Naturally, the U.S. financial crisis will decrease the relative moral and material weight of American leadership. The irresponsibility of large banking institutions, the probably criminal behavior of very important companies in the stock market, and the continued negligence of the government show that today in the U.S. unscrupulous behavior in the economic arena is not an isolated phenomenon.

This is serious, given that the U.S. is not only the most important nation in the planet, it is, as well, a sort of role model to the rest of the world. With what moral authority can the U.S. government fight against international corruption, defend transparency and preach the virtues of globalization after this shameful spectacle? There is no doubt but that this crisis will severely affect America’s ability to influence the rest of the world. — Carlos Alberto Montaner [ READ MORE ]

Popularity: 1% [?]

 Columnist - John Sammon
I can’t figure out if George Bush’s stupidity is malicious, or just the innocent bumblings of a genuine simpleton, a true Cro-Magnon primitive.

You can tell by looking at the shape of his head he isn’t very bright.

Bush and his African American token Lisa Rice (he picked her despite her incompetence because her color would diffuse the widely understood notion that the Republican Party is racist), signed a deal with Poland to put missiles in that country.

Of course, Russia was infuriated by this.

Bush and Rice refer to the missiles as “defensive,” indicating both their naiveté and their “moronic” inclinations.

Bush evidently thinks this move, arming Poland, will make us all safer. He doesn’t read books. He doesn’t learn. He doesn’t know any better. He doesn’t know history.

World War One resulted because the powers in Europe all had binding treaties with each other in a spider web of guarantees to come to each others’ defense (really offense) if any of their small allies were attacked.

They turned each other into armed camps.

Thus, if one small country in the Balkans attacked another small country, the big countries were automatically required to enter the fray, widening it into an uncontrollable world-wide conflict. This prevented the localizing of the war (keeping it small).

Bush and his stooge Rice are doing this. It’s a repeat of 1914.

Rice said, “Poland would be considered (defended) as if it’s US soil.”

Brilliant Rice! When you’re stupid enough to say any attack anywhere on anybody is a direct attack on me, you limit your ability (flexibility) to prevent war. Not the other way around. Learn from 1914.

Bush can’t learn. He isn’t capable of it.

Hey wait a minute! This is also a repeat of 1962.

The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. In reverse. For those of you too young to remember, the Russians in 1962 tried to import missiles into Cuba 90 miles from Florida. Then-President John Kennedy told the Russians this was unacceptable. The world came to within an inch of nuclear World War Three before the Russians backed down under the threat of US military confrontation and had the missiles removed.

Now this jingo idiot (Bush) and his token stooge (Rice) are doing the same thing in reverse.

How would you feel if you were Russia and the world’s reigning superpower was arming all the little (formerly Russian) breakaway satellite countries on your borders, like Georgia? Wouldn’t you feel threatened, encircled, and paranoid? (The same dysfunctional feeling Germany and Russia felt in 1914).

For decades, presidents have been trying to disarm the world (by treaty, not war), to make war less likely. Bush is doing the opposite.

America is the most hypocritical country in the world. We arm everyone to buy their friendship like a bribe. All the while professing peace and accusing countries we don’t like of building their own weapons of mass destruction. We build weapons like mad and ship them. We then attack other countries based on false evidence they have weapons, but are angered whenever other countries follow our bad example and do what we do… attacking countries they don’t like.

We don’t lead by example.

We hold ourselves to a different set of double standards.

Bush is mad. He and his sycophant (Rice) have brought the world a step closer to Armageddon. When will we finally be rid of this man, this mediocrity who always makes the wrong choice? How much more damage can he do before his term is up?
I can’t understand why the American people (twenty percent of them, the ones with flags on their cars), turn a blind eye, and let Bush do this and get away with it.

Maybe they’re as stupid as he is.

Bush is the worst president in American history.

   [Enlarge]

Popularity: 9% [?]

Writes: Earl Beal in Terre Haute, Indiana

In the power politics of international relations, superpower behavior is governed by the concept of geopolitical spheres of influence. When a superpower nation meddles in the internal affairs of another and attempts to exert undue political or economic influence in its perceived sphere, that’s when trouble starts.

The trouble started when President Bush pressured Poland and the Czech Republic to establish a missile-defense system in their territories. This policy was then, and continues to be, seen by some as a direct threat to Russia, not to mention Bush’s push for democratic reforms in former Soviet Republics still considered vital to Russia’s national security interests.

Also, if Russia placed ballistic missiles in Cuba and/or Venezuela, this would constitute a direct threat to the U.S. Washington’s hue and cry over such a move would be surpassed only by Bush’s hypocrisy when he and his Pentagon took the "dramatic," "brutal" and "disproportionate" measure of invading a sovereign Iraq in 2003.

As a result, what do we have?

• The hemorrhaging of our national treasure in terms of lives lost.

• Thousands of courageous people wounded.

• A cost of more than $10 billion a month to finance this fiasco.

• 5 million Iraqi refugees scattered and without homes.

…..and today secretary Rice ushered in the new COLD WAR:

References:

1. The Cuban Missile Crisis — was a confrontation between the United States, the Soviet Union, and Cuba during the Cold War. In Russia, it is termed the “Caribbean Crisis,” (Russian: Karibskiy krizis) while in Cuba it is called the “October Crisis.” The crisis ranks with the Berlin Blockade as one of the major confrontations of the Cold War, and is often regarded as the moment in which the Cold War came closest to a nuclear war….[ MORE >> ]

2. Abkhazia, Ossetia, Georgia, Russia, Europe, USA, Turkey, and the Yet Untold Truth — Russia may certainly have ceaselessly tried to oppose NATO’s expansion up to the Russian borders, but this does not imply that the West has to take this Russian policy into consideration. However, the Western inconsistent and biased stance, interpreted as grave threat by Russia, only damages the chances of the West to diffuse the Western values, ideas and principles among the numerous oppressed peoples who form a sizeable – and traumatized – minority in Russia, being however the local majority either on small (like the Abkhazians) or vast (like the Yakutians) territory. …[ MORE >> ]

Popularity: 11% [?]

History can be at times repeated – as farce; but the farcical has always been an inseparable element of the human condition.

A retrospective view over the Kennedy years and the Cuban Missile Crisis management helps us understand the real challenge the assassinated Democrat President had been for part of the American establishment.

Contrarily to the nightmare of the Johnson and Nixon years, with Vietnam, Angola, Abyssinia, South Yemen, Mozambique turning to communist or pro-communist regimes, the brief period of JFK’s tenure demonstrated the limits of a well propagated myth, the bi-polar world politics and the so-called Cold War.

The Vilification of the ‘Other’

The bipolar world never truly existed; it was a media fabrication based on the traditional political game, the vilification of the ‘other’. This game serves political elites and establishment mainly in inner politics, in shaping popular imagination and the so-called public opinion in a very lucrative way; the vilification of the ‘other’ pays also dividends at the level of foreign policy and exports’ increase.

When a political establishment needs to impose mind and thought control and divert the average people from vital issues, all they need is to portray another state as enemy and to instigate into the public imagination dire images and horrible descriptions. With the outright majority being thus entrapped in an unreal situation, the most vital issues for the establishment can be tackled without criticism, interference or opposition as they go easily unnoticed.

The vilification of the ‘other’ helps pressurizing countries in the periphery about inexistent dangers that are depicted as real and possible to face only by following allied directives, purchasing arms, and re-aligning their foreign policy accordingly.

The true reality of the post-WW II world is that in 1945 there was only one true world power left, namely the United States, and that viewed comparatively with the rest, it could and should definitely be called ’superpower’.

With Japan, Italy and Germany destroyed, with France liberated from the Nazi occupation, with Britain economically exhausted and drained, and with the USSR’s most important territory totally destroyed during WW II, it is difficult to find out a real counterbalance to the only – omnipotent in 1945 – superpower US.

The Creators of the Myth of the Bipolar World

What could have been the real objectives of those who diffused through the world media the myth of the bipolar world, and how can we identify them? What world developments did the creators of the myth of the bipolar world try to keep secret and unnoticed by the average Americans?

Average people usually forget; new unreal images and fresh imaginative narratives, diffused through the media, contribute greatly to this situation. Before WW II, there was not any alliance between the United States and the European capitalist countries; there was simply a common rejection of the Soviet regime, but this was a secondary element. Even the Western European opposition to Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy was not widely shared in 1930s’ America.

If we go back to the end of WW I, we realize that President Wilson’s idealism consisted in a true impediment for the Anglo-French tandem of the Entente Cordiale, Clemenceau and Lloyd George. Scrutinizing the American foreign policy of the late 19th and early 20th century, we can certainly identify it as anti-colonial, humanist, and idealist. The American anti-colonial policy was particularly highlighted in the wars against the Spanish colonial empire; but America was not in bad terms with Germany, Russia, and the Ottoman Empire. We can however attest an animosity between the United States and the Austrian – Hungarian monarchy, viewed as the representative of a Medieval Order of things and situations to which the rise of America had to put a dead end.

It is undisputedly confirmed that America was largely manipulated in order to enter WW I against Imperial Germany.

What did America get instead?

Nothing!

Not even Iraq!

The dismembered territories of the demised Ottoman Empire were divided to English and French zones of ‘mandate’. The developments that led to America’s entrance into war with Imperial Germany and the final outcome, after the post-WW I treaties had been signed, demonstrate that America had been simply used by the colonial empires of France and England for their exclusive benefit.

Not a real achievement for Washington D.C.!

The same concerns America’s entrance into WW II. Thinking that the United States had any sort of obligation toward England and France in 1940 consists in mere projection of today’s viewpoints into another era. A sizeable part of the American establishment, particularly former President Herbert Hoover, argued that it would be a folly for America to rush to save England. The same person had however not hesitated to send humanitarian help to Central Europe and Communist Russia in 1921! It all relates to a completely different approach than that of conventional Americans presidents of the last 45 years.

How can one summarize the various aforementioned points? In fact, for the entire first half of the 20th century, the colonial powers (England and France) managed to inflect the anti-colonial ideology and policy of America, and use the vast resources of the fast expanding country to their benefit. This enterprise has been carried out by the pro-British part of the American establishment; the best representatives of this circle of power are the Federal Reserve, large part of the Banking sector, the Oil sector and more particularly Standard Oil and the derivative companies. They all viewed America as a mere instrument for their global objectives.

Behind them were hidden the Anti-Christian circles of the Freemasonic European establishment well known at those days for promoting outrageous Anti-Italianism, Anti-Germanism, Anti-Ottomanism, Anti-Russianism, atheism, Anti-Catholicism, demolition of the historical European Code of Ethics, evolutionism, materialism, relativism, and all sorts of corrupt practices. They have however pursued the same policies ever since, and down to our times.

The next step was the invention of the Myth of the Bipolar World whereby the US would be portrayed as the leader of the Free World, the Champion of the Free Market, the Paragon of the Democratic Parliamentary System, and the Beacon of Human Rights, whereas the USSR would be depicted as the focus of evil.

What was the functionality of the Myth of the Bipolar World?

At a moment colonial England and France were totally exhausted and their resources drained, in the aftermath of WW II, the concept of the frontal opposition between the communist and the capitalist worlds would help

1. England and France transform their colonies to independent states and their colonial domination to postcolonial rule (without America or the USSR being involved in the process),

2. the colonial structure of vast part of the world be left intact,

3. the dependence of the former colonies on the respective metropolises be effectuated as part of the entire plan, and

4. America and the USSR pursue an arms race that would be an incredible burden for both economies

5. other countries rise (or rise again) to power status (entirely or partly). China, Japan, Germany, Italy, Brazil and Mexico are some of the examples in this case.

6. perpetuate the world order set up earlier by the colonial powers whereby any other power, namely America, the USSR, China, interfering in a former colony, would not be able to destabilize and/or overthrow the prevailing colonial structure

7. England and France finally recover and, through a criminal plan, impose throughout Western Europe a complex totalitarian system which would enable them to come back as a global superpower (Europe) through the immoral practice of conditioning financial help to smaller countries on deliberately demanded social and foreign policy compromises.

In fact, America has already paid dearly for the takeover of its political life by an illegitimate and unrepresentative gang which disregarded the real national interests of America that are in full accordance with the Declaration of Independence and the Principles of the Founding Fathers.

America had indeed a different socio-economic system than that of the USSR. But this did not necessarily imply geo-strategic differences of primary order. Since the mid-20s, Stalin’s rise to power heralded the consolidation of the ‘dictatorship of proletariat’ in one country (USSR), and the abandonment of the dream of the international revolution.

If we take into consideration Lenin’s position on the various peoples and nations in the USSR, America was certainly closer to the USSR than to the Western European colonial powers. Tyrannical practices carried out in France against the various oppressed ethnic groups would be considered as absolutely inhuman and appalling in America. Minority languages were prohibited in France and the terrorist practice was imposed in a brutish way reminiscent of African tyrannies.

The maltreatment of the Breton minority in France was characteristically illuminated in the sentence “In the streets, it is prohibited to spit and to speak Breton” (http://ouiaubreton.com/spip.php?article4311). America was criminally kept unaware of similar practices carried out in France (against the Bretons, the Alsatians, the Basks, the Occitans, the Catalans and the Corsicans), in England (against the Welch, the Irish and the Scots) and in Spain (against the Catalans, the Basks and the Galicians).

NATO – A Trap for the US

In fact, by engulfing the US politics into the swamp of the myth of the bipolar world, the pro-British Freemasonic part of the American establishment prevented the planning and the deployment of a genuinely American – and therefore anti-colonial – foreign policy emanating from the Declaration of Independence and the chief principles of the Founding Fathers.

The implementation of such a foreign policy would cost much less to the US, and as it would be in direct opposition to the Anglo-French colonial policy, it would eliminate any eventual Soviet policy of infiltration.

By genuinely siding with the oppressed and tyrannized, destitute and needy nations of Africa, Asia, Oceania, Europe and America, the US would become the principal Advocate of the Global Liberation, adroitly shaping a comprehensive political project of anti-colonial education, cultural authenticity, liberal (anti-dirigisme) economics, democratic political structure, and genuine nation building.

An American Anti-Colonial Alliance would contain the USSR more efficiently and would result in complete and comprehensive decolonization, national emancipation for dozens of states, and irreversible decadence for the colonial states England, France, Spain and Portugal.

In the 50s, the rise of a US-led Alliance encompassing Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Kabylia (liberated from the French colony ‘Algeria’), Italy, Denmark (including Greenland), Sweden, Turkey, Iran, India, Thailand, Australia (forcefully proclaimed as Republic), Japan, the Philippines, and Polynesia (liberated from the French tyranny), and the decolonized Congo, Somalia, Angola, Madagascar and Mozambique would serve America’s interests far better than NATO.

In fact, one of the major misconceptions of the American foreign and defense policies was the establishment of NATO. The USSR would not expand beyond the border lines of 1945 – 8, and with America forging an anti-colonial alliance, European unification would prove to be impossible.

Not only Anti-Americanism would never go beyond the limits of England and France (two nations that have spent billions of dollars in anti-American activities and propaganda) but America would not embark on a ruinous arms race that spoiled the country’s chances of sustainable economy without deficits. It was already clear that the Soviet system would fail, due to inner contradictions and inconsistencies, and collapse sooner or later.

The American – Western European alliance triggered Anti-Americanism among Third World countries and many Western Europeans who envisioned a possible political space for themselves between the USA and the USSR. This mistake was detrimental for the US global interests.

Contrarily, an American – Third World alliance would leave no political space for the Europeans to cover, would ostracize the Soviets from the Third World, and would help America materialize the objective of being the world’s champion of Democracy, Equity, Justice, and Human Rights.

However, this would be detrimental for the pro-British Freemasonic part of the American establishment, and for their plans that were geared to target the destruction of the uni-polar political system in which the world entered practically at the end of WW II, with the demise of Nazi Germany.

Long Term Objectives of the Pro-British Freemasonic part of the American establishment

For a myriad of American statesmen, consultations with Europe are essential. Thus, you can automatically understand that they don’t truly care for America’s integrity and prevalence – let alone the long term imposition of a Pax Americana.

For them, Western Europe, evolving around the Anglo-French pseudo-democratic establishment, is the center of the world. It sounds odd how people like Truman, Johnson, Nixon, Kissinger, Ford, Clinton, and Cheney, who have admittedly been so eloquent about the America’s destiny to lead the world, may have had this sort of back thoughts.

They may actually have not; not all of them truly ruled the country. But their mentors, the Rockefeller family and their likes, certainly viewed America’s role as a mere instrument of the Old European Freemasonic guard.

With the rise of 27-member Europe, 63 years after the end of WW II, the time has come for some dramatic changes that will affect the entire world.

Their long term objectives encompass the following:

1 - the termination of the American supremacy (this will be completed with a nuclear attack against Iran, and the dire consequences that it will entail),

2 - the return of the US to a sort of reassessed isolationism in the New World,

3 - the rise of Europe as the main power in the West,

4 - the creation of a sizeable periphery of Europe in Africa and the Middle East (the project has just started, Mediterranean Union),

5 - the recognition of Europe’s role to be involved in Jerusalem and to protect Israel,

6 - the provocation of a terrible war in the Middle East,

7 - the subsequent turmoil in Europe with clashes between indigenous nationalists and Muslim immigrants,

8 - the White Terror (following the imposition of indigenous nationalists) and the rise of a totalitarian European Empire that will cancel Christianity, introduce another religion, and typically annex the Middle East (involving new mass transportations to a new – different – “Israel”),

9 - the departure of few selected top elite people (along with their clones and relevant technological infrastructure) to the space, and

10 - the ensuing clash of the European Empire with Russia and China and a nuclear hecatomb.

Nothing of all this can be materialized as long as the United States remains the world’s only superpower. American supremacy started indeed being shaken with the demise of the Soviet Block and the USSR (1989 – 1991).

The narratives of tele-guided media forgery have it that America was catapulted to supremacy as the world’s only superpower only in 1991. This is a preposterous interpretation. There is nothing falser than this.

In fact, the Soviet Union was never a counterweight, except in myth, in mythical and forged narratives of masterminded media, in the shameful lies in which the entire world had been plunged for four (4) entire decades (1950 – 1990).

Soviet Union was financially insignificant, and without its fixed currency (which demonstrated nothing more than the economic policy of a tyranny), the country could have been bought up many times by a few leading US corporations. In the early 70s, Japan and Germany were economically and financially far more significant than the Soviet Union with its anachronistic system of production and distribution.

JFK and the Revelation of the Uni-polar World

Militarily, the USSR certainly expanded and at a certain moment possessed higher number of otherwise useless conventional weapons that were not employed – except in Iraq, Syria, Abyssinia, Afghanistan and some other peripheral and insignificant territories. But does it truly matter for a supposedly influential country to produce loads of anachronistic weapons that can ensure only a spectacular defeat (like the notorious Soviet tanks of Saddam Hussein)?

Beyond the conventional weapons, the Soviet Union reached up to the point of possessing more nuclear heads than the US. But the Soviet regime – contrarily to today’s rulers of Kremlin – was irremovable from its policy of nuclear balance. This system of international politics was then much safer than ours, because it entailed the guarantee of non use of the nuclear weapons that simply drained the resources of the two countries. With the now rising nationalistic and imperialistic policies, this guarantee does not exist anymore.

In fact, with the implementation of one interpretation of the Marxism - Leninism in Soviet Union, the country ceased to exist at the political level; it became a non – topos, a Utopia self-condemned in barter trade, unrepresentative currency exchange rates, and utter isolation. The Soviet Union and its East European satellites were in fact a neutral territory, a no-man’s-land impossible to be integrated into the world political system.

This became very clear at the times of the Cuban Missile Crisis; despite the apparent interaction and the political game (mostly played by Tovarich Andrei Gromyko theatrically saying ‘Net’ in every session of the UN Security Council), the Soviet Union would never risk to be turned from political no-man’s-land to physically annihilated territory.

President J. F. Kennedy’s public denunciation of secret societies and commitment to making visible the hidden reality of the uni-polar system were the real reason of his assassination. If he had been ‘allowed’ to pursue his policy further, the world would have soon been very different, and the Soviet Union would have collapsed much earlier. Following these developments, the then 6-member European Community would have never been able to form a large Union of states.

It was a mere customary act for JFK’s opponents to carry out the assassination, but there was a critical corroboration of the need for such an assassination; there was Lyndon Johnson available to replace an assassinated President Kennedy. Lyndon Johnson was a person controlled – only too well – by the Pro-British Freemasonic part of the American establishment, and beforehand placed in the correct position: that of the Vice President.

At this point, it would be necessary to quote the following insightful details: “Lyndon B. Johnson was initiated on October 30, 1937 in Johnson City Lodge No. 561, at Johnson City, Texas, but completed only the Entered Apprentice, or first, of the three Masonic degrees. For this reason, he is not included in the gallery”.
(http://www.pagrandlodge.org/mlam/presidents/index.html)

The Democratic Nomination – Denver 25 - 28 / 8/ 08

There are policies that can consolidate the already shaken American supremacy; and there are policies that can trigger the final demise of the American supremacy and our entrance into a multi-polar world.

The few words of criticism uttered by Barack Obama with respect to the Oil cartel suggest that he belongs to the world of JFK. This means that he can have the same destiny as the 35th President of the United States, if he intends to pursue a policy that would guarantee American supremacy and world peace. The Pro-British Freemasonic part of the American establishment, and behind them the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group, and above all the Apostate Freemasonic Lodge would do all that it takes to prevent a development that would avert the aforementioned, well planned world clash.

If Barack Obama has a chance to save America and let the world survive, he should avoid the lethal mistake of entrusting the position of the Vice President to either Al Gore (with slim chances) or Hillary Clinton (with stronger chances).

With any of these two persons nominated in Denver as Vice President, Barack Obama, even if he manages to win the November 2008 presidential elections, prevailing over the Republican nominee, the notorious Free Mason John McCain (http://www.radaronline.com/features/2008/05/secret_societies_bohemian_grove_masons_trilateral_commission-print.php), will have to either obey rules that are given by invisible masters in striking contrast with the American national interests or wait the moment of his premature and undeserved death.

Note: Hillary Clinton with the face turned to the right side, and with the right hand elbow based on something (in this case the chair’s arm) and the right hand palm covering the left hand palm; the right hand index and little fingers are slightly extended to help shape the symbol the two horns. These are typical freemasonic posture and gestures showing details about Hillary Clinton’s grade.

Popularity: 12% [?]

‘Water-Boarding’ Kenyan terror suspects and how they were flown out of Kenya

Writes: Ben Agina

Details on how 19 terror suspects arrested in Kenya, but removed from police custody by foreign security agents for interrogation can be revealed today.

Interrogation by the foreign agents — including US’ Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and Britain’s MI6 — have been described as “most inhumane” and involved blindfolding suspects, shackling their feet and handcuffing them from the back.

   Arrest Bush - A War Criminal!
According to a report by a presidential committee exclusively obtained by The Standard, the case of one detainee, Amir Mohamed, stands out as an example how foreign agents could easily access and remove suspects from police custody in various stations.

Mohamed was taken out of his cell at Nairobi’s Kileleshwa Police Station by American agents in a US registered vehicle and taken to a local hotel for interrogation.

When contacted, Government Spokesman Alfred Mutua asked: “What is the report saying?”

After consulting the Head of Public Service Francis Muthaura, Dr Mutua said the Government had not received the final report.

However, Mutua said they were aware of the committee’s “rough draft” whose content not all members were agreed on.

He said the committee was asked to make the report more accurate.

“The committee is still refining it (report) to try and come up with a more accurate document,” he said.

The Presidential Special Action Committee appointed last year to address specific concerns of the Muslim community received reports that the foreign agents had direct access to prisoners without restraint.

The report was to be handed over to the President on March 31, but to date it is yet to be received at State House.

The committee received reports from the Muslim Human Rights Forum, which witnessed Mohamed being brought back to Kileleshwa from an interrogation session on February 5, last year, in a US Embassy vehicle.

The detainee confirmed to the human rights’ group that he was interrogated by FBI agents about possible links with Al–Qaeda training military camps in Mogadishu, Somalia.

Another detainee, Mohammad Ezzouek, said he was interrogated by British intelligence agents at Kileleshwa Police Station between February 3 and 5 last year.

The human rights’ group also reported that during a fact-finding mission to Kiunga, Lamu District, the residents reported seeing foreign security personnel together with Kenyan security forces in the hunt for people fleeing Somalia and seeking refuge in Kenya.

One Abdulmalik Mohamed, said to be a Kenyan citizen and suspected of being involved in the bombing of Paradise Hotel in Mombasa, was arrested in Kenya and handed to foreign agents who flew him to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, after being held in custody in Mombasa and Nairobi.

The report quotes a statement by the US Department of Defence on March 26, 2006, indicating that Abdulmalik had admitted his involvement in terrorist attacks in Mombasa in 2002 and the US Embassy bombings in Nairobi in 1998.

One suspect who appeared before the committee, Fatma Ahmed Chande, a Tanzania national married to a Kenyan, narrated her ordeal as she and her husband, Salim Awadh Salim, were fleeing from Somalia.

“It was so chilly and drizzling. We were bundled into pick ups and driven to the runway. I saw very many people, including women, kneeling,” said Chande.

“The men were blindfolded and their hands handcuffed behind their backs and feet chained. I was led to the group of women and ordered to kneel, too,” said Chande.

She added: “An armed man came to me and pulled down my veil to uncover my face. Some of the detainees were crying loudly. The men had black hoods covering their heads. We knelt for some time, till our knees ached. We were taken to the plane, still blindfolded. I could, however, see through my veil as it was of light material. It was very scaring, cold and wet.”

According to the committee, Chande’s statement confirms the report by the human rights’ group that her husband, Salim, said to be Kenyan, was moved to Ethiopia, where he is still held.

The committee received reports that on March 31, last year, heavily armed police officers cordoned off a residential area in Kongowea, Mombasa, and harassed everyone in sight as they sought terror suspects.

After the ordeal, the officers arrested two people and later released them without charges.

On the night of April 24-25, last year, heavily armed hooded ATPU personnel raided Guraya in Mombasa.

Again, they cordoned off the area and blocked the adjacent Jomo Kenyatta highway, and proceeded to break doors at homes and paraded residents, including children and the elderly, in the rain at 3am.

It was alleged that the police ransacked their homes and took away valuables and cash, arrested 11 residents, 10 of who were later released without charges, while one was deported to the Comoros.

The committee also heard from Noor Sheikh Hassan, also said to be a Kenyan citizen who, together with five others, was arrested in Liboi, a town on the Kenya-Somali border on January 6, last year, and transferred to Langata Police Station in Nairobi, where he was held in solitary confinement for 25 days.

He was denied access to a lawyer and family members and could not make any phone call.

As of today, none of the arrests have yielded any prosecution for crimes connected with terrorism.

The report adds that some of those arrested were later released without charges whereas others were prosecuted for minor immigration offences and deported.

“The rendition of the terror suspects is illegal under the Constitution and international law because it disregards judicial and administrative processes,” says the report.

Most Kenyan victims of “rendition” were arrested and detained, while others were abducted and denied legal representation.

The committee notes that rendition violates other human rights: For instance, victims of rendition have no opportunity to challenge their detention, or the arbitrary decision to transfer them to another country.

The Kenyan security agents have continued to defend themselves over the rendition, saying those taken to foreign countries were not Kenyans

The committee, however, claims to have received evidence of the rendition of at least 19 Kenyans to Ethiopia, Somalia and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Flight manifests made available to the committee show that in January and February last year, chartered planes left Nairobi with about 80 people on board to the Somali capital Mogadishu and the town of Baidoa. They were suspected to have links with Al-Qaeda.

The flights left at night, and the manifests appear to have omitted important details.

The 19 were Aden Sheikh Abdullahi, Saidi Shifa, Salam Ngama, Bashir Hussein Chirag Mohammed Sader, Said Hamisi Mohamed, Swaleh Ali Tunza, Hassan Shaban Mwazume, Hussein Ali Said, Tsuma Solomon Adam Ayila, Abdi Muhammed Abdillahi, Salim Awadh Salim, Abdulrashid Mohamed, Kasim Musa Mwarusi, Ali Musa Mwarusi, Abdallah Halifan Tondwe, Nasru Tuko, Mohammed Said Mohamed, Saqaawi Diin (all in Ethiopia) and Wahab Mohamed Abdulmalik (Guatanamo bay, Cuba).

Muslim Human Rights Forum reported to the committee that it had filed 34 applications at the High Court in Nairobi, while six others were filed in Mombasa.

Despite High Court orders in all the cases, the State defied, and only released two suspects, while the rest were moved to foreign jurisdictions.

Popularity: 13% [?]