"I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts;
"A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick;
"Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels;
"Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth all the day.
"Behold, it is written before me: I will not keep silence, but will recompense, even recompense into their bosom,
"Your iniquities, and the iniquities of your fathers together, saith the LORD, which have burned incense upon the mountains, and blasphemed me upon the hills: therefore will I measure their former work into their bosom."
(Is. 65:2-7)

August 20, 2008

This interview I am sharing with you, done March 9, 2007, is with a young Israeli soldier who fought in the war in Lebanon. He ended up in Portland, Maine, because of unusual circumstances. I saw him in a newsclip on the internet, and I started using some of his mannerisms to drive home the issue about the listlessness of the Israeli military personnel. He became aware that I was doing this, and he showed up to find out what was going on. Then, he decided he wanted to testify in this way.

I am requesting again that the reader have respect for this man's integrity and bravery, as with all the persons who are choosing to testify in this manner. The information that is being shared is very secret, and these people who are testifying are displaying a lot of courage just for coming forward in this way.

Thank-you very much.

Heil Hitler!

Susan F. Smith

"And mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: I will recompense thee according to thy ways and thine abominations that are in the midst of thee; and ye shall know that I am the LORD that smiteth.
"Behold the day, behold, it is come: the morning is gone forth; the rod hath blossomed, pride hath budded.
"Violence is risen up into a rod of wickedness: none of them shall remain, nor of their multitude, nor of any of theirs: neither shall there be wailing for them.
"The time is come, the day draweth near: let not the buyer rejoice, nor the seller mourn: for wrath is upon all the multitude thereof.
"For the seller shall not return to that which is sold, although they were yet alive: for the vision is touching the whole multitude thereof, which shall not return; neither shall any strengthen himself in the iniquity of his life.
"They have blown the trumpet, even to make all ready; but none goeth to the battle: for my wrath is upon all the multitude thereof. "
(Ez. 7:9-14)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John From Tel Aviv

S. How old are you?

J. I'm 38 years old.

S. Is that you I see in the soup kitchen?

J. Yes.

S. How did you get into the war in Lebanon?

J. I was recruited from a global search for Israelis who knew how to fight.

S. I thought Israel had a standing army over there. Isn't this true?

J. No. We just pretend to be well equipped. We're very pretentious.

S. Where are all the Israeli soldiers? Where is the standing army of Israel?

J. They don't exist.

S. Does Israel have military equipment such as guns and helicopters?

J. Sort of. We keep an arsenal of guns and ammo around just for show. But we are braindead when it comes to using the weapons.

S. Do Jews know how to shoot a gun?

J. Sort of. They know how to look like shooting someone. But they don't know how to handle the weapon without it exploding in their face. This is why they are so fragmented and afraid of confrontation with anyone.

S. I want to ask you a personal question. I understand that the Jews must always work together in groups. I understand that outside their support they are lost. How does this translate in their behavior in the military?

J. I don't know. We operate ... (silence)

S. How does a Jew feel when he's alone and separate from his brethren?

J. I can't tell you.

S. Why can't you tell me?

J. It's secret.

S. Is there danger in your telling me.

J. Yes. I can't tell you.

S. Is it serious?

J. Yes.

S. Do the Jews always stick together?

J. Always.

S. How would this be manifest in Israeli military strategy? How would the Israeli leaders plan for this issue?

J. They would make sure that there were Jews in the brigade where we were located. We always need a standby in case something happens that we can't get out of.

S. Something you can't get out of?

J. Something like a mishap where I am taken captive, and they are going to torture me.

S. What does your partner do in this instance?

J. He will tweak the captain and make sure I don't get taken alive, or else everything is ruined.

S. Is there something here that you are not telling me?

J. Of course there is. I can't reveal military secrets like that. We are here to win, and ... (silence).

S. What kind of strategies need to be developed for the Israeli army given this vulnerability?

J. We have to stay in pairs and fours, if we want to get through the lines.

S. Does this need have to do with your difficulty getting motivated for aggressions and physical combat?

J. Yes, partly. It also has to do with safety in numbers. We feel too vulnerable when we are by ourselves for any length of time in the field.

S. Awhile back, I read about an interesting maneuver behind enemy lines, during the civil war in Yugoslavia, where a pilot crashed behind the lines and lost contact, then resurfaced a week later to return to safety. When I read about this, it sounded like a highly skilled maneuver on the part of one individual, who acted completely alone. Could a Jew do something like this?

J. No. I don't think a Jew could perform a feat such as that. I remember that. It was heroic. He got information from the deep.

S. Could a Jew do a maneuver like this, if he believed there would be Jews somewhere in the enemy ranks to support him.

J. I don't think he could, unless he knew absolutely that someone would be there for him behind the lines.

S. How long of a span of time could an Israeli operative endure without his support?

J. Maybe a couple of days, to a week, or even up to a year if he is prepared.

S. An Israeli operative could last up to a year without his support. Then what happens?

J. He deteriorates and goes berserk without support.

S. What do you mean, berserk?

J. He will go bananas if he doesn't get tweaked on a regular basis.

S. Tweaked?

J. He gets wild, and will start throwing things and shouting, and calling people names, and then he shoots himself in the head. I've watched it on video film. It was done to an Israeli officer in the field who wasn't obeying command, and we let him deteriorate into chaos. This is what happens to a Jew who has been isolated too long.

S. Is this all you did to him, not tweak him?

J. Yes. We didn't do anything to provoke him in any way, whatsoever, and he went berserk on us, just to prove a point about camaraderie.

S. Explain the point that was made, please.

J. The point was you need to stick together to get through the battle, because you don't know how you would be treated if you are captured. We can't handle being around the Goyim for any length of time without contact with other Jews, or we go berserk.

S. How does it feel to be around the Goyim, without brethren, before you go berserk?

J. It feels okay to a point, but then you feel icky about all your secrets that you can't discuss with them or they would kill you. Then you get weird thinking that something is leaking out and they aren't telling you what they know. Then you go wild.

S. I understand this woman named Linda acts as a relay tweaker for the Israeli military. Could you explain this job?

J. I'm getting embarassed.

S. Please try. ... I'm going to help you. I understand it that there always needs to be a rabbi around to tweak the military into action. Is this correct?

J. Yes. And then some.

S. What do you mean?

J. We have to have stand-bys in case the rabbi is busy somewhere else. This is where people like Linda come in. She can tweak like a rabbi, because her dad trained her to do it this way.

S. Does the rabbi tweak you with these big humps?

J. Yes. Up the ass for the boys, and in the vagina for the women.

S. What message does this relay to the soldiers?

J. I'm the boss. I'm in charge and there is nothing you can do, because I can tweak you into madness.

S. Is there a memory in you of this occurring?

J. Yes. They do this to all their parishioners. They tweak them into momentary insanity, where you can't think at all until they tweak you back to sanity.

S. Is there psychosis, fear, or pain involved in this?

J. Yes. Utter dread that they are going to do it to you at any time.

S. So the state of insanity is an unpleasant state?

J. Absolutely. It feels like you have reached the end of your existence and you have nowhere to go except death. Then they tweak you back up to breathe and obey the rabbi.

S. Does this tweak invoke any childhood memories of rape or violence?

J. It invokes the first rape and subsequent rapes and traumas they put upon us from day one.

S. How many back-up tweakers are there in a squadron?

J. There are about four extra tweakers in a group of maybe ten men and eight personnel, who pick up supplies and ammo and bring it to the fighters.

S. What happens if the tweakers neglect to tweak?

J. You go berserk, as I said.

S. Even if you are among other Jews?

J. No, you get sad for the most part, because you miss the tweaks.

S. How often do you get tweaked in battle?

J. Often. Maybe five to eight times an hour when you are in combat. Otherwise it's about four times a day.

S. Do the tweaks vary?

J. They vary in scope and meaning. Some tweaks shame, and others caress, some give you hope, some make you despair for shame.

S. What do the rabbis shame you for?

J. They shame you if you are doing something you don't need to be doing.

S. Please elaborate. Please give an example.

J. If you are doing something the rabbis don't approve of, they will tweak you with shame.

S. Do you ever feel that the rabbis may be wrong in judgment, concerning the battlefields?

J. Yes. That's all I can say.

S,. So, you are saying that the rabbis are directing the battle, when the Jews go to war?

J. Sort of. They are behind the scenes giving directives to the commanders concerning how to handle the goy in the battle field in regard to occult maneuvers.

S. Occult maneuvers? In the battlefield?

J. Yes. We make maneuvers according to Talmudic mandates concerning the Goyim.

S. For example?

J. Rape the goyim until they bleed, until they die. We left a number of Hezbollah fighters raped with rocks and hemorrhaging until they were dead. It was horrible to watch. They were horrified and sad.

S. Can you give me another example?

J. I can tell you that we left a lot of people blinded and childless, because we are mandated to destroy the light in the Goy parents' eyes, and we did it by blinding their children, and then stoning them with rocks until they bled to death from their genitals.

S. You say stoning to death, but it sounds like rape, with rocks, here against the children. Please explain.

J. We read the word "to stone" as in a punishment against idolatry, as raping with stones until they bleed to death. This is where the rabbis got the idea to rape with stones and sharp sticks, and now barbed wire.

S. The Israeli army raped Lebanese children with rocks, and gouged their eyes out?

J. Yes. A number of them were left for dead in this manner.

S. Why didn't we hear about this?

J. For the same reason why you didn't hear about the massacre in Beersheba. They don't report these events, in case it would be a danger to the synagogue. This is all we are concerned about, protecting the synagogue.

S. How many Lebanese children would you estimate were killed in this manner?

J. A few dozen, maybe thirty or so. Maybe more.

S. Has this happened to Palestinian children?

J. Amazingly, very few have been killed in this way, perhaps because they are afreaid of an uprising, and the Palestinians would win.

S. Could you give me just one more example of how the rabbis determine choices in battles?

J. I can tell you a story about one in Lebanon during the war. The Lebanese people were refusing to allow Israeli military personnel to have access to their spring that they had dug out and had built a well around. The army poisoned the underground aquafer so all the people who drank from the well would choke to death in a horrible way, gagging and spewing vomit and stones from the abdomen. The chemical compound can chrystallize the water and turn it hard as a rock, and you vomit stones.

S. What happened?

J. The community caught on when a few people choked to death in this manner. They summoned for help, and a U.N. truck came with water, and they put a filter on the well, to keep it safe. Thankfully, that's all that happened.

S. Is this chemical a standard weapon in the Israeli army?

J. Yes.

S. Are they planning to use it in this country?

J. Yes. They are planning to use it world wide against all goyim, including you. They have tried to put it in your drinking water, but to no avail. Somehow you have managed to survive with no mishap.

S. We are out of time. Do you have any more to share?

J. No. Let's leave it here, until later.

S. Thank-you for sharing.

(brief pause)

J. I want to share something with you.

S. What's that?

J. I'm an American who served in the Israeli military. That's why I'm here. I live here in Portland, Maine. i moved here after you spotted me in the training film.

S. That was a training film?

J. It was. We released it when the news agencies caught whiff of our foibles and mishaps in the war. It was a promo for the Army reserves.

S. Are you a Jew?

J. Yes.

S. Are you as much under the control of the rabbi as the israeli Jews?

J. In a way. But I'm an American, and I don't like doing that to the Goyim. That is why I'm here.

S. How dependent is Israel on the American military?

J. Completely dependent. Without American military might we are doomed.

S. How dependent is the Israeli military on American Gentiles.

J. We are very dependent on Gentile expertise and strength in the Israeli military.

S. In what way?

J. We need them for back-up and for maneuvering that we are unable to perform ourselves.

S. Could you give an example?

J. We need them to operate the equipment that needs special dexterity, such as flying helicopters and airplanes. Jews are dyslexic and can't operate this equipment well, for the most part. Some can.

S. Could you explain the downing of so many helicopters in Iraq? Is this because of the Jews?

J. I think they are downed just because they were shot down, or because someone didn't know how to handle them well. This could be because the Jews were handling them. I don't know.

S. The Gentiles who help out in the Israli military - are they sworn to secrecy about this?

J. Yes. Absolutely. They are sworn to absolute secrecy, or else they will get killed. It's an embarassment for Israel to have so many Goyim fighting their wars.

S. Was this the case back in the wars of the late sixties and early seventies, the Eight Day War, and the Yom Kippur Wars? Were there Gentiles back then?

J. There were more Gentiles in those wars than in this one. This is why we fucked up so royal. We don't know how to fight a war.

S. Do you know this for a fact, that there were more Gentiles fighting for you at that time?

J. I know this as a secret that has been passed down through the channels. That is all I can tell you.

S. Thank-you for sharing. ... (brief pause) You forgot to tell me what the Talmudic mandate was about the well water.

J. We are supposed to put in the well filth and dirt to make the goyim vomit soot and debris.

S. Where is it written in Scripture to do this?

J. I don't know. It's in there somewhere.

S. Thank-you again for sharing.

"So will I break down the wall that ye have daubed with untempered morter, and bring it down to the ground, so that the foundation thereof shall be discovered, and it shall fall, and ye shall be consumed in the midst thereof: and ye shall know that I am the LORD.
"Thus will I accomplish my wrath upon the wall, and upon them that have daubed it with untempered morter, and will say unto you, The wall is no more, neither they that daubed it;
"To wit, the prophets of Israel which prophesy concerning Jerusalem, and which see visions of peace for her, and there is no peace, saith the Lord GOD."
(Ez. 13:14-16)

SOUNDTRACK

So hooked was I by the video for "Buddy Holly" that there was little chance of me ever disliking Weezer.  When Pinkerton came out, it quickly became one of my favorite records.  "Pink Triangle" is such a great song about unrequited love for a lesbian.  And of course, "El Scorcho" is a wonderfully off-kilter single.  Since then, Weezer have put out a bunch of albums, some with titles and some without.  This is their 3rd record called Weezer, but it's the Red Album because its cover is red (duh).

I know that many people can't stand Weezer (or at least couldn't back the last time I bothered to check what the pop culture world was thinking...although I think they may be cool now).  They have an uncanny sense of pop melody even when their songs are weird or funny or even seemingly out of tune.  I think that's why I like them so much, because their songs sometimes start out of tune and the ultimately wind up being super catchy.  I also like them because Rivers Cuomo went back to Harvard to get his degree in English (one wonders of course, why he chooses to write such pedestrian rhymes, but that's another story altogether), and because he's a geek in general.

No doubt you've heard at least one Weezer song, and you'd be living under a rock if you haven't heard their new, ubiquitous single "Pork and Beans."  And "Pork and Beans" is as good a place to start as any.  It's got fairly heavy guitars, it's catchy as all get out, it's rather anti-authority, and parts of it don't make any sense...that's Weezer for you.

This record is pretty strong overall.  The first 5 songs are pretty standard Weezer.  There's a really heavy start song, a sentimental song "Heart Songs" which name checks some of Rivers' favorite songs growing up, and what has become my favorite song on the record: "The Greatest Man that Ever Lived."  This is a long song (for Weezer) at nearly six minutes.  What's cool about it is that every verse is done in a different style of music: there's a metal verse, a choral verse, a spoken word verse etc.  And the chorus is simple and wonderful.  It could go on for twenty minutes and would still be great.

"Everybody Get Dangerous" is a weird song to me.  It doesn't quite sound right. It's still catchy, but I think maybe saying the word dangerous makes a chorus sound weird.  (How's that for subjective?).  Or, which is more likely, the verses are the catchy part and the chorus is the off-kilter section.

The second half of the record strikes a few firsts, in that the other members of the band sing lead vocals on a few tracks.  Even though the songs are good (and when I heard "Automatic" on the radio the other day on WRXP, it sounded great by itself) there's something off about them being on a Weezer record.  I think maybe I associate Rivers' voice with their style so much that any other voice just makes things seems askew.  That said, the songs are good, they're just not "Weezer."

I have to get back to the lyrics though.  Rivers is more about harmony and melody, I know, but sometimes those lyrics are so simple as to be almost a joke in themselves.  Maybe that's the point.  (And as an English major myself, I secretly believe it is the point).  After a few listens I stop cringing about the lyrics and I just start enjoying them.

The last song gives me some problems because it runs nearly seven minutes long.  Obviously not a problem in itself, but the last two or two and a half minutes are just the song fading out, which...come on.

DIGRESSION: I think I'm probably the only person who gets bothered by songs that fade out too long or songs that I think should be a minute shorter than they are.  And I realized it's because I have a limited time where I can listen to music carefully.  And so when I do, I don't want it wasted with silence or fade outs or final choruses that repeat sixteen times. On the other hand, if I just have music on in the background (which is how most people listen to music) you will hardly notice those extra 45 seconds.  But when you're in the car, and you know you'll be at work in exactly 3 minutes, you don't want 2 minutes of fade!

[READ: August 14, 2008] One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich

My first real awareness of Solzhenitsyn actually comes from the Moxy Fruvous song "Johnny Saucep'n":

Well he was just some Johnny Saucep'n when he walked into that kitchen.
And the chef picked up the order and put down his Solzhenitsyn

I'd made a mental note to check him out based on this (it doesn't take much sometimes).  But then when he died on August 3 (and who could have even imagined he was still alive), it was a second impetus to read him.  The last straw came when a patron asked for his obituary.  He said he used to teach his books.  So, I asked him where I should start.  He told me One Day... (it's by far the shortest) and I made sure to read it right away.

And thus, I have now read two Russian books in a row.  (Mental Floss magazine also had an article about Ukraine that I just read about as well, so there's lots of Russian in my blood these days).

One Day is the story of Ivan Denisovich, a prisoner in a Soviet gulag.  He has been in prison for 8 years and has two more to go on his sentence.  The reason for his being in the camp is a trumped up charged of being a spy for the Germans (he was captured by the Germans and escaped, but since he was crossing from enemy lines he was branded a spy).  The story follows (as you may guess) one day in the prison camp.

Camp conditioners are brutal.  Official policy is that if the temperature drops below minus 40 degrees F, they do not have to work.  On this day, the temperature hovers around minus 25 degrees F, so they must go off to work.  Today's work includes building a building for future prisoners.  Thus, they are erecting a building with bricks and mortar OUTSIDE in minus 25 degree weather.  There is a heater, but it is of little help (and they must find the fuel for it themselves).

The zeks (prisoners) are given three meals, yet they hardly receive the minimum requirement (everyone up the chain of command takes a bit extra), so they barely scrape by.  A zek considers himself lucky if he can lick out an extra bowl.  Any sort of misbehavior (actual or imagined) (including licking out another's bowl) gets you sent to the hole, which is pretty much a hole.  As Ivan puts it, a short stay gives you pneumonia, a ten day staff (a common punishment) and you'll never recover.

Clearly, reading this book at lunch time during the summer, was not the most sympathetic reading time.

But regardless, the most bizarre thing about this book is that Ivan is a surprisingly good-natured individual.  Even though in the morning when he wakes up, (at 5 AM before everyone else, even before 6AM wake up) he uses all his ingenuity to try to go to sick bay to get out of work.  When it doesn't work out, he seems to take everything else in stride.  In fact, as far as days go, this one was a particularly good one for him.  Without giving too much away: he scores extra rations, he avoids getting put in the hole, and most fascinatingly, he builds a wall.  He is working on the wall of this building, and since he has masonry skills, he is put in charge of this one section of the wall.  A great deal of time is spent at this wall: how it is so cold the cement freezes very quickly, etc.  But what makes it so fascinating is that he really gets a groove going on, and starts enjoying himself.  The hard work warms him, and he gets a sense of satisfaction from what he's doing; so much so that when the whistle blows for his day to be over, he wants to finish his section!  (He says its so that it won't settle incorrectly for tomorrow).

All in all you get this really weird sense that he sort of likes being in the prison....  He even says as much at one point: he has been away from his family for so long that it may be easier for him to stay where he is.  When I started the book, I imagined I was in for a horror story the likes of Elie Weisel's Night, or Upton Sinclair's The Jungle.  I was blown away at how not terrible he made it sound (despite all of the horrors within).

Solzhenitsyn himself was in the gulag for many years, so this story is somewhat autobiographical.  It is still surprising that it was published when and where it was, and yet when you read about its impact, and its effect on the USSR specifically and human rights in general, it's amazing how much a little recognition can have.  I also hate to sound like he had it easy in the gulag.  I'm not saying that freezing temperatures an no food is easy, but compared to the things I've seen and heard at Guantanamo Bay, this isn't nearly as bad.  i assume he tried to keep it more mild, so that it would get printed, as if he told the real gruesome details I can't imagine the paper would have printed it.

Nevertheless, I don't think I 'm ready to read Gulag Archipelago anytime soon.

Will the boomerang of Georgia, Russia arming Israel's enemies cause Israel to preemptively attack?



How many 'old guard' figures say it is the best time to attack. Before the 'enemies' get even stronger.



It's a weak argument, based on the past. And the recent past is very different to the one a few decades ago.



The enemies are enemies because they want to control themselves.



Most countries have neighbours with comparable militaries. Israel can't cope with anything like that.

Olmert warns Israelis next war will hit their cities



Olmert warned that now that Hizbullah is the "dominant" force in Lebanon, Israel will hit back "harder than before." Olmert added that the Jewish state did not use all means to respond in 2006, but "if Lebanon becomes a Hizbullah state, then we won't have any restrictions in this regard."



whatreallyhappened (Michael Rivero) Source & Commentary:



Israel is itching to get back into Lebanon, any which way it can.

[vodpod id=ExternalVideo.666543&w=425&h=350&fv=]

Warning

.

This video may contain images depicting the reality and horror of war/violence and should only be viewed by a mature audience.

linktv

Mosaic needs your help! Donate here: http://linktv.org/contribute
"43 People Killed in Algeria," Al Arabiya TV, UAE
"Life After Musharraf," Dubai TV, UAE
"Iran Launches Space Rocket," Abu Dhabi TV, UAE
"Turkey Strengthens Ties With Africa," Al Jazeera TV, Qatar
"Olmert Threatens to Fire Barak," IBA TV, Israel
"Young Women Train for Jihad in Gaza," New TV, Lebanon
"Russia Starts Georgia Pullout," Al Jazeera English, Qatar
Produced for Link TV by Jamal Dajani.

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.1493959&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

I was wondering why the search "a woman in berlin film" kept coming up in the blog stats. The adaptation of the war diary kept during the siege of Berlin in spring 1945 is going to be screened at Toronto in September.

A Woman of Berlin to screen in Toronto

Writing on the HumanEvents.com news site, he recalls how the United States sanctioned the latest Israeli war on Lebanon, the NATO bombing campaign against Federal Yugoslavia and the forceful separation of Kosovo. All these adventures lasted for months and claimed thousands of lives. It’s also noteworthy that the Lebanon war was in response to the capture of just two soldiers, and Kosovo’s ties to Serbia are much closer than those of Abkhazia and South Ossetia to Georgia.

Read the full article.

TheRealNews

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.1493968&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

***

Sent to me from The Real News Network

The Real News Network is a television news and documentary network focused on providing independent and uncompromising journalism.

Our staff, in collaboration with courageous journalists around the globe, will investigate, report and debate stories on the critical issues of our times.

We are member supported and do not accept advertising, government or corporate funding.

NEWS RELEASE 08 20 08

Here is our latest story on the Russia-Georgia conflict - an interview with Eric Margolis.

Democrats onside with Bush on Georgia
Is Obama afraid of getting on the wrong side of the Patriotic issue?

August 20 – As the Russians work to keep pace with their U.S. counterparts in Eastern Europe, Senator John McCain continues to hammer home his message to his fellow Americans that he is the right man to put into office, especially in light of the recent conflicts taking place in Georgia, Poland and the Czech Republic. In response, Senator Barack Obama works carefully to show his true patriotic colours while maintaining his initial promise to keep a peaceful, diplomatic and open mind when dealing with such situations.

Journalist and author, Eric Margolis believes that Obama should be using this moment to make a stronger stance and claims “he (Obama) is afraid and the democrats are afraid of getting on the wrong side of the patriotic issue. The war drums are beating in the U.S., the flags are flying and the media is taking a very hard line towards Russia, and McCain is right out in front taking a hard line, calling for confrontation with Russia. If Obama contradicts this policy he is going to be accused of appeasement, being soft on Russia and soft on aggression and he will be killed(politically), so what he is doing is quietly tagging along”.

Obama’s latest statements show his hard stance against the Russians and their excessive use of military action in Georgia and calls for more talk and less fighting. He also uses language that is friendly and inspirational in nature compared to President George Bush and his fellow Republican John McCain.

In an August 11th press release, Obama’s states “Let me be clear: we seek a future of cooperative engagement with the Russian government, and friendship with the Russian people. We want Russia to play its rightful role as a great nation - but with that role comes the responsibility to act as a force for progress in this new century, not regression to the conflicts of the past. That is why the United States and the international community must speak out strongly against this aggression, and for peace and security.”

Senior Editor, Paul Jay of The Real News Network interviews author Eric Margolis in a four-part series to help understand the underlying issues of the recent US missile deal between Poland and the U.S., along with the fragile truce in Georgia and how all of this affects the upcoming U.S. election and the foreign policy establishment.

***

Other video reports in the 4 Part Series:

Margolis: It’s like August, 1914 - US missile deal enrages Russia

Russian General threatens Poland over missile deal

RNN: Margolis: Russians checkmate US in Georgia

see

Evidence of Georgian tanks + Poland Signs Missile Defense Shield Deal + NATO warns Russia

Crisis in the Caucasus. What Were They Smoking in the White House?

The Force Be With Us But Not With You by Bruce Gagnon

Alexander Cockburn on Russia Today: McCain uses Ossetian bloodshed to score points

Why Not Simply Abolish NATO? by Rodrigue Tremblay

Georgia

During the build-up to the US invasion of Iraq (for the second time), huge pressure was put on the leaders of Western countries to contribute troops and logistical aid to the invasion to present a united front to the world’s media.

President Chirac of France resisted, and fought in a number of arenas, not least in the world’s press, to deter the invasion and was right to do so as it later turned out, as the invasion was based on a pretext of lies and misinformation.

He and his country experienced abuse, particularly in the US, where many people stopped buying French goods, renamed French Fries as Liberty Fries and stopped drinking French wine.

Yesterday, 10 French soldiers paid the ultimate price in an attack by Taliban fighters just 30 miles from Kabul, Afghanistan’s capital. A different, but just as futile a war, as that in Iraq. It was the worst combat-related loss of life for the French military since a suicide bombing in Lebanon in 1983.

Cheese-eating surrender monkeys? I think not…

RussiaToday

Evidence of Georgian tanks rolling into South Ossetian capitol

After hellfire night of heavy shelling, Georgian creepers and straightlegs poured into South Ossetian capital of Tskhinval. In this unique footage Georgian troops were filmed on 08.09.2008 at about 13:00 in a small village of Rgneti just half a mile from the South Ossetian capital.

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.1493257&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

Georgian helos bring it on South Ossetian dwelling houses

Unique footage made from the Georgian army side of Georgian helicopters pepper with fire residential area of the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinval, rocketing and shelling multiple apartment buildings.

Poland Signs Missile Defense Shield Deal with U.S.

VOTERSTHINKdotORG

http://cspanjunkie.org/
August 20, 2008 BBC

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.1493220&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

NATO warns Russia

TheRealNews

http://therealnews.com/c.php?c=08081YT
Western powers send tough message; Russian minister responds.
NATO allies warned Russia on Tuesday that the alliance's cooperation with Moscow would depend on the pullout of troops from Georgia. They insisted Georgia remained on track to join NATO despite Moscow's opposition. The emergency meeting in Brussels highlighted a rift within the 27-nation bloc between former Soviet satellite nations wanting tough action against Russia and western European members warning against antagonizing Moscow. In an editorial from The Independent newspaper entitled "NATO is walking a tightrope over Georgia" Anne Penketh states that "[NATO] foreign ministers want to send a tough message to the Kremlin, but the big powers know that they cannot afford to isolate Moscow which remains an essential partner for the US and Europe in dealing with other major crises such as the showdown with Iran over its nuclear programme."

see

Crisis in the Caucasus. What Were They Smoking in the White House?

The Force Be With Us But Not With You by Bruce Gagnon

Alexander Cockburn on Russia Today: McCain uses Ossetian bloodshed to score points

Why Not Simply Abolish NATO? by Rodrigue Tremblay

Russian General threatens Poland over missile deal

Georgia

1.  9/11, Sadaam's intentions, and Iranian threat are not conspiracies. For those that really believe that the attacks on 9/11 were a government orchestrated event, you are flat out wrong. Our own government can't keep a secret to save its life. How many daily news articles contain the phrase, "An official speaking on the condition of anonymity said..."? 9/11 as a government action would have taken months to plan, months to prepare, and thousands of people willing to kill other Americans - just for starters. Just assuming all that's true and really happened, after nearly 7 years not one of the participants got a guilty conscience and leaked something? Not one got greedy and wanted to sign a book or movie deal? Not one indisputable scrap of evidence surfaced to prove the conspiracy? It really happened folks. Just like we don't want to believe a loved one really died, some people grieve through denial. It's much easier to accept that a government you somewhat control did evil to you than spooky strangers whose culture and religion we don't understand, much less can't control harmed you.

2. Whatever reason we went to war for, it doesn't matter now. Whether the invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq was sold as a hunt for weapons of mass destruction and they weren't found is nearly irrelevant. See point #1. We were attacked on 9/11. We were attacked by people trained in the safe havens of Afghanistan and funded by nations and nation states the likes of Iraq under Sadaam Hussein. Sadaam had multiple UN resolutions to allow in weapons inspectors and instead fought a crafty game of delaying. In those delays we gave him years to hide, export and dismantle his WMD programs. What the idealist fails to understand is that WMD are made from common commercial chemicals. A company making ink or fertilizer today can be spun up in hours to produce highly toxic chemical and biological weapons. Our own Oklahoma City Federal Building was blown up by fertilizer and disel fuel. It's that easy. Sadaam used chemical weapons to quell the Kurdish rebellion, killing upwards of 50,000 of his own citizens. He used them numerous times in their war against Iran. A WMD program is about intent, not capability. Why would we not think he was willing to use them against the US or Israel?

3. The Patriot Act is an absolute necessity. People who live among us even now are planning, watching, plotting, and resourcing the next attack. They say hi. They have good jobs, they appear peaceful. They do whatever necessary to blend in to prove assimilation and appear non-threatening. Now factor in that for terrorism to work - generate fear and chaos and cause governments to waste resources - each successive attack must be either larger in scope or greater in magnitude to achieve the desired effects. Those plotting aren't working on how to crash more planes. Just brainstorm on your own and within five minutes you could dream up a host of scenarios that could meet the objectives of terrorism. What if 30 shopping malls blew up on the same day across the nation? What if on the first day of school 15 yellow buses were hijacked and the children tortured or killed? It doesn't take much. How do you stop it? You beat them at their own game. Just like in driving, if you want to avoid an accident, you have to know what the other driver is going to do before he acts. This is called the OODA loop. You "Observe" the other driver to see what he's doing. You "Orient" on the other driver's behavior. You "Decide" quickly what the other driver appears intent upon doing, and finally you "Act" to protect yourself. Stopping a terrorist is no different. To defeat him, you get inside his OODA loop and foil his decision making. To do that requires the ability to "see" everything - phone conversations, emails, security videos, to be able to screen for indicators of ill intent. Those who cry "invasion of privacy" have a baseless argument assuming the government is well intentioned. (By the way, if it wasn't well intentioned we wouldn't have the act. They would do all the above and just not tell you.) It's not people sitting in and listening to your phone calls and reading your emails. It's computers that look for certain items of information that helps analaysts narrow their focus. I could go on and on about this. Bad guys do bad things. We have to know what they are doing before they strike.

5. Soldiers don't enjoy war or killing. We like the toys. We like the challenge of service. We love the brotherhood. We hate the killing. How many killers do you know - really know? Most would say none. I know many. I know of none that wouldn't take them all back if they could. Killing is not a video game or a movie set. Soldiers experience the blood, the guts, the sprays, the smells, the limbs and innards. They live and re-live a million times what they do. The main driving force is that their buddies need them, fear of what happens to them and their friends if they don't fight back, and that the enemy stands in the way of them coming home. There is no pleasure in it whatsoever.

6. People in the military aren't serving because they have no other options. The academic elite think no one with half a brain would serve. It must be that we're naive fools who serve at the hypnotizing drumbeat of a corrupt government. Not even the best recruiter could fool a mom, dad or youth into an enlistment under the premise that you aren't going to war. Everyone knows one thing for certain about the military - if you join you are going somewhere. When someone joins they are walking into harm's way. Yes, many join because the benefits outweigh the risks to them. I am one of them. It's been good to me and my family. And if someone in poverty or from an inner city joins because they are poor or have few options, then good for them. They always have other options - welfare, drug culture, minimum wage jobs, etc. I tell people to get whatever they can from service because it's like a casino - no matter what you get, the house still wins in the end. You never get more than you give in this line of work.  

2. It's OK to support the troops and be thankful you're an American. We need to stop apologizing for being American and supportive of those in authority. I don't know when it became a national sport to mock those in authority, but it needs to stop. It's not Biblical nor is it wise. Why mock your own nation and give encouragement to your enemies? Why not support those who are doing the work of government? If you don't support the war, make your voice heard but don't forget that you can only do so because you have a Constitution, governing leaders, and a submissive military that permit you the blessings of liberty. Unlike many nations, we don't have a cult of personality where when the President changes there's a military coups that immediately follows as people jockey for power. Inauguration Day will be just another day in the lives of Americans, when in other nations, depending on your party affiliation, it could be the day of your death. God has blessed us with a democratic society that despite all its faults, is a safe, blessed, and inspiring place to live, and we need to quit dragging our tails like we're ashamed of what He's given us.

As the comedian Stephen Wright said, "Someone's always putting their two cents in, but you only get a penny for your thoughts. Somebody's losing a penny!" Thanks for listening to my ramblings.

No comments!!! I couldn't help but laugh crazily on seeing this!!! Read the question and read the answer too!! :D

Fifty percent of these instances he stood in still sunlight that made his face glow with heat as he squinted into the epitome of commerce: bustling business types along glittering skyscrapers and flashing taxi cabs.

Twenty five percent of these instances, he wiped his brow and looked down a windswept avenue littered with tumbling newspapers and battered vehicles piloted by desiccated corpses. A dog barked in the distance. A storm swept overhead, clouds like grey flags in high wind.

Nineteen percent of these instances, he died. Face askew on the fractured windshield of a car, stunned driver mumbling he came from nowhere, nowhere. Skull split open from a falling vase. Screeching human sacrifice of natives whose piercings hung with transistors and diodes. Abdomen trailing intestines, rent open by the jaws of wild dogs. Freak storms. Beaten to death with calculators in a siege of accountants. Carved up with bottleglass in an inter-city tribal war. Torn to shreds by feminists dedicated to ridding the world of penises. Boiled in the gastric symphony of a hideous beast that burst from the torn maw of a shattered hotel.

Five percent of these instances found him in a wasteland. Utter emptiness, sometimes cold and sleepless in a harsh wind, sometimes sleepily contoured from the lullaby of constant zephyrs. There weren't always cities, stinging particles always stung his eyes.

One percent of these instances found him in a howling void, bursting apart in a parody of dance, then crystallizing to float icily in a vacuum. Often the rictus of his corpse was illuminated by a sun, usually a G-type. Less frequently, he drifted amid the giant shards of a world. Mostly, it was the blackest black, cold and empty.

It was time to regroup, he mused. He had found what he was looking for.

The military intelligence ministry has received two new reports of bombardments in August in Tokyo caused by the hazardous iPod bombs, said ministry official Hiroyuki Yoshitsune.

There were no injuries and the reason for attack is still unclear, he said.

Japan had already launched an investigation in March after a mini-version of the bomb called iPod nano sent out flaming shards causing havok in a music club.

According to the ministry, The United States of America remains their suspect of the attack which caused a total of 14 similar fires and explosions in Japan. Out of those, two Japanese nerds suffered minor burning. The bomb, which looks like a small music player has a small logo shaped like a weird white fruit, which hints of American origin.

The ministry said the incidents were caused by four bombs  marked -- MA004J/A, MA005J/A, MA099J/A and MA107J/A -- of which 1.81 million of which were reportedly slipped by Tech-Terrorists between September 2005 and September 2006 in Japan.

U.S. President George Bush has yet to comment, but he already gave a smirk on the issue last Saturday during a speech on his new movie.

Glenn Greenwald (repost)- Glenn Greenwald writes at Salon

Aug. 19, 2008 | It's hardly news that the U.S., like many countries, espouses standards that it routinely violates, but still, even in light of such routine hypocrisy, wouldn't you think that this, from Condoleezza Rice today, on an airplane to U.S. reporters while traveling to a NATO meeting, would be too brazen to utter:

Russia is a state that is unfortunately using the one tool that it has always used whenever it wishes to deliver a message and that's its military power. That's not the way to deal in the 21st century.

Whatever one's views are on the justifiability of each isolated instance, it's simply a fact that the U.S. invades, bombs, occupies, and interferes in the internal affairs of other countries far more than any other country on the planet. It's not even a close competition.

Just during the time Rice has served in the Bush administration, we bombed, invaded and occupied Afghanistan; did the same to Iraq; repeatedly bombed Somalia,killing all sorts of civilians; fed bombs to Israel as they invaded and bombed Lebanon; top political officials (led by John McCain and Joe Lieberman) have repeatedly threatened, and advocated, that the same be done to a whole host of other countries, including Iran and Syria. That's to say nothing of the virtually countless interventions and bombings in the pre-Bush, "peacetime" years -- from the Balkans and Panama to Somalia, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, and on and on and on.

The most enduring and predominant rule of American politics is that every national politician must demonstrate their willingness, even eagerness, to start wars. On the day in 1989 that the first George Bush ordered the deadly U.S. invasion of Panama, The New York Times' R.W. Apple approvingly wrote on the front page that starting wars like that was "a Presidential initiation rite," and that "most American leaders since World War II have felt a need to demonstrate their willingness to shed blood to protect or advance what they construe as the national interest." Thus, proclaimed Apple, Bush's attack on Panama was an example of his "showing his steel" and "has shown him as a man capable of bold action."

A Kos diarist today hailed Joe Biden as an excellent Vice Presidential choice and, to bolster his argument, posted a video of Biden from a couple of months ago, appearing on The Today Show with Matt Lauer. The diarist believes the video shows how "tough" and "aggressive" Biden is. Lauer asked Biden how Democrats could combat the perception that Republicans are more trustworthy on national security because Democrats are "weak," and Biden assured Lauer that he had the right strategy to combat that:

LAUER: [McCain's] argument -- the Democratic Party itself, somewhere in the late 1960s, became weak on national security, at least perceived to be weak -- we started to see a party wringing its hands and blaming American for what's wrong in the world. Now, as we look at the upcoming election, particularly between a war hero and Barack Obama, do you think that's going to be a major problem for Democrats? 

BIDEN: I think that's what they're going to revive. There's truth to that. I ran in 1972 as a young 29-year-old guy who won the Senate seat, being the guy who was viewed as a hawk, because I didn't join in that mantra.

It was Bill Clinton -- and, I might say, me pushing it -- saying that you had to go to war in the Balkans to end genocide. It was John McCain initially saying, no no no you can't do that -- the Republicans voting, no no no we can't do that.

Apparently, that's the way many Democrats believe they can and should answer the accusations that they're "weak" on national security -- not by contesting the underlying premises that starting wars is a sign of "strength,' but instead, by proving that they, too, want to prosecute wars -- just perhaps in different places or with different tactics. As Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in 2002, Biden also voted to authorize the attack on Iraq. 

And Biden just returned from visiting Georgia, spouting all sorts of bluster towards Russia ("Russia's actions in Georgia will have consequences") and demanding that $1 billion of U.S. taxpayer money be transferred to Georgia to help them after they decided to start their own war (McClatchy: "Biden talks tough after Georgia visit"). As Billmon documented yesterday, Biden has been a leading proponent of passing legislation to demand NATO admission for Georgia and, even without it, to treat Georgia as though it is a full-fledged U.S. ally (Billmon: "There are times, it seems, when Joe Biden can be damned near as dangerous as Dick Cheney"). In Biden's mind, nobody will accuse him of being "weak" -- because he exudes the mandatory affection for using U.S. military force in a wide variety of situations far beyond self-defense.

The idea that the U.S. can, should and must be, more or less, in a state of permanent war, and can start wars in a whole host of circumstances having nothing to do with defending the country from an attack or imminent attack, is as close to an unchallengeable, bipartisan article of faith as it gets. We're a country that fights wars and uses military force in far more places and for far broader reasons than any other country in the world, by far. Again, regardless of one's views about whether our wars are really Good and Just -- even if one believes that what we drop on other countries are Good and Loving Freedom Bombs -- it's still just a fact that no country views military action as a more appropriate response in more situations than the U.S. does.

That's why it's so amazing to watch Condoleezza Rice, more or less without contradiction, say things like this:

Russia is a state that is unfortunately using the one tool that it has always used whenever it wishes to deliver a message and that's its military power. That's not the way to deal in the 21st century.

Other than our media elite, is there anyone who doesn't recognize how absurd it is for Rice to be issuing a sermon like that? Who is the target audience for that? And what does it say about our political discourse that Rice knows she can say things like that with a straight face -- and, before her, that John McCain can do much the same -- without its being pointed out how darkly laughable it is? 

-- Glenn Greenwald

I have to say that I think people are beautiful. Even if they don't measure up to society's standards... I see each and every person as beautiful. Some make you wonder why humanity is even still in existence, but for the most part, each person is so unique. It's hard for us to look past the outward and see the heart and soul of a person created uniquely in the image of God.

For instance, my youngest sister has Downs Syndrome. A genetic defect on the 25th chromosome made her slower to learn than most children her age, and shorter as well. She has JRA (Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis) and Miocitis, both self-crippling immune diseases that cause her quality of life to be very poor. But let me tell you - she is the most drop-dead gorgeous little 10 year old I have ever seen. Why?

Because she loves. She loves more than any other person I have ever met or probably will meet. She will point out my bruises or minor cuts and kiss them. She bandages all her stuffed animals so that they won't hurt (since she assumes everyone bears the same amount of pain she does). She kisses and hugs everyone in the room, and is always careful to consider feelings. I'm not saying she's a perfect child - believe me, she has her days. But she loves unconditionally, and has mastered something that I haven't been able to grasp in all my 20 years of "life-experience." And I would venture to say I will never learn the lessons she has had to learn through her crippling illnesses.

Humans are beautiful. We're flawed, yes. Broken, yes. Bruised, bloody, torn, hurt, aching, sinful. But we are created in the loving image of a God who wants us to see each other as he sees us - broken, but not beyond repair; heartbroken, but not beyond coping; despairing, but not yet without hope. Beautiful.

I resolve to never again call a person ugly or demean them. I am tired of all the battles and wars we fight with each other, hating and causing hatred. No one is beyond helping, I firmly believe. Love all, live at peace as much as you are able to, and remember that you are beautiful, beyond the shadow of a doubt.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92M56AO1&show_article=1&catnum=0

*Can't say I blame 'em.*

On the possibility of a Security Council resolution on Georgia, he said there was a new draft whose purpose was "quite simply to support with the authority of the Security Council the six-point Medvedev-Sarkozy plan, and it is a completely different territory now."

He stressed that in any discussions regarding the territorial integrity of Georgia, "there is the question of the will of the people of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and we believe all these needs must be reflected in the thinking of the international community."

Responding to a question on Georgia's desire to join NATO, Churkin said Russia is opposed to any expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, and there are "better ways to deal with matters of European-North Atlantic security, more cooperative ways that would include rather than exclude Russia".

Watch the full press briefing

REUTERS

MOSCOW, Aug 20 (Reuters) - Russian soldiers rode into battle against Georgia perched on top of their armoured personnel carriers, not out of bravado but because a flaw in their armour can make it more dangerous to travel inside. 

The conflict -- Russia's biggest combat operation outside its borders since the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan -- showed its armed forces have emerged from years of neglect as a formidable fighting force, but revealed important deficiencies. 

Those weaknesses, especially in missiles and air capability, leave Russia still lagging behind the image of a world-class military power it projects to the rest of the world. 

"The victory over the Georgian army ... should become for Russia not a cause for euphoria and excessive joy, but serve to speed up military transformations in Russia," Ruslan Pukhov, director of Russia's Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technology, wrote in a report. 

The performance of the armed forces will be examined closely by NATO planners, who have been prompted by Russia's newly assertive foreign policy to start viewing the Kremlin once again as a potential adversary. 

It could also hold lessons for defence strategists in the Middle East: Russia supplies some of its hardware to countries such as Syria and Iran, while their foe Israel helps equip Georgia's security forces. 

CHINKS IN RUSSIAN ARMOUR 

Russian forces were deployed in response to Georgian troops moving into Georgia's Moscow-backed breakaway region, South Ossetia. Russia quickly crushed the Georgian army and its troops pressed on to within 45 km (30 miles) of the capital, Tbilisi. 

It was never in doubt that Russia would defeat the much smaller and less well-equipped Georgian force, but the manner of the victory exposed some shortcomings: 

* Anatoly Khrulyev, the commander of the 58th army which spearheaded the operation, was wounded in a Georgian attack on day two of the Russian deployment. 

Media reports said he was travelling in a column of armoured personnel carriers (APCs), along with a group of Russian journalists, when they were ambushed by Georgian troops. 

Analysts said Russian APCs are not well protected against strikes by large-calibre weapons or land mines, which is one reason why troops often prefer to travel on top. 

* Russia said four of its aircraft -- including one Tupolev-22 long-range supersonic bomber -- were shot down by Georgia's air defences. 

"It was remarkable that they shot down a number of Russian fighters, which Russia probably did not expect," said Lieutenant-Colonel Dr. Marcel de Haas, Russia and security expert at the Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. 

Analysts said Russia failed to destroy Georgia's anti-aircraft systems fast enough, probably because they did not have the aerial reconnaissance to establish where they were. 

"Initial reconnaissance was difficult," Anatoly Nogovitsyn, deputy chief of Russia's General Staff, told Reuters. "We will be introducing serious changes, the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, for example." 

* Russia's tactics broadly followed a Soviet pattern, with an air and artillery attack followed by the deployment of a large ground force. 

Analysts said the need to send in a large ground force may have been dictated by a shortage of precision-guided missiles. 

"Missiles and rockets would negate the need for large-scale troop deployments in the way they had to carry them out," said Colonel Christopher Langton, Senior Fellow at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies. 

DISCIPLINED FORCE 

The Kremlin has declared modernising its armed forces a priority. Its defence budget for last year was 22 percent higher than in 2006 and it plans to spend $189 billion on new hardware over eight years. 

Improvements were in evidence in the Georgian campaign. In contrast with the rag-tag conscripts humiliated in Russia's rebel Chechnya region in the 1990s, commanders said the force in Georgia was made up entirely of professional soldiers. 

Reuters reporters on the ground saw disciplined, well-equipped troops. Petrol trucks shuttled around the front line refuelling tanks and APCs, and trucks ferried supplies of rations to soldiers manning checkpoints. 

But Langton said Russia's campaign in Georgia left many questions about its military capability unanswered. 

"There is no way they could say from this operation that they are capable of carrying out operations against something as sophisticated as NATO forces," he said. "It wasn't a serious test for them." (Additional reporting by Aydar Buribaev in Moscow, James Kilner in Tbilisi and Oleg Shchedrov in Sochi; writing by Christian Lowe; editing by Tim Pearce)

Russia says its response to U.S. missile shield development will go beyond diplomacy. Russia's Foreign Ministry says the U.S. plan is part of an "extremely dangerous bundle" of military projects.

Ivan is begging for it, and about to get it. Question #1 for Russians? Do you actually think we brought out the latest in military hardware to go after insurgents? Question #2; Was star wars really a bluff?

When all the lights go out, and your ipod stops working, "I told you so."

It is important to note. Poland is one of the only places that have ignored the trend of Anti-Americanism. There will no more "We must annex the Sudetenland" bullshit. While Russian is betting on the Americans to be too tired of military conflict to respond, I would rethink that.

Suggestions from this Kentuckian. Watch your mouth, you could get punched in it.

Update;

OSLO, Norway - Norway's Defense Ministry says Russia has informed it that it plans to cut all military ties with NATO.

Ministry spokeswoman Heidi Langvik-Hansen says the country's embassy received a telephone call from Russia's Defense Ministry on Wednesday, saying Moscow plans "to freeze all military cooperation with NATO and allied countries."

Norway was told in the telephone call a written note about this would be sent out shortly.

Russian officials were not immediately available to confirm the information and officials at NATO headquarters said they have not been informed of any such moves.

NATO foreign ministers Tuesday suspended formal contacts with Russia as punishment for sending troops into Georgia.