Land Destroyer Report
March 15, 2012
Guardian skewers own credibility with hamfisted Wikileaks knock-off aimed at Syria.
editorial by Tony Cartalucci
“It is impossible to rule out the possibility of fakes in the email cache, but…” “The Assad E-Mails,” London Guardian, March 14, 2012.
This sentence right here should have immediately halted the publication of anything revolving around an alleged cache of e-mails provided to the Guardian by the obviously compromised “Syrian opposition.” The source is clearly biased, politically motivated, and their information unconfirmed. Yet the Guardian decided to run with the story anyway, casting doubt on their own objectivity, journalistic integrity, and their true motivation, which now is clearly not “journalism.”
The Guardian, in their explanation as to why they decided to publish unconfirmed information included the following statement, “we believe the more detailed picture of the workings of Assad’s inner circle that emerges from the mails, and the extent to which he and his wife have managed to sustain their luxurious lifestyle, are also of public interest.” A “more detailed picture” that is in fact unverified and most likely a politically motivated fabrication is indeed of “public interest” if you are trying to sell a particular narrative regardless of the actual facts.
The job of a journalist is to report the facts impartially to help inform the public and enable them to make accurate decisions in regards to a vast array of issues that affect their daily lives as well as the collective well-being of their communities and nations. A journalist is not to irresponsibly publish anything that comes across their desk, applying sensational headlines while making incredible innuendos only to post disclaimers halfway down the page that the information they are attempting to foist upon the public as fact and “truth,” “may not be verified or true.”
That is propaganda, deceit, manipulation, and above all, fraud. Of course, in the Guardian’s quest to “verify” these alleged e-mails, they contact other propagandists within the same circle of corporate-media outfits, including ABC News (whose Barber Walters’ interview with Assad was a humiliating disgraceful display of how far America’s journalistic establishment has sunk.) Another source contacted to “confirm” whether or not at least some of the e-mails were genuine was former British Ambassador to Syria “Sir” Andrew Green, whose former employer, the British Foreign Ministry, is a viciously adamant opponent of Assad’s government working directly with Syrian opposition harbored in London, with members of the notorious Syrian Observatory for Human Rights literally passing in and out of Foreign Secretary William Hague’s office.
So in the Guardian’s quest to verify what they claim “would be difficult for even the best resourced hoaxer or intelligence agency to gather or fabricate,” they contact two vast organizations who just so happen to possess not only the capacity to fabricate such lies, but the motive and a demonstrative history of working actively against the Syrian government to undermine and ultimately oust it from power.
Both the Western corporate-media and the British Foreign Ministry are more than capable of using their official contacts with Bashar Al-Assad to bolster otherwise fabricated e-mails, as well as hand over the “cache” to activists they work with on a daily basis. In fact, it is most likely during these daily meetings that Syrian activists helped refine the cache’s fabricated contents to ensure a credible narrative was produced to match what the Syrian public already knows about the Assad family.
Wikileaks performed a similar function during the onset of the Tunisian and Egyptian “Arab Spring” unrest. Now fully confirmed to be a US-engineered geopolitical destabilization planned years in advance, it is clear that Wikileaks is a creation and tool of the US State Department, leveraged by the corporate establishment-media with whom “anti-establishment” Julian Assange works so closely with, to help augment, not hinder the agenda of Wall Street and London. The impact of Wikileaks has been severely diminished by deceitful “journalists” and corporate lobbyists who have been exposed using the less than reputable word of the US State Department and its ambassadors to sell the US State Department’s very own agenda to the public.
The Syrian opposition itself, has been mired from the very beginning in one scandal after another, as their attempts to manipulate the perception of the world in tandem with their foreign sponsors is exposed repeatedly, beginning with “Gay Girl in Damascus” who turned out to be a 40 year old American man living in the UK, to “Syrian Danny” who was recently caught staging fake gunfire off camera and getting into character before giving a hysterical casualty report to CNN’s Anderson Cooper. Cooper would go on to admit that Western coverage of events in Syria is entirely based on unverified, biased accounts provided solely by the Syrian opposition and exposed liars like “Danny.”
With cities being restored to order now in quick succession, and Russia and China steadfastly denying Wall Street and London another opportunity to repeat their craven atrocities committed in Libya, the stops are being pulled out and every imaginable gambit is being pursued, even rehashes of already worn-out gambits like Wikileaks-style e-mail caches.
Since the Guardian wants to play the game of speculation, we can in turn speculate about their latest reportage on “The Assad E-mails.” It appears that the Guardian is working in tandem with other members of the Western media and the British Foreign Ministry to undermine the Assad family and his support across Syria which has just recently manifested itself in nation-wide pro-Assad rallies, bitterly renounced by the media who is supposed to simply report the facts.
The Guardian, by doing so, has resigned its journalistic integrity while their staff members, including Robert Booth, Luke Harding, Angelique Chrisafis, and Matthew Taylor who signed off on this “junk journalism,” should never be considered, believed, trusted or labeled as anything but propagandists again. They have willfully violated the trust their credentials erroneously lend them and have further eroded Western journalism in what appears to be a process of irreparable decay.
Whether or not the e-mails are legitimate is not really even the issue – the issue is the untenable, unjournalistic process with which this alleged information was approached and handled. Would the Guardian give equal consideration to a cache of e-mails produced by the Assad government regarding Syrian opposition leaders actively collaborating with NATO, the US and British government as well as terrorists from Iraq and Libya?
Certainly not, especially when outright admissions by the opposition themselves are glossed over by Western propagandists. The Guardian has established they have an agenda, that is to undermine and remove Assad from power, with the truth being nothing more than another barrier to remove in the process.
March 15, 2012 | Categories: co-opting and/or destabilization, news, sovereignty, Syria, tyranny, war | Leave a comment
by Stephen Lendman
Global Research
March 13, 2012
On March 11, Assad repeated what he’s said numerous times. He’s “ready to support any honest effort to solve the situation.”
He told former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan (Ban Ki-moon’s envoy appointed with Washington’s approval) that doing so depends on accurately assessing conditions on the ground. It also requires admitting Syria’s dealing with Western-backed insurgents.
As a result, he’s obligated to protect Syrians from heavily armed gangs. Violence won’t stop until chaos, instability, and terrorism they cause ends.
Annan came to Syria on a mission. A reliable imperial tool, his one-way settlement terms involved Assad accepting Western demands.
Assad said “no political dialogue or political activity can succeed while there are armed terrorist groups operating and spreading chaos and instability.”
Annan wanted none of it. His pro-Western marching orders mandated he follow them to the letter. Assad never had a chance for honest dialogue and peaceful resolution. Washington won’t tolerate it.
Russian-Led Five-Point Conflict Resolution Plan
Over the weekend, Russia, China, and Arab League states met in Cairo. They agreed on a five-point plan. It includes:
“(1) First, to stop violence, wherever it comes from.
(2) Second, to create an impartial and free monitoring mechanism.
(3) Third, no external interference.
(4) Fourth, unhindered delivery of humanitarian aid to all Syrians.
(5) Fifth, first support for [UN and LAS Special Envoy] Kofi Annan’s mission in order to start political dialogue between the government and all opposition groups.”
Despite agreement, post-meeting comments revealed unresolved disputes.
Saudi Arabia criticized Russian and Chinese Security Council vetoes. Despite clear evidence, Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani claimed:
“There are no armed gangs. The systematic killing came from the Syrian government side for many months. After that, the people were forced to defend themselves so the regime labeled them armed gangs.”
He also called the Russian and Chinese ceasefire proposal inadequate. In response, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said:
“My country has always supported people’s rights and their striving for freedom and development. This resolution has a chance to be agreed upon, provided we are not guided by the desire to support the opposition armed groups to win the battle in the cities.”
“But if we are driven by the desire to make sure there is no fighting in the cities and towns, then the relevant proposals are on the table, and we have plenty of opportunities to agree on them.”
Separately he said Assad’s confronting armed gangs with Al Qaeda members. They’re involved in violence, killings and atrocities.
On March 12, Syria’s Information Minister Adnan Mahmoud accused armed gangs of committing an “atrocious massacre against women, children and elderly citizens in Karm al-Zaytoun, and mutilating their bodies in order to put pressure to elicit international stances against Syria.”
He called Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other complicit states accomplices in willful terrorism. “We’ve grown accustomed to the bloody escalation of these terrorist groups in committing massacres, murdering citizens and attacking public and private establishments which preceeds international meetings,” he said.
He called Karm al-Zaytoun’s massacre one of many armed gangs committed. A local resident this time said ordinary people were targeted, including family members and a 75-year old man. A local woman added that insurgents rape, kill, throw bodies in streets, then film them for Al Jazeera and Saudi’s al-Arabia TV.
Al Jazeera’s War on Syria
Once a reliable news and information source, Qatar-based Al Jazeera abandoned professionalism and integrity. Like Western media scoundrels, it broadcasts propaganda, not truth and full disclosure.
Last April, its Beirut chief and popular host Ghassan Bin Jiddo resigned. Others remaining at the time criticized AJ’s biased/falsified reporting, especially on Libya, Bahrain, Syria, and elsewhere in the region.
Last September, top AJ executive Wadah Khanfar quit after eight years heading its satellite news operation. In 2003, he became managing director, then later made director general.
Qatar royal family member Sheikh Hamad Ben Jassem Al-Thani replaced him. He formerly chaired its board with veto power over program content. Now directing programming assures compromised coverage lacking credibility. AJ’s fall from grace hit bottom. Khanfar had enough and quit. He wasn’t the last to go.
On March 12, Russia Today said AJ again lost staff over biased reporting. Beirut staff members resigned over falsified Syria reporting.
Last week, managing director Hassan Shaaban, correspondent Ali Hashem, and a producer quit. The Lebanese newspaper Al Akhbar said Hashem left because AJ “refused to show photos he had taken of armed fighters clashing with the Syrian army in Wadi Khaled.”
Instead, he was criticized for disloyalty. Hashem was also furious over AJ’s refusal to cover regime instigated Bahraini violence. At the same time, it falsified reports on Assad. “In Bahrain,” he said, “we were seeing pictures of a people being butchered by the ‘Gulf’s oppression machine,’ and for Al Jazeera, silence was the name of the game.”
Beirut’s producer left because AJ wouldn’t cover Syria’s overwhelmingly approved constitutional reform referendum. Former AJ correspondent Afshin Tattansi said it’s now a pro-Western tool no different from BBC and Western media. The way it covers Syria and most else is totally one-sided.
Russia and China Oppose Foreign Intervention
Both countries strongly oppose replicating Libya’s model in Syria. Their vetos and resolute stand so far prevented Washington’s interventionist scheme succeeding, but for how long. Regime change by any means is planned, including war.
Ominous signs suggest it. Paris-based Syrian National Council (SNC) head Burhan Ghalioun calls no solution possible without military intervention.
Washington, Britain, France, Israel, and rogue Arab states want it. For months, they’ve recruited, funded, armed and trained rogue killer gangs. They’ve destabilized Syria to facilitate Western intervention. Annan’s mission was more theater than honest conflict resolution diplomacy.
Like Ban-Ki-moon, his entire UN Secretary-General tenure reflected betrayal and failure. An imperial tool, he never achieved peace or worked for it.
He didn’t condemn or act against Washington’s devastating Iraqi economic sanctions. They killed 1.5 million or more defenseless men, women and children. Silence betrayed his complicity.
He showed it later in Washington’s 2003 war, its 2001 Afghan one, and Israel’s Palestinian occupation and crimes against humanity.
For a decade (January 1996 through December 2006) go-along position supported imperial Washington. His Syria mission mandated reinventing his earlier role. Instead of seeking peaceful resolution, he subverted it. As a result, he came, dialogued, and left with no deal because what he offered no responsible leader would accept.
His one-way terms demanded Assad “stop the killing and the misery and the abuse that is going on today and then give time for a political settlement.” He ended talks telling Assad the ball’s in his court. He also said he’ll try to unite opposition against him. Some diplomat.
On Sunday, he flew to Qatar to meet its pro-Western rogue emir (Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani), another leader complicit in Western war crimes. He actively supported NATO’s Libya killing machine. He’s now involved in stoking Syrian violence and instability. It involves targeted assassinations, killing civilians, and wrongly blaming Assad.
He, Russia, China, and others want peaceful conflict resolution. Washington plans military intervention. On March 10, Washington Post writer Karen DeYoung headlined, “Talk of military aid rises as hopes fade for peaceful Syria resolution,” saying:
Washington and key allies began discussing “potential military involvement in Syria….Possibilities include directly arming opposition forces (of course, ongoing for many months), sending troops to guard a humanitarian corridor or ‘safe zone’ for the rebels (effectively a ground-based no-fly zone assuring war), or an air assault on Syrian air defenses, according to (US) officials and other” anti-Assad nations.
In other words, after failing to get Security Council approval, circumventing it’s now planned to accomplish the same thing belligerently.
DeYoung said governments involved in discussions “remain deeply divided over the scope of any intervention, how, when it would happen, and who would participate.”
Many question its legitimacy. Of course, it has none, nor did NATO’s Libya intervention. So what hope has Syria to prevent Washington’s regime change plans by any means, and perhaps intent to go it alone if willing allies aren’t found or enough of them.
On March 8, Turkey’s President Abdullah Gul expressed concern about intervention “from outside the region,” but remains firmly allied with Western regime change plans.
Syria’s state media SANA said the nation’s Italy-based expat community firmly rejects foreign intervention. It supports Assad’s reform process.
“Under the motto – No to Foreign Interference, No to War and Yes to Peace….No to Armed Gangs….No to Fabricated Media and No to Economic Siege on the Syrian People – the Syrian and Arab communities in Italy staged a huge mass rally in the center of the Italian capital, Rome, on Sunday.”
Participants called for denouncing anti-Assad goals through killings, terror tactics, and efforts to destabilize and destroy Syria.
On March 8, huge pro-Assad crowds massed in Damascus’ Bahart Square. Participants rejected all forms of foreign interference. So do nonviolent anti-Assad protesters.
Damascus participants chanted national songs, held Syrian flags and banners, and opposed all schemes undermining Syria’s stability, independence and dignity.
International law prohibits interfering in other countries’ internal affairs. Among others, the 1933 Montevideo Convention of Rights and Duties is very explicit.
Article 8 says “No state has the right to intervene in the internal or external affairs of another.”
Under Article 10, differences between states “should be settled by recognized pacific methods.”
Article 11 calls sovereign state territory “inviolable….”
The UN Charter also mandates state sovereignty, equality among all nations, non-interference in their domestic affairs, self-determination, non-interference in other states’ internal affairs, settling disputes peacefully, and avoiding threats or force.
Washington spurns international and US law. As a result, independent states like Syria are vulnerable. Months of externally-generated violence continues.
Replacing its independent regime with a pro-Western one is planned. If current methods fail, expect war. It’s America’s last resort and sometimes its preferred one.
Humanity wonders who’s next and whether rogue US policies may engulf the world in flames and destroy it. Maybe it’s the only way Washington’s killing machine can be stopped. Nothing else so far worked.
Given America run by warmongering zealots spurning peace, be scared. Be very scared.
Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net .
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/ .
Stephen Lendman is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Stephen Lendman
[hat tip: Infowars]
March 13, 2012 | Categories: co-opting and/or destabilization, news, sovereignty, Syria, tyranny, war | 2 Comments
By Dana Gabriel
Be Your Own Leader
March 12, 2012
Through a series of bilateral meetings, U.S. and Canadian officials are busy working out the details of the perimeter security action plan. This includes a recent joint crime forum that dealt with border and law enforcement issues. These various discussions are part of the implementation process which when finished would bring about the complete transformation of the northern border and another step closer in the creation of a fully integrated North American security perimeter.
In early March, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano met with Canadian Justice Minister Rob Nicholson and Public Safety Minister Vic Toews as part of the Cross-Border Crime Forum. On the agenda was, “transnational crime issues such as organized crime, counter-terrorism, smuggling, economic crime and other emerging cross-border threats.” Both countries also signed a memorandum of understanding on the Dissemination and Exchange of Information to combat human smuggling and trafficking. The meetings were used as an opportunity to further advance U.S.-Canada cooperation in areas of law enforcement, criminal justice and intelligence. This ties in with my previous article which detailed the Obama administration’s new counter-narcotics strategy for the northern border that includes closer collaboration with Canada in the war on drugs. Much of the joint crime forum discussions focused around the progress being made on the Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness Action Plan, announced in December 2011.
A readout of Attorney General Holder and Secretary Napolitano’s visit to Ottawa explained that talks with their Canadian counterparts centered largely around promoting the perimeter security agreement. It highlighted, “efforts to develop the next-generation of integrated cross-border law enforcement operations, and improve information sharing practices.” Attorney General Holder stated, “Our productive discussions today at the Cross Border Crime Forum go a long way toward advancing a key pillar of the Beyond the Border initiative that President Obama and Prime Minister Harper announced last year: integrated law enforcement that adds value to our relationship by leveraging shared resources, improving information sharing and increasing coordination of efforts.” Secretary Napolitano emphasized that, “We will continue to work with Canada to further enhance information sharing and integrate our cross border law enforcement operations, strengthening the national and economic security of both our nations.” As part of the perimeter security deal, both countries are moving ahead with harmonizing intelligence sharing capabilities.
The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) recently hosted stakeholder meetings regarding programs and initiatives found in the Beyond the Border action plan. CBP Acting Deputy Commissioner Thomas Winkowski confirmed that the, “agreement forged by President Obama and Prime Minister Harper is about strengthening and expediting trade and travel between our countries.” He went on to say, “It’s about finding common-sense solutions to our most complicated problems. And it’s about extending national security for both of our nations, well away from the border.” CBSA President Luc Portelance acknowledged, “As these joint meetings with stakeholders indicate, we are committed to working with our U.S. partners to bring about greater consistency, efficiency and predictability in the management of our shared border.” The perimeter security deal will mean deeper integration between both border agencies. Some have warned that it might force Canada to harmonize its immigration and refugee policies with U.S. practices. Over a period of time, this could lead to the creation of a binational institution that would manage the northern border.
Steven Chase of the Globe and Mail reported that during recent border security discussions, Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary of International Affairs, Alan Bersin commented on how, “he believes the time will come when Canada and the United States have a joint organization to handle border controls – what he described as a NORAD border.” Bersin is quoted as saying, “Why should we have separate admissibility processes … if, in fact, North American security would suggest that a Canadian and a U.S. immigrations and customs official ought to be working together to clear people in Frankfurt who are coming into Canada, to clear them such that they would be able then to come seamlessly across (the joint border into) the United States.” An article by Christopher Sands of the Hudson Institute also included another top level Homeland Security official using the same NORAD analogy to describe future joint border controls. David Heyman explained that this, “could be a model for how the two countries might handle the protection of citizens against 21st-century threats from terrorism, pandemics, cyberattacks, and organized crime.”
On February 16, the Conservative government introduced the Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act. The legislation proposed, “reforms to the asylum system to make it faster and fairer, measures to address human smuggling, and the authority to make it mandatory to provide biometric data.” The new changes would put Canada in line with the U.S. and other international partners. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney praised the use of biometrics as an, “important new tool to help protect the safety and security of Canadians by reducing identity fraud and identity theft.” He added, it “will improve our ability to keep violent criminals and those who pose a threat to Canada out. In short, biometrics will strengthen the integrity of Canada’s immigration system while helping facilitate legitimate travel.” Under the section about sharing relevant information to improve immigration and border determinations, the U.S.-Canada action plan calls for implementing, “systematic and automated biographic information-sharing capability by 2013 and biometric information-sharing capability by 2014.” There are fears that a joint biometric identification system would be used to track Canadians and Americans alike.
U.S.-Canada bilateral dialogue on strategic issues concerning the Beyond the Border deal continues as the action plan lays out deadlines where initiatives will be incrementally implemented over the next several years. The proposed changes promise to bring about a radical transformation of the northern border. This will further bring Canadian security practices in line with American ones and under the reach of the Department of Homeland Security.
Related articles by Dana Gabriel
Northern Border Drug Strategy Tied to Perimeter Security Deal
Perimeter Security and the Consolidation of North America
U.S. Dictating North American Air Travel Security
Advancing U.S.-Canada Economic, Energy and Security Integration
Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at beyourownleader.blogspot.com
March 13, 2012 | Categories: Canada, news, sovereignty, tyranny | Leave a comment
Democrat Party headquarters in Lake County, Florida has been flying an American flag with a face of Barack Obama on it. Yes, you read that correctly. The “Obama flag” features a huge picture of the face of Barack Obama in the area where the stars are usually located. To many Americans today, the American flag may be “just a piece of cloth”, but when I was young I was taught that one must never desecrate the American flag. The American flag is our highest national symbol. Millions of Americans have fought and died defending freedom and liberty under that banner. To see a photo of Barack Obama plastered on it is an absolute disgrace. Sadly, there are lots of these flags floating around. In fact, you can buy them online for $12.95. Down in Florida, the chairwoman of the Lake County Democratic Party took down the “Obama flag” after a group of veterans protested, but she also said that she is not promising that she will not put it back up and that she is going to consult an attorney about all of this.
