The Dangerous Nazification of Ukrainian Airwaves

[Ukrainian TV HAS to be even more boring than Russian TV.  Let’s see how long Svoboda can contain the restless longings of the Ukrainian masses if they are all bored beyond the point of their capacity to be mesmerized by inanity.]

OSCE slams Ukraine’s repressive censorship of Russian TV channels

Russia-Today

Neo Nazi Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok

The OSCE has criticised Kiev’s “repressive” move to shut down the broadcasting of Russian TV channels after the media watchdog reported over 50% of providers have already fulfilled the order allegedly aimed at “ensuring national security and sovereignty.”

“As of 11:00 GMT, March 11th, 50 percent of providers throughout Ukraine have disabled broadcasting of foreign channels,” others are preparing to follow, the National Television and Radio Broadcasting Council of Ukraine, said on its website.

The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe has voiced strong concerns over the decision.

“I repeat my call to the authorities not to initiate these repressive measures,” OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Dunja Mijatović said. “Banning programming without a legal basis is a form of censorship; national security concerns should not be used at the expense of media freedom.”

“While I deplore any kind of state propaganda and hate speech as part of the current information war, everyone has the right to receive information from as many sources as he or she wishes,” Mijatovic said. “Switching off and banning channels is not the way to address these problems; any potentially problematic speech should be countered with arguments and more speech.”

So far at least 5 Russian channels have been excluded from the list of options, following an appeal by the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine last week.

“The National Television and Radio Broadcasting Council of Ukraine requires the program service providers to stop the broadcast of the Russian TV channels Vesti, Russia 24, Channel One (worldwide transmission), RTR ‘Planeta’, and NTV-World in their network,” the National Council order says.

More than half of Ukraine’s population speaks Russian regularly and one third say it’s their native tongue. In Crimea over 90 percent of the population uses Russian on an everyday basis.

Participants of a rally on Yevpatoria's central square voice their support to Russia. (RIA Novosti/Andrey Stenin)Participants of a rally on Yevpatoria’s central square voice their support to Russia. (RIA Novosti/Andrey Stenin)

On Sunday, Republic of Crimea began broadcasting Russian TV channels on frequencies earlier occupied by Ukrainian television. It has been done because of “legal reasons and moral principles,” Crimea’s information minister Dmitry Polonsky told Itar-tass.

“From the moral point of view, all Ukrainian TV channels were rigidly censored by Kiev’s illegitimate authorities. In violation of fundamental principles they broadcast only one point of view – Crimean politicians, community leaders and Crimeans were unable to comment on the situation,” Polonsky said, adding that their round the clock false reporting of “Russia occupying Crimea” or “declaring war on Ukraine” did not correspond to reality and was used to aggravate the situation and escalate violence.

Polonsky also said that existing contracts should be brought into line with the “current legal situation”, as he urged Ukrainian TV channels to renegotiate contracts for new frequencies with the Crimean broadcasting authorities.

Following the move Ukraine’s media watchdog Goskomteleradio demanded an immediate resumption of Ukrainian TV channels broadcast in Crimea, accusing Russia of “aggression.”

“We regard this as a manifestation of undisguised information aggression against Ukraine by the Russian Federation,” the statement reads.

Russia has long voiced concerns over banning Russian media broadcasts on Ukraine’s national frequencies, calling it a violation of human rights.

“We are aware of proposals to prohibit broadcasts in Ukraine by companies of countries that are not signatories to the European Broadcasting Convention,” Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov said late February after the proposal to ban some channels were first introduced by Svoboda Party in Ukraine.

“Russia is not a signatory to this convention, but this circumstance has not stopped us from broadcasting across Europe. Such broadcasts have not encountered any problems in any country of the European Union. If such a decision is adopted in Ukraine, it will be serious violation of freedom of speech,” Lavrov added.

September 11, Opening Act of The Saudi War Upon the American People

[Bush’s low-down redaction of hard Saudi truths from the 911 Report was merely a temporary holding action.  The groundswell of American retribution awaiting the vile monarchs is a huge body of water, just waiting to be released.   When the dam of truth is finally broken down, vengeance will sweep the Saudi monarchy from the pages of time itself, reducing them to a mere footnote, designating a tribe of ruthless “camel jockeys” who made themselves into a real threat to Western civilization.]

Do the Saudis really control the terrorists they court?

new york post

 

 

 

In a 2003 Rose Garden press conference, a reporter asked President Bush why he was sealing a congressional report “incriminating the Saudi government when it comes to 9/11.”

 

Bush, without denying the description of the report’s contents, argued he had to seal it “so that those who are being investigated aren’t alerted.”

 

Only, the Saudi suspects named in the report weren’t really “being investigated.” Several months earlier, then-FBI Director Robert Mueller admitted as much during a closed hearing with the 9/11 Joint Inquiry staff on the Hill. Mueller sheepishly acknowledged the only people aggressively investigating the Saudi connections were sitting there across the table from him.

 

This was beyond odd. At both the FBI and CIA, there were files thick with memos and other documents detailing connections between the Saudi hijackers and Saudi officials and agents in at least seven US cities coast-to-coast. They revealed a vast Saudi support network spanning from Los Angeles and San Diego in the West to Washington, DC, Falls Church, Va., and Herndon, Va., in the East; and from Sarasota, Fla., in the South to Paterson, NJ, in the North.

 

Yet the only people connecting the dots were congressional staffers, as case agents and detectives assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Forces in San Diego and Washington complained of being frustrated by brass in their attempts to run down Saudi leads, particularly ones that led back to the Saudi Embassy.

 

There was so much Saudi-related evidence that it took 28 pages just for Hill investigators to summarize it all.

 

In fact, there arguably was more evidence for the Justice Department to indict Omar al-Bayoumi, the suspected Saudi intelligence agent who aided two of the hijackers in San Diego, than there was to indict Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker. The attorney general could just have easily thrown material support of terrorism charges at Bayoumi. But he did not. The only real difference is Bayoumi’s a Saudi.

 

If Bush’s objective really was to avoid tipping off subjects of ongoing investigations, he could have carefully redacted the names of Bayoumi and other Saudis cited in the 28-page section. Instead, he elected to censor the entire section, scrubbing out anything and everything Saudi.

 

The day before he did that, he met with the Saudis in the White House to discuss that secret Saudi section, which remains classified today. Walking away from that hour-long meeting, the Saudis no doubt felt reassured their secrets were safe. Confident Bush would never release the 28 pages, Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar made a show of demanding they be released, arguing the Saudis have nothing to hide.

 

It was an obvious, if effective, ploy.

 

The congressional report safely sealed up, the Saudis had only the 9/11 Commission Report to worry about — and, lo and behold, it cleared the Saudis (even though the commission director never let investigators see the 28 pages from the earlier congressional report). Upon its release, Bandar clucked that the panel exonerated the Kingdom, not to mention himself, conveniently.

 

The report curiously leaves out evidence tying Bandar and his wife to the hijackers through a Saudi bag man, Osama Bassnan, who received personal checks from the Bandars while handling the hijackers in San Diego. Bandar appears a few times in footnotes, and only in passing.

 

The Bandars claim the checks were “welfare” for Bassnan’s supposedly ill wife, and that they did not know what Bassnan was really up to.

 

Maybe so. The Saudis have a history of turning a blind eye to the extremists among them, funding radical mosques as a way of placating their population and keeping themselves in power.

 

But even if you take Bandar’s ignorance at face value, as he sows the wind, we reap the whirlwind.

 

Last year, Bandar was promoted to chief of Saudi intelligence. Saudi Arabia very much wants to see Bashar al-Assad removed from power in Syria. Bandar, frustrated with Obama’s inaction, has been letting Saudi jihadists cross the border to fight in the civil war — and has been funneling arms and support to the Islamic Front rebel group, according to the Daily Beast, weapons that can easily end up in the hands of al Qaeda.

 

Bandar also has pushed Russia to drop its backing of Assad. In August, according to the Telegraph, he gave President Vladimir Putin both a carrot — oil deals — and a stick:

 

“I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year,” Bandar allegedly said. “The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us.”

 

By Chechen groups, he means Islamic terrorists — just like the ones who bombed the Boston Marathon. It’s a startling, shocking admission.

 

Which is the more scary scenario? That members of the Saudi government provide funding to al Qaeda and other terrorist groups but can’t control them — or that they can?

 

Either way, we can’t find out the full story without an investigation. And the necessary first step is declassifying those 28 pages. Let’s finally connect those dots.

 

Paul Sperry is a Hoover Institution media fellow and author of “Infiltration” and “Muslim Mafia.”

US Risking War With China To Defend Imperial Japan’s War Conquests

 

[SEE: Forget Trade Talks, Biden Is in East Asia to Stop a Potential War ]

[Obama was so frustrated with his failed attempt to engineer world war with Russia in the Middle East, that he has now “pivoted” to his next intended war front in the South “China Seas.”  The US and Japanese Navies are now skirting around the Chinese Navy and their new aircraft carrier, in order to reinforceJapan, which was forced into relinquishing its claims to the Paracel/Spratly Islands as a condition of the WWII surrender document.  The dubious claims made upon the Spratlys by the Japanese are related to Japan’s many aggressions committed against China. 

First, Obama confirmed that Bush’s terror is now his own, before he escalated the war in the Middle East against multiple nations, revealing for all to see that he is waging a true “war of aggression” against the entire world.

Next, Obama anoints the new Imperial Japanese government with his blessing, in the form of a promise to invoke the American postwar commitment to defend Japanese territory, even those defined by previous war claims.  Obama, the self-celebrated legal expert, doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on in this intricate, pre-arranged dogfight.  Is WWIII to begin with a revival of WWII?]

TREATY OF PEACE WITH JAPAN

Signed at San Francisco, 8 September 1951
Initial entry into force*: 28 April 1952

CHAPTER II, TERRITORY, Article 2, (f) Japan renounces all right, title and claim to the Spratly Islands and to the Paracel Islands.

 

The Inconvenient Truth Behind the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands

new york times logo

By HAN-YI SHAW
Diaoyu Island is recorded under Kavalan, Taiwan in Revised Gazetteer of Fujian Province (1871).Han-yi ShawDiaoyu Island is recorded under Kavalan, Taiwan in Revised Gazetteer of Fujian Province (1871).

Japan’s recent purchase of the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands has predictably reignited tensions amongst China, Japan, and Taiwan. Three months ago, when Niwa Uichiro, the Japanese ambassador to China, warned that Japan’s purchase of the islands could spark an “extremely grave crisis” between China and Japan, Tokyo Governor Ishihara Shintaro slammed Niwa as an unqualified ambassador, who “needs to learn more about the history of his own country”.

Ambassador Niwa was forced to apologize for his remarks and was recently replaced. But what is most alarming amid these developments is that despite Japan’s democratic and pluralist society, rising nationalist sentiments are sidelining moderate views and preventing rational dialogue.

The Japanese government maintains that the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands are Japanese territory under international law and historical point of view and has repeatedly insisted that no dispute exists. Despite that the rest of the world sees a major dispute, the Japanese government continues to evade important historical facts behind its unlawful incorporation of the islands in 1895.

Specifically, the Japanese government asserts, “From 1885 on, our government conducted on-site surveys time and again, which confirmed that the islands were uninhabited and there were no signs of control by the Qing Empire.”

My research of over 40 official Meiji period documents unearthed from the Japanese National Archives, Diplomatic Records Office, and National Institute for Defense Studies Library clearly demonstrates that the Meiji government acknowledged Chinese ownership of the islands back in 1885.

Following the first on-site survey, in 1885, the Japanese foreign minister wrote, “Chinese newspapers have been reporting rumors of our intention of occupying islands belonging to China located next to Taiwan.… At this time, if we were to publicly place national markers, this must necessarily invite China’s suspicion.…”

In November 1885, the Okinawa governor confirmed “since this matter is not unrelated to China, if problems do arise I would be in grave repentance for my responsibility”.

“Surveys of the islands are incomplete” wrote the new Okinawa governor in January of 1892. He requested that a naval ship Kaimon be sent to survey the islands, but ultimately a combination of miscommunication and bad weather made it impossible for the survey to take place.

Letter dated May 12, 1894 affirming that the Meiji government did not repeatedly investigate the disputed islands.Japan Diplomatic Records Office.Letter dated May 12, 1894 affirming that the Meiji government did not repeatedly investigate the disputed islands.

“Ever since the islands were investigated by Okinawa police agencies back in 1885, there have been no subsequent field surveys conducted,” the Okinawa governor wrote in 1894.

After a number of Chinese defeats in the Sino-Japanese War, a report from Japan’s Home Ministry said “this matter involved negotiations with China… but the situation today is greatly different from back then.” The Meiji government, following a cabinet decision in early 1895, promptly incorporated the islands.

Negotiations with China never took place and this decision was passed during the Sino-Japanese War. It was never made public.

In his biography Koga Tatsushiro, the first Japanese citizen to lease the islands from the Meiji government, attributed Japan’s possession of the islands to “the gallant military victory of our Imperial forces.”

Collectively, these official documents leave no doubt that the Meiji government did not base its occupation of the islands following “on-site surveys time and again,” but instead annexed them as booty of war. This is the inconvenient truth that the Japanese government has conveniently evaded.

Japan asserts that neither Beijing nor Taipei objected to U.S. administration after WWII. That’s true, but what Japan does not mention is that neither Beijing nor Taipei were invited as signatories of the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951, from which the U.S. derived administrative rights.

When Japan annexed the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands in 1895, it detached them from Taiwan and placed them under Okinawa Prefecture. Moreover, the Japanese name “Senkaku Islands” itself was first introduced in 1900 by academic Kuroiwa Hisashi and adopted by the Japanese government thereafter. Half a century later when Japan returned Taiwan to China, both sides adopted the 1945 administrative arrangement of Taiwan, with the Chinese unaware that the uninhabited “Senkaku Islands” were in fact the former Diaoyu Islands. This explains the belated protest from Taipei and Beijing over U.S. administration of the islands after the war.

Report dated August 12, 1892 from navy commander affirming the islands were not fully investigated. Source:  Library of The National Institute for Defense Studies.Report dated August 12, 1892 from navy commander affirming the islands were not fully investigated. Source:  Library of The National Institute for Defense Studies.

The Japanese government frequently cites two documents as evidence that China did not consider the islands to be Chinese. The first is an official letter from a Chinese consul in Nagasaki dated May 20, 1920 that listed the islands as Japanese territory.

Neither Beijing nor Taipei dispute that the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands — along with the entire island of Taiwan — were formally under Japanese occupation at the time. However, per post-WW II arrangements, Japan was required to surrender territories obtained from aggression and revert them to their pre-1895 legal status.

The second piece evidence is a Chinese map from 1958 that excludes the Senkaku Islands from Chinese territory. But the Japanese government’s partial unveiling leaves out important information from the map’s colophon: “certain national boundaries are based on maps compiled prior to the Second Sino-Japanese War(1937-1945).”

Qing period (1644-1911) records substantiate Chinese ownership of the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands prior to 1895. Envoy documents indicate that the islands reside inside the “border that separates Chinese and foreign lands.” And according to Taiwan gazetteers, “Diaoyu Island accommodates ten or more large ships” under the jurisdiction of Kavalan, Taiwan.

The right to know is the bedrock of every democracy. The Japanese public deserves to know the other side of the story. It is the politicians who flame public sentiments under the name of national interests who pose the greatest risk, not the islands themselves.

Update: The author would like to include an updated image of the Qing era documents that recorded, “Diaoyutai Island accommodates ten or more large ships”, as mentioned in his blog post.

Record of Missions to Taiwan Waters (1722), Gazetteer of Kavalan County (1852), and Pictorial Treatise of Taiwan Proper (1872).National Palace Museum, Taipei, Taiwan.Record of Missions to Taiwan Waters (1722), Gazetteer of Kavalan County (1852), and Pictorial Treatise of Taiwan Proper (1872).

Han-Yi Shaw is a Research Fellow at the Research Center for International Legal Studies, National Chengchi University, in Taipei, Taiwan.

After October 17, the US Govt Will Only Have $30 Billion Left To Pay Its Bills With

U.S. Treasury starts last measures to preserve borrowing authority

Reuters

 

U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew addresses the Economic Club of Washington D.C., in Washington, September 17, 2013.  Credit: Reuters/Jonathan Ernst

WASHINGTON

(Reuters) – The U.S. Treasury on Tuesday started using its last tools for pushing back the date when the government will run out of legal borrowing authority, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said.

In a letter to lawmakers, Lew said the Treasury Department was suspending some reinvestments of a government currency exchange fund and would also enter into a debt swap with the Federal Financing Bank and the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund.

He repeated past statements that these measures would allow it to continue below its $16.7 trillion limit for a little while longer, but that by October 17 the government will have exhausted its borrowing authority and will be left with about $30 billion in cash to pay the nation’s bills.

“If we have insufficient cash on hand, it would be impossible for the United States of America to meet all its obligations,” Lew said in a letter to lawmakers. “For this reason, I respectfully urge Congress to act immediately to meet its responsibility by extending the nation’s borrowing authority.”

After borrowing authority expires, Treasury by law would then have to rely on its remaining cash and incoming revenue to pay the country’s obligations.

The nonprofit Bipartisan Policy Center estimates that the United States would begin defaulting on some obligations between October 18 and November 5.

Lew said the partial federal shutdown, which started after Congress failed to pass legislation to fund the government in the new fiscal year that began on Tuesday, would not “materially” impact Treasury’s projections for when its borrowing authority will expire.

(Reporting by Jason Lange; Editing by Christopher Wilson and Will Dunham)

There Will Be NO “AMERICAN SPRING,” Only A Second American Revolution—Bomb Syria, Obumma, and The American People May Bomb You

[Obumma, There Is One Way To Help the Syrian People—Call-Off Your Saudi Attack Dogs and Stand-Up To the bloodthirsty Republicans. 
If you weren’t such a coward and a sell-out to the rest of the human race, then you would not take pleasure from recruiting the Republican Fascists to your side. 
If the anti-Democracy American Congress opens another war front, then the American people must open a war front of their own—right on the White House lawn. 

“Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”

Prepare to lay-down your lives for the sake of the human race…come to Washington for action…If the American bombs fall on Damascus, then gather together in Lafayette Square for the beginning of the Second American Revolution!]

no war

Obama wins backing for Syria strike from key figures in Congress

Reuters

WASHINGTON/BEIRUT

(Reuters) – President Barack Obama won the backing of key figures in the U.S. Congress, including Republicans, in his call for limited U.S. strikes on Syria to punish President Bashar al-Assad for his suspected use of chemical weapons against civilians.

Leaders of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee said they reached an agreement on a draft authorization for the use of military force in Syria, paving the way for a vote by the committee on Wednesday. However, the draft is much narrower than the request made by Obama and includes a provision barring the use of U.S. troops on the ground.

Speaking after the United Nations said two million Syrians had fled a conflict that posed the greatest threat to world peace since the Vietnam war, Obama said on Tuesday the United States also has a broader plan to help rebels defeat Assad’s forces.

“What we are envisioning is something limited. It is something proportional. It will degrade Assad’s capabilities,” Obama said. “At the same time we have a broader strategy that will allow us to upgrade the capabilities of the opposition.”

Having startled friends and foes alike by delaying a punitive attack on Assad until Congress reconvenes and agrees, Obama met congressional leaders at the White House to urge a prompt decision and assure them it did not mean another long war like Iraq or Afghanistan.

John Boehner, the Republican speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor both pledged their support for military action after the meeting.

Votes are expected to be held in the Senate and House next week, with the Republican-led House presenting the tougher challenge for Obama.

The House leadership has indicated the votes will be “conscience votes,” meaning they will not seek to influence members’ votes on party lines. All the same, it would have been a blow to Obama if he had not secured the backing of the top two Republicans.

“I believe that my colleagues should support this call for action,” Boehner told reporters.

The president said strikes aimed at punishing the use of chemical weapons would hurt Assad’s forces while other U.S. action would bolster his opponents – though the White House has insisted it is not seeking “regime change.”

Among other provisions, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee draft, which was obtained by Reuters, sets a 60-day limit on U.S. military action in Syria, with a possibility of a single 30-day extension subject to conditions.

COMPROMISE DEAL

The compromise deal reached by Senator Robert Menendez, the Democratic chairman of the panel, and Senator Bob Corker, the top Republican, includes a provision banning any use of U.S. armed forces on the ground in Syria, according to the draft document.

It requires Obama to consult with Congress and submit to the Senate and House of Representatives foreign relations panel a strategy for negotiating a political settlement to the Syria conflict, including a review of all forms of assistance to the rebels fighting to oust Assad.

Secretary of State John Kerry initially told the committee he would prefer not to bar the use of ground troops to preserve options if Syria “imploded” or there was a threat of chemical weapons being obtained by extremists.

But when Corker, the Republican senator, told Kerry he “didn’t find that a very appropriate response regarding boots on the ground,” Kerry quickly, and repeatedly, backtracked.

Kerry said he was simply “thinking out loud” and raising a hypothetical situation, but he did not want to leave the door open to sending ground troops to Syria.

“Let’s shut the door now,” Kerry said. “The answer is, whatever prohibition clarifies it to Congress or the American people, there will not be American boots on the ground with respect to the civil war.”

An Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Tuesday that Obama has failed so far to convince most Americans. Some 56 percent of those surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria, while only 19 percent supported action, essentially unchanged from last week.

In remarks that appeared to question the legality of U.S. plans to strike Syria without U.N. backing, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the use of force is only legal when it is in self-defense or with Security Council authorization.

If U.N. inspectors confirm the use of chemical weapons in Syria, the Security Council, which has been deadlocked on the 2-1/2-year Syrian civil war, should overcome its differences and take action, Ban said.

Assad denies deploying poison gas that killed hundreds of civilians last month.

The Syrian opposition, which said a forensic scientist had defected to the rebel side bringing evidence of the Assad forces’ use of sarin gas in March, has appealed to Western allies to send them weapons and use their air power to end a war that has killed more than 100,000 and made millions homeless.

COMFORTABLE GOING FORWARD

Obama has said he is “comfortable going forward without the approval of a United Nations Security Council that so far has been completely paralyzed and unwilling to hold Assad accountable.

The presence in rebel ranks of Islamist militants, some of them close to al Qaeda, has made Western leaders wary, while at the same time the undoubted – and apparently accelerating – human cost of the conflict has brought pressure to intervene.

Russia, backed by China, has used its veto power in the U.N. Security Council three times to block resolutions condemning Assad’s government and threatening it with sanctions. Assad, like Russia, blames the rebels for the August 21 gas attack.

Obama was due to leave Washington on Tuesday for a G20 meeting in Russia. France said foreign ministers of some of the G20 member states will convene on the sidelines of the meeting to discuss Syria.

The conflict has divided the Middle East on sectarian lines, with Shi’ite Iran backing Assad and Washington’s Sunni Arab Gulf allies supporting the mainly Sunni rebels. It has also revived Cold War-style tensions between the Western powers and Moscow.

In an interview in Le Figaro, Assad told the French newspaper: “Everybody will lose control of the situation when the powder keg blows. There is a risk of a regional war.”

The U.N. High Commission for Refugees said there had been a near tenfold increase over the past 12 months in the rate of refugees crossing Syria’s borders into Turkey, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon – to a daily average of nearly 5,000 men, women and children.

This has pushed the total number of Syrians living abroad to more than 2 million.

That represents some 10 percent of Syria’s population, the UNHCR said. With a further 4.25 million estimated to have been displaced but still resident inside the country, close to one third of all Syrians are living away from their original homes.

Comparing the figures to the peak of Afghanistan’s refugee crisis two decades ago, U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres, said: “Syria has become the great tragedy of this century – a disgraceful humanitarian calamity with suffering and displacement unparalleled in recent history.

“The risks for global peace and security that the present Syria crisis represents, I’m sure, are not smaller than what we have witnessed in any other crisis that we have had since the Vietnam war,” said Guterres, a former Portuguese prime minister.

(Additional reporting by Tom Miles and Stephanie Nebehay in Geneva, Steve Gutterman and Timothy Heritage in Moscow, Jeffrey Heller and Dan Williams in Jerusalem, Dasha Afanasieva in Istanbul and Phil Stewart, Arshad Mohammed, Susan Cornwell and Andy Sullivan in Washington.; Writing by Claudia Parsons.; Editing by Christopher Wilson, Jim Loney and Raju Gopalakrishnan)

Obama/Netanyahu Try To Force War Upon the World with Unannounced Missile Launches In Med

[If mere rumors of military action against Syria are enough to produce such volatility in the Eastern stock markets (the first to open), then think of the negative economic consequences for starting an actual regional war in the Middle East.  By springing this missile test upon the world without prior warning, Netanyahu and Obama have revealed more about themselves than they would have wanted.  Both men have obviously signed-off on a joint attempt to set the entire Middle East on fire, witnessed by a world audience that was already paying attention.  This may prove to be the “final straw” which breaks the back of world opinion on supporting America’s multiple wars of aggression.  

Unexpected revelations about the depth of American lies, the rapid growth of the American police state and open support for “al-Qaeda” terrorists in Syria, were all bad enough to shatter popular support for US aggression, even before this latest provocation exposed the bloodthirsty intentions of the black and white Zionist twins.  The people of the world are no longer willing to bear the weight of bloody American intervention on the pretext of “fighting terror,” or the damages that have been done by successive American administrations to the global economic order.  The wars  that have been painted with the broad brush of “patriotism” by both Obama and Bush have been revealed to be obscene “wars of aggression” (true “crimes against humanity”) in the service of an American global empire.  Whenever Obama revealed himself to be the moral equal of that “low-life” Benjamin Netanyahu, by attempting to force an even wider war upon the human race (even though we have expressed our absolute rejection of the tyranny of the terror war), he exposed the lies which have cemented the war coalition together, causing even the ultra-loyal lapdog British Parliament to recoil in horror at the idea of association with such a war-monger.  At the very least, Americans have the same duty as the rest of the human race to take a viable stand to end Obama’s deceptive reign of despotism.

If we cannot impeach him, then we will have no other choice but to overthrow the war-monger, locking his narrow ass away somewhere, as if he was the bastard son of the Muslim Brotherhood.]

HT Correspondent and Reuters, Hindustan Times
New Delhi/Moscow
A demonstrator holds a sign during a rally against the proposed military intervention against Syria. Reuters

The rupee and stock markets plunged on Tuesday, with bechmark Sensex sliding by 650 points on reports that missiles were fired at Syria, raising fears of disruption in oil supply and spike in prices. The rupee slipped below 68 against a dollar, losing more than two percent of its value in the day trade. The 30-scrip S&P Sensex of the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) tanked 651.47 points or 3.45 percent at 18,234.66 points.

The Sensex hit a low of 18,166.17 points in the intra-day.  The wider 50-scrip S&P CNX Nifty of the National Stock Exchange (NSE) also slumped 3.77 percent at 5,341.45 points. Banking, realty and oil and gas stocks slumped after the Russian  defence ministry announced that it has detected launch of two ballistic missiles from the central part of the Mediterranean Sea toward the eastern part of the Mediterranean coast.

The markets recovered after it emerged that there were no signs of a missile strike on the country, where a festering controversy over alleged use of chemical weapons by the ruling regime has precipitated a crisis prompting possible military intervention by the US and allies.

The US said none of its ships or planes launched any attack.

Although Syria is not a major oil producer, a deepening crisis is seen as destabilising for Middle East and has had a bearing on driving up global oil prices in recent weeks.

The markets tumbled after Russia’s state-run RIA news agency said Russian radar detected the launch of two ballistic “objects” in the Mediterranean Sea, but there was no sign of a missile strike on the Syrian capital Damascus.

A defence ministry spokesperson told Russian news agencies the launch was detected at 10.16 am Moscow time (11.46 IST) by an early warning radar station at Armavir, near the Black Sea, which is designed to detect missiles from Europe and Iran.

“The trajectory of these objects goes from the central part of the Mediterranean Sea toward the eastern part of the Mediterranean coast,” Interfax news agency quoted the spokesperson as saying.

The spokesperson did not say who had carried out the launch and whether any impact had been detected, but RIA later quoted a source in Syria’s “state structures” as saying the objects had fallen harmlessly into the sea.

The Russian defence ministry declined comment to Reuters.

The Russian embassy in Syria said there were no signs of a missile attack or explosions in Damascus, state-run Itar-Tass reported.

Israel said it was unaware of any ballistic missile launch being conducted in the eastern Mediterranean.

“We are not aware, at this time, of such an event having occurred,” a military spokeswoman in Jerusalem said.

Russian defence minister Sergei Shoigu had informed President Vladimir Putin of the launch.

Russia opposes any outside military intervention in the Syrian civil war, and a defence ministry official had earlier criticised the US for deploying warships in the Mediterranean close to Syria.

The US has been preparing for a possible military strike in Syria following what it says was a chemical weapons attack by Syrian government forces. Damascus denies carrying out such an attack.
(With inputs from IANS, Reuters and other agencies.)

Fear of Chemical Attack Spreads through Palestinian Camps in Syria

10 REASONS WHY THE TRUTH ABOUT SYRIAN CHEM ATTACK MUST BE REVEALED. 

 

[Reporter Franklin Lamb warns us that the awful truth about this is about to be revealed, to nearly everyone’s dislike.  Double-dealing on all sides may see the worst come to pass from this provocation.  Bashar Assad will probably be the fall guy.   Update soon.]

w460 (2)

Fear Spreads through Palestinian Camps in Syria

Many Flee, as Worries over Chemical Weapons Mount

by FRANKLIN LAMB

Yarmouk Palestinian camp, Damascus

 


Among those who have fled Syria from the Yarmouk Palestinian camp in Damascus are close to 50,000 children. This is the figure cited by the Palestinian Popular Committees in the Damascus-Homs area as well as Anthony Lake, head of the U.N. children’s agency UNICEF. Roughly 75% of the Palestinian youngsters fleeing the country are under the age of 11, and they make up a significant part of the approximately one million children altogether who have been displaced by the fighting in Syria.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees places the refugee count at more than one million. This is in addition to the two million children who are internally displaced—forced to flee their homes in the face of a conflict which has morphed into a vicious, sectarian civil war.

Problems for Palestinian refugees continue at the Syria-Lebanon Masnaa crossing, adding to the number of children who are homeless and without encouraging prospects of finding either shelter or school enrollment as classes begin next month. Approximately 8000 children, younger than fifteen, have been killed so far in the 30 month civil conflict in Syria.

According to information this observer has received from the Palestinian Popular Committees—in Yarmouk as well as the twelve other Palestinian camps in Syria—evidence now suggests the possibility, indeed probability, of terrorist use of chemical weapons in some of the camp areas. They have called upon Palestinian factions to take preemptive steps to prevent further incidents.

The Popular Committee inside the “free” area of Yarmouk (pockets inside the eastern edge of the camp) issued a statement which included the following: “In the framework of agitating the political and media war against the government of Syria, channels of destruction and sedition have started to air misleading propaganda, claiming that the Syrian Arab Army would fire  mortars and or missiles into the camp with chemical gases, whereas these elements themselves are planning chemical attacks to blame the government much as what happened in Irbin.”

The Committee added, “Those who invaded and destroyed the camp after having displaced its residents would not hesitate to use the meanest ways of killing and destruction to fulfill the U.S.-Zionist goals.”

The statement was drafted by advisers to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine,-GC, led by Ahmed Jabril, a staunch supporter of Syria’s President Bashar Assad. On 8/22/13, the PFLP-GC was targeted by Israel when a missile struck just meters from the entrance to one of a series of underground tunnels in a valley in Naameh, an area 15 kilometers south of Beirut, where the group maintains a military base.

Israel said the attack was in retaliation for Thursday’s rocket attack from Lebanon into the Jewish state. The PFLP-GC source denied the group’s involvement in that attack..

Palestinian camp officials, as well as various medical groups, are growing frustrated with a lack of activity from chief U.N. inspector Ake Sellstrom  and his delegation, who seem to linger for considerable amounts of time in the lobby of their 5-star hotel and its swimming pool. As it happens, the hotel is situated only a few kilometers from Ghouta, the green belt which surrounds Damascus, as well as the Yarmouk camp and the nearby attack area.

“What are they waiting for?”—is a commonly expressed sentiment heard this morning in Irbid, site of the alleged chemical weapon attack.

“They can give me their equipment and I will gather evidence for them if they are too busy,” commented one Palestinian youngster to this observer.

Residents in the Damascus suburbs, and also at Yarmouk, at least seem relieved that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has just urged the Syrian government to allow in the UN inspectors without delay to thoroughly investigate this crime against humanity.

Palestinian sentiments expressed to this observer by refugees in Damascus and Homs seem largely in keeping with what the Syrian government has been saying—namely that Western accusations of government involvement are probably false—and like many others they point to the illogical timing of the attack, just days after the arrival of the inspectors. A change from this initial tentative conclusion is not impossible, however.

Near Irbid one now hears estimates of more than 1,500 killed, with more victims being discovered still, while figures cited by the Unified Medical Bureau for Eastern Gouta are even higher.  One Palestinian member of Yarmouk’s Popular Committee, whose family village is near Safad, pointed to the location of the attacks—Irbin, Jobar, Zamalka and Ain Tarma, rebel strongholds in the portion of the Ghouta east of Damascus, as well as the town of Muadhamiya which is maybe five miles south.

One reason the casualty figures are so high, people from the gassed areas explain, is due to lack of air conditioning. Most residents in this area sleep with their windows opened; victims died in their beds during the early morning attack.

As of morning on 8/23/13, many of the remaining Palestinians in Yarmouk are seeking somewhere to flee to, visibly afraid that chemical weapons will be used in Yarmouk in the coming days.

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Syria and Lebanon and can be reached c/o fplamb@gmail.com