US Presidential Election 2012: Barack Obama Gets Second Term in White House

Fifty-one-year-old African-American Barack Hussein Obama was reelected as the US president on November 7, defeating his Republican rival Mitt Romney in a hard-fought and expensive battle, but he will have to contend with a gridlocked US Congress.

It was not such a long night after all as Obama swept the polls, proving wrong many a pundit who had predicted a close contest, to secure himself a second term at the White House. In fact, not only did the incumbent President doggedly defend the Democratic bastions of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan but the blue wave that he unleashed also swallowed whole the swing States of Virginia, Nevada, New Hampshire, Colorado, Iowa and Ohio — effectively shutting out all routes to victory for his Republican challenger Mitt Romney.

Obama’s reelection bid by a narrow margin gives him four more years in an American environment that is challenging by any standards. Just before he took over as the first black President in his country’s history, he faced the biggest recession that hit his homeland since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

In securing his place in history, however, he will have to continue to face the challenges of a divided nation and Congress, as the popular vote in the highly divisive election was split evenly between him and his Republican rival, Romney, at 49 per cent.

It is a vote for Obama’s stress on jobs, health-care reform and pro-gay, pro-abortion and pro-immigrant policies. Soon after the result, a relieved but energetic Obama promised “the best is yet to come”. It will, however, be a tough going for the new President as the Republicans have retained their hold on the House of Representatives, though the Senate stays with the Democrats.

Obama, however, faces the prospect of renewed challenges posed by a divided Congress with the Republicans retaining control of the House of Representatives and his fellow-Democrats maintaining their hold of Senate.

Election Process

US presidential elections are decided by an electoral college, which gives states a certain number of electoral votes based on population. A candidate must get 270 electoral votes to win the presidency.

Preliminary indications suggested that voter turnout was lower this year than the breathtaking levels that it soared to in 2008. Although it peaked at close to 70 per cent in some States such as Wisconsin, it also dropped heavily in others, by around 11 per cent in Texas.

The biggest plunge by far, according to media reports quoting a study by American University, was in Eastern Seaboard States that were still recovering from the devastation in the wake of Superstorm Sandy, which caused major property damage and knocked out power for millions, thus disrupting standard voting practices.

Obama shot past the 270 mark, garnering 303 electoral votes and winning most of the battleground states. On November 7, a final result was awaited in Florida, where the President had a narrow lead. Florida has 29 electoral votes.

Romney got 206 electoral votes. While the electoral vote margin was significant, the difference between the two candidates in the popular vote was much smaller. Obama got 50 per cent of the popular vote compared to 48 per cent for Romney, a Mormon. In all, Obama won 25 states and the District of Columbia, while Romney won 24 states.

In the 100-member Senate, the Democrats now have 52 seats, a net gain of one seat. The Republicans are left with 45 seats, with a net loss of one seat. Two independents usually caucus with the Democrats.

Two Republican candidates who had made controversial comments on the subject of rape and abortion during campaigning ended up losing the race. Both of them were Tea Party favorites – Richard Mourdock of Indiana and Todd Akin of Missouri.

Road to Success

Undoubtedly, it is true that for all his achievements, including the risky directive to get Osama Bin Laden in his Pakistan hideout, Obama’s four years are a litany of broken promises. He dramatically announced the closure of the notorious Guantanamo prison complex in a year and made a clarion call to the Muslim world from Cairo and promised to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Guantanamo is still very much in existence and the Palestinian plight in overthrowing Israeli rule has never been more desperate, with more and more Palestinian land being colonized with little more than hand-wringing from the Obama administration.
On Guantanamo, he met stout Republican opposition in Congress, and on Israel he was up against the insurmountable Jewish lobby’s hold on the American political system, which has supported and helped the Israeli state in every way since the British departed from the region. It is an indication of Tel Aviv’s ability to influence US policy in the Middle East, as the world calls it, that going against Israel’s interests, whatever the cost to Washington, is a sure road to calumny and oblivion for any American leader.

Focus on Challenges

It is equally true that Americans are tired of fighting wars, particularly in the Arab and Muslim world, and American help in the overthrow of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi was described as “leading from behind” by placing the European powers in front in the Nato air war camouflaging key US inputs.

The Iraq war, perhaps the greatest mistake of the George W. Bush presidency, was wound down and a timeline was set at 2014 for withdrawal from Afghanistan. In addition, President Obama has been seeking to temper Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s belligerence on Iran.

President Obama’s priority must, however, be to make the congressional system work. There are many anomalies in the US electoral system — for instance, Electoral College votes based on state quotas trumping the popular vote — and the President’s right to appoint justices of the Supreme Court is flawed.

It is expected that Obama will push for higher taxes on the wealthy so as to trim down the debt burden and also generate money for his pet programs. Equally importantly, he will try to cut a massive financial deal with Congress in the coming months to reduce the budgetary deficit.

Foreign Policy Issue

Barack is unlikely to do any major change on the foreign policy front. This is a comfortable scenario for India because Obama had amended his policy initiatives vis-à-vis India after his pro-China posturing during the initial months of his first term. He quickly realized the merits in the policy pursued by the George W. Bush administration which had clinched the historic nuclear deal with India. It was a matter of relief for India when he ultimately reverted to Bush’s policy, which was aimed at containing China to protect US interests in East Asia. Attempts at the containment of China were essential as most countries in the region are scared of an over-assertive China, which sees itself as the future superpower.

However, Pakistan and Iran must be feeling uncomfortable with Obama’s reelection as US President, as there is unlikely to be any let-up in the drive to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapon capability and the targeting of Taliban activists in Pakistan’s tribal areas through drone attacks. Of course, Barack Obama, whose forefathers were Muslim Kenyans and who spent his early childhood in Indonesia, no longer has to prove that he cannot be soft toward these countries posing threat to global peace. The truth is that no US President can afford to be lax towards terrorists or an Iran which is considered more dangerous for peace in West Asia than Israel by US allies like Saudi Arabia.

Boost to Indo-US Ties

Obama’s reelection is a good news for the Indian economy, although balance will have to be established between rhetoric and practicality on prickly issues like outsourcing of IT services.

With elections out of the way and status quo maintained, India Inc is betting on increased focus on reviving growth in the US which will also lift its own fortunes and also spur growth across the world. Being one of India’s largest trading partners, the US accounts for more than 13 per cent of total Indian exports and 60 per cent of IT exports.The recent reforms initiated by the UPA government are expected to enhance the Indo-US economic partnership.

The US accounts for more than 13 percent of total Indian exports and 60 percent of IT exports. The feeling is that Obama’s win will ensure continuity in growing India-US relations.

The issue of curbing outsourcing, which Obama made a poll plank, remains to be sorted out. Indian IT firms hope to get an opportunity to partner with US companies to achieve growth targets.

India’s exports to the US grew from $17.24 billion to $19.61 billion, showing a growth of 15 per cent during April-September, 2012, over the corresponding period last year. The share of the US in total exports went up to 13.88 per cent and it has surpassed the UAE as the prime destination of India’s exports.

On defense front, Obama’s reelection is set to boost the defense relations between New Delhi and Washington with focus on technology sharing, joint research, co-production of defense equipment and increased military engagement.

In his first term in 2009, Obama had opened the gates for US companies to enter the multi-billion dollar Indian defense market that was essentially dominated by the Russians and Israelis. As a result, India placed a huge order for US-produced defense equipment worth $9 billion – approximately Rs 47,000 crore. Obama’s second term promises even more deeper ties with India. It was illustrated by US Defense Secretary Leon E Panetta visit to India in June when he listed out several long term partnerships in the defense sector.

In the past four years, New Delhi has ordered medium lift transport planes (C-130-J), heavy lift planes (C-17 Globemaster) and long-range maritime reconnaissance planes (Boeing P8-I). The ties took a significant upswing last month when India gave nod to the purchase of Boeing ‘Apache’ attack chopper.

Assessment

The US president presides over a superpower on the retreat and is more concerned about fixing economic problems back home rather than playing the global “supercop”. By and large, he has not created or aggravated tensions. Having friendly relations with India may be part of the US policy to counter the rise of China, but the change has not hurt India’s interests.

To what degree Obama is successful in this regard will depend on how well he can reach out to the Republicans. He will be well advised to do so with utmost sincerity, as this and other such deals will determine his presidential legacy, which otherwise stands the risk of being rendered hollow by petty partisan politics. All it needs is a new resolve to move away from strange ideologies and beliefs that seem to thrive in the free American air to the detriment of logic and common sense.

US Sinking Under Tides of Economic Crisis

Today, the United States is poor, not capable enough to govern and administer the world. The world's richest country has now become the world's most indebted country. The super power, which used to provide loans to others, is itself heavily indebted today. Today, the United States has trillions of debt, which it cannot pay.
What a good proverb that one has to pay for his deeds, or that what you sow so shall you reap. The United States has been impoverished by its recklessness and arrogance.
Causes and Reasons
If we go a little back, we can see that in 2000 Christian era (when Bill Clinton was relinquishing power to George W. Bush), the United States had a surplus amount of $300 dollars in its exchequer. However, when, in the wake of the 9/11 incidents, Bush resorted to huge military and financial spending, this surplus moved to negative, meaning that $300 billion expenditures were incurred in two years. In the subsequent two years, this expenditure doubled, rising to $600 billion. In the following two years, it further grew to $900 billion, and in 2009 it blew up to $1200 billion (meaning $1.2 trillion), and today we see that it has soared to $1700 billion (meaning $1.7 trillion), which has no precedence in the US history. It forced Washington to obtain loans to prop up its falling economy. It obtained heavy loans from Japan, China, Saudi Arabia, and other Gulf countries.
In Bush's first tenure, the debt of the United States was $ 7.6 trillion while in his second tenure, it rose to $10.6 trillion while today it has increased to $14.02 trillion. These figures show that half of this loan has been taken during the past six years (when wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were on their height). If this $14 trillion loan is divided among all the Americans, every American will have a debt of $453,000.
Economic experts say that the United States may spend $1.3 trillion more than the its revenue this year because the budget deficit is adding $ four billion to the national debts every day, and this loss is gradually leading the United States to sinking. This means that Washington borrows 41 cents of every dollar, which it spends. The finance minister had said that such an eventuality had never occurred in the US history.
Impact of War and Fragile Peace
A matter of more shame is the fact that both the parties blame each other for this big crisis, each of them absolving itself of the responsibility. The Congress is under compulsion to do one of the following two things: either it would have to raise the upper limit of procuring loan so the government can obtain more loans, or it would have to make a huge reduction in spending and budgets. Whatever it does would not prove beneficial because debt always grows in war and fragile peace, although not as much as Bush had incurred. He impoverished the state and handed it over to Barack Obama in a bankrupted condition.
Regrettable is the fact that almost equal to half of this $14 trillion, meaning $6 billion, is to be paid as mark-up. Although the actual mark-up is $900 billion but for several reasons, it increases to$6 trillion:
1. As the government cannot pay the debt, it has to pay more markup.
2. The lenders (governments, companies, banks, and individuals) increase the ratio of their mark-up.
3. As the government loses the trust of the lenders, every one avoids paying more loans or imposes conditions of their choice.
4. It maintains its high defense expenditure and budget, therefore, both the wars are continuing on borrowed money.
The Pentagon's budget for 2011 or the present year is $707 billion. An additional $200 billion is being specified for Afghanistan, Iraq, and the so-called war on terror. Why? The Soviet Union has collapsed and WARSAW Pact has also perished. Then why is it ransacking itself and the world? Why did it lost its 6,000 soldiers without any justification and threw $3 trillion into fire? That is the reason that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have left three questions unanswered:
1. Would the United States receive so much loss if there had not been these wars?
2. Would the United States be so much indebted if there had not been these wars?
3. Would the United States is such a massive economic crisis if there had not been these wars?
Not Accepting Bitter Reality
Naturally, the answers are in negative. The attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq and the huge military expenses in both the countries tumbled the stock market. The companies were plunged into losses and bankruptcy. A big financial crisis ensued in 2007-2008. It accelerated and intensified the financial and trade deficit, badly affecting the mortgage sector. The economy melted like snow. More loans were obtained. Excessive dollars were printed, which further lowered the dollar rate. It caused inflation and financial deficit grew further. Big companies got closer to closing down until the government provided billions of dollars to save them from collapse. Unemployment ensued, grew, and perpetuated. All these factors formed a chain, which has tied the hands and feet of the United States in such a manner that the latter finds it difficult, rather impossible, to get rid of it.
See, even the Soviet Union once did not accept that the Afghan war impaired it. The same way, today the United States is not accepting this bitter reality. So, the question is: If the base of this big crisis is not the Afghan war, what it is?
How and in how much time would the United States get itself out of the $14.2 trillion loan? The answer is totally obscure. Therefore, we can say that this is a very back-breaking and insurmountable crisis, which is gradually submerging the United States. Cannot we say that this huge tide is rising like those violent waves of the Red Sea, which had submerged Pharaoh?

People of Arab World Hijacked

All of a sudden, the love of the prime minister for religion has gone up. Even the Menons (left politicians like Rashed Khan Menon and his accomplices) are uttering verses of the holy Quran. The religion trade is now going on massively by making efforts to stop 'fatwa' (religious addict) saying it is a trade of religion traders and uttering the ideals of Islam. Taking the office of a "religion-less" or irreligious state, the love for religion is nothing but a lie and deception.
The people of the country know in whose interest the women policy has been framed. The CIDAW is a charter of conspiracy for turning the women into a commercial commodity. In 1997, a so-called declaration in the United Nations for ending or abolishing all discriminations against the women had got recognition. It is not a charter for development of the women but a story of deception or intrigue. The real Islamic scholars and leaders have taken to the street. They are united not only against the women policy but against all the anti-Islamic policies. Slogans are being raised everywhere in the country that fatwa will be the constitution of the country in future.
Unity of Society
So it is not hartal (closure strike), what is the great need of the country is unity of the society of religious leaders and Islamic thinkers. And only united strength can protect the dignity of the holy Quran. The people of the Arab world have been hijacked. The people are not seeing the dream of freedom. Their fear always is that when bombs and grenades of the hyenas are thrown into their homes. The boisterous sound of weapons and missiles is shattering the life and peace of human habitats. The people are rushing toward hospital in corpse, carrying ambulances with mutilated and severed bodes of the human beings. What they wanted and what is happening; it is like bringing crocodiles by digging canals. In fact, the character of the United States is one and identical. The difference is only in their complexion or in the color of their skin. So the Nobel Peace Prize winning Barack Obama is doing the same thing as his predecessor George W. Bush did. Overtly, it may seem they are not united, but, in fact, they are. The imperialism is the core policy of the United States. As hyenas do not feel good, the United States does not find it comfortable without aggression. They are carrying out killings as they have been doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are a nation of hyenas. They are selling life-destroying tablets and pills in the packets or phials of peace.
US Responsibility
It is also the US responsibility to protect those who they purchased. The movements are a convocation or installation of grabbing anew. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is a purchased grouping of the United States. And the United Nations is their place for their pastime and gossiping.
The attention of Obama is fixed not on the people of Libya but on their oil resources or oil wealth. Thrown into deep recession, it is the need of the United States to plunder the resources of Muslims to get their luxurious lifestyle going. When the United States citizens are beset with unemployment and are about to start begging at that time their government has attacked the Libyan people to grab their oil resources. Other autocratic Arab rulers joined NATO air attacks. And the responsibility of the United States is to ensure security to the evil doers or Satans. Sending warships to Libya they gave a signal to others that no more now, the game is over. Our target has been achieved.
Warplanes and Warships
The last desire of former US President Bush was to launch attack on Iraq and Libya. Obama has fulfilled that desire of Bush. But the difference is Bush has already been insulted trough the hurling of shoes while Obama is yet to get that treatment. The people across the world have been fuming. Obama is playing such a game where the world is clapping with contentment when Libya is being bombarded. It means there will be attacks, but quietly. There would be killing but without any sound.
Obama! You are not t he last. The more your atrocities will grow, the more your days will be numbered. Your nuclear weapons will lose their strength and prowess. Look at Fukushima of Japan. They are counting their days for ruination with their own arms. Not much time would be needed to end your game of pride. Your warplanes and warships would crash onto the roof of your White House only in three minutes. Your nuclear reactors would add gloom to the taste of your dream. The wait of the Muslim ummah (community) is for the help of God. The things for which you boast are your deathtrap.

Unethical US Feelings Exposed

At the moment, the Muslims are the victim of terrorism and are in a state of subjection. Muslim countries are being maligned. Some powers have made the principle that "first defame and then target". The bad luck of the Muslims is that they have no courage even to give verbal response to the United States. Those who are unearthing the brutality and violence of the United States are rising from Europe. American Professor of Philosophy, Noam Chomsky is one of among of those pro-just writers. Most of his books are proven best sellers. Prof Noam's new book, the Power and Terror has been introduced in the market.
Violation of International Norms and Laws
In his new book, while expressing his views about incident of Osama Bin Laden, Prof Noam wrote that the assassination of Osama is an open violation of international norms and laws. It seems clear that no effort was been made to arrest unarmed persons alive. 80 commandoes took part in the operation to arrest Osama and they did not face any resistance. There were arms with the people in the Osama's house Osama, but he was killed despite the fact that not a single bullet was fired on the American Commandos. The suspects were arrested alive and case filed against them in a transparent manner in a society, which claims to be civilized and where the law is strictly followed.
Osama Bin Laden was blamed for destroying twin towers in the United States through two airplanes. The name of investigator into incident is Robert Molar. On April, 2002, Robert Molar told the press that they could say more after comprehensive investigations that the plan was prepared in Afghanistan and its details were decided in United Arab Emirates and Germany. Molar did not mention Pakistan in his investigations which mostly become target of criticism after the incident. Pakistan was maligned and inflicted great losses and it was given the punishment for the crime which it did not commit.
The United States could arrest Osama Bin Laden if it wanted since in 2002 Taliban offered that they themselves will hand over Osama to the United States if it provides evidence about his involvement in attack on twin towers.
It was never the aim of the United States to arrest Osama because it was staging fake drama to arrest of Osama to justify its continue it presence in the region. America has spent hundreds of billions of dollar in war in Afghanistan and it is strange that it spent such a huge amount just for one person.
The objectives of the United States are as under:
1. To maintain its military presence in selected parts of the world.
2. To occupy natural resources including gas, oil and uranium of these countries.
3. To prevent any other country to become a super power.
4. Continuous battle-field training of American forces.
5. To continue production of arms manufacturing factories of the United States.
Prof Chomsky says it has been claimed that Al-Qa'ida carried out 9/11 attacks but there is no concrete evidence of it. The major evidence which was described as Barack Obama's that they carried out them. Such statements and claims for their so-called successes do not have any legal status.
Prof Chomsky states, the United States is unhappy with Pakistan as it had been providing shelter to Osama for five years; but ironically America is not embarrassed over violation of Pakistani borders. The United States sent its troops inside a sovereign country which is itself a big crime and it has provoked anti-US sentiments in Pakistan. Osama was killed and his dead body thrown in the sea inspite of being arresting him alive.
Chomsky asks the US administration that what will be reaction of masses of the United States if the commandos of a hostile country carry out such operation in the United States, enter into White House , kill American President and throw his dead body in the sea"?
The allegations leveled against Osama are controversial, while there are numerous allegations of human killings on former US President George W. Bush. The US President had committed those crimes on the pattern of German Nazis. A heavy bombardment was carried out on Iraq on the order of Bush and the whole country was changed into rubbles. Millions of people were killed and injured, millions were rendered homeless and jobless. The biggest torture cell of the world was set up at Abu Gharib prison in Iraq. Iraqi President Sadam Hussain was traced and executed after trial.
Osama bin Laden could be arrested alive and he could be brought for trial but on the contrary a much uncivilized method was adopted in this regard.
Although Osama Bin Laden has been killed but have his preachings and ideas been killed. Is there now no supporter of Osama in the world and can half of the population of any country be called terrorists?
Collapse of Twin Towers
Prof Chomsky is pro-justice American scholar. The rulers of Muslim countries could not say even secretly to the United States the remarks which the Prof Chomsky is saying openly. Several others pro-justice scholars also are unearthing the naked aggression of the United States. There is solid evidence in their writings which opens the eyes of every the person who favors justice.
The collapse of the twin towers was just drama as the upper parts of the towers should have been destroyed when the planes hit them. A preview of the photos raises the question that why the towers collapsed from foundations as the explosives was planted in the foundations of the towers.
Rulers and Policymaking Bodies
There is no doubt that the United States has reached in the climax of the progress but regrettably it is facing constant defeat because of its moral behaviors. There are such people in the United States rulers and policymaking bodies who are the most wealthiest people of the world. They ignore every moral norm in their lust of accumulating money. In the second half of the 20th century (1950 to 2000), the United States had committed lots of bloodshed which was never committed by any other country in the entire history.
1. Millions of people including women and children were burnt alive by dropping nuclear bomb on Japan.
2. Millions of Koreans were killed in war of Korea.
3. Millions of poor people were killed in the Vietnam War.
4. The aggressive polices of the United States in Middle East particularly in Palestine caused large scale devastations.
5. Iraq and Afghanistan have been changed into graveyards and rubbles.
The main voice is rising from the United States against the cruelty of the United States. Lot of things would be written about Osama Bin Laden in the next few years which would clarify the situation. T.S. Elliott was a famous poet and critic of the United States. In his famous drama (Murder in Cathedral), a priest was killed in the Church by the order of king in Britain in 1130. The unethical feelings of the United States are exposed while reading the book of T.S. Eliot, keeping in mind the killing of Osama Bin Laden.
US Joint Conscious
Today the joint conscious of the United States is weeping and saying that:
* The terror by night, that ends in deadly actions,
* We are soiled by filth that we cannot clean and clear the air, clear the key,
* Wash the wind, wash the brain,
* Wash the soul, Wash them all.
The pro-justice observers and scholars have not agreed over the point of view of the United States about the killing of Osama Bin Laden. No one from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan can disclose the cruelty of the United States; rather a new sun will be rise from the west and will provide concrete proofs to the United States about its brutality. Western media itself is saying that the drama of Osama was staged to improve popularity of graph of President Obama; and it is a good omen that the western media is speaking the truth.

US Downfall Will Take Years, Not Decades

Plague is a contagious fatal disease. The victim of this disease at first suffers from severe fever and then very painful tumors appear on his neck, armpit etc. The patient vomits time and again and, in some cases, loses mental balance. This disease hit the world in the 14th century and wreaked havoc in Europe, Asia, and Africa. It killed one-thirds of the European population. Millions of people died in Asia and Africa as well. Black spots appear on the body of the patient suffering from this disease because of blood clots. Therefore, this disease is also called Black Death.
Plague is an infectious disease. The dictionary meanings of the word plague are: a fatal disease, divine retribution, affliction, and outbreak of something unpleasant in large numbers.
Impact of Western Civilization
The art of using psychological tactics in wars dates back to the ancient times. In the modern world, we have media which can make the mountain of a molehill. Translating desire into reality is the easiest thing in the world for the West. A civilization devoid of any foundation has to resort to propaganda at every front to ensure its survival. The Western civilization, which has given nothing but pain and terror to the world, lends itself as a very good example in this regard. The United States is nothing less than a divine retribution for the world. It has made life difficult for the nations of the world. The contagious New World Order has assumed the form of a deadly plague so that black death rules everywhere.
Let us put off for some other time whether or not Pakistan is a failed state and see where the United States, which declares others failed states, stands.
It is a principle of nature that every zenith has a nadir. I am not talking about the specific brigade that, enslaved to the western viewpoint, parrots the lessons inculcated by their lords. They look at the world through the western glasses. All the superpowers of the past e.g. Rome, Byzantine Empire, Ottoman Empire, United Kingdom, and Soviet Union, could not keep away their decline despite having all the qualities required to be superpower in their respective eras. What makes the United States so sacred then that it will escape the decline? Now, the impartial US experts and intellectuals too are predicting the US decline.
Dr Paul Craig Roberts was assistant secretary of the US Department of State in famous US President Ronald Reagan's regime. Later, he also worked as associate editor of famous US the Wall Street Journal. These days he is working as professor of economics and politics at George Town University, Washington. Center for Research on Globalization, a famous US think-tank, interviewed him on the prevailing situation in the United States. In this interview, he categorically said that the United States has become the most failed state.
Elaborating the statement, he said that the war on terror, an invention of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, has destroyed the US constitution and civil liberties. The Bill of Rights is lying dead now. US President Barack Obama has reinforced the attack on the US freedom. Today, any US citizen, once he is declared terrorist, loses all the rights. However, who is this terrorist? Anyone who does not agree to the US imperialism and policies!
The United States has become a police state. The police have the weapons which generally army has. The purpose is nothing but to terrorize the people. In a failed state, the government and the police are the greatest threat to people. This is precisely the kind of situation, which prevails in the United States today. The US constitution has kept the different US ethnic groups united. If the constitution is destroyed, how can the United States survive? Today, there are only powerful groups; accountability does not exist. The elections are meaningless; both the parties depend on the centers of power.
Currently, Military Security Complex is the most powerful group in the United States. It consists of the Pentagon, CIA, and weapons manufacturers and then oil companies, banks, financial institutions, US-Israel Public Affairs Committee, and multinational companies. This group is so powerful that it cannot be removed through voting.
Fall in Tax Collections
In 1990, when the financial institutions started pursuit of earning more in less time, joblessness increased, as the US companies started to get goods manufactured in other countries. The growing joblessness meant a fall in the tax collections. As a result, the wheel of economic progress came to a halt. The graduates, with degrees in their hands, are forced to do low level jobs. Therefore, the universities are also losing their importance. The increase in imports has open floodgates of trade deficit. Other countries started to buy US bonds and properties and the profits yielded by these go to these very countries. If the United States has not yet gone bankrupt, it is so only because dollar is world's reserve currency. Right now, the US Government as well as the US citizens is under the burden of debts.
Process of Borrowing From Banks
The process of borrowing from banks for extravagant spending has driven the US people to a point where they cannot borrow anymore. Hence, they are forced to buy only the necessities; luxuries are beyond their reach now. The consumer demand based economy is faced with losses because of the decline in buying power. Selfishness has become a character trait of the Americans. They are utterly devoid of the sense that the world hates them and regards them as the brute of the modern world.
The terror threat is self-created. Under this excuse, the Americans attacked the Muslims and set out to conquer the world. They killed 1 million Iraqis and displaced 4 million on the base of a lie. The US troops are killing the Afghans like beasts. The army personnel sitting before the video screens kill citizens in Pakistan by carrying out drone strikes. The Americans are not ashamed of it; they are indifferent. Israel is perpetrating similar brutality in Palestine with the US patronage. The fact remains that the country most favorite with the United States is regarded ‘plague’ in the world.
The plague has started to make its presence felt. Those who regard technology as God may or may not believe but the United States is destined to decline. The grave which holds the superpowers of the past will very soon contain another failed state. It is a matter of years, not decades. It is something which the experts and analysts are repeatedly drawing attention to.

Confrontation Between China, US, India Continues in East Asia

Since the conclusion of the Cold War, Asia has provided a platform for the "soft confrontation" between China, the United States, and India, especially between China and the United States. These three nations have extensive common interests and tremendous potential for cooperation in the aspects of politics, economy and trade, regional security, and global governance. If they could agree to disagree and handle their bilateral and trilateral relations from a strategic perspective, there is a possibility for them to form positive and interactive strategic relations to achieve a win-win and mutually benefiting situation. This will, in turn, play a critically important role in the stability and development in Asia.
The United States has made corresponding strategic arrangement and policy adjustment in three aspects to prevent itself from being excluded from the process of regional integration, particularly to stop any potential newly emerged country from becoming a strategic competitor of the United States and the dominant player in the process of regional integration. This is to protect the political, economic, and security interests of the United States in East Asia.
In the aspect of security, the United States strengthens and develops the existing "axis and auxiliary security structure" centered round the United States by stepping up and adjusting its relations with its allies like Japan and North Korea. Economically, the United States takes the initiative to encourage negotiation on bilateral trade. It earnestly participates in and attempts to spearhead the process of economic integration in East Asia by signing free trade agreements with East Asian countries. Ideologically, it advocates its democratic value diplomacy. It tries to establish an "alliance of value" that corresponds to the US value system by using ideology as the criterion, so that it could influence the value system of the integration of East Asian region.
The three aforementioned aspects constitute the US strategic framework in East Asia after the Cold War. The main objective of this strategy is to support its allies with its hegemonic power to further boost the US dominant power in East Asia.
The East Asian region includes Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia. This article will focus on analyzing and elaborating the strategic maneuvers of China, the United States, and India in Southeast Asia and its influence.
Both US, India Aim at Countering Against China
China, the United States, and India have taken persistent efforts to strengthen their relations with Southeast Asian countries to garner more strategic interests. The United States has officially started to intervene into the affairs in South China Sea. Meanwhile, India is also working hard to strengthen its cooperation with Southeast Asian countries and making this region as a breakthrough point for it to emerge as a strong power in this region on a par with China and the United States. India intends to become a new power in between the United States and China, so that it could elevate its international status to realize its strategic goal of becoming a regional power.
The United States has refocused its attention on its ties with Southeast Asian countries. One can observe from this adjustment the US strategic agenda to counterbalance, contain and diminish China's rising influence in this region.
Meanwhile, India introduced its timely "eastward" policy, aiming at expanding its influence and activities to South China Sea and part of Pacific region. India sees Southeast Asia countries as its important partners and hopes to step out of South Asia with the help of Southeast Asian region as India has "extensive strategic interests" from the Gulf to South China Sea. India's concern over the safety of the environment and potential security issues covers the area "the west, south and east of India from the Persian Gulf to Malacca Strait, middle Asia in its Northwest, China in its Northeast to Southeast Asia."
Southeast Asia is the focus of India's foreign policy, in terms of geographical strategy, economic, and political interests. India strives to strengthen its bilateral ties with Thailand, Burma [Myanmar], Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos through bilateral economic and trade cooperation with these countries to expand its influence to Southeast Asian region. Through the "eastward" policy, India expanded its influence and activity scope to South China Sea and part of Pacific region. Through the implementation of its "eastward" policy, India "improved its cooperation with Southeast Asian countries and even East Asian countries and bolstered its influence in Asia." By doing so, it has established an image of "big power" in Southeast Asia in time and at the same time; it counterbalances and diminishes China's influence in this region to a certain degree.
US Not Happy With India's Expansion of Maritime Influence
Yet, in its consideration of its global strategic interests, the United States would not allow India to become the world police in this waters and it will not allow India to be the dominant power in the Indian Ocean. Although the two countries have fostered increasingly closer cooperation in security, if India "goes overboard" to the extent that affects the US strategic interests in the Indian Ocean, the United States would definitely take action to contain India.
Nevertheless, in view of China's continuous emergence in politics and economy, the United States is thinking of developing closer bilateral ties with India and making India as its most important strategic ally in Asia to counterbalance China's rising influence in Southeast Asia. At the same time, following the expansion of China's political, economic and military powers in Southeast Asia, the United States is "back to Asia" to contain China. The strategic consideration behind the strengthening of economic cooperation between the United States and Southeast Asian countries is to counter China's expansion of influence in this region.
China should take more initiative to strengthen its ties with Southeast Asian countries and develop multilateral and bilateral ties with these countries to establish an image of a "big power" in this region. It should build up new security ties and bilateral cooperation in all aspects with Southeast Asian countries based on the principles of equality and mutual benefit. At the same time, China should handle its bilateral relations with the United States and India properly, including dealing with the border issue with India in an appropriate manner. It should seek common ground with other countries and put aside differences between each other to create a stable and peaceful environment for the modernization process in China. The policy of developing relations with Southeast Asian countries conforms to China's national strategic interests.
Southeast Asian Countries on Guard Against China
The relations between China and Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) have further improved thanks to the efforts in building up political trust, economic cooperation, and common security. Yet, because of their differences, ASEAN countries are still concerned and worried about China's economic growth and the boost in its military power, particularly when China's military actions in Southeast Asian region are deemed by certain countries as actions meant to expand its military power. The unfavorable influence of nontraditional security factors keeps arising and this has directly or indirectly undermined the efforts to develop more closer ties between China and ASEAN member states.
Although far Southeast Asian countries have not explicitly voiced out that China poses a threat to that region, the intensifying arms race in Southeast Asia, in fact, reflects Southeast Asian countries' strategic intention to stay on guard against China. Essentially, the cooperation in economic sector has not diminished Southeast Asian countries' "hostility" against China. Therefore, China should reinforce its mutual understanding and exchange with Southeast Asian countries to do away with this sentiment.
China's Strategies in Southeast Asia
As opposed to China's strategies in Southeast Asia, apparently the United States has failed to maintain consistent and coherent strategies in Southeast Asia. During the times of President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush, the United States did not pay adequate attention to the region of Southeast Asia. Despite its endeavor to advocate democracy in Southeast Asia, the United States has not implemented free trade consistently and persistently in that region.
China should make use of the good opportunity to develop China-US ties remain strategically strong. It should place more emphasis on East Asian region in devising its foreign policy and give more priority to the status and role of relevant East Asian countries and regional power in its diplomatic agenda. China should utilize various forms of media to publicize its policies to prepare the US mentally and attitudinally for the latter to accept a stronger China. As such, China, the United States, and India will be able to achieve a virtuous cycle in their interaction in Southeast Asia and this region could become a peaceful region that enjoys rapid economic development.

Compromises Take Toll on US President's Bedrock Supports

The economic prospects remain unclear, US President Barack Obama suddenly made a policy U-turn by calling on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to withdraw its new proposal on ozone standards. He claimed that such a move was meant to reduce the burden on corporate so that it would not hinder the latter from creating employment opportunities. His supporters lambasted him for "surrendering" to corporate by sacrificing public health.
Law on Smog Emission
EPA Administrator proposed to tighten the law on smog emission. The proposal was strongly objected by lobby groups. The latter claims that the industrial sector would have to make enormous spending if the new pollution rule is implemented and this will cause more people lose their jobs.
But actually, limiting smog emission would not affect the employment rate much. On contrary, it may generate more job opportunities as a result of the increase of corporate investment and spending.
Obama argued that the already approved or implemented environmental regulations -- including regulations on eco-friendly cars and reduction of pollutant emission of power plants -- will help reduce environmental pollution. In any case, given the fact that even if the revision of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ground-Level Ozone is passed in the Congress, the law will come into effect only a few years later, to a larger extent, Obama's withdrawal of the bill was done in view of political pressure and the presidential election next year.
Health Care Reform Plan
In early 2010, despite the objection from the Republican Party, Obama insisted in implementing his health care reform plan and accomplished one of the major goals the Democratic Party had sought for many years. The health care reform legislation has also become an achievement Obama has taken pride in.
Yet, after the Republican Party gained the control over the House of Representatives following the midterm elections held in November last year, Obama has become a lame-duck president. Under the pressure of the reality, Obama has started to flip-flop in his policies. For example, once he insisted to abolish the policy of tax reduction for the rich during the era of President George W. Bush. But he eventually put off this plan in December 2010. Early this year, he gave in to the Republican Party to prevent the government from shutting down.
Impact of Economic Recession
Obama can blame the Republican Party for the economic recession in the United States. But his repeated compromises have outraged and later disappointed voters who supported him. In fact, Obama has gradually lost his bedrock supports he enjoyed three years ago.
Obama once proclaimed: "I would rather be a good president for one term than be a president who achieves nothing in eight years." But in reality, it is hard to be a good president even for one term only.

War on Terror: End of Post-9/11 Era

When the artist Art Spiegelman told his story of 9/11 in a graphic novel, he called it In the Shadow of No Towers. It was an arresting thought, the gloom cast not by the twin peaks of the World Trade Centre but by their absence. We have been living in that shadow for the last 10 years -- but it's time we escaped it. We need to declare the end of the post-9/11 era.
Of course that will be impossible for those directly affected. No one expects -- and no one would ask -- those still grieving for a wife or son, a husband or sister, to put the September 11 attacks behind them just because an anniversary with a round number is looming. What deepens their tragedy is that it continues. The television documentaries, newspaper testimonies and eloquent reminiscences that have been flowing for days leave no doubt that for those directly affected, 9/11 will never let them go.
Artists and writers too will resist closing the book on September 11 any time soon. Happenings on that scale take many decades, not just one, to process. As Salman Rushdie puts it: "I think these great events have to rot down. Maybe another generation has to look at it."
Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
If grief and art will necessarily stay fixated, the realm of politics needs to move on. Osama Bin Laden is dead; George W. Bush and Tony Blair are long gone from office. The two 9/11 wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are not over, but both now have a timetable for troops to come home. The phrase of the age -- "the war on terror" -- has been retired.
As far as Al-Qaida is concerned, it has been decapitated: as well as Osama Bin Laden, the network's new number two and chief operational planner was killed last month, and the man branded its "foreign minister" revealed to be in Pakistani custody on Monday. Most analysts say Al-Qaida is weakened, its capacity to act reduced.
Post-9/11 Landscape
Of course no wants to tempt fate with complacency. For that reason one aspect of the post-9/11 landscape will and should remain in place: vigilance. Police and intelligence agencies charged with protecting the public cannot revert to September 10 pretending that 9/11 -- or, for that matter, Bali, Madrid and London -- did not happen. The threat has changed, but it has not disappeared.
Other aspects of the post-9/11 order persist too. Guantanamo Bay remains open, one of the early disappointments of the Barack Obama presidency. The US "homeland security" apparatus created a decade ago is now well dug in. Given the tenacity of such bureaucracies -- plenty of cold war American military structures linger to this day -- few would bet on this newer one allowing itself to be mothballed.
Overarching and Paramount Threat
Moreover, it is the mind-set that has to go. In those dazed days after the attacks, a new foreign policy doctrine was hastily assembled. It said that the world faced a single, overarching and paramount threat in the form of violent jihadism. Every other battle had to be subordinated to, or subsumed into, that one. And the call went beyond foreign policy. Culture, too, was to be enlisted in a clash of civilizations between Islamism and the west that would rank alongside the great 20th century struggles against communism and fascism. Christopher Hitchens confessed he felt "exhilaration" as he saw the towers fall. At last there would be war against "dull and vicious theocratic fascism. I am prepared for this war to go on for a very long time. I will never become tired of waging it, because it is a fight over essentials. And because it is so interesting."
Such talk has been a constant of the 9/11 decade but its time has passed. For one thing, it's predicated on a mistake. The right way to regard the 2001 attacks was as a heinous and wicked crime -- not a declaration of war. As Eliza Manningham-Buller, the former head of MI5, argued in her first Reith lecture calling it a war "legitimizes the terrorists as warriors & quote. It is exactly what Al-Qaida wanted -- feeding their fantasies of grandeur -- and we gave it to them.
Second, post-9/11 thinking has led to grave and lethal misjudgments. The greatest of these is agglomeration, lumping disparate and complex threats under one easy heading. The most notorious example will always be Iraq, casting that as part of the war on terror even though there was nothing to connect Saddam Hussein to Osama Bin Laden.
But it worked in subtler ways too. The director of Chatham House, Robin Niblett -- who was in Washington when flight 77 struck the Pentagon -- recalls how, during the cold war, regimes in Africa, Asia or Latin America won western backing as they fought off local, domestically motivated rebels simply by casting their opponents as part of "the global Communist foe". In the past decade, the west fell for the same trick all over again. Hosni Mubarak gained a new lease on office by insisting he was holding back the Muslim Brotherhood, which he portrayed as the Egyptian branch of the global jihad. This week has brought fresh evidence that Colonel Gaddafi was playing the same game, persuading British intelligence to become complicit in his torture of dissidents, partly by painting the Libyan opposition in Al-Qaida colors. "The danger of the 9/11 mindset is that you try to compress all kinds of challenges into a single threat," says Niblett.
Making the war against jihadism paramount has had other consequences too, still being felt. On post-9/11 logic, the shredding of civil liberties -- condemned by Manningham-Buller as handing "victory to the terrorists" -- was almost inevitable, for surely such freedoms had to take second place to the supreme threat. More serious has been the unleashing of a rampant Islamophobia -- intense in Europe, recently lethal in Norway and rising in the US. That too is all but inevitable once Islamism is deemed the greatest peril faced by the human race.
Famously Tony Blair declared after 9/11 that the "kaleidoscope has been shaken. The pieces are in flux". But the kaleidoscope has been shaken again -- most dramatically by this year's Arab revolutions. Whatever landscape was created once the dust of the World Trade Centre had settled in 2001 has been remade in 2011. Change has come to Egypt, Tunisia and Libya -- and Osama Bin Laden had nothing to do with it.
Again, this is not to say the dangers have receded. Would-be terrorists have seen the earth-shaking impact a spectacular attack can have -- especially if it prompts a massive reaction that fuels the terrorists' cause, as the Iraq invasion did for Al-Qaida. If one of the Arab revolutions fails, an Al-Qaida offshoot could find purchase in that country. But vigilance is not the same as a careless, undiscriminating monomania.
Even those who were not there say the memory is so vivid, it feels like yesterday. But it was not yesterday. It was 10 years ago. We should mark the 9/11 anniversary with respect and care for those who died. But then we ought to close this sorry and bloody chapter -- and bury the mentality it created.

US Pays Heavy Opportunity Cost 10 Years After 9/11 Terrorist Attacks

Prior to 11 September 2001, the United States was always full of confidence in facing all kinds of challenges and provocations. The name of the United States then was synonymous to "international police personnel" and "financial big brother."
But suddenly, 11 September 2011 came; three aircrafts hit the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon Building of the US Defense Department. Towering buildings collapsed; and the confidence of the people in the United States also collapsed with them. The world community suddenly realized US President George W. Bush could so easily be attacked by the weaker party.
In 2009 when George W. Bush, Jr. left the White House, many people in the United States especially the family members of the US soldiers who had to station overseas to fight the so called counterterrorism war in Iraq and in Afghanistan; as well as the antiwar protestors, were happy to see Bush leaving. They applauded.
Spreading Islam-Phobia
After the 11 September terrorist attacks in the United States, the US security mechanism has also undergone tremendous change. The so-called Islam-phobia also spread quickly in the United States. In the US society, the personal freedom of the citizens became subject to certain restrictions. The immigration law has also been tightened. Once again, Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilization" thought caught the attention of the people again.
Joseph Nye, Jr. who served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs in the Clinton administration believed that a major significant shift of the 11 September incident was that there was an increasing strength of the nonstate actors in the power fight. This shift of power has become one of the largest power transitions in the information age.
The number of the people in the United States killed by Al-Qaida terrorist network was more than the people killed by the Japanese military when Japan attacked the US Pearl Harbor during the Second World War. As such the attacks by the terrorists as non-state actors can perhaps be called the "privatization of war." This is because the war between two nations can no longer be limited or confined to the fight and contest of military strength between nations only.
During the Cold War period, the "mutually assured destruction" strategy allowed the United States and the former Soviet Union to process strong and elite military force. But such a strategy could not allow either country to get benefit from adversaries. In the end both sides became equally vulnerable in order to avoid disaster from happening. But the 11 September terrorist attack in the United States has re-written this international rule of the game.
Creating Asymmetric Situations
Joseph Nye, Jr believed the 11 September terrorist attack incident has created two asymmetric situations that in turn have helped to push the Al Qa'ida terrorist network a step forward.
First, it is the "information" asymmetry. While the terrorists are well aware of their target of attacks, but the United States has little understanding of the hiding places and facial features of the terrorists. While some intelligence were able to predict the damage of the nonstate actors could cause to great powers such as the United States but the conclusions of the intelligence did not get acceptance and be included as part of the official counterterrorism strategy adopted by the authority. Second, there is this "attention" asymmetry. While it is logical for large scale participating bodies with many interests and goals to overlook and pay less attention to some of the smaller scale participating bodies; on the other hand, the smaller participating players can pay more attention to their own goals and are able to focus their attention to what they want to do.
On reflection, the global agenda pertaining to the terrorist attacks staged by Al-Qaida Chief Osama Bin Laden has already been dominated in the world scene for approximately 10 years. Although Bin Laden has already been killed by the US military force in Pakistan in May 2011, but the United States has also paid trillions of dollars in the past ten years trying to arrest Bin Laden. The United States has ended up paying more for the opportunity cost than it has earlier expected.
It is indeed strange and funny for us to observe that when the people in the far away land in the United States suffered the hurt of terrorist attacks 10 years ago, some sectors still hold the suspicion that the 11 September terrorist attacks in the United States was but a self-directed act by the United States itself. Moreover, there were also some sectors that were thankful that such tragedy had happened in the United States but had not happened to them; and there were also some compassionate sectors who expressed their sympathies to the people in the United States. But a tragedy remains a tragedy. After the wounds heal, the indelible scars left in the hearts of the Americans can still occasionally feel the pain.
It has been ten years after the 11 September terrorist attacks in the United States. The world media has spent large media space to report on news related to the 11 September incident in order to evoke our past memory of what had happened to the United States ten years ago. But such a memory war will not just stop here; it may even turn worse as days go by.
Top National Priority
International rule of the game is like the Leaning Tower of Pisa; it will continue to tilt toward the side of the stronger power. US President Barack Obama has tried to change it. He begins US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. But the asymmetry situation he faces will be difficult for him to see the result within short period of time.
No wonder some people in the United States feel that the biggest lesson the United States can learn from the experience of the 11 September incident is on how the US Government should handle its foreign affairs. They feel that the US Government should adhere to the advice of former US President Eisenhower who had won many highly decorated war honors for half of his life some half a century ago. This former US president had said: "Do not get into war that involves in the occupation of other countries' territories. Put focus on strengthening US economy as top national priority."
Unemployment Rate and Federal Deficit
However, now the US economy is in a mess. Although the pending US sovereignty debt issue seems to have been resolved, but there are many hidden concerns in the US society. President Obama has continued to be troubled by the high unemployment rate and federal deficit issue in the United States.
The United States has already bid farewell to its former arrogant hegemony and their proudly-hailed power. The misjudgment of what the United States should do after the 11 September terrorist attacks has led the United States loosing many good opportunities to make good the nation. What is left after the 11 September incident is but a rotten economy, a mess and regret in the US society.

War Hysteria Responsible for US Economic Crisis

The serpent of debt is about to swallow the United States. The day of 2 August carries much importance for US economy. This fear has considerably increased that the US crisis will affect the global economy as well.
IMF’s Warning
Christine Lagarde, chief of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), has once again stated emphatically that the debt crisis in the United States should be resolved as early as possible, as a further delay in it cannot be afforded. Any crisis in the US economy will badly affect the economies all over the world.
If realities are kept in view, it becomes crystal clear that the United States has torn apart global economy directly or indirectly. By plunging several countries into the war, the United States has deteriorated their economies. But, the United States has itself fallen prey to this complex crisis today.
If the United States' past 20-year history is reviewed, we will find that it is its war hysteria that has made it to face this situation. Whether it is senior Bush or junior Bush, their combatant thinking has broken the back of US economy. The Iraq and Afghan wars have been waged without any reasons and only to maintain its status of being a superpower. America's wars did not end, but George W. Bush's government did end and he passed on these gifts to President Barack Obama. The ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan forced the US economy to breathe its last.
Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
The United States has to spend approximately $2 billion a week on the wars, while the country's revenue has considerably decreased. The prices of food and other commodities are increasing and it is becoming difficult for American people to cope with this situation. On the other hand, the income is falling. Unemployment and inflation are witnessing an upward trend. President Obama has curtailed the war hysteria, but the situation appears to be slipping out of hand. Economic situation in the United States is going from bad to worse and becoming complex with each passing day. Neither President Obama nor the Congress has a solution to this situation. According to experts, if the Congress and the President did not come out with a proper arrangement before 2 August, the United States can face problems from the IMF, which the US economy will not be able to withstand.
Moreover, energy reserves in the United States are also at the lowest level, which is a big challenge for the US Administration and people. If the huge sum of money spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is used to resolve the economic crisis, perhaps US economic situation can improve. The earlier the United States gets rid of these futile and meaningless wars, the better it is for the country.

Unethical US Feelings Exposed

At the moment, the Muslims are the victim of terrorism and are in a state of subjection. Muslim countries are being maligned. Some powers have made the principle that "first defame and then target". The bad luck of the Muslims is that they have no courage even to give verbal response to the United States. Those who are unearthing the brutality and violence of the United States are rising from Europe. American Professor of Philosophy, Noam Chomsky is one of among of those pro-just writers. Most of his books are proven best sellers. Prof Noam's new book, the Power and Terror has been introduced in the market.
Violation of International Norms and Laws
In his new book, while expressing his views about incident of Osama Bin Laden, Prof Noam wrote that the assassination of Osama is an open violation of international norms and laws. It seems clear that no effort was been made to arrest unarmed persons alive. 80 commandoes took part in the operation to arrest Osama and they did not face any resistance. There were arms with the people in the Osama's house Osama, but he was killed despite the fact that not a single bullet was fired on the American Commandos. The suspects were arrested alive and case filed against them in a transparent manner in a society, which claims to be civilized and where the law is strictly followed.
Osama Bin Laden was blamed for destroying twin towers in the United States through two airplanes. The name of investigator into incident is Robert Molar. On April, 2002, Robert Molar told the press that they could say more after comprehensive investigations that the plan was prepared in Afghanistan and its details were decided in United Arab Emirates and Germany. Molar did not mention Pakistan in his investigations which mostly become target of criticism after the incident. Pakistan was maligned and inflicted great losses and it was given the punishment for the crime which it did not commit.
The United States could arrest Osama Bin Laden if it wanted since in 2002 Taliban offered that they themselves will hand over Osama to the United States if it provides evidence about his involvement in attack on twin towers.
It was never the aim of the United States to arrest Osama because it was staging fake drama to arrest of Osama to justify its continue it presence in the region. America has spent hundreds of billions of dollar in war in Afghanistan and it is strange that it spent such a huge amount just for one person.
The objectives of the United States are as under:
1. To maintain its military presence in selected parts of the world.
2. To occupy natural resources including gas, oil and uranium of these countries.
3. To prevent any other country to become a super power.
4. Continuous battle-field training of American forces.
5. To continue production of arms manufacturing factories of the United States.
Prof Chomsky says it has been claimed that Al-Qa'ida carried out 9/11 attacks but there is no concrete evidence of it. The major evidence which was described as Barack Obama's that they carried out them. Such statements and claims for their so-called successes do not have any legal status.
Prof Chomsky states, the United States is unhappy with Pakistan as it had been providing shelter to Osama for five years; but ironically America is not embarrassed over violation of Pakistani borders. The United States sent its troops inside a sovereign country which is itself a big crime and it has provoked anti-US sentiments in Pakistan. Osama was killed and his dead body thrown in the sea inspite of being arresting him alive.
Chomsky asks the US administration that what will be reaction of masses of the United States if the commandos of a hostile country carry out such operation in the United States, enter into White House , kill American President and throw his dead body in the sea"?
The allegations leveled against Osama are controversial, while there are numerous allegations of human killings on former US President George W. Bush. The US President had committed those crimes on the pattern of German Nazis. A heavy bombardment was carried out on Iraq on the order of Bush and the whole country was changed into rubbles. Millions of people were killed and injured, millions were rendered homeless and jobless. The biggest torture cell of the world was set up at Abu Gharib prison in Iraq. Iraqi President Sadam Hussain was traced and executed after trial.
Osama bin Laden could be arrested alive and he could be brought for trial but on the contrary a much uncivilized method was adopted in this regard.
Although Osama Bin Laden has been killed but have his preachings and ideas been killed. Is there now no supporter of Osama in the world and can half of the population of any country be called terrorists?
Collapse of Twin Towers
Prof Chomsky is pro-justice American scholar. The rulers of Muslim countries could not say even secretly to the United States the remarks which the Prof Chomsky is saying openly. Several others pro-justice scholars also are unearthing the naked aggression of the United States. There is solid evidence in their writings which opens the eyes of every the person who favors justice.
The collapse of the twin towers was just drama as the upper parts of the towers should have been destroyed when the planes hit them. A preview of the photos raises the question that why the towers collapsed from foundations as the explosives was planted in the foundations of the towers.
Rulers and Policymaking Bodies
There is no doubt that the United States has reached in the climax of the progress but regrettably it is facing constant defeat because of its moral behaviors. There are such people in the United States rulers and policymaking bodies who are the most wealthiest people of the world. They ignore every moral norm in their lust of accumulating money. In the second half of the 20th century (1950 to 2000), the United States had committed lots of bloodshed which was never committed by any other country in the entire history.
1. Millions of people including women and children were burnt alive by dropping nuclear bomb on Japan.
2. Millions of Koreans were killed in war of Korea.
3. Millions of poor people were killed in the Vietnam War.
4. The aggressive polices of the United States in Middle East particularly in Palestine caused large scale devastations.
5. Iraq and Afghanistan have been changed into graveyards and rubbles.
The main voice is rising from the United States against the cruelty of the United States. Lot of things would be written about Osama Bin Laden in the next few years which would clarify the situation. T.S. Elliott was a famous poet and critic of the United States. In his famous drama (Murder in Cathedral), a priest was killed in the Church by the order of king in Britain in 1130. The unethical feelings of the United States are exposed while reading the book of T.S. Eliot, keeping in mind the killing of Osama Bin Laden.
US Joint Conscious
Today the joint conscious of the United States is weeping and saying that:
* The terror by night, that ends in deadly actions,
* We are soiled by filth that we cannot clean and clear the air, clear the key,
* Wash the wind, wash the brain,
* Wash the soul, Wash them all.
The pro-justice observers and scholars have not agreed over the point of view of the United States about the killing of Osama Bin Laden. No one from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan can disclose the cruelty of the United States; rather a new sun will be rise from the west and will provide concrete proofs to the United States about its brutality. Western media itself is saying that the drama of Osama was staged to improve popularity of graph of President Obama; and it is a good omen that the western media is speaking the truth.

Whither Middle East Peace Process?

US President Barack Obama, during his maiden visit to the Middle East in May 2009, delivered an important speech in the Egyptian capital -- Cairo. In that address, Obama said that Israel would have to suspend the construction of its legal settlements on the Palestinian lands on the West Bank for the restart of Arab-Israel peace talks. Almost instantly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had rejected the proposal of the US President. The Israeli prime minister said that the building of the settlements was suspended for one year that means up to September 2009 during the tenure of President George W. Bush and after expiry of the timeframe Israel will again start the construction. President Osama had to withstand that insult silently. It had become clear that the Fatah party government of Palestine would not sit for peace talks unless Israel stopped building settlements.
Arab-Israel Conflicts
Since then, Israel has established a good number of new illegal settlement areas on the West Bank and the captured East Jerusalem and built several thousands of structures on the Palestinian lands. Rather arrogant and aggressive Netanyahu and his government blamed the Palestinians for the capture of lands. The argument of the Israeli government was the Palestinians are divided, among them the HAMAS is determined to eliminate the existence of Israel, so no peace talks are possible with them. As the United States and European Union (EU) have recognized HAMAS as terrorist so the plea of Israel is acceptable to them. In the internal politics Obama has earned the wrath of the US capitalist over his national health bill. And his popularity was nosedived.
In addition, Obama did not get enough opportunity to think over the Middle East as he lost majority in the Congress in the midterm polls. Moreover, he will have to seek votes in November 2012 to become the US President for the second term. Obama knows it very well that it will not be possible for him to win the election by annoying the 'most powerful' Israeli lobbies in the US. And as a result, he prefers keeping mum on the issue of Arab-Israel conflicts.
Unexpected Address
President Obama on 19 May gave a completely unexpected statement at the US Department of State. He had definitely an intention of revising to some extent the present anti-US policy in the Middle East. At the beginning of the so-called 'Arab autumn' process the US seemed to be against the trend. But as the development began going out of the control of the US policy Washington welcomed the revolution in Tunisia and Egypt one after another. But in other places the United States is still lagging behind the pace of developments. Washington was in a dilemma for a long time regarding the mass upsurge in Yemen and Syria. Huge criticisms were raised in the US over mysterious indifference of the Obama administration to sending of Saudi Arabian troops to quell rebellion in Bahrain.
In his State Department address, Obama made attempts to minimize those criticisms. He said: 'The US welcomes those changes that expand the scopes for self determination and opportunities- there should not be any doubt about it. For many decades we have been admitting the no change in situation of this region or the Middle East, but now we have gotten the chance of following the path through which the world could advance in the right direction.'
Obama in that address further said that the basis of the Arab-Israeli crisis would be a 'secured Israel' and on the basis of an independent Palestinian state, and the borders of the two states will be along the demarcation line that was before the 1967 war. But Obama said that some changes along the common borders here and there were possible on the basis of mutual understanding.
On 2 May, the US commandoes swooped on a residence at Abbottabad in Pakistan and killed Usama Bin Ladin. Since then popularity of Obama has jumped high repeatedly. The US President might have thought that he would implement his 2009 Cairo address riding on this popularity. Besides, he might have realized that Israel has been using the peace talks with the Palestinian as a technique of killing time and the crisis will no be solved this way. Now he is thinking over the 2002 Saudi proposal. In that Saudi proposal it was stipulated that the borders of Palestine and Israel will be fixed along the demarcation line of 1967 and all Arab states will recognize Israel simultaneously.
Bad Tempered Dialogue
The US foreign policy is not determined in Washington. This is determined in Israel and the Israelis secure this control by dint of the strength of the Israeli lobbies in the United States. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was scheduled meet the US President in Washington on the following day of the speech of Obama. Prior to his departure for Washington, Netanyahu announced that the 1967 borderline was not acceptable to Israel. He said that the ground realities have under gone many changes (because of illegal Israeli settlements) since 1967 and those changes cannot be ruled out. In other words, he said that the Jews (those came from Europe) had the right to build settlements in the areas where they have settlements during the Bible era that means in entire Palestine.
The Jewish people in the United States could hardly be one-thirtieth of the total population. But in pursuance of Zionist conspiracy, they have taken control of the US politics, economy, and media. Of them, the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is the most powerful group. It being said that no bill in the US Congress could be passed without approval from the AIPAC. Obama might have thought that he will be able to create influence by addressing the AIPAC conference. The AIPAC conference silently heard the speech of Obama. But when the US President referred to the 1967 borderline they raised voice in unison to condemn him. To pacify the anger, President Obama was compelled to announce that the United States will oppose the Arab proposal in the UN General Assembly in September 2011 for giving recognition to the Palestinian state.
Netanyahu also addressed the AIPAC conference. In his address, the Israeli Prime Minister said that the 1967 borderline was not acceptable to his country for security reasons. He had again referred to the Jewish settlements in the Bibal area. And it is needless to mention that the address of Netanyahu was welcome amid repeated clapping from the audience. Netanyahu has again demanded that as a condition for establishing peace Israel must have to be recognized as a Jewish state. His proposal means forfeiting the birth right of the Palestinians, expelled from Israel, in returning to their homeland, which the United Nations accepted for many times. The proposal will give Israel the liberty of expelling nearly 2 million Palestinian from that country. The Palestinian will accept the proposal.
On 24 May, Netanyahu was more cordially greeted in the joint session of the two houses of the US Congress than the AIPAC conference. During his address to the House, both the Republican and Democrat members of the Congress gave him standing ovation 18 times. By this time, Obama and Netanyahu held face to face meeting in the White House. According to available information, their discussions were exciting and bad tempered.
Split in Western Alliance
However, Obama was given rousing receptions during his visit to Irish Republic and the United Kingdom. He earned the rare distinction of addressing the joint session of the British Parliament in Westminster Hall. Before him no US President was fortunate to address the joint session of the British Parliament. In his address, Obama traditionally raised the Palestinian issue and said: 'We (US and Europe) are united for cause a secured Israel and an Independent Palestinian state.
But Obama knows it better that the Europe is now not united with the United States on the Palestinian issue. Virtually Europe is getting more intolerant with each passing. So long the Arab-Israel issue has been under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States. It was true that a quartet was formed on the issue comprising the United Nations, EU, Russia, and the United States. But that quartet was absolutely ineffective. Former US President George W. Bush appointed his cohort in misdeeds -- Tony Blair -- as the representative of that quartet. It seemed from the statements of Tony Blair that protecting interest of Israel was his prime concern. He is going to Jerusalem off and on and Israelis are receiving him very cordially. It being heard that Tony Blair has been benefiting for her relations with Israel.
Now the EU could have realized that the US foreign policy is determined in Tel Aviv, not Washington. And as a result, no just solution of the crisis is possible by the United States. Some of the EU countries believe the Europe now will have to take responsibility from the United States the initiatives of solving the Arab-Israel crisis. Some of the EU countries, including France, have hinted that they are ready to recognize the independence of Palestine if it is unilaterally declared by the Palestinians.
The Europe has some special advantages also. The Israeli lobbies are very active in Europe particularly in France and Germany. But they are yet to become so stronger like the AIPAC in the United States. In addition, the progress of Israeli economy still largely depends on Europe. Israel is enjoying the duty free access to Europe in exporting goods like other EU members. That means Israeli Prime Minister will find no courage to show his red eyes to the Europe the way he has been demonstrating his audacity to hackle the US President. Under the above circumstances, the people, who support an independent Palestinian state inside Israel, will be encouraged.
Recent Development
Meanwhile, a significant change has taken place in the situation of the Middle East. Israel has been successful in laying a siege to Gaza for long four years with active support from the Hosni Mubarak government of Egypt. That the Egyptian Government acting on behalf of the Israeli Administration has closed down the Rafa Crossing on the southern frontier. But a post-revolution Egypt is not ready to act as a guard of Egypt. Egypt opened the Rafa Crossing on 28 May. Most countries in the Middle East are now witnessing mass upsurge. The friends of Israel in Europe believe Israel will be more friendless if 'Arab Autumn' gets perfection. Under the above circumstances, it will be better for Israel to reach a settlement without killing time.
The Arab League, at a meeting in Doha on 22 May, has decided that despite objection from the US they will move a resolution in the UN General Assembly in September for giving recognition to an independent Palestinian state with the border of 1967. That resolution will create very complex situation for the United States. Under pressure from Israel, the United States will try to oppose the resolution. However, most countries in the world are likely to give recognition to the Palestinian state. The public opposition of so many countries will surely hamper the international dignity of the United States.
Only one option has been left for Washington to adopt. The option is supporting the Arab League resolution. If the United States fails, Washington should abstain from voting against the proposal and handover initiatives of resolving the Middle East crisis to the EU.