Search This Blog

Saturday, August 31, 2013

Obama set for holy Tomahawk war

 By Pepe Escobar

The ''responsibility to protect'' (R2P) doctrine invoked to legitimize the 2011 war on Libya has just transmogrified into ''responsibility to attack'' (R2A) Syria. Just because the Obama administration says so.

On Sunday, the White House said it had ''very little doubt'' that the Bashar al-Assad government used chemical weapons against its own citizens. On Monday, Secretary of State John Kerry ramped it up to ''undeniable'' - and accused Assad of ''moral obscenity''.

So when the US bombed Fallujah with white phosphorus in late 2004 it was just taking the moral high ground. And when the US  helped Saddam Hussein to gas Iranians in 1988 it was also taking the moral high ground.   

The Obama administration has ruled that Assad allowed UN chemical weapons inspectors into Syria, and to celebrate their arrival unleashed a chemical weapons attack mostly against women and children only 15 kilometers away from the inspectors' hotel. If you don't believe it, you subscribe to a conspiracy theory.

Evidence? Who cares about evidence? Assad's offer of access for the inspectors came ''too late''. Anyway, the UN team is only mandated to determine whether chemical weapons were deployed - but not by who, according to UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon's spokesman.

As far as the Obama administration and UK Prime Minister David ''of Arabia'' Cameron are concerned - supported by a barrage of corporate media missiles - that's irrelevant; Obama's ''red line'' has been crossed by Assad, period. Washington and London are in no-holds-barred mode to dismiss any facts contradicting the decision. Newspeak - of the R2A kind - rules. If this all looks like Iraq 2.0 that's because it is. Time to fix the facts around the policy - all over again. Time for weapons of mass deception - all over again.

The Saudi-Israeli axis of fun

 The window of opportunity for war is now. Assad's forces were winning from Qusayr to Homs; pounding ''rebel'' remnants out of the periphery of Damascus; deploying around Der'ah to counterpunch CIA-trained ''rebels'' with advanced weapons crossing the Syrian-Jordanian border; and organizing a push to expel ''rebels'' and jihadis from suburbs of Aleppo.

Now, Israel and Saudi Arabia are oh so excited because they are getting exactly what they dream just by good ol' Wag the Dog methods. Tel Aviv has even telegraphed how it wants it: this Monday, the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper headlined with ''On the Way to Attack'' and even printed the ideal Order of Battle. (see photo)

Months ago, even AMAN, the Intelligence Directorate of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) concluded that Assad was not a fool to cross Obama's chemical weapon ''red line''. So they came up with the concept of ''two entwined red lines'', the second line being the Syrian government ''losing control of its chemical weapons depots and production sites''. AMAN then proposed different strategies to Washington, from a no-fly zone to actually seizing the weapons (implying a ground attack).

It's now back to the number one option - air strikes on the chemical weapons depots. As if the US - and Israel - had up-to-the-minute intelligence on exactly where they are.

The House of Saud had also telegraphed its wishes - after Prince Bandar bin Sultan, aka Bandar Bush, was appointed by King Abdullah as head of Saudi General Intelligence. Abdullah's hard on is explained by his mother and two of his wives coming from an influential, ultra-conservative Sunni tribe in Syria. As for Bandar Bush, he has more longevity than Rambo or the Terminator; he's back in the same role he played in the 1980s Afghan jihad, when he was the go-to guy helping the CIA to weaponize president president Ronald Reagan's ''freedom fighters''.

Jordan - a fiction of a country totally dependent on the Saudis - was easily manipulated into becoming a ''secret'' war operation center. And who's in charge? No less than Bandar's younger half-brother, and deputy national security adviser, Salman bin Sultan, also known as ''mini-Bandar''. Talk about an Arab version of Dr Evil and Mini Me.

Still, there are more CIA assets than Saudis in the Jordanian front.

The importance of this report cannot be overstated enough. It was initially leaked to Lebanon's Al-Safir newspaper. Here's Bandar's whole strategy, unveiled in his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, already reported by Asia Times Online. After trying - for four hours - to convince Putin to drop Syria, Bandar is adamant: ''There is no escape from the military option.''

Mix Kosovo with Libya and voila!

Former president Bill Clinton resurfaced with perfect timing to compare Obama's options in Syria to Reagan's jihad in Afghanistan. Bubba was right in terms of positioning Bandar's role. But he must have inhaled something if he was thinking in terms of consequences - which include everything from the Taliban to that mythical entity, ''al-Qaeda''. Well, at least al-Qaeda is already active in Syria; they don't need to invent it.

As for that bunch of amateurs surrounding Obama - including R2P groupies such as Susan Rice and new Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power, all of them liberal hawks - they are all suckers for Kosovo. Kosovo - with a Libya add-on - is being spun as the ideal model for Syria; R2P via (illegal) air strikes. Right on cue, the New York Times is already frantically parroting the idea.

Facts are, of course, absent from the narrative - including the blowing up of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade (a remix in Syria with the Russian embassy?) and getting to the brink of a war with Russia.

Syria has nothing to do with the Balkans. This is a civil war. Arguably the bulk of the Syrian urban population, not the country bumpkins, support Damascus - based on despicable ''rebel'' behavior in places they control; and the absolute majority wants a political solution, as in the now near-totally torpedoed Geneva II conference.

The Jordanian scheme - inundating southern Syria with heavily weaponized mercenaries - is a remix of what the CIA and the Saudis did to AfPak; and the only winner will be Jabhat al-Nusra jihadis. As for the Israeli solution for Obama - indiscriminate bombing of chemical weapons depots - it will certainly result in horrendous collateral damage, as in R2A killing even more civilians.

The prospects remain grim. Damn another coalition of the willing; Washington already has the British and French poodles in the bag, and full support - in air-con safety - from the democratic Gulf Cooperation Council petro-monarchies, minion Jordan and nuclear power Israel. This is what passes for ''international community'' in the newspeak age.

The Brits are already heavily spinning that no UN Security Council resolution is needed; who cares if we do Iraq 2.0? For the War Party, the fact that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey said Syrian ''rebels'' could not promote US interests seems to be irrelevant.

Washington already has what it takes for the Holy Tomahawks to start flying; 384 of them are already positioned in the Eastern Mediterranean. B-1 bombers can be deployed from Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. And bunker-busting bombs will certainly be part of the picture.

What happens next requires concentric crystal balls - from Tomahawks to a barrage of air strikes to Special Ops commandos on the ground to a sustained air campaign lasting months. In his long interview to Izvestia, Assad gives the impression he thinks Obama is bluffing.

What's certain is that Syria won't be a ''piece of cake'' like Libya; even depleted on all fronts, Gaddafi resisted for eight long months after NATO started its humanitarian bombing. Syria has a weary but still strong army of 200,000; loads of Soviet and Russian weapons; very good antiaircraft systems; and full support from asymmetrical warfare experts Iran and Hezbollah. Not to mention Russia, which just needs to forward a few S-300 air defense batteries and relay solid intelligence.

So get used to how international relations work in the age of newspeak. General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi's army in Egypt can kill hundreds of his own people who were protesting against a military coup. Washington couldn't care less - as in the coup that is not a coup and the bloodbath that is not a bloodbath.

No one knows for sure what exactly happened in the chemical weapons saga near Damascus. But that's the pretext for yet another American war - just a few days before a Group of 20 summit hosted by Putin in St Petersburg. Holy Tomahawk! R2A, here we go.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007), Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge (Nimble Books, 2007), and Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at

(Copyright 2013 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

Syrians in Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack

by Dale Gavlak and Yahya Ababneh, August 31, 2013
Dale Gavlak assisted in the research and writing process of this article, but was not on the ground in Syria. Reporter Yahya Ababneh, whom the report was written in collaboration with, was the correspondent on the ground in Ghouta who spoke directly with the rebels, their family members, victims of the chemical weapons attacks and local residents.

Gavlak is a MintPress News Middle East correspondent who has been freelancing for the AP as a Amman, Jordan correspondent for nearly a decade. This exclusive report is not an Associated Press article, rather it is exclusive to MintPress News.

Ghouta, Syria – As the machinery for a U.S.-led military intervention in Syria gathers pace following last week’s chemical weapons attack, the U.S. and its allies may be targeting the wrong culprit.

Interviews with people in Damascus and Ghouta, a suburb of the Syrian capital, where the humanitarian agency Doctors Without Borders said at least 355 people had died last week from what it believed to be a neurotoxic agent, appear to indicate as much.

The U.S., Britain, and France as well as the Arab League have accused the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for carrying out the chemical weapons attack, which mainly targeted civilians. U.S. warships are stationed in the Mediterranean Sea to launch military strikes against Syria in punishment for carrying out a massive chemical weapons attack. The U.S. and others are not interested in examining any contrary evidence, with U.S Secretary of State John Kerry saying Monday that Assad’s guilt was “a judgment … already clear to the world.”

However, from numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, a different picture emerges. Many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.

“My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta.

Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels were killed inside of a tunnel used to store weapons provided by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, who was leading a fighting battalion. The father described the weapons as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”
Ghouta townspeople said the rebels were using mosques and private houses to sleep while storing their weapons in tunnels.

Abdel-Moneim said his son and the others died during the chemical weapons attack. That same day, the militant group Jabhat al-Nusra, which is linked to al-Qaida, announced that it would similarly attack civilians in the Assad regime’s heartland of Latakia on Syria’s western coast, in purported retaliation.

“They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K.’ “We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.

A well-known rebel leader in Ghouta named ‘J’ agreed. “Jabhat al-Nusra militants do not cooperate with other rebels, except with fighting on the ground. They do not share secret information. They merely used some ordinary rebels to carry and operate this material,” he said.

“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” ‘J’ said.

Doctors who treated the chemical weapons attack victims cautioned interviewers to be careful about asking questions regarding who, exactly, was responsible for the deadly assault.

The humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders added that health workers aiding 3,600 patients also reported experiencing similar symptoms, including frothing at the mouth, respiratory distress, convulsions and blurry vision. The group has not been able to independently verify the information.
More than a dozen rebels interviewed reported that their salaries came from the Saudi government.

Saudi involvement

In a recent article for Business Insider, reporter Geoffrey Ingersoll highlighted Saudi Prince Bandar’s role in the two-and-a-half year Syrian civil war. Many observers believe Bandar, with his close ties to Washington, has been at the very heart of the push for war by the U.S. against Assad.

Ingersoll referred to an article in the U.K.’s Daily Telegraph about secret Russian-Saudi talks alleging that Bandar offered Russian President Vladimir Putin cheap oil in exchange for dumping Assad.

“Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord,” Ingersoll wrote.

“I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” Bandar allegedly told the Russians.
“Along with Saudi officials, the U.S. allegedly gave the Saudi intelligence chief the thumbs up to conduct these talks with Russia, which comes as no surprise,” Ingersoll wrote.

“Bandar is American-educated, both military and collegiate, served as a highly influential Saudi Ambassador to the U.S., and the CIA totally loves this guy,” he added.

According to U.K.’s Independent newspaper, it was Prince Bandar’s intelligence agency that first brought allegations of the use of sarin gas by the regime to the attention of Western allies in February.

The Wall Street Journal recently reported that the CIA realized Saudi Arabia was “serious” about toppling Assad when the Saudi king named Prince Bandar to lead the effort.

“They believed that Prince Bandar, a veteran of the diplomatic intrigues of Washington and the Arab world, could deliver what the CIA couldn't: planeloads of money and arms, and, as one U.S. diplomat put it, wasta, Arabic for under-the-table clout,” it said.

Bandar has been advancing Saudi Arabia’s top foreign policy goal, WSJ reported, of defeating Assad and his Iranian and Hezbollah allies.

To that aim, Bandar worked Washington to back a program to arm and train rebels out of a planned military base in Jordan.

The newspaper reports that he met with the “uneasy Jordanians about such a base”:

"His meetings in Amman with Jordan's King Abdullah sometimes ran to eight hours in a single sitting. "The king would joke: 'Oh, Bandar's coming again? Let's clear two days for the meeting,' " said a person familiar with the meetings."

Jordan's financial dependence on Saudi Arabia may have given the Saudis strong leverage. An operations center in Jordan started going online in the summer of 2012, including an airstrip and warehouses for arms. Saudi-procured AK-47s and ammunition arrived, WSJ reported, citing Arab officials.

Although Saudi Arabia has officially maintained that it supported more moderate rebels, the newspaper reported that “funds and arms were being funneled to radicals on the side, simply to counter the influence of rival Islamists backed by Qatar.”

But rebels interviewed said Prince Bandar is referred to as “al-Habib” or ‘the lover’ by al-Qaida militants fighting in Syria.

Peter Oborne, writing in the Daily Telegraph on Thursday, has issued a word of caution about Washington’s rush to punish the Assad regime with so-called ‘limited’ strikes not meant to overthrow the Syrian leader but diminish his capacity to use chemical weapons:

"Consider this: the only beneficiaries from the atrocity were the rebels, previously losing the war, who now have Britain and America ready to intervene on their side. While there seems to be little doubt that chemical weapons were used, there is doubt about who deployed them.
"It is important to remember that Assad has been accused of using poison gas against civilians before. But on that occasion, Carla del Ponte, a U.N. commissioner on Syria, concluded that the rebels, not Assad, were probably responsible."

Some information in this article could not be independently verified. Mint Press News will continue to provide further information and updates .
Dale Gavlak is a Middle East correspondent for Mint Press News and has reported from Amman, Jordan, writing for the Associated Press, NPR and BBC. An expert in Middle Eastern affairs, Gavlak covers the Levant region, writing on topics including politics, social issues and economic trends. Dale holds a M.A. in Middle Eastern Studies from the University of Chicago. Contact Dale at

Yahya Ababneh is a Jordanian freelance journalist and is currently working on a master's degree in journalism, He has covered events in Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Libya. His stories have appeared on Amman Net, Saraya News, Gerasa News and elsewhere.


Posted on August 30, 2013 by Alexandra Valiente


The document entitled “U.S. Government Assessment of the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013”, released in tandem with public statements made by Secretary of State John Kerry, is merely summary of a manufactured narrative designed to lead the US into yet another criminal and disastrous war in the Middle East.  Having been released prior to even preliminary reports from UN chemical weapons investigators on the ground in Syria, the document is as much a work of fiction as it is fact.

It begins with the conclusion that “The United States Government assesses with high confidence that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs on August 21, 2013.”  Naturally, one would immediately wonder how such a conclusion was reached when even the expert investigators on the ground have yet to conclude their own study.  If these experts with years of training in the field of chemical weapons, toxicology, and other related disciplines, have yet to make such a determination, it would seem more than convenient that the US has already reached this conclusion.

Moreover, based on its own admissions as to the sources of this so-called “intelligence”, very serious doubt should be cast on such a dubious government report.  The document explains that:
These all-source assessments are based on human, signals, and geospatial intelligence as well as a significant body of open-source reporting…In addition to US intelligence information, there are accounts from international and Syrian medical personnel; videos; witness accounts; thousands of social media reports from at least 12 different locations in the Damascus area; journalist accounts; and reports from highly credible non-governmental organizations.
First and foremost, any critical reading of this document must begin with the notions of “human intelligence” and “witness accounts”.  Such terminology indicates that the US is simply basing pre-conceived conclusions based on rebel sources and the much touted “activists” who seem to always be the sources quoted in Western media reports.  Secondly, it is obvious that US officials have cherry-picked their eyewitness accounts as there are many, from both sides of the conflict, which directly contradict this so-called high-confidence assessment.
As reported in the Mint Press News by Associated Press reporter Dale Gavlak, Syrians from the town of Ghouta – the site of the chemical attack – tell a very different story from the one being told by the US government.  Residents provide very credible testimony that “certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.”  What makes such testimony even more compelling is that it comes from anti-Assad Syrians, many of whom have seen their children die fighting Assad’s forces.  One of the Ghouta residents described his conversations with his son, a fighter tasked with carrying the chemical weapons for the Nusra Front jihadi group, who spoke of Saudi-supplied weapons being unloaded and transported.  His son later was killed, along with 12 other rebels, inside a tunnel used to store weapons.
It is essential to also dispute the very notion that “social media reports” constitute credible evidence to be used in making a case for war.  It is a long-established fact that US and other intelligence agencies are able to manipulate twitter, Facebook and other social media in whatever way they see fit.  As the Guardian reported back in 2011:
The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites by using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda…each fake online persona must have a convincing background, history, and supporting details, and that up to 50 US-based controllers should be able to operate false identities from their workstations ‘without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries.’
Essentially then, the United States is using social media, a system over which they have control, to justify their pre-fabricated war narrative.  Additionally, the idea that videos constitute a shred of evidence is laughable.  As any investigator can tell you, videos are easily manipulated and, even if they are untouched, they cannot be used to assess the culprit of a crime.  Videos merely show what is visible, not the underlying motives, means, and opportunity – all part of genuine investigation.
Finally, one must feel serious apprehension at the idea of journalist reports as being part of this pastiche called a “high confidence assessment,” for the simple reason that Western coverage of the conflict in Syria is mostly coming from journalists outside the country or those already sympathetic to the rebel cause.  Whether they are paid propagandists or simply convenient tools used as mouthpieces of the corporate media, their reports are highly suspect, and certainly should have no role in shaping war-making policy.
It is critical to examine the “intelligence information” referred to in the assessment.  It would seem that, according to the document itself, much of the case for war is based on human intelligence.  Many news outlets have reported that the entire case against Assad is being based on an intercepted phone call provided to US intelligence by none other than the Israelis.  Israel, with its long track record of fabricating intelligence for the purposes of war-making, is not exactly a neutral observer.  As one of the principal actors in the region calling for the overthrow of the Assad government, Tel Aviv has a vested interest in ensuring a US intervention in Syria.
The ardently pro-Israel FOX News reported that:
The initial confirmation that the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad was responsible for a chemical weapons attack Aug. 21 came from a tip from the Israeli intelligence service…a special unit of the Israeli Defense Force – an intelligence unit that goes by the number 8200…helped provide the intelligence intercepts that allowed the White House to conclude that the Assad regime was behind the attack.
It would seem rather convenient that one of the primary beneficiaries of a war to topple Assad would be the primary source of the sole piece of evidence purportedly linking Assad to the attack.  If this strikes you as at best a flimsy pretext for war, you would be correct.
The assessment also outlines the way in which Washington arrived at its conclusion that Assad carried out the attacks.  The document states:
We assess with high confidence that the Syrian government carried out the chemical weapons attack against opposition elements in the Damascus suburbs on August 21.  We assess that the scenario in which the opposition executed the attack on August 21 is highly unlikely.  The body of information used to make this assessment includes intelligence pertaining to the regime’s preparations for this attack and its means of delivery, multiple streams of intelligence about the attack itself and its effect, our post-attack observations, and the differences between the capabilities of the regime and the opposition.
In analyzing the above excerpt, it should be immediately clear to anyone who has been following events in Syria closely, that this conclusion is based on faulty premises and outright lies.  First, the idea that it is “highly unlikely” that the chemical attack was carried out by the opposition is an impossible assertion to make given that there is abundant evidence that the “rebels” carried out chemical attacks previously. As the widely circulated video showing rebels mounting chemical weapons onto artillery shells demonstrates, not only do they have the capability and delivery system, they have a significant supply of chemicals, certainly enough to have carried out the attack.  Moreover, the multiple massacres carried out by Nusra Front and other extremist rebel factions demonstrates that such groups have no compunction whatsoever about killing innocent civilians en masse.
As for the claim that the US has based their conclusions at least in part on “the regime’s preparations for this attack”, this too is a dubious assertion simply because there has been no evidence provided whatsoever to support it.  Ostensibly, the United States would like international observers to “take their word for it” that they have such evidence, but the fragile public simply cannot be allowed to see it.  More echoes of Bush’s lies before the Iraq War.
And the so-called “post-attack observations” are again suspect because, as I have previously noted, the US has not bothered to wait for the results of the UN chemical weapons investigation.  Therefore, these observations could only come from anti-Assad sources on the ground or international observers not present at the site who merely repeat the same information fed to them from those same anti-regime sources.
As if intended as a cruel joke to the reader, the document points out that, despite the claim that this is an irrefutable, evidence-based assessment, it is in fact based on nothing but hearsay and rumor.  Buried at the end of the first page is the most important quote of all:
Our high confidence assessment is the strongest position that the U.S. Intelligence Community can take short of confirmation [emphasis added].
So, the US is supposed to make war on a country that has not attacked it or any of its allies based on admittedly unconfirmed evidence? This would be laughable if it weren’t so utterly outrageous and criminal.
The “U.S. Government Assessment of the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013” is a poorly constructed attempt to justify the politically, militarily, and morally unjustifiable war against Syria.  It relies on lies, distortions, and obvious propaganda to create the myth that Assad is the devil incarnate and that the US, with its clear moral high-ground, must take it upon itself to once again wage war for the sake of peace.  Nothing could be more dishonest. Nothing could be more disgusting. Nothing could be more American.
Eric Draitser is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City.  He is the founder of and a regular contributor to CounterPunch, RT, Global Research, and a number of other news outlets.

Global front being formed against war on Syria: Analyst


A global front is being formed against Washington’s potential unilateral plan to wage war against Syria, a political analyst tells Press TV.

“As the world wakes up, as the British parliament votes against a war on Syria, as people here in the US plan to turn out in a massive demonstration which will begin against war on Syria, it seems that Russia and China are also emboldened to stand up,” said Kevin Barrett in a Friday interview.

“I think the world is waking up. We have been living in an era of nonstop deception and with illegal wars of aggression since the September 11 coup d’état in the US and slowly but surely the world is catching on to these deceptions,” he added.

The analyst noted that the new US scenario against Syria is reminiscent of Washington’s similar plot “in the run-up to the war on Iraq when lies about alleged weapons of mass destruction were being said around by the same people.”

In 2003, the US and Britain invaded Iraq in blatant violation of international law and under the pretext of finding weapons of mass destruction. But no such weapons were ever discovered in Iraq.

“Everyday more information comes out showing that it was almost certainly Syrian rebels, with help from their Western suppliers, who used these chemical weapons in a false-flag attack designed to bring the West into a war on Syria,” Barrett pointed out.

The rhetoric of war against Syria primarily intensified after foreign-backed opposition forces accused the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad of launching a chemical attack on militant strongholds in the suburbs of Damascus on August 21.

A number of Western countries, including the United States, France, and the UK, were quick to engage in a major publicity campaign to promote war against Syria despite the fact that Damascus categorically rejected the claim that it has been behind the attack.

On Tuesday, August 27, speculations became stronger about the possibility of a military attack on Syria. Media outlets reported US plans for likely surgical attacks, which would be in the form of “cruise-missile strikes,” and “could rely on four US destroyers in the Mediterranean [Sea].” The plan was said to be awaiting US President Barack Obama’s go-ahead.

On Wednesday however, the British government, the United States’ closest ally, announced that its support for military intervention in Syria would require a second vote in the country’s parliament. A first non-binding vote in the British legislature on August 29 rejected a British role in a potential war on Syria.

On Friday, August 30, NATO also distanced itself from participating in any military intervention in Syria, with the chief of the Western military coalition, Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, saying he did not “foresee any NATO role” in an international war on Syria.

Nevertheless, Washington has remained defiant, saying that it is willing to go ahead with its plans for a strike on Syria without the approval of the United Nations or even the support of its allies.

Syria has been gripped by deadly unrest since 2011. According to reports, the Western powers and their regional allies -- especially Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey -- are supporting the militants operating inside Syria.

Iran, Russia, and China, as well as the United Nations, have warned against war.


US revealed as enemy of world

By Finian Cunningham
The USS San Antonio departs Naval Station Norfolk in Norfolk, Virginia on October 31, 2012.
The USS San Antonio departs Naval Station Norfolk in Norfolk, Virginia on October 31, 2012.
Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:41PM
By Finian Cunningham
Can you believe how ridiculous these American puppets sound? What the deluded Americans do not seem to realize is that they are on their own. The only entities willing to support their aggression on Syria is Saudi Arabia and Israel. So, how’s that for credibility? The only support Washington can muster is from a feudal, sword-wielding, head-chopping regime and a criminal pariah genocidal state. Coalition of the Willing? More like Coalition of the Killing.
Related Interviews:
The United States of America stands exposed in the eyes of the entire world as the number-one terrorist threat to the future of humanity. Many have known this fact already, but now it is universally clear.

As the US prepares to launch an overt war on Syria (the covert war has been raging for 30 months), the vast majority of humanity can finally see through all its decades of pretense and conceit as the world’s model of democracy and international law. And what they see is the ugly opposite. The US is a terrorist state that holds international law, democracy and human rights in utter contempt. It is ready, as it always has been, to kill countless civilians for its selfish political ambitions. That is the conventional definition of “terrorism”.

Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad made a profound point recently when he said that his country has faced aggression for more than two years, but only now is the real enemy revealing itself - the US and its minions. But the US terrorist state is not just being called out over Syria. It is being revealed as the enemy to the entire world.

From past wars in the Caribbean, Central America, Philippines, Vietnam and Indochina, through coups and covert ops in Iran, Iraq, Africa, to recent killing fields in Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia, the historical picture is now complete. All these conflicts and many more - too many to mention here - integrate into one indisputable truth. The US is the world’s biggest terror state. If it is not dealt with definitely, then the future of the world is in peril more than ever.

In previous crimes of aggression, the US ruling elite could invoke the spurious cover of “a coalition of the willing”, or the abused authority of the United Nations or NATO. It was able to do that through deployment of lies, fabrications and a supine mass media that would lend credibility to the mendacity. Now, thanks to alternative, critical media and instant global communications, the American lies don’t work any longer. In an instant, they are exposed; just like the attempt in the last few hours of US Secretary of State John to frame up Syria over alleged chemical weapons use.

The New York Times, BBC and the usual Western media mouthpieces for imperialist propaganda dutifully facilitated Kerry and his US state terrorism with bombastic, important-sounding headlines: “Kerry lays out evidence against Syria”. There was hardly a critical question raised, even though there are grounds for dozens such questions. Years ago, that kind of herd-think might have been enough to buy the US warmongers enough time to launch a war - but not any more. Within minutes of Kerry’s supposedly definitive condemnation, statements, articles, tweets and blogs were pulling the charade asunder, showing that apart from Western-media-amplified bombast, Kerry was not saying anything of value. It was just another risible repetition of earlier hyperbole and empty rhetoric. Or in short, lies.

The people of the world have reached a critical mass of intolerance towards the rogue terror states of the US, Britain, France, Israel and a few other accomplices. We have watched their relentless mass murder and exploitation of fellow humans in Asia, Africa, and the Americas. We have witnessed how this tiny group of state terrorists imposes on the vast majority of humanity their vile criminality and in the process then insult us with grotesque lies and justifications. We have seen how these rogue states have stolen land, poisoned people’s water, burnt their crops, dispossessed their homes, assassinated families with aerial drones and ground drones in the form of death squads. They have committed all these shocking crimes with lies and impunity to the point where now these state terrorists are operating in more than one country simultaneously in a permanent state of relentless war, pushing the very future of humanity to the brink.

However, despite this lawlessness and gangsterism, the people of the world are fighting back.

This week the British parliament voted against the London government’s arrogance to provide its usual criminal special relationship to the Americans. In the execution of past war crimes in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya - to mention a few - Washington could rely on the trusty British imperialists to give a veneer of “coalition of the willing”. British premier David Cameron’s plans to repeat the criminality by backing Washington’s plans to bomb Syria were dealt a crushing blow by the British parliament voting against any such military action. Cameron was forced to withdraw. The vote in the British parliament is not so much a sign of ethics among Britain’s political class. It is
more a reflection of the global awakening among ordinary citizens that this insane state terrorism must stop.

The French government has also backed off earlier bellicose bravado, with French President Francois Hollande belatedly calling for a “peaceful, political solution” over the Syrian crisis. Even Washington’s reliable Canadian puppet Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said that his country will not be getting involved military in Syria. It is also reported that 10 members of the NATO alliance - one-third of the total - are not willing to support American strikes. This latter grouping comprises the usual minions of the US. And we haven’t even yet acknowledged the more strident opponents, such as Russia, China, Iran and the majority of nations elsewhere in Asia, Africa and the Americas.

The people of the world have had it with elite Western rulers acting as terrorists who are holding humanity to ransom. The rulers are presiding not only over military terrorism. They are inflicting economic, social and ecological terrorism with their bankrupt capitalist smash-and-grab system. That system has reached the point of meltdown and that is why we are being pushed into relentless wars - in order for the rulers and their politician puppets to corner the remaining resources. The ultimate solution to end the wars is for the people to overthrow the economic system that US and Western elite rulers preside over. The insane criminality of the US rulers over Syria is exposing this historic challenge facing humanity.

After the British parliamentary setback the US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said: “Our approach is to continue to find an international coalition that will act together. It is the goal of President Obama and our government... whatever decision is taken, that it be an international collaboration and effort.”

Can you believe how ridiculous these American puppets sound? What the deluded Americans do not seem to realize is that they are on their own. The only entities willing to support their aggression on Syria is Saudi Arabia and Israel. So, how’s that for credibility? The only support Washington can muster is from a feudal, sword-wielding, head-chopping regime and a criminal pariah genocidal state. Coalition of the Willing? More like Coalition of the Killing.


US-Israeli False Flag Gas Attack Unravels

Information Clearing House
Friday, Aug 30, 2013

Commit a war crime to cover up a war crime?

I think what’s apparent here is that Mossad used a device that is quite common when governments/intelligence agencies want to plant a phoney story; release it through a relatively unknown publication and wait for it to be picked up by the MSM.

This is where it all started: The Israeli intelligence front the Debkafile, which is the source of the story that implicated the Assad government and/or its military in the gas attack on East Ghouta and now forms the basis for the war on Syria.

DEBKAfile’s military sources affirm that, just as the Assad brothers orchestrated the chemical shell attack on Syrian civilians, so too did Hizballah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah set in motion the rocket attack on Israel. – ‘The sarin shells fired on Damascus – by Syrian 4th Division’s 155th Brigade – were followed by rockets on Israel and car bombings in Lebanon‘.
- Debkafile, 24 August 2013

Let’s try sum up what we do know:

On the 21 August from a suburb of Damascus, Douma (or Duma) then under ‘rebel’ control, two missiles were fired at another ‘rebel’ controlled suburb of Damascus called East Ghouta, killing an unknown number of people, including children. It is assumed now that some kind of nerve gas or at least poison gas was used.

The New York Times have documented this here, although they’ve moved some of the locations on the map. In this regard how does the NYT reconcile their take on the source of the missiles with the Mossad version, which makes them artillery shells fired from the mountains in the South ( see the Mossad version below, such as it is).

This is confirmed by Pepe Escobar’s report of Russian satellite evidence.

Within hours, or even minutes, videos of the alleged effects of the attack were circulating on the Web and without a pause for a breath (let alone any evidence), led by the UK and followed closely by France, they were blaming the Assad government for the attack and pressing for an immediate attack on Syria, with or without authorisation from the UN Security Council.

For more on this see this Wiki, where details on the launch of the two missiles can be found. It’s not exactly a coherent presentation as it’s an assemblage of links and descriptions, but it looks like the missiles were launched from a Syrian Special Forces base in Douma (or Duma) then occupied by the ‘rebels’.

The ‘Evidence’
For several days, in fact until 28 August, there was no evidence offered in the mainstream media that confirmed the allegations made by the US, the UK and France.

Then a story released by the Israeli Mossad intelligence service to the German magazine Focus on the 24 August got picked up by the MSM.

Today the 28th a report in the London Guardian newspaper tells us that the ‘evidence’ was from an Israeli source, specifically the 8200 intelligence unit of the Israeli Defence Forces,

“which specialises in electronic surveillance, intercepted a conversation between Syrian officials regarding the use of chemical weapons, an unnamed former Mossad official told Focus. The content of the conversation was relayed to the US, the ex-official said.”
– The Guardian, 28 August 2013

A more complete article on the Israeli connection can be found in a Times of Israel article dated 27 August:

It was Brun, the IDF’s top intelligence analyst, who in April shocked the international community by declaring that the army was quite certain that Assad had used chemical weapons against rebel forces in Syria in March.

This time, too, Israeli military intelligence has reportedly played a key role in providing evidence of Assad’s chemical weapons use. On Friday, Israel’s Channel 2 reported that the weapons were fired by the 155th Brigade of the 4th Armored Division of the Syrian Army, a division under the command of the Syrian president’s brother, Maher Assad. The nerve gas shells were fired from a military base in a mountain range to the west of Damascus, the TV report said.

The report did not state the source of its information. But subsequently, Germany’s Focus magazine reported that an IDF intelligence unit was listening in on senior Syrian officials when they discussed the chemical attack. According to the Focus report Saturday, a squad specializing in wire-tapping within the IDF’s prestigious 8200 intelligence unit intercepted a conversation between high-ranking regime officials regarding the use of chemical agents at the time of the attack. The report, which cited an ex-Mossad official who insisted on remaining anonymous, said the intercepted conversation proved that Assad’s regime was responsible for the use of nonconventional weapons.

Giora Inbar, the former head of the IDF’s liaison unit in southern Lebanon, said Tuesday that Israeli military intelligence made a priority of intelligence-gathering in Syria, was very well-informed, and was widely trusted. The United States was “aware of” Israel’s intelligence on the doings of the Syrian regime, he said in a Channel 2 interview, “and relies upon it.” – ‘Israeli intelligence seen as central to US case against Syria‘,

- Times of Israel
Here’s a Google translation of the relevant passage from the Focus article:
Mossad: “poison gas missile by Syrian government forces”

According to the findings of Israeli intelligence community, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is responsible for the gas attack in Damascus. One unit of the Military Intelligence Service Amam, which specializes in wireless spy “Unit 8200″, controlled (tapped?) at the time of the gas attack, the communication of the Syrian army. A former Mossad officer told FOCUS, the analysis has clearly shown that the bombardment with poison gas missiles was made by Syrian government forces. – ‘UN calls on Syria to allow access for poison gas inspectors‘.

- Focus magazine, 24 August 2013

I think what’s apparent here is that Mossad used a device that is quite common when governments/intelligence agencies want to plant a phoney story; release it through a relatively unknown publication and wait for it to be picked up by the MSM.

After all, if the ‘crack’ 8200 Unit was actually listening in on the 21st August “at the time of the attack” to Syrian Army radio, why didn’t they immediately release the information to the world (even as it happened!)?

Isn’t that what you or I would have done with that kind of war-starting information?

Then there was the panic on Saturday 24 August by the USUK to try and get the UN inspection team’s visit to Syria, cancelled.

Now what was that all about? The USUK backed it up with talk about it ‘being too late’ and that the Assad regime had ‘cleaned up’ (this in an area then not controlled by the Syrian government). Too late to find out if hundreds of people had been gassed?

The sudden reversal and overt hostility toward the U.N. investigation, which coincides with indications that the administration is planning a major military strike against Syria in the coming days, suggests that the administration sees the U.N. as hindering its plans for an attack.

Kerry asserted Monday that he had warned Syrian Foreign Minister Moallem last Thursday that Syria had to give the U.N. team immediate access to the site and stop the shelling there, which he said was “systematically destroying evidence”. He called the Syria-U.N. deal to allow investigators unrestricted access “too late to be credible”.

– ‘In Rush to Strike Syria, U.S. Tried to Derail U.N. Probe‘,
Gareth Porter, IPS, 28 August 2013

In yet another version of the Mossad-inspired story, in the Israeli Tikum Olam we read:

It [Ynet on the 27 August] says that three senior Israeli military-intelligence officers are currently in Washington briefing their U.S. counterparts on the Unit 8200 intercepts. The paper also claims that the primary evidence the west is using on which to base its charges of Syria government responsibility is the IDF secret intercepts. This makes me nervous for several reasons: one, because IDF claims are notoriously unreliable. This brings to mind the Mossad’s notoriously biased “evidence” offered regularly to the IAEA to “prove” Iran’s intent to develop nuclear weapons. Two, it makes me wonder what Israel’s ulterior motives may be in weighing in like this.
– German Report That Israel’s NSA Affirms
Syria Government Responsibility for Chemical Attacks,

By Richard Silverstein, Tikum Olam, 26 August 2013

And what of the UN mandate that forbade the inspection team from apportioning blame, should it be able to do that? Everything looks set to fail except the option to bomb.

Why the rush to war?
And ultimately, why the rush to war without even falsified evidence to offer until this late stage?

Surely, if on the day of the attack the Israelis had released the information of an alleged gas attack by the Syrian government, it would have given the US and the UN, every (albeit twisted) justification to attack instead of relying on “belief” and “common sense” as Hague and Kerry both asserted?

I never thought I’d see the private intelligence arm of the US state, Stratfor utter the following but I think it’s another indication of a false flag plot gone seriously amiss that only an immediate attack on Syria could have masked:

Stratfor’s job is to analyze the world as objectively as possible, and the situation in Syria is among the most difficult we have seen. The problem is we really don’t know what happened. The general consensus is Syrian President Bashar Assad ordered the use of chemical weapons against his enemies. The problem is trying to figure out why he would do it. He was not losing the civil war. In fact, he had achieved some limited military success recently. He knew that U.S. President Obama had said the use of chemical weapons would cross a red line. Yet Assad did it.

Or did he? Could the rebels have staged the attack in order to draw in an attack on al-Assad? Could the pictures have been faked? Could a third party, hoping to bog the United States down in another war, have done it? The answers to these questions are important, because they guide the U.S. and its allies’ response. The official explanation could be absolutely true–or not.

– Stratfor Email 28 August 2013

No wonder Stratfor is circumspect about the cause of the chemical attack. Worse, it’s even doubting the US government when it says, “The official explanation could be absolutely true–or not.”

If as Gareth Porter asserts, the US wanted the inspection team canceled because I assume, it didn’t want have to bomb them as well the unfortunate Syrians, then it follows that regardless of the evidence, the Empire had planned to rain death and destruction from afar on Syria, and had planned to do so since last year.

And then it was presented with the perfect opportunity until those damn UN inspectors got in the way!

Waging war would avoid the embarrassing act of actually finding out what went on and as we know the victor writes the history. By the time cooler heads get to have a look at the facts, it’s all ‘history’.

Source URL

Gilad Atzmon on Press TV - President Obama is 'confused' about possible attack on Syria


Resistance Is Our Destiny

Published Saturday, August 31, 2013
To hell with all the talk about democracy backed by the United States, France, Britain … and Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel.

To hell with every bid for freedom with the support of these murderers.

To hell with every fool, criminal, and coward, no matter what they look like, what they are called, where they live, or what they do.

To hell with all those who support an international war to topple Syria.

To hell with this bunch of collaborators, who people will no doubt will hold accountable one day, come chaos or stability.

To hell with all traitors, their speeches, their false tears, and to hell with their human rights groups and their subservient civil society organizations.

Israeli infantry soldiers walk in a deployment training area in the Israeli-annexed Golan Heights near the border with Syria on 29 August 2013. (Photo: AFP - Menahem Kahana)

The decision to wage war on Syria is only the last step in the course set two and a half years ago, to destroy Resistance, its cities, people, and even its very idea.

There is no room for any kind of bargaining, and there is no room for any discussion or debate. There is no room to listen to any collaborator touting the list of causes of war and the causers, and there is no room for those who cling to their opinions, positions, or labels, wearing bandanas on their foreheads after wearing blindfolds on their eyes, and joining forces with collaborators and takfiris.
To begin with, these people live on the crumbs thrown to them by the robbers of Arab resources and fortunes. They work for them and receive from them money and all kinds of support.

It is a duty for every capable person to fight these killers, wherever they may be, wherever there is a chance to take revenge against them, and punish all the traitors, one after the other, in their beds, behind their desks, inside their tanks, or in their palaces, whether they are alone, or among their families.

What do you want from us today?

Do you want to repeat the experience of Iraq?

Do you want to repeat the experience of Afghanistan and Somalia?

Do you want to repeat the experience of Libya?

Do you want to repeat the experience of war in Lebanon?

Or do you think that this will be a war to destroy the right that will never be eliminated, and whose name, forever shall remain: Palestine?

We do not have to repeat our arguments or repeat the process of searching for answers; we do not have to repeat our comments or our warnings. All we have to do is declare one position, namely, that the war being prepared for Syria is a colonial war, and every participant in it, whether by supporting it, funding it, promoting it, justifying it, or directly fighting in it, is a cowardly collaborator whose sole punishment must be death, in public, without shame or hesitation.

It's war!

They will gang up on Damascus, the mother of all cities, with the aim of crushing the people, the army, and the leadership. They want to destroy its history and its heritage of resisting invaders. They want to destroy every spirit that resists colonialism and supports resistance in the whole region. They want to extend a permanent lifeline to Israel and the oppressive regimes in our Arab countries, and they want to have collaborators of all kinds take over countries, rob their resources, and annihilate their peoples.

When America says that it needs no cover, legal justification, scientific investigation, or political support, and that it is able to manipulate the fate of a nation, for the sole reason that it has decided that its interests require it, then this means that we must act exactly like America, and wait for no cover, support, justification, or ask about international norms and so forth.

We must fight against it, and against its colonies, all forms of war, and we must spare no effort to seek to transfer the fire to its soil, in every place of its land and cities; we must scream in the face of the butcher. We would do all this, without giving them the ability to strip us of our humanity, which we shall keep for ourselves, our children, and for the oppressed everywhere.

Yesterday, the West showed its true colors: a spiteful, murderous West, that has no place for anyone except those who know how to kneel down before it, and raise the white flag above their heads.
Yesterday, Europe showed its foul nature. It is not just a foolish old crone, but an ugly one too, with venom spewing from all its folds. Dishonor mars its opinion-makers, factories, schools, universities, and its people who do not come out to disavow the killers among them.

All we can do is resist them, with all our capabilities. Nothing will prevent us from seeking out our sole enemy, which has many faces, but one name: the barbarians, the bloodsuckers. As for us, resistance is our destiny.

Ibrahim al-Amin is editor-in-chief of Al-Akhbar.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

قدرنا … المقاومة!

ابراهيم الأمين

إلى الجحيم كل نقاش حول ديموقراطية تدعمها أميركا وفرنسا وبريطانيا والسعودية وتركيا وإسرائيل…

من تظاهرات اليمن امس ضد العدوان الغربي

إلى الجحيم كل مسعى إلى حرية بدعم من هؤلاء القَتَلة.

إلى الجحيم كل تافه، مجرم، خائف، مهما كان شكله أو اسمه أو عنوانه أو وظيفته.

الى الجحيم كل الذين يدعمون حرب التدخل العالمية لإسقاط سوريا.

الى الجحيم كل هذه الحفنة من العملاء الذين لا بد ان يحاكمهم الناس في يوم قريب، في حالة استقرار أو حالة فوضى.

الى الجحيم كل الخونة، وكل خطاباتهم، وكل دموعهم الكاذبة، وكل عويلهم وصراخهم، وكل منظماتهم الخاصة بحقوق الانسان، وكل منظمات مجتمعاتهم المدنية الخانعة.

قرار الحرب على سوريا، ليس سوى الخطوة الاخيرة، المقررة منذ سنتين ونصف، بحثاً عن تدمير المقاومة، مدنا وبشرا وفكرة ايضا.

لا مجال لأيّ نوع من المساومة، ولا مجال لأيّ نقاش أو سجال، ولا مجال للاستماع إلى أيّ عميل يعرض علينا لائحة الأسباب والمسبّبين، ومَن يتمسّك من هؤلاء برأيه أو موقعه، أو تصنيفه، فليذهب ويضع عصبة على جبينه بعدما وضع عصبة على عينيه، ولينضمّ إلى مجموعات العملاء والتكفيريين.

هؤلاء يعيشون أصلاً على فتات سارقي الثروات العربية، يعملون عندهم، ويتلقّون منهم الأموال وكل أشكال الدعم، ولم يعد ينقصهم سوى إعلان الاندماج كليّاً في عوالم هؤلاء القَتَلة الذين بات واجباً وفرض عين على كل قادر مقاتلتهم، حيث هم، حيث يتواجدون، حيث تتوافر فرصة الانتقام منهم، ومعاقبة كل الخونة، واحداً تلو الآخر، في أسرّتهم، أو خلف مكاتبهم، أو داخل دباباتهم، أو في قصورهم، لوحدهم، أو بين أفراد عائلاتهم…

ماذا تريدون منا اليوم؟

هل تريدون تكرار تجربة العراق؟

هل تريدون تكرار تجربة أفغانستان والصومال؟

هل تريدون تكرار تجربة ليبيا؟

هل تريدون تكرار تجربة حروب لبنان؟

او هل انتم تعتقدون انها الحرب التي تقضي على حق لن يزول اسمه الوحيد الدائم الى ابد الابدين: فلسطين!

لسنا مضطرّين إلى تكرار السجال، ولا إلى تكرار البحث والأجوبة والتعليقات والتحذيرات، ولسنا مضطرّين سوى إلى إعلان موقف واحد، وهو أنّ الحرب التي يُعَدُّ لها ضدّ سوريا هي حرب استعمارية، وكل مشارك فيها، كلياً، تأييداً، تمويلاً، ترويجاً، تبريراً، وقتالاً، هو عميل خائف، ولا عقوبة له سوى الموت، جهاراً نهاراً بدون خجل أو حياء!

إنّها الحرب!

سيستفردون دمشق، أم مدن العالم، ويريدون سحق الناس والجيش والقيادة هناك. يريدون تدمير التاريخ والموروث الوطني بوجه الغزاة. ويريدون تدمير كل روح تقاوم الاستعمار وتدعم المقاومين في كل المنطقة. ويريدون مدّ شريان حياة دائمة لإسرائيل، ولأنظمة القهر في بلادنا العربية، ويريدون إيصال العملاء، من كل الصنوف والأشكال، لتولّي بلدان وسرقة ثرواتها، وإبادة شعوبها.

عندما تقول اميركا انها لا تحتاج الى تغطية، ولا الى تبرير قانوني، ولا الى تحقيق علمي، ولا الى دعم سياسي، وانها تقدر على التحكم بمصير امة لمجرد انها قررت ان مصلحتها تفرض عليها ذلك، يعني ان علينا التصرف مثلها تماماً، بأن لا ننتظر تغطية ولا دعما ولا تبريرا ولا سؤالا عن معايير دولية وخلافه، وان نخوض بوجهها، ووجه مستعمراتها، كل انواع الحروب والقتال، وان نسعى، بكل جهد، الى نقل النار الى ارضها، في كل مكان من ارضها ومدنها، والى أن نصرخ بوجه السفاح، ان كل ذلك سنقوم به، من دون ان تقدروا على تجريدنا من انسانيتنا، تلك التي نحتفظ بها لاجل انفسنا ولاجل اولادنا ولاجل المقهورين في كل الارض.

امس، ظهر الغرب كله على حقيقته. غرب حاقد، قاتل، لا مكان فيه لحق إلا لمن يعرف الخنوع امامه، ولا امان فيه الا لمن يرفع الراية البيضاء.

امس بدت اوروبا كريهة. ليست عجوزا حمقاء فقط، بل قبيحة، السم يفحّ من كل ثناياها، وفيها العار يسكن صناع الرأي العام، ويسكن مصانعها ومدارسها وجامعاتها وناسها الذين لا يخرجون ويطردون القتلة من بينهم.

ليس لنا سوى مقاومتهم، بكل ما تملكه ايدينا وعقولنا ودمائنا، ولا شيء سيحجب عنا رؤية العدو الواحد، الذي له وجوه عدة، ولكن باسم واحد: انهم البرابرة، مصاصو الدماء… اما نحن، فقدرنا هو المقاومة!



Posted on August 30, 2013 by Alexandra Valiente

The British parliament’s rejection of military action in Syria this week may be just enough to halt the manic march to all-out war – a war that many fear would not only engulf the Middle East region, but could lead to a global conflagration. The manic march is under the orders of the imperial rulers in Washington, London and Paris – in apparent defiance of a global consensus that is sick of endless, illegal, bankrupting wars conducted by these unaccountable rogue Western regimes.
But could we have reached a positive turning point? Could Syria represent a Damascene moment of revelation? This would not be due to any benign awakening among the Western political class, but rather out of a sense that the vast majority of ordinary people are acutely aware and implacably against any further war-making propaganda stunts. The British parliamentary vote against military action in Syria is reflective of the public anger and indignation against unaccountable rulers constantly banging the drums of war.
Polls show that the majority of ordinary citizens in the US, Britain and France in particular are firmly opposed to any military intervention in Syria, yet their rulers insist that they have the «moral authority» to fire cruise missiles and launch air strikes on the strife-torn Arab country – a strife that has been covertly fomented and exacerbated by the these same Western powers, resulting in more than 100,000 deaths over the past 30 months.
The policy of these Western states towards Syria exhibits the wider problem of dysfunctional democracies under a bankrupt capitalist system. The Western public does not want war; they want jobs, social welfare and public services. Nevertheless, the citizens are instead told that there is no money for such public goods, however there are somehow funds to mount yet another foreign war – all on the back of yet more dubious claims that have likewise underpinned previous wars over the last 10 years.
This tendency of unilateral, unaccountable warmongering just received a welcome blow. On Thursday, the gung-ho British Prime Minister, David Cameron, suffered a stunning defeat when members of his governing Conservative party joined with opposition Labor parliamentarians to vote against military strikes on Syria. Days before that, Cameron had imperiously given a commitment to US President Barack Obama that British forces would augment American military attacks on Syria following hoary accusations from Washington, London and Paris that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons on its own people last week.
However, Britain will not now be part of any US-led «coalition of the willing» to attack Syria. Cameron showed surprising modesty when he said after the parliamentary setback that he would obey the will of the people and desist from military action in Syria. Not that Cameron has undergone an ethical conversion. He simply has enough savvy to know that his government will be torn to shreds by an outraged public if he dares engage in unilateral militarism at a time when austerity and poverty are crushing millions of Britons.
This absence of America’s «special partner» in imperialist adventurism, adds to Washington’s increasing problems of launching a war on Syria. Officially, the White House is still proceeding with plans for military intervention, despite the British parliamentary No vote. Some commentators speculate that the US may gave the orders on Sunday for cruise missile strikes from its five warships currently off the coast of Syria. One factor is that Washington is possibly waiting for the UN chemical weapons inspection team to leave Syria this weekend. The team, led by Ake Sellstrom, is due to depart on Saturday and immediately report its findings to the UN General Secretary, Ban Ki-Moon.
After the British parliamentary setback, US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel issued a statement while visiting the Philippines. «Our approach is to continue to find an international coalition that will act together,» Hagel told a news conference in the capital, Manila. «It is the goal of President Obama and our government… whatever decision is taken, that it be an international collaboration and effort.»
That sounds more like the US pushing to recruit a lynch mob than an international consensus over Syria. But, taking Hagel at his word, if an «international coalition» is Washington’s criterion for attacking Syria, then there is a fair chance that any such action will not eventuate. Without the trusty British, any supposed coalition of the willing that the Americans might muster will be of risible credibility. Recall that the Americans needed the salesman-like qualities of the British in railroading the wars on Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. Following the formal British withdrawal from a military strike on Syria, it is questionable whom Washington may be able to press-gang. A coalition starring the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel along with Al Qaeda militants within Syria – a «coalition of the killing» – stretches credulity way beyond breaking point. The international backlash will be withering…
It is significant, too, that the other member of the Western triumvirate, France, has also toned down its initial bellicose rhetoric. At the start of the week, French President Francois Hollande was warning that his country was «ready to punish the Syrian regime» over the alleged chemical weapons attack. But on the same day that the British MPs voted against military intervention, the French leader had decidedly calmed down and was urging «a peaceful, political solution» to the Syrian crisis.
That leaves Washington isolated on the United Nations Security Council, with Russia and China both having made clear their categorical opposition to any military strikes against their ally, Syria.
Furthermore, within the US itself, the Obama administration is facing stiffening resistance to its threats of another war in the Middle East. US officials may claim that their military is preparing to use «limited surgical strikes» aimed at cautioning the Assad government over its alleged use of chemical weapons. But no one is buying that. Military strikes of any kind are the beginning of a slippery slope into uncontrollable all-out war. A letter signed by 140 American lawmakers warned the president that any move to use military strikes against Syria would violate the US Constitution without first obtaining authorization from Congress on such a deployment. As in Britain, American lawmakers seem to be heeding the public’s contempt for intelligence conclusions that are cloaked with «classified secrecy».
This no doubt reflects increasing public repudiation of threadbare official lies and spurious pretexts to justify relentless overseas’ wars: fighting terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, responsibility to protect civilians. Adding fuel to the public ire are the recent revelations about massive illegal US (and British) government spying on citizens, which is compounding an already seething distrust towards these authorities and their unaccountable agencies.
Again, Syria is a crystallizing point for many issues: illegal wars, a failing bankrupt economic system, and official lies about everything from unemployment statistics to chemical weapons. Not only is the increasing evidence of Western collusion with terrorism in Syria morally repugnant, it also drives home to the Western public the propaganda charade of the entire «war on terror». The latest claims by Western governments over the alleged chemical weapons attack as a pretext for military intervention smacks of yet more self-serving lies told by an incorrigible anti-democratic elite who profit from war, death and destruction.
The alleged chemical weapons incident in three suburbs of the Syrian capital, Damascus, is still under investigation by a team of United Nations technical experts. Tellingly, the UN inspectors are being facilitated by the government in Damascus; they were shot at earlier this week by unknown snipers while driving with Syrian security personnel on the way to collect incriminating field data; and the UN team is finishing off its investigation by carrying out tests on Syrian soldiers injured in the alleged gas attack apparently with the deadly nerve agent Sarin. But the American, British and French governments had embarked on a bombastic media campaign making strident assertions immediately following the incident on 21 August – in which hundreds were killed – that it had been perpetrated by Syrian forces loyal to President Bashar al Assad.
Washington, London and Paris typically did not provide any verifiable evidence to support their assertions – just as they did not provide evidence to back up similar earlier claims over the poison gas attack in Khan al-Assal in March. An official Russian study into the Khan al-Assal incident – whose results were independently verifiable – found that the perpetrators were the Western-backed mercenaries trying to topple the Assad government.
US officials are now claiming that they have based part of their conclusions over the latest chemical weapons incident near Damascus on intercepted phone conversations between «senior regime figures». But this purported US intelligence is not presented. Likewise, the British and French governments balk at disclosing the «evidence» they claim to have that makes them so apparently certain in their accusations against Assad.
The rush to escalate war in Syria by this cabal of three powers who don the mantle of the «international community» has mobilized widespread alarm and resentment among the actual international community of preponderant governments and citizens. The credibility of the US and Britain in particular following their genocidal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which were subsequently shown to be based on entirely false claims, is at an all-time low in the eyes of the world. The French have tarnished any moral authority they may have had with participation in the neocolonial NATO blitz on Libya in 2011, and then its unilateral intervention in Mali earlier this year. The latter operation was allegedly conducted to prevent radical Islamists toppling the Francophile regime, yet the France along with the US, Britain and others are supporting similar extremists trying to overthrow the sovereign government in Syria.
Syria is still very much in danger of being attacked by the US military in the coming days. The crisis-ridden capitalist system that the US presides over is wired for war and perhaps the warmongering American elite may be immutable in the face of widespread political opposition, both within the US and around the world. But, having said that, one glimmer of hope is that Syria perhaps represents a point in history where Western rogue rulers and their rotten capitalist system are no longer able to launder their lies for war. The world’s public can finally see the filth and who is causing it.