HIGHLY POTENT NEWS THAT MIGHT CHANGE YOUR VIEWS

US

To Stop the Killing in Syria, Fulfill JFK’s Promise to Break Up the CIA [video]

TARPLEY.net

Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
PressTV
August 23, 2012

[download video] [download audio]


Obama and Netanyahu Lay Out Strategic Plans to Strike Iran and Cause WW III

By Susanne Posel
theintelhub.com
August 23, 2012

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has come out publicly stating that he will authorize a military strike on Iran before US elections in November.

With the Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, this is viewed as a preparatory strategy as the operation to destabilize and takeover Syria and Iran is prime on Israel’s colonization agenda to control the Middle East.

In New York, at the UN General Assembly, Netanyahu and Obama discussed their plans to use military and propaganda to justify and cover their agenda against Iran.

Tom Donlion, National Security Advisor to Obama and Ron Demer, senior advisor to Netanyahu are devising a “four-point plan” to implement Israeli strategies into US foreign policy concerning Iran.

In their scenario , Obama will inform Congress in writing that he will use military force against Iran in response to their alleged nuclear weapons program. In asking for their approval, Obama could be enabled to circumvent their decision.

It is decided that Obama will speak in Israel just weeks before the US elections wherein he will devote the US military to Israel’s plan to attack sovereign Islamic nations.

Paralleling this strategy, the federal intelligence and surveillance agencies in the US will be “upgraded” so that regardless of who is elected this November, the US government will be equipped with the necessary resources to attack Iran.

This is slated for the spring of 2013.

Israeli propaganda is reporting that Iran is “upgrading” their short-range missile defense systems in response to the US military threat.

Emily Landau, director of the Arms Control and Regional Security Project at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies, says that she guesses that Iran is responding to the US threat in the Gulf.

Landau said: “The fact that Iran indicated that it can hit both land targets and a target at sea [with the Fateh-110 missile] seems to hint at least that this kind of message is directed at the US.”

Landau maintains that Iran’s constant announcements of their growing military might must be indicative that they “have special messages” that veil a threat to Israel.

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) believes that Syria and Iran will collaborate their military forces to battle the US together.

As the US continues to infiltrate Syria with state-sponsored fake revolution with the Free Syrian Army (FSA), the CFR happily favors the use of al-Qaeda in conjunction with CIA training bases in Turkey that support the FSA in destabilizing Syria.

This week, Obama warned Syria and intimated that he was not opposed to using military might against Assad. Obama used the false claim of Syria’s alleged chemical or biological weapons to justify his threat of attack.

Obama said: “We have been very clear to the Assad regime but also to other players on the ground that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my equation. . . . We’re monitoring that situation very carefully. We have put together a range of contingency plans.

“We cannot have a situation in which chemical or biological weapons are falling into the hands of the wrong people. We have put together a range of contingency plans. We have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region that that’s a red line for us.”

Obama also stated that his threat is not for Syria alone, but also alluded to Iran as they are also planning on framing other nations that are “considering chemical warfare.”

A strike on Syria would lead to an involvement with Russia. Russian naval ships have positioned themselves with troops off the coast of Tartus.

When Israel moves to attack Syria, Russia will be strategically placed to respond.

This would lead to another world war.

Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporate-funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page.

RELATED ARTICLES:


The Inevitable Police State [video]

YouTube — crabbydogtrix
August 22, 2012

Our Partner in Alternative Media Gabe Elton of Austin Rare Coin and Bullion
800-994-0837

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/22/politics/conventions-anarchists/index.html

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/more-than-half-of-all-americans-a…


Breaking: Judge Orders Release of US Marine Detained for Facebook Posts

theintelhub.com
August 23, 2012

A judge has ordered the release of patriot marine Brandon Raub after he was essentially abducted and held against his will for posts he made on Facebook that the government deemed suspicious.

The petition put forward by the state was deemed devoid of ANY factual allegations and the judge was actually shocked that Raub had been held with no legitimate grounds to do so.

The judge as well as the Rutherford Institute should be applauded for their quick action in support of Raub’s first amendment protected rights.

From RT:

Brandon J. Raub (Photo from facebook.com/BrandonJRaub)

On the basis that there was zero reason to detain a retired Marine and commit him to a medical facility for psychiatric evaluation, a Virginia judge has demanded that Brandon Raub be released from custody immediately.

Raub, 26, had his home visited one week earlier by FBI, Secret Service and local law enforcement agents who expressed concern over a series of Facebook posts he had made on his public social networking profile.

They detained him without charge and admitted him to a local hospital for evaluation.

“The petition is so devoid of any factual allegations that it could not be reasonably expected to give rise to a case or controversy,” reads a signed statement by Circuit Judge W. Allan Sharrett, which was provided to the Richmond Times-Dispatch Thursday afternoon.

Judge Sharrett adds that he was shocked to find that a magistrate did not include any grounds at all for holding Raub, who was placed in custody for a full week without any charges being pressed.

Earlier in the week, attorneys representing Raub from the Rutherford Institute attacked the mishandling of the case by suggesting that the entire ordeal was a war on their client’s constitutional rights.

“This is not how justice in America is supposed to work — with Americans being arrested for doing nothing more than exercising their First Amendment rights, forced to undergo psychological evaluations, detained against their will and isolated from their family, friends and attorneys.

This is a scary new chapter in our history,” Rutherford Institute President John W. Whitehead says in a statement released on Tuesday this week.

“Brandon Raub is no different from the majority of Americans who use their private Facebook pages to post a variety of content, ranging from song lyrics and political hyperbole to trash talking their neighbors, friends and government leaders.”

Days before he was detained, Raub had made a series of posts that reportedly worried the authorities.

His most recent postings included critique of the investigation of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and other messages, such as, “The Revolution will come for me. Men will be at my door soon to pick me up to lead it” and “Sharpen up my axe; I’m here to sever heads.

“The bottom line is his freedom of speech has been violated,” Raub’s mother, Cathleen Thomas, told the Associated Press after her son was detained.

On Thursday, she told the Times-Dispatch that the entire ordeal has been “phenomenal” and that others could be considered because, “This could have happened to anyone.”

“This has never been about anything but freedom of speech…. We’re going to continue to post on Facebook,” Thomas continued, adding that she considered her son a “true patriot.”

Raub served in both Iraq and Afghanistan and says he had been considering reenlisting before last week’s events.

RELATED ARTICLES:


Jailed For Facebook Comments! [video]

The Truth Girls
August 23, 2012

T-shirts: http://thetruthergirls.spreadshirt.com
FB was set up as a CIA op from the beginning. Now, courts have been ruling comments can be used as evidence so be careful what you say on there because it could come back to haunt you!


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/facebook-court-ruling-share-faceb…
http://occupycorporatism.com/1st-amendment-violated-as-facebook-assists-polic…
update : http://www.businessinsider.com/lawyer-for-detained-marine-says-he-is-being-he…
http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/376026/20120822/facebook-cia-darpa-tanking-ipo…
http://www.blacklistednews.com/Anonymous_releases_how-to_instructions_on_fool…


Israel’s War Plans to Attack Iran “Before the US Elections”

Pakalert Press
August 22, 2012

by Michel Chossudovsky

Israel’s Channel 10  suggests, in no uncertain terms, that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is “determined to attack Iran before the US elections” and that the “time for action is getting closer.”

“Israel is now closer than ever to a strike designed to thwart Iran’s nuclear drive”.

This timely report suggests that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak firmly believe that President Obama “would have no choice but to give backing for an Israeli attack” were it to be waged before the November presidential elections:

The TV station’s military reporter Alon Ben-David, who earlier this year was given extensive access to the Israel Air Force as it trained for a possible attack, reported that, since upgraded sanctions against Iran have failed to force a suspension of the Iranian nuclear program in the past two months, “from the prime minister’s point of view, the time for action is getting ever closer.”

Asked by the news anchor in the Hebrew-language TV report how close Israel now was to “a decision and perhaps an attack,” Ben-David said: “It appears that we are closer than ever.”

He said it seemed that Netanyahu was not waiting for a much-discussed possible meeting with US President Barack Obama, after the UN General Assembly gathering in New York late next month — indeed, “it’s not clear that there’ll be a meeting.” In any case, said Ben-David, “I doubt Obama could say anything that would convince Netanyahu to delay a possible attack.”

There is considerable opposition to an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the report noted — with President Shimon Peres, the army’s chief of the General Staff and top generals, the intelligence community, opposition leader Shaul Mofaz, “and of course the Americans” all lined up against Israeli action at this stage.

But, noted Ben-David, it is the Israeli government that would have to take the decision, and there Netanyahu is “almost guaranteed” a majority. Other Hebrew media reports on Tuesday also said Netanyahu had dispatched a senior official, National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror, to update the elderly spiritual leader of the Shas ultra-Orthodox coalition party, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, on the status of the Iranian nuclear program, in order to try to win over Shas government ministers’ support for an attack. (Times of Israel, emphasis added)

In an earlier report, Richard Silverstein provides details of a leaked military document (translated from the Hebrew) which outlines the nature of Netanyahu’s proposed “shock and awe attack” on Iran:

The Israeli attack will open with a coordinated strike, including an unprecedented cyber-attack which will totally paralyze the Iranian regime and its ability to know what is happening within its borders.  The internet, telephones, radio and television, communications satellites, and fiber optic cables leading to and from critical installations—including underground missile bases at Khorramabad and Isfahan—will be taken out of action.  The electrical grid throughout Iran will be paralyzed and transformer stations will absorb severe damage from carbon fiber munitions which are finer than a human hair, causing electrical short circuits whose repair requires their complete removal.  This would be a Sisyphean task in light of cluster munitions which would be dropped, some time-delayed and some remote-activated through the use of a satellite signal.

A barrage of tens of ballistic missiles would be launched from Israel toward Iran.  300km ballistic missiles would be launched from Israeli submarines in the vicinity of the Persian Gulf.  The missiles would not be armed with unconventional warheads [WMD], but rather with high-explosive ordnance equipped with reinforced tips designed specially to penetrate hardened targets.

The missiles will strike their targets—some exploding above ground like those striking the nuclear reactor at Arak–which is intended to produce plutonium and tritium—and the nearby heavy water production facility; the nuclear fuel production facilities at Isfahan and facilities for enriching uranium-hexaflouride.  Others would explode under-ground, as at the Fordo facility.

A barrage of hundreds of cruise missiles will pound command and control systems, research and development facilities, and the residences of senior personnel in the nuclear and missile development apparatus.  Intelligence gathered over years will be utilized to completely decapitate Iran’s professional and command ranks in these fields.

After the first wave of attacks, which will be timed to the second, the “Blue and White” radar satellite, whose systems enable us to perform an evaluation of the level of damage done to the various targets, will pass over Iran.  Only after rapidly decrypting the satellite’s data, will the information be transferred directly to war planes making their way covertly toward Iran.  These IAF planes will be armed with electronic warfare gear previously unknown to the wider public, not even revealed to our U.S. ally.  This equipment will render Israeli aircraft invisible.  Those Israeli war planes which participate in the attack will damage a short-list of targets which require further assault.

Among the targets approved for attack—Shihab 3 and Sejil ballistic missile silos, storage tanks for chemical components of rocket fuel, industrial facilities for producing missile control systems, centrifuge production plants and more.

Richard Silverstein underscores the fact that there is considerable opposition eithin Israel to the Netanyahu-Barak plan to bomb Iran, which is being waged with a view to allegedly ensuring the “safety of Israel” against Iran.

Will this Israeli opposition prevail were a decision to be taken by Netanyahu and his Defense Minister to carry out an attack plan?

Is Netanyahu a US Political Proxy?

Who is backing Netanyahu? There are powerful economic interests in the US who are in favor of an attack on Iran.

Is this an Israeli war project or is Israel’s prime minister a US political proxy, acting on behalf of  the Pentagon?

What happens if Netanyahu gives the order to attack? Will this order be carried out by Israel’s high command despite extensive opposition from within Israel’s Armed Forces?

The issue is not whether Washington will grant a green light to Israel before the US elections as conveyed by the the Israeli media.

The fundamental question is twofold.

1. Who at the political level decides on launching this war? Washington or Tel Aviv? Who are the economic powers elites which overshadow the political process in both the US and Israel?

2. Who ultimately decides– in terms of military command and control– in carrying out a large scale theater war in the Middle East: Washington or Tel Aviv?

Israel is a de facto US military outpost in the Middle East. US and Israeli command structures are integrated, with close consultations between the Pentagon and Israel’s Ministry of Defense. Reported last January, a large number of US troops are to be stationed in Israel. Joint war games between the US and Israel are also envisaged.

US-Israel-NATO war plans directed against Iran have been ongoing since 2003 including the deployment and stockpiling of advanced weapons systems.

The Israeli media reports are misleading. Israel cannot under any circumstances wage a war on Iran without the military backing of the US and NATO.

Advanced weapons systems have been deployed. US and allied Special Forces as well as intelligence operatives are already on the ground inside Iran. US military drones are involved in spying and reconnaissance activities.

Bunker buster B61 tactical nuclear weapons are slated to be used against Iran in retaliation for its alleged nuclear weapons program.

Military actions against Iran are coordinated with those pertaining to Syria.

What we are dealing with is a global military agenda, centralized and coordinated by US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) involving complex logistics, liaison with various military and intelligence entities. In 2005, USSTRATCOM was identified as “the lead Combatant Command for integration and synchronization of DoD-wide efforts in combating weapons of mass destruction.” This Combatant Command integration also included coordination with America’s allies including NATO, Israel and a number of frontline Arab states, which are members of NATO’s Mediterranean dialogue.

In this broader context of imperial warfare coordinated out of USSTRATCOM in liaison with US Central Command (USCENTCOM), Netanyahu’s attack plan against Iran, conveys the illusion that Tel Aviv rather than Washington calls the shots on waging a war on Iran.

The Israeli media reports mentioned above convey the impression that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are in a position to act independently of Washington as well as force Obama into supporting Israel’s attack on Iran.

The notion that Israel could act alone and against the interests of the US is part of a subtle disinformation campaign. There is a longstanding foreign policy practice for Washington to encourage its close allies to take the first step in the unleashing a war, with the Pentagon pulling the military strings in the background.

Let us be under no illusion, the war plans directed against Iran, which have been on the Pentagon’s drawing board since 2003, are established at the highest levels in Washington in consultation and coordination with Tel Aviv and NATO headquarters in Brussels.

While Israel participates in the conduct of war, it does not play an overriding central role in setting the military agenda.

This article was written by Michel Chossudovsky and originally published at Global Research


Western Geopolitical Blitzkrieg in Sudan

by Eric Draitser
StopImperialism.com

July 18, 2012

The protests that have broken out in Sudan are, on the surface, the manifestation of legitimate grievances.  Portrayed in the Western media as a direct response to austerity measures implemented by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, these protests indicate a strong current of dissatisfaction among the people of the country.  However, seen from a broader, more critical perspective, the demonstrations are the tangible fruits of a carefully constructed destabilization campaign incorporating opposition political parties, civil society groups, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), Hollywood celebrities and Western financiers.  These powerful forces have aligned against the government in Khartoum in order to execute the geopolitical agenda of the imperialist ruling class in the West.

The Development of the Protests

The immediate impetus for the protests, which broke out in recent weeks in and around the capital of Khartoum, was the announcement of the removal of fuel subsidies.  This troubling development, coupled with other austerity measures such as the reduction of government jobs and the devaluation of the currency, were designed to mitigate the effects of soaring inflation in Sudan.  However, because of the integral role of fuel prices in the Sudanese economy, the move seemed to spark mass indignation.  In a country already dogged by high unemployment and rampant poverty, these difficult decisions inflamed already high tensions throughout the country.

Reports from inside Sudan suggest that a small group of female demonstrators gathered outside dormitories at the University of Khartoum and began protesting the fuel subsidy cuts, among other issues. This was the first in what became a series of daily demonstrations against a whole host of grievances.  Central among these was the feeling, widespread among particularly young people, that the government in Khartoum was punishing the people while continuing to spend “lavishly” on defense.  Many groups directly involved in the protest movement, groups such as Sudan Change Now and the popularized twitter moniker #SudanRevolts, have used the demonstrations as a springboard for a much broader and, it could be argued, more opportunistic agenda, one that is directly in line with the geopolitical interests of the United States and the Western imperialist ruling class: regime change.

This is, of course, not to diminish the genuine grievances of many of the demonstrators. Instead, it is important to maintain a critical understanding of the way in which these sort of movements are hijacked or otherwise cynically manipulated through a variety of means by those in the West for whom power and hegemony are the goals above all else.

The Wizards Behind the Curtain

In order to understand the way in which the protests in Sudan, and movements like them all over the world, are manipulated, influenced, or otherwise controlled by Western powers, we must first examine the major players and the often deliberately obscured connections between them, western intelligence networks, and international financiers.

In Sudan, we’ve seen an extraordinary proliferation of western-financed NGOs that have entrenched themselves in the civil society of the country, particularly in an urban center such as Khartoum.  Organizations such as Sudan Now and the Enough Project (the latter of which is directly connected to George Clooney, the US State Department and George Soros) indicate the degree to which humanitarian concerns and NGOs are utilized by the US imperialists as cover for their geopolitical agenda.  In fact, in the case of Clooney and the Enough Project, we see the presence of John Prendergast, head of the organization and former Director for African Affairs at the National Security Council.  His participation, not to mention his close relationship to UN Ambassador Susan Rice, Samantha Power, and the International Crisis Group of George Soros, should illustrate the degree to which this and other organizations working inside Sudan are either directly or tangentially part of the US intelligence establishment.

The Enough Project is also significant because of its ability to sell a Western-constructed narrative of Sudan to an unsuspecting and generally ill-informed public.  George Clooney who, along with Council on Foreign Relations member Angelina Jolie, has cultivated an image as a politically progressive humanitarian, is able to construct a particular discourse in the American public’s imagination: Bashir is a monster and the United States must act decisively including possibly using force, to remove him from power.  Such a dominant narrative, once entrenched in the public discourse, becomes difficult, if not impossible, to deconstruct.

The Enough Project and other humanitarian organizations alone are not the whole story, however.  Important players inside the country are also playing an integral role in the attempt at regime change in Sudan.  One such important individual is Dr. Hassan al-Turabi, head of the opposition Popular Congress Party (PCP), one of the leading factions within the often-fragmented political opposition.  Turabi, a longtime “progressive Islamist”, is not merely a major player in Sudanese politics.  In fact, he’s one of the leading “experts” on Sudan with long-standing connections to the US State Department-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED).  In fact, as recently as 2008, Turabi was one of the keynote speakers at the NED in Washington DC where he presented on, among other things, how to bring about regime change in Sudan.  Though the usual covers of “democracy promotion”, “transparency”, and other such high-minded abstractions are utilized by Turabi and the NED, these are merely the rhetorical devices used to obscure the obvious goal of such a conference.

Turabi’s association with the NED and the US intelligence community is not only significant in demonstrating the role that those institutions are playing in destabilizing Sudan.  It also demonstrates the way in which the US imperialists have long-standing ties with so-called “Islamists”, a conclusion made ever more apparent by the ascension of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the deployment of Al Qaeda and other religious militants in Libya, Syria, and elsewhere.  In this way, a clearer understanding develops of just how the Western imperialists are able to utilize a variety of means, many of which are “Islamist” in nature, to destabilize regimes they deem to be unfriendly.

International Subversion

Aside from having to deal with powerful forces engaged in the internal struggles in Sudan, Bashir’s government has also been faced with extraordinary international pressure.  Not only has Bashir himself been accused by the ICC (itself an arm of US-NATO power projection) of being a war criminal for his purported role in the conflict in Darfur, he has also watched as the United States and other Western powers fomented a brutal civil war, only to then partition the country, carving out South Sudan, and create the conditions for the current situation.  Essentially, Bashir has had to try to maintain his grip on the country in the face of a multi-pronged effort to destroy his regime and the Sudanese state.

The conflict with South Sudan has taken a heavy toll on the Sudanese economy.  Because of the loss of an estimated 75% of total oil reserves located in the South, inflation has dramatically increased and Khartoum’s revenue from trade with China and other major oil importers has decreased sharply.  Additionally, the skirmishes and other armed conflicts between North and South have focused Bashir’s attention to the Abyei Province and other border areas and, consequently, away from other pressing concerns inside the country.  This was precisely what the Western powers intended when they began pushing for the partition of the country a few years ago.

The imperialist aggression against Libya was an indication to many keen observers that the imperialist ruling class had every intention of completely consolidating control over all of North Africa by removing any vestiges of nationalism and any leaders who might pose a challenge to AFRICOM and the neo-colonial agenda.  Gaddafi met his barbaric end at the hands of a vicious lynch-mob or, as they’re called in the West, “freedom fighters”. They and their NTC masters such as Mahmoud Jibril, now the head of the so-called Libyan government, were merely puppets of the West, supported for purposes of economic exploitation of natural resources and to create a safe haven for terrorists to then menace the rest of the region.  Likewise, Bashir is on the target list and, without taking precautions, could meet the same fate.

What Do They Want?

The United States and its western partners have a number of goals in seeking regime change in Sudan.  As is the case in so many other conflicts around the world, the main objective is to block Chinese economic development.  The Chinese have, for years, been the biggest importer of Sudanese oil and, other than Angola, Sudan was its main supplier on the continent. Aside from oil however, Sudan had become one of the main markets for Chinese economic investment.  In fact, by 2002, Sudan was China’s fifth biggest source of revenue and had become a major player in the power generation and other markets.  For these reasons, China began to pose a threat to US hegemony in East Africa and, from the perspective of the imperialists, had to be checked.

Aside from China, the United States has other geopolitical and economic reasons for destabilizing Sudan.  Washington seeks to consolidate control over East and Central Africa and, in order to do so, must eliminate one of their biggest obstacles, Sudan.  The US has gone to painstaking lengths to maintain compliant puppet governments in Rwanda, Uganda, Burundi, and elsewhere.  In so doing, the US is able to keep Central and East Africa under their thumb, at least to some degree. By destroying the Bashir regime, these imperialists believe they will be able to project US hegemony forward for the foreseeable future and, as a result, secure unfettered access to the wealth of raw materials in the region.

There is also an element of opportunism to this plan.  The West looks to capitalize on the still viable discursive construct of the Arab Spring as a means to their end.  So long as this idea can inspire masses of disaffected youth to take to the streets, the United States and its partners can continue to impose their will in the region. However, as the conflict in Syria has unequivocally shown, without such mythological pretexts, it becomes impossible for the imperialists to achieve their goals.

In examining the situation in Sudan, it is important to keep in mind that a critical, anti-imperialist perspective does not mean that one absolves Bashir of any wrongdoing.   In fact, it should illustrate the ways in which Bashir and his government have contributed to creating the climate that breeds such protests.  However, by analyzing this uprising and investigating simultaneously the positive and insidious forces at work within it, we can begin to apply a broad understanding to the issue and, in so doing, work to prevent the Western imperialist ruling class from destroying yet another sovereign state.

[hat tip: Land Destroyer]