Jul 24, 2014
nsnbc : An Air Algerie passenger jet, carrying 110 passengers from Burkina Faso to Algiers crashed in Mali near the Algerian border. Air traffic controllers lost contact with Air Algerie Flight AH 5017 50 minutes after takeoff. The plane was rerouted due to weather conditions, reports the airline.
The Aglerian news agency APR reported that air traffic controllers lost contact with Air Algerie Flight AH 5017 at 01:55 GMT, some 50 minutes after takeoff from Burkina Faso’s capital Ouagadougou. Reports, according to which the plane should have had the niece of former Cuban President Fidel Castro on board have since been denied. It is too early to tell whether any of the passengers or crew have survived the crash as search and rescue operations are still underway by the time of writing this article.
Information thus far, indicated that weather conditions may have caused the crash. The pilot reportedly contacted the control tower in Niamey, Niger because of weather conditions.
An unidentified person with Air Algiers as saying that Flight AH 5017 was not far from the Algerian border when the crew was asked to make a detour because of poor visibility and to prevent the risk of collision with another aircraft on the Algiers – Bamako route.
The airline reports that it has launched its emergency response in accordance with the airlines procedures, reports the APS news agency. French military, according to initial reports stationed in Mali, launched fighter planes to search for the MD-83 and discovered the crashed plane in Mali, not far from the border to Algeria. nsnbc will follow-up on the report when more, verifiable information is available to us.
CH/L – nsnbc 24.07.2014
The Corbett Report
Apr 30, 2014
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Pearse Redmond of Porkins Policy Review joins us for the first time to discuss how divide and rule has been used to neo-colonize the continent of Africa. We discuss how America and its allies have sown the seeds of strife, conflict and genocide in many different countries over the years, and the corporate and geopolitical interests that they are serving. We also discuss China’s role in Africa and whether it truly represents a third way.
Stop NATO…Opposition to global militarism
Xinhua News Agency
January 26, 2014
Germany considering troops increase in African missions
BERLIN: German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen is considering increasing the international engagement of German national defence forces, or Bundeswehr, local media Spiegel reported Sunday.
She said the Bundeswehr could provide a helicopter to evacuate wounded soldiers in Central Africa, where “a bloody war between Christians and Muslims unfolds.”
“We cannot allow that the conflict sets the entire region in flames,” said Von der Leyen.
The minister also said she was considering increasing the German contingent in Mali.
“Currently, the mandate upper limit is 180 men with 99 soldiers on site. We could strengthen this commitment, which is also expected from our allies, especially the French government. I could imagine that the mandate will be increased up to 250 men,” said Von der Leyen.
She replied “yes” when asked whether Germany should assume more international responsibility, suggesting the replacement of national armies in the European Union by united European forces in the long run.
However, the minister admitted that there is still a long way to go before reaching the goals, and the requirement of parliamentary approval needs to be considered as well.
“But I think unified armed forces will be a logical consequence of an ever-increasing military cooperation in Europe,” said Von der Leyen.
Jan 26, 2014
Source: Secret Defense
This is a huge field of operations as large as Europe, but almost entirely desert. “Armed terrorist groups” (GAT, according to military acronym) that travel does not know national boundaries, with a line drawn by former colonial administrations in the middle of … nothing. As his enemies, the French army, which is at the forefront in the war against the jihadists in the Sahel, decided to abstract these boundaries. To this end, the Ministry of Defence in depth reorganizes its military presence in Africa.This “regionalization of the Sahel” is being implemented: no ads mirobolantes but a discrete adjustment work here are the highlights.
Everything starts with an analysis of the threat after defeating – but not entirely removed – TGA in northern Mali in the first half of 2013, the French army and intelligence services, not surprisingly, found that these were, in part, scattered in neighboring states. Particularly in the south-western Libya, where has been a real “safe black hole” in the Fezzan around the triangle Oubari-Sebha-Mourzouk. It is from this base that the jihadists back back north Mali – nineteen of them were killed during a special operation in December – and Niger, where a significant terrorist act has recently been thwarted. The GAT borrow a line more than a thousand kilometers, after the pass of El Salvador, following the border between Niger and Algeria. The tracks also borrowed going well on the Algerian territory that Nigerian. France’s strategy is to cut the jihadists their rear base in Libya, where it is impossible to speak openly.
For the French military, three states in the region now form a single theater Mali, Niger and Chad.Their three governments involved in the fight against terrorism and cooperate with France.
In the region, France will have four main bases: N’Djamena (Chad), Niamey (Niger), Gao (Mali) and Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso). A N’Djamena: combat aircraft Rafale and Mirage 2000, supported by tankers and ground forces – and the staff who will control operations in the Sahel. In Niamey, intelligence assets, including two new Reaper drones purchased in the United States and will be operational in the coming days. These monitoring devices controlled from the ground in Niamey are collocated with those of the U.S. Air Force. This base can also accommodate combat aircraft and Atlantique 2 maritime patrol, used both above the desert of the ocean. In Gao, land forces, with a large helicopter detachment. Finally, more discreetly, in Ouagadougou, the group of special forces Sabre operates throughout the area from the rear base. These four main bases, the French army will add support points further north, that is to say, closer to possible interception areas of terrorist groups. Two of them were chosen: Tessalit, in the far north of Mali, and Faya-Largeau in northern Chad. Another is still being sought in the north-eastern Niger, knowing that special forces are already present in the Arlit mining (northwest) area. These support points must have airstrip, even briefly, for depositing light vehicle or implement helicopters. Not to mention the collection of intelligence, human or electronic … In total, this device in the Sahel mobilize 3,000 French soldiers permanently with air assets nearly thirty aircraft (fighter, transport, helicopters, drones, etc).
The whole of this new device, which has not received baptism generic name, will be supported by three rear bases in Africa: Dakar (Senegal), Abidjan (Côte d’Ivoire) and Libreville (Gabon). To compensate for the rise in the Sahelian zone, the number of Dakar and Libreville and those of Djibouti will be revised downwards. The abandonment of Abidjan, a time considered, is no longer valid, quite the contrary. Logistical role is even considered as a priority towards the Sahel. Djibouti, turned to another theater of operations – including Somalia – will see its numbers continue to decline.Relations between France and Djibouti government are no longer what they were … A regiment, the 13th DBLE has already left the country to settle in the United Arab Emirates.
In total, about 6,000 French soldiers who remain active in Africa, permanently, half the Sahel. That’s a lot. More so than any other Western country. The idea to withdraw from the continent, caressed in the drafting of the previous White Paper of Defence (2008), fizzled. France remains more than ever, a permanent African military power far beyond operations decided by François Hollande, Serval Sangaris Mali and the Central African Republic.
[…CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE]
September 9, 2013
President Hollande of France (like other leaders on NATO countries) does not seem to care about the French people!
July 21, 2013
Mali has lifted the state of emergency to allow for campaigning ahead of presidential election. The situation in the war-ravaged country however remains tense, with a third of the population starving, mostly in the still-dangerous north. READ MORE: http://on.rt.com/eie7ms
RT LIVE http://rt.com/on-air
Subscribe to RT! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_c…
Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTnews
Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_com
Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/rt
Follow us on Google+ http://plus.google.com/+RT
RT (Russia Today) is a global news network broadcasting from Moscow and Washington studios. RT is the first news channel to break the 1 billion YouTube views benchmark.
June 4, 2013
France utilizes divisive tactics to maintain control over West African Mali
Abayomi Azikiwe (PAP),- France is continuing its occupation of northern Mali to the growing displeasure of youth who have staged a sit-in in the city of Gao. The young people, many of them women, believe that Paris is seeking to maintain its control over the region by pitting the Tuareg people against other nationalities inside the country.
On May 30 the youth of Gao accused France of favoring the Tuareg rebel movement, the National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA), over other groups by not consulting broadly in regard to plans related to the future of the state. National elections are scheduled to be held in July and talks have already been held in neighboring Burkina Faso between various political parties.
The civilian government of President Amadou Toumani Toure was overthrown in a military coup on March 20, 2012. The engineer of the seizure of power was Capt. Amadou Sanogo who was trained in several military academies in the United States.
Photo via The 4th Media
During the protest in Gao people carried signs saying “No elections without trust,” and “Our thoughts are with the victims, not the killers.”
Much attention was focused on the northern city of Kidal where France appears to be operating in alliance with the MNLA in the occupation. Reports indicate that the Malian army has not been able to enter the city through an agreement between France and the MNLA.
One youth activist at the demonstration in Gao told Middle East online that”The banners, which were addressed to Francois Hollande, were saying ‘you liberated Mali from terrorists, now free Kidal, otherwise Mali is going to brutally divorce you’”. (May 30)
Despite this widespread notion that France played a positive role in driving out several Islamist organizations from several northern cities, criticism against Paris has escalated in recent months. Attacks on the French occupation have taken place within the press and among some Malian politicians who are accusing the occupation forces of working to extend their presence inside the country.
Gao was the first city that was attacked by the French military in January. Consequently, it is significant that the first mass demonstration was held there.
One of the organizers of the Gao demonstration, Moussa Boureima Yoro, said that ”We want to give France a heads-up and to tell them that they are allowing a situation to take place in Kidal that we do not understand. We want France to tell us what they are up to — because we are confused when they say on the one hand that Kidal is part of Mali, and at the same time, they act as if it doesn’t belong to Mali.”(Associated Press, May 30)
Humanitarian Crisis Worsens in Gao and Other Areas
Since the rebel campaign of the MNLA and other armed groups in the north of Mali, there have been hundreds of thousands of people who are internally displaced and forced into exile. Gao, which has a population of 70,000, has been severely impacted as well.
In the aftermath of the military coup, and the seizure of power by the Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa (MUJWA) and Ansar Dine in several northern cities and towns, France utilized this internal political crisis as a rationale for intervention. Nonetheless, the social situation of the civilian population has deteriorated with the French invasion.
A recent United Nations report documents that there are serious issues that need addressing in Gao. For example, the access to clean drinking water is in serious decline.
An Inter-agency mission to Gao led by Aurelien Agbemonci, who is the coordinator for Malian humanitarian assistance from the United Nations, noted that it was imperative that the availability of drinking water be addressed. Jens Laerke, spokesperson for the UN Office for the Coordination for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), told the international press that available drinking water had fallen by 60 percent over the last few weeks. (United Nations News Service, May 28)
“Water is a main issue: some neighborhoods in Gao did not have water at all due to dysfunctional pumps and lack of electricity,” said Mr. Laerke. “Outside of the city, the situation is even worse because the Niger River was the only source of water and there were concerns about cholera outbreaks.”
In addition to problems involving access to clean drinking water, food is also in short supply. The UN says that only one-third of the population of Gao is being serviced with food distribution.
At present there are approximately 100 humanitarian organizations operating in Mali. According to the UN, the proposed budget of $410 million needed for humanitarian relief is only 29 percent funded.
Most of the schools in the cities of Gao, Timbuctu and Kidal are still not functioning. The conditions in areas outside the cities and towns are even more precarious due to the lack of security despite the presence of nearly 4,000 French troops as well as thousands of soldiers from Chad and other regional states.
With these problems continuing, it will be very difficult to organize credible national elections by the end of July. The UN reports that 174,000 Malians are living outside the country in neighboring states.
The UN is attempting to ensure that refugees will have an opportunity to participate in the upcoming elections. ”While details of the out-of-country electoral process are still being worked out, UNHCR is ready to facilitate the exercise by refugees of their right to vote,” said UNHCR spokesperson Adrian Edwards.
The bulk of Malian refugees are to be found in Mauritania with some 74,000 people being harbored. In Burkina Faso, it is reported that at least 50,000 have taken residence there and in Niger, another 50,000 have fled from the fighting and dislocation in northern Mali.
France Deepens Involvement in West Africa
Although France publicized its withdrawal of what it said was 2,000 troops from Mali during May, the occupation of the country will continue even into 2014. French defense ministry officials have said that at least 1,000 troops will remain after the conclusion of 2013 to serve as trainers for the Malian army and to work in conjunction with a UN peacekeeping force, numbering nearly 13,000 scheduled to take control of the country beginning on July 1.
The French National Assembly and Senate voted on April 22 to extend its occupation of Mali. There was no opposition to the plan by any political party within the legislative body. (Center for Research on Globalization, May 7)
When members of the Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa(MUJWA) and the Signatories in Blood staged a joint attack in two locations within neighboring Niger against the French-owned Areva uranium mining facilities and the local military on May 23, France took the lead in so-called counter-insurgency operations. Over two dozen Niger troops were killed in the attacks which the government claims was organized from southern Libya.
Since the attacks on French interests in Niger, France has called for military operations in southern Libya to ostensibly prevent further attacks. The United States has also dispatched at least 100 Special Forces in Niger where it is establishing a drone station in the uranium-rich nation.
Despite the presence of French and U.S. forces in Niger, on June 1, an attack on a prison in the capital of Niamey resulted in the deaths of two guards and the wounding of 10 others. Reports indicate that inmates held in the facility are from the Boko Haram group that is operating in northern Nigeria as well as others designated as “terrorists” from throughout West Africa. (Daily News & Analysis, June 1)
Abayomi Azikiwe via Pan African Newswire and The 4th Media
12.500 UN Troops Deployed to Mali. France Offloads Its Neo-Imperialism to UN
UN report reveals Libya as hub for arms deliveries to insurgents in Syria and Mali, fails to identify state sponsors of terrorism and elicits systemic flaws of UN System
UN-Reports indicate French Plot against Mali´s Military and Commander Sanogo
Mauritania hosts International Military Exercise with 19 European, Arab and African Nations, among growing concerns for Spill-Over of Mali War and a widening of the French Africa Pivot
EU Stability Fund releases 20 Million to Mali for Joint European-African Economic Suicide
Kidnapping and Release of Mali Opposition Leader Mariko an additional Chapter of Modo-Colonialism in Africa
Is France preparing Elections in Mali ? Presidential Candidate, SADI Secretary General, Dr. Oumar Mariko, Kidnapped
In depth background articles:
Neo-Colonialism, Subversion in Africa and Global Conflict
French Africa Policy Damages African and European Economies. Bleeding Africa and Feeding France. The Face of French Modo-Colonialism
March 16, 2013
France’s intervention in northern Mali against Islamist extremists has disrupted the supply of cocaine to Europe, reported Middle East Online. In January, France sent in troops to combat al-Qaeda linked extremists who controlled the northern swathe of the country for nine months and were threatening to extend their reach southwards towards the capital Bamako.
Extremist groups have long engaged in the lucrative drug running business as a means to secure funding. A common practice was to levy taxes upon smugglers running drugs sourced in Latin America, via Mali, to feed Europe’s growing market.
The lack of any real government or police presence in the north of Mali facilitated the drug-trade.
Typically, drugs are shipped to the Gulf of Guinea or flown directly in from Venezuela into Mauritania or Mali where they are stored and eventually transported to the Mediterranean’s southern shores.
This route is commonly referred to as “Highway 10,” in reference to the line of latitude which cuts through Columbia, Venezuela, Guinea and Nigeria; the 10th parallel.
The U.N.’s office on Drugs and Crime released a recent report that stated around 10 percent of the 172 tons of pure cocaine that found its way to Europe in 2010, transited through West Africa.
France’s military intervention in Mali has “totally disrupted the trafficking of drugs, weapons and migrants in the region, smashing up all the networks transiting through northern Mali,” French researcher Mathieu Guidere was quoted by Middle East Online as saying.
French special forces pressured some of the jihadist groups’ most remote bases, “this has sent everyone scurrying away but they are all trying to set up new routes,” Guidere said.
Alain Rodier, head of France’s CF2R intelligence research center, said regional smuggling networks had already been disturbed by Arab Spring revolutions in Tunisia and Libya.
“Traffickers however are continuing their business by using other routes, which demonstrates their ability to adapt,” he said.
Smugglers have always adapted to new situations, said criminologist Xavier Raufer, who pointed out that the supply of cocaine from Latin America to Europe has never once broken in 40 years.
“You can never draw accurate maps of cocaine trafficking because the routes have already changed by the time the ink dries up,” he explained.
March 3, 2013
Sunday Times: Mr. President your recent offer of political dialogue was qualified with a firm rejection of the very groups you would have to pacify to stop the violence: the armed rebels and the Syrian National Coalition, the main opposition alliance.
So in effect you are only extending an olive branch to the loyal opposition, mostly internal, that renounce the armed struggle, and who effectively recognizes the legitimacy of your leadership, who are you willing to talk to, really?
President Assad: First of all, let me correct some of the misconceptions that have been circulating and that are found in your question in order to make my answer accurate.
Sunday Times: Okay.
President Assad: Firstly, when I announced the plan, I said that it was for those who interested in dialogue, because you cannot make a plan that is based on dialogue with somebody who does not believe in dialogue. So, I was very clear regarding this.
Secondly, this open dialogue should not be between exclusive groups but between all Syrians of every level. The dialogue is about the future of Syria. We are twenty three million Syrians and all of us have the right to participate in shaping the country’s future. Some may look at it as a dialogue between the government and certain groups in the opposition – whether inside or outside, external or internal -actually this is a very shallow way of looking at the dialogue. It is much more comprehensive. It is about every Syrian and about every aspect of Syrian life. Syria’s future cannot be determined simply by who leads it but by the ambitions and aspirations of all its people.
The other aspect of the dialogue is that it opens the door for militants to surrender their weapons and we have granted many amnesties to facilitate this. This is the only way to make a dialogue with those groups. This has already started, even before the plan, and some have surrendered their weapons and they live now their normal life. But this plan makes the whole process more methodical, announced and clear.
If you want to talk about the opposition, there is another misconception in the West. They put all the entities even if they are not homogeneous in one basket – as if everything against the government is opposition. We have to be clear about this. We have opposition that are political entities and we have armed terrorists. We can engage in dialogue with the opposition but we cannot engage in dialogue with terrorists; we fight terrorism. Another phrase that is often mentioned is the ‘internal opposition inside Syria’ or ‘internal opposition as loyal to the government.’ Opposition groups should be loyal and patriotic to Syria – internal and external opposition is not about the geographic position; it is about their roots, resources and representation. Have these roots been planted in Syria and represent Syrian people and Syrian interests or the interests of foreign government? So, this is how we look at the dialogue, this is how we started and how we are going to continue.
Sunday Times: Most have rejected it, at least if we talk about the opposition externally who are now the body that is being hailed as the opposition and where the entire world is basically behind them. So, most of them have rejected it with the opposition describing your offer as a “waste of time,” and some have said that it is “empty rhetoric” based on lack of trust and which British Secretary William Hague described it as “beyond hypocritical” and the Americans said you were “detached from reality.”
President Assad: I will not comment on what so-called Syrian bodies outside Syria have said. These bodies are not independent. As Syrians, we are independent and we need to respond to independent bodies and this is not the case. So let’s look at the other claims.
Firstly, detached from reality: Syria has been fighting adversaries and foes for two years; you cannot do that if you do not have public support. People will not support you if you are detached from their reality. A recent survey in the UK shows that a good proportion British people want “to keep out of Syria” and they do not believe that the British government should send military supplies to the rebels in Syria.
In spite of this, the British government continues to push the EU to lift its arms embargo on Syria to start arming militants with heavy weapons. That is what I call detached from reality–when you are detached from your own public opinion! And they go further in saying that they want to send “military aid” that they describe as “non-lethal.” The intelligence, communication and financial assistance being provided is very lethal. The events of 11th of September were not committed by lethal aids. It was the application of non-lethal technology and training which caused the atrocities.
The British government wants to send military aid to moderate groups in Syria, knowing all too well that such moderate groups do not exist in Syria; we all know that we are now fighting Al-Qaeda or Jabhat al-Nusra which is an offshoot of Al-Qaeda, and other groups of people indoctrinated with extreme ideologies. This is beyond hypocritical! What is beyond hypocrisy is when you talk about freedom of expression and ban Syrian TV channels from the European broadcasting satellites; when you shed tears for somebody killed in Syria by terrorist acts while preventing the Security Council from issuing a statement denouncing the suicide bombing that happened last week in Damascus, and you were here, where three hundred Syrians were either killed or injured, including women and children – all of them were civilians. Beyond hypocrisy when you preach about human rights and you go into Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and kill hundreds of thousands in illegal wars. Beyond hypocrisy is when you talk about democracy and your closest allies are the worst autocratic regimes in the world that belong to the medieval centuries. This is hypocrisy!
Sunday Times: But you always refer to the people fighting here as terrorists, do you accept that while some are from the Jabhat al-Nusra and those affiliated to Al-Qaeda but there are others such as the FSA or under the umbrella of the FSA? That some of them are the defectors and some of them are just ordinary people who started some of the uprising. These are not terrorists; these are people fighting for what they believe to be the right way at the moment.
President Assad: When we say that we are fighting Al-Qaeda, we mean that the main terrorist group and the most dangerous is Al-Qaeda. I have stated in many interviews and speeches that this is not the only group in Syria. The spectrum ranges from petty criminals, drugs dealers, groups that are killing and kidnapping just for money to mercenaries and militants; these clearly do not have any political agenda or any ideological motivations. The so-called “Free Army” is not an entity as the West would like your readers to believe. It is hundreds of small groups – as defined by international bodies working with Annan and Al-Ibrahimi – there is no entity, there is no leadership, there is no hierarchy; it is a group of different gangs working for different reasons. The Free Syrian Army is just the headline, the umbrella that is used to legitimize these groups.
This does not mean that at the beginning of the conflict there was no spontaneous movement; there were people who wanted to make change in Syria and I have acknowledged that publically many times. That’s why I have said the dialogue is not for the conflict itself; the dialogue is for the future of Syria because many of the groups still wanting change are now against the terrorists. They still oppose the government but they do not carry weapons. Having legitimate needs does not make your weapons legitimate.
Sunday Times: Your 3-staged plan: the first one you speak of is the cessation of violence. Obviously there is the army and the fighters on the other side. Now, within the army you have a hierarchy, so if you want to say cease-fire, there is a commander that can control that, but when you offer cessation of violence or fire how can you assume the same for the rebels when you talk about them being so many groups, fragmented and not under one leadership. So, that’s one of the points of your plan. So, this suggests that this basically an impossible request. You speak of referendum but with so many displaced externally and internally, many of whom are the backbone of the opposition; those displaced at least. So, a referendum without them would not be fair, and the third part is that parliamentary elections and all this hopefully before 2014; it is a very tall list to be achieved before 2014. So, what are really the conditions that you are attaching to the dialogue and to make it happen, and aren’t some of the conditions that you are really suggesting or offering impossible to achieve?
President Assad: That depends on how we look at the situation. First of all, let’s say that the main article in the whole plan is the dialogue; this dialogue will put a timetable for everything and the procedures or details of this plan. The first article in my plan was the cessation of violence. If we cannot stop this violence, how can we achieve the other articles like the referendum and elections and so on? But saying that you cannot stop the violence is not a reason to do nothing. Yes there are many groups as I have said with no leadership, but we know that their real leadership are those countries that are funding and supplying their weapons and armaments – mainly Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
If outside parties genuinely want to help the process they should be pressuring those countries to stop supplying the terrorists. As with any other sovereign state, we will not negotiate with terrorists.
Sunday Times: Critics say real and genuine negotiations may be the cause of your downfall and that of your government or regime, and that you know this, hence you offer practically impossible scenarios for dialogue and negotiations?
President Assad: Actually, I don’t know this, I know the opposite. To be logical and realistic, if this is the case, then these foes, adversaries or opponents should push for the dialogue because in their view it will bring my downfall. But actually they are doing the opposite. They are preventing the so-called ‘opposition bodies outside Syria’ to participate in the dialogue because I think they believe in the opposite; they know that this dialogue will not bring my downfall, but will actually make Syria stronger. This is the first aspect.
The second aspect is that the whole dialogue is about Syria, about terrorism, and about the future of Syria. This is not about positions and personalities. So, they shouldn’t distract people by talking about the dialogue and what it will or will not bring to the President. I did not do it for myself. At the end, this is contradictory; what they say is contradicting what they do.
Sunday Times: You said that if they push for dialogue, it could bring your downfall?
President Assad: No, I said according to what they say if it brings my downfall, why don’t they come to the dialogue? They say that the dialogue will bring the downfall of the President and I am inviting them to the dialogue. Why don’t they then come to the dialogue to bring my downfall? This is self-evident. That’s why I said they are contradicting themselves.
Sunday Times: Mr. President, John Kerry, a man you know well, has started a tour that will take him this week end to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, where he will be talking to them about ways to ‘ease you out.’ In London and Berlin earlier this week, he said that President Assad must go and he also said that one of his first moves is to draft diplomatic proposals to persuade you to give up power. Would you invite him to Damascus for talks? What would you say to him? What is your message to him now given what he said this week and what he plans to say to his allies when he visits them over the weekend? And if possible from your knowledge of him how would you describe Kerry from your knowledge of him in the past?
President Assad: I would rather describe policies rather than describing people. So, it is still early to judge him. It is only a few weeks since he became Secretary of State. First of all, the point that you have mentioned is related to internal Syrian matters or Syrian issue. Any Syrian subject would not be raised with any foreigners. We only discuss it with Syrians within Syria. So, I am not going to discuss it with anyone who is coming from abroad. We have friends and we discuss our issues with friends, we listen to their advice but at the end it is our decision as Syrians to think or to make what’s good for our country.
If anyone wants to ‘genuinely’ – I stress the word genuinely – help Syria and help the cessation of violence in our country, he can do only one thing; he can go to Turkey and sit with Erdogan and tell to him stop smuggling terrorists into Syria, stop sending armaments, stop providing logistical support to those terrorists. He can go to Saudi Arabia and Qatar and tell them stop financing the terrorists in Syria. This is the only thing anyone can do dealing with the external part of our problem, but no one from outside Syria can deal with the internal part of this problem.
Sunday Times: So, what is your message to Kerry?
President Assad: It is very clear: to understand what I said now. I mean, not a message to Kerry but to anyone who is talking about the Syrian issue: only Syrian people can tell the President: stay or leave, come or go. I am just saying this clearly in order not to waste the time of others to know where to focus.
Sunday Times: What role if any do you see for Britain in any peace process for Syria? Have there been any informal contacts with the British? What is your reaction to Cameron’s support for the opposition? What would you say if you were sitting with him now, especially that Britain is calling for the arming of the rebels?
President Assad: There is no contact between Syria and Britain for a long time. If we want to talk about the role, you cannot separate the role from the credibility. And we cannot separate the credibility from the history of that country. To be frank, now I am talking to a British journalist and a British audience, to be frank, Britain has played a famously (in our region) an unconstructive role in different issues for decades, some say for centuries. I am telling you now the perception in our region.
The problem with this government is that their shallow and immature rhetoric only highlight this tradition of bullying and hegemony. I am being frank. How can we expect to ask Britain to play a role while it is determined to militarize the problem? How can you ask them to play a role in making the situation better and more stable, how can we expect them to make the violence less while they want to send military supplies to the terrorists and don’t try to ease the dialogue between the Syrians. This is not logical. I think that they are working against us and working against the interest of the UK itself. This government is acting in a naïve, confused and unrealistic manner. If they want to play a role, they have to change this; they have to act in a more reasonable and responsible way, till then we do not expect from an arsonist to be a firefighter!
Sunday Times: In 2011 you said you wouldn’t waste your time talking about the body leading opposition, now we are talking about the external body, in fact you hardly recognized there was such a thing, what changed your mind or views recently? What talks, if any are already going on with the rebels who are a major component and factor in this crisis? Especially given that your Foreign Minister Muallem said earlier this week when he was in Russia that the government is open to talks with the armed opposition can you clarify?
President Assad: Actually, I did not change my mind. Again, this plan is not for them; it is for every Syrian who accepts the dialogue. So, making this initiative is not a change of mind. Secondly, since day one in this crisis nearly two years ago, we have said we are ready for dialogue; nothing has changed. We have a very consistent position towards the dialogue. Some may understand that I changed my mind because I did not recognize the first entity, but then I recognized the second. I recognized neither, more importantly the Syrian people do not recognize them or take them seriously. When you have a product that fails in the market, they withdraw the product, change the name, change the packing and they rerelease it again – but it is still faulty. The first and second bodies are the same products with different packaging. Regarding what our minister said, it is very clear.
Part of the initiative is that we are ready to negotiate with anyone including militants who surrender their arms. We are not going to deal with terrorists who are determined to carry weapons, to terrorize people, to kill civilians, to attack public places or private enterprises and destroy the country.
Sunday Times: Mr. President, the world looks at Syria and sees a country being destroyed, with at least 70,000 killed, more than 3 million displaced and sectarian divisions being deepened. Many people around the world blame you. What do you say to them? Are you to blame for what’s happened in the country you are leading?
President Assad: You have noted those figures as though they were numbers from a spreadsheet. To some players they are being used to push forward their political agenda; unfortunately that is a reality. Regardless of their accuracy, for us Syrians, each one of those numbers represents a Syrian man, woman or child. When you talk about thousands of victims, we see thousands of families who have lost loved ones and who unfortunately will grieve for many years to come. Nobody can feel this pain more than us.
Looking at the issue of political agendas, we have to ask better questions. How were these numbers verified? How many represent foreign fighters? How many were combatants aged between 20 and 30? How many were civilians – innocent women and children? The situation on the ground makes it almost impossible to get accurate answers to these important questions. We all know how death tolls and human casualties have been manipulated in the past to pave the way for humanitarian intervention. The Libyan government recently announced that the death toll before the invasion of Libya was exaggerated; they said five thousand victims from each side while the number was talking at that time of tens of thousands.
The British and the Americans who were physically inside Iraq during the war were unable to provide precise numbers about the victims that have been killed from their invasion. Suddenly, the same sources have very precise numbers about what is happening in Syria! This is ironic; I will tell you very simply that these numbers do not exist in reality; it is part of their virtual reality that they want to create to push forward their agenda for military intervention under the title of humanitarian intervention.
Sunday Times: If I may just on this note a little bit. Even if the number is exaggerated and not definitely precise, these are numbers corroborated by Syrian groups, however they are still thousands that were killed. Some are militants but some are civilians. Some are being killed through the military offensive, for example artillery or plane attacks in certain areas. So even if we do not argue the actual number, the same applies, they still blame yourself for those civilians, if you want, that are being killed through the military offensive, do you accept that?
President Assad: Firstly, we cannot talk about the numbers without their names. People who are killed have names. Secondly, why did they die? Where and how were they killed? Who killed them? Armed gangs, terrorist groups, criminals, kidnappers, the army, who?
Sunday Times: It is a mix.
President Assad: It is a mix, but it seems that you are implying that one person is responsible for the current situation and all the human casualties. From day one the situation in Syria has been influenced by military and political dynamics, which are both very fast moving. In such situations you have catalysts and barriers. To assume any one party is responsible for all barriers and another party responsible for all the catalysts is absurd. Too many innocent civilians have died, too many Syrians are suffering. As I have already said nobody is more pained by this than us Syrians, which is why we are pushing for a national dialogue. I’m not in the blame business, but if you are talking of responsibility, then clearly I have a constitutional responsibility to keep Syria and her people safe from terrorists and radical groups.
Sunday Times: What is the role of Al-Qaeda and other jihadists and what threats do they pose to the region and Europe? Are you worried Syria turning into something similar to Chechnya in the past? Are you concerned about the fate of minorities if you were loose this war or of a sectarian war akin to that of Iraq?
President Assad: The role of Al-Qaeda in Syria is like the role of Al-Qaeda anywhere else in this world; killing, beheading, torturing and preventing children from going to school because as you know Al-Qaeda’s ideologies flourish where there is ignorance. Ideologically, they try to infiltrate the society with their dark, extremist ideologies and they are succeeding. If you want to worry about anything in Syria, it is not the ‘minorities.’ This is a very shallow description because Syria is a melting pot of religions, sects, ethnicities and ideologies that collectively make up a homogeneous mixture, irrelevant of the portions or percentages. We should be worrying about the majority of moderate Syrians who, if we do not fight this extremism, could become the minority – at which point Syria will cease to exist.
If you worry about Syria in that sense, you have to worry about the Middle East because we are the last bastion of secularism in the region. If you worry about the Middle East, the whole world should be worried about its stability. This is the reality as we see it.
Sunday Times: How threatening is Al-Qaeda now?
President Assad: Threatening by ideology more than the killing. The killing is dangerous, of course, but what is irreversible is the ideology; that is dangerous and we have been warning of this for many years even before the conflict; we have been dealing with these ideologies since the late seventies. We were the first in the region to deal with such terrorists who have been assuming the mantle of Islam. We have consistently been warning of this, especially in the last decade during the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. The West is only reacting to the situation, not acting. We need to act by dealing with the ideology first. A war on terror without dealing with the ideology will lead you nowhere and will only make things worse. So, it is threatening and it is dangerous, not just to Syria but to the whole region.
Sunday Times: US officials recently, in particular yesterday, are quoted as saying that US decision not to arm rebels could be revised. If this was to happen what in your view will the consequences in Syria and in the region? What is your warning against this? Now, they are talking about directly equipping the rebels with armament vehicles, training and body armaments.
President Assad: You know the crime is not only about the victim and the criminal, but also the accomplice providing support, whether it is moral or logistical support. I have said many times that Syria lies at the fault line geographically, politically, socially and ideologically. So, playing with this fault line will have serious repercussions all over the Middle East. Is the situation better in Libya today? In Mali? In Tunisia? In Egypt? Any intervention will not make things better; it will only make them worse. Europe and the United States and others are going to pay the price sooner or later with the instability in this region; they do not foresee it.
Sunday Times: What is your message to Israel following its air strikes on Syria? Will you retaliate? How will you respond to any future attacks by Israel especially that Israel has said that we will do it again if it has to?
President Assad: Every time Syria did retaliate, but in its own way, not tit for tat. We retaliated in our own way and only the Israelis know what we mean.
Sunday Times: Can you expand?
President Assad: Yes. Retaliation does not mean missile for missile or bullet for bullet. Our own way does not have to be announced; only the Israelis will know what I mean.
Sunday Times: Can you tell us how?
President Assad: We do not announce that.
Sunday Times: I met a seven year old boy in Jordan.
President Assad: A Syrian boy?
Sunday Times: A Syrian boy who had lost an arm and a leg to a missile strike in Herak. Five children in his family had been killed in that explosion. As a father, what can you say to that little boy? Why have so many innocent civilians died in air strikes, army shelling and sometimes, I quote, ‘Shabiha shootings?’
President Assad: What is his name?
Sunday Times: I have his name…I will bring it to you later.
President Assad: As I said every victim in this crisis has a name, every casualty has a family. Like 5 year-old Saber who whilst having breakfast with his family at home lost his leg, his mother and other members of his family. Like 4 year-old Rayan who watched his two brothers slaughtered for taking him to a rally. None of these families have any political affiliations. Children are the most fragile link in any society and unfortunately they often pay the heaviest price in any conflict. As a father of young children, I know the meaning of having a child harmed by something very simple; so what if they are harmed badly or if we lose a child, it is the worst thing any family can face. Whenever you have conflicts, you have these painful stories that affect any society. This is the most important and the strongest incentive for us to fight terrorism. Genuine humanitarians who feel the pain that we feel about our children and our losses should encourage their governments to prevent smuggling armaments and terrorists and to prevent the terrorists from acquiring any military supplies from any country.
Sunday Times: Mr. President, when you lie in bed at night, do you hear the explosions in Damascus? Do you, in common with many other Syrians, worry about the safety of your family? Do you worry that there may come a point where your own safety is in jeopardy?
President Assad: I see it completely differently. Can anybody be safe, or their family be safe, if the country is in danger? In reality NO! If your country is not safe, you cannot be safe. So instead of worrying about yourself and your family, you should be worried about every citizen and every family in your country. So it’s a mutual relationship.
Sunday Times: You’ll know of the international concerns about Syria’s chemical weapons. Would your army ever use them as a last resort against your opponents? Reports suggest they have been moved several times, if so why? Do you share the international concern that they may fall into the hands of Islamist rebels? What is the worst that could happen?
President Assad: Everything that has been referred to in the media or by official rhetoric regarding Syrian chemical weapons is speculation. We have never, and will never, discuss our armaments with anyone. What the world should worry about is chemical materials reaching the hands of terrorists. Video material has already been broadcast showing toxic material being tried on animals with threats to the Syrian people that they will die in the same way. We have shared this material with other countries. This is what the world should be focusing on rather than wasting efforts to create elusive headlines on Syrian chemical weapons to justify any intervention in Syria.
Sunday Times: I know you are not saying whether they are safe or not. There is concern if they are safe or no one can get to them.
President Assad: This is constructive ambiguity. No country will talk about their capabilities. Sunday Times: A lot has been talked about this as well: what are the roles of Hezbollah, Iran and Russia in the war on the ground? Are you aware of Hezbollah fighters in Syria and what are they doing? What weapons are your allies Iran and Russia supplying? What other support are they providing?
President Assad: The Russian position is very clear regarding armaments – they supply Syria with defensive armaments in line with international law. Hezbollah, Iran and Russia support Syria in her fight against terrorism. Russia has been very constructive, Iran has been very supportive and Hezbollah’s role is to defend Lebanon not Syria. We are a country of 23 million people with a strong National Army and Police Force. We are in no need of foreign fighters to defend our country. What we should be asking is, what about the role of other countries, – Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, France, the UK, the US, – that support terrorism in Syria directly or indirectly, militarily or politically.
Sunday Times: Mr. President, may I ask you about your own position? Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov recently said that Lakhdar Ibrahimi complained of wanting to see more flexibility from your regime and that while you never seem to say ‘no’ you never seem to say ‘yes’. Do you think that there can be a negotiated settlement while you remain President, which is a lot of people are asking?
President Assad: Do not expect a politician to only say yes or no in the absolute meaning; it is not multiple choice questions to check the correct answer. You can expect from any politician a vision and our vision is very clear. We have a plan and whoever wants to deal with us, can deal with us through our plan. This is very clear in order not to waste time. This question reflects what has been circulating in the Western media about personalizing the problem in Syria and suggesting that the entire conflict is about the president and his future. If this argument is correct, then my departure will stop the fighting. Clearly this is absurd and recent precedents in Libya, Yemen and Egypt bear witness to this. Their motive is to try to evade the crux of the issue, which is dialogue, reform and combating terrorism. The legacy of their interventions in our region have been chaos, destruction and disaster. So, how can they justify any future intervention? They cannot. So, they focus on blaming the president and pushing for his departure; questioning his credibility; is he living in a bubble or not? is he detached from reality or not? So, the focus of the conflict becomes about the president.
Sunday Times: Some foreign officials have called for you to stand for war crimes at the International Criminal Court as the person ultimately responsible for the army’s actions? Do you fear prosecution by the ICC? Or the possibility of future prosecution and trial in Syria?
President Assad: Whenever an issue that is related to the UN is raised, you are raising the question of credibility. We all know especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union – for the last twenty years – that the UN and all its organizations are the victims of hegemony instead of being the bastions of justice. They became politicized tools in order to create instability and to attack sovereign countries, which is against the UN’s charter. So, the question that we have to raise now is: are they going to take the American and the British leaders who attacked Iraq in 2003 and claimed more than half a million lives in Iraq, let alone orphans, handicapped and deformed people? Are they going to take the American, British French and others who went to Libya without a UN resolution last year and claimed again hundreds of lives? They are not going to do it. The answer is very clear. You know that sending mercenaries to any country is a war crime according Nuremberg principles and according to the London Charter of 1945. Are they going to put Erdogan in front of this court because he sent mercenaries? Are they going to do the same with the Saudis and the Qataris? If we have answers to these questions, then we can talk about peace organizations and about credibility.
My answer is very brief: when people defend their country, they do not take into consideration anything else.
Sunday Times: Hindsight is a wonderful thing Mr. President. If you could wind the clock back two years would you have handled anything differently? Do you believe that there are things that could or should have been done in another way? What mistakes do you believe have been made by your followers that you would change?
President Assad: You can ask this question to a President if he is the only one responsible for all the context of the event. In our case in Syria, we know there are many external players. So you have to apply hindsight to every player. You have to ask Erdogan, with hindsight would you send terrorists to kill Syrians, would you afford logistical support to them? You should ask the Qatari and Saudis whether in hindsight, would you send money to terrorists and to Al-Qaeda offshoots or any other terrorist organization to kill Syrians? We should ask the same question to the European and American officials, in hindsight would you offer a political umbrella to those terrorists killing innocent civilians in Syria?
In Syria, we took two decisions. The first is to make dialogue; the second is to fight terrorism. If you ask any Syrian, in hindsight would you say no to dialogue and yes to terrorism? I do not think any sane person will agree with you. So I think in hindsight, we started with dialogue and we are going to continue with dialogue. In hindsight, we said we are going to fight terrorism and we are going to continue to fight terrorism.
Sunday Times: Do you ever think about living in exile if it came to that? And would you go abroad if it increases the chances of peace in Syria?
President Assad: Again, it is not about the president. I don’t think any patriotic person or citizen would think of living outside his country.
Sunday Times: You will never leave?
President Assad: No patriotic person will think about living outside his country. I am like any other patriotic Syrian.
Sunday Times: How shaken you were you by the bomb that killed some of your most senior generals last summer, including your brother-in-law?
President Assad: You mentioned my brother-in-law but it is not a family affair. When high-ranking officials are being assassinated it is a national affair. Such a crime will make you more determined to fight terrorism. It is not about how you feel, but more about what you do. We are more determined in fighting terrorism.
Sunday Times: Finally, Mr. President, may I ask about my colleague, Marie Colvin, who was killed in the shelling of an opposition media center at Baba Amr on February 22 last year. Was she targeted, as some have suggested, because she condemned the destruction on American and British televisions? Or was she just unlucky? Did you hear about her death at the time and if so what was your reaction?
President Assad: Of course, I heard about the story through the media. When a journalist goes into conflict zones, as you are doing now, to cover a story and convey it to the world, I think this is very courageous work. Every decent person, official or government should support journalists in these efforts because that will help shed light on events on the ground and expose propaganda where it exists. Unfortunately in most conflicts a journalist has paid the ultimate price. It is always sad when a journalist is killed because they are not with either side or even part of the problem, they only want to cover the story. There is a media war on Syria preventing the truth from being told to the outside world.
14 Syrian journalists who have also been killed since the beginning of the crisis and not all of them on the ground. Some have been targeted at home after hours, kidnapped, tortured and then murdered. Others are still missing. More than one Syrian television station has been attacked by terrorists and their bombs. There is currently a ban on the broadcast of Syrian TV channels on European satellite systems. It is also well known how rebels have used journalists for their own interests. There was the case of the British journalist who managed to escape.
Sunday Times: Alex Thompson?
President Assad: Yes. He was lead into a death trap by the terrorists in order to accuse the Syrian Army of his death. That’s why it is important to enter countries legally, to have a visa. This was not the case for Marie Colvin. We don’t know why and it’s not clear. If you enter illegally, you cannot expect the state to be responsible. Contrary to popular belief, since the beginning of the crisis, hundreds of journalists from all over the world, including you, have gained visas to enter Syria and have been reporting freely from inside Syria with no interferences in their work and no barriers to fulfill their missions.
Sunday Times: Thank you.
President Assad: Thank you.
Press For Truth
March 18, 2013
Pressfortruth.ca correspondent Tyrone Drummond takes a closer look at the ongoing situation in Mali with sociologist, former Canadian Soldier, and author of the book: Globalization of Nato, Madhi Darius Nazemroaya.
Follow Tyrone Drummond on social media:
Support independent media by joining Press For Truth TV
We rely on you the viewer to help us continue to do this work. With your help I can continue to make videos and documentary films for youtube in an effort to raise awareness all over the world. Please support independent media by joining Press For Truth TV!
As a Press For Truth TV subscriber you’ll have full access to the site’s features and content including Daily Video Blogs on current news from the PFT perspective and High Quality Downloads of all Press For Truth Films, Music and Special Reports! Subscribe to Press For Truth TV
You can also support Press For Truth and help us continue to do this work by donating or becoming a sponsor at pressfortruth.ca
Canadian Awareness Network
March 14, 2013
Youtube description: I had the opportunity to voice my opposition about Canada’s Role in the War in Mali to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper after he hosted French Prime Minister Jean Marc Ayrault for dinner at the Chateau Laurier in Ottawa on March 13th,2013.
February 8, 2013
So-called militants – encouraged by imperialists – so that western colonialism can intervene to save Africa from the menacing Islam.
Algeria is the next target
Israel needs these developments in order to portray herself as a saviour
Salafists are dajjals warriors fighting NATO’s wars
It is because of Putin that Turkey has not attacked Syria.
by Jason Liosatos
21st Century Wire
February 23, 2013
As France’s Prime Minister Hollande leads the charge in Africa from the safety of his desk, with his military killing, terrifying and displacing Africans, he is to receive a peace prize from UNESCO? To say this was absurd and outright insanity would be putting it mildly.
It seems obvious that the French military charge into Africa is simply to secure the uranium rich mines there in Mali and Niger, some of which are already controlled by Areva, France’s nuclear energy giant, who have a strong foothold on the strategically important mines and assets. Add to this that France is highly dependent on uranium for its countries power supply and we begin to get a whiff of what is going on, that it is no coincidence or conspiracy theory that France has grabbed the chance to secure the region.
There is a mad scramble to hijack Africa and its mineral rich land by China and the US, so this opportunity to create the usual Western style gunslinger, cowboy attack could not be resisted by Obama, Hollande and Cameron to snatch the Gold reserves. With the Fiat paper money collapsing faster than the twin towers it is imperative that Africa is secured for its bountiful supply of gold, and the usual excuse of a terrorist threat was employed, when in truth the greatest terrorist threat worldwide is the US, Israeli and Western megalomaniac governments, who will do virtually anything to satisfy their insatiable lust for power and control.
So as Prime French Prime Minister Hollande, Obama and Cameron bomb and bully their way into the black mans land again, to rob and pillage under the guise of liberators and bringers of democracy, we see the black people with very little, and hoping for a little more, yelling Viva La France as the French troops and military hardware roll by as they clap and cheer, though little do they know that they could very well be the IMF’s next unsuspecting victims, who may soon be taking out loans and mortgages, in a more sophisticated re enslavement of black Africans by the unscrupulous West, as they empty their gold and uranium mines from under their noses.
If this all seems like cynicism let us take a close look first and see the facts and realize there is a great difference between cynicism and reality.
Author Jason Liosatos is a writer and peace advocate based in the UK, and host of Global Peace Radio Show.
by Tony Cartalucci
February 4, 2013 (Guardian War Propaganda) – It’s hard to contemplate the audacity of the Guardian in their feigning concern for the victims of extremism in Mali as 2 years ago they were cheering on almost identical extremists in the very same region.
Image: Libya’s “rebels” were in fact Al Qaeda’s US State Department, United Nations, and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf)-listed terrorist organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) who committed sweeping atrocities, even exterminating entire cities with little or no condemnation from the West. Now they fight in Syria with Western arms and cash, while their ideological compatriots in Mali serve as a casus belli for French occupation.
The UK Government and media outlets downplayed and largely ignored the brutalization of black communities during the Libyan conflict and in its aftermath reports of ethnic cleansing were conveniently swept under the carpet. The extremists who were committing these atrocities and war crimes were subjected to the least amount of scrutiny possible as they were essentially fighting on behalf of Western interests and were backed up militarily by NATO. Compare this to the current situation in Mali. A near autonomous region in the North of the country is this time directly threatening Western interests so miraculously its all systems go with regards to rigorous reporting and faux outrage.
What does this duplicity tell us about government policy and the news reports that shamelessly support it?
It tells us that human rights and democracy play little to no part in the decision to promote and pursue wars. The Guardian can, and do, propagandize a cause based solely on the Governments financial interests.
February 6, 2013
The French military, assisted by local militia, has taken the city of Kidal – the last major city still controlled by Islamist militants. Meanwhile, warplanes have continued striking the remaining militant hideouts in the far north of the country. The French foreign minister has hinted that the operation may be over as early as March. But while the advance has been swift, the conflict is already taking its toll on the civilians. Geopolitical analyst Patrick Henningsen believes the war on terror is just a pretext used by Western powers to tighten their grip on Africa – in the ‘New Cold War’ for resources in the 21st century..
January 19, 2013
President Hollande of France visited Algeria 2 weeks before launching his attack on Mali. He was given a green light for his attack aircraft to be refueled in Algerian Airspace, and according to an anonymous Algerian source he was given the finance to wage the war on Mali (reminds me of Gaddafi financing Sarkozy’s election campaign).
That Algeria gave the countries of the hostages (Japan, US, France and the UK) no advance warning of an attack (on the In-Amenas Oil installation) shows Algeria doesn’t trust the West or wish to give them any excuse to enter on the ground.
Fact is, Algeria is Paying France In Blood And Money for the so-called Mali War.
And for my detractors – when I say these wars are for social engineering – the resources can be got for a lot less than the cost of bombing, furthermore that there are a group of people ready to profit from raping the countries resources proves nothing.
Why has Qatar been used to facilitate orphanages in Mali?
January 20, 2013
The Algerian military has reportedly taken five Islamic terrorists alive, in the aftermath of the gas facility hostage siege. With the clear-up operation still ongoing, the civilian death toll’s expected to rise as more bodies are discovered. Several foreign civilians were among dozens killed when Algerian forces stormed the site, taken by militants in revenge for the French intervention in neighbouring Mali. Britain has stepped forward to help the French intervention, by providing cargo planes to transfer supplies to the war zone. But journalist and broadcaster Neil Clark says the European stance against Islamists is inconsistent – READ FULL SCRIPT http://on.rt.com/ii6exk
RT LIVE http://rt.com/on-air
Subscribe to RT! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=RussiaToday
Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTnews
Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_com
Follow us on Google+ http://plus.google.com/+RT
January 17, 2013
An analyst says Britain, the US and their puppets Saudi Arabia and Qatar which have in the first place played a role in the creation of rebels are the root cause of incidents such as that which took place in Algeria.
The comment comes as militants in Algeria say they have repelled an attack by the Algerian Army trying to rescue tens of kidnapped foreigners, among them French, British and Americans nationals.
The incident occurred late Wednesday when Nigerian soldiers made an attempt to enter the gas installation in the country’s eastern town of In Amenas, where armed men are holding up to 41 foreigners.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Lawrence Freeman with the Africa Desk at the Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) weekly magazine to further discuss the issue.
Follow our Facebook on: https://www.facebook.com/presstvchannel
Follow our Twitter on: http://twitter.com/presstv
Follow our Tumblr on: http://presstvchannel.tumblr.com
January 14, 2013
Yahya addresses the destabalising factors and the wrongness of foreign military intervention. Amazingly this was recorded in October in 2012 – It is so prophetic it could have been recorded today! At the time it was only uploaded for a few hours as I (perhaps mistakenly) thought it was not compelling enough.
by Tony Cartalucci
NATO funding, arming, & simultaneously fighting Al Qaeda from Mali to Syria.
January 11, 2013 (LD) – A deluge of articles have been quickly put into circulation defending France’s military intervention in the African nation of Mali. TIME’s article, “The Crisis in Mali: Will French Intervention Stop the Islamist Advance?” decides that old tricks are the best tricks, and elects the tiresome “War on Terror” narrative.
TIME claims the intervention seeks to stop “Islamist” terrorists from overrunning both Africa and all of Europe. Specifically, the article states:
“…there is a (probably well-founded) fear in France that a radical Islamist Mali threatens France most of all, since most of the Islamists are French speakers and many have relatives in France. (Intelligence sources in Paris have told TIME that they’ve identified aspiring jihadis leaving France for northern Mali to train and fight.) Al-Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), one of the three groups that make up the Malian Islamist alliance and which provides much of the leadership, has also designated France — the representative of Western power in the region — as a prime target for attack.”
[READ ENTIRE ARTICLE…]
December 31, 2012
The Canadian Press
Defence Minister Peter MacKay says the Conservative government is examining whether to dispatch Canadian troops to help train an African force whose purpose would be to take back a vast swath of Mali from an off-shoot of al-Qaeda. (Fred Chartrand/Canadian Press)
The Harper government is examining whether to dispatch Canadian troops to help train an African force whose purpose would be to take back a vast swath of Mali from an off-shoot of al-Qaeda.
Defence Minister Peter MacKay, speaking in Halifax Sunday, said what form of military assistance can be provided to a growing international swell is something that’s under active discussion.
“What I can tell you is that we are contemplating what contribution Canada could make,” MacKay said at an announcement related to rental housing rates on military bases.
The United Nations recently decided to back a proposal from Economic Community of West African States — ECOWAS — to send 3,300 troops to the region.
Canadian special forces troops were active in the west African country for several training missions prior to the coup last March that installed a shaky interim government. Those missions also took place before Islamic Maghreb — known as AQIM — overran much of the northern portion of the impoverished nation.
“We are not at a point where we would be making an announcement, but as you know, training is something that the Canadian Forces is particularly adept at doing,” MacKay said. “We’ve demonstrated that repeated in the last, well, throughout our history, but certainly the training mission in Afghanistan is a testament to that commitment and that ability and something that has garnered the admiration of recipient nations but also other countries who emulate Canadian training techniques.”
October 19, 2012
The aftermath of NATO’s assistance in North Africa is plenty of weapons in Mali, it is more Al Qaeda types who have taken control of Northern Mali. Now the French, the Algerians and the EU have all voiced support for a military intervention.
Which will probably happen quite soon from Western sponsored African forces.
A google search of Yahya Eromosele will bring up his FB and YT accounts
September 23, 2012
Seems like the usual culprits: Saudia Arabia, Qatar, Israel, and Algeria and Libya have played a role.
Gaddafi is missed.