HIGHLY POTENT NEWS THAT MIGHT CHANGE YOUR VIEWS

Saudi Arabia

VIDEO — Some of John McCain’s Friends: US-Supported Insurgents Humiliate Syrian Old Man in Aleppo

Global Research TV
May 11, 2014

In March 2013 the US-supported insurgent group known as the so-called “Free Syrian Army” abducted the famous “Yellow Man of Aleppo.” The Yellow Man of Aleppo, whose real name is Abu Zakhour, is an old man who is a local celebrity.

When a Syrian journalist asked him, in a 2010 interview, why he wears yellow all the time, the old man responded that he “chose yellow because it’s a color that gives people happiness and joy” whenever they see it. “People loved me from the beginning and I want to repay them that love” by bringing joy into their lives by wearing yellow, he explained. In 2013, his desires to bring joy were met by punishment, physical abuse, verbal abuse and public humiliation when US-supported fighters entered Aleppo.

After abducting Abu Zakhour the insurgent fighters uploaded a video of themselves insulting and tormenting the old man online before he was taken away in their car. The FSA thugs intimidate and force the old man from Aleppo to pretend he supports them and the US-supported insurgency in Syria, to curse President Bashar Al-Assad, and to even bark like a dog and to smile while they slap and hit him multiple times.

These are the criminals that John McCain and the US, UK, French, Turkish, Qatari, Saudi, German, and Canadian government support and want in power.

For more news and articles about the situation in Aleppo and Syria please visit Global Research at http://www.GlobalResearch.ca or click the following link:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/indepthr…

PLEASE SUPPORT GLOBAL RESEARCH SPREAD THE TRUTH


VIDEO — The Ingredients of Geneva II – Syrian Girl

108morris108
Jan 5, 2014

We learn insights and the backgrounds to Syria in the Geneva 2 prism.

http://youtu.be/idx3MPU6Qb8


Thailand’s Upcoming Sham “Elections”

Land Destroyer

Like tyrants throughout history, Thaksin will use “elections” to lend himself legitimacy he otherwise doesn’t have. 

December 25, 2013 (Tony Cartalucci) – Elections alone do not make any given regime legitimate. Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, held regular elections – of course, Hussein was the only viable candidate running and easily was returned to power, time and time again (See BBC’s “Saddam ‘wins 100% of vote‘”). He enjoyed immense popularity especially as he stood up against the unwarranted aggression of the United States, however no one would describe his government as particularly “democratic.” Of course, the West had no problems saying so.

A similar tale can be told of North Korea’s elections – with its one-party government enjoying “landslide victories” as reported in the Telegraph’s “Elections declared a success in one party North Korea.” Similarly, the West has no problem making a mockery of the process

Image: In Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to vote (or even drive for that matter). Despite this gross injustice, the autocratic feudal regime is one of the West’s closest allies and exists in a media black-hole of immunity and self-censorship. This reveals that what is considered “acceptable” and “unacceptable” by international standards is solely based on Western interest – not objective, impartial principles. The West’s backing of upcoming sham “elections” in Thailand, where only one main party is running and the top three candidates are all from the same family (Thaksin Shinawatra, sister Yingluck Shinawatra, and brother-in-law Somchai Wongsawa) is another display of double standards and the convenient circumvention of the rule of law.

[READ THE FULL ARTICLE]


Saudi capital hit with rare floods, residents urged to stay indoors (PHOTOS)

RT
November 17, 2013

Cars drive through a flooded street in northern Riyadh, on November 17, 2013, after heavy rains fell overnight in the Saudi capital, caused floods and traffic jams which forced the Saudi Eduction Ministry to suspend studies in schools and universities for one day (AFP Photo / Fayez Nureldine)

Severe flooding is being reported in Saudi Arabia, especially in the kingdom’s capital of Riyadh, with the government closing schools and urging people to stay indoors amid heavy rain. Flooding is rare in the country dominated by the Arabian Desert.

Witnesses in Riaydh, which is also the country’s largest city, are reporting flooded streets and shops. Pictures posted on Twitter show cars drowning in rainwater.

[READ THE FULL ARTICLE and see a video and more pictures]


Saudi-Pakistani new alliance to topple Syrian government

CounterPsyOps
November 7, 2013

image

Pakistan could be given the responsibility for training two militant brigades in Syria, with about 5,000-10,000 militants.

Saudi Arabia, one of the biggest spenders of the foreign-sponsored war in Syria is turning to Pakistan to train militants, repeating a partnership that once failed in Afghanistan, a new report says.

The Foreign Policy Magazine wrote in an article on Thursday that Saudi Arabia is embarking on a major new effort to train Syrian rebel forces.

The article cites three sources with knowledge of the program that say Riyadh has enlisted the help of Pakistani instructors to do it.

According to the sources Pakistan could be given the responsibility for training about 5,000-10,000 militants from two brigades.

The report says the main goal of the Saudi project is to unite the mainstream armed opposition in Syria, many of whom are extremist forces, under the banner of a unified army.

The decision came after signs of rift in relations between Washington and Riyadh became evident.

Saudi Arabia’s decision to move forward with training the Syria militants independent of the United States is the latest sign of a split between the two longtime allies.

In Syria, Saudi officials were aggrieved by Washington’s decision to cancel a strike on the Syrian government in reprisal for a chemical attack on the Damascus suburbs this summer.

A top Saudi official told the Washington Post that Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan was unaware of the cancelation of the strike. “We found about it from CNN,” he said.

As a result, Saudi Arabia has decided to follow its own plans which rely on a network of Saudi allies in addition to Pakistan, such as Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, and France.

“As the Saudis expand their effort to topple Assad, analysts say the central challenge is not to inflict tactical losses on the Syrian army, but to organize a coherent force that can coordinate its actions across the country. In other words, if Riyadh hopes to succeed where others have failed, it needs to get the politics right — convincing the fragmented rebel groups, and their squabbling foreign patrons, to work together in pursuit of a shared goal,” the article writes.

“The biggest problem facing the Saudis now is the same one facing the US, France, and anyone else interested in helping the rebels: the fragmentation of the rebels into groups fighting each other for local and regional dominance rather than cooperating to overthrow Assad,” said David Ottaway, a scholar at the Wilson Center who wrote a biography of Prince Bandar.

Syria militants are facing with deep divisions and rivalries with every now and then several of them pledging alliance together to form independent armies.

On Thursday, al-Qaeda leader Aymen Zawahiri who has the strongest militant groups on the ground in Syria fighting alongside the US-backed opposition urged all armed groups to be united and overthrow the Syrian government and set up their own ruling system.

Source: Alalam


Syria and the Saudi-Israeli Connection: The Chemical Weapons Attack. Who was Behind It?

by Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich
Global Research
September 19, 2013

The long anticipated UN inspectors report confirmed the use of chemical weapons on August 21, 2013 in the Ghouta area of Damascus. The investigators report provided “clear and convincing evidence that surface-to-surface rockets containing the nerve agent Sarin were used”.   Warmongers were quick to pounce on the use of rockets as evidence that the Assad government was responsible. The Russian Foreign Minister Sergie Lavrov was quick to point to the “post hoc ergo propter hoc” argument — correlation does not equal causation.  So whodunit?

Foremost, given that the report emphasis the use of rockets, the Saudis should be asking themselves  why it is that the accusatory finger has been pointed to them. There is no doubt that Saudi Arabia is involved in the Syria conflict.    Their involvement is not restricted to providing arms to the rebels but as USA Today reported in January, they have been sending death-row inmates to fight in Syria.   That said, the UN report clearly repudiates dubious reports which surfaced on the internet citing a rebel’s father who had claimed that the Saudis supplied the chemical weapons without instructions, or without telling the rebels what they were which is why “they” (chemical weapons) went off in the tunnel.

While it is not a secret that the Saudis aim to spread their influence in the region by assisting neocons remove Assad from power, what should be of note to the Saudis and of interest to media watchers is the fact that in spite of the Saudi ‘s full cooperation with America and Israel in funding and supporting wars against fellow Arabs and Moslems, and even providing them with terrorists, the neoconservatives such as the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies are now claiming that Saudi Arabia is responsible for pushing for war .   This should give Saudis reason to pause and reflect.  But to the report….

According to the UN report two types of rockets had been used, including an M14 artillery rocket bearing Cyrillic markings and a 330-millimeter rocket of unidentified origin – though perhaps not so unidentified.    Shortly after the August incident, Foreign Policy published and made mention of these mysterious rockets which according to former UN inspectors bore a strong resemblance to a 1970’s American weapon—the SLUFAE.   Although SLUFAE had been shelved, the concept was built upon by several countries—namely Israel.  According to the former UN inspector, “a very similar munition was found 3-5 years ago, during one of the Israeli excursions,” into Southern Lebanon”.  Further, there is the strong possibility that the rockets with Cyrillic markings (attributed to the Soviets) can be traced back to the “Bear Spares” program.

  According to the 1995 Teicher Affidavit, the United States had a “Bear Spares” program with the objective to provide ammunition for Soviet or Soviet-style weaponry and deliver them third countries without direct involvement.  Israel which had a large stockpile of Soviet weaponry and ammunition captured during its wars was active in this program and, according to Teicher, transferred the spare parts and weapons to third countries or insurgents (such as to Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war, to the Afghans, and the Contras).

Of note is the fact that Israel possess Sarin gas and it is not party to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).  It is worthwhile repeating here that it was Israeli “intelligence” which alerted the United States of the use of Sarin on August 21, and of its delivery method long before the UN report was published.   It was the Israeli ‘intelligence’ which prompted John Kerry to point the finger at Assad with confidence.

 Often left unmentioned is the fact that it was John Kerry’s  public suggestion to rid Syria of its chemical weapons which became the basis for the Russian initiative to avert war.  Undoubtedly, Israel stands to gain from this initiative given its territorial ambitions (see HERE for example) given that it is thought that Syria’s entire defense against Israel may rest on chemical weapons and warheads[i].   Not surprisingly, the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu regards the initiative as a precedent for dealing with Iran’s civilian nuclear program.

 While Israel has the most to gain by the chemical attack incident,  it is not unique in its access to Soviet weaponry –  and to Sarin gas.   Egypt also served as a supplier for the Bear Spares program where it manufactured weapons and spare parts from Soviet designs and provided these weapons and ammunition to the Iraqis (during the Iran-Iraq war) and other countries.  The United States approved, assisted and encouraged Egypt’s manufacturing capabilities.   It is not without relevance to mention here that the Syrian opposition group had headquarters in Egypt for some time.  The leader of Egyptian military coup, General al-Sisi was hailed as a “national hero for all Jews’ by the Israeli ambassador in Cairo.  The military continues to be in charge with the full support of and funding from the United States (and Saudis).

Contrary to the Western media pundits who attempt to pain this as a straightforward case against Assad, without evidence or without thought, one can point the finger to other more likely culprits who stand to gain a great deal from this heinous crime.  The only way to narrow down the field is to consider ‘cui bono’.   Clearly, Assad is the biggest loser.

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich is an independent researcher and writer with a focus on U.S. foreign policy and the role of lobby groups in influencing US foreign policy.

 Note

[i] Terrill, W. Andrew,  “The Chemical Warfare Legacy of the Yemen War.”  Comparative Strategy, 10 (1991), 109-119.

more articles by: Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

Related content:

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Center of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: publications@globalresearch.ca

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: publications@globalresearch.ca


Is The United States Going To Go To War With Syria Over A Natural Gas Pipeline?

by Michael Snyder
MND – Your Daily Dose of Counter-Theory
September 3, 2013

[Potent News editor’s note: While I don’t think the situation is as simple as a natural gas pipeline (for reasons I expand on halfway through Potent News Blast #10) I still think the information below is relevant and valuable.]

Why has the little nation of Qatar spent 3 billion dollars to support the rebels in Syria?  Could it be because Qatar is the largest exporter of liquid natural gas in the world and Assad won’t let them build a natural gas pipeline through Syria?  Of course.  Qatar wants to install a puppet regime in Syria that will allow them to build a pipeline which will enable them to sell lots and lots of natural gas to Europe.  Why is Saudi Arabia spending huge amounts of money to help the rebels and why has Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan been “jetting from covert command centers near the Syrian front lines to the Élysée Palace in Paris and the Kremlin in Moscow, seeking to undermine the Assad regime”?  Well, it turns out that Saudi Arabia intends to install their own puppet government in Syria which will allow the Saudis to control the flow of energy through the region.  On the other side, Russia very much prefers the Assad regime for a whole bunch of reasons.  One of those reasons is that Assad is helping to block the flow of natural gas out of the Persian Gulf into Europe, thus ensuring higher profits for Gazprom.  Now the United States is getting directly involved in the conflict.  If the U.S. is successful in getting rid of the Assad regime, it will be good for either the Saudis or Qatar (and possibly for both), and it will be really bad for Russia.  This is a strategic geopolitical conflict about natural resources, religion and money, and it really has nothing to do with chemical weapons at all.

It has been common knowledge that Qatar has desperately wanted to construct a natural gas pipeline that will enable it to get natural gas to Europe for a very long time.  The following is an excerpt from an article from 2009

Qatar has proposed a gas pipeline from the Gulf to Turkey in a sign the emirate is considering a further expansion of exports from the world’s biggest gasfield after it finishes an ambitious programme to more than double its capacity to produce liquefied natural gas (LNG).

“We are eager to have a gas pipeline from Qatar to Turkey,” Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, the ruler of Qatar, said last week, following talks with the Turkish president Abdullah Gul and the prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in the western Turkish resort town of Bodrum. “We discussed this matter in the framework of co-operation in the field of energy. In this regard, a working group will be set up that will come up with concrete results in the shortest possible time,” he said, according to Turkey’s Anatolia news agency.

Other reports in the Turkish press said the two states were exploring the possibility of Qatar supplying gas to the strategic Nabucco pipeline project, which would transport Central Asian and Middle Eastern gas to Europe, bypassing Russia. A Qatar-to-Turkey pipeline might hook up with Nabucco at its proposed starting point in eastern Turkey. Last month, Mr Erdogan and the prime ministers of four European countries signed a transit agreement for Nabucco, clearing the way for a final investment decision next year on the EU-backed project to reduce European dependence on Russian gas.

“For this aim, I think a gas pipeline between Turkey and Qatar would solve the issue once and for all,” Mr Erdogan added, according to reports in several newspapers. The reports said two different routes for such a pipeline were possible. One would lead from Qatar through Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq to Turkey. The other would go through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey. It was not clear whether the second option would be connected to the Pan-Arab pipeline, carrying Egyptian gas through Jordan to Syria. That pipeline, which is due to be extended to Turkey, has also been proposed as a source of gas for Nabucco.

Based on production from the massive North Field in the Gulf, Qatar has established a commanding position as the world’s leading LNG exporter. It is consolidating that through a construction programme aimed at increasing its annual LNG production capacity to 77 million tonnes by the end of next year, from 31 million tonnes last year. However, in 2005, the emirate placed a moratorium on plans for further development of the North Field in order to conduct a reservoir study.

As you just read, there were two proposed routes for the pipeline.  Unfortunately for Qatar, Saudi Arabia said no to the first route and Syria said no to the second route.  The following is from an absolutely outstanding article in the Guardian

In 2009 – the same year former French foreign minister Dumas alleges the British began planning operations in Syria – Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter’s North field, contiguous with Iran’s South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets – albeit crucially bypassing Russia. Assad’s rationale was “to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe’s top supplier of natural gas.”

Instead, the following year, Assad pursued negotiations for an alternative $10 billion pipeline plan with Iran, across Iraq to Syria, that would also potentially allow Iran to supply gas to Europe from its South Pars field shared with Qatar. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the project was signed in July 2012 – just as Syria’s civil war was spreading to Damascus and Aleppo – and earlier this year Iraq signed a framework agreement for construction of the gas pipelines.

The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan was a “direct slap in the face” to Qatar’s plans. No wonder Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, in a failed attempt to bribe Russia to switch sides, told President Vladmir Putin that “whatever regime comes after” Assad, it will be “completely” in Saudi Arabia’s hands and will “not sign any agreement allowing any Gulf country to transport its gas across Syria to Europe and compete with Russian gas exports”, according to diplomatic sources. When Putin refused, the Prince vowed military action.

[READ THE FULL ARTICLE]