a functional aggregate on the new border of an enlarging West." Azerbaijan and Georgia in tandem, the report notes, provide a unique transit corridor for Caspian energy to Europe, as well as an irreplaceable corridor for American-led and NATO to bases and operation theatres in Central Asia and the Greater Middle East."

Okay. So, NATO’s real goal is to break-up existing countries into smaller parts, undermine nationalism, incite ethnic conflicts and create a "new Euro-Atlantic borderland" that provides a "transit corridor for Caspian energy to Europe" as well as a jumping off spot for other military bases.

Sounds a lot like Iraq, doesn’t it?

This should dispel the notion that the US cares about the Muslims of Kosovo or that America bombed Belgrade into rubble to "get rid of the dictator, Milosevic". That’s all half-truths, misinformation or outright lies. America’s only interests are bases and oil. Period.

Escalation and the prospect of a Wider War

An article was posted last night (7-18-07) by the Times Online:

"RAF fighter jets were scrambled to intercept two Russian strategic bombers heading for British airspace yesterday, as the spirit of the Cold War returned to the North Atlantic once again. The incident, described as rare by the RAF, served as a telling metaphor for the stand-off between London and Moscow over the murder of Alexander Litvinenko. While the Kremlin hesitated before responding to Britain’s expulsion of four diplomats, the Russian military engaged in some old-fashioned sabre-rattling. (Times Online, Richard Beeston; "RAF Scrambles to intercept Russian bombers http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article20
93759.ece )

This is a good example of how quickly hostilities can escalate when leaders feel overly confident in their poor judgment. Russia is not to be trifled with. Putin will not be hounded or humiliated into submission. He won’t be starved like the Palestinians, bombarded like the Iraqis, or abducted and tortured like the Empire’s other so-called enemies. If Brown and Bush decide that its "good sport" to poke the Bear with a stick—so be it. But, they should be aware of the consequences. Russia only spends 5% of what the US allocates yearly for military expenditures, but it can still flatten Washington and London in a matter of minutes. That’s always worth considering.

Putin: "Glavny protivnik", the main enemy?

Putin is not America’s enemy. He is a fierce nationalist who has led his country out of depression and anarchy into prosperity and resurgent patriotism. He has stabilized the ruble, consolidated his regional power, and elevated the standard of living for every class of Russians. The Russian Federation now has the third largest FOREX reserves, the largest natural gas deposits, and—on many days—provides more oil to foreign markets than Saudi Arabia. The country has regained its international prestige and it has become a force for peace and stability in the region.

The West---and particularly the United States---needs to come to grips with Russia’s ascendant place on the world scene. Russia is not going away. Petroleum and natural gas are becoming scarcer and more costly by the day. Russia’s power will naturally grow in proportion to the diminishing of crucial supplies. This cannot be avoided without initiating a third and, perhaps, final world war.

America’s preeminence in the world depends to great extend on its ability to control the global economic system. That system requires that the dollar continue to be linked to oil reserves. But everywhere the petrodollar is under attack. The only solution is to control two-thirds of the world’s remaining petroleum –which is in the Caspian Basin—and demand payment in dollars.

But that plan has failed. The war in Iraq is lost and the longer America stays, the harder the fall will be. Oil will not continue to be traded in petrodollars, the USD will lose its place as the world’s "reserve currency", and America will slide into a long and agonizing economic downturn.

The machinations and secret "shuttle diplomacy" of Kissinger and his cohorts will amount to nothing. The situation is irreversible. Geography is fate.

We need to extend the olive branch to Russia and prepare for the inevitable shifting of world power. In the meantime we need to withdrawal from Iraq and let the inescapable struggle for political power begin. Our presence only increases the violence.

American leadership can still be salvaged if we eradicate the cancer that has infected the body-politic and restore the principles of republican government. But that won’t be easy. The small cadres of ruling elites who control policy are driven by a force more powerful than the procreative urge or even the will to survive. They are overwhelmed by a sense of "entitlement"---the fanatical belief that they were born to run the world. This is the rich man’s fundamentalism.

The only way the US can play a productive role in the world’s future, and participate in the species-threatening decisions which face us all (global warming, peak oil, nuclear proliferation, famine, disease) is by removing this poisonous element from our political life and holding them accountable for their long list of crimes. Otherwise our confrontations with Russia, Venezuela, Iran and others will become increasingly uncontrollable and violent causing suffering and death on an unimaginable scale.

It’s up to us.

http://uruknet.info/?p=m34614&s1=h1

====================================

Demonizing Putin: The summit in Kennebunkport

Jul 17, 2007, 00:59
Presidents Bush and Putin concluded their brief summit in Kennebunkport, Maine, without resolving any of the main issues. Bush seeks Putin's help to pressure Iran into giving up its nuclear enrichment program and Putin wants Bush to abandon his plans to deploy the US Missile Defense System in Czechoslovakia and Poland. No progress was made on either topic.

Russia and the United States are now more politically divided than any time since the breakup of the Soviet Union. In fact, following the meeting in Maine, First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov, blasted Washington in the blistering rhetoric of the Cold War era.

"They are trying to push us into knocking heads with Europe . . . in order to create a new dividing line, a New Berlin Wall," bawled Ivanov. "It is obvious that continuing with the plans and carrying them out by placing rockets in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic will present an obvious threat to Russia."

Ivanov is right. Missile Defense poses a clear danger to Russia's national security. It integrates the United States entire nuclear capability (including space-based operations) with systems that are inside Russia's traditional sphere of influence.

Putin summed it up like this in a press conference at the G-8 meetings: "For the first time in history, there are elements of the US nuclear capability on the European continent. It simply changes the whole configuration of international security . . . Of course, we have to respond to that."

The Bush administration is trying to achieve what nuclear weapons specialist Francis A. Boyle calls the "longstanding US policy of nuclear first-strike against Russia." By placing weapons systems and radar on Russia's borders the US will have a critical advantage that will disrupt the essential balance of power. This is forcing Putin to restart the arms race.

The media has tried to downplay the gravity of the situation by focusing on the personal aspects of the Putin-Bush relationship. But this is intentionally misleading. Putin did not go to Kennebunkport to win-back Bush's affections or for sensitivity-therapy. He went to see if he could change Bush's mind on an issue that could quickly escalate into a nuclear standoff.

Putin has made a number of offers designed to satisfy Bush's concerns for "enhanced security." For example, Putin proposed a "global integrated missile shield that would protect all of Europe" and would include both the United States and European countries, including neutral ones such as Austria, Finland and Sweden. All of the participating countries in the program would have equal access to the system's control."

"We are proposing to create a single missile defense system for all participants with equal access to the system's control," Ivanov said on the state-run Russian TV.

The Russian proposal would "create missile defense data exchange centers in Moscow and Brussels, headquarters of NATO and the European Union. Ivanov also did not rule out the sharing by Russia of some of its 'highly sensitive' technologies with the West as part of creating the new integrated system, in order to generate trust in thwarting rogue missile threats." (There's been no coverage of this offer in the Western media)

Putin also reiterated his earlier offer to allow the US to use existing "early warning" radar located in Azerbaijan that can observe the launching and flight of any long-range ballistic missiles from Iran. Bush politely rejected that offer, too.

These are reasonable offers made in good faith to allay Bush's so-called concerns about security.

But Bush is not serious about defense or security. His real intention is to force Moscow to do whatever Washington wants by putting a loaded gun to its head. Putin can't allow this to happen.

Bush's doggedness has already triggered a strong reaction from the Kremlin. When Putin was rebuffed by Bush at the G-8 meetings a month ago, he promptly retaliated at the International Economic Forum in St. Petersburg less than 24 hours later. In his address to the conference, he called for "a new architecture of economic relations requiring a completely new approach (with an) alternative global financial center that will make the ruble the reserve currency for central banks." He said that the World Trade Organization, the World Bank and the IMF are "archaic, undemocratic and inflexible" and do not "reflect the new balance of power."

Putin's speech is seen as a direct challenge to Washington's global leadership and the institutions which preserve its position as the world's only "superpower." He rejects "US hegemony" and the prevailing doctrine of a "unipolar" world order.

The Kremlin reacted just as quickly after the "Lobster Summit" at Kennebunkport. Less than 10 hours after Putin's departure from the US, Deputy Prime Minister Ivanov warned that if Bush deployed Missile Defense in Eastern Europe, Russia "would place medium-range nuclear missiles in Kallingrad," a small finger of Russian-owned territory sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland. This would put Russian-controlled nuclear weapons just a few hundred miles from the heart of Europe.

Ivanov added, "If our proposals are accepted, however, Russia would no longer need to deploy new missile systems in our European territory, including Kaliningrad."

Putin and Ivanov apparently rehearsed this "good cop, bad cop" routine before Putin even arrived in the USA. But their point is still well taken. Putin is forcing Bush to decide whether he wants to work for regional stability or "turn Europe into a powder keg." It's up to Bush.

Putin knows that the Bush administration is full of Cold War militarists who deliberately sabotaged the ABM Treaty, so they could expand their nuclear arsenal while surrounding Russia with American bases. He also knows that these same armchair warriors embrace a belligerent National Security Strategy that advocates "preemptive" first-strike attacks on rivals and which may include the use of low-yield, bunker-busting nuclear weapons. Putin, who has watched the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan from the sidelines, knows that the threat of American aggression cannot be taken lightly. He must carefully consider the "stated goals" of the administration for global domination and prepare for the worst. He cannot allow the Missile Defense System to be deployed even if that means "unilaterally" taking it out.

But why would Bush choose to confront Russia now when American troops and resources are already stretched to the limit? What is Bush thinking?

The Bush administration and their counterparts in the far-right think tanks still believe that America can be a big player in the fight to control resources in the Caspian Basin and Central Asia. The war on terror was basically designed to conceal US geopolitical ambitions in Eurasia, not Iraq. The neocons managed to expand the conflict to Iraq, but ruling elites have had serious misgivings about the invasion-occupation from the very beginning. Now the failures in Iraq are weakening the military, constraining US involvement in Central Asia and Latin America, and triggering anxiety among "old order" conservatives who think that the greater project may collapse altogether if Iraq does not wind-down quickly so the US can refocus on its original goals. This may explain why the defections in the Senate are beginning to snowball and why the establishment media is suddenly calling for a drawdown of troops. The situation has gotten so bad that it's impossible for Washington to execute its broader imperial strategy.

Demonizing Putin

The personal attacks on Putin are no different than the attacks on Iran's Ahmadinejad or Venezuela's Hugo Chavez. Any leader who has the temerity to control his nation's own resources -- and use them for the common good rather than enriching privately owned corporations -- is the de facto enemy of the Empire. In truth, Putin is neither a tyrant nor an opponent of the United States. The criticism directed at him is mostly hot air. He's demonized because he has used Russia's vast natural wealth to rebuild his country and to improve the standard of living for the Russian people. There's nothing more to it.

Presently, Putin enjoys an 84 percent public approval rating -- the highest rating of any world leader today. He has reduced poverty, stabilized the ruble, strengthened defense, deposed the rapacious "oligarchs" and restored Russia's international prestige. He is fiercely nationalistic and the Russian people admire him for it.

More importantly, Putin has successfully out-maneuvered Washington in every major energy deal since Bush took office in 2000. Even the invasion of Afghanistan -- which was supposed to clear pipeline corridors for transporting resources from the Caspian Sea to Pakistan -- has turned out to be a complete fiasco. The resurgent Taliban have ensured that the safe shipment of resources will be impossible for the foreseeable future. Also, setbacks in Afghanistan have exacerbated divisions in NATO which are causing the European allies to reconsider their involvement in the US-led mission. This is a dodgy predicament for Bush & Co. If NATO falls apart, the Transatlantic Alliance will probably unravel, leaving America friendless in a world that is increasingly hostile to foreign adventurism.

While Bush is bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, Putin has continued to consolidate his power in Central Asia while making impressive inroads into Europe. In fact, Russia seems to have already won "The Great Game" of controlling Eurasia's massive natural resources without even clashing with the US.

In this year alone, Russia has increased its "strategic dominance over Europe's energy supplies while US-led efforts to promote energy diversity for Europe are faltering and the EU's policies are in disarray." ("Escaping Putin's Energy Squeeze" Adrian Karatnycky)

In June, Russian energy giant Gazprom firmed up a deal with Italy to build a gas pipeline to southern Europe via the Black Sea sabotaging Washington's plan for a similar project called Nabucco.

At the same time, Putin has worked out deals with Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to ship natural gas to Germany via a proposed pipeline under the Baltic Sea. And, just last week, Gazprom put the finishing touches on agreement with Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to work jointly on a gas pipeline project that will transport natural gas along the Caspian coast.

These deals represent huge commitments of resources which will put Washington at a disadvantage for decades to come. The US military has proved to be a much less effective tool in procuring dwindling resources than the "free market."

The Bush administration has tried to exert greater control over Central Asian resources by building pipelines from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean. But the plan has failed miserably. Putin has out-flanked Washington at every turn. The ex-KGB alum has proved to be the superior capitalist leaving Bush with nothing to show for his efforts except a badly battered military.

Putin is also on friendly terms with Turkey and is pushing for "long-term energy contracts for the Black Sea states." The Turkish leadership shares Putin's belief that the US should be kept from meddling in the region. This may explain why Dick Cheney is so mad at Putin and has even accused him of "blackmail." But this is just sour grapes. In truth, Putin is just doing what the United States used to do -- using free market competition to his best advantage.

What's wrong with that?

An American energy specialist summarized America's defeat in the Eurasian Resource Wars saying: "Western energy policies in Eurasia collapsed in May 2007. During this month, Russia seems to have conclusively defeated all Western-backed projects to bring oil and gas from Central Asia directly to Europe . . . Cumulatively, the May agreements signify a strategic defeat of the decade-old US policy to open direct access to Central Asia's oil and gas reserves. By the same token they have nipped in the bud the European Union's belated attempts since 2006 to institute such a policy."

Putin's greatest energy-coup may be the mega-deal he put together with Austria earlier this year. According to M K Bhadrakumar ("A Pipeline into the Heart of Europe," Asia Times), "Last September, Austria entered a long-term contract with Russia whereby Gazprom will meet 80 percent of Austria's gas requirements of 9 billion cubic meters annually during the next 20-year period." The project will involve "a massive gas-storage facility near Salzburg." . . ."which has an overall capacity of 2.4bcm. The facility is being built at a cost of 260 million euros (nearly US $350 million) by Gazprom and, upon completion in 2011, will be the second-largest underground gas-storage facility in Central Europe . . . [Putin has expanded] Austria's role as a crucial gas-supply hub for transiting Russian gas to France, Italy and Germany in Western Europe; to Hungary in Central Europe; and to Slovenia and Croatia in the Balkans."

Gazprom's agreement with Austria is the death knell for the Washington-backed Nabucco gas pipeline project. It will be very difficult now for the major Western energy giants to catch up with Russia and compete head-on in the European market. Putin caught them flat-footed once again. He has consolidated Eurasian oil and natural gas and established a central depot for distributing resources to consumers throughout Europe.

Game. Set. Match.

Russia is now in the catbird's seat peering over all of Europe and the Balkans as part of its energy fiefdom. Meanwhile Bush and his legions continue to toil away aimlessly in Mesopotamia. What a waste.

Missile Defense is an expression of Washington's frustration with its own failures. The Global Resource War (a.k.a. The War on Terror) has been so badly bungled that Bush will have to initiate "asymmetrical" strategies to counter Russia's economic triumphs. We can expect that US-backed NGOs will continue funding troublemaking "pro democracy" groups inside Russia, hoping to trigger a "color-coded" revolution in Moscow. At the same time, there will probably be a sudden outbreak of violence in Chechnya, after rebel-separatists have been "mysteriously" rearmed by foreign intelligence agencies. (Guess who?) The Bush administration will also try to strengthen its military position on Russia's perimeter by pushing NATO into Ukraine and Georgia.

But, will any of these plans succeed?

Bush and his fellows will do whatever it takes to disrupt Russia's steady march to becoming the new century's Energy Superpower. The "charm offensive" at Kennebunkport is just one part of America's guerilla war on Putin. Missile Defense is another.

Welcome to the new Cold War.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2198.shtml

======================

Celebrating 50 years in Space and Missile Defense

The 10th Annual Space and Missile Defense Conference and Exhibition will take place Aug. 13-16, 2007, at the Von Braun Center. (Huntsville, Alabama). The theme for this year's event is "Celebrating 50 Years in Space and Missile Defense."

The SMD Conference is widely attended by professionals and individuals from throughout the United States and our allies around the world. Event sponsors include the National Defense Industrial Association-Tennessee Valley Chapter (NDIA-TVC), Air Space and Missile Defense Association (ASMDA), and the Air Defense Artillery Association-Huntsville Chapter (ADAA). Conference highlights include presentations from internationally recognized experts in the areas of global ballistic missile defense systems development and operation, as well as integration, synchronization, and capability development to meet new threats. The conference also will include a training and technology track focused on emerging technologies. Sessions will also cover space support to the warfighter, homeland defense, and the integration of cruise missile defense. Confirmed speakers include Gen. James E. Cartwright, commander, U.S. Strategic Command***: Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, commander, Air Force Space Command; Lt. Gen. Henry A. "Trey" Obering III, director, Missile Defense Agency; LTG Kevin T. Campbell, commanding general, SMDC/ARSTRAT; Lt. Gen. Michael A. Hamel, commander, Space and Missile Systems Center, Air Force Space Command; Lt. Gen. (R ) Ed Anderson, former vice commander of NORAD; Lt. Gen. (R) James A. Abrahamson, first director of the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization; Lt. Gen. (R) Thomas Stafford, former astronaut; and many more. There will be exhibit displays throughout the entire VBC and daily attractions in each hall, including celebrity authors, the Liberty Bike, and-displayed for the first time in a public forum-the Liberty Guitar. The conference will also have a technology trek, a scavenger hunt, and a theater projection of the Army's video game. Many of these attractions, along with the viewing of all exhibits, are free and open to the general public.

http://www.waff.com/Global/story.asp?S=6812159

Criminalize nuclear weapons!
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2007/06/chomsky-eliminate-nuclear-weapons.html


*** USSTRATCOM provides a broad range of strategic capabilities and options for the President and Secretary of Defense. Command mission areas include full-spectrum global strike, space operations, computer network operations, Department of Defense information operations, strategic warning, integrated missile defense, and global C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance), and specialized expertise to the joint warfighter.

========================

he Bank for International Settlements issued a warning last week that the Federal Reserve's monetary policies have created an enormous equity bubble which could lead to another "Great Depression". The UK Telegraph says that, "The BIS--the ultimate bank of central bankers--pointed to a confluence a worrying signs, citing mass issuance of new-fangled credit instruments, soaring levels of household debt, extreme appetite for risk shown by investors, and entrenched imbalances in the world currency system."

The IMF and the UN have issued similar warnings, but they've all been ignored by the Bush administration. Neither Bush nor the Federal Reserve is interested in "course correction". They plan to stick with the same harebrained policies until the end.

The "easy credit" which created the subprime crisis in mortgage lending has now spread to the hedge fund industry. The troubles at Bear Stearns prove that Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson's assurance that the problem is "contained" is pure baloney. The contagion is swiftly moving through the entire system taking down home owners, mortgage lenders, banks, rating agencies, and hedge funds. We are just at the beginning of a system-wide breakdown.

The problem originated at the Federal Reserve when Fed-chief Alan Greenspan lowered the Feds Fund Rate to 1% in June 2003 and kept rates perilously low for more than 2 years. Trillions of dollars flowed into the economy through low interest loans creating a massive equity bubble in real estate which drove up housing prices and triggered a speculative frenzy.

The Feds' "easy money" policy has disrupted the "debt-to-GDP" balance which maintains the integrity of the currency. By expanding circulation debt via low interest rates; Greenspan put the country on the path to hyperinflation and, very likely, the collapse of the monetary system.

The problems at Bear Stearns are the logical upshot of Greenspan's policies. The over-leveraged hedge funds are a good example of what happens during a "credit boom". Liquidity flows into the markets and raises the nominal value of all asset classes but, at the same time, GDP continues to shrink. That's because the wages of working class people have stagnated and not kept pace with productivity. When workers have less discretionary income, consumer spending"which accounts for 70% of GDP"begins to decline. That's why this quarters earnings reports have fallen short of expectations. The American consumer is "tapped out".

The current rise in stock prices does not indicate a healthy economy. It simply proves that the market is awash in cheap credit resulting from the Fed's increases in the money supply. Consumer spending is a better indicator of the real state of the economy than stocks. When consumer spending drops off; it is a sign of overcapacity, which is deflationary. That means that growth will continue to shrivel because maxed-out workers can no longer purchase the things they are making.

The underlying problem is not simply the Fed's reckless increases to the money supply, but the growing "wealth gap" which is undermining solid economic growth. If wages don't keep pace with productivity; the middle class loses its ability to buy consumer items and the economy slows.

The reason that hasn't happened yet in the US is because of the extraordinary opportunities to expand personal debt. The Fed's low interest rates have created a culture of borrowing which has convinced many people that debt equals wealth. It's not; and the collapse in the housing market will prove how lethal that theory really is.

To large extent, the housing bubble has concealed the systematic destruction of America's industrial and manufacturing base. Low interest rates have lulled the public to sleep while millions of high-paying jobs have been outsourced. The rise in housing prices has created the illusion of prosperity but, in truth, we are only selling houses to each other and are not making anything that the rest of the world wants. The $11 trillion dollars that was pumped into the real estate market is probably the greatest waste of capital investment in the nations' history. It hasn't produced a single asset that will add to our collective wealth or industrial competitiveness. It's been a total bust.

The Federal Reserve produces all the facts and figures related to the housing industry. They knew that trillions of dollars were being diverted into a speculative bubble, but they did nothing to stop it. Instead, they kept interest rates low and endorsed the lax lending standards which paved the way for millions of defaults. Now the effects of their "cheap money" policies have spread to the hedge fund industry where hundreds of billions of dollars in pensions and savings are in jeopardy.

Alan Greenspan played a major role in the housing boondoggle. On February 26, 2004, he said, "American consumers might benefit if lenders provide greater mortgage product alternatives to the traditional fixed rate mortgage. To the degree that households are driven by fears of payment shocks but willing to manage their own interest-rate risks, the traditional fixed-rate mortgage may be an expensive method of financing a home."

Greenspan tacitly approved the whacky financing which produced all manner of untested loans"including ARMs, piggyback loans, "no doc" loans, "interest only" loans etc. These loans are a break from traditional financing and have contributed to the increase in bankruptcies.

Millions of people who were hoodwinked into buying homes with "interest-only", "no down" loans will now either lose their homes or be shackled to an asset of decreasing value for the next 30 years. They've been tricked into a life of indentured servitude.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal revealed the extent of Greenspan's involvement in the housing fiasco. Here's an excerpt from the article:

"Edward Gramlich, who was Fed governor from 1997 to 2005, said he proposed to Mr. Greenspan in or around 2000, when predatory lending was a growing concern, that the Fed use its discretionary authority to send examiners into the offices of consumer-finance lenders that were units of Fed-regulated bank holding companies.

"I would have liked the Fed to be a leader" in cracking down on predatory lending, Mr. Gramlich, now a scholar at the Urban Institute, said in an interview this past week. Knowing it would be controversial with Mr. Greenspan, whose deregulatory philosophy is well known, Mr. Gramlich broached it to him personally rather than take it to the full board.

"He was opposed to it, so I didn't really pursue it," says Mr. Gramlich.

"Still, Mr. Greenspan's views did color the regulatory environment, facilitating growing concentration in banking and a hands-off approach to derivatives and hedge funds. That approach, broadly shared by both the Clinton and Bush administrations, is coming under increased scrutiny". (Wall Street Journal)

So, Greenspan had the chance to "crack down on predatory lending" and he refused. Now millions of low income people are saddled with payments they have no reasonable prospect of paying off. How much of the present carnage could have been avoided if he had Greenspan done the right thing?

The "Not So Great" Depression

An article appeared this week in the UK Telegraph by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard which supports the theory that Greenspan's "loose monetary policy" fueled a huge credit bubble, which is pushing the global economy towards a "1930s-style slump."

The article quotes from a statement made by The Bank for International Settlements:

"Virtually nobody foresaw the Great Depression of the 1930s, or the crises which affected Japan and Southeast Asia in the early and late 1990s. In fact, each downturn was preceded by a period of non-inflationary growth exuberant enough to lead many commentators to suggest that a 'new era' had arrived".

But today we face "worrying signs" of another economic meltdown.

The BIS said that they were "starting to doubt the wisdom of letting asset bubbles build up on the assumption that they could safely be cleaned up' afterwards". (Greenspan's method) and that, "while cutting interest rates in such a crisis may help, it has the effect of transferring wealth from creditors to debtors and sowing the seeds for more serious problems further ahead.'"

"The bank said it was far from clear whether the US would be able to ignore the consequences of its latest imbalances, ($800 billion per year) citing a current account deficit running at 6.5% of GDP, a rise in US external liabilities by over $4 trillion from 2001 to 2005, and an unprecedented drop in the savings rate. The dollar clearly remains vulnerable to a sudden loss of private sector confidence."'

The BIS referred to the toxic effect of the "$470 billion in collateralized debt obligations (CDO), and a further $524 billion in "synthetic" CDOs which have spread through hedge funds industry. These CDOs are the loans (many sub primes) which were bundled off to Wall Street and turned into securities which are highly leveraged in hedge funds for maximum profitability. As Bear Stearns is discovering, these CDOs are like roadside bombs; exploding without notice whenever the stock market suddenly dips.

The BIS also cautioned about the excess of "leveraged buy-outs (mergers) which touched $753bn, with an average debt/cash flow ratio hitting a record 5.4--. Sooner or later the credit cycle will turn and default rates will begin to rise.'"

The central banks around the world are increasingly worried that the Bush administration's profligate spending and irrational monetary policies will trigger a global depression. The recent volatility in the stock market suggests that the credit boom is just about over. Once the liquidity dries up---stocks will fall sharply.

The Housing Slump

Yesterday's housing data, shows that sales are still weak while inventory continues to grow. Existing home sales dropped 3% while prices dropped another 2.1%. Falling prices mean that cash-strapped home owners will not be able to tap into their home's equity for other expenses. Last year, mortgage equity withdrawals (MEWs) accounted for $600 billion of consumer spending. This year, the amount will be negligible at best.

The media and the Fed continue to mislead the public about the magnitude of the housing bubble. Fed chief Bernanke assures us that the sub prime calamity hasn't "spread to other parts of the economy" (tell that to Bear Stearns) and the media keeps cheerily reiterating that a "turnaround" or "soft landing" is just ahead.

These claims are ridiculous. Apart from the 80 or more sub-prime lenders that have gone "belly-up" in the last few months, the rickety collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and mortgage backed securities (MBSs) are steamrolling their way through the stock market bowling down everything their path. Bear Stearns is just the first on the casualties list. There'll be many more before the storm is over.

Fed-chairman Bernanke knows what's going on. He was given a full rundown by "John Burns Real Estate Consulting that the national sales information for both new and existing homes, is "misleading and covering up a deep plunge of the housing sector." The housing market is freefalling. Existing-home sales are down 22% in May and mortgage applications have fallen a whopping 18%....In Florida home sales are down 34%, not 28% as NAR reported; Arizona sales are down 38%, not 28%; and California's down 37%, not 24% as NAR reports."

Down 37% in California!?! It's a landslide.

As the defaults continue to pile up; the hedge funds will take a bigger and bigger pounding. It can't be avoided. That's what happens when bankers abandon traditional lending standards and lend trillions of thousands of dollars to people who have bad credit and lie on their loan applications.

Thousands of these same shaky sub primes loans have been wrapped up like the Crown Jewels and sold off to Wall Street as CDOs. Now they are ripping through the hedge fund industry like a tornado in a trailer park. The media has tried to downplay the damage, but its not hard to see what is really going on. According to Reuters:

"Banks doubled the amount of CDOs outstanding in the past two years to $2.6 trillion, including a record $769 billion sold last year, according to J.P. Morgan. These figures include funded and unfunded issuance. Pimco's Bill Gross said there are hundreds of billions of dollars of subprime residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS), derivatives on subprime RMBS and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) that buy subprime RMBS and/or the derivatives on the RMBS -- all of which he considers "toxic waste."'

"$2.6 trillion"! That's enough to bring down the whole economy. And, as Bear Stearns proves, the whole mess is beginning to unwind pretty quickly.

"Foreign investors have been the dominant buyers of these exotic debt instruments in recent years, owing to their insatiable demand for yield. If investors start dumping them, oh boy, watch out for some massive credit widening," said Dan Fuss, Vice Chairman at Loomis Sayles. (Reuters)

If the hedge fund industry follows the downward slide of the housing bubble, foreign investors will run for the exits. In fact, this may already being happening.

China sold $5.8 billion in US Treasuries in May; the first time they have dumped USTs on the market. This may be the first sign of "capital flight"---foreign investment fleeing the US for more promising markets in Asia and Europe. The greenback's survival now depends on the generosity of foreign bankers. If they refuse to recycle our $800 billion current account deficit by purchasing US bonds and securities, then the dollar will sink like a stone and lose its place as the world's reserve currency.

More Housing Blowdown

Last Friday, the stock market took a 185-point nosedive on the news that Bear Stearns was trying to raise $3.2 billion to rescue its battered hedge fund. According to the New York Times, however, Bear was only able to came up with "$1.6 billion in secured loans to bail out one of the 2 hedge funds".

The funds are the latest victim of the sub-prime meltdown which Bernanke and Paulson assured us was "largely contained". In fact, Paulson even said, "We have had a major housing correction in this country," and "I do believe we are at or near the bottom."

Anyone who believes Paulson should take a look this chart It illustrates that how loan "resets" will continue to pound the housing market for at least another year and a half getting steadily worse as inventory grows.

The disaster is so bad that even the realtors are beginning to tell the truth. As one agent noted, "It's a bloodbath."

But the debacle in housing is only the first part of a much larger problem"a global liquidity crisis. Banks and mortgage lenders have already begun to tighten up their lending practices and many have abandoned sub prime loans altogether. (20% of the housing market in 2006 was sub prime) Now the focus has shifted to the stock market, where banks are beginning to see that "risk" has not been properly calculated. That means that if more hedge funds collapse, the banks may not be able to cover the losses.

The Bear Stearns fiasco has had a chilling affect on lending. In fact, the New York Times reported on 6-26-07 that "After years of supersize private equity deals--the buyout boom may be about to hit a bump--Rising interest rates and tougher terms from investors may signal that private equity players will soon be struggling to continue reaping the outsize returns that have made the buyout business so lucrative." (Private Equity Investors Hint at Cool Down" NY Times)

Liquidity is drying up in the private equity business. The troubles at Bear Stearns has changed the credit-landscape overnight. Bankers are nervous, money is getting tighter, and liquidity is vanishing.

"We know that these holdings are not unique to Bear Stearns," said Professor Joseph R. Mason, co-author of a recent study warning of dangers in securities backed by home loans to high-risk borrowers. "It would be hard to find a Wall Street firm that hasn't created similar funds."

That's right; the industry is waist-deep in these sub-prime time-bombs. Shaky loans and rising foreclosures threaten to knock the foundation blocks out from under the stock market and set off a wave of panic selling.

Could it have been avoided?

Perhaps, if there were better regulations on rating bonds and restricting leverage.

Consider this: one of Bear Stearns hedge funds took a $600 million investment and leveraged it 10 times its value to $7 billion. Their portfolio was chock-full of dicey CDOs and "illiquid assets" such as timber holdings in foreign countries and toll roads. These assets are difficult to price and nearly impossible to quickly auction off if the market suddenly takes a downturn.

It looked like Merrill Lynch & Co., was going to auction off $850 million of Bear Stearns CDOs this week, but backed off at the last minute. (They were reportedly only offered 30 cents on the dollar!) Once the hedge funds start selling these CDOs, then everyone will know how little they're worth. That could trigger a wave of selling that could bring down the stock market. Even if that scenario doesn't play out, the Bear Stearns incident ensures that CDOs in other hedge funds will be face a substantial downgrading that could take a big chunk out of their bottom line.

And, there's a bigger fear on Wall Street than the fact that 2 hedge funds are headed into bankruptcy, that is, that a sudden tightening of credit will send the over-leveraged stock market into a downward spiral.

The market is particularly sensitive to any rise in interest rates or tougher lending standards. It's become addicted to cheap credit and any break in the chain will cause equities to plummet.

Economist Henry C K Liu sums it up like this:

"The liquidity boom has been delivering strong growth through asset inflation without adding commensurate substantive expansion of the real economy. --. Unlike real physical assets, virtual financial mirages that arise out of thin air can evaporate again into thin air without warning. As inflation picks up, the liquidity boom and asset inflation will draw to a close, leaving a hollowed economy devoid of substance. --A global financial crisis is inevitable". (Henry C K Liu "Liquidity boom and looming crisis" Asia Times)

In other words, the "virtual" wealth of Wall Street is a chimera which was created by the Fed's inexorable expansion of debt. It can vanish in a flash if the sources of liquidity are cut off.

Puru Saxena draws the same conclusion in his article "A Gradual Transition":

"Thanks to the Federal Reserve's expansionary monetary policies over the past 5 years, US asset-prices have risen considerably; also known as the "wealth effect". At the end of last year, the market capitalization of the US stock market rose to a record-high of US$20.6 trillion, matching the value of household real-estate, which also rose to a record-high at the same time. On the surface, this may seem like brilliant news, however you must realize that this "wealth illusion" achieved by an ocean of money and record-high indebtedness is only a consequence of inflation."

Code Red: Subprime Chernobyl

We expect that the mounting losses in CDOs and the continuing defaults in the housing industry will precipitate a "severe credit crunch" which will end in a stock market crash. A report which appeared yesterday in the UK Telegraph appears to agree with this analysis. Lombard Street Research predicted that:

"Excess liquidity in the global system will be slashed. Banks Capital is about to be decimated, which will require calling in a swathe of loans. This is going to aggravate the US hard landing"' ("Banks set to call in swathe of loans" UK Telegraph 6-26-07)

Three of the main hoses which provide liquidity for the market, have either been cut off or severely damaged. These are "securatized" subprime CDOs, corporate mega-mergers and hedge fund leveraging. Without these instruments for expanding debt; liquidity will dry up and stocks will fall. The period of "easy credit" will end in disaster.

We should now be able to see the straight line that connects the Fed's low interest rates to the impending stock market meltdown. The problems began at the central bank.

Presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) summed it up best when he said:

"From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the burst of the dot.com bubble; every economic downturn suffered by the country over the last 80 years can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and artificial "boom" followed by recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts".

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He can be reached at: fergiewhitney@msn.com

http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney06302007.html