Erdogan Copies Bashar Assad’s Mistakes—Ordering Police To Treat Protesters As “Terrorists”

[This rebranding of democratic protesters as “terrorists” is a prelude to unleashing lethal force upon the assembled Turkish patriots.   They are there to “redress grieveances,” namely Erdogan’s subversion of Turkey’s democracy to create his Islamist Dictatorship.  At this point, the only thing that can save these people is further demonstrations, which will undoubtedly lead to a massive demonstration of superior firepower by the dictator’s minions and the mass death of dozens patriotic democratic forces.  If Erdogan is not very careful he may inadvertantly rebrand all of the protesters as “freedom fighters, when he starts calling them all terrorists.  

The international community has absolutely NO use for honest reporting on these Imperial subjects, but the people are NOT blind to the fact that the weapon of “democratic-revolution,” which Erdogan has so eagerly helped the Evil Empire to deploy against Bashar Assad, has now been turned upon Erdogan himself.  Zbigniew Brzezinski was right, very SOON… It will also be unleashed upon Obama, too.

I pray to God that I might be worthy of seeing that joyous day arise very soon.]

Police to consider protesters in Istanbul’s Taksim Square terror organization members: Minister



Egemen Bağış has been very critical of foreign media reports of the ongoing protests in Turkey. DHA photo

Egemen Bağış has been very critical of foreign media reports of the ongoing protests in Turkey. DHA photo

Everyone who enters Istanbul’s Taksim Square, the heart of nearly 20-day-long protests against the government, will be considered a member or a supporter of a terrorist organization, Turkey’s European Union minister said in a televised interview late last night.

“I request our citizens who supported the protests until today kindly to return to their homes,” Egemen Bağış said in an interview on broadcaster A Haber.

“From now on the state will unfortunately have to consider everyone who remains there a supporter or member of a terror organization,” he said. “Our prime minister has already assured [activists] about their aim with the protests. The protests from now on will play into the hands of some separatist organizations that want to break the peace and prioritize vandalism and terrorism.”

High-ranking Turkish officials have been posting warnings on the issue and everyone should act in a sensitive manner, he said.

Clashes between the police and protesters in Istanbul continued around the square along with some other parts of the city until this morning.

Bağış repeated his criticism of foreign media for exaggerating the protests in Turkey.

“Unfortunately, the foreign press has made a big mistake on this issue,” he said, saying that they wanted to reflect Turkey as a country where life has halted.

“Hours-long broadcasting that is even not interrupted by commercials has damaged Turkey’s image,” he said.

“But these long broadcasts surely have a financial reason, and this will be revealed. International channels such as BBC and CNN never do such broadcasting without any advertisement. Somebody somehow financed these broadcasts. Like our prime minister said, the losses of the interest rate lobby due to low interest rates have exceeded $650 billion in Turkey,” he said, adding that this was a result of the government’s dedication. “This drives them crazy and they are doing everything to disturb the calm in our country and win back their losses.”

in for a penny they are in for a pound,

[It is good to see that Assad’s air force intends to wipe-out the “Al-Qaeda” enclaves in Aleppo, the pre-recipients of American weaponry, before the USAF can once again become “Al-Qaeda’s air force” there, as they have previously done in Yugoslavia and in Libya.  (Obama’s project to carve-up the world actually began with Clinton, if not with Reagan himself.)  “In for a penny, in for a pound,” Bashar Assad must use all of his tools NOW to uproot the terrorists or to kill them all, before the invasion of Damascus gets underway.  Whenever Western boots get on the ground, he will be hunted-down and killed, just like Saddam and Qaddafi.  If he wants to live through the treachery that is set to wash over him, he must act now.  He probably doesn’t realize the level of subterfuge that is headed at him.  Remember that the “Resounding Fall” of Damascus has already been filmed.  Sound stages and mock-ups have already been constructed in Qatar, before Obama fired the “Fat Pig,” who had grown  impatient and taken it upon himself to turn Obama’s planned Syrian “free-for-all” into an Islamist jihad.  Hezbollah has confirmed  the report for us, that Palestinian “tunnel rats” are already busy helping the terrorist army to construct secret passages, first in Qusayr, then no doubt, in Aleppo, followed by Damascus itself.

Hezbollah Footage Shows Vast Tunnel Network in al Qusayr Syria War 2013

Russia would do well to physically oppose any threatened long-range missile strikes by NATO or US forces.  The tragedy that will be made from any attempt to impose a nationwide “no-fly-zone” upon Syria, is being mere words.  If we are all even a little bit “lucky,” Obama has NOT just opened the gates to World War III.]

Syrian jets hit rebels awaiting promised U.S. weapons


A Free Syrian Army fighter looks through a periscope while instructing his colleague on where to shoot in the Mouazafeen neighbourhood in Deir al-Zor, June 14, 2013. REUTERS-Khalil Ashawi

By Oliver Holmes

BEIRUT | Sat Jun 15, 2013 3:51pm BST

(Reuters) – Syrian artillery and warplanes pounded rebel areas in Damascus on Saturday as President Bashar al-Assad’s foes pleaded for advanced weapons from the United States, which has promised them unspecified military aid.

Western powers have been reluctant in the past to arm Syrian insurgents, let alone give them sophisticated anti-aircraft missiles that might fall into the hands of Sunni Islamist insurgents in rebel ranks who have pledged loyalty to al Qaeda.

Free Syrian Army (FSA) commander Salim Idriss told Reuters on Friday that rebels, who have suffered setbacks at the hands of Assad’s forces in recent weeks, urgently needed anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles, as well as a protective no-fly zone.

“But our friends in United States, they haven’t told us yet that they are going to support us with weapons and ammunition,” he said after meeting U.S. and European officials in Turkey.

A source in the Middle East familiar with U.S. dealings with the rebels has said planned arms supplies would include automatic weapons, light mortars and rocket-propelled grenades.

Russia, an ally of Damascus and fierce opponent of outside military intervention, warned on Saturday against any attempt to enforce a no-fly zone over Syria using F-16 fighter jets and Patriot air defence missile systems from Jordan.

“You don’t have to be a great expert to understand that this will violate international law,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told a news conference with his Italian counterpart in Moscow.

Western diplomats said on Friday the United States was considering a no-fly zone over Syria, but the White House said later that it would be far harder and costlier to set up one up there than it was in Libya, stressing that the United States had no national interest in pursuing that option.

Outgunned rebels have few ways to counter Assad’s air power. The pro-opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said jets and artillery had attacked Jobar, a battered district where rebels operate on the edge of central Damascus, on Saturday.

It said heavy artillery was also shelling opposition fighters in the provinces of Homs, Aleppo and Deir al-Zor.

A Turkish official said 71 Syrian army officers, including six generals, had defected to Turkey, in the biggest single mass desertion from Assad’s military in months.

The United Nations says at least 93,000 people, including civilians and combatants, have died in the Syrian civil war, with the monthly death toll averaging 5,000 in the past year.


On Thursday, a U.S. official said President Barack Obama had authorised sending U.S. weapons to Syrian rebels for the first time, after the White House said it had proof the Syrian military had used chemical weapons against opposition forces.

Abu Nidal, from the Islamist Ahrar al-Sham rebel group, said U.S. help was welcome, but questioned how effective it would be.

“I doubt the influx of weapons will significantly tip the balance into our favour,” he said via Skype. “They might help push back regime offensives of the last few days.”

Abu Nidal’s faction is not part of the more moderate FSA, Washington’s chosen channel for military aid, but he said the two groups fight alongside each other on the battlefield.

“We are not at odds with the Free Syrian Army now. We fight in one formation,” the Islamist fighter said.

Other opposition sources have also voiced scepticism over what type and quantity of arms the United States would deliver.

The surface-to-air missiles that rebels say they need to ward off Assad’s air force are particularly worrisome for Western powers as they could be used against commercial jets.

Since the anti-Assad revolt erupted in March 2011, Western nations have demanded the Syrian leader’s ouster, but have not used force as they did to back Libyans fighting Muammar Gaddafi.

Intervening against Assad is considered riskier because Syria has a stronger military, sits on the sectarian faultlines of the Middle East, and is supported by Iran and Russia, which has vetoed three U.N. Security Council resolutions on Syria.

Yet an apparent shift in the military momentum in Assad’s favour, especially with the arrival of thousands of fighters from Lebanon’s Iranian-backed Hezbollah group, has made his swift removal look unlikely without outside intervention.

However, Israel’s defence minister suggested the pendulum could still swing the other way, despite the capture this month of Qusair, a former rebel stronghold near the Lebanese border.

“Bashar al-Assad’s victory in Qusair was not a turning point in the Syrian civil war, and I do not believe that he has the momentum to win,” said Moshe Yaalon, who is visiting Washington.

“He controls just 40 percent of the territory in Syria. Hezbollah is involved in the fighting in Syria and has suffered many casualties in the battles, and as far as we know, it is more than 1,000 casualties,” Yaalon said in a statement.

“We should be prepared for a long civil war with ups and downs.”

It was not immediately clear why the group had deserted. Just hours ago, the United States said it would arm Syrian rebels, having obtained proof that Assad’s forces used chemical weapons against fighters trying to end the president’s rule.

(Additional reporting by Jonathon Burch in Ankara, Ari Rabinovitch in Jerusalem, Mark Hosenball in Washington and Thomas Grove in Moscow; Editing by Alistair Lyon)

Obama Overthrows Fat Pig of Qatar, Without Firing A Shot

[Obama takes over the Syrian terrorist operation from the Fat Boar of Doha.  Replacing the big oinker with the Qatari piglet is rebranding the "Islamist Crusade" with a less controversial face.  This set the stage for today's announcement that the Pentagon will be supplying weapons directly to the Syrian terrorists, much like their previous secret mission to supply the KLA terrorists in Kosovo under Bill Clinton.  I guess that Clinton's calling Obama "chicken" was the real motivation for these decisions.

Time to overthrow Obama.  American revolution is mandatory.  Human survival demands nothing less.]

Sheikh Hamad’s Stepping Down is U.S. Decision

news lebanon

The decision made by Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani to cede power in Qatar was not a personal decision to be justified by ‘health reasons’ suffered by the man who plays serious roles in recent years, whether at the Arab level or at the international level, Lebanese Assafir daily reported Thursday.

“The decision is an American one, first and foremost, and the Emir had been informed through an exceptional para-military envoy, who is a senior official at the US Central Investigation Agency (CIA),” the newspaper said citing reliable diplomatic sources.

“The decision was studied in the White House and was made after collecting all the information gathered by different apparatuses on the activities of Sheikh Hamad and his foreign minister,” the sources added.

However, the daily noted that activities of Hamad and his Prime minister have exceeded in many cases the limits set by Washington, both in terms of the situation in Syria, or in what related to the support provided by the Emir of Qatar for some Islamic organizations, including those groups which the U.S. intelligence suspects about their relation with Doha via receiving kinds of financial and military support.

Some of those who have had access to the details of US decision summarized the message delivered by the presidential envoy to Sheikh Hamad as follows:

“You have one specific choice, either we impose seizure over your money around the world, or you leave your position for one of your sons that we name to be the ruler after you.”

When the Emir tried to discuss the matter, the special envoy replied:
“I’m not authorized to negotiate with you, but I’ve come to inform you about our decision.”

The available information revealed that the US conditions include the departure of Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim, the PM and the FM, with his Emir, along with pending all the Qatari investments around the world, except in regions where the US administration decides.

“Any decision regarding various affairs of Qatar should be made in Washington and by Washington,” the diplomatic sources quoted the envoy in his extraordinary message as saying.

Earlier on June 11, The Assafir stated that the power transition process in Qatar will begin at the end of June until the first week of August, in which Emir Hamad bin Khalifa will cede power to his crown prince Tamim.

Arab and Western diplomats in Doha and other countries also noted that the transition process is guaranteed by many Western and Arab countries.

For its part, Reuters news agency stated that two scenarios are highlighted. The first is that crown prince Tamim takes office first as prime minister, while the second is that deputy PM Ahmad Mahmoud occupies the position when Hamad bin Jassim steps down.

Worthy of mentioning that Prince Tamim, 33 years, is the second son of the Emir and the first son of his second wife Mozah Bint al-Masnad.

The British ‘The Daily Telegraph’ newspaper reported Monday that Tamim is closely linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. His powers have been crystallized when he became responsible for defense and arms affairs.


Maryland v. King: The total loss of our bodily integrity


Maryland v. King: The total loss of our bodily integrity


By John W. Whitehead – The Rutherford Institute

As I document in my new book, “A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State,” our freedoms — especially the Fourth Amendment — are being choked out by a prevailing view among government bureaucrats that they have the right to search, seize, strip, scan, spy on, probe, pat down, taser and arrest any individual at any time and for the slightest provocation.

Now, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court’s devastating decision in Maryland v. King — in which a divided court determined that a person arrested for a crime who is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty must submit to forcible extraction of their DNA — you can add invasive DNA sampling to the list of abuses being “legally” meted out on the long-suffering American populace.

Once again the court has sided with the guardians of the police state over the defenders of individual liberty in determining that DNA samples may be extracted from people arrested for “serious offenses.” While the court claims to have made its decision based upon concerns of properly identifying criminal suspects upon arrest, what they have actually done is opened the door for a nationwide dragnet of suspects targeted via DNA sampling.

The case revolves around Alonzo King, who was arrested on April 10, 2009, and charged with assault. Relying on a state law which authorizes DNA collection from people arrested but not yet convicted of a crime, while processing King’s arrest, police obtained his DNA via a forcible cheek swab without first procuring a warrant. This information was not used to identify him, but rather sat in a police file, and then a crime lab, before finally being tested some months later.

In the meantime, King was positively identified via fingerprinting and other methods. Once his DNA was finally tested, over three months later, the results were entered into Maryland’s DNA database, alongside other personally identifying information. This information was then forwarded to the FBI’s national DNA database, where it was found to be a match to evidence taken from the scene of an unsolved rape that occurred in 2003. King was then tried and convicted of the 2003 rape.

On appeal, the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled in April 2012 that the state law used to forcibly extract King’s DNA violated the Fourth Amendment. In an unusual move, in July 2012, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts issued a stay of the lower court’s ruling, prior to the court’s even agreeing to hear the case, using the rationale that collecting DNA from people accused of serious crimes is “an important feature of day-to-day law enforcement practice in approximately half the states and the federal government.”

When King’s lawyers mounted their appeal to the Supreme Court, insisting that the police had not obtained a warrant in order to extract King’s DNA and had no particular reason for obtaining his DNA during his arrest, Roberts sided with the police, justifying the practice as being a legitimate means of identifying individuals suspected of having committed “serious offenses.” With Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito joining Roberts in affirming the practice of warrantless DNA grabs by the police, the court’s 5-4 ruling further guts an already severely disemboweled Fourth Amendment and goes so far as to equate forcefully obtaining a DNA sample to “fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.”

The only glimmer of reason came from Justice Antonin Scalia, who wasted no time dispatching the court’s dubious claim that DNA is necessary for suspect identification. Scalia was joined in his biting dissent by the three female justices on the court; Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan. As the minority opinion pointed out, Maryland actually took a full three months to test King’s DNA before handing the DNA over to the FBI to be matched against a database of unsolved crimes (that is, crimes in which the suspect has not been identified). Clearly, the state’s intention was not to identify King, but to potentially implicate him in a crime other than the one for which he was accused.

While the court majority attempted to delineate a difference between collecting DNA in general versus cases in which the suspect is accused of a “serious offense,” Scalia rightly pointed out how meaningless this distinction really is, given that the court’s ruling succeeds only in burdening “the sole group for whom the Fourth Amendment’s protections ought to be most jealously guarded: people who are innocent of the State’s accusations.”

For example, if such a questionable practice were to prevail simply for the sake of “solving more crimes,” as Scalia suggests, it would not take much to justify the “taking of DNA samples from anyone who flies on an airplane (surely the Transportation Security Administration needs to know the “identity” of the flying public), applies for a driver’s license, or attends a public school.”

As disheartening as this ruling is, it is simply one more volley in a long line of attacks on our right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures by government agents. In the past few years, the Supreme Court has determined that freedom from unreasonable government intrusion, a core component of the United States Constitution, is of little importance in an age of surveillance and security at any cost.

Any American who thinks they’re safe from the threat of DNA sampling, blood draws and roadside strip and/or rectal or vaginal searches simply because they’ve “done nothing wrong,” needs to wake up to the new reality in which we’re now living. As the Supreme Court’s ruling in Maryland v. King shows, the mind-set of those in the highest seats of power — serving on the courts, in the White House, in Congress — is a utilitarian one that has little regard for the Constitution, let alone the Fourth Amendment. Like Justice Scalia, all I can hope is that “today’s incursion upon the Fourth Amendment” will someday be repudiated.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute and editor of His latest book “A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State” (SelectBooks), is available online at He can be contacted at

Sen. John McCain’s Double-Talk, Telling Strategic Lies To Save His Syrian Terrorist Buddies

[McCain knows that he is lying with every breath he takes.  Arming the Terrorists in Syria is a surefire method to instantly double the number of extremists.  The old gray-headed bastard learned the art of double-speak while he was a guest in Hanoi.  Now he uses it to advance the neoconservative agenda.  Every American knows by now, after 8 Bush-years, that the neoconservatives purposely multiply the number of terrorists in their fake wars, always taking actions that are guaranteed to produce shockwaves of extremist reactions.  Neocons claim to fight terrorists, when all they really do is to multiply their numbers.If someone was killing your relatives in their sleep, wouldn't you take-up arms against them?  I guarantee that I would.]

Arm Syrian rebels or risk rise of extremism: McCain

the daily star
Agence France Presse
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) speaks at the Brookings Institution June 6, 2013 in Washington, DC. McCain spoke about U.S. policy in Syria and the Middle East.   Win McNamee/Getty Images/AFP
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) speaks at the Brookings Institution June 6, 2013 in Washington, DC. McCain spoke about U.S. policy in Syria and the Middle East. Win McNamee/Getty Images/AFP

WASHINGTON: The United States must deepen its engagement in Syria by equipping the rebels or setting up a safe zone to protect the opposition, a top Republican senator demanded Thursday.

Failure to show US leadership risks seeing the Middle East descend into “extremism, and war, and despair,” Senator John McCain said, speaking after visiting Syria last week to meet with rebel leaders.

“The Syrian state is disintegrating in much of the country, leaving vast ungoverned spaces that are being filled by extremists, many aligned with Al-Qaeda,” McCain told the Brookings Institution think-tank.

“They are the best armed, best funded, and most experienced fighters. And every day this conflict grinds on, these extremists are marginalizing moderate leaders like the commanders I met last week.”

The Free Syrian Army and its commanders seeking to oust President Bashar al-Assad were in desperate need of “ammunition and weapons to counter Assad’s tanks, artillery, and air power,” he said.

While Washington has been the largest single donor of humanitarian aid to Syrian refugees and has been working to support a political transition, it has so far only agreed to provide non-lethal support to the rebels.

McCain has long argued for military aid to the Syrian opposition to tip the balance in the conflict now in its third year, and he stressed “we need the good guys to win.”

“Put simply, the space for moderate politics is collapsing as the Middle East descends deeper into extremism and conflict,” he said, warning the conflict in which 94,000 have been killed was spilling across Syria’s borders.

“In short, if the Middle East descends into extremism, and war, and despair, no one should think America would be able to pivot away from those threats. Our national security interests will suffer. That is an inescapable reality.”

And McCain argued that a deeper engagement by the administration of President Barack Obama did not imply thousands of American boots on the ground.

“We could use our stand-off weapons, such as cruise missiles, to target Assad’s aircraft and ballistic missile launchers on the ground,” McCain said.

“We could enable a provisional government to establish itself in a safe zone in Syria that we could help to protect with Patriot missiles. And we could organize a full-scale operation to train and equip Syrian opposition forces.”

He was speaking as the State Department said it was evaluating evidence provided by France, which Paris says shows sarin gas was used in Syria.

Obama has said that any use of chemical weapons would be a red line in the conflict, and the US administration is under pressure to stand by its words.

McCain called for a more effective strategy to advance US interests in the Middle East, but said it was dependent on “the sustained, outspoken, and determined leadership of the President of the United States.”

“That is what we need from him now more than ever. We need him to lead.”

Read more:
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News ::

Mysterious E-Mail, Lists of Politicians’ Home Addresses and “The Government That We Deserve”

A Few Days Ago, I received an anonymous email, which consisted of a list of Washington politicians, including their home numbers and addresses. 

I flushed it away, since it seemed very suspicious at the time.  It felt like a set-up, made to order for those police state functionaries, who like to look through our private emails and listen to our private phone calls.  Today, I received a follow-up email, which called for “lone wolves” to begin eliminating those politicians on that list, hoping to scare the rest of them into giving-up their treasonous, Fascistic ways.  Since I oppose all terrorism, especially assassination, I am outing the guy, by posting his email below.  (HE WAS PROBABLY FBI, ANYWAY.)

I hope this tells you who the real coward is, 

From: Dexter <>
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2013 12:22 AM
Subject: Sissies

There is speculation that we are acting on the behalf of a federal agency. The truth is that our identity and motivation don’t matter. People are not going to do something just because an e-mail tells them to, regardless of who sent it or how genuine the motivation of the sender might be. People are much more strongly motivated by seeing their dreams crushed, their lives crumble and their loved ones suffer. As more and more people suffer from the crimes of the politicians, more and more people will be motivated to fight back.

The reason for this speculation is fear. Some people are afraid that the government will punish them for just receiving a list of addresses of politicians. Some are afraid that the government will punish everyone collectively because such a list is being sent out. Many contact the FBI and other agencies, and even though they can make up lots of excuses, the real reason is that they are afraid that if someone actually starts fighting for real, the government will punish people collectively with new legislation. This fear is not something that they can articulate or face, and therefore they cannot see it in themselves, but it can be seen by others. What a bunch of sissies.

“FBI, help! Somebody sent me an e-mail that might imply that someone is threatening the government. Please, don’t put me in a FEMA camp, I didn’t ask for this email and I would never think of violence against our benevolent and most democratic government. Please, don’t take my guns away, I would never use them for fighting.”

It is ironic (moronic) that the same crowd that calls us FBI agents is also actively trying to turn us in. The response of the government to this is hilarious – they are telling people that this is caused by a virus. The fact that they tell such a technologically implausible lie suggests that whoever is handling this situation is technically incompetent and the fact that it’s a lie suggests that they have no integrity. The fact that some people seem to buy the virus story shows that there is no shortage of ignorance on either side. These people are pathetic. Were it not for the Covenant I made with God, I might have just walked away from this fight.

Since the overwhelming majority is a bunch of pathetic quivering sissies that are themselves not much better than the criminals that they harbor, the NWO is going to keep advancing and will kill a lot more people. This will be allowed to happen to teach those who are left a valuable lesson. The politicians have committed countless crimes including treason and war crimes that resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths. If the politicians are not stopped, they will commit even more treason and war crimes, resulting in more deaths. Virtually everyone knows this, but people tell us that they don’t want violence, while threatening us with violence. The politicians need to be stopped to save countless lives, and there is only one way to stop them. But none of these people are going to do what it takes because they are cowards and we are going to stand down until they have paid the price that every coward has to pay for refusing to fight. People get the government that they deserve.

It is not necessary to fight against armored vehicles, against police, against the army, against the drones, etc. Politicians have minimum security most of the time. This is necessary, because they have to meet a lot of people. Heavy security would make this difficult and the career of a politician that does it would suffer. Heavy security also tells people that they are afraid and makes the resistance look stronger, which inspires more people to join. Ultimately, even if they lived on military bases, they would still be vulnerable to IEDs in transit and to snipers virtually all the time. They would have to live in a prison to prevent getting killed, which they are not likely to accept – they would probably just quit if they were that intimidated. Therefore, it is not necessary to eliminate all the politicians all at once – attacking a few is likely to start a chain reaction that will get some more killed while the rest of them quit.

Now let the cowards carry on with pointless discussions of who is sending these messages and why. Talking is all they are good for.


FireShot Pro Screen Capture #314 - 'peter_chamberlin - Yahoo! Mail' - us-mg6_mail_yahoo_com_neo_launch__rand=1ttkrgo34btj8#mail

Is Washington’s Lafayette Park About To Become Obama’s Tiananmen/Tahrir Square?

Lafayette Park

Analysis: Obama’s agenda scorched in firestorm


Susan Page, @susanpage, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — President Obama, meet the second-term curse.

Revelations that the U.S. government has been collecting a massive database of telephone usage by millions of Americans — citizens not suspected of any wrongdoing — created a firestorm Thursday that would be damaging for any administration. But it is is especially problematic for Obama because it stokes controversies he already was struggling to contain and reinforces criticism that has dogged him from the start.

MORE: NSA taps data from 9 major Net firms

Republicans have long depicted Obama as an advocate of a big, dangerous and overreaching government, back to the federal bailout of the auto industry he undertook during the financial crisis that greeted his first inauguration. That has been their fundamental philosophical objection to his signature Affordable Care Act, now just months away from implementation of its major provisions.

In recent weeks, it has fueled outrage over the targeting by the Internal Revenue Service of conservative Tea Party groups seeking non-profit status, and over the use of secret subpoenas and search warrants against the Associated Press and Fox News in Justice Department investigations of news leaks.

Now the headlines are focused on governmental monitoring that touches not just reporters but, apparently, just about anyone who makes a phone call. Thursday began with explosions over a story in The Guardian in London of a broad secret U.S. warrant for phone records from Verizon. By midday, Senate Intelligence Chairman Dianne Feinstein had confirmed the surveillance had been going on for years. By the end of the day, The Washington Post and The Guardian reported that a data-mining program targeting foreigners was tapping into such Internet companies as Microsoft, Google, Yahoo and Facebook.

All that overwhelmed the president’s planned message for the day, and likely well beyond. (For the record, he had stopped by Mooresville Middle School outside Charlotte to promote his plan to provide schools with high-speed Internet access. Not that anyone noticed.)

And in a bit of timing that is at least awkward, he holds high-profile meetings in California today with President Xi Jinping of China — a government the United States has long faulted for its heavy-handed treatment of its own people.

Indeed, as a U.S. senator from Illinois in 2007, Barack Obama blasted President George W. Bush for sweeping surveillance of Americans in the name of battling terrorism — just the sort of justification that Obama officials were making Thursday.

Then, Obama called it “a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand.”

“I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom,” he said in a speech then. “No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists.”

To be sure, Obama didn’t launch the data-mining initiatives, which were started during the Bush administration, though he has expanded them. He had defenders Thursday ranging from California Sen. Feinstein, a liberal Democrat, to South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, a conservative Republican. “It’s called protecting America,” Feinstein said.

But his critics also spanned the political spectrum. “Is it just me, or is secret blanket surveillance obscenely outrageous?” former vice president Al Gore posted on Twitter. Rep. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, an author of the Patriot Act that was used to obtain the court order, called it “excessive and un-American.”

The scarcest precious resource for second-term presidents isn’t political clout, which they demonstrate by joining the small fraternity of those who have managed to win the presidency twice. It is time — the time to pursue the agenda they choose before a scandal or foreign-policy crisis erupts, and before the next presidential campaign begins to consume all the oxygen in town. For former president Bill Clinton, the Monica Lewinsky affair ended his hopes of winning serious entitlement reform during his second term. Former president Richard Nixon found himself bedeviled with and eventually forced from office by the Watergate scandal.

Obama’s plan has been to be able to win approval for and sign a comprehensive immigration bill in Congress by fall. He hopes to be able to negotiate a big budget deal that would curb the deficit and put Medicare on a firmer long-term footing before the 2014 midterm elections and the 2016 presidential race seize the political world.

Instead, explaining and defending these surveillance programs — what they are, how they work and why he thinks they’re needed — are about to take up a lot of his time.

Generals Get Grilled Over Rape Culture In All Branches of US Military Services–HOW THEY WANT YOU TO SERVE

[SEE:  Roots of military’s sexual assault problem include macho culture, fewer recourses for victims ; Blasting a Hole In US Military’s Stone Wall Hiding Facts On Soldier Rape ; Lackland AFB Drill Instructors Accused of Cadet Rape In Multiple Cases ; Soldiers Raped by Other Men ; UCMJ Definitions of Military Harassment, Sexual Assault and Rape]

The Invisible War Documentary Online

Senators blast military response to sex assaults

Daily Herald chicago

generals getting grilled

ASSOCIATED PRESS As Congress investigates the growing epidemic of sexual assaults within the military, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing on Capitol Hill Tuesday to demand answers from top uniformed leaders. From right to left are: Legal Counsel to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Brig. Gen. Richard C. Gross, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno, Judge Advocate General of the Army Lt. Gen. Dana K. Chipman, Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. James F. Amos, and Staff Judge Advocate to the Marine Corps

Associated Press

WASHINGTON — U.S. senators dressed down senior military leaders Tuesday, led by female lawmakers, combat veterans and former prosecutors who insisted that sexual assault in the ranks has cost the services the trust and respect of the American people as well as the nation’s men and women in uniform.

Summoned to Capitol Hill, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the beribboned four-star chiefs of the service branches conceded in an extraordinary hearing that they had faltered in dealing with sexual assault. One said assaults were “like a cancer” in the military.

But they strongly opposed congressional efforts to strip commanders of their traditional authority to decide whether to level charges in their units.

Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, especially the panel’s seven female senators, grilled the chiefs about whether the military’s mostly male leadership understands differences between relatively minor sexual offenses and serious crimes that deserve swift and decisive justice.

“Not every single commander necessarily wants women in the force. Not every single commander believes what a sexual assault is. Not every single commander can distinguish between a slap on the ass and a rape because they merge all of these crimes together,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.

Frustration among the senators seemed to boil over as they discussed recent high-profile cases and statistics on sexual assault that underscored the challenges the Defense Department and Congress face.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a Navy veteran of Vietnam, said a woman came to him the previous night and said her daughter wanted to join the military. She asked McCain if he could give his unqualified support to her.

“I could not,” McCain said. “I cannot overstate my disgust and disappointment over the continued reports of sexual misconduct in our military. We’ve been talking about the issue for years, and talk is insufficient.”

The committee is considering seven legislative proposals, including one introduced by Gillibrand that would deny commanders the authority to decide when criminal charges are filed and remove the ability of senior officers to convene courts-martial.

More than 40 senators are sponsors or co-sponsors of the proposals, several of which have overlapping provisions. A bill by Sens. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., would provide any victims with a special military lawyer who would assist them throughout the process. Another, sponsored by Sens. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, would require any service member found guilty of rape or sexual assault receive a minimum punishment of a dismissal or a dishonorable discharge. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., introduced a bill with provisions that require commanders to submit reports of sex-related offenses to more senior officers within 24 hours.

Dempsey and the service chiefs warned against making the dramatic changes called for in Gillibrand’s legislation. Removing commanders from the military justice process, Dempsey said, would undercut their ability to preserve good order and discipline in their units.

“We cannot simply legislate our way out of this problem,” said Gen. Ray Odierno, the Army’s chief of staff. “Without equivocation, I believe maintaining the central role of commander in our military justice system is absolutely critical to any solution.”

But Gillibrand defended her proposal, which has garnered 18 co-sponsors in two weeks. She said victims of sexual assault are reluctant to report the crimes to their commanders because they fear their allegations will be dismissed and they might face retaliation. Aggressive reforms in the military’s legal code are needed to force cultural changes, she said.

“You have lost the trust of the men and women who rely on you,” Gillibrand said. “They’re afraid to report. They think their careers will be over. They fear retaliation. They fear being blamed. That is our biggest challenge right there.”

Dempsey and the service chiefs told the committee they back Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s April recommendation to change the Uniform Code of Military Justice and largely strip commanding officers of the power to toss out a military verdict. That change is included in several of the Senate proposals including Gillibrand’s and is likely to be adopted by the House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday in its version of the annual defense policy bill.

But Gillibrand and several other senators said that wasn’t nearly enough.

Several members of the committee noted that American allies including Great Britain, Israel and Australia have already have taken serious cases outside the chain of command. The U.S. military leaders said they had just begun to study the changes to see how they might apply to this country.

The committee’s Democratic chairman, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, opened the hearing by saying the problem of sexual assault “is of such a scope and magnitude that it has become a stain on our military.” Levin has not endorsed any of the bills.

The military leaders didn’t dispute Levin’s assessment.

“Sexual assault and harassment are like a cancer within the force, a cancer that left untreated will destroy the fabric of our force,” Odierno said. “It’s imperative that we take a comprehensive approach to prevent attacks, to protect our people, and where appropriate, to prosecute wrongdoing and hold people accountable.”

While acknowledging the problem and accepting that legislation is inevitable, the military leaders insisted that commanders keep their authority to handle serious offenses including sexual assault cases that occur in their units.

The Air Force’s top officer, Gen. Mark Welsh, said, “Commanders having the authority to hold airmen criminally accountable for misconduct … is crucial to building combat-ready, disciplined units.”

But, their voices rising, female members of the committee complained that the military’s reporting process fails to recognize the seriousness of rape.

“This isn’t about sex,” said McCaskill, a former county prosecutor in Missouri. “This is about assaultive domination and violence. And as long as those two get mushed together, you all are not going to be as successful as you need to be at getting after the most insidious part of this, which is the predators in your ranks that are sullying the great name of our American military.”

The Pentagon estimated in a recent report that as many as 26,000 military members may have been sexually assaulted last year, up from an estimated 19,000 assaults in 2011, based on an anonymous survey of military personnel. While the number of sexual assaults that members of the military actually reported rose 6 percent to 3,374 in 2012, thousands of victims were still unwilling to come forward despite new oversight and assistance programs aimed at curbing the crimes, the report said.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., suggested that youth is partly to blame for the problem. “The young folks that are coming into each of your services are anywhere from 17 to 22 or 23,” he said. “The hormone level created by nature sets in place the possibility for these types of things to occur.” But Chambliss also said the military and Congress need to do far more to stop sexual assaults from occurring.

Commanders and senior enlisted troops are ultimately responsible for ensuring that their units don’t develop climates conducive to sexual assaults and harassment. But Dempsey said that he and other military leaders haven’t kept their fingers on the pulse of their units as closely as they should over the past decade due to the heavy pace of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“I think I took my eye off the ball a bit in the commands that I had,” said Dempsey, who spent more than three years as a commander in Iraq.

Dempsey also said in response to a question from McCain that there are gaps in the way the services screen prospective recruits that could allow an individual with a history of sex-related crimes to join.

“There are currently, in my judgment, inadequate protections for precluding that from happening,” Dempsey told McCain. “So a sex offender could, in fact, find their way into the armed forces of the United States.”

The committee’s hearing, which lasted nearly eight hours with testimony from three different panels of witnesses, came as a string of incidents has raised doubts about how aggressively the services are acting to change their cultures and eradicate sexual assaults.

Last week, the Pentagon said the U.S. Naval Academy is investigating allegations that three football team members sexually assaulted a female midshipman at an off-campus house more than a year ago. A lawyer for the woman says she was “ostracized” on campus after she reported it.

In recent weeks, a soldier at the U.S. Military Academy was charged with secretly photographing women, including in a bathroom. The Air Force officer who led the service’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response unit was arrested on charges of groping a woman. And the manager of the Army’s sexual assault response program at Fort Campbell, Ky., was relieved of his post after his arrest in a domestic dispute with his ex-wife.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif Demands End of Drone Strikes As First Official Act

Nawaz Sharif elected Pakistan's PM for third time

Nawaz Sharif elected Pakistan’s PM for third time
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s new prime minister Nawaz Sharif on Wednesday called for the United States to end its campaign of drone attacks in the country’s tribal northwest in his first address since taking office.

“We respect the sovereignty of others and they should also respect our sovereignty and independence. This campaign should come to an end,” he said after lawmakers endorsed him for an unprecedented third term as premier.

Anglo-French Idiocy—Pouring arms into Syria will spell more disaster

[The following article from an unusual source, The Times of Oman, has a broken link on their website, even though it was written by the site's editor.  I found it on Silobreaker, which has a corrected address.]

Pouring arms in Syria will spell more disaster


British Foreign Secretary William Hague has now become William Vague. The world has thus re-christened him following the bizarre argument he put forward while forcing the EU to lift arms embargo on Syrian opposition. Supported by Britain’s poodle, France, William argued that withdrawal of the embargo will enable the Syrian opposition to fight back the regime; empower the moderates (the pro-West) rebels; fortify their positions; dissuade them from defecting to better-armed pro-Al Qaeda extremist groups and mount pressure on all stakeholders to attend the proposed peace conference.

William perhaps couldn’t have been more vague. Evidently, his arguments were based on conjectures and, more than that, they were precariously fraught with the danger of spilling the conflict over a “region extending from the Straits of Hormuz to the Mediterranean.” In foisting their move to arm the Syrian opposition, Britain and France have obviously not taken into consideration the regional dimension of the raging Syrian conflict. In their myopia they risked “fuelling a speedy and devastating escalation of the conflict”.

Russia was rather quick in its response to the Anglo-French move. Moscow announced to deliver advanced S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Syria. Russia’s announcement scuttled William’s basic assumptions. Advanced S-300 missiles will only tilt the balance of firepower in favour of the regime and dangerously undermine opposition’s ability to fight back.

Russian deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, was blunt in his defence of Kremlin’s announcement. The missiles, he said, would stabilise the emotions in Europe and discourage “hotheads” from dabbling further into a conflict which isn’t theirs. In an overt warning to Britain and France Ryabkov said that the EU decision to let the arms embargo lapse may directly jeopardise the Geneva peace talks on Syria.

William’s assumption that withdrawal of arms embargo will force all stakeholders to attend the proposed peace conference was proved wrong. Britain and France thus escalated the conflict more than working towards its resolution.

The proxy war the West and Russia have been fighting for past two years in Syria has now come into open. Even the sectarian war for the control of Middle East and Muslim world will escalate. And an obvious ramification will be a prolonged confrontation between Al Qaeda and Hezbollah which will equally bloody and no-hold-bar.

The Anglo-French move towards “capacity building” of the Syrian rebels is hazardously open ended. More than building fighting capacities of the “moderate” rebels most of the arms will find way to Al Qaeda and empower them beyond imagination. Syrian President Bashar Al Assad is no more a friend to the West. But neither is Al Qaeda. To aid Al Qaeda, directly or indirectly, will only imperil the world.

Armed with Russian advanced S-300 anti-aircraft missiles the regime too will gain awesome firepower. This “radar-guided missiles that could be used by (the regime) against any target, airborne or not” will become a game changer in Syria.

Simon Tisdall, an assistant editor of the Guardian, says that Britain acted as a stalking horse for the US in the EU talks, softening up the ground for an American intervention – not the first time London has played this ignoble role. And “if the EU moves were followed by similar action by the Obama administration, as congressional Republicans, such as Senator John McCain, would like” the situation will certainly implode into a full scale multi-layered regional war with Russia too stepping in with no uncertain terms.

The West has a long history of picking up sides in wars and conflicts to its own detriment; but this time it has done so to the detriment of the world. The first casualty will be the UN peace keeping mission in Golan Heights. Austria has already threatened to pull its 300 soldiers out of the mission if Britain moves on to arm Syrian rebels. Austrian move may well inspire other stakeholders in the UN mission. The threatened withdrawal “would heighten the growing sense of greater Middle East crisis, creating a vacuum on the strategically vital heights which the Israelis would be tempted to fill quickly”.

Through history we have seen war holding irresistible attractions for democratic leaders. Britain and France are the two nations in particular, who have had carved out empires through wars, bloodshed, plunder and treachery, have always shown uncanny penchant for wars. With their national character more like that of vultures they have always thrived on carcasses of nations fomenting division, encouraging strife and plundering. The EU was thus terribly wrong in believing William and his French counterpart.

Effort to topple Assad by pouring in arms in Syria is a flawed philosophy. It will not see Assad stepping down neither will it end his rule. Two years have already passed by and the Syrian conflict has not shown any sign of abating. Earlier this year the United Nations estimated at least 70,000 people dead there.

By now the toll must have crossed 80,000. In the past three weeks 300 more have died.
Supplying arms to the rebels may or may not build the rebels’ capacity to fight the regime. But the move will ensure more death, more orphans, more widows and more parents burying their sons.

The author is the Opinion Editor of Times of Oman.

Zionist Press Taunts British Spooks for Letting Their “Islamist” Slips Show

[This Jewish piece would be ironic if it was not meant as a Zionist upbraiding of their royal patrons for sloppy spywork.  The JPost author finishes his criticism of British mentors by highlighting some of the more well-known examples of previous British foul-ups, most notable among them, "Sheikh Omar," the butcher of Daniel Pearl who also killed the real bin Laden, according to Benazir Bhutto right before her own assassination (SEE:  Benazir Bhutto Says Osama Bin Laden murdered by Omar Sheikh). 

Anytime that your spy works leave a visible trail back to the source, there is now a danger that civilians like us will see through the smokescreen, revealing the British hand in countless terrorist operations, because of the Internet.  Now we can see the patterns clearly emerging, like spider webs, all leading back to London.  In many ways, Lyndon Larouche has been spot-on in some of his assessments of the shameless schemes of London and those carried-out in concert with foreign royals.  It seems that there is still a web of trust between the royal blood lines, especially when it comes to secret operations.  It is no wonder that London and Riyadh work so smoothly together.  Both thrones are historically bloodthirsty, with ambitions that far exceed their small populations or geographical areas. 

Normally the British are more circumspect about leaving blood trails leading back to MI5 or MI6.  They have repeatedly blown their covers in this terror war, starting in Basra (SEE:  So what were two undercover British soldiers up to in Basra?) and in Afghanistan's Helmand Province (SEE: What exactly were Mervyn Patterson and Michael Semple doing in Helmand?), be it soldiers getting captured by local police, or militant operatives revealing themselves to the targeted governments. 

Manufacturing terrorists from radicalized Muslim males is the cheapest way concocted to raise an army since the days of organized slavery.  It is high time that this process of waging war on the cheap, using mercenaries and brainwashed cadres of Wahhabiized "Islamists," is brought to an end. 

It seems that the back story of V for Vendetta was all true.


 Britain, will you wait until the 5th of November to bring the evil plot to an end?]

UK’s Islamist problem



It should come as no surprise that random terrorist attacks have been, and will remain for the foreseeable future, MI5’s greatest security threat.

A police forensics officer investigates a crime scene where one man was killed in Woolwich, London

A police forensics officer investigates a crime scene where one man was killed in Woolwich, London Photo: REUTERS
Since 9/11, the West’s perception of violence perpetrated in the name of a warped interpretation of Islam has changed. No longer can this violence be seen as an exclusively external threat faced by countries located in the Middle East such as Israel. Rather, it is a domestic threat as well.This lesson was driven home yet again for Brits on Wednesday when Michael “Mujaheed” Adebolajo and an accomplice brutally murdered a man in broad daylight on a London street while shouting “Allahu akbar.”

The victim, a British soldier, was wearing a T-shirt with the slogan “Help-the Heroes,” which is also the name of an organization that supports British forces fighting in Afghanistan and Mali.

The vast majority of Muslims in Britain and in other European countries are law-abiding, upright citizens who are undoubtedly appalled that the two men have claimed to be acting in the name of Islam. The Muslim Council of Britain was quick to denounce the atrocity.

Nevertheless, Britain and other European countries do have a problem with radical Islamists. And they have for some time now.

“Londonistan” apparently originated as an appellation used in the 1990s by French security officials frustrated at British leaders’ failure to confront in their capital the dangers of radical Islam, which, the officials feared, would spill over into France. Steven Simon, a former White House counterterrorism official, referred to London as “the Star Wars bar scene,” that caters to all kinds of Islamist recruiters and fund-raisers for, and practitioners of, holy war.

Abu Hamza al-Masri, the imam of the Finsbury Park Mosque in central London, provided shelter to Richard Reid, a.k.a. “the Shoe Bomber,” and Zacarias Moussaoui, a member of the team that carried out the 9/11 attacks, and other terrorists.

The 2002 video butchering in Pakistan of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was organized by Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, another Brit and a former student at the London School of Economics. A year later, Asif Mohammed Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif, both born in England, took part in a suicide attack on Mike’s Place, a Tel Aviv bar.

British authorities have taken steps to crack down on extremists. Abu Hamza was eventually jailed on charges of soliciting murder and inciting racial hatred. In March of this year, Jamaican-born Abdullah El-Faisal, a supporter of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, was sentenced to nine years in jail for urging his followers to kill nonbelievers in a holy war.

Some radical Muslim clerics have managed to manipulate Britain’s democratic system. At the end of March, police said they were unable to prosecute Anjem Choudary for saying that British Prime Minister David Cameron and US President Barack Obama should be killed. After the British daily The Sun provided authorities with secretly filmed footage, Choudary claimed he had been “joking,” though he maintained that bin Laden was his “hero.”

In the wake of the brutal murder on Wednesday, Choudary said he was acquainted with Adebolajo, who converted to Islam in 2003. According to The Telegraph, Adebolajo appeared publicly alongside other radical members of Islamist group Al-Muhajiroun, the banned forerunner to 4 UK, which was headed by Choudary.

Commenting on Adebolajo’s act of terrorism, Choudary said: “What he did was unusual and it’s not the kind of view that I propagate and I do not condone the use of violence, but those views are out there. Some members of the Muslim community struggle to express themselves and he is making his voice heard in blood.”

Clerics such as Choudary walk a thin line between criminal incitement and freedom of expression. And his messages enjoy a remarkably receptive audience in a country where the fastest growing religion is Islam. In a 2006 survey commissioned by Channel 4, a quarter of British Muslims said the July 7, 2005, bombings in London that left 52 dead were justified because of the British government’s support for the war on terror. Muslims under 24 were twice as likely to agree.

There is no evidence that these sorts of sentiments among some Muslims have significantly changed. In an atmosphere in which murderous terrorist attacks are see as justified, the sort of seemingly random lone wolf attack perpetrated by Adebolajo and his accomplice becomes all the more likely. It should come as no surprise that random terrorist attacks have been, and will remain for the foreseeable future, MI5’s greatest security threat.

“Metropolitan police entered BBC studios and arrested Mr Nusaybah….His arrest was not directly linked to…Adebolajo”

“Metropolitan police entered BBC studios and arrested Mr Nusaybah….His arrest was not directly linked to his 28-year-old friend Adebolajo’s alleged murder of soldier Lee Rigby.”

[Is there anybody in all of Britain who believes this denial?  If it had truly been unrelated to the testimony that he was in the process of giving in the BBC interview, then why was the session disrupted by the police, just as he was testifying to the involvement of British secret services in the pre-attack life of Mr. Adebolajo?  The BBC was inadvertantly stepping on MI5/6 toes, probably causing news bosses to freak-out over what their minions were up to, forcing them to request the emergency shut-down of the dangerous interview by intelligence officials.

England is about to burn, and all of Europe with it, but probably for the exact wrong reasons.  Continent-wide civil war will not help the struggle of the common man, but will merely strengthen the hand of the State (SEE:  Camp of the Saints).]

Woolwich attack: Michael Adebolajo’s friend tells the BBC MI5 tried to recruit his friend


Michael Adebolajo

Michael Adebolajo, front, shouts slogans as Muslims march in London in a protest against the arrest of six people in anti-terror raids in April 2007. Picture: AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth

A FRIEND of one of the Woolwich fanatics has been arrested by counter terrorism police moments after he told BBC that M15 attempted to recruit his friend to work for them.

The alleged Woolwich attackers, identified as Michael Adebolajo and Michael Oluwatobi Adebowale, are currently both being held by heavily armed police in separate hospitals where they have been recovering from gunshot wounds.

The pair was shot by police on Wednesday after they allegedly hacked to death 25-year-old Lee Rigby and then, armed with knives and a hand gun, charged at police.

In other developments:

Abu Nusaybah gave an interview to the BBC at their premises in central London about his childhood friend murder suspect Michael Adebolajo .He said Adebolajo had undergone a “change” after he was detained by security forces in Kenya last year and underwent physical and sexual abused during interrogation.

He said when he returned to the UK M15 asked if he would work for them as an informer. They allegedly harassed him for some months.

“His wording was, “They are bugging me – they won’t leave me alone”,” Mr Nusaybah said.

“He mentioned initially they wanted to ask him if he knew certain individuals. But after him saying that he didn’t know these individuals, what he said was they asked him if he would be interested in working for them. He was explicit in that he refused to work for them, but he did confirm he didn’t know the individuals.”

Then in a twist, Metropolitan police entered BBC studios and arrested Mr Nusaybah in relation to terrorism offences. They also raided his home and another in East London. Police have confirmed the 31-year-old was being held on suspicion of the commission, preparation and instigation of acts of terrorism at a south London police station.

His arrest was not directly linked to his 28-year-old friend Adebolajo’s alleged murder of soldier Lee Rigby.

The British Government has yet to comment on the claims made by Mr Nusaybah about Adebolajo or on his own arrest.

It is understood Mr Nusaybah had once been linked to an extremist Islamic group in Britain led by self styled “sheik of east London” and hate preacher Anjew Choudary although claims he moved away from the group sometime ago.

Claims Adebolajo was tortured by Kenyan authorities last year after refusing to speak with them could also not be verified. Mr Nusaybah said however his friends’ experiences in Kenya and alleged “harassment” by M15 changed his personality, made him withdrawn and less talkative.

“His mind was somewhere else but his presence was there,” he said, adding that tears welled in his friend’s eyes when he spoke about Kenya although he was not exactly sure what happened.

“He said ‘ I feel shy to describe what that did to me’,” Mr Nusaybah said of his friends experiences which he suggested was sexual abuse.

Lee Rigby

Flowers and tributes mount at the place outside Woolwich Barracks where British soldier Lee Rigby was murdered yesterday.

He said Adebolajo had wished to live in a Muslim country with Sharia law and had visited Kenya for this reason.

It has been previously claimed the Adebolajo may have been attempting to make his way to Somalia to join a terrorist group to make jihad.

Attack pair set to be grilled

THE two men accused of a frenzied murder of a soldier in south east London are expected to be interviewed this weekend.

Police shot the pair. Despite their injuries they have been deemed fit to be interviewed.

Woolwich machete hacking attack against soldier Lee Rigby

Woolwich machete hacking attack against soldier Lee Rigby. Both attack suspects were known to MI5 security forces from previous security services investigations.

Investigators from the counter terrorist police unit are particularly keen to establish whether they acted alone or whether the attack was part of a broader orchestrated campaign involving others.

It has been established at least one belonging to an extremist Islamic group and influenced by a banned imam who has since been booted out of the UK.

Two women arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to murder Drummer Rigby have now been released without charge.

A 29-year-old was arrested yesterday in connection with the killing while a 31 year-old, had been held by police at a home in south London last night and later released.

Detectives are still questioning a 29-year-old man also on suspicion of conspiracy to murder.

Fears of more lone wolf style attacks

Meanwhile, Britain potentially faces more “individualist jihad” style killings similar to the attack Drummer Rigby as anti-Muslim sentiments are stirred to dangerous levels.

That’s the view of a number of terrorism experts in Britain as they fear certain radical magazines and social media can remotely spark extremist converts into attacks.

Reading University international terrorism and al Qaeda expert Dr Christina Hellmich said while al Qaeda’s capabilities are largely destroyed individual terrorism could flourish.

“The fear right now is that we have a wave of individual terror ahead of us,” she said.

“The term al-Qaeda always comes up as if it is al-Qaeda that is propagating these attacks. But that gives us the illusion that there is still some monolithic group behind this pulling the strings. This is not the case. We are dealing with individualist jihadist everywhere but they are the fragment of the organisation.”

The concepts of individual attacks are being promoted by radical Islamists, including through the Inspire magazine produced by al-Qaeda, largely blamed for promoting the attack on the Boston Marathon earlier this month.

“Inspire has been trying to propagate the individual jihad as a strategy since 2010 in their magazine but it hasn’t really paid off. If these are the only attacks then it’s not very much.”

Jeffrey DeMarco, lecturer and researcher in criminology at Kingston University, agrees the attack demonstrates an increase in “lone wolf” terrorism which could pose a risk for security services to manage.

“We have been seeing slowly but really most noticeably with Mumbai in 2008, this escalation and this frequent recurrence of the lone wolves who aren’t part of the intricate terrorist cells or organisations,” he said.

According to DeMarco the purpose is to invoke widespread fear. “Mass casualties are not necessarily the endgame, the epidemic of fear can be just as damaging.”

Matthew Henman, senior analyst at IHS Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Centre (JTIC), said: “The fact that the attackers made no attempt to flee the scene, combined with their interaction with bystanders, may indicate an effort to maximise publicity of the attack and to ensure that their message was recorded and publicised.”

Obama To Make All Wars Covert Wars—He’s Running Scared

obama-doubletalk.jpg w=450&h=126

[Obama's speech and the following report about it are total bullshit...disinformation at best.  Nobody has any intention of ever ending this war, no matter how many times Obama claims to be doing it.  He has no more intention of closing Guantanamo Bay today than he did the last time he promised to close it.  The very fact that Team Obama has made this public speech about ending America's "perpetual wartime footing," is proof that the Establishment is running scared over anti-war and anti-police state sentiments.  Perpetual, or "persistent war" are descriptions of the American terror war that have come straight from the Pentagon itself.  The fact that Obama felt it necessary to disassociate his administration from this idea of a "perpetual" war or a thirty-year war, is proof positive that this is a very touchy issue. 

We the People are slowly starting to catch-on to the schemes of the American ruling class, worrying all of them that we will figure-out what they have been doing to us before they get finished fucking us.  This is why Obama is giving this speech (SEE: Obama Trying To Make Rape Look Like Seduction ).  It is good to know that the idea of an American awakening gives the Big Bosses a little trouble sleeping.  It is way past time to repeal the completely worn-out AUMF (authorization to use military force) from the 911 attacks:

"To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States."

Since we are no longer engaged anywhere with any of the "al-Qaeda" factions which have been blamed for the attacks, and because we are now allied with some of those same "al-CIA-da" groups in Syria and in Africa, the government should be forced into producing a brand new "authorization for military force," defining precisely who we are fighting against into the forseeable future, and even more important, why we are waging war against them.]

Should President Obama end the war on terror?


He came to talk about the future, but the past keeps pulling him back.

President Obama outlined his vision for a revised American counterterrorism policy during Thursday’s speech at the National Defense University in Washington, D.C., renewing his call to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and announcing new guidelines to govern the use of targeted drone strikes on foreign soil.

Animating many of the president’s proposals was a stated desire to “discipline our thinking and our actions” and to move America away from a “perpetual wartime footing” that has held sway for nearly 12 years, since Congress passed an Authorization to Use Military Force [AUMF] in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

The president pledged to “work with Congress” to “refine and ultimately repeal” the AUMF, warning that a strategy of “perpetual war – through drones or special forces or troop deployments – will prove self-defeating, and alter our country in troubling ways.”

Simply put: While “our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue,” the president said, “This war, like all wars, must end.”

While Mr. Obama has spoken before about the need for a return to normalcy of sorts in how America views and responds to terrorist threats, rarely has he expressed that point so baldly and called for an outright “end” to the nearly-12-year old conflict.

But should the “war on terror,” as we know it today, be drawn to a conclusion, given the continued threat posed by terrorists? And with the hypersensitivity attending public discussion on the issue, is it politically realistic to expect a declared end to the “war on terror” any time soon?

The “big question here is whether the president’s words translate into real policy or operational practice,” said CBS News senior national security analyst Juan Zarate. “Ultimately, the threats, as they continue to morph, will dictate how willing we are to constrain [counterterrorism] power.”

And the “political realities” of zero tolerance for terrorist attacks on the homeland will jeopardize “any attempts to limit our [counterterrorism] actions,” added Zarate, also a former deputy national security adviser in the George W. Bush administration.

“The most important advance in the speech was the acknowledgement that the war will end at a foreseeable point in the future,” former assistant secretary of state for public affairs P.J. Crowley told “This will require an unwinding of policies, authorities and tactics that have accumulated over the past dozen years.”

But if the immediate reaction to Mr. Obama’s speech is any indication, some in Congress are not so keen on abandoning America’s post-9/11 counterterrorism policies, with several Republican senators blasting the president for what they fear is a premature pivot.

The president’s speech “will be viewed by terrorists as a victory,” Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said in a statement. “Rather than continuing successful counterterrorism activities, we are changing course with no clear operational benefit.”

Play Video

GOP Sens. slam Obama’s suggestion that war on terror “must end”

“To somehow argue that al Qaeda is quote, ‘on the run,’ comes from a degree of unreality that is really incredible,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said after the president’s speech Thursday afternoon, arguing that the terrorist syndicate is expanding, not contracting. “To somehow think we can bring the authorization of the use of military force to closure conflicts with the reality of the facts on the ground.”

Crowley knocked Republicans for pushing a strategically and legally “unsustainable” policy, explaining, “We have invested significant powers in the president in a time of war, but to suggest that we will be engaged in war indefinitely fundamentally changes the Constitution, and I don’t know that the American people want that and I’m not sure that the congress wants that either.”

“Wars have beginnings, wars have endings, and wars have defined boundaries,” he said. “Without specifics, then it’s impossible to define success.”

And a failure to augment America’s counterterrorism posture, Crowley warned, could present dangers separate from the concerns voiced by GOP senators. “The concept of indefinite war plays into the al Qaeda narrative,” he explained, noting the grievances that foreign populations have voiced about America’s aggressively militarized counterterrorism policies. “When you project the prospect of indefinite war, that continues to suggest that the military will always be the primary instrument, and we have said many times that we can’t kill our way out of this problem.”

He added that the president “signaled very clearly that the challenge of terrorism is not going away,” and that he is only striving to combat that terrorism in different ways as the threat evolves.

Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, echoed Crowley on that point, telling in an email that the president’s speech was “hopeful…in intent in aspiration, but also conservative in not abandoning any existing tools of warfare prematurely.”

So where do we go from here? If the existing tools in the war on terror are increasingly difficult to situate within the 2001 authorization of military force, as Crowley and others argued, can Congress be expected to revise – or repeal outright – that authorization to accommodate evolving realities?

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., offered at least a glimmer of an opening to the president in a statement released before the speech, arguing that that the 2001 AUMF is “increasingly unrelated to current terrorist threats,” and welcoming discussions with the administration and bipartisan members of congress on “how best to pursue necessary updates to the authorization for use of military force.”

“I hope that Congress is open to a revision of the AUMF for a variety of reasons,” Crowley said, “but if we’re still at war, the American people need to know that we’re still at war and they need to be assured that what we continue to do in various places around the world is consistent with both domestic and international law.”

“The immediate response from members of Congress” on revising the AUMF “is not surprising but disappointing,” Crowley said.

Zarate added that, while the president’s “promise of eventual repeal is quite significant,” it “will never be done in this term.”

And as the promise of a long, hard slog awaits the president and those who support his push to pull Americans back from the fever pitch of a perpetual “war on terror,” some argued that an abundance of patience might be in order.

“The president suggested that at a point, the war against al Qaeda or the war on terror will end just like all wars eventually end,” Crowley said. “He didn’t say it would be tomorrow.”

  • prev
  • no next page

© 2013 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Israel Preparing New Syrian Airstrikes, Warns Assad Against Retaliation of Any Kind

[If, after all the stink that has been raised over the previous Israeli aggressions upon Syria in the midst of the US/Saudi war to destroy Syria, Israeli bombers attack again, and Assad fails to retaliate again, then it will prove some level of Israeli control over Assad (SEE: When the Hummus Hits the Fan, Israel Will Choose Bashar al-Assad Over Radical Islamists).  Such a Zionist revelation, coupled with recent news of an Israeli/Saudi alliance, will also reveal the true Patron/Client relationship between the Fascist Shit-hole and the Arab royal dictatorships, who have been the traditional alleged "protectors" of the rights of the Palestinian people.  The Mideast monarchies have given hope that one day they would avenge the "Nakba" ethnic-cleansing of Palestine by returning millions of refugees back to their rightful homes. 

Such is the nature of the "Bizarro world" that we live in. 

Good always turns-out to be evil in the end.  The power of weakness is a Christian delusion.  When we are meek before the enemies of the human race, then the most bloodthirsty criminals will determine the vile nature of the next step in the spiritual/psychological evolution of mankind.]


Report: Israel warns Assad not to retaliate to airstrikes


Israeli senior official tells New York Times Israel considering further military strikes on Syria to stop transfer of weapons to Hezbollah. ‘If Assad reacts, he will risk forfeiting his regime,’ he says

A senior Israeli official signaled on Wednesday that Israel was considering further military strikes on Syria to stop the transfer of advanced weapons to Islamic militants, and warned Syrian president Bashar Assad, that his government would face crippling consequences if it retaliated against Israel, the New York Times reported.

“Israel is determined to continue to prevent the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah . The transfer of such weapons to Hezbollah will destabilize and endanger the entire region,” the official said in an interview.

“If Syrian President Assad reacts by attacking Israel, or tries to strike Israel through his terrorist proxies,” the official said, “he will risk forfeiting his regime, for Israel will retaliate.”

The newspaper noted that the Israeli official has been briefed by high-level officials on the Syria situation in the past two days and had contacted The New York Times on Wednesday.

The paper considered the timing of the statements. “The precise motives for Israel’s warning were uncertain: Israel could be trying to restrain Syria’s behavior without undertaking further military action, or alerting other countries to another strike. That would ratchet up the tension in an already fraught situation in Syria,” the report said.

Foreign reports claim Israel carried out a total of three airstrikes in Syria since the civil war there began two years ago. The first allegedly took place in January when a convoy was bombed near the Syria-Lebanon border.

The target was reported to have been an arms shipment to Hezbollah that included Russian-made SA-17 missiles – possibly “game changing” weapons in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. Damascus later conceded there had been an attack claiming the target was a military research center in Jamraya.

The second airstrike allegedly occurred in early May and was reported by US media. The target was an arms shipment from Iran to Hezbollah. Another strike was reported 48 hours later. According to Syria, the Jamraya military center had been bombed again.

Israel did not comment on the reports.

Bankrupt Detroit—America In A Microcosm

Report by emergency manager says Detroit’s finances are crumbling, future is bleak

Associated Press

Detroit Finances_Cala.jpg

Detroit is broke and faces a bleak future given the precarious financial path it’s on, according to a new report out by the city’s state-appointed emergency manager.

The report was released late Sunday by bankruptcy attorney Kevyn Orr and is his first on Detroit’s finances since officially taking the job in March.

Under state law, the report was due within 45 days of Michigan’s newest emergency manager law taking effect. Orr’s spokesman Bill Nowling had warned last week that the report was an early look at Detroit’s fiscal condition and would not be glowing.

The summation is the latest blow to the city which came under state oversight in March when Gov. Rick Snyder selected Orr to handle Detroit’s finances. Then, the city estimated its budget deficit to be about $327 million. Detroit also has struggled over the past year with cash flow, relying on bond money held by the state to pay some of its bills.

But Orr reports that Detroit’s net cash position was negative $162 million as of April 26 and that the projected budget deficit is expected to reach $386 million in less than two months.

He also warns that the city’s financial health might change as more data is collected and analyzed.

“What is clear, however, is that continuing along the current path is an ill-advised and unacceptable course of action if the city is to be put on the path to a sustainable future.”

Detroit is the largest city in the country under state control and the city’s wallet is now Orr’s to command. He dictates how Detroit spends its money, something that had been the responsibility of first-term Mayor Dave Bing and the nine-member City Council.

In a statement Monday morning, Bing said his office plans a “comprehensive evaluation” of the report over the next day.

“A comprehensive review of the emergency manager’s financial and operating plan has yet to be conducted,” Bing said. “However, my initial review is that the assessment by Mr. Orr of the city’s financial condition is consistent with my administration’s findings.”

The city’s problems preceded Bing, a former steel supply company owner and professional basketball Hall-of-Famer.

“This has been a moving target. The historical numbers that have been reported were unreliable,” bankruptcy expert Doug Bernstein said. “Certainly, nobody was going to expect the numbers were to be better than were reported.”

Orr described the city’s operations as “dysfunctional and wasteful after years of budgetary restrictions, mismanagement, crippling operational practices and, in some cases, indifference or corruption.”

“Outdated policies, work practices, procedures and systems must be improved consistent with best practices of 21st century government,” he said in the report. “A well run city will promote cost savings and better customer service and will encourage private investment and a return of residents.”

The report also looked at attempts officials have made to fix problems.

“Recently, tens of millions of dollars of pension funding and other payments have been deferred to manage a severe liquidity crisis at the City,” Orr wrote in the report. “Even with these deferrals, the City has operated at a significant and increasing deficit. It is expected that the City will end this fiscal year with approximately $125 million in accumulated deferred obligations and a precariously low cash position.”

The city also owes more than $400 million in outstanding obligations, including $124 million used to provide funds for public improvement projects.

Orr’s report identifies areas of concern and those needing immediate attention.

It’s highly likely he will seek concessions from the city’s labor unions. At least five unions representing police and firefighters are seeking arbitration in collective bargaining with the city.

Detroit lacks, but is developing a “comprehensive labor strategy for managing” its relationships with its unions, according to Orr.

The emergency manager law gives Orr the authority to “reject, modify or terminate” collective bargaining agreements and concessions will be sought, he wrote in the report.

“This power will be exercised, if necessary or desirable, with the knowledge and understanding that many city employees already have absorbed wage and benefit reductions,” he wrote.

When taking the job, Orr said he hoped to avoid a municipal bankruptcy filing, but didn’t rule one out if Detroit can’t reach agreements with its many creditors and bond holders.

“If he already hasn’t, he should continue negotiating for savings necessary in collective bargain,” said Bernstein, a managing partner of the Banking, Bankruptcy and Creditors’ Rights Practice Group for the Michigan-based Plunkett Cooney law firm. “He has to negotiate reductions with bond holders and get as many concessions as he can. It’s an across-the-board savings.

“If he can’t get everything completed by consent, then there is no option but bankruptcy. It should be a last resort. It should be used sparingly. It is an option. When all else fails, that’s the last tool in the tool box.”

The report also notes the instability in leadership atop the city’s police department. Detroit has had five different police chiefs over the past five years with varying plans on how to best handle the city’s high crime rate.

“As a result, (the department’s) efficiency, effectiveness and employee morale are extremely low,” Orr wrote. “Based on recent reviews … and input from the Michigan State Police and other law enforcement agencies, it is clear that improvements in DPD’s operations and performance could be achieved through the strategic redeployment of resources, civilianization of administrative functions, other labor efficiencies and revenue enhancements.”

The department also could benefit from more and better technology, equipment, police cars and personnel.

Zbig Admits That Global Political Awakening Is Roadblock To Elite Domination

The more that the people “awaken” to the fact that a small segment of the human race considers the rest of us as their “cattle,” the faster that their power over us erodes.  Brzezenski is not sounding a prophetic message of hope to the world’s masses, he is warning the elite that their window of opportunity is slipping away.  That is the great part of True Democracy–the righteous, self-igniting outrage which is a natural bi-product of learning about grievous injustice or the intentional, institutional abuse of our rights or those of our fellow man.  The more we learn, the more dangerous we become to the elite. 

[If they hope to survive their great social experiment involving all of our lives, then they will move against us while they still can.--Peter]

When the Hummus Hits the Fan, Israel Will Choose Bashar al-Assad Over Radical Islamists

When the Hummus Hits the Fan, Israel Will Choose Bashar al-Assad Over Radical Islamists

Peter Chamberlin

Once again (just as in the recent US Embassy bombing in Ankara) a spectacular terrorist attack takes place in Turkey and the government immediately blames another obscure Marxist terrorist group, that they have conveniently resurrected from Turkey’s distant past.  The individual faction of this group has also allegedly been identified, as “Mirhac Ural,” who has recently been named by the Syrian opposition as the man behind the latest alleged “ethnic cleansing” in a town called Banias, along the Syrian coast (SEE:  Syria: Enter the ethnic cleanser of Banias).

Ural was originally a founding member of TPLP-C (Acilciler), a Marxist/Leftist/revolutionary group which was formed to fight US imperialism within Turkey, specifically, to act as a counter-force to US “Gladio”/”Gray Wolves” operations.  The TPLP-C supported its sister organization, the DHKP/C, which was blamed for the recent bombing outside the American Embassy in Ankara.

Mihraç Ural and Ocalan 2

Ural is also a close friend of terrorist PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan.  He allegedly introduced Bashar al-Assad to Ocalan.  It was allegedly Ural who persuaded Assad to play the “Kurdish” card against Erdogan.  Erdogan thought that he had trumped this move when he negotiated the latest peace agreement with the PKK, until Iraq’s government refused to accept the expatriated Kurdish guerillas.  The Kurds cannot be blamed for using Syrian-based assets against Turkey in this terror bombing in Reyhanli over the denial of new sanctuary in northern Iraq, because the attack was clearly intended to help the Turkish Prime Minister to persuade Obama to intervene in Syria on Turkey’s behalf, and this would not help the Kurds in any conceivable way.

It is claimed in the Saudi/Arab press that Bashar Assad has become desperate in his resistance to the Imperial terrorist invasion, choosing at this time to gather his forces to him in the center of his Alawite home turf, as he ethnically cleansing Syria of the majority Sunnis.  They have reinforced this ethnic cleansing theme in the reports emerging from the Imperial press Turkish outfit, Zaman, about an alleged “Banias massacre.”  This massacre supposedly took place the day after Ural was quoted on YouTube, saying, “We need to cleanse Banias of traitors at the earliest.”

From the video, if it is genuine, it seems that Ural could be a legitimate leader of a Syrian counter-terrorist cell.  If that is true, then he would certainly have plenty of reasons to want to close the supply lines from Turkey.  But there is much more to this incident than this simple explanation.  If Ural is an anti-Islamist fighter, then why would he be immortalized in the Islamist press?  The story about an “Alevi rump state” along the coast of Syria, builds upon Sunni fears that they are about to also be ethnically cleansed from around Hatay, Turkey–Giving them a good reason to fight a sectarian war.  This benefits the Saudi-Israeli alliance, up unto the point where the destabilization plot it increases ethnic tensions on the wrong side of the border.  Proper conflict management prevents the various sub-plots from getting out of control and, as a consequence, over-driving the main destabilization plot and thereby, unintentionally causing the opposite effects, instead of the planned reactions.

Always, in these destabilization plots, there are two primary parties working the target–the destabilizing power and a patsy partner within the target entity (corporation, organization, state) that is to be destabilized.  Since the Saudis and Israel are obviously working together to carry-out the Imperial diktat for the Middle East, then it is clear that it is the Saudis who will eventually be the losing party.  Whether they will lose more than they can afford to pay is the risk that they are willing to take to eject Assad.  It is not in Israel’s interests to see an Islamist victory in Syria, but the Saudis and friends erroneously believe that it is in theirs.  It is unlikely that the Saudis would support an effort to divide Syria if it would harm Turkey, or make it harder to get weapons over the Syrian border to the terrorist front.

If the bombing of Turkey is clearly not in the Islamists’ interests, but does no harm to Israeli interests, then it may mean that Israel is using another PKK-related terror group to rein-in Prince Bandar’s Islamist attack dogs, in order to save Assad, in order to maintain the quagmire in Syria.  Consider the points raised in this piece from Zaman (SEE:  Opposition commander: Assad defeated, we are fighting Iran, Hezbollah).  The Gulenist mouthpiece Zaman interviews an alleged Syrian rebel commander,  of the al-Tawhid Brigade, Commander Abdulkader Saleh.  He makes the extraordinary claim that Israel and Iran are secretly working together against the Syrian terrorists:

“Bashar al-Assad’s regime does not have the strength to carry on its battle against opposition fighters, adding that Iran and Hezbollah are the forces behind the protracted war….Iran and Hezbollah are the ones who are continuing the war in Syria,”  

“Furthermore, Iran and Hezbollah are cooperating with Israel to be able to support Assad. Assad has protected Israel’s border for 40 years,”

The first time I read the Saleh interview, I laughed it all off as nonsense, until I read the article in Foreign Affairs magazine, written by former head of Mossad, Efraim Halevy (1998 to 2002).  He affirmed to the world that Bashar Assad is Israel’s Man in Damascus (or “Why Jerusalem Doesn’t Want the Assad Regime to Fall”).
It is obviously in Israel’s interests to preserve the Assad dynasty, as opposed to the radical, unpredictable Islamists.  It may be impossible to determine the truth about Israeli conniving with Arab leaders until someone makes a big messy mistake.  If there were any honest news sources in the Middle East, then maybe we could figure-out just exactly who has benefitted from Israel’s latest bombings of Syria.  Would the Zionist state really have committed an “act of war” against Syria and Lebanon, just to prevent Hezbollah forces from upgrading a few of their missiles?  Was the Syrian military or government informant/traitor warning Israel about the imminent acquisition of “game-changing weapons” by Hezbollah, or by the Free Syrian Army?
If all of this proves to be true, that Israeli bombers were destroying heavy weapons and killing a lot of Syrian soldiers, in order to keep the weapons out of the hands of Syria’s terrorists, or that Mossad manipulated PKK-related killers to murder more than 40 innocent people in Reyhanli, then what does that say to the rest of the world, which is drowning in despair over the Syrian conflict?   What advantage is there in a Saud/Israeli alliance, when the Israelis are there to play the part of “spoiler” to all of the Islamist plans?  Above all else, Mossad/Israeli objectives are constant and unwavering, to establish Jewish dominance over every square inch of the Middle East, as a stepping stone to Jewish world dominance.  This justifies the spoiler role for Israel, support the Goyim’s plans, until the advantage shifts to Jewish interests, at which time all partners are double-crossed.  

the Saudi Gazette (SEE: Israel’s strategy in Syria ).

“But the bigger threat to Israel is the growth of democracy in the Arab world. If the Arab world were ever to become a democracy, it would expose Israel as the democracy fraud that it is.

Israel fears the Arab Spring because the Arab Spring augments the voices of freedom and calls for freedom throughout the region, not just in the Arab world, but in Israel too. And Israel is one of the most oppressive country’s in the Middle East. Although most Jewish citizens of Israel enjoy unprecedented freedoms and benefits from the state, non-Jews suffer simply because they are non-Jews. Christian Arabs and Muslim Arabs are victimized by Israel both as so-called “citizens” and as imprisoned victims in the occupied lands.”

If the Syrian terrorist forces have suffered devastating losses because of Israeli actions, then they will know the truth–That they have just been attacked by “friendly” forces allied to the Arabs and to the West….This can be expected to be reflected in the spirit of the anti-Assad forces and in their communiques to the outside world.  If they have been demoralized by these betrayals, then they can be expected to show that in subtle ways.  Their positive response to Western calls for an international Syrian peace conference, to be organized jointly by the US and Russia, may be just such a sign.

“Syria’s opposition will consult with backers Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey before it decides whether to take part in a peace conference proposed by the United States and Russia, its acting chief said Monday.”  Syria opposition to consult backers on peace talks.  This is a complete reversal to all previous dismissals of negotiations with Assad out of hand.  Such a conference confirms Obama’s complete reticence in expanding the Syrian conflict into a regional war.  If Erdogan was hoping that the terror bombings in Turkey would sway Obama’s opinion about bringing-in American or NATO support against Syria, then he is likely to be disappointed when they meet in DC this week.

As far as the possibility that Turkey will escalate the confrontation with Syria on its own (SEE: Turkey says it won’t be drawn into Syria conflct), there is very little chance that Erdogan will make this misstep, especially when he cannot really be certain exactly who is on his side.







Sister Megan Rice

On 8 May 2013, “an 83-year-old nun, Sister Megan Rice, who broke into a Tennessee depleted uranium storage facility in 2012 …. exposing a massive security hole at the nation’s only facility used to store radioactive conventional munitions, was convicted and sentenced to a term of up to 20 years in prison.”


Victim of the US government’s depleted uranium.

Victim of the US government’s depleted uranium.

Victim of the US government’s depleted uranium.

Victim of the US government’s depleted uranium.

Victim of the US government’s depleted uranium.

The USA is a Nazi state.

The USA has very bad karma.

If there is a Hell, it will be mainly filled with Americans, especially those from Tennessee.
Tennessee is filled with Nazis.

Lynching of an innocent black kid in the USA. aangirfan: DUMB WHITE PEOPLE

In 1889 the husband of Jessie Woolen confessed that he had killed his wife.

Earlier, in 1886, Eliza Woods, an African-American woman, was lynched in Jackson, Tennessee, after being wrongly accused of poisoning and killing Jessie Woolen.

A crowd of 1,000 was reportedly present when Woods was hanged naked.

Reportedly, the Nazi CIA tortures innocent Moslems to turn them into mind-controlled al Qaeda operatives to fight in Syria.

Turkey vs Iraq–We Are Witnessing the Next Regional War Setting-Up In The Middle East

[Obama and all previous American presidents like to lead, until plans go sour, then it becomes advantageous to let our underlings take the heat for us.  We are now letting Turkey "take one for the team" all over the Middle East and in parts of Central Asia, as they become the focal point for the anti-Iranian ambitions of the Gulf/Israeli coalition, who carry the ball for Western interests in the Mideast.  The Sunni Gulf States help provide the black ops financing to the Saudi Islamist project (otherwise known as "al-Qaeda"), which supplies the foot soldiers for Israel's terrorist operations throughout the Muslim world.  The Mossad, helps the CIA and the Pentagon to locate and acquire the weapons needed by this Sunni "Islamist" army, which facilitates CIA plans for a regional war, stretching from Central Africa into Pakistan.  In both Iraq and in Syria, Turkey is fully prepared to accept global oppobrium for having led the charge straight into a grand civil war within Islam itself. 

opprobrium \uh-PRO-bree-uhm\ , noun:
1. Disgrace; infamy; reproach mingled with contempt.
2. A cause or object of reproach or disgrace.

Perhaps the saddest part of this grand tragedy is that the tragic civil war unfolding in Iraq was always part of a cleverly crafted plan, a plan designed to amplify the great conflict within Islam, the never-ending argument between the Sunni and Shia faiths.  One side teaches that the Quran's authority and the mantle of The Prophet (PBUH) rests upon the actual bloodline of Mohammad (PBUH), the Shia opinion, the other side teaches that the Muslim elite should choose the most popular scholar of the Quran (Sunni).  The Sunnis even elevate the teachings of these Islamic scholars to a level of prominence equal to that of the Sacred Book itself. 

The American/British/Israeli "Zionist" plan to throw all of our weight behind the Sunnis in this conflict (intending to force a violent resolution of the issue) is obviously immoral, thus necessitating the American need for cover, whenever this ugly fact threatens to be revealed, that Christian/Judaic powers are waging a covert "Crusade" against Islam.  This Judeo-Christian Crusade to destroy Islam would never have been possible without the Sunni collaborators from the Middle East who have actually executed the plan.  Turkey stands at the top of this long list of Islamic traitor nations, who have collaborated intimately with the West to destroy the faith of 1.3 billion Muslims.  As long as the great Muslim majority can be kept in the dark about the Arab/Israeli union at the center of this Crusade they can be expected to allow all of this to continue indefinitely, enabling Turkey to escape that well-deserved popular revulsion for its acts of treachery.]

Saadun al-Dulaimi: Turkey controls Sunni protests against Maliki

Middle East Online

BAGHDAD – Acting Defence Minister Saadun al-Dulaimi on Sunday accused Turkey of controlling Sunni anti-government protests in Iraq, saying the demonstrations are a haven for “terrorists and killers.”

“There are foreign agendas controlling these sites,” Dulaimi said of the protests.

“It is like Anbar, or Mosul or Samarra are part of the Ottoman Empire,” he said, referring to Sunni areas in Iraq.

Areas of what is now Iraq were part of the Ottoman Empire, which was governed from Istanbul in what is now Turkey, before the empire’s dissolution after World War I.

Ties between Baghdad and Ankara have been strained by issues including Turkey hosting Tareq al-Hashemi, Iraq’s fugitive former vice president who has been sentenced to death on charges including murder.

Dulaimi also had harsh words for the protesters themselves.

“Shame… on those sites that are opening their doors to Istanbul or any other country,” he said.

“Protest sites have become a safe haven for terrorists and killers and those who call for strife, sectarianism and hate.”

The protests broke out in Sunni areas of Shiite-majority Iraq more than four months ago.

Demonstrators have called for the resignation of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, a Shiite, and criticised authorities for allegedly targeting their community with wrongful detentions and accusations of involvement in terrorism.

On April 23, security forces moved on protesters near the town of Hawijah in Kirkuk province, sparking clashes that killed 53 people.

Dozens more died in subsequent unrest that included revenge attacks targeting security forces, raising fears of a return to the all-out sectarian conflict that claimed tens of thousands of lives between 2006 and 2008.



Imran In Scathing Attack On Convenient “Islamist” Fazl–CHANGE PAKISTAN ON MAY 11

[Fazl and those like him, who treat the Islamic faith as a "convenient" political ladder to self-elevation are the bane of those with True Faith.  The Convenience of Political Islam for those slothful, evil men, who know neither morality nor honesty, is at the root of the global conflict within Islam itself.  The Saudis and those who feed at their trough have spread this corrupted message all over the Muslim world, while reinforcing its message with the largesse of treasure.  This has misled many.  Pakistani politicians have faithfully travelled this path for many decades.  It is time to change this equation, so that true democracy might really turn-out to be Pakistan's salvation. 


Imran in scathing attack on Fazl


PESHAWAR: In sharp contrast to his Sharif-bashing in Punjab, Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf chairman Imran Khan on Saturday turned his guns towards JUI-F leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman, accusing him of exploiting the sacred name of Islam to reach the corridors of power.

Speaking at election rallies in a whirlwind tour of what is known as the Peshawar Valley, the PTI chief said that Maulana Fazlur Rehman was shedding crocodile’s tears and was befooling the people again in the name of Islam. The Maulana had always politicised Islam to serve his own interests, he alleged.

The towns Imran Khan visited were Charsadda, Mardan, Swabi and Buner.

He charged that Maulana Fazlur Rehman, Awami National Party, Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari were responsible for destruction of the country. The time, he said, had come to hold looters accountable. “The nation will reject the plunderers of national wealth on May 11.”

Addressing a public meeting in Nowshera, Imran Khan said that no corrupt leader or party would be able to face PTI’s tsunami on the election day. He said the enthusiasm of youth would change the country and make a new Pakistan.

Lashing out at the JUI-F chief, he said that for five years, Maulana Fazl had kept mum over the bloodshed of thousands of innocent Pakhtuns and remained hand in glove with President Asif Zardari to stick to power.

The PTI chief claimed that his forewarning against joining the US-led “war on terror” had come true. “I never said it was our war as it neither was nor ever will be.

Pakistan drew fire to the peril of its people by readily becoming America’s lieutenant in this war for no reason”, he said.

In Charsadda, Imran Khan said that after coming to power, the PTI would restore the dignity of Pakistan in international community, which he said was badly damaged by the previous governments.

He continued to target Maulana Fazlur Rehman, saying that the JUI-(F leader was responsible for the killings of thousands of people during the Afghan war. Maulana Fazl never spoke against US drone strikes and military operations in the country, Imran said, adding that the JUI-F leader had adopted a dubious policy to deceive the masses.

Addressing a rally in Swabi, Imran Khan said the Pakistan Muslim League- Nawaz and the Pakistan People’s Party had dominated the country’s politics since 1988, but they had utterly failed to deliver the goods.

He said that the two major parties and their allies would taste a crushing defeat and the PTI tsunami would sweep them away from power corridors. “We are poised to say goodbye to all former political actors on May 11 and those who labelled us as Jew and Qadiani will not be able to re-enter the parliament to devour public money,” he said.

He bitterly criticised JUI-F leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman, President Asif Ali Zardari, Mian Nawaz Sharif and ANP president Asfandyar Wali Khan, calling them political actors and US stooges.

“They always look to the Americans’ nod and wink in all affairs,” he said. “If we are voted to power on May 11, we will neither remain under American influence nor work according to their agenda. “We oppose US drone strikes. If we are voted to power, there will be no drone attacks in Pakistan. The PTI will formulate an independent foreign policy,” he said.

He said that the former rulers indulged in corruption, looting national exchequer and inflicting a colossal loss to the country and its people. “This practice is not acceptable to PTI and the youth of the country have been awakened. Those who ruined the country could not rebuild it”, he said. “The PTI will make a new Pakistan where justice, peace and prosperity will prevail,” said Mr Khan.

YOUTH AND DREAM: In Buner, the PTI chief said the enthusiastic youths would make the dream of a new Pakistan come true on May 11.

He said that after coming to power the PTI would explore the local natural resources to end loadshedding and would create employment opportunities for the youth.

He pointed to the cheering crowd, saying that “these change-makers” will ensure a positive change on May 11.

In Mardan, Imran Khan said American drones would be shot down if his party was elected to power in the coming general elections.

All nominated candidates on three National Assembly and eight PK constituencies of Mardan were present on the occasion.

He said the PTI supporters had struggled and waited for the last 17 years to lay foundation of a new Pakistan and now the dawn was nigh as the people would witness the start of a new Pakistan on May 11.

He said the ANP promoted the culture of easy load and plundered both the people and the public money ruthlessly.

He hit out at the JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman for making propaganda against him (Imran Khan) that he had been backed by Jews and Qadyani.

“I am a true Muslim and believe that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the last prophet,” he said, asking Maulana Fazl to stop telling lies to the people. He accused Maulana Fazl of making money through corrupt practices and diesel permits.

The Maulana supported Pervez Musharraf and President Asif Ali Zardari “during their regimes of corruption”.

“It Is Our Right, It Is Our Duty” To Abolish Despotic Government–WE MIGHT NEED OUR GUNS


“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness….But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”–The Declaration of Independence.

Nearly A Third Of Americans Think Armed Revolution Might Be Necessary


Nearly A Third Of Americans Think Armed Revolution Might Be Necessary

Underpinning some concerns about new gun control legislation, a new poll found nearly a third of registered voters in the U.S. think an armed revolution might be necessary in the next few years in order to protect personal liberties.

The poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University’s PublicMind showed that 29 percent of voters think an armed revolution might be necessary, while another five percent are unsure.

Among those that think an armed revolution might be necessary, only 38 percent support additional gun control legislation, compared with 62 percent of those who don’t think an armed revolt will be needed.

Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson, said, “The differences in views of gun legislation are really a function of differences in what people believe guns are for.”

“If you truly believe an armed revolution is possible in the near future, you need weapons and you’re going to be wary about government efforts to take them away,” he added.

The poll found that just 18 percent of Democrats think an armed revolution may be necessary, compared to 44 percent of Republicans and 27 percent of independents.

Overall, fifty percent of registered voters, including 73 percent of Democrats, support new gun control laws, while 39 percent, including 65 percent of Republicans, are opposed to new laws.


The US Government War Against the People–ALL People

[It is not often that I find myself in agreement with VA editor Gordon Duff, but in the following article from PressTV,  he nails the dire issues we face squarely on the head.  It really takes a military man to understand the criminal activity associated with his everyday job.  He understands that the Pentagon/CIA mission is no longer to "protect freedom," but to destroy all remaining human freedom.  This should be becoming obvious to every serious observer of world events, because of America's new foreign policy of fomenting civil wars (Gordon's topic).  How could the Pentagon seriously claim to be the protector of our freedom, when they have weaponized religion itself, perhaps our most treasured human freedom?  The "Gangsters" who run this big show have promoted religious civil war from N. Africa to Pakistan, using their networks of private contractors.  This has been accomplished through multiple , false flag terror attacks upon Shia, hoping to ignite Shiite vendettas.  Wherever there is division within a targeted population, of any kind, then the CIA super-sleuths have ferreted it out, in order to exacerbate it.  What else should we expect in an "intelligence-driven war"? 
Kudos to Duff.]

America’s unspoken civil war


Over the past decades, America has planned and executed civil wars across the globe, turning nation after nation into a cesspool of blood, as “tool of foreign policy.” Now the cabal that has kept the world aflame for a lifetime or longer has now turned inward, targeting America.

Far from “conspiracy theory,” the highest levels of America’s military and intelligence are, not just aware, aided by privatization of key security functions now “outsourced” to what can only be described as America’s real enemies.

The term those assigned the hopeless task of protecting America from the vast criminal empire that has seized “the high ground” in every aspect of society and culture use to describe what may well have already destroyed America is “bifurcation.”

Deep divisions within the military, intelligence and law enforcement organizations, divisions that now extent into the hundreds of “contractor” groups run by retirees, is now nearing open warfare.

The treasonous group, calling themselves “right wing patriots,” a bizarre combination of adherents to the “Dominionist” apocalypse death cult, “middle management” of the drug cartels and Bolshevik “Neocons” totalitarians, have proven themselves willing and capable of any outrage.

Turning away from freedom

Since the appointment of Bush (43) by the Supreme Court, a move increasingly accepted as a coup de etat by legal experts, a “nation within a nation” was established, answerable to no laws, domestic or international, no controls, no regulations, a government that faces no elections, no limitations on power, a “criminal gang” capable of waging war, controlling currencies and crashing economies.

The “Bifurcated Government of the United States,” a conglomeration of political extremists, secret societies and corporate criminals, has now turned “inward” after a decade of staging terror attacks, waging wars, looting economies and murdering millions.

Gangster rule

When president Obama, last week at the White House Correspondents Dinner, spoke of Sheldon Adelson’s $100,000,000 personal “contributions” meant to buy the American presidential election, it was an admission of the “bifurcation” threat.

Who “they” can’t buy, they smear or bankrupt or imprison or murder. With control of several special operations commands and most military and “intelligence” (read “narcotics smuggling”) contractors, murders, packaged as suicides, illnesses, accidents or “street crimes,” have become commonplace.

America’s second government

Even the drones America has used to keep Afghanistan aflame as a cover for its $100 billion narcotics empire, stretching from Kabul to Bagdad to Dubai to Baku to Tel Aviv to Kosovo to Zurich, have now been brought home, armed and operating over America.

While the pop-culture media, very much a part of the mechanism of entropy, is tasked with its smears and deceptions, very real conspiracies, many highly classified, are now “on the radar” as a “clear and present danger” to America’s security.

Today’s story on Syria, another hoax claiming the US has announced plans for military intervention, is “business as usual” for America’s “not so secret” criminal masters.
Even when the American government refuses to accepted falsified intelligence or to be bullied or blackmailed into treason, the controlled media plants hoax articles too often used as “open source intelligence” by world leaders whose “handlers” are blind to internal struggles in the US.

The recognized threats

From the list of “official” threats that can never be spoken of:

1. Five acts of terrorism against America are officially recognized, under highest security classification, as “false flag.” Among these are Oklahoma City, 9/11, Sandy Hook and Boston.
2. The United States Supreme Court is controlled, a combination of bribery, blackmail and mental instability, allowing, not just the Bush 943) coup but the suspension of all constitutional rights and full control of America’s electoral process by drug cartels. (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 -2010)
3. A Bush policy of forced integration of defense and intelligence firms with partner companies in Israel has created a “superhighway” for espionage, placing America’s most sensitive military “tech” on the world market.
4. Erosion of individual rights and a dramatic increase in unrestricted private data-mining, not just Google, but literal control of America’s communications infrastructure by foreign corporations tied to intelligence services, has quietly brought the long feared Orwellian threat to full fruition, shielded by its control of all information that would expose its capabilities and dire purpose.
5. Key defense mechanisms, originally seized by the Bush/Cheney administration and moved outside accountability have allowed extremist political groups inside the US to wage war using government resources. Most notable was the 2007 Barksdale/Minot nuclear incident where a religious cult seized a B-52 bomber armed with nine thermonuclear missiles, some of which are unaccounted.
6. Under the guise of a secret protocol with Mexico to protect both nations from powerful drug cartels, heavily armed drones have been deployed up to 1000 miles inside the US. These missions are both unauthorized by any constituted authority and quite likely represent a form of “piracy.”“Bifurcation” groups working with cartels can, at will, use these lethal systems to simulate disasters, terror plots or eliminate potential opposition.
7. Due to, not just massive political bribery through “Citizens United” but illegal redistricting called “Gerrymandering,” the US House of Representatives has been fully compromised, using its legislative role to war against America on behalf of criminal groups that now control all leadership positions in that legislative body. Their role has been to paralyze the American government, protecting the interests of the criminal elements thatare, at times, themselves shocked and sickened at the excesses of American politicians whose moral and ethical standards would leave even Roman Emperor Caligula uneasy.


During the 1930s, Marine General Smedley Butler, spoke out against the use of America’s military might by organized crime. In 1934, a treasonous cabal from the American Legion (a veterans groups tied to Italy’s Mussolini), Dupont Corporation and Merrill Lynch, tried to hire Butler to lead an insurrection, arresting the president and establishing a police state under Wall Street control.

No student of American history is ever taught of this. Even the internet has been cleansed of any mention of it, any mention that resembles the truth, that is.

Butler is unique in that he is the first and only military leader, a two time Medal of Honor winner, to speak out openly against, not just “gangsterism,” but the control Wall Street has had over the American military and, through the service academies, the officer corps, typically feudal, typically resentful of America’s dwindling freedoms.

From 1933, Smedley butler:

“I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country’s most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

Clearly, Butler foresaw the current state of affairs. America’s military had been used at home many times, to rout veteran “bonus marchers,” to wage war on workers seeking unionization and a living wage and today, a “bifurcated” America, with key elements of taxpayer funded agencies and private “contractors” tirelessly waging a treasonous war on America’s people and their last remaining freedoms.




Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran, a combat infantryman, and Senior Editor at Veterans Today. His career has included extensive experience in international banking along with such diverse areas as consulting on counter insurgency, defense technologies or acting as diplomatic representative for UN humanitarian and economic development efforts. Gordon Duff has traveled to over 80 nations. His articles are published around the world and translated into a number of languages. He is regularly on TV and radio, a popular and sometimes controversial guest. More Press TV articles by Gordon Duff


The American Plan To Liberalize “Islam”

[In 2003, long before any hint of an "Arab spring," the RAND Corp. produced the following document (click on title for pdf).  This is the strategy which has been followed by Barack Obama since Day One.  If the strategy is not a crime against humanity, or at least against religion itself, then it should be, since no man has the right to alter someone else's religion.  That is exactly what this strategy proposes and Obama has been fully committed to, changing Islam itself, from the inside out.  Liberalize it, so that it becomes as acceptable to the international community as any other religion.  This means removing all of the bloody parts of Islam, in order to manufacture a new liberalized product which resembles Sufi Islam, which is an acceptable substitute for Wahhabism. 

RAND proposes that we now introduce this Sufi-like anti-Wahhabism, in order to undo what we have done with the CIA's grand experiment in using American military power as a tool for social engineering.  The weaponized "Islam," followed by the weaponization of the Afghan "mujahedeen," who had received the new synthetic "Islam," produced the first generation of "jihadi" "holy warriors."   The incalculable damage which has been done to peace-loving Islam since then, by the introduction of the CIA's weaponized Wahhabi Islam to the Muslim world over the past three-and-a-half decades, is now to be undone in just one "Spring," or a half-dozen?  The scale of the arrogance shown by the American meddlers in purposely doing this, and now attempting to undo what they have done, in order to gain further advantage, is on the level of a Hitler, or a Mussolini. 

When is Obama, or some other evil wise ass going to straighten-out the deficiencies in Christianity, or (God forbid!) Judaism?  We have no right by any stretch of the imagination to do what has been laid-out in the 88-pages of Civil Democratic Islam.]

Civil Democratic Islam


2003 RAND Corporation

The Islamic world is involved in a struggle to determine its own nature and values,
with serious implications for the future. What role can the rest of the world,
threatened and affected as it is by this struggle, play in bringing about a more
peaceful and positive outcome?
Devising a judicious approach requires a finely grained understanding of the
ongoing ideological struggle within Islam, to identify appropriate partners and
set realistic goals and means to encourage its evolution in a positive way.
The United States has three goals in regard to politicized Islam. First, it wants to
prevent the spread of extremism and violence. Second, in doing so, it needs to
avoid the impression that the United States is “opposed to Islam.” And third, in
the longer run, it must find ways to help address the deeper economic, social,
and political causes feeding Islamic radicalism and to encourage a move toward
development and democratization.
The debates and conflicts that mark the current Islamic world can make the
picture seem confusing. It becomes easier to sort the actors if one thinks of
them not as belonging to distinct categories but as falling along a spectrum.
Their views on certain critical marker issues help to locate them correctly on
this spectrum.
It is then possible to see which part of the spectrum is generally compatible
with our values, and which is fundamentally inimical. On this basis, this report
identifies components of a specific strategy.
This report should be of interest to scholars, policymakers, students, and all
others interested in the Middle East, Islam, and political Islam.


Chapter Three

The problem of Islamic radicalism—its manifestations, its underlying causes,
and its propensity to meld with other social and political conflicts—makes this
an extremely complex issue. There is no one correct approach or response, and
there certainly is not one identifiable “fix.” Instead, what is called for is a mixed
approach that rests on firm and decisive commitment to our own fundamental
values and understands that tactical and interest-driven cooperation is simply
not possible with some of the actors and positions along the spectrum of
political Islam but that possesses a sequence of flexible postures suitable to
different contexts, populations, and countries.
This approach seeks to strengthen and foster the development of civil, democratic
Islam and of modernization and development. It provides the necessary
flexibility to deal with different settings appropriately, and it reduces the danger
of unintended negative effects. The following outline describes what such a
strategy might look like:
• Support the modernists first, enhancing their vision of Islam over that of the
traditionalists by providing them with a broad platform to articulate and
disseminate their views. They, not the traditionalists, should be cultivated
and publicly presented as the face of contemporary Islam.
• Support the secularists on a case-by-case basis.
• Encourage secular civic and cultural institutions and programs.
• Back the traditionalists enough to keep them viable against the fundamentalists
(if and wherever those are our choices) and to prevent a closer
alliance between these two groups. Within the traditionalists, we should
selectively encourage those who are the relatively better match for modern
civil society. For example, some Islamic law schools are far more amenable
to our view of justice and human rights than are others.
• Finally, oppose the fundamentalists energetically by striking at vulnerabilities
in their Islamic and ideological postures, exposing things that neither the youthful idealists in their target audience nor the pious traditionalists
can approve of: their corruption, their brutality, their ignorance, the bias
and manifest errors in their application of Islam, and their inability to lead
and govern.
Some additional, more-direct activities will be necessary to support this overall
approach, such as the following:
• Help break the fundamentalist and traditionalist monopoly on defining,
explaining, and interpreting Islam.
• Identify appropriate modernist scholars to manage a Web site that answers
questions related to daily conduct and offers modernist Islamic legal opinions.
• Encourage modernist scholars to write textbooks and develop curricula.
• Publish introductory books at subsidized rates to make them as available as
the tractates of fundamentalist authors.
• Use popular regional media, such as radio, to introduce the thoughts and
practices of modernist Muslims to broaden the international view of what
Islam means and can mean.


Appendix C

The following describes, in somewhat more detail, how the recommendations
in Chapter Three could be implemented.
Build Up a Modernist Leadership
Create role models and leaders. Modernists who risk persecution should be
built up as courageous civil rights leaders, which indeed they are. There are
precedents showing that this can work. Nawal Al-Sadaawi achieved international
renown for enduring persecution, harassment, and attempts to prosecute
her in court on account of her principled modernist stand on issues related to
freedom of speech, public health, and the status of women in Egypt. Afghan
interim minister of women’s affairs Sima Samar inspired many with her outspoken
stance on human rights, women’s rights, civil law, and democracy, for
which she faced death threats by fundamentalists. There are many others
throughout the Islamic world whose leadership can similarly be featured.
Include modern, mainstream Muslims in political “outreach” events, to reflect
demographic reality. Avoid artificially “over-Islamizing the Muslims”; instead,
accustom them to the idea that Islam can be just one part of their identity.1
Support civil society in the Islamic world. This is particularly important in situations
of crisis, refugee situations, and postconflict situations, in which a democratic
leadership can emerge and gain practical experience through local NGOs
and other civic associations. On the rural and neighborhood levels, as well, civic
associations are an infrastructure that can lead to political education and a
moderate, modernist leadership.
1This idea is more extensively developed in Al-Azmah (1993). Al-Azmah is himself a “Euro-Muslim.”


Develop Western Islam: German Islam, U.S. Islam, etc. This requires gaining a
better understanding of the composition, as well as the evolving practice and
thought, in these communities. Assist in eliciting, expressing, and “codifying”
their views.
Go on the Offensive Against Fundamentalists
Delegitimize individuals and positions associated with extremist Islam. Make
public the immoral and hypocritical deeds and statements of self-styled fundamentalist
authorities. Allegations of Western immorality and shallowness are
a cherished part of the fundamentalist arsenal, but they are themselves highly
vulnerable on these fronts.
Encourage Arab journalists in popular media to do investigative reporting on
the lives and personal habits and corruption of fundamentalist leaders. Publicize
incidents that highlight their brutality—such as the recent deaths of Saudi
schoolgirls in a fire when religious police physically prevented Saudi firefighters
from evacuating the girls from their burning school building because they were
not veiled—and their hypocrisy, illustrated by the Saudi religious establishment,
which forbids migrant workers from receiving photographs of their newborn
children on the grounds that Islam forbids human images, while their own
offices are decorated by huge portraits of King Faisal, etc. The role of “charitable
organizations” in financing terror and extremism has begun to be more clearly
understood since September 11 but also deserves ongoing and public investigation.
Assertively Promote the Values of Western Democratic Modernity
Create and propagate a model for prosperous, moderate Islam by identifying
and actively aiding countries or regions or groups with the appropriate views.
Publicize their successes. For example, the 1999 Beirut Declaration for Justice
and the National Action Charter of Bahrain broke new ground in the application
of Islamic law and should be made more widely known.
Criticize the flaws of traditionalism. Show the causal relationship between
traditionalism and underdevelopment, as well as the causal relationship
between modernity, democracy, progress, and prosperity. Do fundamentalism
and traditionalism offer Islamic society a healthy, prosperous future? Are they
successfully meeting the challenges of the day? Do they compare well with
other social orders? The UNDP social development report (UNDP, 2002) points
clearly to the linkage between a stagnant social order, oppression of women,
poor educational quality, and backwardness. This message should be energetically
taken to Muslim populations.

Build up the stature of Sufism. Encourage countries with strong Sufi traditions
to focus on that part of their history and to include it in their school curricula.
Pay more attention to Sufi Islam.
Focus on Education and Youth
Committed adult adherents of radical Islamic movements are unlikely to be
easily influenced into changing their views. The next generation, however, can
conceivably be influenced if the message of democratic Islam can be inserted
into school curricula and public media in the pertinent countries. Radical fundamentalists
have established massive efforts to gain influence over education
and are unlikely to give up established footholds without a struggle. An equally
energetic effort will be required to wrest this terrain from them.
Thus, to accomplish the overall strategy, it will be necessary to
• Support the modernists and mainstream secularists first, by
— publishing and distribute their works
— encouraging them to write for mass audiences and youth
— introducing their views into the curriculum of Islamic education
— giving them a public platform
— making their opinions and judgments on fundamental questions of
religious interpretation available to a mass audience, in competition
with those of the fundamentalists and traditionalists, who already have
Web sites, publishing houses, schools, institutes, and many other vehicles
for disseminating their views
— positioning modernism as a “counterculture” option for disaffected
Islamic youth
— facilitating and encouraging awareness of pre- and non-Islamic history
and culture, in the media and in the curricula of relevant countries
— encouraging and supporting secular civic and cultural institutions and
• Support the traditionalists against the fundamentalists, by
— publicizing traditionalist criticism of fundamentalist violence and
extremism and encouraging disagreements between traditionalists and
— preventing alliances between traditionalists and fundamentalists

— encouraging cooperation between modernists and traditionalists who
are closer to that end of the spectrum, increase the presence and profile
of modernists in traditionalist institutions
— discriminating between different sectors of traditionalism
— encouraging those with a greater affinity to modernism—such as the
Hanafi law school as opposed to others to issue religious opinions that,
by becoming popularized, can weaken the authority of backward
Wahhabi religious rulings
— encouraging the popularity and acceptance of Sufism.
• Confront and oppose the fundamentalists, by
— challenging and exposing the inaccuracies in their views on questions
of Islamic interpretation
— exposing their relationships with illegal groups and activities
— publicizing the consequences of their violent acts
— demonstrating their inability to rule to the benefit and positive development
of their communities
— targeting these messages especially to young people, to pious traditionalist
populations, to Muslim minorities in the West, and to women
— avoiding showing respect or admiration for the violent feats of fundamentalist
extremists and terrorists, instead casting them as disturbed
and cowardly rather than evil heroes
— encouraging journalists to investigate issues of corruption, hypocrisy,
and immorality in fundamentalist and terrorist circles.
• Selectively support secularists, by
— encouraging recognition of fundamentalism as a shared enemy, discouraging
secularist alliances with anti-U.S. forces on such grounds as
nationalism and leftist ideology
— supporting the idea that religion and the state can be separate in Islam,
too, and that this does not endanger the faith.

Obama Keeps Resisting Zionist “Red Lines,” Tripwires, Forcing His Hand On Syria

[Both Zionist Central in London and that shitty little Zionist cesspool in the Middle East urge Obama to accept whatever "evidence" that they produce of any chemical weapons's use within Syria as proof that the "red lines" have been crossed, even if the lines were violated by the terrorist rebels, instead of by Assad (SEE:  'Growing evidence' of chemical weapons use in Syria - UK).  They have managed to recreate the same scenario within Syria that they almost pulled-off in Iran, with the help of different terrorist friends of America, the anti-Shia MEK/Jundullah.  Just as he refused to cave-in to previous Zionist pressure to launch an airborne aggression against Iran, he is apparently resisting pressure to cross the line which he has drawn in the sand with his own hand.  This doesn't mean to imply that he is secretly a good guy, but that he does not like it when other people try to force him to take unpleasant, ill-advised actions.  Don't read this as hope on my part that Obama will choose to do the right thing when the time comes, because I still firmly believe that he will not hesitate to push the "big red button" when the time comes, probably with a big smile on his lips.  He will be smiling  when he follows his master's order to unleash Armegeddon, pleased with himself for having ignored the hyped screams of the Apocalyptic cheerleaders like McCain, Cameron and Netanyahu.  Mistakes have been made by all of the team players who have misjudged the resiliency of Assad and the core strengths of the Lebanese resistance forces, but jumping the gun on WWIII will not improve the Empire's chances of success.  The time for the Greater Middle East War has passed, since the momentum for that war has been missed by both Bush and Obama.  Bush missed it on several occasions, after Afghanistan, after Iraq and after Israel failed in Lebanon in 2006, failing yet one more time, after the failed Georgian tangent in 2008.  Obama's big failure was in his hesitation in the early days of the anti-Syrian war.   Failure to jump on the war wagon there gave Russia time to turn the tables.  Odds are, the American/world economies will be fully depleted before Obama can organize another attempt, meaning that nothing has changed except for the American ability to control the flow of future events.  World War III will probably happen by accident, the way it should all go down.  Taking steps to avoid such an extinction-level event should by the number one priority with all earthly governments.]

White House: Obama’s red line not crossed on Syria chemical weapons

cbs this-morning

The U.S. has acknowledged evidence of a small-scale nerve gas attack in Syria. But, has Syria crossed President Obama's red line and will the U.S. intervene militarily? Major Garrett reports.

(CBS News) For the first time, the White House says chemical weapons have been used in Syria’s civil war. The Obama administration said it believes President Bashar Al-Assad used sarin gas on people last month. That report is leading some to ask if the U.S. is ready to consider military action.

The White House said the evidence of Syrian chemical weapons attacks is still too thin and President Obama’s red line has not been crossed, and that means military intervention by the United States in the Syrian civil war is not imminent and not guaranteed but more study and investigation is needed.

Syria has likely used chemical weapons on a “small scale,” Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday.Hagel was the first to confirm the startling news. He read from a prepared statement: “The Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin.”

But Hagel, consistent with administration policy, laced his announcement with carefully crafted caveats. Hagel said, “We still have uncertainties about what was used, what kind of chemicals was used, where it was used, who used it.”

Secretary of State John Kerry told lawmakers that Syria used chemical weapons twice last month, once near Damascus and once in Aleppo. Victims appeared to have been gassed.

Mr. Obama has repeatedly said Syrian use of chemical weapons would cross a red line and could move the U.S. closer to military intervention in the Syrian civil war.

Mr. Obama said on Aug. 20, 2012, “A red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus.”

But top White House advisers insist the red line has not been crossed. In letters to Congress, the administration said it needs more proof — in its words, “credible and corroborated facts.”

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who has continuously pressed Mr. Obama to intervene, said the president is ducking his own standard. “The president of the United States said that this would be a red line if they used chemical weapons. The president of the United States has now told us that they used chemical weapons,” McCain said. “We must give the opposition the capability to drive out Bashar Assad once and for all.”

U.S. intelligence says it has “varying degrees of confidence” Syria used chemical weapons. But the U.S. isn’t the only nation hedging its bets. British intelligence says it has “persuasive information chemical weapons were used.” French intelligence says it has clues but no proof. However, CBS News’ Major Garrett reported, “Definitive proof may be very hard to find amid the raging Syrian civil war.”

© 2013 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Have You Ever Heard Of “Al-CIA-da” Attacking Iran?

[I, myself, have been one of the loudest voices in the past, protesting that "Al Qaeda is Sunni and hates Iran," but the longer this game goes on, the more I come to see that Shia Iran has been an ally of the real "al-CIA-da" all along.  After all, wasn't it Iran that supplied most of the first recruits from the Afghan mujahedeen to ship to Bosnia for Clinton? (SEE:  Dutch inquiry into the 1995 Srebrenica massacre).  Can anyone remember ever hearing of an "al-CIA-da" attack upon Iran, or Shiites, for that matter?  For Westerners to admit that previous murders and terrorist attacks have been committed by the same bunch of intelligence operatives that we normally would label "al-Qaeda" anywhere else, would be an admission of our own major guilt in international terrorism, or our ISI surrogates, or the Saudis. 

As far as the timely "al-CIA-da" plots to bomb trains in Canada, involving Iranian sources, anything is possible in this messed-up world    (SEE: Conservative anti-terror bill and arrests match up beautifully, don’t they: Mallick).  The big problem with this bit of terrorist news, which coincidentally supports currently debated Canadian anti-terror legislation, is that it is old news; the reported plot is at least one year old (dormant). Like all news concerning the terrorist phenomenon known as "al-CIA-da," it is all conveniently-timed hype, intended to ease the democratic transition into a total police state.  Canada is behaving like a good subservient government should act.  Ottawa is walking the rocky path to Fascism blazed by Cheney and Bush.]

“No attack was imminent and the tip was a year old.”

Iran’s unlikely Al Qaeda ties fluid, murky and deteriorating 


al-zawahiri-file-670Al Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri. — File photo

When Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri spoke in an audio message broadcast to supporters earlier this month, he had harsh words for Iran. Its true face, he said, had been unmasked by its support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad against fighters loyal to Al Qaeda.

Yet it is symptomatic of the peculiar relationship between Tehran and Al Qaeda that in the same month Canadian police would accuse “Al Qaeda elements in Iran” of backing a plot to derail a passenger train.

Shia Muslim Iran and strict Sunni militant group Al Qaeda are natural enemies on either side of the Muslim world’s great sectarian divide.

Yet intelligence veterans say that Iran, in pursuing its own ends, has in the past taken advantage of Al Qaeda fighters’ need to shelter or pass through its territory. It is a murky relationship that has been fluid and, say some in the intelligence community, has deteriorated in recent years.

“I wouldn’t even call it a marriage of convenience. It’s an association of convenience,” said Richard Barrett, former head of counter-terrorism for Britain’s MI6 Secret Intelligence Service and later head of the UN Security Council’s monitoring team maintaining the world body’s Al Qaeda and Taliban sanctions blacklists.

“It’s not a strategic alliance. An Al Qaeda presence may suit the Iranians because it allows them to keep an eye on them, it gives them leverage in the form of people who are akin to hostages,” he added.

“There has been a lot of travel between Iraq and Pakistan and I cannot imagine the Iranians are not aware of that,” he said. But it was unlikely that Iran would take the risk of actively collaborating with Al Qaeda against North America: “I don’t think the Iranians would take it kindly if it turned out that there had been plotting by Al Qaeda on their territory.”

Canadian police have said there was no sign the plot had been sponsored by the Iranian state. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said Al Qaeda’s beliefs were in no way consistent with Tehran’s.

As yet, many details of the alleged plot remain unclear. However, a US government source cited a network of Al Qaeda fixers based in the Iranian city of Zahedan, close to the borders of both Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The source said they served as go-betweens, travel agents and financial intermediaries for Al Qaeda operatives and cells operating in Pakistan and moving through the area.

Another Western source suggested that with relations deteriorating between Iran and Al Qaeda over the civil war in Syria, Tehran had acted recently to stop fighters crossing through from Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) to join Islamist militants fighting to overthrow Assad.

“Although the relationship between Iran and Al Qaeda has always been strained, this worsened after 2011 when the two sides lined up on opposite sides in the Syrian civil war,” said Shashank Joshi, a researcher at the Royal United Services Institute think-tank in London.

“Syria’s strongest rebel group is allied to Al Qaeda, and both have sharply criticised Iranian support for the Assad regime.”

It is unclear whether the planning for the alleged Canadian plot, which Canadian police said had been in the works for some time, was carried out before Syria’s war deepened the strain between Tehran and Al Qaeda.

“There has been a loosening of the ties,” said Barrett, noting that documents released after US forces caught and killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in 2011 showed the Al Qaeda leader saying he was not able to trust the Iranians at all.

“Since then we have Zawahri castigating Iran quite recently. So clearly something had gone wrong.”

Iranian control far from clear

If indeed the Al Qaeda network was based in and around Zahedan — which lies on the main road to Pakistan and is the capital of Sistan-Baluchestan province — it is far from clear how easy it would be for Iran to control.

The region is home to a toxic mix of drug smuggling, illicit trade and gun-running by insurgents. Afghan refugees long ago crowded into poor neighborhoods on the outskirts of Zahedan, although Iran, like Pakistan, periodically tries to push them out, arguing they are a security risk.

Iranian authorities have also been battling a Sunni insurgency of their own in recent years by ethnic Baloch complaining of discrimination. The Jundollah group has claimed several attacks including a bombing that killed 42 people in 2009 — there is no sign it is linked to Al Qaeda, though it is often confused with a Pakistan-based group of the same name.

At the same time, on the Pakistan side of the border, Pakistani security forces are fighting an insurgency by secular Baloch separatists, while Al-Qaeda linked militants in the Sunni sectarian Lashkar-i-Jhangvi group have carried out a string of attacks against the Shia population there.

Pragmatic approach

Despite a common Western misconception that Iran, as the pre-eminent Shia power, is motivated by religion, it has always been much more pragmatic in pursuing its national interest, analysts and diplomats say, allowing it to turn a blind eye to Sunni Al Qaeda using its territory.

“The thing that has stymied people is that ‘Al Qaeda is Sunni and the rest of the people we are talking about here are Shia. They don’t mix and match.’ Well, they do. And they do it whenever they want to. They just look the other way,” said Nick Pratt, a retired US Marines colonel and CIA officer now with the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies.

Before the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, Iran cooperated with India and Russia against the Pakistan-backed Taliban then in power in Kabul. When Al Qaeda members fled Afghanistan after the overthrow of the Taliban, it detained them under house arrest in Tehran.

“Since 9/11 a number of senior Al Qaeda figures including one of Osama bin Laden’s sons and senior commander and strategist Saif al Adel made their way to Iran,” said Nigel Inkster, former director of operations for Britain’s MI6.

“They were detained under quite strict conditions by the Iranian authorities who subsequently sought to use them as a bargaining chip with the US government in their ongoing dispute about Iran’s nuclear program,” added Inkster, who is now director of Transnational Threats and Political Risk at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Vahid Brown, a US-based researcher who has written extensively on Al Qaeda, said in an article on the Jihadica website earlier this year that the men who fled to Iran constituted a dissident faction within Al Qaeda, which in recent years had become increasingly vocal in their criticism of Osama and Zawahiri.

Divided by their views on the advisability of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, broadly speaking, “the pro-9/11 group, including bin Laden and Zawahiri, fled to Pakistan, while the anti-9/11 group ended up in Iran, where they were placed under house arrest by Iranian authorities,” he wrote.

Iran had been willing to cooperate with the United States on Afghanistan initially, but relations soured after Tehran was denounced by then President George W. Bush as part of the “axis of evil” in 2002 and worsened further after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Later, analysts say, Tehran allowed Al Qaeda members — among them Al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — to transit through Iran.

But Iran has been vulnerable to Al Qaeda as well. After one of its diplomats was kidnapped in Pakistan some years ago it released some of the Al Qaeda members it had under house arrest in exchange for his freedom, according to Pakistani media reports.

“About 18 months ago the Iranians released most if not all of those they were holding, for reasons still not entirely clear,” said Inkster.

“There may well be a residual AQ presence in Iran though I would be cautious about presenting it as something very structured or hierarchic,” he added.

“AQ is far from being the organisation it once was and what matters more are relationships between like-minded individuals. And that may well be what we are seeing in the Canada case. There seems to be no evidence of Iranian official involvement.”

When Will We Learn?–Beirut Embassy Bombing Thirty Years Later

When Will We Ever Learn?


Franklin Lamb
Beirut — This observer has no idea if the American Ambassador here in Beirut, Maura Connelly or Secretary of State John Kerry has ever listened to Marlene Dietrich’s classic October 1965 performance of Pete Seeger’s “Where Have All The Flowers Gone,” still stunning, deeply moving and available on the Internet.But on this 30th anniversary of the bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut I found myself near the old embassy site on the sea front for personal reasons, and stepped down the block below the American University of Beirut to meet a friend at Starbucks. When I entered, maybe the 5th time in my life
I have been to a Starbucks since I don’t drink coffee and for political reasons tend to avoid the chain, I noticed someone was playing Dietrich’s classic.

Having just read reports in the Lebanese media  concerning  the American Ambassador and Secretary of  State’s political comments on the embassy events, three decades on, Marlene’s  enchanting, deep voiced, “When will they ever learn,?” numbed me.

Kerry slammed Hezbollah in the Lebanese media, saying “On this 30th anniversary of the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, the United States celebrates 30 years of close cooperation with the people of Lebanon that proves the enemies of democracy failed,” he said from
Washington, “especially at the people-to-people level, and this proves the terrorists’ goals were not achieved.”

For her part, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Maura Connelly said the bombing opened a new chapter in America’s history in the Middle East. Connelly said the explosion taught Americans that “peaceful intentions were not enough to protect us from those who would use terror to achieve their aims in the Middle East.”

What both officials avoid mentioning is the subject of who was committing the terrorism in Lebanon when these events, including the US Marine Barracks and the Embassy again in 1984, occurred.

Regarding Hezbollah, which would not be a formed organization ready to announce itself publicly until 1985, CIA operative Robert Baer and his team assigned to investigate the Embassy bombing concluded there was not enough reliable evidence to support the theory that the Party of God was
responsible. Among the more than three dozen militias of various persuasions operating in Beirut alone in the early 1980’s, only Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.

The American officials also failed to take into consideration the fact, never denied by Washington, that at that time the US Embassy had the largest contingent of CIA agents working out of the Embassy and performing command and control functions for the US Marine base in South Beirut, more in fact than in any other capital city except Moscow. When the US Embassy became a command post, by the terms of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic relations it lost its protected status.

The US Marines as a hostile military force in Lebanon never had adequate protection, and by targeting civilians, its base near the airport became a legitimate target. Contrary to the political spin put on the event, there was no terrorism involved in the operation.

The reason is because, despite Reagan administration claims, and this week’s assertion by Ambassador Connelly, the US forces were not “a neutral peacekeeping unit” as hyped. Rather, they were enemy combatants fighting and killing on one side of a civil war conflict. When the battleship New Jersey’s shells killed hundreds of people, mostly Shiites and Druze, that fact was clear. It’s not surprising that in his memoir, General Colin Powell, at the time an assistant to Caspar Weinberger noted that “When the shells started falling on the Shiites, they assumed the American ‘referee’ had taken sides.”

Some examples. On 14 December, 1983 the New Jersey fired 11 projectiles from three of her 16 inch (406 mm) guns at the rate of three per minute each at positions inland of Beirut. These were the first 16 inch shells fired for effect anywhere in the world since New Jersey ended her time on the gunline in Vietnam in 1969.

US shells
photo:  US Pentagon. The New Jersey opens fire on an enemy position off
the coast of Beirut 9 January 1984. New Jersey’s shells were sometimes
fired from 16 inch (406mm) guns at the rate of four per minute and killed
hundreds of Lebanese civilians, mostly Shiites and Druze since arriving at
Beirut on 9/23/82). The ships on board arsenal included 21,000 shells.

According to news accounts by reporters in Beirut at the time, the New Jersey bombardment sometimes began at 1:25 P.M. and ended at 11 P.M. followed by American fighter-bombers which could be heard flying over Beirut in search of targets.

On September 19, 1983, the New Jersey and other US warships began shelling Druze, Syrian and Palestinian positions in the Chouf Mountains outside Beirut. The battleship New Jersey with its 2,700 pound shells (“flying Volkswagens”) led the action. And on 8 February 1984, the New Jersey fired
almost 300 shells at Druze and Shi’ite positions in the hills overlooking Beirut. More of the massive projectiles rained down on the Bekaa valley east of Beirut and constituted the heaviest shore bombardment since the Korean War.

The inaccuracy of New Jersey’s guns was a scandal in US government circles and was consistently called into question. An investigation, led by Marine colonel Don Price, into New Jersey’s gunfire effectiveness in Lebanon found that many of the ship’s shells had missed their targets by as much as 10,000 yards (9,144 meters) and therefore may have inadvertently killed civilians. Records and oral hearings of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the matter could not be clearer, and Secretary Kerry and Ambassador Connelly know this. Tim McNulty, a correspondent for the Chicago Tribune based in Lebanon at the time wrote: “Everybody loved the New Jersey until she fired her guns. Once she fired, it was obvious she couldn’t hit anything,” Well, as the citizens of Lebanon know, it did indeed hit things mainly innocent civilians, their property and Lebanon’s infrastructure.

As Secretary of State Kerrey knows well from his nearly three decades in the US Senate and his four years (2009-2013) as Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee the actions of the USS New Jersey itself was arguably terrorism and some experts in the International Law Bureau of the Pentagon have said as much.

This observer lived for more than a year in the Chouf village of Choueifat, a beautiful place set high above the remains of the US marine barracks, the Beirut airport and the Mediterranean Sea where the USS Jersey and other US Sixth fleet warships are normally positioned when they come calling on
Neighbors still recall what some here call, “the terror days of USS New Jersey” and its shelling with both 26 inch and 19 inch shells, the former weighing up to 2,700 pounds. Clearly visible around Choueifat and dozens of other smaller towns, are the remains of houses and buildings not yet repaired from the devastation caused by the intense shelling. Also visible at various locations are indications that unexploded shells even now remain imbedded in the ground.

One wonders if as part of the “special enduring friendship between the United States and Lebanon on a people to people level” that the president might order the Pentagon to defuse and remove these huge unexploded bombs. If so he would distinguish his administration from that of the occupiers of Palestine who for more than three decades have targeted various parts of Lebanon with American supplied and US taxpayer-paid weapons, including literally millions of US-made cluster bombs during the 33 day Israeli aggression in 2006.

Janet's body
Photo: AFP with permission. The remains of an American journalist
and her unborn son are removed from the rubble of the US Embassy
on 4/18/82. Janet Lee Stevens, 32 years old at the time of her death,
was Ph.D. student in Arabic literature at the University of Pennsylvania
and she loved her experience in Lebanon and enthusiastically wrote her
twin sister back in Atlanta, Georgia that in Lebanon, she was doing “the
best writing I have done in my life, because here one must do one’s utmost.”
“Devoted to the cause of Palestine. Humane, talented, self-reliant, ambitious,
fearless, and rebellious,” is how one former Lebanese editor described Janet.

It is certainly appropriate to honor the victims of the 1983

Janet Lee Stevens, hours before her death

US Embassy bombing but it is no less appropriate to honor the other tragedies in Lebanon during this period under review that precipitated it. In her closing remarks this week, Ambassador Connelly noted that in her opinion, “the bombing of the US Embassy taught us the stakes of involvement in this region.”

Has it?
As we contemplate another “neutral peacekeeping presence” being planned in Washington for Syria, we gravely doubt that it has.

When will we ever learn?

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Lebanon and Syria and can be reached c/o

Hamid Karzai Seeks To Curb Illegal CIA Militia Operations In Afghanistan

Hamid Karzai seeks to curb CIA operations in Afghanistan

the guardian

President believes battle in which 10 children and a US agent died was fought by illegal militia working for spy agency

Hamid Karzai

Afghan president Hamid Karzai’s campaign against CIA operations sets up a heated showdown with the US government. Photograph: S Sabawoon/EPA

President Hamid Karzai is determined to curb CIA operations in Afghanistan after the death of a US agent and 10 Afghan children in a battle he believes was fought by an illegal militia working for the US spy agency.

The campaign sets the Afghan leader up for another heated showdown with the US government, and will reignite questions about the CIA’s extensive but highly secretive operations in the country.

Karzai’s spokesman Aimal Faizi said the CIA controlled large commando-like units, some of whom operated under the nominal stamp of the Afghan government’s intelligence agency, the National Directorate of Security (NDS), but were not actually under its control.

“Some of them are said to be working with the NDS, but they are not armed by the NDS, not paid by the NDS, and not sent to operations by the NDS. Sometimes they only inform the NDS minutes before the operation,” Faizi said. “They are conducting operations without informing local authorities and when something goes wrong it is called a joint operation.”

One of these groups was involved in a battle with insurgents in a remote corner of eastern Kunar province in early April that left several Afghan children dead, Faizi said. Karzai has fired the provincial head of intelligence in connection with the incident.

The US citizen who died during the battle was advising the Afghan intelligence service, and the airstrike that killed the children is believed to have been called in after he was fatally injured.

The US embassy declined to comment on CIA issues, but sources with knowledge of the battle said he was an agent, and his name has not been released, usually an indication of intelligence work.

Bob Woodward in his 2010 book Obama’s Wars described a 3,000-strong Afghan militia working for the CIA, and Faizi said the Afghan government had little information about the teams. “There is a lack of clarity about their numbers and movement,” he said when asked how many men the CIA had on their payroll, or where these large teams might be based.

Woodward said the unofficial commando units were known as counter-terrorism pursuit teams, and described them as “a paid, trained and functioning tool of the CIA”, authorised by President George W Bush.

They were sent on operations to kill or capture insurgent leaders, but also went into lawless areas to try to pacify them and win support for the Afghan government and its foreign backers. Woodward said the units even conducted cross-border raids into Pakistan.

In the wake of the Kunar battle, Karzai has also ordered his security officials to step up implementation of a presidential decree issued in late February abolishing “parallel structures”. Faizi said this order was aimed primarily at dismantling CIA-controlled teams.

“The use of these parallel structures run by the CIA and US special forces is an issue of concern for the Afghan people and the Afghan government,” he said.

For Karzai the move is another step towards reasserting Afghan sovereignty, part of a long campaign waged against US forces and their allies. He has already won control of the main US-run prison in the country, and ended unilateral night raids on insurgent hideouts that coalition commanders once described as critical to the war.

But Karzai’s move comes at a critical time for an already volatile relationship, when Washington and Kabul are trying to negotiate what, if any, military presence the US will have in Afghanistan beyond 2014, and curbing the CIA’s reach could strike at the heart of US strategic interests there.

Barack Obama has been clear that the US does not plan to fight the Taliban after next year. Instead some foreign troops will train Afghan soldiers to fight the insurgency while US special forces pursue groups such as al-Qaida hiding along the lawless border with Pakistan.

While the US is expected to keep a few thousand soldiers in Afghanistan, bolstered by troops from Nato allies, Obama has also made clear there is “zero option” of a complete US withdrawal, as happened in Iraq.


Army Shuts-Down Unmanly “New Agey” Therapy At Madigan Army Center

[This is a typical Army "snafu," it hires a New Age hypnotist/healer to allegedly "help" soldiers with PTSD deal with their stress-related problems, which she tries to do, using her so-called "Wiccan" methods.  Once this method starts to produce results, the Army decides that they are the wrong results.  The woman was trying to help soldiers to embrace their trauma as a first-step to getting past it; the Army preferred that they simply be taught the getting past the stress, without any "touchy-feely" hugs or "unmanly" tears (SEE:  US Army Stressed-Out Veterans, Butch Up!  ;  Report details flaws in Army’s handling of PTSD ). 

This is the basic problem--the Army is confused about how to deal with the issue of PTSD, formerly known as "battle fatigue," or "shell shock."  They consider it a disipline problem, men unwilling to grow-up on command.  Real men do not cry, or suffer emotional problems over the manly act of killing the "enemies of America."  The cure to most PTSD is for the Army to stop sending-in young men to murder innocent foreigners, in order to steal their resources.  The entire system is corrupt.  Human Nature Is the Enemy of the State.  Turning boys into killing machines is not a natural act.  If it is being done for any other reason than the defense of homeland, it is an abomination of nature and every one of these boys going through the brutality of "basic training" understands the situation that he is in.  Those brought-up with a high level of morality cannot accept this and crack under the stress of being forced to violate their most basic beliefs.]

Army panel shut down over ‘toxic’ training methods

seattletime times

An investigation concluded that leaders of the national program, based at Madigan Army Medical Center in Western Washington, sometimes used “bullying tactics” and created “a wolf pack mentality” when training its staff.

By Hal Bernton

Claudette Elliott  Claudette Elliott

A high-profile Army Medical Command task force charged with improving the health-care atmosphere among patients and staff was shut down late last year after an investigation found that it created a “toxic and intimidating working environment” in its own ranks.

The investigation concluded that leaders of the national program, based at Madigan Army Medical Center in Western Washington, sometimes used “bullying tactics” and created “a wolf pack mentality” when training its staff.

The investigative report also noted the use of questionable “Wiccan practices” in training, such as using stones and crystal bowls for “energy readiness.”

The Army Medical Command said Thursday the task force, which spent more than $3 million, was shut down because “it failed to execute its assigned mission and was promoting an internal hostile work environment.”

The 721-page report of the investigation, first obtained by KUOW Public Radio under the federal Freedom of Information Act, criticized the leadership of Claudette Elliott, director of the task force, who was identified by title but with her name redacted in the document.

Elliott, who describes herself as an “organizational development consultant,” led a 26-person task force that was charged with conducting training sessions at medical centers across the county. The training was intended to help build trust with patients, family members and staff.

Task-force staff at Madigan complained to the Army, which led to the investigation.

In one such session, according to the documents, a task-force employee being trained was made to relive combat-related trauma, “an experience that resulted in a PTSD diagnosis, where one had never been diagnosed.”

Elliott, 56, of Auburn, previously had Washington licenses as a registered counselor and as a hypnotherapist in the early to mid-2000s, when she was president of The Healing Tree, an “alternative wellness center.”

Elliott, who used the titles “Dr.” and “Ph.D.,” has a 2006 doctorate of philosophy and psychology from Warren National University, formerly Kennedy-Western University, an unaccredited school that the U.S. Government Accountability Office included in a 2004 report entitled “Diploma Mills.”

The Army investigator’s memo, which was heavily redacted, noted Elliott’s unaccredited degree and recommended that Elliott “immediately cease” using “Ph.D.” in all Defense Department actions.

Elliott, reached Thursday, said she had not yet seen the report. But she said the report’s findings, as summarized by a reporter, contained inaccuracies and represented just one side of the story.

Elliott said she had received lots of positive feedback from officers who had been helped by the training and also from trainers in the task force. She said that a doctorate was not necessary for her position and that her superiors knew where her diploma came from and encouraged her to use the title of doctor. She declined further comment until she could talk with her attorney.

The “Culture of Trust” task force was launched in September 2010 by then-Army Surgeon General Lt. Gen. Eric Schoonmaker.

During Schoonmaker’s tenure, the Army Medical Command was trying to rebuild trust after a series of searing investigative reports in The Washington Post in 2007 that detailed shoddy outpatient care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Madigan also had problems. In the spring of 2010, Oregon National Guard members complained to their congressional delegation that they were treated as second-class soldiers as they returned from a tour of duty in Iraq and sought care at Madigan. One embarrassing Power Point presentation, developed by a Madigan employee, depicted National Guard soldiers as “weekend warriors.”

Schoonmaker said he was “appalled by the insensitivity” of the Madigan officer who developed the controversial Power Point presentation.

The “Culture of Trust” task force was intended to create an environment where medical professionals would thrive and patients would receive the best care, according to an Army public-affairs article.

“Every year, millions of dollars are lost from employee disengagement, which impacts mission accomplishment,” Elliott was quoted in the article. “We are creating an ambience of excellence within Army medicine.”

Another public-affairs article described a task-force training exercise conducted for 1,400 employees at Irwin Army Community Hospital in Kansas.

“It was very inspiring and the training broke through a lot of barriers with employees,” said Laura Dukes, a medical technician.

Yet within the task force, the Army’s investigator wrote in the 2012 report, employees endured a “strongest survive environment” and only “negative feedback was encouraged during team-building exercises.”

“It felt a lot like a gang of animals who would gang up on the most vulnerable individual,” said a task-force member who was interviewed by the investigator.

The Army investigation also criticized task-force spending, noting that members accumulated many hours of overtime, and “potentially excessive” temporary duty expenses.

Hal Bernton: 206-464-2581 or KUOW reporter Patricia Murphy contributed to this report.

Photos of Military-Looking Suspects Photographed Carrying Backpacks Before Detonations At Boston Marathon

Excellent source of Boston Bombing photos: 

4chan ThinkTank 


R2P=I2I (“Instigate to Intervene” Disguised As “Responsibility to Protect”)

[SEE: The Obscenity of Humanitarian Warfare ]

“Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) Or “Instigate to Intervene” (I2I)

By Atul BHARDWAJ (India)

“Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) Or “Instigate to Intervene” (I2I)

American democracy appears to be in jeopardy. Irrespective of the political dispensation at the White House, the policy of promoting proxy wars and covert military operations across the globe continues to mutate.

Any nation that decides to exercise its sovereign right to protect its citizens from armed insurgents incurs Washington’s wrath. America wants to permanently amend the rules of the game by stating that a nation’s right to protect is subordinate to the international community’s responsibility to Protect (R2P). Syria is the latest in the long list of nations that is suffering to sustain American imperialism.

R2P is the new name for humanitarian intervention, a norm adopted by the UNO in 2005. According to Gareth Evans, R2P equips everyone in the international community to prevent the “catastrophic human rights violations taking place behind sovereign state walls,” with “coercive military action as a last resort, not a first.”

The problem with analysts like Gareth is that their vision permits them to peep through the walls of sovereignty but not through the iron curtain of the empire that adheres to the doctrine of Instigate to Intervene (I2I). It is through use of such dubious norms and instigations that America attacked Libya and is now in the process of destabilizing Syria. Russia, China and Iran are the three countries preventing the Western military juggernaut to roll over Syria completely.

In an open defiance of well established international practices, Washington is blatantly using Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and UAE to lead an armed insurgency inside Syria. As a result the three-year-old dissent in Damascus is now an international problem. The Western media, with an agenda to flare up the situation in Syria began beaming in the misdemeanors of Bashar Al-Assad and his dynastic rule; projecting the opposition as victims of political atrocity.

Political struggle is a part and parcel of any state. The problem begins when political fissures are exploited by external actors. This is exactly what has happened in Syria where the government’s legitimate actions against the opposition-armed militancy are being dubbed as human rights violations.

The branding of Assad as a tyrant is a ruse to plunge the nation into a war of attrition. Since the beginning of January 2012, the C-130 transport aircraft loaded with weapons have been regularly taking off at the American military base in Qatar to land at Turkish airports. From the airports, the arms consignments travel by road to rebel-military camps on the Syria-Turkey border.

The NATO’s encouragement to Syrian rebels is not limited to moral and material support; the NATO countries are also in the forefront to mobilize manpower to augment the foot soldiers of the Free Syria Army (composed of Syrian military officers who have defected from their parent outfit, a bunch of mercenaries and Al-Qaeda terrorists). According to a study by King’s college London, “Hundreds of Europeans have travelled to Syria since the start of the civil war to fight against the country’s President, Bashar al-Assad…600 individuals from 14 countries including the UK, Austria, Spain, Sweden and Germany had taken part in the conflict since it began in 2011. European fighters made up to between 7% and 11% of the foreign contingent in Syria, which ranged between 2,000 and 5,500 people.”

America has anointed the main opposition party, Syrian National Coalition (SNC) to occupy the official Syrian seat at the Arab League. It is perhaps for this reason that Moaz al-Khatib the former leader of SNC, admitted, “We thank all the governments who supported us, but the role to be played by the United States is much bigger.” To democratize the instigation to intervene, and retain American control, the US has appointed Ghassan Hitto, an IT professional from Dallas, US, as the head of the planned interim government.

The imperial American obduracy flows from the ideological belief that the nation-states’ ‘monopoly over organized violence’ is not a right that can be exercised without the approval of the empire. Thereby meaning that the states are authorized to use violence within their own territory, only to protect those people certified as victims by the empire. Any violence against the American certified victims is branded as human rights violations and genocide.

The Western fetish for R2P and their so-called ‘good intentions’ have already caused mayhem in the lives of ordinary Iraqi or Libyan. The Russian President Putin says,

“The state is falling apart, Inter-ethnic, inter-clan and inter-tribal conflicts continue.”

However, the Americans will not abandon R2P because it is a tool to re-order the states in accordance with what Stephen Gill has identified as “new constitutionalism – imposition of new constitutional and quasi-constitutional political and legal frameworks – with respect to the state and the operation of strategic, macroeconomic, microeconomic and social policy.”

Atul Bhardwaj is a researcher at School of Liberal Studies, Ambedkar University, Delhi. He can be contacted at