HIGHLY POTENT NEWS THAT MIGHT CHANGE YOUR VIEWS

US

Rep. Dennis Kucinich: “Throw Out the NDAA”

P.A.N.D.A. People Against The NDAA
December 15, 2012

U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) issued a press release agreeing with PANDA’s analysis of the Feinstein-Lee Amendment, and advocating for Congress to “Throw Out the NDAA.”

We couldn’t agree more:

“Today, this House will send the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to conference. Contrary to its title, the bill does not provide for the protection of the American people. It expands war. It further indebts our nation. It encroaches on basic rights with regards to indefinite detention. It eliminates the basic tenet that due process rights apply to everyone in this country – not just American citizens.

“The legislation also includes additional sanctions against Iran despite numerous reports that our sanctions are affecting the ability of ordinary Iranians to obtain medicine and offer basic goods. Sanctions have thus far not served to solve the impasse or bring Iran to the negotiating table. More sanctions are not the answer and do not bring us closer to a diplomatic solution.

“This legislation also perpetuates the myth that we are ending the war in Afghanistan. We are not leaving Afghanistan. We are deepening our commitment. This bill provides for another staggering $88 billion for the war. The Strategic Partnership Agreement between the U.S. and Afghanistan commits us to the country for at least another decade with a $20 billion price tag.

“Finally, this legislation continues financing our bloated Pentagon. The United States maintains 1,000 bases worldwide. Some of these bases are infamous, like Guantanamo Bay. There are small bases to support our drones program. There are fortresses to support our wars.

“The cost to maintain these bases is billions of dollars. Included in these costs are the costs to maintain and run 234 golf courses around the world.

“The Pentagon is expanding their spy agency. The CIA has become a paramilitary organization. We are preparing to support intervention in Mali. Our government’s policy in Syria is incoherent. We are expanding our military presence in Asia and in Africa.

“And for what? For millions of Americans to be unemployed? For millions of Americans to go hungry? For millions of Americans not to have adequate access to education or even healthcare? For millions to lose their homes? For millions to lose their retirement security? For roads and bridges to collapse because we have no money for infrastructure?

“I say it’s time we pay attention to the defense of the American people’s pocketbooks – The defense of the dignity of the American people – The defense of the moral authority of the United States. It’s time to end this state of permanent war. We should throw out the NDAA, put an end to interventionism and begin to take care of things back home.”

Contact:

Nathan White (202)225-5871

Nathan.white (at) mail.house (dot) gov”

http://kucinich.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=315176


BREAKING: No Viable Connection Between Peter Lanza & US Senate LIBOR Hearings

by Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
December 17, 2012

It seems the alternative media has been caught in purveying disinformation concerning the recent shootings in Connecticut, the father of one of the shooters, Peter Lanza and the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) scandal. In fact, research proves that Lanza has no ties to the LIBOR debacle, nor is there documentative evidence that Lanza is scheduled to testify at an up-coming hearing regarding the technocratic scheme.

One alternative media source claims that: “Peter Lanza was scheduled to testify in the ongoing global LIBOR scandal. In what could only be described an amazing coincidence, the father of Colorado Batman shooter James Holmes, Robert Holmes, was also a LIBOR witness in his position with FICO.”

No citation links are provided to corroborate this assertion – simply the illusory connection is made which seems to be enough to shift an entire social meme and cause distraction from the actual factual evidence emerging about the shooting; as well as the implications of this event with regard to the 2nd Amendment.

The rumor circulating the internet is based on assertions without evidence, which is being paralleled with the assumptions made about James Holmes’ father and another alleged connection to LIBOR simply because Holmes’ father is a computer economist at FICO. In fact, a known disinfo agent was the originator of the Holmes/LIBOR connection, although the alternative media masses continue to repeat the lie without checking their facts.

Another alternative media source has ties to purveying the rumor as fact without providing evidence with their social networking site as well as commentary that misleads the public in a thread at the bottom of an article concerning the recent shootings at Sandy Hook elementary.

According to Lanza’s Linkedin page, Lanza has worked “closely with many of the preeminent partnership tax advisors in the United States on a daily basis.” Currently Lanza is employed as the tax director and vice president of taxes at GE Energy Financial Services (GE-EFS).

Lanza’s responsibilities at GE-EFS include:

• Tax strategies, planning and tax operations
• Reporting directly to GE-EFS Chief Financial Officer
• Consultations on “structuring, negotiating asset acquisition, dispositions”
• Responsible for risk management on transactions
• Assist other employees in achieving business tax objectives
• Partner with GE Corporate tax group to “leverage technical resources . . . provide support on projects and initiatives”

Cited in mainstream media, GE has been successfully evading paying taxes for some time now. Although the corporation reported global profits of $14.2 billion with $5.1 billion of that total being attributed to American operations, GE claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion. Lanza, would have contributed to the success of GE evading corporate taxes in the US.

With the use of lobbyists on Capitol Hill, the abuse of tax breaks and creative accounting, GE has been able to pay low tax rates in the US; as well as move their monetary assets into offshore bank accounts.

While President Obama claims to want to reign in the corporate tax system and stop multi-national companies from cheating the system, he appointed Jeffrey Immelt, GE chief executive, as his chairman on the President’s Council on Jobs and Competiveness, as well as liaison to the corporate community and expert on corporate taxes.

The originator of the unqualified information about Lanza and LIBOR appears to be a member of the CIA-controlled and NSA-sponsored nameless, faceless hacker group Anonymous. Again, there are no citations provided that back-up these allegations, but that is not the point when disinformation is being spread across the alternative media circuit.

Propaganda does not require evidence to prove itself. It simply utilizes the ignorant masses that believe what they see and tend to repeat the lie as fact to their friends; family; repost to message boards, comment threads, social media sites which props up the lie until the truth no longer matters.

The reality of the shooting in Connecticut, as well as the previous shootings this year, is the beginning of a national call for gun control and the demise of the 2nd Amendment. Supporting the coming national debate is the mainstream media as they attack the survivors and victim’s families for verification on the facts of the incident. This information would only serve to propagate future discussions about gun control and legislation to restrict American’s ability to exercise their 2nd Amendment.

Last week, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg postured himself with this statement: “With all the carnage from gun violence in our country, it’s still almost impossible to believe that a mass shooting in a kindergarten class could happen. It has come to that. Not even kindergarteners learning their A,B,Cs are safe.”

Bloomberg said that Obama’s “calling for ‘meaningful action’ is not enough” and he would like to see Obama “send a bill to Congress to fix this problem.” He asserted that “a national tragedy . . . demands a national response.”

As a member of the coersive network called Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), Bloomberg is one of 600 mayors across the nation that would like to see massive restriction of the 2nd Amendment under “commonsense reforms”. Bloomberg has contributed considerable financial donations to MAIG, along with the Joyce Foundation, a globalist Chicago-based non-profit organization started by Valerie Jarrett and Barack Obama.

On the WeThePeople website, a petition was initiated with the “goal . . . to force the Obama administration to produce legislation that limits access to guns” as well as a “national dialogue” to coerce the general public to support gun restrictions to “reduce the number of people murdered in gun related deaths.”
At the time this article was written, there were 124,626 signatures of support amassed for this petition.

The Columbine shooting, which is still misrepresented in the mainstream and alternative media, was used to instill the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 which identified semi-automatic firearms, or assault weapons” as dangerous and removed them from the hands of all Americans for 10 years.

Since then, the renewal of this restriction of the 2nd Amendment has not been approved by Congress.

Senator Dianne Feinstein said last week that “the president will soon have legislation ‘to lead on’ in the gun control debate.” Feinstein is heading the march against the 2nd Amendment with the introduction of a bill into Congress in January of 2013. This document is just now being drafted with a proposal for the US House of Representatives.

Feinstein explains the bill “will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation, and the possession. Not retroactively, but prospectively. It will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets. There will be a bill.”

And while alternative media is spinning their wheels on disinformation and unsubstantiated allegations between Lanza and LIBOR, the Obama administration is setting the stage and implementing the necessary legislation to finally destroy our Constitutional right to bear arms and protect ourselves from this tyrannical government.

[hat tip: Sheila Aliens]


CrossTalk: Selective Justice [video]

Russia Today
December 12, 2012

Is the International Criminal Court unfair and biased? Is it really about geopolitics? The US refuses to sign up as member of the court while proclaiming itself a nation governed by the rule of law. Is this hypocrisy? A vast majority of investigations at the ICC come from Africa — but surely there have been other major crimes committed in other parts of the world. So why aren’t they looked into? CrossTalking with Lawrence Douglas, William Keylor and George Szamuely.

Follow Peter Lavelle on Twitter http://twitter.com/PLCROSSTALK

Watch all CrossTalk shows here:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL75A81D67D2955F81 (Sep 2009 – Feb 2011)
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLPszygYHA9K12YqkZDcnaHfDd5cptKhs9 (Mar 2011 – Jul 2012)
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLPszygYHA9K1wI7Kcpxfq6NviCKYKjXAn (Jul 2012 – current)

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

RT (Russia Today) is a global news network broadcasting from Moscow and Washington studios. RT is the first news channel to break the 500 million YouTube views benchmark.


What Did President Obama’s Comments On Marijuana Legalization Mean?

by Anthony Johnson
The Weed Blog
December 18, 2012

Are Media Outlets Missing What President Obama Really Said About Marijuana?

Barbara Walters interview with President Obama aired last Friday and marijuana legalization was one of the topics covered.  Reactions have varied from the hopeful to the pessimistic since a preview of the interview and a partial transcript were released.  Now that the interview has been aired, where do the marijuana legalization measures in Colorado and Washington stand with the federal government?  Different people took different things away from the interview.  Just as I have blogged previously, I don’t think that President Obama said anything very substantial and feel that is is upon us, the civil libertarian and cannabis law reform communities, to lead on this issue, because the President simply isn’t.

Andrew Sullivan was encouraged by President Obama’s statements to Barbara Walters, while Matt Yglesias thought that his comments were “meaningless.”  The folks at Reason were skeptical that the President’s statements really indicated any new policy as he didn’t signal a change towards targeting marijuana providers and Alex Seitz-Wald, writing for Salon, stated that “history suggests reformers should be wary.”

A lot of people I spoke with over the past couple of days, seemed to be very influenced by headlines like, “Marijuana Not High Obama Priority,” “Obama lets the states decide on marijuana” and “Obama: Feds shouldn’t target recreational pot users in Colorado, Washington,” as these headlines all imply that the Obama Justice Department will allow states to implement their own marijuana laws.  Unfortunately, the Presidents comments did not signal that his administration will adhere to the will of the voters in Washington and Colorado, he simply stated that going after recreational users will not be a priority of the federal government, but that has never been a priority of the federal government, so I tend to agree with Matt Yglesias that his statements regarding recreational consumers were pretty meaningless.  I agree with The Denver Post’sheadline, “Obama’s stance on marijuana still not clear.”

The only aspects about his comments that weren’t really meaningless fluff were his statements about how it is time to have a conversation about legalization and that is is upon Congress to pass laws and the Executive Branch to enforce laws.  These statements make it clear to me that President Obama is completely unwilling to be a true leader marijuana law reform.  We, anyone concerned about drug laws, states’ rights or civil liberties, must lead on this issue.  If we force Congress to act, then the President will follow us and finally listen to the will of the people and allow states to operate as laboratories of democracy as Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandies once called for.  Fortunately for us, Senator Patrick Leahy, who has stated his intention of holding hearings on the issue, Rand Paul and several House members have provided us an opening to take the lead.

One one hand, I sympathize with President Obama’s predicament and understand his willingness to lead on drug law reform issues.  He has so many issues on his plate, including the fiscal cliff negotiations, health care, immigration policy, foreign policy and gun control, that marijuana legalization cannot be his top priority.  His Justice Department is staffed with prosecutors who have spent their careers prosecuting people for marijuana, they aren’t going to be hopping on the legalization bandwagon any time soon.  Vice-President Joe Biden has been a Drug War warrior his entire political career as well, so he probably isn’t advising the President to allow states to implement their own cannabis laws.  Finally, President Obama’s historical significance as the first African American to occupy the White House likely weighs upon him and he is likely sensitive as being seen as “pro-pot” or “soft on drugs.”

On the other hand, I don’t understand President Obama’s reluctance to be more of a leader on this issue.  Marijuana legalization is favored by a majority of voters in many polls and a very strong majority of voterswant the federal government to allow states to implement their own cannabis laws.  Both of the legalization states sent their electoral votes to President Obama and most of his core constituencies  including young people and liberals, overwhelmingly support ending cannabis prohibition.  Also, prior to running for the presidency, Barack Obama is on record supporting marijuana decriminalization and examining the failed Drug War.  Now that he doesn’t have to worry about re-election, there isn’t a better time for President Obama to have our nation thoroughly evaluate the Drug War, particularly the War on Marijuana. And finally, the President has been provided political cover by Republican Senator Rand Paul and the influential conservative magazine, the National Review.  If Obama were given to much grief about allowing states to implement their own marijuana laws, he could always pin the idea on the conservative junior senator from Kentucky and on the conservative disciples of William F. Buckley, Jr. (the founder of the National Review.)

Regardless of how the Obama Administration ultimately responds to Colorado and Washington or whether we help usher a bill through Congress that allows states to implement their own cannabis laws without a threat of federal interference, or not, marijuana legalization is not going away.  President Obama and Congress cannot stop more states from ending cannabis prohibition in 2014, 2016 and beyond.  The federal government simply doesn’t have the resources to stop our movement.  As more and more people understand that ending cannabis prohibition will allow law enforcement resources to be better prioritized to combat serious and violent crime, while generating revenue and creating jobs, the polls will continue to move in our favor.  As the polls continue to move in our favor, so will elected officials all across the country, and just as Alcohol Prohibition went the way of the dodo bird, so will cannabis prohibition.

Republished with special permission from the National Cannabis Coalition


Unmasking the Brotherhood: Syria, Egypt, and Beyond

Land Destroyer

December 13, 2012 (Stop Imperialism) – The complexities of the Arab Spring and the struggle for political freedom throughout the Arab world should not obscure what has now become an absolutely essential understanding for all anti-imperialists: the Muslim Brotherhood is one of the most powerful weapons of the Western ruling class in the Muslim world.  While that may be a difficult pill for some to swallow for emotional or psychological reasons, one need look no further than the insidious role the organization is playing in Syria and the abuses of power and human rights of the government of Egypt.  In the US-NATO sponsored war against the Assad government, the Muslim Brotherhood has emerged as the leading western-sanctioned force, the avant-garde of the imperialist assault.  While, in Egypt, President Morsi and the Brotherhood government seek to destroy what had been, little more than a year ago, the promise of the revolution.

Muslim Brotherhood in Syria

This week’s establishment of the Supreme Military Command, in charge of all military aid and coordination to the rebels, demonstrates unequivocally the leadership role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the drive for regime change in Syria.  As Reuters reported, “The unified command includes many with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and to Salafists…it excludes the most senior officers who have defected from Assad’s military.”[1] This command structure, formed at the behest and under the sponsorship of the US, UK, France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey among others, does not simply include members of the Muslim Brotherhood, it is, in fact, dominated by them.  Is it possible that the Western imperial powers simply did not notice that the group they were forming was comprised of these elements?  To suggest so would be to accuse some of the leading “statesmen” of the world (Hillary Clinton, William Hague, Laurent Fabius, Ahmet Davutoglu, etc.) of being stupid.  Alas, they are not so.  Instead, these individuals have collaborated to create a Muslim Brotherhood proxy force in Syria, one that can be controlled and depended on to do the bidding of the West.

However, it is not enough to say that the Muslim Brotherhood is heading this new military structure, for that would be to imply that they have not been playing a critical role all along.  Rather, the organization has been central to the destabilization of Syria since the beginning of the armed conflict.  The Syrian National Council, originally the face of the Western-backed “opposition” was itself dominated behind the scenes by the Muslim Brotherhood. As former Muslim Brotherhood leader Ali Sadreddine stated regarding the SNC, “We chose this face, accepted by the West…We nominated [former SNC head Burhan] Ghalioun as a front for national action. We are not moving now as the Brotherhood but as part of a front that includes all currents.”[2] Essentially then, we see that the organization has, from the very beginning, maintained a large degree of control of the foreign-based opposition, as distinctly different from the indigenous opposition of the National Coordinating Councils and other groups.  The Muslim Brotherhood, an international political and paramilitary machine, has come to lead the battle against Assad government.

In fact, the Muslim Brotherhood has provided many forms of leadership and assistance to the foreign-based, foreign-backed opposition beyond simply direct leadership. From providing diplomatic and political cover, to on-the-ground tactical support such as weapons smuggling, fighter recruitment, and other necessary responsibilities, the organization has come to permeate every aspect of what we in the West conveniently refer to as the “rebels”.

As early as May 2012, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the center of the organization, was already providing the political and diplomatic support the rebels needed to topple the Assad regime.  As they were poised to win the Egyptian elections, the Brotherhood was busy making public comments about the need for Western military intervention in Syria.  The organization’s spokesman, Mahmoud Ghozlan stated, “The Muslim Brotherhood calls on Arab, Islamic, and international governments to intervene…to bring down the [Assad] regime.”[3] This brazen public statement flies in the face of all arguments which claim that the Muslim Brotherhood is somehow anti-imperialist, that they stand in opposition to Western dominance of the Arab world.  On the contrary, though they may posture themselves as opposing the West, they are, in fact, tools of the imperial powers used to destroy independent nations which stand in opposition to US hegemony in the Middle East.

Image: In the US-NATO sponsored war against the Assad government, the Muslim Brotherhood has emerged as the leading western-sanctioned force, the avant-garde of the imperialist assault.  While, in Egypt, President Morsi and the Brotherhood government seek to destroy what had been, little more than a year ago, the promise of the revolution. 

….

This political and diplomatic backing is merely one aspect of the Brotherhood’s involvement in the destruction of Syria.  As the New York Times reported in June of 2012, “CIA officers are operating secretly in Southern Turkey helping allies decide which Syrian opposition fighters across the border will receive arms…by way of a shadowy network of intermediaries including Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood.”[4] The use of the Muslim Brotherhood to smuggle arms to the rebels in Syria should come as no surprise considering the fact that it is the Sunni monarchies of the region (Saudi Arabia and Qatar primarily) who have been the most vociferous voices championing regime change in Syria by any means necessary.  The relationship between these monarchies and the Muslim Brotherhood is self-evident: they share similar religious convictions and are avowed enemies of all forms of Shiism.  Moreover, they have been part and parcel of the system of US hegemony that has kept the entire region under its vice grip for decades.

Many have argued in the past that, though they share identical ideologies and “brand”, the Syrian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood is somehow independent of the Muslim Brotherhood proper.  This preposterous claim is countered by the simple fact that every public position the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood has taken has been in direct alignment with the public statements from Cairo.  As the Carnegie Middle East Center’s article The Muslim Brotherhood in Syria demonstrates, Since the beginning of the revolution, the Brotherhood has maintained that foreign intervention is the only possible solution to the crisis in Syria. In October 2011, it also called on Turkey to intervene and establish protected humanitarian zones in Turkish territory.”[5] When two entities bear the same name, have the same sponsors, and take the same positions, it is an exercise in willful ignorance to argue that they are somehow not the same entity or, as is more accurate, taking orders from the same masters. But who are these masters?

The Powers Behind the Muslim Brotherhood

In examining the utterly insidious role that the Muslim Brotherhood is playing in Syria, one must begin with an understanding of the historical relationship between the Muslim Brotherhood and Western imperialism.  The organization was founded by Hassan al-Banna in 1928 with the intention of reestablishing a purer form of Islam as had existed centuries before.  However, this was merely the religious veneer that was created to mask the political intentions of the organization.  As explained in the Mother Jones article entitled What is the Muslim Brotherhood and Will It Take Over Egypt?, the author explains that, “The Muslim Brotherhood served as a battering ram against nationalists and communists, despite the Brothers’ Islam-based anti-imperialism, the group often ended up making common cause with the colonial British.  It functioned as an intelligence agency, infiltrating left-wing and nationalist groups.”[6] This indisputable fact, that the Muslim Brotherhood functioned, even its early days, as a de facto arm of Western intelligence, is critical to understanding its development and current political power.

However, there are those who argue that, despite this “coincidence” of objectives and agendas, the Muslim Brotherhood could never be tied directly to the intelligence community.  However, as Robert Dreyfuss, author of the Mother Jones article clearly points out, there is ample evidence tying the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood directly to the CIA:

By then [1954], the group’s chief international organizer and best-known official was Said Ramadan, the son-in-law of Hassan al-Banna. Ramadan had come to the attention of both the CIA and MI-6, the British intelligence service. In researching my book … I came across an unusual photograph that showed Ramadan with President Eisenhower in the Oval Office. By then, or soon after, Ramadan had likely been recruited as a CIA agent. Wall Street Journal reporter Ian Johnson has since documented the close ties between Ramadan and various Western intelligence services … Johnson writes: ‘By the end of the decade, the CIA was overtly backing Ramadan.'”[7]

The fact that the central figure in the international organization was a known CIA agent corroborates the assertions made by countless analysts and investigators that the Brotherhood was used as a weapon against Nasser and, in fact, all Arab socialist leaders who at that time were part of a rising tide of Arab nationalism which sought, as its ultimate goal, independence from Western imperial domination.

In order to fully grasp just how the Brotherhood developed into the organization we know today, one must understand the relationship between it and the royal family of Saudi Arabia.  In fact, the Saudis have been the key financiers of the Brotherhood for decades for the same reasons that the United States and the Western powers needed them: opposition to Arab nationalism and the growing “insolence” of Shiite states.  Dreyfuss writes, “From its early days, the Brotherhood was financed generously by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which appreciated its ultra-conservative politics and its virulent hatred of Arab communists.”[8] Essentially, as the United States began to exert its post-war might throughout the region, the Muslim Brotherhood was there to be a willing beneficiary and humble servant sowing the seeds of hatred between Sunni and Shia, espousing a hate-filled Salafist ideology that preached conflict and inescapable war between the branches of Islam.  Naturally, all to the benefit of Western powers who cared little for the ideology and more about the money and resources.

A Tool of the Western Powers Today?

It is often argued that, though the historical record unequivocally shows the Brotherhood as intimately connected to Western intelligence, somehow the organization has changed, that it has become a peaceful force for political progress in the Arab world.  As recent events in Egypt have shown, nothing could be further from the truth.  With the undemocratic attempted power grab by Egyptian President Morsi, the scaling back of civil liberties, the rights of women, and religious and ethnic minorities, the Muslim Brotherhood has shown itself to be little more than a reactionary political force parading itself as a form of “progress”.

If one had any doubts as to the true intentions and motivations of the Muslim Brotherhood once in power in Egypt, one needed look no further than its position on the institutions of global finance capital, particularly the International Monetary Fund.  In one of the first decisions taken by Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood government, Cairo established that it would, in fact, welcome conditional loans from the IMF[9] to rescue itself from the prospect of a continued economic crisis.  However, as part of the conditions of the loan, Morsi’s government would have to drastically reduce subsidies, regulations, and other “market restrictions” while increasing taxes on the middle class.  Essentially, this meant that the Brotherhood consented to the usual cocktail of austerity medicine that had been administered by the agents of finance capital so many times all over the world.  This, naturally, begged the question: Was this the end of the revolution? Indeed, many in the streets of Cairo are asking themselves this same question.  Or, to put it more accurately, they already know the answer.

In Egypt, as in Syria, the Muslim Brotherhood has made itself into an appendage of the Western imperialist ruling class.  It has dutifully served these interests over the course of decades, though the names, faces, and propaganda have changed over the years.  As we watch the tragic images coming from Syria or the tens of thousands in the streets of Cairo, we must question why it has taken so long for this perfidious organization to be exposed or even understood. The answer is, as usual, because it serves the interests of global capital to keep the rest of the world confused as to who the enemies of progress really are.  By revealing their true nature, the real forces of peace and progress around the world can reject the Muslim Brotherhood and the imperial system in all its overt and covert forms.

Eric Draitser is the founder of StopImperialism.com.  He is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City.  He is a regular contributor to Russia Today, Press TV, GlobalResearch.ca, and other media outlets. You can reach him at ericdraitser@gmail.com.


[1] http://news.yahoo.com/rebels-circle-damascus-airport-russia-u-downbeat-013515100.html [2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/06/us-syria-brotherhood-idUSBRE84504R20120506
[3] http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/egypts-brotherhood-calls-intervention-syria
[4] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/world/middleeast/cia-said-to-aid-in-steering-arms-to-syrian-rebels.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
[5] http://carnegie-mec.org/publications/?fa=48370
[6] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/what-is-the-muslim-brotherhood
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] http://www.albawaba.com/business/morsi-egypt-imf-loan-432065


Fox News bans employees from debating gun control [video]

Russia Today
December 18, 2012

Since last Friday’s school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, gun control has taken center stage in the media. One media outlet isn’t allowing employees to take part in the debate of gun regulations. According to reports, Fox News has mandated that its employees refrain from talking about gun control. Christopher Chambers, journalism professor at Georgetown University joins us with more.

RT America LIVE http://rt.com/on-air/rt-america-air/
Subscribe to RT America! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=RTAmericaLike us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTAmerica
Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_America


Military Escalation, Dangerous Crossroads: Russia-US Confrontation in Syria?

by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research
December 15, 2012

On December 14, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta signed a Pentagon order to deploy 400 US missile troops to Turkey.  According to Washington, the security of Turkey, NATO’s heavyweight, is threatened.  US military personnel will to be deployed to Turkey in the coming weeks to operate two US Patriot missile batteries.

According to the Pentagon’s spokesman, George Little:

“The United States has been supporting Turkey in its efforts to defend itself,… [against Syria]

“I’m not going to go into precise locations at this time, he added, “but I wanted to let you…know that we signed that order and that we are prepared in the context of NATO to support the defense of Turkey for an unspecified period of time.”

“The purpose of this deployment is to signal very strongly that the United States, working closely with our NATO allies, is going to support the defense of Turkey, especially with potential threats emanating from Syria,”  US Air Force News, December 14, 2012)

The Patriot surface-to-air interceptors are deployed to deal  “with threats that come out of Syria” According to U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. these threats “include Syrian strikes inside Turkey and fighting between the government and rebels that extends into Turkey”  (CNN, December 14, 2012):

“We can’t spend a lot of time worrying about whether that pisses off Syria,” said Panetta [sic] after signing the order Friday. (Ibid, emphasis added)

In addition to the US missile deployment, Germany and the Netherlands have confirmed that they will also deploy Patriot missiles in Turkey directed against Syria.

Not mentioned in the official Pentagon statement, this buildup of patriot missile batteries is not only directed against Syria, it is intended to confront Russia’s military presence  in Syria as well  as its support to the development of Syria’s air defense system.

The US-NATO Led Insurgency

The Pentagon’s initiative in Turkey is part of the US-NATO-Israeli led insurgency against Syria. In recent months, this insurgency has evolved towards an unofficial (yet de facto) allied invasion characterized by the presence inside Syria of French, British, Turkish and Qatari Special Forces.

These Special Forces are “embedded” within rebel ranks. They are not only participating in the training of rebel forces, they are also involved in de facto paramilitary command and coordination, in liaison with NATO.

In other words, member states of the Atlantic Alliance through their Special Forces and intelligence operatives on the ground  largely determines the nature and thrust of rebel activities. Of significance, the main fighting force directly recruited and trained by US-NATO, Saudi Arabia and Qatar is the Al Nusra Front, (see image right) an Al Qaeda affiliated militia involved in countless terrorist acts against civilians.

The Broader Middle East War

The US Patriot missile deployment in Turkey is part of a regional process of  militarization which includes the establishment of US command posts and the stationing of American troops in Jordan and Israel.  This  regional military deployment also threatens Iran.

Moreover, US-NATO-Israeli war preparations with regard to Syria are coordinated with those pertaining to Iran. The command posts in Israel, which oversee some 1000 US troops, in coordination with Israel’s IDF, are under the jurisdiction of  US European Command (EUCOM).

In a recent statement Iran’s chief of staff warned that the stationing of Patriot anti-missile batteries on Turkey’s border with Syria “was setting the stage for world war”

It is worth noting that in addition to the Patriot missiles in Turkey, Patriot batteries targeted at Iran have also been deployed to Kuwait, Qatar, the UAE and Bahrain (2010).

[READ MORE…]