Jean-Claude Juncker, the most powerful person in Europe, the chief of the European Commission and therefore Europe’s closest equivalent to America’s President, said, in a little-noticed comment on March 3rd, «Ukraine will definitely not be able to become a member of the EU in the next 20-25 years, and not of NATO either».
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/03/11/jean-claude-juncker-damns-obama-plan-for-ukraine.html
I-BRIDGE's blog (Link Campus University's Research Centre on Global Affairs) - editor, Marco Emanuele - Critical thinking, complexity, international relations (Twitter, @Glob_Eye - Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/marco.emanuele.50)
Showing posts with label Eric Zuesse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eric Zuesse. Show all posts
Saturday, 12 March 2016
Monday, 29 February 2016
Clinton-Bush Hardliner Attacks Congress for Blocking Invasion of Syria (Eric Zuesse, Strategic Culture Foundation)
In a Huffington Post interview on February 23rd, the Clinton-Bush former head of the NSA and CIA, and defender of their use of waterboarding, and of their violating the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution (both of which types of legal violations he says are necessary in order to keep Americans safe), accused Congress of being gutless: «Congress didn’t step up and authorize the use of military force» to invade Syria.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/02/29/clinton-bush-hardliner-attacks-congress-for-blocking-invasion-of-syria.html
Monday, 22 February 2016
Gallup Poll Shows Americans Prefer Terrorist Nations Over Iran. Why? (Eric Zuesse, Strategic Culture Foundation)
A February 17th Gallup Poll showed that Americans prefer the chief nation that sponsors international terrorism, when given a choice between that terrorist-sponsoring nation and Iran. The disapproval shown of Iran is 79%; the approval is 14%. Back in 2014, the disapproval / approval were 84%/12%. At that time, Saudi Arabia had figures of 57%/35%. Iran was seen by Americans as being even more hostile toward Americans than Saudi Arabia.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/02/21/gallup-poll-shows-americans-prefer-terrorist-nations-over-iran-why.html
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/02/21/gallup-poll-shows-americans-prefer-terrorist-nations-over-iran-why.html
Friday, 19 February 2016
Obama at a Crossroads: to Join Russia or to Fight against It (Eric Zuesse, Strategic Culture Foundation)
US President Obama, due to the leadership of his Secretary of State John Kerry, has now turned away from the former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s obsession against Russia, and is trying to back off from what had previously been the Obama Administration’s objective of overthrowing Russia’s Syrian ally Bashar al-Assad, whom even Western polling shows to be overwhelmingly preferred by the Syrian people to lead Syria.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/02/18/obama-at-a-crossroads-to-join-russia-or-fight-against-it.html
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/02/18/obama-at-a-crossroads-to-join-russia-or-fight-against-it.html
Saturday, 13 February 2016
End NATO Now (Eric Zuesse, Strategic Culture Foundation)
The continuation of NATO, after its counterpart the Warsaw Pact ended in 1991, is an insanity that’s driving the world inexorably toward World War III.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/02/13/end-nato-now.html
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/02/13/end-nato-now.html
Saturday, 6 February 2016
US Now Overtly at War Against Russia (Eric Zuesse, Strategic Culture Foundation)
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg announced on February 2nd that he approves of US ‘Defense’ Secretary Ash Carter’s proposal to quadruple US armaments and troops in Europe, against ‘Russian aggression’.
Secretary Carter said earlier that same day, in his announcement of America’s arming for war against Russia:
«We are reinforcing our posture in Europe to support our NATO allies in the face of Russia's aggression. In Pentagon parlance, this is called the European Reassurance Initiative and after requesting about $800 million for last year, this year we're more than quadrupling it for a total of $3.4 billion in 2017.
That will fund a lot of things: more rotational US forces in Europe, more training and exercising with our allies, more preposition and war-fighting gear and infrastructure improvements to support all this.
And when combined with US forces already in and assigned to Europe – which are also substantial – all of this together by the end of 2017 will let us rapidly form a highly capable combined arms ground force that can respond across that theater, if necessary».
The US is preparing for an invasion of Russia.
«By the end of 2017» the US will be prepared to invade Russia.
Secretary Carter went on to say:
«Russia and China are our most stressing competitors. They have developed and are continuing to advance military system[s] that seek to threaten our advantages in specific areas. And in some case[s], they are developing weapons and ways of wars that seek to achieve their objectives rapidly, before they hope, we can respond.
Because of this and because of their actions to date, from Ukraine to the South China Sea, DOD has elevated their importance in our defense planning and budgeting».
Since he is a Secretary of ‘Defense’ instead of a Secretary of Offense, he immediately added:
«While we do not desire conflict of any kind with either of these nations – and let me be clear».
That’s all there was to the assertion there; he didn’t finish the sentence, nor even the thought. But in this offhanded way, he did at least try to give the impression that the US is never an aggressor – for example: that, though the US is expanding NATO right up to Russia’s borders, Russia is being the ‘aggressor’ to move troops and weapons up to those borders – up to Russia’s own borders (to counter the US & NATO invasion-threat, of course; but, no: it’s to threaten NATO, if you believe the West). In the statements by Ash Carter, Barack Obama, and Jens Stoltenberg, that’s ‘Russian aggression’. In the allegory by George Orwell, 1984, America’s rhetoric is called simply «Newspeak».
It’s as if during the Soviet Union (i.e., before 1991), when Nikita Khrushchev was the aggressor in 1962 and John Kennedy was the defender (against Soviet missiles in Cuba), Khrushchev had refused to yield and said that Soviet nuclear missiles near the US had only a defensive, not offensive, purpose (no purpose for a blitz nuclear attack against the US too fast for the US to be able to get its missiles launched in retaliation). Kennedy said no to that idea then, and Putin says no to that idea (right on Russia’s very borders) now. The US, in post-Soviet, post-communist, Russia, has turned around and become the aggressor – against the now democratic nation of Russia. (And Putin’s approval-rating from the Russian people is at least 80%, whereas Obama’s approval-rating from the American people is near 50%.) We’ve switched roles. The US has turned to dictatorship, while Russia has turned to democracy. It’s a super-switcheroo. ‘Democracy’ in the US has become, during recent decades, the election of Presidents and congresspersons who were campaigning on lies, and who then actually delivered more like the opposite, as their actual governmental policies.
A good example of this is that when Mr Obama was campaigning for re-election to the Presidency in 2012, he outright mocked his opponent Mitt Romney’s asserting (2:22 on the video) that, «Russia, this is without question our number one geopolitical foe». But the moment that Obama became re-elected, Obama activated a 1957 CIA plan to overthrow Russia’s ally Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and a more-recent CIA and State Department plan to overthrow the actually neutralist Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in Ukraine and replace him with a rabidly anti-Russian government. The head of Stratfor called it «the most blatant coup in history,» and it was an extremely bloody coup, followed by a civil war – and economic collapse, and even more corruption there. In addition, Obama carried out a French plan to overthrow Russia’s ally Muammar Gaddafi in Syria.
All of these plans were strongly welcomed by Russia’s main oil-market competitors, all of them fundamentalist Sunni Arab financial backers of jihadists: the Saud royal family of Saudi Arabia, and the Thani royal family of Qatar, as well as the Sabah royal family of Kuwait, and the six royal families of the UAE. Those royals own most of the world’s oil, and only Russia and its ally Iran are even in that league. All of those Sunni Arab royal families (especially the Sauds) are the main financial backers of al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other jihadist groups, all of which are fundamentalist Sunni terrorist groups, which especially aim to exterminate all Shiites – and Shiites just happen to be supported by Russia. (The US overthrew the democratically elected progressive President of Iran and installed the tyrannous Shah, back in 1953, and Iranians have loathed the US government ever since.)
President Obama, in his second Administration, ceased his previous focus against the Sunni group al-Qaeda, and refocused US policy to be against Russia, even to the extent of supporting al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other rabidly anti-Russian Sunni groups, who are driving millions of refugees from Syria, Libya, etc., into Europe. (Of course, Obama’s rhetoric remains against those Sunni extremists – just as his rhetoric was against Romney’s policies that Obama ended up imposing in his second term.) All of those terrorist groups are allied with the Sunni Arab royal families against Shiite-led Iran, and Shiite-allied Syria.
The fundamentalist Sunni beliefs of the Arab royal families have, since at least 1744, been committed to exterminating all Shiites. Now that Shiite and Shiite-allied nations are supported by Russia, the United States is more overtly than ever preparing to conquer Russia, for the benefit of the aristocracies of America, and of Arabia.
And there are many other examples of President Obama’s policies exposing him to be an example of «the election of Presidents and congresspersons who were campaigning on lies, and who then actually delivered more like the opposite, as policies», such as his claiming to champion democracy in Syria when his actual demand regarding Syria is to block democracy there because all the evidence shows that it would result in an overwhelming electoral victory for Bashar al-Assad. And another example is Obama’s support of the right of self-determination of peoples regarding Scotland and Catalonia, but not in Crimea, nor in Donbas, nor in Abkhazia. The United Nations supports the right of self-determination of peoples everywhere, and Ban Ki-moon has clearly stated that America’s demand for the removal of Bashar al-Assad from power is alien to the principles upon which the United Nations was founded.
So: the US regime is moving toward a nuclear confrontation against Russia, as a ‘defensive’ measure against ‘Russian aggression’.
Obama had previously used ‘The Iran Threat’ as his basis for placing anti-ballistic missiles in European countries near and bordering Russia, but he can’t do that anymore and so he’s now doing it with what had been his actual motive all along: to ‘protect’ Europe from ‘Russian aggression’.
What had led up to Romney’s assertion that Russia «is without question our number one geopolitical foe» was his having been baited by CNN to comment upon a private statement that Obama had made to Dmitry Medvedev, saying that, «This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility». CNN didn’t say what that matter was about, but simply baited Romney with it for Romney to play the Red-scare Joseph R. McCarthy role, which Romney did (McCarthy, of the anti-communist witch-hunts, being a Republican hero). Reuters explained what the context was, what Obama had been replying to there: Putin’s concern was that placing anti-ballistic missiles (ABMs) in Europe to strip Russia of its ability to retaliate against a first-strike from NATO forces in Europe, was unacceptable. Obama was telling that he would «have more flexibility» against Republican hate-mongers against Russia, after he’d win re-election. It was just another lie from him. He won re-election and turned out to be actually a black Mitt Romney. In fact, Obama had spent his entire first term deceiving the entire world to think that he rejected Republicans being «stuck in a Cold War mind warp», as he put it. It was all merely an act for him. He should be in Hollywood, not in the White House.
If this cat gets much farther out of the bag, it’s not just the cat but the whole world that will be lost.
The first priority for a President Bernie Sanders, or for a President Donald Trump, must be to undo the Bush-Obama foreign policy, because it certainly won’t be undone by a President Hillary Clinton, nor by a President Ted Cruz, nor by a President Marco Rubio – and this is the main thing that’s at stake in the current US Presidential contest. What’s at stake here is nothing less than whether civilization even survives another few decades. That’s now seriously at question, and trillions are being spent right now to bring it to an end.
This isn’t kid’s stuff. And it’s not really rocket science, either. It’s instead a fundamental and stark moral issue, that’s staring the entire world in the face right now. And it hasn’t got a thing to do with religion, but it has a lot to do with restoring democracy where it has been eroded down to virtually nothing.
Democracy requires a truthfully informed public. And that’s the truth. Let’s get with it, before it’s too late to do so.
The likelihood of a nuclear war has never been higher than it is now, except perhaps for the Cuban Missile Crisis, but the entire world was being informed about that then, and what about the situation now? This time around, the situation is perhaps even more serious. The urgency of the situation is critical.
Is this the type of ‘news’ coverage we’ll continue to get on the world’s top matter – that Russia is invading our territory, when we’re actually constantly invading (and perpetrating coups) in theirs, and they’re actually doing what they must do in order to defend the Russian people themselves from NATO?
End NATO now. Or else it (and its cooperative ‘news’ media in the West) will end us all. The whole expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders has been based upon US President George Herbert Walker Bush’s lie to Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990, which induced Gorbachev to end not just the Soviet Union but their equivalent of NATO, the Warsaw Pact – all of which Russia did do in 1991. Russia has consistently fulfilled its part of the bargain, but GHWB’s vicious violation of his promise has been consistently followed, adhered to, by American Presidents ever since. The deceit goes on, and the US is now heading towards culminating the most dangerous lie in world history.
Secretary Carter said earlier that same day, in his announcement of America’s arming for war against Russia:
«We are reinforcing our posture in Europe to support our NATO allies in the face of Russia's aggression. In Pentagon parlance, this is called the European Reassurance Initiative and after requesting about $800 million for last year, this year we're more than quadrupling it for a total of $3.4 billion in 2017.
That will fund a lot of things: more rotational US forces in Europe, more training and exercising with our allies, more preposition and war-fighting gear and infrastructure improvements to support all this.
And when combined with US forces already in and assigned to Europe – which are also substantial – all of this together by the end of 2017 will let us rapidly form a highly capable combined arms ground force that can respond across that theater, if necessary».
The US is preparing for an invasion of Russia.
«By the end of 2017» the US will be prepared to invade Russia.
Secretary Carter went on to say:
«Russia and China are our most stressing competitors. They have developed and are continuing to advance military system[s] that seek to threaten our advantages in specific areas. And in some case[s], they are developing weapons and ways of wars that seek to achieve their objectives rapidly, before they hope, we can respond.
Because of this and because of their actions to date, from Ukraine to the South China Sea, DOD has elevated their importance in our defense planning and budgeting».
Since he is a Secretary of ‘Defense’ instead of a Secretary of Offense, he immediately added:
«While we do not desire conflict of any kind with either of these nations – and let me be clear».
That’s all there was to the assertion there; he didn’t finish the sentence, nor even the thought. But in this offhanded way, he did at least try to give the impression that the US is never an aggressor – for example: that, though the US is expanding NATO right up to Russia’s borders, Russia is being the ‘aggressor’ to move troops and weapons up to those borders – up to Russia’s own borders (to counter the US & NATO invasion-threat, of course; but, no: it’s to threaten NATO, if you believe the West). In the statements by Ash Carter, Barack Obama, and Jens Stoltenberg, that’s ‘Russian aggression’. In the allegory by George Orwell, 1984, America’s rhetoric is called simply «Newspeak».
It’s as if during the Soviet Union (i.e., before 1991), when Nikita Khrushchev was the aggressor in 1962 and John Kennedy was the defender (against Soviet missiles in Cuba), Khrushchev had refused to yield and said that Soviet nuclear missiles near the US had only a defensive, not offensive, purpose (no purpose for a blitz nuclear attack against the US too fast for the US to be able to get its missiles launched in retaliation). Kennedy said no to that idea then, and Putin says no to that idea (right on Russia’s very borders) now. The US, in post-Soviet, post-communist, Russia, has turned around and become the aggressor – against the now democratic nation of Russia. (And Putin’s approval-rating from the Russian people is at least 80%, whereas Obama’s approval-rating from the American people is near 50%.) We’ve switched roles. The US has turned to dictatorship, while Russia has turned to democracy. It’s a super-switcheroo. ‘Democracy’ in the US has become, during recent decades, the election of Presidents and congresspersons who were campaigning on lies, and who then actually delivered more like the opposite, as their actual governmental policies.
A good example of this is that when Mr Obama was campaigning for re-election to the Presidency in 2012, he outright mocked his opponent Mitt Romney’s asserting (2:22 on the video) that, «Russia, this is without question our number one geopolitical foe». But the moment that Obama became re-elected, Obama activated a 1957 CIA plan to overthrow Russia’s ally Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and a more-recent CIA and State Department plan to overthrow the actually neutralist Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in Ukraine and replace him with a rabidly anti-Russian government. The head of Stratfor called it «the most blatant coup in history,» and it was an extremely bloody coup, followed by a civil war – and economic collapse, and even more corruption there. In addition, Obama carried out a French plan to overthrow Russia’s ally Muammar Gaddafi in Syria.
All of these plans were strongly welcomed by Russia’s main oil-market competitors, all of them fundamentalist Sunni Arab financial backers of jihadists: the Saud royal family of Saudi Arabia, and the Thani royal family of Qatar, as well as the Sabah royal family of Kuwait, and the six royal families of the UAE. Those royals own most of the world’s oil, and only Russia and its ally Iran are even in that league. All of those Sunni Arab royal families (especially the Sauds) are the main financial backers of al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other jihadist groups, all of which are fundamentalist Sunni terrorist groups, which especially aim to exterminate all Shiites – and Shiites just happen to be supported by Russia. (The US overthrew the democratically elected progressive President of Iran and installed the tyrannous Shah, back in 1953, and Iranians have loathed the US government ever since.)
President Obama, in his second Administration, ceased his previous focus against the Sunni group al-Qaeda, and refocused US policy to be against Russia, even to the extent of supporting al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other rabidly anti-Russian Sunni groups, who are driving millions of refugees from Syria, Libya, etc., into Europe. (Of course, Obama’s rhetoric remains against those Sunni extremists – just as his rhetoric was against Romney’s policies that Obama ended up imposing in his second term.) All of those terrorist groups are allied with the Sunni Arab royal families against Shiite-led Iran, and Shiite-allied Syria.
The fundamentalist Sunni beliefs of the Arab royal families have, since at least 1744, been committed to exterminating all Shiites. Now that Shiite and Shiite-allied nations are supported by Russia, the United States is more overtly than ever preparing to conquer Russia, for the benefit of the aristocracies of America, and of Arabia.
And there are many other examples of President Obama’s policies exposing him to be an example of «the election of Presidents and congresspersons who were campaigning on lies, and who then actually delivered more like the opposite, as policies», such as his claiming to champion democracy in Syria when his actual demand regarding Syria is to block democracy there because all the evidence shows that it would result in an overwhelming electoral victory for Bashar al-Assad. And another example is Obama’s support of the right of self-determination of peoples regarding Scotland and Catalonia, but not in Crimea, nor in Donbas, nor in Abkhazia. The United Nations supports the right of self-determination of peoples everywhere, and Ban Ki-moon has clearly stated that America’s demand for the removal of Bashar al-Assad from power is alien to the principles upon which the United Nations was founded.
So: the US regime is moving toward a nuclear confrontation against Russia, as a ‘defensive’ measure against ‘Russian aggression’.
Obama had previously used ‘The Iran Threat’ as his basis for placing anti-ballistic missiles in European countries near and bordering Russia, but he can’t do that anymore and so he’s now doing it with what had been his actual motive all along: to ‘protect’ Europe from ‘Russian aggression’.
What had led up to Romney’s assertion that Russia «is without question our number one geopolitical foe» was his having been baited by CNN to comment upon a private statement that Obama had made to Dmitry Medvedev, saying that, «This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility». CNN didn’t say what that matter was about, but simply baited Romney with it for Romney to play the Red-scare Joseph R. McCarthy role, which Romney did (McCarthy, of the anti-communist witch-hunts, being a Republican hero). Reuters explained what the context was, what Obama had been replying to there: Putin’s concern was that placing anti-ballistic missiles (ABMs) in Europe to strip Russia of its ability to retaliate against a first-strike from NATO forces in Europe, was unacceptable. Obama was telling that he would «have more flexibility» against Republican hate-mongers against Russia, after he’d win re-election. It was just another lie from him. He won re-election and turned out to be actually a black Mitt Romney. In fact, Obama had spent his entire first term deceiving the entire world to think that he rejected Republicans being «stuck in a Cold War mind warp», as he put it. It was all merely an act for him. He should be in Hollywood, not in the White House.
If this cat gets much farther out of the bag, it’s not just the cat but the whole world that will be lost.
The first priority for a President Bernie Sanders, or for a President Donald Trump, must be to undo the Bush-Obama foreign policy, because it certainly won’t be undone by a President Hillary Clinton, nor by a President Ted Cruz, nor by a President Marco Rubio – and this is the main thing that’s at stake in the current US Presidential contest. What’s at stake here is nothing less than whether civilization even survives another few decades. That’s now seriously at question, and trillions are being spent right now to bring it to an end.
This isn’t kid’s stuff. And it’s not really rocket science, either. It’s instead a fundamental and stark moral issue, that’s staring the entire world in the face right now. And it hasn’t got a thing to do with religion, but it has a lot to do with restoring democracy where it has been eroded down to virtually nothing.
Democracy requires a truthfully informed public. And that’s the truth. Let’s get with it, before it’s too late to do so.
The likelihood of a nuclear war has never been higher than it is now, except perhaps for the Cuban Missile Crisis, but the entire world was being informed about that then, and what about the situation now? This time around, the situation is perhaps even more serious. The urgency of the situation is critical.
Is this the type of ‘news’ coverage we’ll continue to get on the world’s top matter – that Russia is invading our territory, when we’re actually constantly invading (and perpetrating coups) in theirs, and they’re actually doing what they must do in order to defend the Russian people themselves from NATO?
End NATO now. Or else it (and its cooperative ‘news’ media in the West) will end us all. The whole expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders has been based upon US President George Herbert Walker Bush’s lie to Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990, which induced Gorbachev to end not just the Soviet Union but their equivalent of NATO, the Warsaw Pact – all of which Russia did do in 1991. Russia has consistently fulfilled its part of the bargain, but GHWB’s vicious violation of his promise has been consistently followed, adhered to, by American Presidents ever since. The deceit goes on, and the US is now heading towards culminating the most dangerous lie in world history.
Thursday, 4 February 2016
Assad’s Forces Rout American-Backed Jihadists at Golan Heights (Eric Zuesse, Strategic Culture Foundation)
A major US-backed assault to win Syria’s crucial Golan Heights, by jihadist rebels of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), Jabhat al-Nusra (Syria’s branch of al-Qaeda), and Harakat Ahrar Ash-Sham (the largest rebel group in Syria, though it’s ignored by Western news-media), was repelled on Saturday morning, January 30th, by the army of the non-sectarian Syrian government, the Syrian Arab Army, which are the forces of Syria’s non-sectarian Shiite President Bashar al-Assad and his ideologically non-sectarian Ba’ath Party, the only political force in Syria that insists upon separation of church and state. (The Ba’ath Party in Iraq was led by Saddam Hussein, which George W. Bush’s forces eliminated there. American regimes, both Republican and Democratic, are anti-Ba’athist, pro-jihadist.)
All of the anti-Assad – which is to say anti-Ba’ath – forces in Syria are fundamentalist Sunnis, jihadists who are backed by the US and the Arab royal families, the latter of whom are fundamentalist Sunnis themselves. The United States is supporting those royal families, which are trying to seize Syria, because it’s a strategically crucial pipeline route into Europe for Sunni Arabic royal families’ oil and gas. Under Assad, those pipelines are blocked from being built, and the Arabic royals fear that if Assad isn’t overthrown, then Shiite pipelines will instead be carrying oil and gas from Shiite Iran to Shiite-allied Iraq, thence into Syria, and then perhaps into Europe. It’s a commercial war, not just a war between Sunnis and Shiites. The US wants to replace Russian oil and gas in Europe, by the oil and gas of its Arabic friends who finance international jihadism-terrorism, and who dominate the list of nations that buy the most US-made weapons. (Those are weapons-sales that don’t go to the world’s second-largest weapons-producer: Russia.)
The United States sells weapons to the Saud family, which then are transported via Erdogan’s Turkey to al-Nusra, ISIS, Harakat Ahrar Ash-Sham, and other jihadist fighting forces that have been flocking into Syria and backed by the Arab royal families and Erdogan and by the United States government, in order to force a removal from power of the existing non-sectarian Syrian government. One prominent early news-report about this was Seymour Hersh’s «The Red Line and the Rat Line», which was rejected by US print-media and then published in Britain by the London Review of Books. It was subsequently confirmed by a study that was done by a committee of Turkey’s Parliament.
Hersh had reported that US President Barack Obama’s effort with Erdogan of Turkey and the Sauds of Saudi Arabia, to arrange a sarin gas attack and blame it on Assad (who has been demonized in the US press as being the cause of the ongoing civil war in Syria, which is actually between Assad’s non-sectarian Syrian Arab Army versus the foreign Western-supported invading jihadists, fundamentalist Sunnis from all over the world – an invasion of Syria by the US-Saudi-Turkish-UAE-Qatari coalition), was intended to ‘justify’ Obama’s bombing Syria. But Obama needed at least Britain as an ally for that invasion. Britain refused to join it. British intelligence (Hersh found) had confirmed that the sarin attack was a set-up and lies from Washington. David Cameron’s government decided not to do what its predecessor had done – serve as America’s lap-dog (as Tony Blair had done). This time around, Britain wouldn’t invade on the basis of an American President’s lies and fake ‘intelligence’. This time, Britain acted on its own intelligence services, instead of ignored them.
The Golan Heights are strategically important because their altitude provides a great advantage to whichever military force controls there – to shoot down upon and thus provide military advantage over any forces below.
Most of Golan was conquered by Israel in 1967, but all nations except Israel recognize the seizure of that land to be theft and barbaric treatment of its citizens, and to have no legal standing. Even the US recognizes Golan to be part of Syria (because to do otherwise would be too embarrassing internationally).
Wikipedia says, «Israel demolished over one hundred Syrian villages and farms in the Golan Heights. After the demolitions, the lands were given to Israeli settlers». It’s a brutal military occupation. Although Israel is an international pariah-state on account of its apartheid policies and other numerous violations of international law, the Arabic-royal-families-allied US government supports that apartheid nation, so that support of Israel is not even an issue in American elections, because of America’s controlled press. Israel fears Shiite Iran far more than it does the Sunni-controlled nations. The US is allied with Israel and the Sunni-controlled nations, against Russia and its allied nations such as Iran and Syria. Europe is allied with the US as a holdover from Europe’s aristocrats’ ties with the CIA after World War II. George Herbert Walker Bush in 1990 double-crossed the Soviet Union’s Mikhail Gorbachev and set the US on the path of conquering Russia after communism, and this has been continued by all subsequent US Presidents.
On 13 December 2006, the US Ambassador in Syria sent to Washington a cable itemizing the ways in which Assad could be overthrown, and one was «Play on Sunni fears of Iranian influence». A 20 July 2015 article by Jonathan Marshall summarized «The US Hand in the Syrian Mess», and reported that from 2001 on, the US government was aiming for «regime change» in Damascus, despite the fact that, «Not only did the regime provide life-saving intelligence on planned al-Qaeda attacks, it did the CIA’s dirty work of interrogating terrorism suspects ‘rendered’ by the United States from Afghanistan and other theaters». Assad started peace talks with Israel and«offered a far reaching and equitable peace treaty that would provide for Israel’s security and is comprehensive – and [would] divorce Syria from Iran and even create a crucial distance between it and Hezbollah and Hamas… But the Bush administration nixed them… The Bush Administration’s role in scuttling any peace accord was decisive».
The GWB Administration wanted more war; they blocked peace. On 5 March 2007, the New Yorker, not yet under such lockdown mode as to reject Seymour Hersh’s great submitted articles (as they do now), headlined «The Redirection», and Hersh wrote: «The policy shift has brought Saudi Arabia and Israel into a new strategic embrace, largely because both countries see Iran as an existential threat». However, since Assad was willing to «divorce Syria from Iran», that excuse for America’s overthrow-Assad bent was merely a con. Bush demanded Assad’s ouster, not his agreement; and Bush’s successor Obama continued Bush’s policy there. From the very moment when Obama entered the White House, he was a hawk eye looking for an opportunity to invade Syria to overthrow Assad, not to help him to achieve peace with either the US or Israel.
The only way that Americans now can learn the truth regarding international matters is via a few small sites on the Web, which are allowed in the US because America’s aristocracy control all of the major media, both mainstream and alt-news. The audience for the few honest media is too small to matter. The aristocracy control the public’s mind-set about political matters – the principle here is: get the eyes and ears, and you get the brain and then the body; the public then become mere dupes – especially concerning international affairs. And very few Americans even know about the few, small, honest news-media. Those media are inconsequential, except for their integrity.
Because this failure of US-allied forces in Syria concerns too many sub-narratives that contradict what US media issue, it will be ignored in America. But Syria’s military victory on the Golan is, in fact, a significant defeat for the US-Saudi side, and a victory for the country that the US-Saudi proxies are invading – and a victory too for the Syrian people’s Russian and Iranian defenders. Whereas the Syrian public overwhelmingly support Assad and overwhelmingly oppose ISIS and the other invaders, the Saudi public have been so brainwashed that they 92% favor ISIS.
But America is supporting the Saudis, and bombing the Syrians. And the political ‘debate’ in America is about how hard to bomb them. Even famous investigative reporters such as Seymour Hersh are having their best news stories rejected by all of the publishers in America that have significantly large or influential audiences.
Each nation has a market for great journalism, but in a dictatorship there are substantially no publishers or broadcasters for it. The press, even in a ‘free market’, can become merely a different branch of the same aristocracy that controls the government. It’s called «fascism». Mussolini used that term for it, but also «corporationism». In a speech in November 1933, translated in George Seldes's 1935 Sawdust Caesar, p. 426, Mussolini said: «Corporationism is above socialism and above liberalism. A new synthesis is created. It is a symptomatic fact that the decadence of capitalism coincides with the decadence of socialism... Corporative solutions can be applied anywhere». Aristocrats control the corporations, which control us. That’s the situation.
Here is the best news-source on the Syrian war, Almasdar News, showing a video interview of a Saudi cleric who says that ISIS (called «Daesh») and the Saudi people agree. That polled 92% Saudi figure confirms his view. However, in Syria, 78% of the public disapprove of ISIS, and 82% blame the US and its allies for ISIS.
How come only an inconsequential few Americans know any of these things? How can ‘democracy’ even function in such a misinformed country? Of course, it doesn’t. It can’t.
This report constitutes American samizdat. It’s not ‘major media’ news-reporting, and it’s not even ‘alternative news’ reporting. It is, instead, news-reporting that provides an honest context. This is the reason why it’s samizdat. You are reading what – in the West, at least – is forbidden to know. We had all better watch out, now. Agents for the corporate state might be disturbed at the publication of too much truth, even if it’s only in a small news-medium such as this. They’re watching us, constantly. It’s like «Big Brother». Except: this one’s real.
All of the anti-Assad – which is to say anti-Ba’ath – forces in Syria are fundamentalist Sunnis, jihadists who are backed by the US and the Arab royal families, the latter of whom are fundamentalist Sunnis themselves. The United States is supporting those royal families, which are trying to seize Syria, because it’s a strategically crucial pipeline route into Europe for Sunni Arabic royal families’ oil and gas. Under Assad, those pipelines are blocked from being built, and the Arabic royals fear that if Assad isn’t overthrown, then Shiite pipelines will instead be carrying oil and gas from Shiite Iran to Shiite-allied Iraq, thence into Syria, and then perhaps into Europe. It’s a commercial war, not just a war between Sunnis and Shiites. The US wants to replace Russian oil and gas in Europe, by the oil and gas of its Arabic friends who finance international jihadism-terrorism, and who dominate the list of nations that buy the most US-made weapons. (Those are weapons-sales that don’t go to the world’s second-largest weapons-producer: Russia.)
The United States sells weapons to the Saud family, which then are transported via Erdogan’s Turkey to al-Nusra, ISIS, Harakat Ahrar Ash-Sham, and other jihadist fighting forces that have been flocking into Syria and backed by the Arab royal families and Erdogan and by the United States government, in order to force a removal from power of the existing non-sectarian Syrian government. One prominent early news-report about this was Seymour Hersh’s «The Red Line and the Rat Line», which was rejected by US print-media and then published in Britain by the London Review of Books. It was subsequently confirmed by a study that was done by a committee of Turkey’s Parliament.
Hersh had reported that US President Barack Obama’s effort with Erdogan of Turkey and the Sauds of Saudi Arabia, to arrange a sarin gas attack and blame it on Assad (who has been demonized in the US press as being the cause of the ongoing civil war in Syria, which is actually between Assad’s non-sectarian Syrian Arab Army versus the foreign Western-supported invading jihadists, fundamentalist Sunnis from all over the world – an invasion of Syria by the US-Saudi-Turkish-UAE-Qatari coalition), was intended to ‘justify’ Obama’s bombing Syria. But Obama needed at least Britain as an ally for that invasion. Britain refused to join it. British intelligence (Hersh found) had confirmed that the sarin attack was a set-up and lies from Washington. David Cameron’s government decided not to do what its predecessor had done – serve as America’s lap-dog (as Tony Blair had done). This time around, Britain wouldn’t invade on the basis of an American President’s lies and fake ‘intelligence’. This time, Britain acted on its own intelligence services, instead of ignored them.
The Golan Heights are strategically important because their altitude provides a great advantage to whichever military force controls there – to shoot down upon and thus provide military advantage over any forces below.
Most of Golan was conquered by Israel in 1967, but all nations except Israel recognize the seizure of that land to be theft and barbaric treatment of its citizens, and to have no legal standing. Even the US recognizes Golan to be part of Syria (because to do otherwise would be too embarrassing internationally).
Wikipedia says, «Israel demolished over one hundred Syrian villages and farms in the Golan Heights. After the demolitions, the lands were given to Israeli settlers». It’s a brutal military occupation. Although Israel is an international pariah-state on account of its apartheid policies and other numerous violations of international law, the Arabic-royal-families-allied US government supports that apartheid nation, so that support of Israel is not even an issue in American elections, because of America’s controlled press. Israel fears Shiite Iran far more than it does the Sunni-controlled nations. The US is allied with Israel and the Sunni-controlled nations, against Russia and its allied nations such as Iran and Syria. Europe is allied with the US as a holdover from Europe’s aristocrats’ ties with the CIA after World War II. George Herbert Walker Bush in 1990 double-crossed the Soviet Union’s Mikhail Gorbachev and set the US on the path of conquering Russia after communism, and this has been continued by all subsequent US Presidents.
On 13 December 2006, the US Ambassador in Syria sent to Washington a cable itemizing the ways in which Assad could be overthrown, and one was «Play on Sunni fears of Iranian influence». A 20 July 2015 article by Jonathan Marshall summarized «The US Hand in the Syrian Mess», and reported that from 2001 on, the US government was aiming for «regime change» in Damascus, despite the fact that, «Not only did the regime provide life-saving intelligence on planned al-Qaeda attacks, it did the CIA’s dirty work of interrogating terrorism suspects ‘rendered’ by the United States from Afghanistan and other theaters». Assad started peace talks with Israel and«offered a far reaching and equitable peace treaty that would provide for Israel’s security and is comprehensive – and [would] divorce Syria from Iran and even create a crucial distance between it and Hezbollah and Hamas… But the Bush administration nixed them… The Bush Administration’s role in scuttling any peace accord was decisive».
The GWB Administration wanted more war; they blocked peace. On 5 March 2007, the New Yorker, not yet under such lockdown mode as to reject Seymour Hersh’s great submitted articles (as they do now), headlined «The Redirection», and Hersh wrote: «The policy shift has brought Saudi Arabia and Israel into a new strategic embrace, largely because both countries see Iran as an existential threat». However, since Assad was willing to «divorce Syria from Iran», that excuse for America’s overthrow-Assad bent was merely a con. Bush demanded Assad’s ouster, not his agreement; and Bush’s successor Obama continued Bush’s policy there. From the very moment when Obama entered the White House, he was a hawk eye looking for an opportunity to invade Syria to overthrow Assad, not to help him to achieve peace with either the US or Israel.
The only way that Americans now can learn the truth regarding international matters is via a few small sites on the Web, which are allowed in the US because America’s aristocracy control all of the major media, both mainstream and alt-news. The audience for the few honest media is too small to matter. The aristocracy control the public’s mind-set about political matters – the principle here is: get the eyes and ears, and you get the brain and then the body; the public then become mere dupes – especially concerning international affairs. And very few Americans even know about the few, small, honest news-media. Those media are inconsequential, except for their integrity.
Because this failure of US-allied forces in Syria concerns too many sub-narratives that contradict what US media issue, it will be ignored in America. But Syria’s military victory on the Golan is, in fact, a significant defeat for the US-Saudi side, and a victory for the country that the US-Saudi proxies are invading – and a victory too for the Syrian people’s Russian and Iranian defenders. Whereas the Syrian public overwhelmingly support Assad and overwhelmingly oppose ISIS and the other invaders, the Saudi public have been so brainwashed that they 92% favor ISIS.
But America is supporting the Saudis, and bombing the Syrians. And the political ‘debate’ in America is about how hard to bomb them. Even famous investigative reporters such as Seymour Hersh are having their best news stories rejected by all of the publishers in America that have significantly large or influential audiences.
Each nation has a market for great journalism, but in a dictatorship there are substantially no publishers or broadcasters for it. The press, even in a ‘free market’, can become merely a different branch of the same aristocracy that controls the government. It’s called «fascism». Mussolini used that term for it, but also «corporationism». In a speech in November 1933, translated in George Seldes's 1935 Sawdust Caesar, p. 426, Mussolini said: «Corporationism is above socialism and above liberalism. A new synthesis is created. It is a symptomatic fact that the decadence of capitalism coincides with the decadence of socialism... Corporative solutions can be applied anywhere». Aristocrats control the corporations, which control us. That’s the situation.
Here is the best news-source on the Syrian war, Almasdar News, showing a video interview of a Saudi cleric who says that ISIS (called «Daesh») and the Saudi people agree. That polled 92% Saudi figure confirms his view. However, in Syria, 78% of the public disapprove of ISIS, and 82% blame the US and its allies for ISIS.
How come only an inconsequential few Americans know any of these things? How can ‘democracy’ even function in such a misinformed country? Of course, it doesn’t. It can’t.
This report constitutes American samizdat. It’s not ‘major media’ news-reporting, and it’s not even ‘alternative news’ reporting. It is, instead, news-reporting that provides an honest context. This is the reason why it’s samizdat. You are reading what – in the West, at least – is forbidden to know. We had all better watch out, now. Agents for the corporate state might be disturbed at the publication of too much truth, even if it’s only in a small news-medium such as this. They’re watching us, constantly. It’s like «Big Brother». Except: this one’s real.
Friday, 29 January 2016
Tuesday, 26 January 2016
Saturday, 23 January 2016
Tuesday, 19 January 2016
Sunday, 17 January 2016
Saturday, 16 January 2016
Thursday, 14 January 2016
Saturday, 9 January 2016
Thursday, 10 September 2015
Wednesday, 19 August 2015
Friday, 7 August 2015
Monday, 3 August 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)