Former CIA Asset, Susan Lindauer, provides an extraordinary first-hand account from behind the intelligence curtain that shatters the government's lies about 9/11 and Iraq, and casts a harsh spotlight on the workings of the Patriot Act as the ideal weapon to bludgeon whistle blowers and dissidents. A terrifying true story of "black budget" betrayals and the Patriot Act, with its arsenal of secret evidence, indefinite detention and threats of forcible drugging,
EXTREME PREJUDICE(Book by Susan Lindauer) reveals one Asset's desperate struggle to survive the brutal cover ups of 9/11 and Iraq. EXTREME PREJUDICE delivers a high tension expose of the real facts surrounding the CIA's advance warnings of 9/11 and Iraq's contributions to the 9/11 investigation.
POLITICAL PRISONER EDGAR J. STEELE PETITIONS U.S. SUPREME COURT
Moscow, Idaho, October 31, 2011 - Convicted in another U.S. government show trial this year, author and attorney Edgar Steele will ask the highest court in the land to address non-written rules that allow unlawful and unconstitutional intrusions into what should be completely private attorney-client communications. In the Petition, U.S. Supreme Court Case Number 11-7108, filed today, Mr. Steele champions the rights of all federal detainees whose confidential letters and discussions are regularly recorded, intercepted and passed on to prosecutors and judges in spite of well-established court regulations to the contrary.
Mr. Steele was arrested June 11, 2010 based on an FBI-manufactured informant's report that Steele wanted his wife of 25 years – as well as his wife's mother – killed. Steele's long-time handyman Larry Fairfax was enlisted by the FBI to entrap him, through the use of hidden microphone recordings which supposedly the two men had just prior to his arrest. Many who watched the trial, which ended May 5, 2011, observed that it was a ‘kangaroo court' proceeding with the judge excluding all evidence favorable to Mr. Steele.
In an Affidavit filed with the trial court in August, former attorney, Mr. Robert McAllister, once a U.S. prosecutor, admitted that he was wholly ineffective as Mr. Steele’s counsel and failed to offer even a fraction of the available proof of innocence. Mr. McAllister, who declared bankruptcy in March, was disbarred in Colorado shortly after the Steele trial because of embezzlement of client funds. His Affidavit cited his anxiety over the pending disbarment as the reason for non-performance at the Steele trial.
The U.S. Supreme Court Petition filed today by Mr. Steele does not address ineffectiveness of counsel, rather it seeks dismissal because the judge, the US Marshals Service and the prosecutor colluded to enforce new “rules” of procedure that were not pre-approved by the high court. These new rules allowed recording of Mr. Steele’s conversations with his attorneys, so that the prosecution team could anticipate and counter his every move.
Supposed murder-for-hire target, Cyndi Steele (Edgar's wife), has asserted unwavering confidence in her husband's complete innocence. She has publicly denounced as fabricated the recording “evidence” of her husband supposedly directing handyman Fairfax to arrange her demise. This case gained national notoriety when a pipe bomb planted by the government informant was found attached to Mrs. Steele’s car during an oil change the day of her husband’s first hearing, June 15, 2010, in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho.
A 40-page combined Petition for Writs of Mandamus and Prohibition, plus 194 pages of supporting documents in an Appendix were submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court. This could be a landmark case. But, if the USSC refuses to hear the Petition, it sends a message to lower courts and prosecutors that they can, without restriction, make up their own rules and function outside the Constitution; especially when they seek conviction of the innocent who have proven to be politically incorrect. Steele says that prosecuting him was “pay-back” for his years of defending those who had been attacked by an oppressive government.
Mr. Steele's sentencing hearing on mandatory prison terms totaling sixty or more years, is set for November 9th. In approaching the Supreme Court, he requests dismissal of the 4-count conviction, or a new trial where the old “tainted” files are sealed and a new prosecutor and judge are restricted from gaining defense strategy through eavesdropping. A new trial would also allow
introduction of audio forensic analysis by experts, showing the Fairfax hidden microphone recordings are unreliable and have been manipulated (or even manufactured) by the FBI.
For more information, visit the FES web site or contact Robert Magnuson, Vice-President of the Edgar Steele Defense Fund, at: 208-304-6608
You Only Think You’ve Got Rights
No Attorney-Client Privilege (Part VIII)
by Edgar J. Steele
October 31, 2011
I like to say that, while we never want to repeat boot camp, always we are glad to have had the experience. Jail is (way) different. Never will I say that I am glad I spent this time in jail. Perhaps a week or two in jail, at most, would be instructive for many of us, but extended imprisonment simply exacts too great a personal toll to justify the lessons it teaches.
The Real Cost of Imprisonment
Don’t Do the Crime if you Can’t Do the Time?
No. Don’t do the crime, to be sure, but “serving” time simply makes no sense for, perhaps, 95% of all current prisoners in America. Serving time creates massive unemployment (ex-convicts are unemployable), turns ordinary people into “nothing to lose” criminals, hardens petty truants and mischief-makers into genuinely dangerous criminals, fuels the exploding use of drugs throughout America and costs an ever-exploding share of federal, state and local budgets (America’s prison population has tripled during the last two decades).
Nor is the cost restricted to government. The War on Drugs inexorably becomes a war on Americans, with drug users criminally seeking money for their habits and law enforcement officers desperately trying to advance themselves and their departmental funding. America’s prison industry (yes, that is exactly what American jails and prisons have become) now is a huge slavering, self-sustaining beast, out of control and growing ever-faster as its product (discontent, resentment, rebellion and hopelessness) increasingly provide its own raw material (ordinary people- cum -criminals).
The Criminalization of Innocence
Worse, even ignoring those jailed for victimless “crimes” (drug users, tax avoiders/evaders, etc .), a huge and growing segment of America’s prison population consists of people who are innocent! How could it be otherwise, after all, with the Feds’ 97% conviction rate and a tripling of American prisoners in just 20 years?
I have been telling you how they’re doing it to me. I face 60 years, minimum, for a crime I did not commit; a crime with no victim, no damage and the self-confessed perp already serving his 2-year sentence (a slap on the wrist in exchange for his false testimony against me) . No – actually, there was some damage: $45,000 in silver bullion stolen by the perp from my wife (the victim) and myself.
From the beginning, my wife (the “victim,” don’t forget) resolutely has stood by my side, proclaiming my innocence to the world, despite the massive federal effort to put me away for the rest of my life.
Murderers routinely are released from prison after serving 6-8 years, but no less than 60 years is what our government says I deserve for the (non) “crime” I committed against nobody, least of all my biggest supporter: my wife. 60 years! Think about it for a moment.
What’s more, the government repeatedly has lied, cheated and stolen during its scorched-earth campaign against me, a genuine American political dissident. There are so many stories of government treachery in my case that I could tell you (not to mention many other cases I have handled, mostly pro bono, during my 30-year career as a trial lawyer).
How They Do It
In the last 7 weekly installments, I have been serializing part of a chapter from my upcoming book, Evil Edgar. I have told you precisely how the feds and the judge illegally, unethically and unconstitutionally have denied me the right to confidential communications with my attorneys, while using the information they illegally obtained by eavesdropping against me – before, during and after my trial.
Of All Things, a Writ Petition
With the deck totally stacked against me, I feel like a drowning man, going down for the third time. Desperate times call for desperate measures, so I have just unleashed the “Hail Mary” of all legal maneuvers. This past week, I filed a Petition for Writ with the U.S. Supreme Court, highest court in America.
U.S. Supreme Court Writ petitions almost never are granted, I was taught over 30 years ago in law school. I recall the image conjured by my law professor then, of a mail-room clerk stamping “Rejected” on all the just-opened envelopes holding Writ petitions.
What else can I do? The very same Federal District Court judge who refused to allow me to put on any sort of defense at trial now is bent upon denying me confidential access to any appellate attorneys to help me with my appeal, due out in 3 weeks.
My combined Petition for Writs of Mandamus (tell ‘em to do something, Supremes) and Prohibition (tell ‘em to stop doing something else) concerns only the topic of the last seven installments: the illegal invasion and denial of my 5 th and 6 th Amendment right to confidential “assistance of counsel.”
Predictably, my petition for writ is a substantial legal filing. Go here for a copy of the Writ petition. Go here for a 23-page, plain language, synopsis of the governmental wrongdoing that led me to file this petition.
What I Want
Here, in brief, are what I ask from the U.S. Supreme Court via my just-filed petition:
Writ of Prohibition – Order this trial court (others, too) to stop enforcing the unwritten U.S. Marshals Service policy that allows the Feds to eavesdrop, record and copy all communications (written, telephonic and in-person) between federal detainees and their private (as well as “of record”) lawyers.
Writ of Mandamus – Order the outright dismissal of my case or, in the alternative, a new (and, hopefully this time a fair ) trial, because of the extensive governmental and judicial misconduct that has taken place.
You Can Help
Please help in drawing attention to my Petition for Writs, thereby enhancing the chance that the Supremes will agree to schedule it for hearing. Go here for a letter to supporters describing how to join our letter-writing campaign to the Supreme Court justices, Presidential candidates, congressional leaders and mass media outlets.
Let’s face it – since they have eliminated virtually all of the “Movement” leaders and now are imprisoning Movement lawyers, too, just who do you suppose will be there to help when the Feds come for you?
If we can just get the U.S. Supreme Court to hear my Petition, then it certainly will grant it . That would make a huge difference to thousands of federal detainees, both now and going forward. We would strike a genuinely history-making blow for liberty in our time.
I still wouldn’t be able to say I am glad to have spent all this time in jail, but I would be proud of the outcome. Very proud.
Together, we can do this.
Together, we can make a difference.
Together, we can strike a blow that, just maybe, will begin America’s march back from the very precipice of outright, full-blown tyranny.
Forward as you wish. Permission is granted to circulate this article and its related audio file among private individuals and groups, post on all Internet sites and publish in full in all not-for-profit publications. Contact author for all other rights, which are reserved.
Since the North Atlantic Treaty Organization adopted its first Strategic Concept for the 21st century a year ago this month in Portugal, and in the process all but formalized the bloc as a global military intervention force, discussion has been rife concerning a collective partnership with the 54-nation African Union, a "mini-NATO" in the Persian Gulf and another in the Arctic Ocean and the Baltic Sea, the culmination of the transformation of the Mediterranean into a NATO sea and the effective "NATOization" of the ten-nation Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). [1-5]
The U.S.-dominated military alliance, whose current American ambassador, Ivo Daalder, for years has advocated becoming a full-fledged global NATO (in one instance in an article with that precise title), expanded from 16 to 28 full members in the decade beginning in 1999 and has over forty partners in four continents outside the Euro-Atlantic zone under the auspices of programs like the Partnership for Peace in Europe and Asia, the Mediterranean Dialogue in Africa and the Middle East, the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative in the Persian Gulf, the Contact Country format in the Asia-Pacific region (Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea), Annual National Programs with Georgia and Ukraine, the Afghanistan-Pakistan-International Security Assistance Force Tripartite Commission, the NATO-Russia Council, the NATO Training Mission-Iraq and NATO-Training Mission - Afghanistan (with a Libyan version to follow), a bilateral agreement with the Transitional Federal Government in Somalia where NATO has airlifted thousands of Ugandan and Burundian troops for the war there and other arrangements.
Formal partnerships with the African Union and ASEAN would gain the world's only military bloc fifty new cohorts in Africa (Algeria, Egypt, Tunisia, Mauritania and Morocco - the last not an African Union member - are already members of the Mediterranean Dialogue) and ten in Southeast Asia: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore. Thailand and Vietnam.
In addition, in September U.S. permanent representative to NATO Daalder told Indian journalists visiting the Alliance's headquarters in Brussels:
"I think it is important to have a dialogue (with India) and deepen that dialogue.
"It is through dialogue, through understanding each other's perceptions and perhaps by working on misperceptions that may exist, that we can strengthen the relations between India and NATO."
He also bluntly suggested that India, a founding member of the 120-nation Non-Aligned Movement, should abandon its policy of neutrality and collaborate with the U.S. and NATO in the development of an international interceptor missile system.
In articles written in the last decade, including the aforementioned "Global NATO,"  Daalder and fellow Brookings Institution and Council on Foreign Relations officials argued for partnerships between the bloc and nations around the world under Daalder's concept of an Alliance of Democratic States and other mechanisms. The countries mentioned by name include Australia, Botswana, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, India, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, South Africa and South Korea. 
Immediately ahead of the NATO summit in Lisbon, Daalder was quoted stating:
"We're launching Nato 3.0.
"It is no longer just about Europe - it's not a global alliance but it is a global actor. We need to look for opportunities to work with countries we haven't worked with before, like India, China and Brazil."
The month before, in October of last year, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in a video post on his blog, "We should reach out to new and important partners, including China and India."
With NATO as the prime mover and in charge, that is. He added: "We should encourage consultations between interested allies and partners on security issues of common concern, with NATO as a hub for those discussions."
In September of this year he told the Xinhua News Agency: "I would very much like to see a strengthened dialogue between China and NATO." China and India were among 47 nations represented at a meeting at NATO headquarters on September 14 to discuss naval operations in the Gulf of Aden and in the broader Indian Ocean where NATO runs Operation Ocean Shield. Other non-NATO nations present were Australia, Egypt, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden and the United Arab Emirates. At the time the last two were supplying warplanes for NATO's Operation Unified Protector assault against Libya.
If the architects of an international NATO realize their ambitions fully, more than 140 of the world's 194 nations will be members or partners of the North Atlantic Alliance. Their troops, military hardware and air and other bases will be available to the U.S.-dominated bloc for actions nearly everywhere in the world, as warplanes from NATO partner Israel have recently been training in Romania, Greece and a NATO air base in Sardinia for strikes against Iran.
With every nation on the European continent and every European island nation except for Cyprus now either a NATO member or partner and with the Alliance now firmly ensconced in Africa, the Middle East and the Indian Ocean, the U.S. and its Western allies are concentrating their firepower on East Asia.
The war in Afghanistan is in its eleventh year and it has provided NATO the opportunity to integrate the militaries of over fifteen Asian-Pacific countries (including the Middle East and the South Caucasus in that category) through supplying troops and other military personnel to NATO's International Security Assistance Force: Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Georgia, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Mongolia, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, Tonga, Turkey and United Arab Emirates. All but Bahrain and Japan are what the bloc refers to as Troop Contributing Nations, of which Kazakhstan is to be the 49th, with its parliament at least temporarily blocking the formalization of that status.
Before his death late last year U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke was recruiting Bangladesh to become the 50th official supplier of troops for NATO's Afghan war. 
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta recently concluded an eight-day trip to Asia, his first as Pentagon chief, where he visited Indonesia, Japan and South Korea.
On the first leg of his journey he met with the defense ministers of the ten members of ASEAN. Indonesia holds the organization's chairmanship this year. Next year it will be transferred to Cambodia, where at the same time Panetta was in East Asia his subordinate, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for South and Southeast Asia Robert Scher, visited for two days to solidify military relations with the host nation where U.S. Army Pacific has led multinational Angkor Sentinel military exercises for the past two years.
Xinhua quoted the Pentagon official as saying:
"It's a fruitful visit. I participated in a series of productive meetings with the Cambodian Ministry of Defense and Royal Cambodian Armed Forces (RCAF) to discuss the growing U.S.-Cambodia bilateral defense relationship..."
He was additionally cited stating he "had discussions about Cambodia's objectives as it approaches to take over the chairmanship of ASEAN in 2012.
"The U.S. Department of Defense is committed to continuing to work with the RCAF to develop a professional force that will contribute to regional and international peace and stability" and "the United States' overall commitment is to enhance its engagement in the Asia-Pacific region in the future."
While in Indonesia, Panetta indulged in the affectation of identifying himself as "a son of the U.S. Pacific coast," having been raised in California, as his commander-in-chief, Hawaii-born President Barack Obama, has touted himself as America's first Pacific head of state.
He met with Indonesian Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro, according to the Stars and Stripes newspaper, "to discuss growing bilateral military relations and broader issues facing Southeast Asia...[c]hief among those issues [being] China's growing assertiveness in an area it considers its own backyard."
In his own words, "I've made it very clear that the United States remains a Pacific power, that we will continue to strengthen our presence in this part of the world and that we will remain a force...in this region."
Later in Japan, the Pentagon chief told American troops at the Yokota Air Base near Tokyo: "We are not anticipating any cutbacks in this region. If anything we are going to strengthen our presence in the Pacific." Two weeks earlier Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had spoken in a similar vein: "Probably the greatest opportunities in the years ahead will be found in the Asia Pacific region, which is why we have renewed America's leadership and pre-eminent role there."
In July of 2010 Clinton attended the ASEAN Regional Forum in Hanoi and entered the fray in the disputes between ASEAN member states and China over the Spratly and Paracel islands in the South China Sea, in essence pledging the U.S. as guarantor for ASEAN against China. Panetta's meeting with his ten ASEAN counterparts last month provided an overt military component to the commitment.
While in Japan the defense secretary celebrated a half century of American-Japanese military colloboration enshrined in the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan of 1960, adding, "And it will be for the next 50 years as well."
Panetta also told assembled U.S. and Japanese troops: "I just had the opportunity to be in Indonesia and meet with the (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) defense ministers. And I conveyed the same message to them: the United States will continue to work with all of them to improve our cooperation, to improve our assistance, and to make sure that we strengthen security for all nations in the Pacific region."
Southeast Asia has a population of approximately 600 million, two-thirds that of the Western Hemisphere and almost three-quarters that of Europe. It contains one of the world's most vital shipping lanes, the Strait of Malacca. The strait runs for 600 miles between Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore to the east and the Indonesian island of Sumatra to the west.
According to the United Nations International Maritime Organization, at least 50,000 ships pass through the waterway annually, transporting 30 percent of the goods traded in the world, including oil from the Persian Gulf to major East Asian nations like China, Japan and South Korea. As many as 20 million barrels of oil a day pass through the Strait of Malacca, an amount that will only increase with the further advance of the Asian Century. 
Since the end of the Cold War the U.S. and its Western allies have expanded NATO throughout Europe and combined that effort with the creation of an Asian NATO that in part consists of the revival and expansion of other Cold War military alliances based on NATO: The Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) and the Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS).
But what is being built currently is far more extensive than all the latter three combined and is, moreover, not complementary to but in collusion with NATO, the Afghan war serving the purpose of unifying East and West under American and NATO control as the Korean War and Vietnam War did for the creation and consolidation of SEATO and ANZUS.
In May of 2010 the Atlantic Council of the United States, the main NATO lobbying group in the Western Hemisphere and indeed in the world, posted an article by Max Boot, the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations and frequent lecturer at the Army War College and the Command and General Staff College, titled "Building an East Asian NATO."
It contained this excerpt:
"A common complaint heard among American officials and policy analysts is that in East Asia - one of the most important and conflict-prone areas of the planet - there is no security architecture comparable to NATO. The U.S. has ties to many key countries, notably Japan, South Korea, Singapore, the Philippines, Australia, Thailand, and Taiwan. But they do not have strong ties to one another, and there is no joint military planning of the kind that NATO undertakes..." 
In recent months the topic of a NATO-ASEAN military partnership has been given increased attention.
In August U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell gave an interview to The Australian in which he said:
"One of the most important challenges for US foreign policy is to effect a transition from the immediate and vexing challenges of the Middle East to the long-term and deeply consequential issues in Asia."
"There is an undeniable assertive quality to Chinese foreign policy and we're seeing that play out in the South China Sea and elsewhere.
"What has been effective in the past year or so is the number of countries in the Asia-Pacific (that) have been prepared to say to China that greater transparency (from China in military matters) is in the interests of the Asia-Pacific region.
"I think what you see is an across-the-board effort (by the US) to articulate India as playing a greater role in Asia, and also revitalising relations with ASEAN - both ASEAN as an institution, and with its key members, such as Indonesia, Vietnam and Singapore, and revitalising what used to be a very important relationship with The Philippines." 
His comments paralleled those of defense chief Panetta and other Pentagon officials in affirming that with the withdrawal of troops from Iraq and the beginning of a drawdown in Afghanistan, the Pentagon is focusing on East Asia, with NATO to take a greater role in policing the Greater/Broader/New Middle East and Africa in order to free up the American military to shift to the east.
In July an article appeared in the Jakarta Post with the title "Sketching out a future ASEAN-NATO partnership" by Evan A. Laksmana, identified as a researcher for the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Jakarta, presumably an affiliate of the think tank of the same name in Washington, D.C. Indonesia, recall, currently chairs ASEAN.
The author's comments included:
"As the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) enters its seventh decade and as ASEAN consolidates its regional community building ahead of and beyond 2015, the bodies have much to learn from each other.
"For NATO, ASEAN will be increasingly critical for the future of Asian stability and order and would be an ideal candidate for a strategic counterpart to tackle common regional and global security challenges - especially when ASEAN consolidates its regional community building, allowing it to share NATO's role as a community of like-minded nations...
"Southeast Asia's geopolitical, geo-strategic, and geo-economic value also suggests that NATO's future missions beyond its traditional area of operations might increasingly depend on ASEAN."
Further, he recommended:
"Any future ASEAN-NATO partnership could at least be placed within five major policy areas: peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR), maritime security, defense reform and counterterrorism."
"These five areas of engagement could be further executed in four levels of cooperation: strategic, institutional, operational and people-to-people.
"Strategically, NATO can engage ASEAN in discussions and dialogue regarding the five security issues using two tracks.
"In track one, the ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting Plus (consisting of all ASEAN countries plus Australia, the US, China, South Korea, Japan, India, Russia and New Zealand) as well as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) provide critical dialogue venues.
"In track two, two groupings are crucial: the ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies (ASEAN-ISIS), a network of nine major think tanks in Southeast Asia, and the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific (CSCAP), a network of nearly all major Asia Pacific think tanks.
"Institutionally, NATO could explore future cooperation or collaboration with either the ASEAN Secretariat, the network of ASEAN Peacekeeping Centers, the ASEAN Center for Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief or even the ASEAN Institute for Peace and Reconciliation.
"Other forms of diplomatic defense activities such as port visits or officer exchanges that are more practical and 'neutral' might also help alleviate some of the sensitivities of regional countries regarding NATO's visibility."
The writer ended his piece with these comments:
"This would slowly and gradually raise the public profile and awareness of NATO's potential contribution to regional stability.
"This is at least the writer's impression from discussions with various NATO officials on a recent trip.
"NATO should at least start thinking of engaging ASEAN early to avoid any surprises when a new, region-wide crisis in Asia comes knocking. For ASEAN, if we are serious about boosting our regional security community building, would it hurt to learn from a multi-national organization that has had the longest practical experience in the endeavor?" 
Three days later an article appeared in the Pakistani press called "NATO knocks at the door of ASEAN" by Dr. Jassim Taqui, which issued these warnings:
"Having failed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has decided to change direction towards Southeast Asia. In this regard, NATO shows a keen interest to establish a partnership with ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations)."
Although "the United States continued to influence ASEAN since 1997," now "Washington is combining with India to influence the region in a bid to neutralize the rising cooperation between ASEAN and China.
"During her visit to India, the US Secretary of State Ms Hillary Clinton urged India to expand its traditional sphere of influence from South Asia to Central Asia and Southeast Asia to contain China's increasing assertiveness. Ostensibly, Clinton's slip of the tongue suggests a strategy that aims to encircle China in its backyard in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Rim on one hand and to boost engagement in Central Asia, on China's western flank, on the other.
"Clinton's tone is confrontational. It justifies the containment of China by Washington and New Delhi on the ground of 'common values and interests.' Clinton also announced that the Obama administration would soon launch a three-way dialogue with India and Japan to counter China." 
At the beginning of the year U.S. Defense Department spokesman Geoff Morrell told reporters:
"We have 28,500 troops on the Korean Peninsula. We've got, I think, north of 50,000 troops in Japan. So we have significant assets already there. Over the long-term lay-down of our forces in the Pacific, we are looking at ways to even bolster that, not necessarily in Korea and Japan, but along the Pacific Rim, particularly in Southeast Asia." 
As the year nears it end it is apparent that the Pentagon and its increasingly global military bloc, NATO, are concentrating on integrating the militaries of Southeast Asia in their inexorable drive to contain and confront China and abort the emergence of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization as a viable, non-military alternative to them in Eurasia.
1) Africa: Global NATO Seeks To Recruit 50 New Military Partners
Stop NATO, February 20, 2011
2) US envisions NATO of the Gulf
RT, October 31, 2011
U.S. And NATO Allies Escalate Military Buildup Against Iran
Stop NATO,December 6, 2010
3) Britain Spearheads “Mini-NATO” In Arctic Ocean, Baltic Sea
Stop NATO, January 22, 2011
4) Cyprus: U.S. To Dominate All Europe, Mediterranean Through NATO
Stop NATO, March 3, 2011
5) North Korea As Pretext: U.S. Builds Asian Military Alliance Against China And Russia
Stop NATO, December 3, 2010
After NATO Summit, U.S. To Intensify Military Drive Into Asia
Stop NATO, November 17, 2010
Southeast Asia: West Completes Plans For Asian NATO
Stop NATO, October 21, 2010
6) Global NATO, Ivo Daalder and James Goldgeier
Foreign Affairs, September-October 2006
7) West Plots To Supplant United Nations With Global NATO
Stop NATO, May 27, 2009
8) Bangladesh: U.S. And NATO Forge New Military Partnership In South Asia
Stop NATO, September 29, 2010
9) Southeast Asia: West Completes Plans For Asian NATO
Stop NATO, October 21, 2010
10) Building an East Asian NATO, Max Boot
Atlantic Council, May 12, 2010
11) US keeps an eagle eye on Asia
The Australian, August 15, 2011
Conspiracy Anomalies Week: Day 6 - 9/11 Treason for Slavery vs. Self-Ownership to Freedom
"The death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment." ~ Robert Maynard Hutchins
The Nasty Truth about America? USA ie. Crown Corporation City of London Imperialist Agendas Exposed
But wait... The Story of YOUR Enslavement:
But hey, America, who cares as long as YOU are Dumbed down, Doped up, and Distracted and arrogantly and willfully loving it eh? God Bless Apathy... oops... Amerika:
"Apathy is one of the characteristic responses of any living organism when it is subjected to stimuli too intense or too complicated to cope with. The cure for apathy is comprehension." ~ John Dos Passos (1950)
Hello Dear Readers;
Christians have historically condemned apathy as a deficiency of love and devotion to God and 'his works'; this interpretation of apathy is also referred to as Sloth and is listed among the Seven Deadly Sins.
An apathetic individual has an absence of interest in or concern about emotional, social, spiritual, philosophical or physical life.
They lack a sense of purpose or meaning in their life. He or she may also exhibit insensibility or sluggishness.
In the West it's NOT from poverty, starvation, loss and despair, but from excess pleasure at the expense of Others not caring or giving a f**k about People but being all about themselves and screw everybody but them, and so fried they enjoy the suffering they cause because they've fried themselves, thus Western Hemisphere people in Europe, America, etc. suffer apathy from hedonism and decadence; countless foolish selfish people having burnt out their bodies, brains, nervous systems and synapses on fake pleasures and shallow pursuits of false promise as fat consumers in every area of Life, even Religion... until these people don't care anymore all burnt out like spoiled King Solomon around 900 BC who fried himself in every pleasure/pain known to humanity in excess until all that was left was a sorry old burnt out man whose Last Will and Testament with great regret is in the books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes.
You don't have to believe the Bible to see this one coming. If we aren't in full scale war countdown mode I don't know what.
Here's a possible sequence that appears to be surfacing:
T-Minus 5: The Prep Is On
Pre-9/11, the American people were showing reluctance to back an escalating US militarization and enhanced role as an advancing hegemonic world super power.
Answer? A galvanizing "catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor". 9/11 soon followed.
The paper titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century“, openly advocated for global military dominance. PNAC was a Neo-Conservative think tank in Washington D.C. that was apparently founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan in 1997 (and is supposedly no longer in operation), but has been a likely Pentagon creation by some people’s estimates (PBS); thereby being funded by the American taxpayer. Members included many from the Bush Administration as well as other “prominent” representatives of government and business (Full list of PNAC Members here).
The PNAC report stated this about “a new Pearl Harbor":
“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and industrial policy will shape the pace and content of transformation as much as the requirements of current missions. Source
We're in a very similar position now. As Donald Rumsfeld famously said, "the effects of 9/11 are wearing off" and the public is growing war weary, never mind the obvious strain the war machine has on the failing economy. The small staged terrorist alerts are keeping it alive but they obviously need more.