Sunday, December 20, 2009

Imperial Power & Counter-Power

'Imperial Power & Counter-Power':

(M.A. Jamal's Remarks to the Rosa Luxemburg Conference in Germany / Jan. 10th, 2009
[SP. WRIT. 12/30/08] (C) '08 MUMIA ABU-JAMAL

If one is to address the reactions to the recent election of Illinois Senator Barack Obama to the U.S. Presidency, this can perhaps be best encapsulated by the term, exultation.

For if ever a political figure rode the currents of a stellar alignment, Barack Obama did so.

The exultation was both national and global.

In my 1/2 century of life, I can recall no presidential election that elicited so profound a political -- indeed visceral! -- response.

When one considers what role the left had in such a spectacular political event, again we must look to alignments; not of stars, but of constituencies, which converged to not only elect Obama, but to also close the door to the ruinous politics of the U.S. right wing, represented by the incumbent President, George W. Bush, and his presumed political heirs, Arizona Sen. John McCain, and Alaska's Gov. Sarah Palin of the Republican Party.

While the U.S. left was a constituent part of the larger constituency, it neither drove nor directed the forces that elected Obama. In many ways it was hostage to those forces.

Those forces were youth -- those between 18-28, who mobilized in ways never seen before; it was also African Americans who voted in unprecedented numbers for one they perceived as one of their own; add to this millions of women, some of whom felt, frankly, disrespected by the choice of Palin, who, though a woman, betrayed an astonishing lack of knowledge and expertise on issues, especially given the very real possibility that her running mate, sen. McCain, might not survive the rigors of office.

But one cannot ignore the significant segment of those who felt betrayed or disaffected by the hard-right tilt of the Republican Party -- which ran almost exclusively on the notion that Obama was a "socialist", who in Palin's oft-repeated quote, "pals around with terrorists."

For those beyond our shores, it may be necessary to briefly decode this language. The "socialist" tag was a kind of cleaned - up, classy version of 'communist', the ultimate slur in U.S. capitalist politics, only exceeded by the post 9/11 term "terrorist" (and by calling Obama a "pal" of terrorists, it was tantamount to calling him one).

The last reference was to the alleged friendship between Obama and William Ayers, a Hyde Park educator who, in the 1960's, was a leading member of the Weather Underground, student anti-war and anti imperialist activists, who engaged in acts against property, and who supported the Black liberation movements of the era.

In point of fact, Obama was, by no measure, a leftist.

In the Spring of 2008 issue of The Black Scholar, African-American studies professor, Charles P. Henry makes the point explicitly, citing both Obama's own words, as well as a political biography of him in the New York Times Magazine. (1)

Obama's quoted remarks are instructive:
The Democrats have been stuck in the arguments of Vietnam,
which means that either you're a 'Scoop' Jackson Democrat or you're suspicious of any military action. And that's just not my framework .(2)

Obama's choices were illustrative of two poles of the Democratic Party: Sen. Henry 'Scoop' Jackson was so pro-war that he was called the "Senator from Boeing". (3) ; Hayden by contrast, was a student anti-war activist, and member of S.D.S. (Students for a Democratic Society). (Interestingly, Obama never referred to himself as a Jesse Jackson Democrat either).

This leads us to the next query on the role of the U.S. anti-war movement; in a word, it is moribund.

This, paradoxically, can be traced to the massive demonstrations of Spring 2003 in protest of the imminent Iraq War. For millions of people, this was their first, and last experience of mass action. Sadly, the lesson they learned was of their impotence, not their power, for Bush promptly ignored the protests, rattled the sabers of war, and launched Operation Shock and Awe.

For many people, unused to popular protests, this short-term failure to stop the war blinded them to the rarity that such mass protests represented: never had the nation seen such mass protests before the war was begun. At this stage, the people were a Counter-Power, but they stopped far too soon.

To further analyze the question of whether the election of Obama represents a leftist surge, or if the anti-war movement is in its ascendancy we need only recall that Obama is neither a leftist nor is he anti-war. The early stages of his electoral campaign were explicitly against the Iraq War. As he ran in the later stages, his sound bites announced a troop withdrawal in Iraq was necessary to buttress U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Indeed, given the events occurring as these words are written, there will probably be more U.S. anti-war protests against the Israeli blitzkrieg on Gaza in the next 2 weeks, than there was against the U.S. occupation in Afghanistan in the last two years.

That, I think, succinctly states the case of where we are.

But where we are need not determine where we can go. For people move by inches and by leaps. This was, undoubtedly, a giant step in U.S. history. This was not a day ever envisioned by George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln or even John F. Kennedy.

Yet, one of Black America's most revered historians, Vincent Harding, (author of the classic, There is a River), spoke for far more than himself when he said, "So my hopes are very much focused on him, but not on him alone. I see the energy that's been built up over these two years of campaigns, and I see the possibility that we could gather ourselves together and begin to ask, in a very powerful way, not what should Barack Obama be doing next, but where do we go from here? What is our role as committed, progressive citizens to move to the next stages?"

Harding, a close confidante of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., ended his comments on the Obama election with this fitting suggestion: "Maybe a democracy needs community organizers more than it needs commanders."(4)

Maybe so.

It appears Dr. Harding is suggesting that instead of empire, we need a republic, for if history teaches us anything, it is that the two realities are un- reconcilable. In the days of ancient Rome, the advent of empire spelled the end of the republic.

In 193 C. E., an African seized the throne of Rome. Emperor Septimius Severus extended Rome's power, and strengthened its empire. His sons succeeded him, and exceeded him in cruelty and brutality.

They didn't bring change -- they brought continuity.

Will this empire be any different?

From Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Thursday, December 10, 2009

India Hots Up

Developing countries like India are officially exempt from emissions agreements. Yet the richer nations continue to point the finger of blame. Will an aggrieved India be up for compromise in Copenhagen?

This place keeps on changing, says Pradip, surveying the shifting landscape of the Sunderbans delta. The islanders on Ghoramara island haven't contributed to global warming. There are no roads here and there's no electricity. Yet their home is rapidly disappearing before their eyes. We're nervous living here, says one woman, whose house was swept away a few weeks ago, if the erosion continues, there will be no island in 10 to 20 years.

Whilst India suffers from global warming, it's also - increasingly - making the problem worse. Across India, the trappings of middle class life - and the power to pollute - are finally within reach. Once, a car was a dream for farmers and workers, says a Maruti salesman, now its an essential purchase. Increasingly the US and Australia are pushing for a commitment from India and Indian officials are outraged at what they see as finger-pointing. We will not have a deal in Copenhagen just to appease the polluting nations of the world, says activist Sunita.

India says global warming is high on the agenda, and many renewable energy schemes are planned. Yet there are powerful voices in India who now say no deal would be better than a bad deal brought about by the bullies of the world.

Produced by SBS, distributed by Journeyman

Sunday, November 29, 2009

Crude Impact

Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10

Crude Impact documentary film uncovers some harsh realities about our world and our relationship to fossil fuels. Yet as discussed in the film, there is cause for hope. Crude Impact is meant to inspire us to take action, because as Dr. William Rees says in the film, "this new knowledge gives us the possibility of creating a brilliant future for all us." Objective of the film is to promote positive, hopeful change in the way we source and use energy - changes that will create a more just and sustainable world.

- Peak impact : Peak oil is the point in time when the quantity of oil extracted from the earth begins to irreversibly decline. The United States reached peak oil in the early 1970s. Predictions vary, but global peak oil is anticipated as early as the year 2007.

This fragile balance of the worldwide supply and demand of oil has the potential to incite violent resource wars, where smaller, less economically developed oil-exporting nations will be at risk of both civil conflict from within and potential invasion by industrial nations from without. We may also see increased political and economic instability within these third world oil-producing nations as well as the displacement of indigenous peoples and the vast destruction of pristine environments. And with fossil fuels now such an integral part of our worldwide food production, peak oil also imperils our ability to feed the ever growing human population.

- Food impact : As the world's population has steadily increased, so have our systems of food production and our seemingly insatiable consumption levels. The development of modern agriculture in the U.S. and other industrialized nations has dramatically changed the way in which we grow, process, transport and acquire our food. The distance from farm to table has never been farther, and we now expend ten times more energy getting our food than we do consuming it. In order to offset this imbalance, we must re-localize our food economy and reduce the fossil fuel energy used in growing it by supporting local organic agriculture when buying our food.

- Earth impact : Man's overdependence on fossil fuels is a fundamental threat to the existence of all other life forms. We are currently extinguishing other species at a rate that is far greater than before the age of industrialization. Since the modern age began, humans have repeatedly taken over habitats and eliminated any competing or inconvenient organisms, in an ongoing effort to progress and expand.

Humans are now threatening the very existence of the planet by altering its climate through fossil fuel combustion, the leading contributor to the development of global warming. As a result, we have already seen the onset of more severe storms, hurricanes, tornadoes and droughts around the world. Hurricane Katrina may be just the beginning.

- Human impact : The extraction and production of oil often wreaks havoc on the lives of those who live in its midst and in its wake.

In many oil-producing less economically developed nations, indigenous people are forced to live in cancer zones where the land and the water are heavily contaminated with toxins. And in these smaller, underdeveloped countries, oil extraction has often been supported by regimes with poor human rights records, known for their corruption and abuse of civil liberties. As oil production increases, often the poverty level of regular citizens and indigenous peoples increases as well. These people rarely benefit from the wealth extracted from the land on which they live.

- Population impact : The world's population has exploded in the last hundred years, in great part due to the development of fossil fuels and the subsequent growth of modern agricultural practices and mass food production. As a result, we are straining all of the Earth's resources and crowding out all other species. This massive human population growth may be the single most powerful impact that fossil fuels have had on the planet. The only fair and proven solution to population growth lies in the empowerment of women. It has been shown that when women are given social, political and economic power, population stabilizes and may even decrease.

- Media impact : With the consequences of peak oil and our global dependence on petroleum so severe and the situation so precarious, one might wonder why so few people seem to know about it. Because American mass media outlets - which produce our TV news programs and print our newspapers - are run as profit centers rather than as a public service, the media does not thoroughly or accurately inform the American people about the impact of government's oil policies or even the dire predictions about global peak oil. And lacking proper information, we are woefully ill equipped to take action.

Thursday, November 05, 2009

Al Qaeda Doesn't Exist

Part 1

Part 3

Zbigniew Brzezinski (origin from Poland) is an American Phd political scientist, geostrategist, and statesman who served as United States National Security Advisor known for his hardline policies on the Soviet Union, initiated in 1979 a campaign supporting mujaheddin in Pakistan and Afghanistan, which were run by Pakistani security services with financial support from the CIA and Britain's MI6. This policy had the explicit aim of promoting radical Islamist and anti-Communist forces to overthrow the secular communist People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan government in Afghanistan, which had been destabilized by coup attempts against Hafizullah Amin, the power struggle within the Soviet-supported Parcham faction of the PDPA and a subsequent Soviet military intervention.

In 1998, Brzezinski was interviewed by the French newspaper Nouvel Observateur on the topic of Afghanistan. He revealed that CIA support for the mujaheddin had started before the 1979 Soviet invasion. Brzezinski saw the invasion as an opportunity to embroil the Soviet Union in a bloody conflict comparable to the US experience in Vietnam. He referred to this as the "Afghan Trap" and viewed the end of the Soviet empire as worth the cost of strengthening militant Islamic groups.

He went on to say in that interview, "What is most important to the history of the world? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?" When the interviewer questioned him about Islamic fundamentalism representing a world menace, Brzezinski said, "Nonsense!"

In his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard, Brzezinski says that assistance to the Afghan resistance was a tactic designed to bog down the Soviet army while the United States built up a deterrent military force in the Persian Gulf to prevent Soviet political or military penetration farther south.

In matter that Al Qeada which mean database, was an base which originally created and support by CIA. Al Qeada with Osama bin Laden it self in reality was only a small group with just a few number of member without an strong weaponly neither global network but it seem use to be propagate as a tool for some big power for their own agenda....

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Fallujah 2004 Documentary

In a documentary to be broadcast by RAI, the Italian state broadcaster, a former American soldier who fought at Fallujah says: "I heard the order to pay attention because they were going to use white phosphorus on Fallujah. In military jargon it's known as Willy Pete.

"Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone ... I saw the burned bodies of women and children. Phosphorus explodes and forms a cloud. Anyone within a radius of 150 metres is done for."

A biologist in Fallujah, Mohamad Tareq, interviewed for the film, says: "A rain of fire fell on the city, the people struck by this multi-coloured substance started to burn, we found people dead with strange wounds, the bodies burned but the clothes intact."

The documentary, entitled Fallujah: the Hidden Massacre, also provides what it claims is clinching evidence that incendiary bombs known as Mark 77, a new, improved form of napalm, was used in the attack on Fallujah, in breach of the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons of 1980, which only allows its use against military targets.

More than 25,000 U.S. troops were pulled in to surround Falluja on November 2004, 15,000 of them ready to storm the rebel citadel. Interestingly, as Sgt. Maj. Carlton Kent, the top enlisted Marine in Iraq, was giving a pep talk to 2,500 troops lined up before going in for the kill, he compared the coming battle to the bloody U.S. assault on the Vietnamese city of Hue in March 1968, trying to take back the ancient Vietnamese capital from the Viet Cong (the Vietnamese Communists), who had seized it during the Têt offensive. “You're all in the process of making history,” Kent told them. “This is another Hue city in the making. I have no doubt … that each and every one of you is going to do what you have always done – kick some butt.” He neglected to mention that although the U.S. managed to “take back” Hue, the Têt offensive was a turning point in Vietnam as it became evident even to sections of the American ruling class that they couldn’t win that dirty imperialist war.

The destruction of Falluja inevitably calls to mind the words attributed to a U.S. officer in Vietnam at the time of the Têt offensive: “we had to destroy the village in order to save it.” That certainly is the mentality of the U.S. military in Iraq today. In Vietnam, the United States killed upwards of 3 million Vietnamese during eight years of war. In the Korean War, the U.S. slaughtered more than 2 million Koreans. In World War II, the U.S. notoriously slaughtered more than 200,000 Japanese with the atomic bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. This came after the deliberate firebombing of Tokyo in March 1945, in which the U.S. murdered more than 100,000 people. Or the U.S./British firebombing of Dresden, Germany in February 1945 (150,000 to 225,000 dead, almost all civilians and wounded soldiers), part of the Allied imperialists’ systematic campaign of terror bombing German cities in the latter part of World War II which killed an estimated 635,000 German civilians. (See “The Great Chemical Weapons Hoax” and “U.S./British Massacre at Dresden” in The Internationalist No. 16, May-June 2003.) Not to mention the countless bloody crimes in Latin America: Bay of Pigs invasion, Pinochet coup in Chile, contra terror war on Nicaragua, death squads in El Salvador, the invasion of Panama...etc.

Thursday, October 01, 2009

Wake Up Call - New World Order Documentary

Some of the topics covered in the film:

The New World Order, Federal Reserve, Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, North American Union, the Rockefeller/Rothschild families, Freemasonry, Bohemian Grove, the Illuminati, Illuminati symbolism, Problem-Reaction-Solution, 9-11, war profiteering, the phony 'War on Terrorism', the impending 'Big Brother Surveillance Society', the war on civil liberties, microchipping, mind control, media control and 'education system' indoctrination.

Featuring: Alex Jones, David Icke, Aaron Russo, Jordan Maxwell, G. Edward Griffin, Jim Marrs, Bill Hicks, Daniel Estulin, Jim Tucker, Ted Gunderson, Anthony Hilder, Professor Steven Jones, Webster Tarpley, George Carlin, John Taylor Gatto, Charlotte Iserbyt, Dave vonKleist, Stan Monteith and others...

Part - 2
Part - 3
Part - 4
Part - 5
Part - 6
Part - 7
Part - 8
Part - 9
Part - 10
Part - 11
Part - 12
Part - 13
Part - 14
Part - 15
Part - 16

Saturday, September 12, 2009

Oppressed Muslims of West Burma

Part 2

The Rohingya is a Muslim ethnic group of the Northern Arakan State of Western Burma (nowadays called Myanmar). According to Amnesty International, the Muslim Rohingya people have continued to suffer from human rights violations under the Burmese junta since 1978, and many have fled to neighbouring Bangladesh as a result:

"The Rohingyas’ freedom of movement is severely restricted and the vast majority of them have effectively been denied Burma citizenship. They are also subjected to various forms of extortion and arbitrary taxation; land confiscation; forced eviction and house destruction; and financial restrictions on marriage. Rohingyas continue to be used as forced labourers on roads and at military camps, although the amount of forced labour in northern Rakhine State has decreased over the last decade."

"In 1978 over 200,000 Rohingyas fled to Bangladesh, following the ‘Nagamin’ (‘Dragon King’) operation of the Myanmar army. Officially this campaign aimed at "scrutinising each individual living in the state, designating citizens and foreigners in accordance with the law and taking actions against foreigners who have filtered into the country illegally." This military campaign directly targeted civilians, and resulted in widespread killings, rape and destruction of mosques and further religious persecution."

"During 1991-92 a new wave of over a quarter of a million Rohingyas fled to Bangladesh. They reported widespread forced labour, as well as summary executions, torture, and rape. Rohingyas were forced to work without pay by the Burmese army on infrastructure and economic projects, often under harsh conditions. Many other human rights violations occurred in the context of forced labour of Rohingya civilians by the security forces."

As of 2005, the UNHCR had been assisting with the repatriation of Rohingya from Bangladesh, but allegations of human rights abuses in the refugee camps have threatened this effort.

Despite earlier efforts by the UN, the vast majority of Rohingya refugees have remained in Bangladesh, unable to return because of the negative attitude of the ruling regime in Myanmar. Now they are facing problems in Bangladesh as well where they do not receive support from the government any longer. In February 2009, many Rohingya refugees were rescued by Acehnese sailors in the Strait of Malacca, after 21 days at sea.

Over the years thousands of Rohingya also have fled to Thailand. There are roughly 111,000 refugees housed in 9 camps along the Thai-Myanmar border. There have been charges that groups of them have been shipped and towed out to open sea from Thailand, and left there. In February 2009 there was evidence of the Thai army towing a boatload of 190 Rohingya refugees out to sea.

A group of refugees rescued by Indonesian authorities also in February 2009 told harrowing stories of being captured and beaten by the Thai military, and then abandoned at open sea. By the end of February there were reports that of a group of 5 boats were towed out to open sea, of which 4 boats sank in a storm, and 1 boat washed up on the shore. February 12 2009 Thailand's prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said there were "some instances" in which Rohingya people were pushed out to sea....

International rights groups and agencies, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Amnesty International and other rights groups, have called for Asian countries to show mercy in dealings with the Rohingya migrants.

Friday, August 07, 2009

Documentary on nuclear tests in Xinjiang

Part 2
Part 3

The People's Republic of China conducted 45 tests (23 atmospheric and 22 underground, all conducted at Lop Nur Nuclear Weapons Test Base, in Malan, Xinjiang)

Most damage to Xinjiang locals came from detonations during the 1960s and 1970s, which rained down a mixture of radioactive material and sand from the surrounding desert. Some were three-megaton explosions, 200 times larger than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

Japanese Professor of physics, Jun Takada, calculated that up to 1.48 million Chinese could have caught radiation disease and up to 190,000 of them could have died of leukemia and cancer, reports with reference to The Times.

The scientist calculated that the so-called nuclear sands of radioactive dust and particles had reached many towns and villages situated along the ancient Silk Road. Takada found vestiges of the radiation disease near the border territory between China and Kazakhstan, a republic of the former Soviet Union.

Takada concluded as a result of his research that China’s three major nuclear tests exceeded the power of the Chernobyl disaster four times. He interviewed many Chinese nationals who were involved in the nuclear tests. Many of them told the scientist that they were still suffering from the disease, that many of their children were born with either dead or with severe deformities.

That was the price that the nation had to pay for the decision that the Chinese leadership made in 1955 to build a nuclear bomb. Mao Zedong was concerned about the nuclear power of the United States . He also wanted to take advantage of the USSR as world’s number one communist state, the Japanese scientist believes. The first nuclear test was made on October 16, 1964.

Forty-six nuclear blasts were made on the Lop Nur test ground, 1,500 miles west of Beijing. There were 46 nuclear blasts performed there: 23 bombs exploded in the atmosphere, 22 under the ground, and one explosion ended unsuccessfully.

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Genocide of Uyghurs

The Uyghurs are the native people of East Turkestan, also known as Sinkiang or Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. The latest Chinese census gives the present population of the Uyghurs estimate according to Chinese official statement 8,345,622 million. But the Uyghurs estimate themselves more than 20 millions. There are also 500,000 Uyghurs in West Turkestan mostly known as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan . Almost 75,000 Uyghurs have their homes in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Europe and the United States.

The Chinese sources indicate that the Uyghurs are the direct descendants of the Huns.

Ancient Greek, Iranian, and Chinese sources placed Uyghurs with their tribes, and sub-tribes in the vast area between the west banks of the Yellow River in the east, Eastern Turkestan in the west, and in the Mongolian steppe in the northeast as early as 300 B.C..

Early History

Uyghur Empire: After the fall of the Kokturk Empire in Central Asia, the Uyghurs established their true state Uyghur empire in 744, with the city of Karabalgasun, on the banks of the Orkhun River, as its capital. After the death of Baga Tarkan in 789 and specially after that of his successor, Kulug Bilge Khagan in 790, Uyghur power and prestige declined.

The Ganzhou Uyghur Kingdom: The Kanchou (Ganzhou) Uyghur Kingdom, which was established in today's Gansu province of China, in 850. Several thousand of these Uyghurs still live in the Kansu (Gansu) area under the name yellow Uyghurs or Yugurs, preserving their old Uyghur mother tongue and their ancient Yellow sect of Lamaist Buddhism.

The Karakhoja Uyghur Kingdom: The Uyghurs living in the northern part of Khan Tengri (Tianshan Mountains) in East Turkestan established the Karakhoja Uyghur Kingdom (Qocho) near the present day city of Turfan (Turpan), in 846.

The Karakhanid Uyghur Kingdom: The Uyghurs living in the southern part of Khan Tengri, established the Karakhanid Uyghur Kingdom in 840 with the support of other Turkic clans like the Karluks, Turgish and the Basmils, with Kashgar as its capital. In 934, during the rule of Satuk Bughra Khan, the Karakhanids embraced Islam 19 . Thus, in the territory of East Turkestan two Uyghur kingdoms were set up: the Karakhanid, who were Muslims, and the Karakhojas, who were Buddhists.In 1397 this Islamic and Buddhist Uyghur Kingdoms merged into one state and maintained their independence until 1759.

Manchu Invasion: The Manchus who set up a huge empire in China, invaded the Uyghur Kingdom of East Turkestan in 1759 and dominated it until 1862. In 1863, the Uyghurs were successful in expelling the Manchus from their motherland, and founded an independent kingdom in 1864. The money for the Manchu invasion was granted by the British Banks. After this invasion, East Turkestan was given the name Xinjiang which means "new territory" or "New Dominion" and it was annexed into the territory of the Manchu empire on November 18,1884.

Chinese communist rule: In 1911, the Nationalist Chinese, overthrew Manchu rule and established a republic. Twice, in 1933 and 1944, the Uyghurs were successful in setting up an independent East Turkestan Republic. But these independent republics were overthrown by the military intervention and political intrigues of the Soviet Union. It was in fact the Soviet Union that proved deterrent to the Uyghur independence movement during this period.

In 1949 Nationalist Chinese were defeated by the Chinese Communists. After that, Uyghurs fell under Chinese Communist rule.

Uyghur Civilization

At the end of the 19th and the first few decades of the 20th century, scientific and archaeological expeditions to the region along the Silk Road in East Turkestan led to the discovery of numerous Uyghur cave temples, monastery ruins, wall paintings, statues, frescoes, valuable manuscripts, documents and books. Members of the expedition from Great Britain, Sweden, Russia, Germany, France, Japan, and the United States were amazed by the treasure they found there, and soon detailed reports captured the attention on an interested public around the world. The relics of these rich Uyghur cultural remnants brought back by Sven Hedin of Sweden, Aurel Stein of Great Britain, Gruen Wedel and Albert von Lecoq from Germany, Paul Pelliot of France, Langdon Warner of the United States, and Count Ottani from Japan can be seen in the Museums of Berlin, London, Paris, Tokyo, Leningrad and even in the Museum of Central Asian Antiquities in New Delhi. The manuscripts, documents and the books discovered in Eastern Turkestan proved that the Uyghurs had a very high degree of civilization.

This Uyghur power, prestige and civilization which dominated Central Asia for more than a thousand years went into a steep decline after the Manchu invasion of East Turkestan, and during the rule of the Nationalist and specially during the rule of the Communist Chinese.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Of Savages And Thugs?

Mumia Abu-Jamal -- Of Savages And Thugs?

- U.S. too often follows Israel's lead in diplomatic situations
By Paul Findley

The recently released book, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," co-authored by distinguished professors John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard, offers hope for constructive change. It details the damage to U.S. national interests caused by the lobby for Israel. These brave professors render a great service to America, but their theme, expressed in a published study paper a year ago, is already under heavy, vitriolic attack.

They are unjustly accused of anti-Semitism, the ultimate instrument of intimidation employed by the lobby. A common problem: Under pressure, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs withdrew an invitation for the authors to speak about their book. Council president Marshall Bouton explained ruefully that the invitation posed "a political problem" and a need "to protect the institution" from those who would be angry if the authors appeared.

I know what it is like to be targeted in this way. In the last years of my long service in Congress, I spoke out, making many of the points now presented in the Mearsheimer-Walt book. In 1980, my opponent charged me with anti-Semitism, and money poured into his campaign fund from every state in the Union. I prevailed that year but two years later lost by a narrow margin. In 1984, Sen. Charles Percy, then chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and an occasional critic of Israel, was defeated. Leaders of the Israel lobby claimed credit for defeating both Percy and me, claims that strengthened lobby influence in the years that followed.

The result is that Members of Congress today loudly reward Israel as it violates international law and peace agreements, lures America into costly wars, and subjects millions of Palestinians under its rule to apartheid-like conditions because they are not Jewish.

It is time to call politicians to account for their undying allegiance to a foreign state. Let the Mearsheimer-Walt book be a clarion that bestirs the American people to political action and finally brings fundamental change to both Capitol Hill and the White House.

Citizen participation in public policy development is a hallmark of our proud democracy. But the pro-Israel groups subvert democracy when they engage in smear campaigns that intimidate and silence critics. America badly needs a civilized discussion of the damaging role of Israel in U.S. policy formulation.

Saturday, July 04, 2009

Race for the Nuclear Bomb

History of nuclear weapons chronicles the development of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are devices that possess enormous destructive potential that uses energy derived from nuclear fission or nuclear fusion reactions. Starting with the scientific breakthroughs of the 1930s which made their development possible, continuing through the nuclear arms race and nuclear testing of the Cold War, and finally with the questions of proliferation and possible use for terrorism in the early 21st century.

The first fission weapons, also known as "atomic bombs," were developed in, and partially by, the United States during World War II in what was called the Manhattan Project. In August 1945 two were dropped on Japan. An international team was dispatched to help work on the project.

The Soviet Union started development shortly thereafter with their own atomic bomb project, and not long after that both countries developed even more powerful fusion weapons also called "hydrogen bombs." During the Cold War, these two countries each acquired nuclear weapons arsenals numbering in the thousands, placing many of them onto rockets which could hit targets anywhere in the world. Currently there are at least nine countries with functional nuclear weapons. A considerable amount of international negotiating has focused on the threat of nuclear warfare and the proliferation of nuclear weapons to new nations or groups.

There have been (at least) four major false alarms, the most recent in 1995, that almost resulted in the US or Russia launching its weapons in retaliation for a supposed attack.

Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

Nuclear armed countries produce it in US - Russia - UK - France - China - Israel - India - Pakistan and the latest is North Korean

1 - United States United States: Warheads active - 2,700 (total: 9,400 / first test: 1945 "Trinity")
2 - Russia (former Soviet Union): Warheads active - 4,840 (total: 13,000 / first test: 1949 ("RDS-1"))
3 - United Kingdom: Warheads active - 160 (Total: 185 / first test: 1952 "Hurricane")
4 - France: Warheads active - 300 (Total: 300 / first test: 1960 "Gerboise Bleue")
5 - China: Warheads active - 180 (total: 240) / first test: 1964 "596")

Non-NPT nuclear powers

6 - India: Warheads active - ? / (Total: 60 / first test: 1974 "Smiling Buddha")
7 - Pakistan: Warheads active - ? / (Total: 60 / first test: 1998 "Chagai-I")

States accused of having nuclear weapons

8 - Israel: Warheads active - ? / (Total: 80 / unknown or 1979, see Vela Incident)
9 - North Korea: Warheads active - ? / (Total: <10 2006="2006" br="br" first="first" test="test">
The nuclear powers have conducted at least 2,000 nuclear test explosions which most are far stronger then the atom bomb which distroy Hiroshima (numbers are approximated, as some test results have been disputed):

1- United States: 1,054 tests by official count (involving at least 1,151 devices, 331 atmospheric tests), most at Nevada Test Site and the Pacific Proving Grounds in the Marshall Islands, with ten other tests taking place at various locations in the United States, including Amchitka Alaska, Colorado, Mississippi, and New Mexico.
2- Union Soviet Union: 715 tests (involving 969 devices) by official count, most at Semipalatinsk Test Site and Novaya Zemlya, and a few more at various sites in Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Ukraine.
3- France: 210 tests by official count (50 atmospheric, 160 underground), 4 atomic atmospheric tests at C.E.S.M. near Reggane, 13 atomic underground tests at C.E.M.O. near In Ekker in the then-French Algerian Sahara, and nuclear atmospheric tests at Fangataufa and nuclear undersea tests Moruroa in French Polynesia. Additional atomic and chemical warfare tests took place in the secret base B2-Namous, near Ben Wenif, other tests involving rockets and missiles at C.I.E.E.S, near Hammaguir, both in the Sahara.
4- United Kingdom: 45 tests (21 in Australian territory, including 9 in mainland South Australia at Maralinga and Emu Field, some at Christmas Island in the Pacific Ocean, plus many others in the U.S. as part of joint test series)
5- China: 45 tests (23 atmospheric and 22 underground, at Lop Nur Nuclear Weapons Test Base, in Malan, Xinjiang)
6- India: 6 underground tests (including the first one in 1974), at Pokhran.
7- Pakistan: 6 underground tests, at Ras Koh Hills, Chagai District and Kharan Desert, Kharan District in Balochistan Province.
8- North Korea: 2 tests at Hwadae-ri 2006 and on 2009.

Additionally, there may have been at least three alleged but unacknowledged nuclear explosions. Of these, the only one taken seriously as a possible nuclear test is the Vela Incident, a possible detection of a nuclear explosion in the Indian Ocean in 1979, hypothesized to have been a joint Israeli/South African test.

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Racism a History - The Colour of Money 1

This episode examines to what extent racism is a product of 17th century economic globalisation. With the huge profits of racism fuelling the slave trade, justification for racism was emphasised by generalisations of the inferiority of non-white Europeans.

This was challenged during the Age Of Enlightenment during the 18th century, as well as by slaves themselves, particularly the Black Jacobins of Haiti in the 1790's who, spurred on by the French Revolution, campaigned for their rights and defeated their French masters as well as British invaders.

Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6

- Such an act of slavery which product of 17th century economic globalisation still happening around the world now a day. As example at diamond mine of West Coast of Afrika, slavery in India, sex slavery of Russian girl, or some employer treat badly the Indonesia woman which work under them as house-maid and many other case.....

Monday, June 15, 2009

Battle of Pasir Panjang History

The Battle of Pasir Panjang was initiated upon the advancement of elite Imperial Japanese Army forces towards Pasir Panjang at Pasir Panjang Ridge on 13 February 1942 during World War II in the Battle of Singapore.

13,000 Japanese troops had made an amphibious landing in the northwest part of Singapore near Sarimbun, and had started to advance south towards Pasir Panjang. They had already captured Tengah Airfield en route. The 13,000 attacking Pasir Panjang were a significant part of the total strength of 36,000 Japanese troops attacking Singapore as a whole.

The soldiers fought at the Battle of Pasir Panjang, at Pasir Panjang Ridge in the Bukit Chandu (Opium Hill) area on February 12-14, 1942. Although heavily outnumbered, Adnan refused to surrender and urged his men to fight until the end.

“ The Malay Regiment showed what esprit de corps and discipline can achieve. Garrisons of posts held their ground and many of them were wiped out almost to a man. - Lieutenant General Arthur Percival ”

- Adnan bin Saidi is described by many Singaporeans and Malaysians today as a hero for his actions on Bukit Chandu—he encouraged his men not to surrender and instead fight to the death. He is also credited as the soldier who caught the disguised Indian troops' marching error.

In an attempted trick philopino troops pressed their attack on Opium Hill in the afternoon but under the guise of a deception. The Japaness sent a group of soldiers, dressed in Punjabi uniforms, passing themselves off as Indian soldiers in the British army. C Company saw through this trick as they knew that soldiers of the British army usually marched in a line of three whereas the disguised soldiers were in a line of four. When they reached the Malay Regiment's defensive line, C Company's squad opened fire, killing some many men. Those who survived escaped downhill.

Two hours later, the Japanese launched an all-out banzai attack in great numbers. The attack overwhelmed the Allies, and the defence line shattered. Greatly outnumbered and short of ammunition and supplies, they continued to resist the Japanese. All kinds of arms such as grenades, small arms and bayonets were used by the troops. Soldiers engaged in fierce hand-to-hand combat using bayonets. Yet, they stood their ground frustrating the Japanese. Adnan was seriously wounded but refused to retreat or surrender and instead encouraged his men to fight to the end.

Soon after, Pasir Panjang was under Japanese control, and Adnan bin Saidi, wounded and unable to fight, was captured. Instead of taking him prisoner, he was continuously kicked, punched and beaten by the Japanese. He was then tied to a rubber tree and bayoneted to death.

They held off the Japanese for two days amid heavy enemy shelling and shortages of food and ammunition. Adnan was shot but carried on fighting. The battle went down in history for consisting the only recorded hand-to-hand combat between the allied forces and the japanese army during the battle for Singapore.

Soon after, Pasir Panjang was under Japanese control, and Adnan bin Saidi, wounded and unable to fight, was captured. Instead of taking him prisoner, he was continuously kicked, punched and beaten by the Japanese. He was then tied to a rubber tree and bayoneted to death.

Saturday, April 04, 2009

Gaza in Ruins

The Gaza Strip is a land in ruins, devastated by 22 days of war.

In this news special from Gaza, Al Jazeera focuses on the damage from the war - the human, physical and political damage suffered by people here, people already weakened by an 18-month siege at the hands of Israel.

Part 2
part 3

Focus on Gaza: A Crime of War?

Friday, March 27, 2009

Israeli Use White Phosphorus on Civilians

Isreal military fired white phosphorus over crowded areas of Gaza repeatedly and indiscriminately in its three-week war, killing and injuring civilians and committing war crimes, Human Rights Watch said.

"In Gaza, the Israeli military didn't just use white phosphorus in open areas as a screen for its troops," said Fred Abrahams, a senior Human Rights Watch researcher. "It fired white phosphorus repeatedly over densely populated areas, even when its troops weren't in the area and safe smoke shells were available. As a result, civilians needlessly suffered and died." He said senior commanders should be held to account.

In a 71-page report, the rights group said the repeated use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells in populated areas of Gaza was not incidental or accidental, but revealed "a pattern or policy of conduct".

( White Phosphorus burns in air, and on contact will burn through flesh to the bone. The gas released from it as it burns causes corrosive clouds that are extremely poisonous.)

Tun Dr. Mahathir at The Forum for Palestine in KL

1. Thank you for your presence at this forum on Palestine. I think it is important that we remind ourselves briefly of the background of this tragic country.

2. When after the Second World War, the Europeans had to give up their empires; they left behind time bombs, which regularly exploded, making the development of the ex-colonies fraught with danger and obstacles. Nearly all the newly independent states emerging from European colonisation have not been stable, nor been able to develop themselves, giving the impression that these ex-colonies are unable to manage independence. Many even think that they should remain as colonies.

3. Of the ex-colonies which have to manage the continuously exploding time bombs, none is worse than the mandated territory of Palestine.

4. Britain, which was given the mandate for Palestine had no right to carve the state in order to create the state of Israel. It is shameful that Britain should succumb to the terrorism of the Haganah and the Irgun and Zionist pressures and reneged on the conditions of the mandate. It was a totally irresponsible and dishonorable act unworthy of a country that talks so much about honour and integrity.

5. The Arab Palestinian not only lost much of their land but they were driven out of the portion given to the Jews. Their land was expropriated with no compensation and many were massacred at Deir Yassin, al-Dawayina, Eilaboun, Jish, Ramle and Laydda.

6. Since 1948, the Palestinians had to live as refugees in refugee camps under terrible conditions. Their children grew without proper schooling knowing only poverty and squalor.

7. One would have thought that the imperialists who had wronged the Palestinian Arabs would at least help them reclaim their rights in the state that is now called Israel. But instead we find Britain and the United States in particular giving military aid to the Israelis even when they openly seize more Palestinian land and set up Jewish settlements on land that is not apportioned to them.

8. There are some who blame the Palestinians for what they term as terrorism. I have no liking for irresponsible acts which result in the killing of people, innocent civilians whether Jews or Muslims. In fact I am against war i.e. the killing of people as a way of solving conflicts. But when the Arabs mounted a conventional war against Israel to regain Palestinian land, what did the British and the Americans, the people responsible for the outbreak of fighting between Jews and Muslims do? They provided Israel with military support so that the Arab states of Jordan, Syria and Egypt were defeated.

9. Unable to get any more help from the Arab nations, with no sympathy from other nations, the Palestinians finally had to fight an unevenly matched struggle against the overwhelmingly powerful armed might of Israel. Perhaps they should know that they could not win against Israel backed by American forces. But this is their land unlawfully occupied by the Israelis and even if they have to fight alone against their powerful oppressors, they have to do so. After abortive attempts to dislodge the Israelis, without the weapons to match those of the Israeli military, they had no choice but to resort to methods which must be physically very painful and terrifying to them. It is not something people would like to do – tying explosives to your body and blowing yourself up. But desperate people have to resort to desperate ways. And suicide bombings became their main weapon.

10. If they cannot do this what can they do when the Israelis expanded their territory, building roads on Palestinian land, which the Palestinians were barred from using, building high walls to break-up Palestinian families and their villages.

11. I went to Palestine and was shocked to find that entry into Palestine is controlled by Israelis armed with machine guns. Their checkpoints deliberately delayed my entry into Palestine by more than two hours so that I could not visit the village of Jenin where Israel had destroyed houses while their occupants were still inside, where the whole village was reduced to rubble by Israeli guns and bombs. I could not go to Jerusalem because the Israelis declared that it was unsafe, as if they cared for me. And everywhere I saw Israeli settlements guarded by armed militia while the Arabs were forced to build huts and live in them with their animals to prevent seizure of their land by Israelis for their settlements.

12. I was shocked that the Palestinians were not even allowed to call the remaining land that had formed the state of Palestine after the UN carved up a part of it to give to the Jews, the State of Palestine.

13. The Israelis insisted and the international community appeared to acquiesce that there is no State of Palestine, only a Palestinian Authority. Yet the United Nations when it agreed to create a state of Israel on Palestinian land referred to the partition as creating two separate states of Israel and Palestine. How come today there is no Palestine?

14. At any time Israeli tanks could enter Palestinian towns as if land under the control of what is called the Palestinian Authority is actually under Israeli rule. When I was there Israeli armored cars actually drove through Ramallah. I was told Israeli tanks had surrounded the building where Arafat was forced to seek shelter and Israel’s guns kept up a continuous bombardment of the buildings.

15. The Americans and the British insisted that the Palestinians hold elections to determine who should be the Palestinian Authority. The contest was between Fatah and Hamas. Hamas won hands down.

16. The least the British and the Americans could do was to accept the result of the elections. But these backers of Israel rejected the results of the election because they do not like Hamas.

17. If other countries reject the results of elections these so-called democrats would condemn them. But we now see the great proponents of democracy themselves rejecting the results of the democratic process.

18. But perhaps this is to be expected. America and Britain which had previously condemned detention without trial are now detaining people without trial and without even the benefit of the law. And the American Congress went so far as to make torture of prisoners legal.

19. In the meanwhile the Palestinians have been subjected to condemnation for defending as best they could but the Western Press played up the futile retaliation by the Palestinians as terrorism. That the Israelis attack, kill, destroy and arrest Palestinians thus terrifying them does not make them terrorists.

20. In a recent newspaper report in Malaysia, we are told that the Israelis blasted a car in which a terrorist was traveling. We know the Israelis are technologically advanced. But how could they know which car was carrying a Palestinian “terrorist”. Every time a car or a home is blasted by the Israelis we are told by our own papers that there were terrorists in the car or the house. Can we trust the Jewish controlled Western wire service and media to tell the truth?

21. What we do know for a fact is that schools, including a UN school and hospitals have been blasted by Israeli guns and the victims are plainly children and ordinary people. How come they fail to recognise that they were targeting children when their guns and tanks were so close?

22. Hamas may have fired rockets into Israel. But it was not without provocation. The Israelis had blockaded Gaza under the excuse that arms may be smuggled into the strip. Why is it so wrong for the Palestinians to get some pitiably inadequate weaponry when the US supplies guns, rockets, bombs, tanks and warplanes to the Israelis with which to blast Palestinian towns out of existence, with which to kill children?

23. The peculiar thinking of the Western backers of Israel was also demonstrated during the Serbian ethnic cleansing in Bosnia-Herzegovina when the West did not allow the Bosnians to be supplied with weapons because they will cause more deaths in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It would seem that they wanted to see only the Bosnians killed. The Serbs were to be saved. Yet they talk of Serb brutalities. It would seem that Muslim lives were always expandable.

24. This is also the case with Palestine. The Palestinians must not be supplied with weapons so that they would be totally defenseless in the face of Israeli attacks, so that the Palestinians would be killed, so that the Israeli killers would be saved, so that the Israeli killers would be able to kill with impunity.

25. The same thinking also resulted in allowing Israel to have nuclear weapons while those against Israel are castigated and prevented from having similar weapons or any defensive capability. Sanctions are applied against them even when Israel is being supplied with more brutish weapons like cluster bombs and depleted uranium shells and bombs.

26. War is inhuman and war should be made a crime. People should stop killing people to settle their conflicts. But far worse than the killing in war is the murder of people who have been deliberately deprived of the means to defend themselves, to save their lives.

27. What kind of people are these great powers whose idea of fairness is to literally tie up the hands of the opponents so that their thugs can beat them to a pulp.

28. This is what we are seeing in Gaza. Yes the Gazans may have rockets but the scale of the so-called retaliation by Israel is beyond what can be considered as retaliation. It is nothing less than deliberate genocide worthy of primitive people. And yet the Israelis claim they are the most intelligent people with the greatest number of Nobel Laureates and scientific achievements. The greatness of a people cannot be measured by cerebral brilliance alone. Heartless people and bully are not great. They will go down in history as inhuman brutes. And those who support them must be considered equally brutish.

29. Some apologists for Israel claim that the Palestinians have rejected peace, have been deliberately provocative. But what is the peace that is offered the Palestinians?

30. It consists of being subservient to the Israelis and the Americans. It consists of rejecting their duly elected Government. It consists of giving up land that has been occupied by Israelis during peace as well as through one-sided wars. It means accepting Jewish settlements on Palestinian land, and denial of the Right of Return of the Arab refugees.

31. The peace that is offered by America and the West is the peace for a subservient Israeli colony, where the Palestinian may not even call their land Palestine, where Israeli forces have full liberty to do what they like in the land of the Palestinians.

32. Israeli brutality is unprecedented and shameless. The world knows that Israeli forces attack, kill and maim innocent children, women, the sick and the infirm. They deliberately starve their would be victims and deny them medical aid and fuel for power so as to weaken them before they attacked. And they attack with forces and weapons out of all proportions to the strength or military capability of their victims. And they do all these knowing that the mighty forces of the United States will be right behind them, ready to support their brutal acts.

33. The Americans and the Israelis are forever demanding that the Palestinians stop their terror attacks before there could be peace talks. Why should the Palestinians do that when the Israelis still occupy their land and enforce their rule on Palestinian land, keeping thousands of Palestinians as prisoners and in every way threaten the lives of the Palestinians?

34. If the Palestinians must cease their ineffective attempts to defend themselves, the Israelis must evacuate Palestinian land and allow the return of Palestinian refugees. Then only would it be right to demand that Palestinians do nothing to retaliate against Israeli aggression. Then only could peace negotiations begin.

35. The world must insist on these. The war will not stop otherwise. Today not even the mightiest military power can conquer countries. The authorities or the Governments of the countries concerned may surrender but the people will not. They will continue to fight by whatever means possible until their country is fully liberated.

36. We saw this in Vietnam, in Somalia, in Afghanistan, in Iraq. The only war the US won was in tiny Grenada. Shock and awe will get the military powers nowhere. When people are determined to get back their land they will continue to fight until they achieve their honorable objective.

37. The big powers must realise this. Your weapons of mass destruction your sophistication in inventing new killing machines will avail you of nothing. A hundred years ago you may conquer and colonise. But not any more. You cannot crush the spirit of the people and the love of their land. They will fight if it takes a thousand years.

38. If there is to be peace in this world, if it is going to be freed from acts of terror by irregulars and regulars, stop thinking that force and the killing of people will solve the conflicts between people.

39. If the world is to see peace in Palestine and the Middle-East and indeed the whole world, take no sides in the Palestinian conflict. Only justice based on historical facts will put an end to the Palestinian issue peacefully. Until then the world will continue to see endless violence and war in the Middle-East and Palestine.

40. The onus is on the big powers which created Israel, the time bomb par excellence, which will not stop exploding in the face of the world until justice is done.

41. This is not a religious war. The Jews have been living in Muslim land for centuries. In fact they seek refuge in Muslim land from the oppressions and pogroms of the Europeans. But if the Jews reward their Arab hosts by seizing their land then they and their European invaders will have to pay the price.

42. The tragedy of Gaza will be repeated again and again. But those who think that the Palestinian will be cowed into submission are mistaken. For every Gazan killed many will replace them.

43. War will solve nothing for the militarists. Only justice through peaceful negotiation will.

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Hiroshima & Nagasaki: 長崎県 Atomic Bombing of Japan 広島 原爆投下 通常版

Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nuclear attacks during World War II against the Empire of Japan by the United States of America at the order of U.S. President Harry S. Truman. After six months of intense firebombing of 67 other Japanese cities, the nuclear weapon "Little Boy" was dropped on the city of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, followed on August 9, 1945 by the detonation of the "Fat Man" nuclear bomb over Nagasaki. These are to date the only attacks with nuclear weapons in the history of warfare.

The bombs killed as many as 140,000 people in Hiroshima and 80,000 in Nagasaki by the end of 1945, roughly half on the days of the bombings. Since then, thousands more have died from injuries or illness attributed to exposure to radiation released by the bombs. In both cities, the overwhelming majority of the dead were civilians.
Six days after the detonation over Nagasaki, on August 15, Japan announced its surrender to the Allied Powers, signing the Instrument of Surrender on September 2, officially ending the Pacific War and therefore World War II. (Germany had signed its Instrument of Surrender on May 7, 1945, ending the war in Europe.) The bombings led post-war Japan to adopt Three Non-Nuclear Principles, forbidding that nation from nuclear armament.

The Target Committee at Los Alamos on May 10--11, 1945, recommended Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama, and the arsenal at Kokura as possible targets. The committee rejected the use of the weapon against a strictly military objective because of the chance of missing a small target not surrounded by a larger urban area. The psychological effects on Japan were of great importance to the committee members. They also agreed that the initial use of the weapon should be sufficiently spectacular for its importance to be internationally recognized. The committee felt Kyoto, as an intellectual center of Japan, had a population "better able to appreciate the significance of the weapon." Hiroshima was chosen because of its large size, its being "an important army depot" and the potential that the bomb would cause greater destruction because the city was surrounded by hills which would have a "focusing effect".

Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson struck Kyoto from the list because of its cultural significance, over the objections of General Leslie Groves, head of the Manhattan Project. According to Professor Edwin O. Reischauer, Stimson "had known and admired Kyoto ever since his honeymoon there several decades earlier." On July 25 General Carl Spaatz was ordered to bomb one of the targets: Hiroshima, Kokura, Niigata, or Nagasaki as soon after August 3 as weather permitted and the remaining cities as additional weapons became available.