Today's World News is a site for the people to know what is exactly going on in the news and the world today. Being there is so much hype and propaganda going on these days. This site will add several links so the viewer can research and see the actual news for themselves. Lord knows main stream won't do that for us. Check the links for yourselves. If you find more. By all means. Please share them so they can be added here.
Image via WikipediaLets see do you think our so called fearless President will back down to this threat? Just food for thought. After the Arab up rise and the Middle East. Do you really believe they are all about Peace?
Many choose not to add religion to politics and claim the people are so peaceful. These same people never really studied the other religions from around the World. Their books are about Law. Not a type of worship.. Anyone studying History. Should really study all the History and the brutality that comes with all this mess.
If this article somehow surprises you. You might want to start paying more attention. This is only expected after all the up rises that's been going on the past few months now. http://www.smh.com.au/world/saudi-arabia-warns-off-us-on-palestinian-veto-20110913-1k7rp.html
A FORMER head of Saudi Arabian intelligence and ex-ambassador to Washington, Turki al-Faisal, has warned that an American veto of Palestinian membership of the United Nations would end the ''special relationship'' between the two countries, and make the US ''toxic'' in the Arab world.
The warning comes as Washington is scrambling to avoid a scenario where it alone casts a veto in the UN Security Council against the Palestinian bid for recognition of statehood, which is expected to be formally requested next week.
The US is putting considerable pressure on the Palestinians not to submit the request, and on Britain - the only other permanent member of the Security Council that has not publicly supported the Palestinian request - to also exercise its veto if necessary.
Image by SS&SS via FlickrObama has the right to do this How? It's sad to see a President that don't even know our own Constitution. You know, The Law of the Land of America! http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/05/25/libya.war/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- As U.S. President Barack Obama warned Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi Wednesday that there would be "no letup" in NATO airstrikes, Russia lashed out against the air campaign, calling the bombing of certain Tripoli targets a "flagrant deviation" from the United Nations mandate.
The U.N. chief said Wednesday he had spoken with the Libyan prime minister and stressed the urgent need for a ceasefire.
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the special U.N. envoy for Libya, who has been in Benghazi meeting with the Libyan opposition, would be returning to Tripoli soon to try to secure an agreement.
The war has dragged on for many weeks, with reports of horrific fighting and civilian casualties.
The Russian Foreign Ministry alleged Wednesday that several "non-military facilities in Tripoli that had already been bombed, were again attacked in a massive NATO airstrike, leading to civilian casualties." It said in a written statement that "this is yet another flagrant deviation" from the U.N. Security Council resolution 1973.
That resolution authorized all means necessary, short of occupying forces, to enforce a no-fly zone and protect Libyan civilians from attacks by forces loyal to Gadhafi.
A barrage of at least 18 rockets struck Tripoli Tuesday, killing 19 people and wounding another 150 in the heaviest onslaught since NATO's aerial strikes began, a government official told CNN.
DARAA, Syria (KABC) -- The State Department is advising American citizens to leave Syria as soon as they can.
It's also ordering personnel at the U.S. embassy in the capital city of Damascus to leave the country.
The precautions are being ordered after a brutal crackdown on anti-government forces.
On Monday, at least 11 people were killed in Daraa, the city at the center of the uprising against President Bashar Assad.
Meantime, hundreds of people have reportedly been detained across Syria. Human rights activists say many of the arrests occurred in Damascus.
A relentless crackdown since mid-March has killed more than 400 people across Syria, with 120 dead over the weekend, rights groups said.
Bashar Assad has launched all-out war on his people. Tanks firing artillery, APCs, infantry units, commandoes and snipers were deployed for the first time at daybreak Monday, April 25 in cities across Syria for the most brutal assault on any Arab anti-government protest in the four-month uprising.
In the first few hours, hundreds are estimated to have been massacred (over and above the 350 shot dead in the last three days) and thousands injured. Denied medical attention, they are left in the streets to die. debkafile's military sources report that protest centers in cities with populations of 2-3 million have been stormed by Syrian troops backed by tanks firing automatic 120-mm guns at random, commandoes dropped by helicopter and snipers.
The military offensive to break the back of the uprising (which debkafile Saturday, April 23 first disclosed Assad had decided to launch) is led by his younger brother Maher Assad at the head of the Republican Guard and the 4th Division which is made up mostly of the Assad's Alawite clan. Its first target Sunday night was the southern town of Deraa where the protest movement began and the Mediterranean coastal town of Jableh.
Monday, Syria shut its land borders to Jordan to conceal the scale of the carnage inflicted on the border town of Deraa from outside eyes. Foreign correspondents have been banned from the country since the uprising began.
Monday, indiscriminate fire was also reported in Duma, a dissident suburb of the capital Damascus. By Monday afternoon, thousands of soldiers had spread out across the North, South and Center of the country, apparently preparing to storm the large cities and protest centers of Hama, Homs, Latakiya and the Kurdish north.
While times may have changed, Bashar is his father's son. In 1982, President Hafez Assad turned his artillery on a district of Hama and slaughtered 25-30,000 civilians to smash a Muslim Brotherhood revolt. The operation was commanded by Rifat Assad, Bashar's uncle, today an opposition leader in exile.
The incumbent president's killing fields extend not to one but to a score of Syrian cities with unimaginable consequences.
And yet no Western power is rushing to help the pro-democracy protesters of Syria who are dying in their hundreds day by day. And the verbal condemnations coming from Washington and European capitals are soon buried under layers of inaction.
Isaiah 17
Proclamation Against Syria and Israel
1 The burden against Damascus.
“ Behold, Damascus will cease from being a city,
And it will be a ruinous heap. 2 The cities of Aroer are forsaken;[a]
They will be for flocks
Which lie down, and no one will make them afraid. 3 The fortress also will cease from Ephraim,
The kingdom from Damascus,
And the remnant of Syria;
They will be as the glory of the children of Israel,”
Says the LORD of hosts. 4 “ In that day it shall come to pass That the glory of Jacob will wane,
And the fatness of his flesh grow lean.
UN fails to agree on Syria condemnation
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/04/201142723514236533.html
The UN Security Council has failed to agree on a statement condemning Syria's deadly crackdown on peaceful protesters.
Envoys attending a special open meeting on Syria in New York on Wednesday said Russia, China and Lebanon opposed the wording of a draft statement distributed by European nations.
France called for "strong measures" if Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, rejects appeals to end violence which has killed hundreds.
The US said Assad must "change course now and heed the calls of his own people" for change.
"A real threat to regional security could come from outside interference. Such approaches lead to a never ending circle of violence" Alexander Pankin, Russian deputy UN envoy
Russia, after blocking a Security Council statement condemning the violence, however insisted that the Syrian crackdown did not amount to a threat to international peace and security, grounds that would justify international action.
"A real threat to regional security could come from outside interference," Alexander Pankin, the Russian deputy UN ambassador, told the council.
"Such approaches lead to a never ending circle of violence" and could set off civil war.
Bashar Ja'afari, the Syrian ambassador to the UN, welcomed the Security Council's inaction, saying his government was carrying out an investigation into the violence and that there was no need for a UN commission.
Al Jazeera's Kristin Saloomey, reporting from the UN headquarters, said any hope for Security Council action is "dead" for the moment.
"The council was not able to agree on even the most basic form of the statement calling for calm and calling for an investigation."
She said Russia offered the strongest opposition to the move, saying they were concerned about violence in Syria, but on both sides.
"In the end there were isolated statements of concern from various countries, but no unified action by the council."
China and India called for political dialogue and peaceful resolution of the crisis, with no mention of condemnation.
Nawaf Salam, the Lebanese envoy, said his country shared a special relationship with Syria, and that "the hearts and minds" of the Lebanese people are with the Syrians, and are supporting Assad's lifting of the state of emergency and reforms. Global criticism
The Syrian violence has sparked global criticism in recent days.
France, Britain, Germany and Portugal circulated a draft media statement on Monday calling for the 15-member Security Council to condemn the violence
COPENHAGEN — Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin sharply criticized the Western coalition attacking Libya on Tuesday, saying it had neither a right nor a mandate to kill Moammar Gadhafi.
Putin said the coalition had gone beyond the bounds of a U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing intervention to protect civilians and suggested Gadhafi's actions did not justify foreign interference, let alone attempts to remove him.
"They said they didn't want to kill Gadhafi. Now some officials say, yes, we are trying to kill Gadhafi," Putin said on a visit to Denmark. "Who permitted this, was there any trial? Who took on the right to execute this man, no matter who he is?"
Putin spoke as Britain and the United States discussed stepping up military pressure on Gadhafi, who has survived more than a month of NATO air strikes.
"The country's whole infrastructure is being destroyed, and in essence one of the warring sides is attacking under the cover of aircraft," Putin said at a news conference after talks with his Danish counterpart Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen.
"When the entire so-called civilized community falls upon a small country with all its might, destroys infrastructure created over generations -- I don't know, is that good or not?" Putin said. "I don't like it."
Shortly after Putin spoke, Libyan state news agency Jana said Libya had urged Russia to call an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council to discuss "Western aggression."
In Moscow, Russia's Foreign Ministry said nobody was available to comment on the report.
Putin called Gadhafi's Libya "crooked" but said that did not justify intervention.
Image by The U.S. National Archives via FlickrOne thing we don't seem to be hearing about at all in the news media today is, that we have a President that doesn't seem to think he has to go through Congress to make MAJOR decisions like this.
That's right our so called leader did not go through Congress to go to War. ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 The Congress shall have Power: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress....
ARTICLE 1, SECTION 9
The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
ARTICLE II, SECTION 2 The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States.... He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur....
"If this was so grave, Congress is still in session. The President could have said 'don't go home, I've got to talk to you about what's happening here. I may need your approval.' This is about the Constitution and if we don't abide by our Constitution, everything falls apart here. This is about the Constitution, not about whether you like President Obama or not. I like President Obama, but I love the Constitution," Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) said on FOX News this morning.
A hard-core group of liberal House Democrats is questioning the constitutionality of U.S. missile strikes against Libya, with one lawmaker raising the prospect of impeachment during a Democratic Caucus conference call on Saturday.
Reps. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Donna Edwards (Md.), Mike Capuano (Mass.), Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Maxine Waters (Calif.), Rob Andrews (N.J.), Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.) “all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality of the president’s actions” during that call, said two Democratic lawmakers who took part.
Kucinich, who wanted to bring impeachment articles against both former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney over Iraq — only to be blocked by his own leadership — asked why the U.S. missile strikes aren’t impeachable offenses….
Saturday’s conference call was organized by Rep. John Larson (Conn.), chairman of the Democratic Caucus and the fourth-highest ranking party leader. Larson has called for Obama to seek congressional approval before committing the United States to any anti-Qadhafi military operation.
“They consulted the Arab League. They consulted the United Nations. They did not consult the United States Congress,” one Democrat lawmaker said of the White House. “They’re creating wreckage, and they can’t obviate that by saying there are no boots on the ground. … There aren’t boots on the ground; there are Tomahawks in the air.”
These liberal Democrats have been joined in their position by Republicans ranging from Richard Lugar to National Review’s Andrew McCarthy who wrote yesterday:
The Security Council is powerless to “authorize” the U.S. military to do a damned thing. The validity of American combat operations is a matter of American law, and that means Congress must authorize them.
Read more here. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/congress-the-president-and-war-powers-under-the-constitution/
News from Yahoo today. Lets leave the States and explain it away out there. Does this seem fishy at all? http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theenvoy/20110321/ts_yblog_theenvoy/international-alliance-divided-over-libya-command
President Barack Obama, speaking in Santiago, Chile on Monday, defended his decision to order U.S. strikes against Libyan military targets, and insisted that the mission is clear.
And like a parade of Pentagon officials the past few days, Obama insisted that the United States' lead military role will be turned over—"in days, not weeks"—to an international command of which the United States will be just one part.
The only problem: None of the countries in the international coalition can yet agree on to whom or how the United States should hand off responsibilities.
The sense of urgency among White House officials to resolve the command dispute is profound: with each hour the U.S. remains in charge of yet another Middle East military intervention, Congress steps up criticism that Obama went to war in Libya without first getting its blessing, nor defining precisely what the end-game will be. (On Monday, Obama sent Congress official notification that he had ordered the U.S. military two days earlier to commence operations "to prevent humanitarian catastrophe" in Libya and support the international coalition implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1973.)
Below, an explainer on the military mission in Libya, the dispute over who should command it after its initial phase, and whether the military is concerned about mission creep. What is the U.S. military task in Libya?
The military mission in Libya is implementing U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973, which calls for Gadhafi's forces to pull back from rebel-held towns, and the establishment of a no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians from attack by Gadhafi, and for civilians to be allowed access to food, water and other humanitarian supplies.
With Thursday’s passage of United Natons Security Council resolution 1973, the United States is set to go to war against Libya. Removing Moammar Gadhafi from power would probably advance the cause of freedom, but the United Nations has no legal authority to take a step of this magnitude. By bowing to the will of the U.N. Security Council, President Obama is diluting the sovereign power of the United States.
The U.N. resolution authorizes member states to take a number of military and nonmilitary actions to protect the people of Libya from Col. Gadhafi's government. Under its own rules, however, the United Nations cannot legally authorize military action to shape the internal affairs of member states. Article 2 section 7 of the U.N. charter states that, “Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.” Chapter VII of the charter, which enumerates U.N. intervention powers, applies only to international breaches of the peace. The December 1981 U.N. “Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention and Interference in the Internal Affairs of States” reaffirmed this principle with its solemn declaration that, “No State or group of States has the right to intervene or interfere in any form or for any reason whatsoever in the internal and external affairs of other States.”
1The burden of Egypt. Behold, the LORD rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it. 2And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall fight every one against his brother, and every one against his neighbour; city against city, and kingdom against kingdom. 3And the spirit of Egypt shall fail in the midst thereof; and I will destroy the counsel thereof: and they shall seek to the idols, and to the charmers, and to them that have familiar spirits, and to the wizards. 4And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts.
http://www.debka.com/article/20712 Hours after the UN Security Council unanimously imposed sanctions on Col. Muammar Qaddafi and his regime, his reactivated air force was flying army and tribal reinforcements from the south and landing them at the military airfields of Tripoli, Misrata and Sirte. debkafile's military sources report. Sunday night, Feb. 27, men were immediately deployed at the main road intersections leading to the capital.
This move at the current stage of Libya's civil war lessens the military significance of the rebels' reported takeover of towns around Tripoli, including Al Zawiya to the west, from which Qaddafi's forces pulled back to guard the main road to Tripoli.
For now, the rebels face four main difficulties:
1. They lack organized military strength to stand up to Qaddafi's professionally-trained and equipped soldiers. This imbalance can only be offset by a mutiny in the army's ranks or assassination.2. Instead of digging in and consolidating their control of the eastern part of the country after its capture, the rebels went after Tripoli in order to topple Qaddafi. Sunday night, this goal looked unattainable.
3. They have rejected US and European offers of military assistance in the strongest terms warning that if foreign troops intervened they would redirect their guns from Qaddafi on the interlopers.
4. The rebels are fighting without air cover, while Qaddafi's forces command enough air power and air fields in the south to keep up a steady flow of fresh fighting men in his support.
Recent media reports suggests Jerusalem has increased diplomatic efforts to persuade White House that credible military option needed.
Have Israel's efforts to convince the US to threaten Iran with a credible military option paid off? According to recent media reports, the answer might be yes.
Since the US pushed a fourth round of sanctions against Iran through the UN Security Council last month, Jerusalem has increased diplomatic efforts to convince the White House that for the sanctions to work, a credible military option needs to be on the table to scare Iran to reconsider its pursuit of a nuclear weapon.
RELATED: Iran blames US for suicide bombing Clinton condemns Iran bombing
An indication that this might have happened came in the latest issue of Time magazine, in an article titled "An Attack on Iran: Back on the Table."
Posted Sun Jun 27, 2010 'I believe this is evidence that when you turn your back on Israel, especially when you've been a supporter, you're gonna see judgments come from God. It's finally reaching the point where God is removing His protection from us.'
In the Book of Genesis, God told him, "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse ... ." (Genesis 12:2-3, New International Version)
Regarding the oil spill specifically, Lindsey said, "I think that this disaster is just one of many disasters. Our country is falling apart economically. The current government is overturning our constitutional republic, turning it into a socialist country. That's about as big a curse as you can get. We just have one catastrophe after another and then we have this big wake-up call in the Gulf."
Lindsey, who at age 80 is still active analyzing Bible prophecy on his website, said in preparation for his programs, he studies current world events, taking note of calamities.
April 19, 2010 - 10:30 AM | by: Ben Evansky
The Obama administration is reportedly signaling another major shift in policy towards one of its staunchest allies, Israel, and this shift could change the way it votes at the Security Council. The change would mean an end to the US' use of its veto power in the United Nations Security Council when certain anti-Israel resolutions are introduced for a vote.
Reports surfaced a couple of weeks ago, that a senior US diplomat met with Qatar's foreign minister in Paris. They discussed the possibility that the US was giving serious consideration to not using its veto if a vote on Israeli settlements was to come up. It has been the policy of successive administrations to veto virtually all anti-Israel resolutions at the Security Council.
While the Israeli spokesperson at the United Nations would not comment on the reports, US officials at the UN told Fox News that there is no such initiative before the Security Council and they are not "pursuing or encouraging such action", but some critics believe they are playing a game of smoke and mirrors.
TEHRAN, June 16 (Xinhua) -- Iran's Majlis (Parliament) Speaker Ali Larijani warned the West and certain countries with retaliation if they try to inspect Iranian planes and ships following last week's UN Security Council sanctions resolution against Tehran, the English language satellite Press TV reported on Wednesday.
"I am warning the U.S. and certain adventurous countries that in case they plan to inspect the cargo of Iranian ships and planes, they should rest assured that we will do the same in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman (with their ships)," Larijani was quoted as saying.
"This retaliation would be part of our policy to protect our national interests," Larijani added.
The new round of the UN Security Council sanctions resolution, adopted against Iran last Wednesday over its controversial nuclear program, aims to restrict the country's shipping and air cargo operations.
Anyone that actually knows anything about the Koran and it's harsh requirements against ALL Jewish, Christians and even America, knows how the leaders of Iran will not only send of a Nuclear attack if they get one. But, the entire goal is to actually create and cause the most bloodiest war that man kind has ever seen. This is not just a Religion this is their Law. If they don't go through with it. They are to be killed or even stoned to death.
Say it's not true? You may want to study it for yourself.
This is Jihad. The Holy War. Not about Politics and not ran like the West is.
Seeing this article I still question. This could help stop it. But then again. It could also bring a surprise attack on Israel. I guess a short time will tell.
Saudi Arabia has conducted tests to stand down its air defences to enable
Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities, The
Times can reveal.
In the week that the UN Security Council imposed a new round of sanctions on
Tehran, defence sources in the Gulf say that Riyadh has agreed to allow
Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country
to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran.
To ensure the Israeli bombers pass unmolested, Riyadh has carried out tests to
make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defence systems not
activated. Once the Israelis are through, the kingdom’s air defences will
return to full alert.
Despite the tension between the two governments, they share a mutual
loathing of the regime in Tehran and a common fear of Iran’s nuclear
ambitions. “We all know this. We will let them [the Israelis] through and
see nothing,” said one.
A report by TIME Magazine this week warns that "the next Lebanon War" is on the horizon, but contends that although the Hizbullah terrorist organization and Israel are both fully prepared for war, neither side is looking forward to the eventuality.
The inevitable, says writer Ramzi Haidar, actually depends more on the U.S. and Iran than it does on either Israel or Hizbullah, given that the two are locked in a battle over the Islamic Republic's nuclear development program.
Iran is aiming Hizbullah's tens of thousands of missiles at Israel in a bid to halt American pressure designed to end its ability to build an atomic weapon. The U.S., for its part, is working hard to persuade the United Nations Security Council to impose tougher economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic.
Hizbullah is upgrading its battle plans and preparing for war,
Image via WikipediaLets see do you think our so called fearless President will back down to this threat? Just food for thought. After the Arab up rise and the Middle East. Do you really believe they are all about Peace?
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_ujisMMh-XwVahbNM1vkcoOfThSK6cE-1NTRvIMdjXO1K7oGE7678TV9op7fLZMIs_jeVjRHwA-A6CEZH2Ra_67CE2htY5sTPmscAz5tTYumoLLA7yr6muZ-9_IhEHUYbVhZfUEqwYylrW0a2PBph32=s0-d)
