Rense & Celente – Society is Now a Rotten Fish [video]
Rense
August 16, 2012
Fish Rot from the head down and that is how Celente describes our society …
Will Kurds Fight Kurds – Roy Gutman [video]
108morris108
July 29, 2012
The Kurds of Northern Iraq have the most Independence of all Kurds and they are closely aligned with Turkey, will they allow the newly found autonomy for Syrian Kurds to be become a springboard for Anti Turkish activities?
Roy Gutman is a specialist in this area.
Although there was not time for me to present my question would other outside forces (NATO or Israel?) blackmail Turkey into being more antagonistic to Syria by supporting (militarily) the Kurds of Turkey?
This is his recent and often quoted article on this issue:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/07/26/157943/assad-hands-control-of-syrias.html
Apologies for the poor internet connection, which is why I allowed myself in the video – because his image becomes frozen.
Syria – The Media Lies of Aljazeera & the BBC – Shoruk [video]
108morris108
July 26, 2012
A film set was created for Tripoli (Libya) in Qatar, and they created fictitious demonstrations in order to sway public opinion worldwide. The same happened in Baghdad. And similar events are occurring in Syria. Many Journalists have left AlJazeera as a consequence. Shoruk explains.
BOMBSHELL: Defected Syrian Ambassador Admits Role in Killing US Troops
In Telegraph interview, Western-coddled Nawaf Fares admits he organized “Jihadi units” to fight US troops in Iraq.
by Tony Cartalucci
Update July, 15, 2012: Confessed terrorist Nawaf Fares has now called for “foreign military intervention,” in his latest interview, this time with CNN. During this interview, Fares repeated his farcical claims that the Syrian government was working with, not fighting against, “Al Qaeda,” but was more careful not to repeat admissions that he had a role in dealing with them. Fares’ role for the West is very simple, repeat even the most absurd claims made by the West against Syria, hoping that with his background, an “appeal to authority” can lend these narratives the credibility they factually lack.
July 14, 2012 – Nawaf Fares, former Syrian Ambassador to Iraq who just recently defected and is now harbored in Qatar, admitted in an interview with the London Telegraph that he personally organized “Jihadi units” to fight US troops in Iraq. Fares maintains that he did so under orders by the Syrian government, and that a recent string of bombings in Syria were carried out by “Al Qaeda” in coordination with Syrian security forces.
Image: Nawaf Fares, hailed a “hero” by the West for “defecting” from the Syrian government and joining the suspect “Syrian National Council,” has now admitted he was behind organizing “Jihadi units” that fought and killed US troops in Iraq. Undoubtedly these units he claims he created also killed British troops, as well as Iraqi fighters and civilians. His “hero” status is indicative of the dysfunction and morally depraved state of Western foreign policy.
Unfortunately for Nawaf Fares, who has just admitted to being an international terrorist, not only does he fail to provide any actual evidence to suggest the Syrian government had ordered or condoned his terrorist activities during the US occupation of Iraq (as even the Telegraph notes), nor provide any evidence at all that “Al Qaeda” had coordinated its bombing campaigns with Syrian security forces, but a myriad of confirmed reports and evidence already exist contradicting entirely Fares’ statements.
That President Bashar al-Assad is a “collaborator” with Al Qaeda is farcical at face value. The following headlines help illustrate the absurdity of Fares’ claims: “Al Qaeda head calls for fall of Assad” (AP), “Top US official: Al Qaeda in Iraq joining fight against Syria’s Assad” (McClatchy), “Al Qaeda’s Zawahiri calls for war to oust Syria’s Assad” (AP), just to name a few. Additionally it was reported by Seymour Hersh in a 2007 New Yorker article titled, “The Redirection,” that not only was Al Qaeda being arrayed against the Syrian government since as early as 2007, but it was in fact the United States, Israel, and the Gulf States that were organizing, funding, and arming them.
Casting further doubt on Fares’ claims, particularly regarding allegations that the Syrian government was behind bombings sweeping the country, Reuters in April 2012, ran an entire article covering the so-called Free Syrian Army (FSA) and their “tactical switch” to terrorist bombings in the face of superior military weapons and tactics employed by government security forces. Titled, “Outgunned Syria rebels make shift to bombs,” it states that Syrian extremists who had honed their skills fighting US and British troops in Iraq, had joined the ranks of the FSA militants to employ their bomb-making abilities against, not in collaboration with, the Syrian government.
The Reuters article specifically states:
“Some of these bombing skills may have been brought back from fighters who joined the Sunni insurgency in neighboring Iraq against the U.S. occupation forces. The presence of hardliners from a Syrian Sunni majority that feels oppressed by Assad and his fellow Alawites who dominate the administration has been among causes for concern among those who fear a sectarian civil war similar to that which devastated Iraq over the past decade.”
While even the Reuters article attempts to allay the fears of readers, suggesting that the anti-government militants would never attack civilian targets, reports from both Human Rights Watch (HRW) and the UN have documented cases where militants have committed sweeping atrocities specifically targeting civilians, including kidnapping for ransom, torture, and murder.
The HRW report titled, “Syria: Armed Opposition Groups Committing Abuses,” is broken into three parts, kidnapping, torture, and executions. And while the report attempts to focus mainly on atrocities carried out against security forces and government supporters, the mention of civilian victims is made as well.
In the face of such evidence, Reuters and Fares’ assurances that FSA terrorists are limiting their attacks only to military targets is wishful thinking at best, insulting deceit at worst, and illustrate a pattern of serial deceit used to manipulate the public’s perception to see in a positive light what is in reality a terrorist campaign.
Nawaf Fares – Indicative of the Fraud and Depravity of the Syrian “Opposition”
Fares, a self-confessed terrorist who admits he organized death squads to fight and kill Americans and undoubtedly civilians in neighboring Iraq, has leveled a series of accusations with no evidence, to provide the maximum amount of demonization possible against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
He has left a “regime” he finds unbearable, which he claims without evidence was carrying out a terrorist bombing campaign against its own people, and who supported “Jihadi units” to fight its regional neighbors – to then join a militant organization that has demonstratively and admittedly carried out bombing campaigns against the Syrian people, consists of extremist mercenaries from abroad sent to destabilize and destroy his nation, and guilty, by HRW and the UN’s own admissions, of the same atrocities and horrors Fares has claimed he defected from the government over.
Nawaf Fares comes across as a exaggerating opportunist, so overly eager to play his role, that he has tripped over himself and found both feet lodged firmly in his mouth. While the London Telegraph seems not to have a problem sitting down and talking with a man who admits he organized death squads that killed US and British troops, perhaps because of the complicit role Telegraph’s propaganda played in sending those troops into harm’s way to begin with, it will be more difficult for the US and British governments to similarly ignore his hamhanded admissions, if only to maintain a semblance of consistency. Qatar also finds itself in a quandary harboring a self-confessed terrorist.
If the US and British governments refuse to acknowledge or act upon this, perhaps the armed forces will – finally taking insult to having shed blood and lives for over a decade fighting the “War on Terror” only to see their perceived enemies given five-star lodging in Qatar and airtime on the evening news.
And finally, it is the people of all nations who must recognize, expose, boycott, and replace the corporate-financier interests driving this destructive increasingly unhinged agenda who – interests that are ultimately responsible for the creation, cultivation, and harboring of individuals like Nawf Fares.
Wikileaks Syria Emails – NATO’s Final Media Card [video]
Syrian Girl
July 8, 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vud1qFrG1qU
According to wikileaks Sarah Harrison, SO far these so cold embarrassments ‘Syria’s opponents, are that the emails reveal interactions between western companies http://resistance-episteme.tumblr.com/post/26637468789/rethinking-the-wikilea…
LulzSec was already exposed as an FBI operation earlier this year.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/mar/06/lulzsec-sabu-working-for-us-fbi
In a biography about assange by a guardian journalist it is revealed he deliberately with held damaging information about Israel.
http://www.infowars.com/book-julian-assange-held-back-wikileaks-about-u-s-isr…
In the past, wikileaks, building case for war with Iran, claiming paradoxically that Shi’ite iran was cooperating wahabist Al Qaeda, the CIA led organisation ideologically set on annihilate Iran.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/28/iran-regret-wikileaks-rev…
Wikileaks has been used as a tool to stir up an anti-putin campaign. And it is supposed to have been involved in sparking off the arab sping by by publishing derogatory material about now ousted Tunisian President Ben Ali leaked.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/01/23/webster-tarpley-wikileaks-a-cognitive…
Webster Tarpley has reported that Wikileaks is funded by george Soros.
http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2012/07/05/when-wiki-leaks-assange-syria-paperscov…
————–
Other wikileaks info
http://www.rys2sense.com/anti-neocons/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=23911
http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/06-07-2012/121582-wikileaks_assange-1/
http://www.infowars.com/wikileaks-a-big-dangerous-us-government-con-job-2/
U.S. Remains In Gulf With Tens Of Thousands Of Troops
RT
June 20, 2012
US clings onto Gulf with tens of thousands of troops in region
====
The build-up of the American contingent in the region is a direct result of Washington withdrawing troops from Iraq in December 2011. The troops and military vehicles did not actually go far: many simply crossed the border with Kuwait and added to the population of the three US bases that serve as logistical hubs, training ranges, and which provide support for regional operations. Besides, the territory of Kuwait is securely covered by Patriot missile batteries stationed there, a vital element of missile defense to be developed in the region, as promised by the US to its allies.
====
The latest US Senate Foreign Relations Committee report suggests the US will seek to maintain its position as the only superior military power in the Arabian Peninsula and Persian Gulf region for the time being.
Despite the troop withdrawal from Iraq, the American military presence in the area is set to expand.
The seven-point report suggests that working in close cooperation with GCC (Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf) states, the US intends to maintain military bases or presence in practically all of those countries, namely Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen.
Americans call this strategy a “lily pad” model. The US military bases scattered here and there enable the US military command to hold the territory under full control, allowing it to increase military presence in chosen locations at any given time.
In Kuwait alone, where the US has three bases, there are 15,000 troops stationed, including a couple of brigade combat teams and a combat aviation brigade.
Overall in the region there are reportedly 40,000 American servicemen ready for action.
The build-up of the American contingent in the region is a direct result of Washington withdrawing troops from Iraq in December 2011. The troops and military vehicles did not actually go far: many simply crossed the border with Kuwait and added to the population of the three US bases that serve as logistical hubs, training ranges, and which provide support for regional operations. Besides, the territory of Kuwait is securely covered by Patriot missile batteries stationed there, a vital element of missile defense to be developed in the region, as promised by the US to its allies.
If one divides the Persian Gulf lengthwise, it becomes clear that one shore is under tight Washington control, with troops stationed in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.
Despite the fact that the United States withdrew most troops from Saudi Arabia in 2003, the country remains the biggest American arms buyer. Some 3,000 servicemen of the 64th Air Expeditionary Group are still stationed about 20 km southeast of the Saudi Arabian capital Riyadh.
====
Seven principles of US military policy in the Persian Gulf:
1. The US ensures a “security umbrella” to its Arab allies.
2. The US remains a central part of the Gulf security framework.
3. The US increases trade relations with GCC states to promote economic reform and diversification.
4. The US preserves the “lily pad” model of military bases throughout the Gulf region, which permits the rapid escalation of military force in case of emergency.
5. The US uses the GCC partners’ capabilities in select defensive missions, though keeping its role as a security guarantor.
6. The US provides the Gulf partners with security assistance, supports a comprehensive strategy for regional arms sales and ensures a stable security architecture.
7. The US should promote the gradual political reintegration of Iraq into the Arab fold.
====
The other side of the Gulf belongs to a nation that actually gave its ancient name to it – Iran. Since Iran and its nuclear program remain a major stumbling block in international politics, the correct answer to the question “why does Washington need so many combat-ready troops in the Persian Gulf” is Iran. There is simply no other nation in the region that might pose a threat to Washington’s interests in the Middle East.
The Gulf Security Architecture: Partnership with the Gulf Cooperation Council report prepared by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee again stresses the political and economic importance of the region for the US and outlines seven principles for the US military to provide security in the Persian Gulf region.
The US continues to expand its combat-capable presence in the unstable region of the Middle East despite a declared shift of interests to the Asia-Pacific region. Heavy financing of the American contingent in the Gulf region is called to stress that America has not forgotten its Arab allies and that Washington intends to play a military superpower role in the foreseeable future.
The New War in Iraq
guest post by Eric Draitser of StopImperialism.com,
May 23, 2012 – Since the withdrawal of US military forces from Iraq, there has been an ongoing campaign of demonization and subversion of Prime Minister Maliki. Though this effort likely began with an assassination attempt in December of 2011, it has come to a head in recent months with the warrant, flight, and subsequent trial of Vice President Hashemi. This conflict illustrates not only the deep divides that exist within the ruling power structure in Baghdad, but also the attempts by foreign powers to exert control and influence over the future of Iraq.
Image: Current Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has walked a careful balancing act between departing US occupation forces, the foreign-interests that sent them, and establishing national sovereignty including independently determined relationships with neighboring states such as Syria and Iran.
Prime Minister Maliki came to power by overcoming the opposition of US puppet figures such as Allawi and Chalabi who, despite incredible financial support and propaganda, were unable to establish coalitions or even legitimate bases of support. Instead, Maliki emerged as the Shiite leader who was able to unify officials from a variety of ethnic and religious groups. At the time, this seemed a positive development for US military leadership and the Bush administration, anxious to have anyone who could exert control over Iraq.
However, in the years since then, Maliki has developed into a strong, nationalist leader who, in the interests of the Shiite majority and Iraq more generally, has exponentially expanded relations with Tehran, consolidated political control (particularly in the Kurdish North), and broken with the United States and its proxies in the GCC on issues such as Libya, Syria, and oil contracts. Naturally, this is anathema to US designs for Iraq and has lead to this concerted effort to remove, by any means necessary, Prime Minister Maliki.
Assassination Attempt a Warning To Maliki
In the midst of the withdrawal of US troops from Iraqi soil last December, a very rare event took place: a bomb exploded inside the heavily fortified Green Zone of Baghdad. Although the event garnered little international attention against the backdrop of the so-called “end of the Iraq War”, it sent a very clear message to the leadership in Baghdad – toe the US line or suffer the consequences. In the aftermath of the bombing, Maliki stated publicly that the plot was clearly an attempt on his life. However, instead of capitulating to such threats, the Prime Minister immediately denounced the episode and proceeded to meet with Iranian President Ahmadinejad. Undoubtedly, this decision conveyed to the United States that idea that Maliki would not succumb to pressure and threats.
The lessons learned from this failed assassination were significant. First and foremost, the United States and its proxies in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and elsewhere came to recognize that Maliki and his Shiite base of support in Baghdad had become more than just a thorn in the side of imperial ambitions. Rather, they were forced to admit that he and his ruling coalition had become a legitimate nationalist force. Secondly, those nations with designs to control Iraqi oil wealth, among other natural resources, were forced to admit that the traditional, strong-arm tactics of assassination and physical violence would not be effective against the entrenched and popular Maliki. Instead, they had to change the strategy from overt attacks to covert subversion.
The Hashemi Affair
When the story of Iraqi Vice President Hashemi being implicated in the operation of an assassination death squad first broke, it was immediately apparent that the issue was going to become an attempt to divide the government and destroy Prime Minister Maliki. Not only was Hashemi a representative of the Iraqiya bloc, an integral part of the fragile coalition ruling the country, but he was a Sunni. This meant that Iraq would be divided along political and religious lines. Naturally, the evolution of the crisis only furthered these initial conclusions.
Upon receiving news that an arrest warrant had been issued, Hashemi immediately fled to the Kurdish territory, seeking asylum in the arms of the Barzani government in Arbil. This initial move by Hashemi signaled to the world that this conflict was part of a much larger political struggle that would pit the Shiite majority led by Maliki against much of the Sunni and Kurdish minorities. It is no secret that these divisions have been, and continue to be, the locus of power maintained in Iraq by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and their paymasters in Washington. In order to maintain their domination of Iraq’s wealth and resources, they needed to get rid of Maliki and they were determined to use their agent Hashemi to do so.
Any lingering doubts about the role of Saudi Arabia and Qatar in fostering this conflict were erased when Hashemi left Arbil in the semi-autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan for Qatar followed by Saudi Arabia. It was during these trips where Hashemi met with various power brokers, essentially receiving his orders from the reactionary Sunni leaders of those two nations. Hashemi had proven to be a useful pawn on the chessboard of the Middle East, in which the Gulf monarchies, always acting in the interests of their masters in Washington, seemed intent on exerting their dominance over Iraq at all costs.
The final stop on Hashemi’s destabilization tour was Turkey, where he resides today. Ankara, which has its own strategic interests in Iraq, for which Maliki presents an obstacle, has provided Hashemi with safe haven, even after Interpol issued a warrant calling for Hashemi’s arrest. Turkey, with its large Kurdish minority and ambitions of becoming a dominant regional power, has maintained that they will not extradite Hashemi back to Baghdad where his trial continues. By providing safe haven to an international fugitive, Turkey is playing a dangerous political game, one that threatens not only their own stability, but that of the entire region.
The Propaganda of “Dictatorship”
In the last two months, as the various forces have aligned to subvert the Maliki government, the talking point has been that Maliki is consolidating power into a dictatorship. Naturally, the propaganda function of such absurdities is to conflate Maliki with Saddam Hussein, thereby delegitimizing him in the eyes of an uninformed public. In fact, as Maliki has been attacked seemingly from all sides, he has moved to consolidate control so as to maintain the fragile coalition that rules Iraq despite (not thanks to) the weak, decentralized government established by the US-imposed Iraqi Constitution. In so doing, Maliki has won many enemies while, simultaneously working to restore Iraq’s reputation internationally.
The cries of “dictator” must be directly attributed to the forces of Western imperialism that control much of the international media and who seem to have no issue whatsoever with the dictatorships of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and other proxy states. Of course, this demonization of Maliki is a last-ditch effort at destabilizing his government in the wake of the string of failures already mentioned.
Having fought an aggressive and illegal war, committed billions of dollars to a reconstruction process that favored corporate and financial interests, and sought to exploit natural resources, the United States and its regional proxies have seemingly exhausted all avenues to rid themselves of the disease of Prime Minister Maliki. However, diseases often mutate, changing their form to become resistant to cures and antidotes – surviving even under extreme circumstances. To accept this analogy, we must see Maliki and his relations with Iran as having infected the imperial body and, as anti-imperialists interested in peace, prosperity and freedom for all, not just some, we must support Maliki and the Iraqi people in their ongoing struggle for true independence.
Eric Draister is an independent geopolitical analyst that maintains StopImperialism.com which hosts his weekly podcast. He has been a guest on Dr. Webster Tarpley’s World Crisis Radio and has provided analysis on Russia Today.
PN 