US, Israeli and Saudi-funded Terrorists Destabilizing Syria Now Under Fire in Lebanon

US, Israeli and Saudi-funded Terrorists Destabilizing Syria Now Under Fire in Lebanon


US, Israeli and Saudi-funded Terrorists Destabilizing Syria Now Under Fire in Lebanon

According to a 2007 New Yorker article by Seymour Hersh, “The Redirection,” the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia had been assembling a region-wide army of extremist-mercenaries to battle Hezbollah in Lebanon, destabilize and overthrow Syria, and create a united front against Iran. The forces recruited for this effort would come from the ranks of the CIA-created “Arab foreign legion,” Al Qaeda itself – extremist groups fresh back from fighting US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, including listed terror organizations like the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) from Libya.

Hersh’s 2007 report exposed the groundwork for the very violence unfolding in Syria today, and now Lebanon. Forces to destabilize Syria were primarily to be staged in northern Lebanon, as explained in the article, and indeed the heaviest fighting over the last year has been seen in the Syrian city of Homs, just across the border from northern Lebanon. Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad and his government have been, since the beginning of the violence, attempting to illustrate just this – explained in detail in 2007, and demonstratively being carried out today, with responsibility for deadly bombings being claimed by terrorists, the Pentagon itself admitting Al Qaeda is present in Syria, and reports indicating foreign fighters, weapons, and cash are flowing over Syria’s borders.

Lebanon’s Turn?

Now, the very staging ground in northern Lebanon being used to destabilize neighboring Syria has erupted into violence. Not by Syrian troops crossing the border, but by indigenous Lebanese factions facing off against each other. News is trickling out slowly and the Western media appears intent on keeping the violence as nebulous and confused as possible, but initial information indicates that extremist groups backed by the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia are fighting factions connected to Hezbollah. Extremist leaders across the region are attempting to frame the violence as “Sunni verses Shi’ia,” a ploy Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah warned against back in 2007:

“Nasrallah accused the Bush Administration of working with Israel to deliberately instigate fitna, an Arabic word that is used to mean “insurrection and fragmentation within Islam.” “In my opinion, there is a huge campaign through the media throughout the world to put each side up against the other,” he said. “I believe that all this is being run by American and Israeli intelligence.” (He did not provide any specific evidence for this.) He said that the U.S. war in Iraq had increased sectarian tensions, but argued that Hezbollah had tried to prevent them from spreading into Lebanon. (Sunni-Shiite confrontations increased, along with violence, in the weeks after we talked.)” -The Redirection, Seymour Hersh

Far from genuine sectarian violence, it was planned since 2007, to use terrorist proxies in a battle stretching from Lebanon to Iran with Arab nations from North Africa to the Middle East aiding the effort, dominated by freshly installed US proxies (Tunisia & Libya) and the Muslim Brotherhood, stated in Hersh’s 2007 article to be wards of the West.
Violence has raged for nearly a week, in and around Lebanon’s northern port city of Tripoli. While being depicted as violence “spilling over” from Syria, it is clear that the violence is indigenous, sectarian in nature, and directly related to the larger conflict envisioned by US-Israeli-Saudi machinations in 2007 – pitting Sunnis against Shi’ia. An editorial from NOW Lebanon reveals the “sectarian” nature of the violence in Lebanon and how both sides identify as either supporters or opponents of the neighboring Syrian government.

This prevailing “sectarian” aspect reveals what has been stated by geopolitical analysts since the beginning of unrest in Syria – that the violence was driven not by “pro-democratic” aspirations, but by sectarian violence exploited for the sole purpose of advancing the agenda of foreign meddlers – sectarian violence that has now manifested itself in attacks on Christians, Druze, and Alawites, as well as moderate Sunnis across Syria in the midst of this so-called “democratic revolution.”

The sectarian violence now unfolding in Tripoli is not unheard of in Lebanon. The Lebanese military has already been reportedly deployed but is sitting on the sidelines as factions war in the streets. The violence may ebb, as it has in the past, but with the Syrian unrest reaching a critical point and foreign powers desperate to change momentum that’s been working against them, foreign-backed terrorist forces could try to ignite a wider sectarian battle in Lebanon. This could be to paralyze Hezbollah ahead of either a coup de grâce delivered to Syria by Turkey, or to simply inflame the entire region in conflict, making the movement of weapons, cash, and foreign support to proxy forces easier to move around, as well as grease the skids for introducing a Kosovo-style intervention.

Regardless, “sectarian” differences between Sunni and Shi’ia Muslims were planned for exploitation since at least as early as 2007 by the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, for the sole purpose of advancing their self-serving hegemonic agendas throughout the region. The violence that both sides are playing into will deprive their communities of the security and stability needed for all to prosper and progress, and ultimately leave them at the mercy of foreign dominion.

Source: Land Destroyer

Lebanese Agencies Crack “Al-CIA-da” In Iraq Cell, Tripoli Gun Battles Erupt In Response

[This is in no way an interfaith fight, as the Western media insists—This is a gunfight between Syrian and Saudi proxies right on the streets of Tripoli.  After the “Al-CIA-da” cell was uncovered, the Saudi network shifted to “Plan B,” open warfare in Tripoli.  Allegedly “sectarian warfare” broke-out after the government arrest of al-Mawlawi for contacting an Al-Qaeda In Iraq cell while recently in Syria.  The video below shows his arrest, after being lured in under pretense of free govt. health care, video follows:]

“Fire fights engulfed Syria Street, which divides the two areas and has long been a fault-line between the two communities. ‘Where they clashed is a kind of Saudi-Syrian fault-line, where Sunni-Shia differences are aired,’ said Osama Safa, a Beirut-based analyst.’”

Security Agencies Uncover Terrorist Network Linked to al-Mawlawi

إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية

by Naharnet



Security agencies succeeded in the past few days in uncovering a terrorist network with local, Arab, and European links, reported al-Joumhouria newspaper on Tuesday.

It said that the confessions of one of the detainees led to the arrest of Sunni Islamist Shadi al-Mawlawi, a development which sparked armed clashes in the northern city of Tripoli over the weekend.

The General Security detained in Tripoli last week Hamza Mahmoud Tarbey whose confessions led to al-Mawlawi’s arrest.

The six-member network includes three Lebanese individuals and a national from each of Qatar, Palestine, and Jordan.

They have each been arrested at various times in the past in Lebanon, added al-Joumhouria.

Sources told the newspaper that this was the first time in Lebanon that an entire network is arrested.

Military Tribunal Judge Saqr Saqr had charged on Monday al-Mawlawi and the five other network members with forming an armed terrorist group and undermining the authority of the state, as well as having links to the al-Qaida.

He later issued an arrest warrant against al-Mawlawi.

Prominent security sources told As Safir newspaper on Tuesday that the General Security Department took the initiative to arrest al-Mawlawi given the evidence against him.

Investigations with him soon proved the department right as he confessed to the charges against him, added the sources.

They revealed that a European power contributed information on al-Mawlawi’s terrorist activity outside of Lebanon.

Al-Mawlawi was arrested on Saturday after the General Security Department lured him to an office at Finance Minister Mohammed al-Safadi’s welfare association in Tripoli.

His arrest sparked clashes between the rival Tripoli neighborhoods of Bab al-Tabbaneh and Jabal Mohsen.

Some opposition officials have accused the General Security of acting on foreign orders, while Interior Minister Marwan Charbel has summoned the officer who lured al-Mawlawi to the office for questioning over the manner in which the arrest was made.

Al-Mawlawi’s supporters say he was targeted because of his help for Syrian refugees fleeing to Lebanon.

The General Security Department detained a Jordanian called Abdulmalek Mohammed Youssef Othman Abdulsalam, who is linked to al-Qaida, the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat reported on Monday.

Abdulsalam was extradited by the Iranian authorities to Syria in the past few months, and then he entered Lebanon and was arrested when he was on his way to the Rafik Hariri International Airport.

Investigations revealed that Abdulsalam had continuous contacts with al-Qaida-linked figures in Afghanistan.

Gulf States Resist Saudi Invitation Into the Royal Kingdom

      Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, second right, seen upon his arrival with his bodyguards to the foreign ministers of the Gulf Cooperation Council "GCC"  meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Sunday, May 13, 2012. Gulf leaders will discuss a proposal for a closer political union, which Bahrain said could be modelled on the European Union. The union idea will be on the agenda of the consultative summit of the GCC countries to be hosted by Riyadh on Monday.       - Hassan Ammar      /AP Photo

Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, second right, seen upon his arrival with his bodyguards to the foreign ministers of the Gulf Cooperation Council "GCC" meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Sunday, May 13, 2012. Gulf leaders will discuss a proposal for a closer political union, which Bahrain said could be modelled on the European Union. The union idea will be on the agenda of the consultative summit of the GCC countries to be hosted by Riyadh on Monday. – Hassan Ammar /AP Photo

Gulf states delay decisions on closer ties

The State




RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Gulf Arab states said Monday they would delay any decisions on proposals for closer political and security ties, showing possible signs of internal discord over measures portrayed as potential shields against regional rival Iran and pro-reform challenges inspired by the Arab Spring.

The postponement announced at the meeting of Gulf Cooperation Council envoys in the Saudi capital of Riyadh appeared to reflect concerns within six-nation group over whether smaller nations would sacrifice their independence by handing too much clout to powerhouse Saudi Arabia.

It also suggested there were limits on how much the Western-allied bloc could integrate its policies, despite speaking with a common voice against Iran’s ambitions and the need to work together to preserve their ruling dynasties.

Read more here:

Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said the unity plans now require more study before bringing them to a vote among the member states: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates.

The move came as a surprise. The meeting was widely expected to endorse what has already happened on the ground: an effective "union" between Saudi Arabia and Bahrain whose embattled monarchy has been aided by Saudi troops and money.

"The aim of postponing the announcement of the union between the six countries is to bring onboard all the members and not only two," said the Saudi foreign minister.

But the Saudi-led vision of a super-state stretching from Kuwait to Oman still seems to be a hard sell. There are concerns about how much influence would be given to Saudi Arabia as the bloc’s de facto power, and whether its ultraconservative views could cast shadows over Western-friendly centers such as Dubai and Doha.

Worries about Saudi dominance have already frozen plans for a single Gulf currency.

The GCC, created in 1981, holds frequent discussions on region-wide policies and development initiatives, but member states retain wide autonomy.

"For all the sense more GCC integration makes, the challenges to a European Union-like structure is fraught with questions, challenges and potential pitfalls," said an editorial Monday in the Abu Dhabi-based The National newspaper, which often reflects the views of United Arab Emirates’ authorities.

"Closer integration with its neighbors is welcome, but not at the expense of losing the country’s unique influence."

Without doubt, however, the upheavals of the Arab Spring have forced stronger collective action from the wealthy Gulf states, which have stepped up their international roles to openly support rebel forces in places such as Libya and Syria.

At the same time, they have bonded together in clampdowns on perceived opposition groups in the Gulf and have taken a hard line against Shiite giant Iran, which it accuses of encouraging protests against the Sunni ruling systems in Bahrain and elsewhere. Iran denies the claims.

Last year, Saudi forces led 1,500 Gulf troops into tiny Bahrain to help prop up the kingdom’s Sunni dynasty against a Shiite-led uprising, which is now in its 15th month. The result has been a virtual melding of the two countries on the ground – with the Saudi and Bahraini flags often displayed in unison at the airport and some security checkpoints.

Opposition groups in Bahrain, however, have strongly denounced the calls for tighter bonds with Saudi Arabia and possibly other Gulf states. The head of Bahrain’s main Shiite political group, Al Wefaq, said referendums should be held to determine support for closer Gulf union.

"This is how governments that respect their people deal with such matters," said Sheik Ali Salman. "While here, the union is forcefully imposed, which shows how the governments, here, are just looking down on their peoples."

In Tehran, about 190 lawmakers – more than half Iran’s parliament – issued a statement condemning the union plans.

"This will relay Bahrain’s crisis to Saudi Arabia and drive the region toward more unrest. It will add to the problems," said the statement, which was read on Iranian state radio.

Murphy reported from Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Associated Press writers Reem Khalifa in Manama, Bahrain, and Nasser Karimi in Tehran, Iran, contributed to this report.

Saudi Conniving To Create Wahabbi Super-Caliphate To Rule Over Entire Middle East

An Invitation to War


Diplomatic Courier

The Saudis are making promises intended to convince Americans and Israelis that they have no reason to worry about the price and supply of oil. They are hoping that their pledges will encourage someone else to remove the leaders of Iran before Iran displaces the United States in the region.

Should there be a conflict with Iran, Saudi prince Ali al-Naimi pledged early in February that the price of oil would not exceed US$100 per barrel. He was speaking of West Texas Intermediate , which is an isolated American market. At the time, WTI was trading at just under $100 while Brent Crude, which makes up 60 percent of the world oil market, was trading $20 higher.

Six weeks after the Prince made the pledge on CNBC, he said at a forum of petroleum ministers in Kuwait that the current price near $125 for Brent Crude was not justifiable. He continues to stress that Saudi Arabia alone and in conjunction with other producers can satisfy any and all market demands.

He gave the same assurance during the Libyan civil war. The Prince said that Saudi Arabia could pump 12 million barrels a day and could supply the market for the next eighty-eight years, but there is no indication that they replaced the lost 1.3 million barrels per day of Libyan oil. Strategic petroleum reserves in the U.S. and else where had to be opened to avoid shortages.

At that time, they were pumping 9 million barrels. Today, they are producing 10.9 million. Using the Prince’s own figures, that leaves a surplus of 1.1 million barrels to cover any unforeseen eventuality.

Since January of 2008, Saudi policy – to function as a swing producer that serves to smooth price changes by altering production levels – has undergone a shift. The hardening position of the Saudis reflects their growing anxiety about their domestic problems. Over the last thirty years, the Saudi population has tripled; and the Kingdom suffers from a twenty percent unemployment rate, with youth suffering the worst effects. Worried that the unrest of the Arab Spring would spread to the Kingdom, King Abdullah increased the budget by US$130 billion to provide five hundred thousand low-cost houses and other social benefits.

Paying for the hefty increase in spending leaves little financial flexibility for the Saudis to lower prices, especially because 90 percent of the national revenue comes from the state-owned petroleum industry. According to the International Institute of Finance, the Saudis will need to get a minimum price of eighty-eight dollars per barrel to support their economy.

Other than Saudi Arabia, there are no producers with any surplus production of any consequence, which leaves the world oil market in a precarious position. How precarious was made evident at the beginning of March, when the Iranian news service reported that a pipeline in Saudi Arabia was on fire. Prices jumped several dollars, until the story was revealed to be fiction. That the story appears to have originated with the Iranian news service should be taken as a warning.

The false report, however, does indicate where oil production is the most vulnerable. An Iranian commando raid into Saudi Arabia would be far more effective at cutting the flow of oil than mining the Strait of Hormuz, and would not interrupt the commerce on the Persian Gulf. Even more vulnerable to Iranian sabotage are the oil fields of Southern Iraq, where oil production has been finally restored to 2.6 million barrels per day.

Iranian sabotage of the pipelines or other facilities would be a simple matter and would wipe out the total claimed surplus Saudi capacity. With so many possible threats, traders have driven up prices by fifteen percent since the beginning of the year, to between $115 and $125 per barrel for Brent Crude. According to the Bank of America, a price of $130 per barrel will be enough to move the world economy into a recession.

Why is the Prince so eager to convince the world that the supply is under control? The answer is the loss of the buffer zone along the Northern frontier since U.S. forces left Iraq.

Over the last thirty years, the two rivals have fenced through proxies. With a pro-Iranian regime ruling Iraq, They face the possibility of an Iranian army using Iraq as a bridge. They would be able to meet on a battlefield; and that has altered the geo-military reality to the advantage of Iran.

The threat from Iraq is added to the potential support by Iran of a Shia fifth column in the oil-producing eastern provinces next to Bahrain, where the 70 percent majority Shia population is revolting, and the support of a Hauthi movement in northern Yemen just across the southern border.

One can understand why King Abdullah has urged the United States “to cut off the head of the snake,” meaning Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Cutting off the head of the snake is more than abolishing the development of nuclear weapons – the king wants regime change. The Saudis see Ayatollah Khamenei as Supreme Leader of fanatical, heretical Persian rivals for domination of the region.

A sign of the Saudi determination to have the Iranian regime removed came on December 5, 2011 when Prince Turki Al-Faisal threatened that the Kingdom would purchase nuclear weapons and begin building its own if the Iranians acquire the capacity or an actual weapon. The promise of a low oil price is the Saudi carrot; the threat to go nuclear is the stick.

One factor that is restraining those advocating war with Iran is the possibility of an oil shortage and its impact upon the world economy. Prince Ali al-Naimi is making a major effort to give the reluctant the assurance that it is safe to attack. Oil is being pumped at record rates and going into storage with 10 million barrels being held at Rotterdam, Sidi Kerir, and Okinawa. Another 33 million barrels is being held in tankers. If after all of this effort, his promise proves to be meaningless, who will remember or care that he made it?

Felix Imonti is the retired director of a private equity firm and currently lives in Japan. He has published a history book, Violent Justice, and articles in the fields of economics and international politics. He specializes in the Middle East.

Africa: Neo Colonialism Swarms Continent?

Africa: Neo Colonialism Swarms Continent?


The goal of Pan-Africanism was to liberate Africa and create a wholly independent continent. It was meant to emancipate Africa in all spheres, and enhance Africans to be determiners of their own destiny. The unitary support endowed by African countries during the liberation of Africa was a symbol of the true spirit of African brotherhood devoid of any connotations or hidden agendas.

Westerners are pretending to be philanthropic in order to shift the blame to leaders whom they see as dictators and bad governors. As a show of their ‘façade’ benevolence they have undertaken to sponsor dubious aid and security programmes via specific NGOs for the sole purpose of regime change.

Western atrocities have continued unabated when one recounts what has happened in Libya and all other disturbances and killings in North Africa. All these incidences are testimony that the westerners are simply shedding crocodile tears. The West cannot afford the luxury of leaving Africa alone and it explains why there was a lot of resistance from the colonisers for Africa to attain political independence.

Dear reader, the crux of the matter is the hypocrisy of the West. The West has reconstructed their approach and strategies by influencing Africa’s elite responsible for economic and political issues.

They have simply refined methods for attaining the same old interests or what some can refer to as covert colonialism. Visionary leaders like Kwame Nkrumah predicted that Africa would be overtaken by new forms of colonialism. Neo-colonialism is aided by a complex web of influences and is a complicated process.

The master plan was drafted in such a way that any country that does not comply is liable to punishment. An example is the current Western induced Zimbabwe crisis. The Western countries are taking advantage of globalisation and thus use international institutions such as the World Bank and IMF as political tools to pursue their own national interests by providing policies and conditions which are not compatible to the African problem.

Africa cannot afford to continue taking the same medicine prescribed for different patients and different ailments, what a doctor? Through their Western oriented NGO’s, the EU and the US are trying to influence neo-liberal policies. This is evidenced by their pressure over petty issues of dual citizenship and homosexuality (cheap politics) whilst there are more vital issues of state and governance.

They always speak of African politics, African development, economics, human rights . . . poking their noses in African affairs without the consent of the African masses, as if Africans do not have the brains to solve their own problems. Africa should wake up and smell the coffee. The West is sponsoring neo-liberal political parties to dethrone revolutionary governments and establish their own puppet systems.

If we follow the events in Cote d’ Ivoire, Tunisia and recently Libya, they further expose how the West is using human rights issues as a strategic weapon meant for national gain. They have simply adopted new methods to attain the same strategic interests, they now use pseudo political players whilst they are the major forces of influence behind the scenes.

They bomb to reconstruct!, supply weapons for brother to fight brother. They cause turmoil and confusion to only come in as rescuers, killing more people! They use NATO, and test its new weapons on African soil in promotion of human rights!

With much exception from the Hobbesian theory (Thomas Hobbes) which says that states are bound by national interests, one can possibly notice that the US, UK, EU have engaged in new ways of recolonising Africa through their neo-liberal principles. Hans Morgenthau one of the founding fathers of realism defined politics in as the continuous struggle for power and dominance over scarce resources.

The writers Givemore Mugadzaweta, Tichaedza Chipinda and Vimbikayi Mafika are students of Peace and Governance at Bindura University of Science Education.

Milestone Meeting of CSTO Collective Security Council Tomorrow In Moscow

An anniversary meeting of CSTO Collective Security Council will take place on May 15

via President of Russia.

A meeting of the CSTO Collective Security Council dedicated to 20th anniversary of the Collective Security Treaty and 10th anniversary of CSTO will take place in Moscow on May 15, 2012.

The CSTO Collective Security Council meeting will be attended by heads of all member states: President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan, President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko, President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev, President of Kyrgyzstan Almazbek Atambayev, President of Russia Vladimir Putin, President of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon and President of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov.

An informal meeting of the Council of CIS Heads of State will be held in Moscow on the same day.