Category: CFR ROUND TABLE THINK TANKS



Canada’s PM To Putin: “I Guess
I’ll Shake Your Hand…” Putin’s
Response “Was Not Positive”
"I have only one thing to say to
you: you need to get out of
Ukraine.”

Canada's PM To Putin: "I Guess I'll Shake Your Hand..." Putin's Response "Was Not Positive"

by Zero Hedge | November 16, 2014

Following last week’s (humiliating for the US) APEC meeting in Beijing, in which the BRIC nations clearly distanced themselves from the “developed world” and the topic of the “Russian invasion of Ukraine” was largely missing as it is clearly not in the interest of the Pacific nations to warmonger when the two key nations, Russia and China are obviously not complying with the western media ‘straight to populism‘ narrative, it was time for another major world summit, this time in the quite “western” Brisbane, Australia.

It was here that the G-7 part of the G-20 nations seized the opportunity to quickly pivot against Moscow and remind Europe that the reason why Europe is in a triple-dip recession (if one removes the GDP “boost” from hookers and blow) is because of Russia’s “take over” of east Ukraine, ignoring the reality that it was the US State Department’s Victoria Nuland that incited the Kiev coup and the west that imposed the “costly” sanctions on Russia which have hurt Germany and Europe just as badly. This was all largely lost on the local, as outside the summit, Ukrainian Australians staged an anti-Putin protest, wearing headbands reading “Putin, Killer”.

It was a full court press from the start: as the NYT reports, “at a speech at a university in Brisbane, Mr. Obama called Russia’s aggression against Ukraine a “threat to the world, as we saw in the appalling shoot down of MH-17, a tragedy that took so many innocent lives, among them your fellow citizens,” a reference to the Australian citizens and residents who were killed when Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 went down in eastern Ukraine.

“As your ally and friend, America shares the grief of these Australian families, and we share the determination of your nation for justice and accountability,” Mr. Obama said.”

StevenHarper_douchebag

This charade was set to continue Sunday, when leaders from the European Union planned to meet with Mr. Obama to discuss Ukraine, among other issues, said Herman Van Rompuy, the president of the European Council. He said the European Union was committed to finding a political solution to the crisis.

“We will continue to use all the diplomatic tools, including sanctions, at our disposal,” he said.

Indeed, as Reuters adds “Western leaders warned Vladimir Putin at a G20 summit on Saturday that he risked more economic sanctions if he failed to end Russian backing for separatist rebels in Ukraine.”

But perhaps the best confirmation that all the G-20 meeting was nothing but a giant populist photo-op comes from Bloomberg which reports that “Russian President Vladimir Putin got a blunt message when he approached Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper for a handshake at today’s Group of 20 summit in Brisbane, Australia.

“I guess I’ll shake your hand but I have only one thing to say to you: you need to get out of Ukraine,” Harper told Putin, the prime minister’s spokesman Jason MacDonald said in an e-mail.

Putin’s response to the comment wasn’t positive, MacDonald said, without elaborating. Putin and Harper talked briefly, according to Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

“Indeed Harper told Putin that Russia should leave Ukraine,” Peskov said by phone today in Brisbane. Putin told him that this is impossible because they are not there.”    Which is the real TRUTH” known by all alternative media station

Asked about the tone of the meeting between the two leaders, Peskov said “it was within the bounds of decency.”

Say no more.

Righteous Russian President Vladimir Putin, right,

walks past Canadian Prime Minister

 Hannibal Cannibal Stephen Harper, left,

during a pompous welcoming ceremony at the

G-20Criminal Cabal Summit in Brisbane.

Yet at the end of the day, captioned photo-op or not, one wonders how much of all the front-page drama is even remotely real when every single time the west goes on the “offensive” against Putin with “costs” just to have a convenient scapegoat for Europe’s ongoing depression, one hears in the back of one head the following exchange:

Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir”


Enoch and Elijah – Witnesses to

POLE SHIFTS

Thursday, October 16, 2014 6:56

(Before It’s News)

Enoch and Elijah – Witnesses to Pole Shifts?

The early theologians Irenaeus and Hippolytus may have been the last heirs to the uncorrupted oral tradition of the Apostles, and both of them said that Enoch and Elijah were the two witnesses we will see in the future preaching and dying on the streets of Jerusalem in the end times.  The Bible tells us that their presence will be a sign that the Second Coming is imminent.  I believe their stories also tell of pole shifts in our past, and lend additional support to the idea that they will be a witness to an upcoming pole shift, when we receive “a new heaven and a new earth.”

The Bible tells us that Enoch lived a total of 365 years.  This lifespan brings two obvious ideas to mind: first, that no one normally lives that long – and second, that the years of Enoch’s life match the number of days in a year.  If this is meant to draw our attention to the sun and the number of days it takes for the earth to orbit the sun, what else might we take from the story of Enoch to apply to the sun?

Enoch’s life is broken down into two portions: at the age of 65 he fathered Methuselah, then continued to live another 300 years before he “walked with God” and was “translated away so that he did not see death.” (Hebrews 11:5)  The word “translated” comes from the Greek “metatithemi” which means “taken to another place.”  Because I have spent many years researching topics like pole shifts, this makes me think the story of Enoch may incorporate a coded message about a pole shift event in the distant past when the sun (symbolized by Enoch in this story) would have been positioned in the sky next to the galactic center (God) when it suddenly shifted its apparent position in the sky and was “taken to another place.”

Chichen_Itza-Wiki

I also suspect that the way the Bible breaks down Enoch’s life into two unequal portions might be similar to the way the Maya broke their year down based on the dates on which the sun passes directly overhead in the zenith.  Every spring equinox in March, the sun is directly above the equator at noon.  Lands north of the equator and south of the Tropic of Cancer witness the sun directly overhead at noon at some point prior to the first day of summer.  For example, at Chichen Itza, where the Maya built the great Pyramid of Kukulkan, the sun is directly overhead on May 22.  The sun appears to keep moving north until summer, then starts to fall southwards again.  Chichen Itza experiences a second solar zenith on July 19.  At another Mayan city (Izapa – which is farther south, at a different latitude) where this pattern was first recognized, the two zenith dates are 105 days apart, and the Maya there broke the year into 105 and 260 portions based on the spread of the zenith passage dates at Izapa’s latitude.  What latitude, I wondered, would experience zenith passage dates 65 days apart – and could such zenith dates possibly point us to the previous position of Jerusalem, before the last pole shift?

A little research led me to a chart labelled “Zenith passage dates of the Sun for Observers in Different Latitudes” in Anthony Aveni’s Skywatchers of Ancient Mexico.  Just below 20 degrees north there are 65 days between zenith dates.  Could this be the latitude the holy site we now know as Jerusalem used to be located at prior to the last major shift of the earth’s crust relative to its axis of rotation?  Could the location of this ancient holy site possibly even explain why the Maya had a special term for the 65 day period (Aveni calls it the Cociyo) when neither Izapa nor Chichen Itza experience zeniths 65 days apart?

At first glance, this seems to be a dead end and a bad theory, because we know from other data that the previous North Pole was located on the west side of Hudson Bay.  When the North Pole was there, the land that is now called Jerusalem was approximately eleven and a half degrees north latitude, not just under twenty degrees north latitude.   Jerusalem, at its former latitude, had zenith passage dates well over 100 days apart.  However, I soon noticed that the change in latitude – the northward movement Jerusalem experienced as a result of the last pole shift – is approximately 19.8 degrees.  Which means that Enoch’s being taken away in a “translation” and the years of his life may be astronomical references to a pole shift after all.

the image above may approximate the next position of the “new earth” if the North Pole is near Lake Baikal, as Professor Charles Hapgood suggests it might be in his books.

I believe that cosmic events emanating from the galactic center cause recurring, periodic, and predictable pole shifts on earth.  At the same time I believe the sun will appear to be dark (Revelation 6:12 “the sun became black as sackcloth”) for three days, at the point in the year when it appears at the crossing point of the galactic axis and the ecliptic – the apparent path of the sun and planets.  I suspect it is no coincidence that Jesus died on a cross and was dead for three days and that we are told the sun went dark when he died.  Jonah was in darkness in the belly of the whale for three days, and I believe this is a reference to the sun going dark as it passes through the cosmic leviathan of the Milky Way’s central bulge along the galactic axis.

Elijah encountered “a chariot of fire.”   The Book of Enoch mentions “the sun… and the chariot in which it rises.” (Enoch 72:5)  We can safely assume Elijah represents another heavenly body which encountered the sun. “And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven” just after he walked past Bethel (Beth-El = the house of God = the galactic center) and crossed the Jordan River (the Milky Way) and encountered the chariot of fire (the sun.)  So this occurred when the sun (and some other heavenly body – I suggest Jupiter) had just passed the galactic center and the axis of the Milky Way.  2 Kings 2:17 describes the men sent out to look for Elijah after he disappeared – “They searched three days but could not find him.”  Another symbolic reference to the three days of darkness and confusion.

BOWL-4-SUN-ANGEL

And then one of the even stranger comments in the Bible appears in 2 Kings 2:24 “Two female bears came out of the woods and tore up forty-two lads” from Bethel who had previously mocked Elijah’s son.  Now I have been to that part of Israel.  I have stood in the Jordan River.  Trees are scarce, and I never saw “woods” or a forest dense enough that bears could emerge and suddenly surprise anyone.  And even if we grant that there had been thick woods and a pair of real bears, can you imagine 42 young men not scattering and running off in different directions?  Surely a bear could kill a lad or two, but forty-two of them?  As C.M. Houck commented in The Celestial Spheres: Keys to the Suppressed wisdom of the Ancients: “How could two bears possibly manage to outrun, catch, and destroy forty-two terrified, hyperactive juvenile delinquents?  They couldn’t.  This is sacred language.”  And what I think he means is that this is another astronomical reference, this time to the two “polar bears” – the constellations Ursa Major and Ursa Minor – the Big Bear and Little Bear near the celestial North Pole.  I suggest that during the last pole shift, it was noticed that these “bears” seemed to suddenly move far faster than usual into the sky, corresponding with the sudden disappearance of 42 visible stars which unexpectedly fell below the opposite horizon.

In my last book, End Times and 2019, I conclude that the Bible, the Maya, and the Egyptians all left clues pointing to the next pole shift coinciding with the end of the Tribulation and Judgment Day in late December, 2019.  I suggest that Jupiter is the astronomical representation of the prophet Elijah, that the Sun represents Jesus, and that the conjunction of Jupiter and the Sun on Judgment Day represents Elijah anointing Jesus Christ as King.  I believe that Enoch and Elijah have been portrayed as witnesses to a previous pole shift, and that their stories give us clues about that last pole shift.  I believe they will be the two end times witnesses of the tribulation, and that they will witness during the reign of the Antichrist, just before the next catastrophic pole shift in 2019.  If you appreciate my application of “forensic astronomy” to Bible prophecy as detailed above, you will probably appreciate both my previous book – End Times and 2019 – and my new book focusing on events in the middle of the final seven years in June 2016 – Antichrist 2016-2019.

— contributed by David Montaigne, October 2014

author of  End Times and 2019   and   Antichrist 2016-2019

Washington’s Web of Lies and Deception


Washington’s Secret Agendas
The public continues to fall for the lies

Washington’s Secret Agendas

by Paul Craig Roberts | Infowars.com | September 29, 2014

One might think that by now even Americans would have caught on to the constant stream of false alarms that Washington sounds in order to deceive the Washington people into supporting its hidden agendas.

The public fell for the lie that the Taliban in Afghanistan are terrorists allied with al Qaeda. Americans fought a war for 13 years that enriched Dick Cheney’s firm, Halliburton, and other private interests only to end in another Washington failure.

The public fell for the lie that Saddam Hussein in Iraq had “weapons of mass destruction” that were a threat to America and that if the US did not invade Iraq Americans risked a “mushroom cloud going up over an American city.” With the rise of ISIS, this long war apparently is far from over. Billions of dollars more in profits will pour into the coffers of the US military security complex as Washington fights those who are redrawing the false Middle East boundaries created by the British and French after WW I when the British and French seized territories of the former Ottoman Empire.

The American public fell for the lies told about Gaddafi in Libya. The formerly stable and prosperous country is now in chaos.

The American public fell for the lie that Iran has, or is building, nuclear weapons. Sanctioned and reviled by the West, Iran has shifted toward an Eastern orientation, thereby removing a principal oil producer from Western influence.

The public fell for the lie that Assad of Syria used “chemical weapons against his own people.” The jihadists that Washington sent to overthrow Assad have turned out to be, according to Washington’s propaganda, a threat to America.

The greatest threat to the world is Washington’s insistence on its hegemony. The ideology of a handful of neoconservatives is the basis for this insistence. We face the situation in which a handful of American neoconservative psychopaths claim to determine the fate of countries.

galluppoll3

Many still believe Washington’s lies, but increasingly the world sees Washington as the greatest threat to peace and life on earth. The claim that America is “exceptional and indispensable” is used to justify Washington’s right to dictate to other countries.

The casualties of Washington’s bombings are invariably civilians, and the deaths will produce more recruits for ISIS. Already there are calls for Washington to reintroduce “boots on the ground” in Iraq. Otherwise, Western civilization is doomed, and our heads will be cut off. The newly created propaganda of a “Russian threat” requires more NATO spending and more military bases on Russia’s borders. A “quick reaction force” is being created to respond to a nonexistent threat of a Russian invasion of the Baltics, Poland, and Europe.

Usually it takes the American public a year, or two, three, or four to realize that it has been deceived by lies and propaganda, but by that time the public has swallowed a new set of lies and propaganda and is all concerned about the latest “threat.” The American public seems incapable of understanding that just as the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth, threat was a hoax, so is the sixth threat, and so will be the seventh, eighth, and ninth.

Moreover, none of these American military attacks on other countries has resulted in a better situation, as Vladimir Putin honestly states. Yet, the public and its representatives in Congress support each new military adventure despite the record of deception and failure.

Perhaps if Americans were taught their true history in place of idealistic fairy tales, they would be less gullible and less susceptible to government propaganda. I have recommended Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick’s The Untold History of the US, Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the US, and now I recommend Stephen Kinzer’s The Brothers, the story of the long rule of John Foster and Allen Dulles over the State Department and CIA and their demonization of reformist governments that they often succeeded in overthrowing. Kinzer’s history of the Dulles brothers’ plots to overthrow six governments provides insight into how Washington operates today.

In 1953 the Dulles brothers overthrew Iran’s elected leader, Mossadegh and imposed the Shah, thus poisoning American-Iranian relations through the present day. Americans might yet be led into a costly and pointless war with Iran, because of the Dulles brothers poisoning of relations in 1953.

sgs-emp

The Dulles brothers overthrew Guatemala’s popular president Arbenz, because his land reform threatened the interest of the Dulles brothers’ Sullivan & Cromwell law firm’s United Fruit Company client. The brothers launched an amazing disinformation campaign depicting Arbenz as a dangerous communist who was a threat to Western civilization. The brothers enlisted dictators such as Somoza in Nicaragua and Batista in Cuba against Arbenz. The CIA organized air strikes and an invasion force. But nothing could happen until Arbenz’s strong support among the people in Guatemala could be shattered. The brothers arranged this through Cardinal Spellman, who enlisted Archbishop Rossell y Arellano. “A pastoral letter was read on April 9, 1954 in all Guatemalan churches.”

A masterpiece of propaganda, the pastoral letter misrepresented Arbenz as a dangerous communist who was the enemy of all Guatemalans. False radio broadcasts produced a fake reality of freedom fighter victories and army defections. Arbenz asked the UN to send fact finders, but Washington prevented that from happening. American journalists, with the exception of James Reston, supported the lies. Washington threatened and bought off Guatemala’s senior military commanders, who forced Arbenz to resign. The CIA’s chosen and well paid “liberator,” Col. Castillo Armas, was installed as Arbenz’s successor.

We recently witnessed a similar operation in Ukraine.

President Eisenhower thanked the CIA for averting “a Communist beachhead in our hemisphere,” and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles gave a national TV and radio address in which he declared that the events in Guatemala “expose the evil purpose of the Kremlin.” This despite the uncontested fact that the only outside power operating in Guatemala was the Dulles brothers.

What had really happened is that a democratic and reformist government was overthrown because it compensated United Fruit Company for the nationalization of the company’s fallow land at a value listed by the company on its tax returns. America’s leading law firm or perhaps more accurately, America’s foreign policy-maker, Sullivan & Cromwell, had no intention of permitting a democratic government to prevail over the interests of the law firm’s client, especially when senior partners of the firm controlled both overt and covert US foreign policy. The two brothers, whose family members were invested in the United Fruit Company, simply applied the resources of the CIA, State Department, and US media to the protection of their private interests. The extraordinary gullibility of the American people, the corrupt American media, and the indoctrinated and impotent Congress allowed the Dulles brothers to succeed in overthrowing a democracy.

mlshsm8l-0mdgn7zps4hzw

Keep in mind that this use of the US government in behalf of private interests occurred 60 years ago long before the corrupt Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes. And no doubt in earlier times as well.

The Dulles brothers next intended victim was Ho Chi Minh. Ho, a nationalist leader, asked for America’s help in freeing Vietnam from French colonial rule. But John Foster Dulles, a self-righteous anti-communist, miscast Ho as a Communist Threat who was springing the domino theory on the Western innocents. Nationalism and anti-colonialism, Foster declared, were merely a cloak for communist subversion.

Paul Kattenburg, the State Department desk officer for Vietnam suggested that instead of war, the US should give Ho $500 million in reconstruction aid to rebuild the country from war and French misrule, which would free Ho from dependence on Russian and Chinese support, and, thereby, influence. Ho appealed to Washington several times, but the demonic inflexibility of the Dulles brothers prevented any sensible response. Instead, the hysteria whipped-up over the “communist threat” by the Dulles brothers landed the United States in the long, costly, fiasco known as the Vietnam War. Kattenburg later wrote that it was suicidal for the US “to cut out its eyes and ears, to castrate its analytic capacity, to shut itself off from the truth because of blind prejudice.” Unfortunately for Americans and the world, castrated analytic capacity is Washington’s strongest suit.

The Dulles brothers’ next targets were President Sukarno of Indonesia, Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba of Congo, and Fidel Castro. The plot against Castro was such a disastrous failure that it cost Allen Dulles his job. President Kennedy lost confidence in the agency and told his brother Bobby that after his reelection he was going to break the CIA into a thousand pieces. When President Kennedy removed Allen Dulles, the CIA understood the threat and struck first.

Warren Nutter, my Ph.D. dissertation chairman, later Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, taught his students that for the US government to maintain the people’s trust, which democracy requires, the government’s policies must be affirmations of our principles and be openly communicated to the people. Hidden agendas, such as those of the Dulles brothers and the Clinton, Bush and Obama regimes, must rely on secrecy and manipulation and, thereby, arouse the distrust of the people. If Americans are too brainwashed to notice, many foreign nationals are not.

The US government’s secret agendas have cost Americans and many peoples in the world tremendously. Essentially, the Foster brothers created the Cold War with their secret agendas and anti-communist hysteria. Secret agendas committed Americans to long, costly, and unnecessary wars in Vietnam and the Middle East. Secret CIA and military agendas intending regime change in Cuba were blocked by President John F. Kennedy and resulted in the assassination of a president, who, for all his faults, was likely to have ended the Cold War twenty years before Ronald Reagan seized the opportunity.

Secret agendas have prevailed for so long that the American people themselves are now corrupted. As the saying goes, “a fish rots from the head.” The rot in Washington now permeates the country.

Paul Craig Roberts


Henry Kissinger on the Assembly of a

New World Order

http://online.wsj.com/articles/henry-kissinger-on-the-assembly-of-a-new-world-order-1409328075?tesla=y

The concept that has underpinned the modern geopolitical era is in crisis

The concept of order that has underpinned the modern era is in crisis, writes Henry Kissinger. Above, a pro-Russian fighter stands guard at a checkpoint close to Donetsk, Ukraine in July. European Pressphoto Agency

Libya is in civil war, fundamentalist armies are building a self-declared caliphate across Syria and Iraq and Afghanistan’s young democracy is on the verge of paralysis. To these troubles are added a resurgence of tensions with Russia and a relationship with China divided between pledges of cooperation and public recrimination. The concept of order that has underpinned the modern era is in crisis.

The search for world order has long been defined almost exclusively by the concepts of Western societies. In the decades following World War II, the U.S.—strengthened in its economy and national confidence—began to take up the torch of international leadership and added a new dimension. A nation founded explicitly on an idea of free and representative governance, the U.S. identified its own rise with the spread of liberty and democracy and credited these forces with an ability to achieve just and lasting peace. The traditional European approach to order had viewed peoples and states as inherently competitive; to constrain the effects of their clashing ambitions, it relied on a balance of power and a concert of enlightened statesmen. The prevalent American view considered people inherently reasonable and inclined toward peaceful compromise and common sense; the spread of democracy was therefore the overarching goal for international order. Free markets would uplift individuals, enrich societies and substitute economic interdependence for traditional international rivalries.

In the Middle East, religious militias violate borders at will. Getty Images

This effort to establish world order has in many ways come to fruition. A plethora of independent sovereign states govern most of the world’s territory. The spread of democracy and participatory governance has become a shared aspiration if not a universal reality; global communications and financial networks operate in real time.

The years from perhaps 1948 to the turn of the century marked a brief moment in human history when one could speak of an incipient global world order composed of an amalgam of American idealism and traditional European concepts of statehood and balance of power. But vast regions of the world have never shared and only acquiesced in the Western concept of order. These reservations are now becoming explicit, for example, in the Ukraine crisis and the South China Sea. The order established and proclaimed by the West stands at a turning point.

First, the nature of the state itself—the basic formal unit of international life—has been subjected to a multitude of pressures. Europe has set out to transcend the state and craft a foreign policy based primarily on the principles of soft power. But it is doubtful that claims to legitimacy separated from a concept of strategy can sustain a world order. And Europe has not yet given itself attributes of statehood, tempting a vacuum of authority internally and an imbalance of power along its borders. At the same time, parts of the Middle East have dissolved into sectarian and ethnic components in conflict with each other; religious militias and the powers backing them violate borders and sovereignty at will, producing the phenomenon of failed states not controlling their own territory.

The challenge in Asia is the opposite of Europe’s: Balance-of-power principles prevail unrelated to an agreed concept of legitimacy, driving some disagreements to the edge of confrontation.

The clash between the international economy and the political institutions that ostensibly govern it also weakens the sense of common purpose necessary for world order. The economic system has become global, while the political structure of the world remains based on the nation-state. Economic globalization, in its essence, ignores national frontiers. Foreign policy affirms them, even as it seeks to reconcile conflicting national aims or ideals of world order.

This dynamic has produced decades of sustained economic growth punctuated by periodic financial crises of seemingly escalating intensity: in Latin America in the 1980s; in Asia in 1997; in Russia in 1998; in the U.S. in 2001 and again starting in 2007; in Europe after 2010. The winners have few reservations about the system. But the losers—such as those stuck in structural misdesigns, as has been the case with the European Union’s southern tier—seek their remedies by solutions that negate, or at least obstruct, the functioning of the global economic system.

The international order thus faces a paradox: Its prosperity is dependent on the success of globalization, but the process produces a political reaction that often works counter to its aspirations.

A third failing of the current world order, such as it exists, is the absence of an effective mechanism for the great powers to consult and possibly cooperate on the most consequential issues. This may seem an odd criticism in light of the many multilateral forums that exist—more by far than at any other time in history. Yet the nature and frequency of these meetings work against the elaboration of long-range strategy. This process permits little beyond, at best, a discussion of pending tactical issues and, at worst, a new form of summitry as “social media” event. A contemporary structure of international rules and norms, if it is to prove relevant, cannot merely be affirmed by joint declarations; it must be fostered as a matter of common conviction.

The penalty for failing will be not so much a major war between states (though in some regions this remains possible) as an evolution into spheres of influence identified with particular domestic structures and forms of governance. At its edges, each sphere would be tempted to test its strength against other entities deemed illegitimate. A struggle between regions could be even more debilitating than the struggle between nations has been.

The contemporary quest for world order will require a coherent strategy to establish a concept of order within the various regions and to relate these regional orders to one another. These goals are not necessarily self-reconciling: The triumph of a radical movement might bring order to one region while setting the stage for turmoil in and with all others. The domination of a region by one country militarily, even if it brings the appearance of order, could produce a crisis for the rest of the world.

A world order of states affirming individual dignity and participatory governance, and cooperating internationally in accordance with agreed-upon rules, can be our hope and should be our inspiration. But progress toward it will need to be sustained through a series of intermediary stages.

To play a responsible role in the evolution of a 21st-century world order, the U.S. must be prepared to answer a number of questions for itself: What do we seek to prevent, no matter how it happens, and if necessary alone? What do we seek to achieve, even if not supported by any multilateral effort? What do we seek to achieve, or prevent, only if supported by an alliance? What should we not engage in, even if urged on by a multilateral group or an alliance? What is the nature of the values that we seek to advance? And how much does the application of these values depend on circumstance?

For the U.S., this will require thinking on two seemingly contradictory levels. The celebration of universal principles needs to be paired with recognition of the reality of other regions’ histories, cultures and views of their security. Even as the lessons of challenging decades are examined, the affirmation of America’s exceptional nature must be sustained. History offers no respite to countries that set aside their sense of identity in favor of a seemingly less arduous course. But nor does it assure success for the most elevated convictions in the absence of a comprehensive geopolitical strategy.

—Dr. Kissinger served as national security adviser and secretary of state under Presidents Nixon and Ford. Adapted from his book “World Order,” to be published Sept. 9 by the Penguin Press.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/henry-kissinger-on-the-assembly-of-a-new-world-order-1409328075?tesla=y

Why isn’t this Piece of Shit Kissinger not in jail awaiting his execution for crimes against Humanity? Answer: Because he’s a ZIONIST ELITE


These Three Maps Show Just How Much Western Power Is Surrounding Syria Right Now

MICHAEL KELLEY, GEOFFREY INGERSOLL AND MIKE NUDELMAN AUG. 28, 2013, 5:39 PM

The U.S., despite lack of U.N. approval and growing demands for legal justifications, is determined to strike Syria in response to an Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack attributed to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Earlier we posted a Reuters map that listed the U.S., British, and French forces and bases that are positioned near Syria. But that doesn’t tell the whole story, since it does not illustrate what those assets are threatening.

So we added to it with information from maps created by Foreign Policy, Agence France-Presse, the Institute for the Study of War, The Telegraph and two via BBC in addition to highlighting U.S. military bases in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

Here’s what the Western assets in the arena currently look like:

Syria Map_Expanded

Mike Nudelman/Business Insider

SEE ALSO:  Unnamed US And Israeli Officials Say Intercepted Syrian Communications Prove Chemical Attack — UK Officials Draft UN Strike Resolution

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/map-of-western-forces-near-syria-2013-8#ixzz2dOxmi4Kp

 

22 Reasons Why Starting World War 3 In The Middle East Is A Really Bad Idea

Michael Snyder
Economic Collapse
August 28, 2013

USS Barry (DDG 52) launches a Tomahawk cruise missile March 29, 2011, in the Mediterranean Sea while operating in support of Operation Odyssey Dawn.

USS Barry (DDG 52) launches a Tomahawk cruise missile March 29, 2011, in the Mediterranean Sea while operating in support of Operation Odyssey Dawn.

While most of the country is obsessing over Miley Cyrus, the Obama administration is preparing a military attack against Syria which has the potential of starting World War 3.  In fact, it is being reported that cruise missile strikes couldbeginas early as Thursday“.  The Obama administration is pledging that the strikes will be “limited”, but what happens when the Syrians fight back?  What happens if they sink a U.S. naval vessel or they have agents start hitting targets inside the United States?  Then we would have a full-blown war on our hands.  And what happens if the Syrians decide to retaliate by hitting Israel?  If Syrian missiles start raining down on Tel Aviv, Israel will be extremely tempted to absolutely flatten Damascus, and they are more than capable of doing precisely that.  And of course Hezbollah and Iran are not likely to just sit idly by as their close ally Syria is battered into oblivion.  We are looking at a scenario where the entire Middle East could be set aflame, and that might only be just the beginning.  Russia and China are sternly warning the U.S. government not to get involved in Syria, and by starting a war with Syria we will do an extraordinary amount of damage to our relationships with those two global superpowers.  Could this be the beginning of a chain of events that could eventually lead to a massive global conflict with Russia and China on one side and the United States on the other?  Of course it will not happen immediately, but I fear that what is happening now is setting the stage for some really bad things.  The following are 22 reasons why starting World War 3 in the Middle East is a really bad idea…

#1 The American people are overwhelmingly against going to war with Syria…

Americans strongly oppose U.S. intervention in Syria’s civil war and believe Washington should stay out of the conflict even if reports that Syria’s government used deadly chemicals to attack civilians are confirmed, a Reuters/Ipsos poll says.

About 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria’s civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Barack Obama should act.

#2 At this point, a war in Syria is even more unpopular with the American people than Congress is.

#3 The Obama administration has not gotten approval to go to war with Syria from Congress as the U.S. Constitution requires.

#4 The United States does not have the approval of the United Nations to attack Syria and it is not going to be getting it.

#5 Syria has said that it will use ”all means available” to defend itself if the United States attacks.  Would that include terror attacks in the United States itself?

#6 Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem made the following statement on Tuesday

“We have two options: either to surrender, or to defend ourselves with the means at our disposal. The second choice is the best: we will defend ourselves”

#7 Russia has just sent their most advanced anti-ship missiles to Syria.  What do you think would happen if images of sinking U.S. naval vessels were to come flashing across our television screens?

#8 When the United States attacks Syria, there is a very good chance that Syria will attack Israel.  Just check out what one Syrian official said recently

A member of the Syrian Ba’ath national council Halef al-Muftah, until recently the Syrian propaganda minister’s aide, said on Monday that Damascus views Israel as “behind the aggression and therefore it will come under fire” should Syria be attacked by the United States.

In an interview for the American radio station Sawa in Arabic, President Bashar Assad’s fellow party member said: “We have strategic weapons and we can retaliate. Essentially, the strategic weapons are aimed at Israel.”

Al-Muftah stressed that the US’s threats will not influence the Syrain regime and added that “If the US or Israel err through aggression and exploit the chemical issue, the region will go up in endless flames, affecting not only the area’s security, but the world’s.”

#9 If Syria attacks Israel, the consequences could be absolutely catastrophic.  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is promising that any attack will be responded to “forcefully“…

“We are not a party to this civil war in Syria but if we identify any attempt to attack us we will respond and we will respond forcefully”

#10 Hezbollah will likely do whatever it can to fight for the survival of the Assad regime.  That could include striking targets inside both the United States and Israel.

#11 Iran’s closest ally is Syria.  Will Iran sit idly by as their closest ally is removed from the chessboard?

#12 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with Russia.  On Tuesday, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that the West is acting like a “monkey with a hand grenade“.

#13 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with China.  And what will happen if the Chinese decide to start dumping the massive amount of U.S. debt that it is holding?  Interest rates would absolutely skyrocket and we would rapidly be facing a nightmare scenario.

#14 Dr. Jerome Corsi and Walid Shoebat have compiled some startling evidence that it was actually the Syrian rebels that the U.S. is supporting that were responsible for the chemical weapons attack that is being used as justification to go to war with Syria…

With the assistance of former PLO member and native Arabic-speaker Walid Shoebat, WND has assembled evidence from various Middle Eastern sources that cast doubt on Obama administration claims the Assad government is responsible for last week’s attack.

You can examine the evidence for yourself right here.

#15 As Pat Buchanan recently noted, it would have made absolutely no sense for the Assad regime to use chemical weapons on defenseless women and children.  The only people who would benefit from such an attack would be the rebels…

The basic question that needs to be asked about this horrific attack on civilians, which appears to be gas related, is: Cui bono?

To whose benefit would the use of nerve gas on Syrian women and children redound? Certainly not Assad’s, as we can see from the furor and threats against him that the use of gas has produced.

The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war.

#16 If the Saudis really want to topple the Assad regime, they should do it themselves.  They should not expect the United States to do their dirty work for them.

#17 A former commander of U.S. Central Command has said that a U.S. attack on Syria would result in “a full-throated, very, very serious war“.

#18 A war in the Middle East will be bad for the financial markets.  The Dow was down about 170 points today and concern about war with Syria was the primary reason.

#19 A war in the Middle East will cause the price of oil to go up.  On Tuesday, the price of U.S. oil rose to about $109 a barrel.

#20 There is no way in the world that the U.S. government should be backing the Syrian rebels.  As I discussed a few days ago, the rebels have pledged loyalty to al-Qaeda, they have beheaded numerous Christians and they have massacred entire Christian villages.  If the U.S. government helps these lunatics take power in Syria it will be a complete and utter disaster.

#21 A lot of innocent civilians inside Syria will end up getting killed.  Already, a lot of Syrians are expressing concern about what “foreign intervention” will mean for them and their families…

“I’ve always been a supporter of foreign intervention, but now that it seems like a reality, I’ve been worrying that my family could be hurt or killed,” said one woman, Zaina, who opposes Assad. “I’m afraid of a military strike now.”

“The big fear is that they’ll make the same mistakes they made in Libya and Iraq,” said Ziyad, a man in his 50s. “They’ll hit civilian targets, and then they’ll cry that it was by mistake, but we’ll get killed in the thousands.”

#22 If the U.S. government insists on going to war with Syria without the approval of the American people, the U.S. Congress or the United Nations, we are going to lose a lot of friends and a lot of credibility around the globe.  It truly is a sad day when Russia looks like “the good guys” and we look like “the bad guys”.

What good could possibly come out of getting involved in Syria?  As I wrote about the other day, the “rebels” that Obama is backing are rabidly anti-Christian, rabidly anti-Israel and rabidly anti-western.  If they take control of Syria, that nation will be far more unstable and far more of a hotbed for terrorism than it is now.

And the downside of getting involved in Syria is absolutely enormous.  Syria, Iran and Hezbollah all have agents inside this country, and if they decide to start blowing stuff up that will wake up the American people to the horror of war really quick.  And by attacking Syria, the United States could cause a major regional war to erupt in the Middle East which could eventually lead to World War 3.

I don’t know about you, but I think that starting World War 3 in the Middle East is a really bad idea.

Let us hope that cooler heads prevail before things spin totally out of control.

 

Intelligence Suggests Assad Not Behind Chemical Weapons Attack

Intercepted phone calls indicate Syrian government did not order attack

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
August 28, 2013

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Intercepted phone calls that will be presented by the Obamaadministration as proof that Bashar Al-Assad was behind last week’s chemical weapons attack in Syria actually suggest that the attack was not ordered by the Syrian government.

Phone calls by the Syrian Ministry of Defense intercepted by Mossad and passed to the US reveal that Syrian government officials, “exchanged panicked phone calls with a leader of a chemical weapons unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike that killed more than 1,000 people,” in the hours after last week’s attack.

Why would the Syrian Ministry of Defense be making panicked phone calls “demanding answers” about the attack if they had ordered it?

The fact that the highest levels of the Syrian government apparently had no knowledge of the attack strongly suggests that they did not order it, with the worst case scenario being that the attack was “the work of a Syrian officer overstepping his bounds,” writes Foreign Policy’s Noah Shachtman.

“We don’t know exactly why it happened,” a US intelligence official told Foreign Policy. “We just know it was pretty fucking stupid.”

So despite not knowing exactly what happened, why it happened, or who ordered it, while sabotaging the UN’s investigation of the incident, the US is about to launch cruise missile attacks and potentially enflame the entireregion based on evidence that actually suggests the Syrian government had no idea who was behind the chemical weapons attack.

Meanwhile, previous evidence that suggests the US-backed rebels prepared and used chemical weapons on numerous occasions has been completely forgotten in the rush to war.

The last time the United Nations investigated evidence of chemical weapons use in Syria, inspectors concluded that it was likely the rebels and not Assad’s forces who were behind the attacks.

In addition, leaked phone conversations that emerged earlier this year between two members of the Free Syrian Army contain details of a plan to carry out a chemical weapons attack capable of impacting an area the size of one kilometer.

There are also multiple other examples of video footage which shows US-backed rebels preparing and using chemical weapons.

The notion that Washington has any credibility when it comes to laying blame about weapons of mass destruction is ludicrous.

The last time the world believed the United States’ claims about Iraq’s non-existent WMD, hundreds of thousands of innocent people died as a result.

The Obama administration is about to launch the United States headlong into a conflict that could spark a new war in the Middle East, yet the very justification for the assault is being blithely accepted by the mainstream media, who have learned nothing from how their obsequious and unquestioning behavior prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq helped grease the skids for a decade of bloodshed and disaster.

 

War Media Conjures Weapons of Mass Destruction Ahead of Obama’s Syria Attack

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 28, 2013

Time Magazine is calling for Obama to use Clinton’s illegal 1998 Operation Desert Fox bombing campaign as a template when he bombs Syria, possibly tomorrow. Clinton’s foray into organized mass murder – designed in part to distract from his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky – lasted four days and killed hundreds of Iraqis. According to the United States, a barrage of cruise missiles were fired into Iraq to “degrade” Saddam Hussein’s ability to produce weapons of mass destruction, weapons sold to him by the United States.

Hans Blix: western media pushing war agenda ahead of Syria attack.

Time says the “trigger” for the coming bombing of Syria will be its weapons of mass destruction and “use of chemical weapons in suburbs of the Syrian capital that killed hundreds of civilians,” an “indiscriminate” attack the United States and its corporate propaganda machine say al-Assad maliciously conducted despite the fact there is absolutely no evidence he did anything of the sort.

Time insists the attack will be “rooted in weapons of mass destruction” and will target Syria’s military infrastructure. “It’ll probably be aimed at Syria’s command-and-control systems, the forces who might have been involved in using it, and maybe expanded to include higher headquarters that would have coordinated the operations,” Jeffrey White, a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst now with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told Time.

The corporate war propaganda media invariably trots out neocons and other professional warmongers when it peddles excuses for mass murder under the threadbare banner of subjective and politically expedient humanitarianism. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, WINEP for short, is a “think tank” linked to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and its “scholars” are interchangeable with those over at the American Enterprise Institute and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, neocon operations responsible for pushing the invasion of Iraq (death toll: approximately 1.5 million).

“It’s a lot easier to declare ‘mission accomplished’ when your objective is to blow up command posts, weapons depots and runways, instead of hunting down and destroying weapons of mass destruction, which can be elusive,” Time reports.

In fact, so elusive were Iraq’s WMDs, they were never found. George W. Bush, amply demonstrating the personality quirks of a psychopath, went so far as to contrive a stand-up comedy routine after it was conclusively demonstrated Iraq did not have WMDs. Bush and his cronies knew this.

Following Clinton’s bombing the war media told us the Pentagon went out of its way to spare innocent civilians. “While numerous Ba’ath security, intelligence, and military targets were destroyed, power and telephone systems were spared,” Michael Knights writes for the Washington Institute.

Clinton avoided bombing “dual-use infrastructure” because his predecessor had taken it out a few years before and punitive and medieval sanctions – ultimately claiming the lives of more than 500,000 Iraqi children – made sure Iraq never recovered.

“Bombing of Iraqi cities served no military purpose but was designed to destroy the civilian infrastructure,”David Model wrote in 2005. “War games in July 1990 in South Carolina trained pilots to bomb civilian targets and Pentagon statements about plans to bomb civilian targets in August and September 1990 are evidence that these targets were set well in advance of January 15, 1991.

Critical elements of the civilian infrastructure were destroyed including communication systems, oil refineries, electric generators, water treatment facilities, dams, and transportation centers. Over 90 percent of Iraq’s electrical capacity was destroyed in the first days of the bombing.

One of the most diabolical decisions in the campaign was to destroy Iraq’s water supply, resulting in the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children long after the war was over. The capacity of Iraq to produce food was severely limited by the attacks on agriculture, food processing, food storage and the food distribution system. Half of Iraq’s agricultural output depended on irrigation systems which were also targeted.

Syria will be similarly targeted, but you won’t hear about it in the war propaganda media.

Time concludes:

There will be claims from Syria of innocent civilians killed (Desert Fox killed up to 2,000 Iraqis) and complaints from Syrian allies Iran and Russia that the strikes violated international law, predicts Anthony Cordesman, a military scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “But, at the end of it,” he says, “they probably won’t use chemical weapons again.”

That may be the good news, relatively speaking. The bad news is that there’s no idea of what comes next for Syria, already torn apart by a 30-month civil war that has killed an estimated 100,000 people, after the all-but-certain U.S. attack.

Time does not put the 100,000 figure in context – if indeed accurate, and we have no way to verify the number for certain, it is largely the result of a civil war fomented by the United States and the CIA with their dual-use al-Qaeda mercenaries. It is an engineered civil war designed to take out the government of Bashar al-Assad and usher in a generation or more of failed state chaos in Syria.

“The conditions in Iraq ten years after the invasion do not look bright,” writes Fatih Abdulsalam. “There are more signs of division rather than unity, more signs of separation rather than coming together in regard to almost everything in the country.”

Following Obama’s attack, and subsequent attacks after the first one will undoubtedly prove insufficient, Syria’s future will also not look bright.

Once again, weapons of mass destruction serve as a pretext for a different agenda – the destruction of Syria and its removal as a geopolitical player in the region, an area increasingly dominated by the United States and its regional surrogate, Israel.

Bombshell: Evidence Syrian Rebels Carried Out Gas Attack

“It’s one of the most serious moments in world history US has ever faced”

Julie Wilson
Infowars.com
August 28, 2013

In an interview with Alex Jones, American author and political commentator Dr. Jerome R. Corsi confirmed that Syrian rebels were behind the sarin gas attack in Syria last week. Video evidence and reliable Middle Eastern sources on the ground, Corsi says, prove Syrian rebels launched the attack in an attempt to take over the Syrian government.

He believes if the United States moves towards war with Syria it will surely result in World War 3.

After news broke of the alleged chemical weapons attack, Secretary of State John Kerry took to the stage giving a speech in which he called the attack a “cowardly crime” and a moral “obscenity.” Kerry claims to have “undeniable” proof of the Syrian government’s guilt, however unsurprisingly he failed to offer it to the public.

In an interview with a Russian newspaper, Syrian President Bashar Assad called the allegations “preposterous” and “completely politicized,” reported the LA Times. “How is it possible that any country would use chemical weapons, or any weapons of mass destruction, in an area where its own forces are located?”

Corsi argues several reasons for the US not to go to war with Syria. First off, the US cannot financially or economically sustain another war. “Russia and China are not borrowing $1 trillion a year to make their budget, and the world knows it,” said Corsi. Secondly, public opinion is not there, and it’s most likely not going to get there.

“The ramifications of getting into a shooting match with Russia and China is unpredictable,” said Dr. Corsi. “Risking a confrontation with Russia and possibly China is quite frightening and would become one of the most serious moments in US history.”

When Alex asked Dr. Corsi how Obama plans to get away with starting a war like this, he said Obama probably intends to continue “lying with impunity.”

A report by WND reveals evidence assembled from various Middle Eastern sources that “cast doubt on Obama administration claims the Assad government is responsible for last week’s attack.”

Photo: Dr. Jerome Corsi

Photo: Dr. Jerome Corsi

WND’s report says two YouTube videos show what looks like “Syrian rebel forces loading a canister of nerve gas on a rocket to fire presumably at civilians and possibly government forces.”

A screen capture from a Syrian TV report shows a chemical agent that appears to have been made in a “Saudi factory.” Another report from RT illustrates “captured rebel arsenals apparently with chemical agents manufactured in Saudi Arabia and gas masks,” support Russian claims that rebels are the culprits.

The report further states that an intercepted phone call between a terrorist affiliated with the rebel civilian militia and his Saudi Arabian boss indicates Syrian terrorists, not the Assad government, were behind the chemical weapons attack.

“The Syrian terrorist told him that one of the achievements of his “battalion” was the use of chemical weapons in Deir Ballba.

“The recorded phone call disclosed the cooperation between two terrorist groups in Syria to bring two bottles of Sarin Gas from the Barzeh neighborhood in Damascus,” reported WND.

 

In Rush to Strike Syria, US Tried to Derail UN Probe

by Gareth Porter

WASHINGTON – After initially insisting that Syria give United Nations investigators unimpeded access to the site of an alleged nerve gas attack, the administration of President Barack Obama reversed its position on Sunday and tried unsuccessfully to get the U.N. to call off its investigation.

The administration’s reversal, which came within hours of the deal reached between Syria and the U.N., was reported by the Wall Street Journal Monday and effectively confirmed by a State Department spokesperson later that day.

In his press appearance Monday, Secretary of State John Kerry, who intervened with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon to call off the investigation, dismissed the U.N. investigation as coming too late to obtain valid evidence on the attack that Syrian opposition sources claimed killed as many 1,300 people.

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”.

After the deal was announced on Sunday, however, Kerry pushed Ban in a phone call to call off the investigation completely.

The Wall Street Journal reported the pressure on Ban without mentioning Kerry by name. It said unnamed “U.S. officials” had told the secretary-general that it was “no longer safe for the inspectors to remain in Syria and that their mission was pointless.”

But Ban, who has generally been regarded as a pliable instrument of U.S. policy, refused to withdraw the U.N. team and instead “stood firm on principle”, the Journal reported. He was said to have ordered the U.N. inspectors to “continue their work”.

The Journal said “U.S. officials” also told the secretary-general that the United States “didn’t think the inspectors would be able to collect viable evidence due to the passage of time and damage from subsequent shelling.”

The State Department spokesperson, Marie Harf, confirmed to reporters that Kerry had spoken with Ban over the weekend. She also confirmed the gist of the U.S. position on the investigation. “We believe that it’s been too long and there’s been too much destruction of the area for the investigation to be credible,” she said.

That claim echoed a statement by an unnamed “senior official” to the Washington PostSunday that the evidence had been “significantly corrupted” by the regime’s shelling of the area.

“[W]e don’t at this point have confidence that the U.N. can conduct a credible inquiry into what happened,” said Harf, “We are concerned that the Syrian regime will use this as a delay tactic to continue shelling and destroying evidence in the area.”

Harf did not explain, however, how the Syrian agreement to a ceasefire and unimpeded access to the area of the alleged chemical weapons attack could represent a continuation in “shelling and destroying evidence”.

Despite the U.S. effort to portray the Syrian government policy as one of “delay”, the formal request from the United Nations for access to the site did not go to the Syrian government until Angela Kane, U.N. High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, arrived in Damascus on Saturday, as Ban’s spokesman, Farhan Haq, conceded in a briefing in New York Tuesday.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem said in a press conference Tuesday that Syria had not been asked by the United Nations for access to the East Ghouta area until Kane presented it on Saturday. Syria agreed to provide access and to a ceasefire the following day.

Haq sharply disagreed with the argument made by Kerry and the State Department that it was too late to obtain evidence of the nature of the Aug. 21 incident.

“Sarin can be detected for up to months after its use,” he said.

Specialists on chemical weapons also suggested in interviews with IPS that the U.N. investigating team, under a highly regarded Swedish specialist Ake Sellstom and including several experts borrowed from the Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons, should be able to either confirm or disprove the charge of an attack with nerve or another chemical weapon within a matter of days.

Ralph Trapp, a consultant on proliferation of chemical and biological weapons, said he was “reasonably confident” that the U.N. team could clarify what had happened.

“They can definitely answer the question [of] whether there was a chemical attack, and they can tell which chemical was used,” he said, by collecting samples from blood, urine and hair of victims. There was even “some chance” of finding chemical residue from ammunition pieces or craters where they landed.

Trapp said it would take “several days” to complete an analysis.

Steve Johnson, who runs a programme in chemical, biological and radiological weapons forensics at Cranfield University in the United Kingdom, said that by the end of the week the U.N. might be able to answer whether “people died of a nerve agent.”

Johnson said the team, if pushed, could produce “some kind of view” on that issue within 24 to 48 hours.

Dan Kastesza, a 20-year veteran of the U.S. Army Chemical Corps and a former adviser to the White House on chemical and biological weapons proliferation, told IPS the team will not be looking for traces of the nerve gas sarin in blood samples but rather chemicals produced when sarin degrades.

But Kastesza said that once samples arrive at laboratories, specialists could make a determination “in a day or two” about whether a nerve agent or other chemical weapons had been used.

The real reason for the Obama administration’s hostility toward the U.N. investigation appears to be the fear that the Syrian government’s decision to allow the team access to the area indicates that it knows that U.N. investigators will not find evidence of a nerve gas attack.

The administration’s effort to discredit the investigation recalls the George W. Bush administration’s rejection of the position of U.N. inspectors in 2002 and 2003 after they found no evidence of any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the administration’s refusal to give inspectors more time to fully rule out the existence of an active Iraqi WMD programme.

In both cases, the administration had made up its mind to go to war and wanted no information that could contradict that policy to arise.

© 2013 IPS North America

 

Obama Ignores Congress on Approval For Syria Attack

56 bipartisan House members demand President follow Constitution

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
August 28, 2013

The White House has so far failed to respond to a letter signed by 56 bipartisan members of Congress asking President Obama to get congressional approval for an attack on Syria, despite Obama himself affirming the constitutional necessity of such an authorization during his 2008 campaign.

The letter, written by Virginia Rep. Scott Rigell, strongly urges Obama, “to consult and receive authorization from Congress before ordering the use of U.S. military force in Syria, adding, “Your responsibility to do so is prescribed in the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973.”

It goes on to stress that launching an offensive act of war when the United States is not directly threatened with a green light from Congress is unconstitutional, citing Obama’s decision to order the use of “221 Tomahawk cruise missiles, 704 Joint Direct Attack Munitions, and 42 Predator Hellfire missiles,” against Libya in 2011 with zero congressional approval.

Rigell is asking Obama to reconvene Congress so that lawmakers can carefully study the evidence and the necessity for the United States to become directly embroiled in the conflict in Syria.

According to Rep. Rigell’s official Twitter page, 56 members of Congress from both parties have signed onto the letter, a number which is growing by the hour.

However, on Sunday, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., the top Democrat on the House Foreign Relations Committee, told Fox News that Congress would not be consulted on the move and that lawmakers would have to “assent” to it at a later date.

It’s highly unlikely that Obama will adhere to the constitution by seeking congressional approval for any assault on Syria given his attitude under similar circumstances before the 2011 attack on Libya.

When Obama faced criticism from Congress over the 2011 attack, he churlishly dismissed the issue, remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question,” before claiming that his authority came from NATO and the UN.

According to Congressman Walter Jones, this amounted to “an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.”

Obama’s hostility towards getting Congressional approval before launching military attacks in ironic given that both he and Vice President Joe Biden made reference to that very necessity during their 2008 campaign. “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” Obama said in 2008.

Passed after the Vietnam War, the War Powers Resolution states that the President’s powers as commander-in-chief should be “exercised only pursuant to a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization from Congress, or a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States.”

Obama’s rebuff of Congress during the attack on Libya was followed by former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s astounding claim that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military.

During a March 2012 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Panetta responded to a question about whether the administration would consult Congress before future conflicts by responding, “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”

The difference this time around is that Obama is not even bothering to claim his moral authority from the UN, never mind Congress, with the US indicating that it will launch cruise missile strikes within days without first obtaining a UN Security Council resolution.

 

WW3? Syrian, Iranian Officials Say Israel Will Be “Set On Fire” If US Strikes

Netanyahu calls up reserve forces; Huge US military build up in Qatar; Russia evacuates citizens from Syria
Steve Watson
Infowars.com
Aug 28, 2013

Senior Syrian and Iranian officials have again warned that should the US pursue military action in Syria, thestate of Israel will find itself firmly and immediately in their crosshairs.

“If Damascus comes under attack, Tel Aviv will be targeted too and a full-scale war against Syria will actually issue a license for attacking Israel,” said a Syrian army official in comments to Iran’s Fars News Agency.

“We are rest assured that if Syria is attacked, Israel will also be set on fire and such an attack will, in turn, engage Syria’s neighbors,” the official said, maintaining anonymity during the interview.

The army official also stated that if the US chooses to help Al Qaeda-linked jihadists in Syria, their will be significant blowback in Israel.

“Weakening the central government in Damascus will actually start growing attacks on Israel and will create insecurity for that regime,” he said.

“Thus, a U.S. attack on Syria will herald frequent strikes and attacks on Israel, not just by Damascus and its allies in retaliation, but by extremist groups who will find a ground for staging their aspirations,” the official added.

Senior Iranian officials echoed the comments, with Hossein Sheikholeslam, the director-general of the parliament for International Affairs telling Fars News that “the Zionist regime will be the first victim of a military attack on Syria.”

Iranian Member of Parliament Mansur Haqiqatpur was also quoted as saying that “In case of a U.S. military strike against Syria, the flames of outrage of the region’s revolutionaries will point toward the Zionist regime.”

The fresh threats come in the wake of similar comments made earlier in the week by Syrian Deputy Information Minister Halaf Al-Maftah who warned that Israel will “come under fire” should the United states strike against the Assad regime. He added that the Syrian government has “strategic weapons aimed at Israel,” and warned that “If the US or Israel err through aggression and exploit the chemical issue, the regionwill go up in endless flames, affecting not only the area’s security, but the world’s.”

Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom quoted Muftah as also warning “It’s possible to say unambiguously that a process of war against Syria could lead to an all-out world war. The responsibility for that will rest on the US and the Zionist entity’s shoulders.”

The Beirut Daily Star quoted a “senior source close to” Hezbollah as saying that in the event of major Western strike against Syria “Hezbollah will fight on various fronts,” and predicting an immediate “inferno of a war with Israel.”

Pro-Hezbollah cleric, Afif Nabulsi, who is closely aligned with the Syrian and Iranian governments, was also quoted as saying that “any [US] strike against Syria will be met by harsh responses against US interests in theregion and against Israel directly.”

Lebanese Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour stated in a radio interview that the country would retaliate if Israel “exploits a strike against Syria to attack Hezbollah.”

In response to the threats, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said “The State of Israel is ready for any scenario.” Following a meeting with security officials in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said “We are not part of the civil war in Syria, but if we identify any attempt whatsoever to harm us, we will respond and we will respond in strength.”

According to Israeli intelligence website DEBKAfile, the Israeli security cabinet held another emergency meeting today, ordering the partial mobilization of select, qualitative IDF reserve forces: Rocket, Air Force, missile interception, Home Defense command and intelligence units.

DEBKAfile’s military sources report that an American military operation on Syria is scheduled to start Friday night, early Saturday Aug. 30-31. The report adds that US forces are finalizing a a major buildup at the huge US Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar.

“US air force reinforcements in Qatar will stand ready to rush to the aid of US allies – Israel, Jordan and Turkey – in the event of their coming under Syrian Scud attack.” the report states, adding that on the opposite side the Syrian army has been scattering personnel, weapons and air assets to pre prepared fortified shelters in order to limit damage and losses.

“Syrian army command centers in Homs, Hama, Latakia and the Aleppo region were also being split up and dispersed, after a tip-off to Syrian and Russian intelligence that they would be targeted by the US strike.” the report adds.

The Associated Press also reports that Israel has ordered a special call-up of hundreds of reserve troops to beef up civil defense preparations and to operate air-defense units near the border. Defense officials have confirmed the deployment of Iron Dome and Patriot missile-defense batteries in areas near the Syrian border, stating that they believe a US strike on Syria is imminent.

Israeli security and rescue forces are also engaged in a two-day drill in the Golan Heights along the Syrian border.

The intelligence supposedly handed to the US and its allies suggesting that the Syrian army was involved in the chemical attacks last week is said to have come predominantly via Israeli intelligence agencies.

While Chinese and Russian officials continue to warn of the grave global consequences of a US strike on Syria, Russian citizens are currently being evacuated out of the country.

Meanwhile even firebrand broadcaster Glenn Beck has come out against intervention in Syria, warning that because of China and Russia’s alignment with Iran and Syria, a wider war in the middle east would mean that the US “would not survive”.

Beck warned that “this is World War 3 in the making,” noting the Obama administration is on the exact same destructive warpath that the Bush government set out on 12 years ago.

Beck desperately appealed to his conservative listener base to find common ground with real liberals and hold huge anti-war rallies.

Wall Street Journal: Whack al-Assad and His Family

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 28, 2013

In Mafia don fashion, the Wall Street Journal, on occasion correctly referred to as the War Street Journal, has called for whacking Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, his brother Maher and wife Asma, and apparently his children, Hafez, Zein and Karim.

Neocon hack for WSJ wants to kill this family. Photo: Camera Press

Neocon hack for WSJ wants to kill this family. Photo: Camera Press

“Should President Obama decide to order a military strike against Syria, his main order of business must be to kill Bashar Assad,” writes Bret Stephens. “Also, Bashar’s brother and principal henchman, Maher. Also, everyone else in the Assad family with a claim on political power. Also, all of the political symbols of the Assad family’s power, including all of their official or unofficial residences.”

Stephens, a favorite of the global elite (the World Economic Forum designated him a “Young Global Leader” in 2004), is a former editor of the Jerusalem Post, the neocon editorial outpost in Israel.

Bashar, his wife, and children must be butchered, Stephens argues, because the “world can ill-afford a reprise of the 1930s, when the barbarians were given free rein by a West that had lost its will to enforce global order.”

Indeed, the “barbarians were given free rein,” not by loss of will, but because of it as Antony Sutton and others have documented.

Hitler was a creature of German industrialists and Wall Street financiers, a fact ignored when the Nuremberg Military Tribunals hunted down, prosecuted and executed politically expedient scapegoats.

It is interesting how the neocon apologist Stephens is advocating something Nazi thugs and butchers were comfortable with – summary execution of entire families for alleged crimes containing political weight for his establishment paymasters.

Like Hillary Clinton’s witchy cackle upon learning that Col. Muammar Gaddafi was sodomized and then knifed to death as NATO and the United States systematically murdered 30,000 Libyans, Stephens’ cold-blooded proposition that Bashar al-Assad and his family must be murdered reeks of the sort of demented pathology that dominates the establishment media these days.

 

SYRIA: US AIDED TERRORISTS IN CHEMICAL ATTACK, EUROPE NEXT

Anthony Gucciardi

by Anthony Gucciardi
August 28th, 2013
Updated 08/28/2013 at 5:13 pm

In an explosive declaration, Syria’s deputy foreign minister has now come out on record in declaring that the US, Britain, and France were instrumental in aiding the chemical attacks on Syria through a network of terrorists inside the country.

I spoke earlier on this subject with Alex Jones on the Alex Jones Show to break it down:

Going further with the intel on the subject, the Syrian official now says that the next target will be Europe. Confirming earlier reports by myself and powerhouse journalist Paul Joseph Watson that there was a US government element involved in the planning of the key chemical attacks as documented by Yahoo News, the deputy foreign minister told reporters outside of the Four Seasons hotel in Damascus that he had even presented the United Nations chemical weapons inspectors with bombshell information that reveals the US helped in ‘arming terrorist groups’ to carry out the attacks

The admission is now featured on Reuters as a headline piece titled ‘Syria says ‘terrorists’ will strike Europe with chemical weapons’. The report goes on to state:

“Syria’s deputy foreign minister said on Wednesday that the United States, Britain and France helped “terrorists” use chemical weapons in Syria, and that the same groups would soon use them against Europe. Speaking to reporters outside the Four Seasons hotel in Damascus, Faisal Maqdad said he had presented U.N. chemical weapons inspectors with evidence that “armed terrorist groups” had used sarin gas in all the sites of alleged attacks.”

To break it down plainly, the deputy foreign minister is now adding power behind the January 2013 leaked emails that revealed plans for a major chemical attack as a pretext to war. Emails that, regardless of validity, detail the predictable patterns used to initiate war through orchestrated attacks. One such juggernaut was Yahoo News, which reported:

“The Obama administration gave green signal to a chemical weapons attack plan in Syria that could be blamed on President Bashar al Assad’s regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country, leaked documents have shown. As per the scheme ‘Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to usechemical weapons,’ the Daily Mail reports.”

Will this information be ignored by mainstream media talking heads and politicians despite its massive significance in the heated WW3-tied Syrian conflict? Unless we blast it out and force the mega news media to cover it, the answer is yes.

Read more: http://www.storyleak.com/syria-us-aided-terrorists-in-chemical-attack-europe-next/#ixzz2dP6Kjy5c

 

Syrians Scramble to Hide From Obama’s Humanitarian Love Bombs

“Every neighborhood has some government target. Where do we hide?”

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
August 28, 2013

Despite the US and Britain justifying an imminent attack on Syria in the name of “protecting civilians,” Syrians themselves are scrambling to hide from Obama’s humanitarian love bombs, with one Damascus resident telling Reuters, “We live in the capital. Every turn, every street, every neighborhood has some government target. Where do we hide?”

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Although a torrent of criticism has forced both Washington and London to move towards some kind of symbolic gesture involving the United Nations, a senior US official told NBC News today “we’re past the point of return” and that US air strikes against Syrian targets would inevitably occur “within days.”

That leaves thousands of Syrians living in major cities already ravaged by nearly two years of civil war and western-backed Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks looking up to the skies in anticipation of a fresh delivery of cruise missiles – all in the name of “protecting civilians” of course.

As Reuters reports, “dozens of military sites are mixed in among the civilian population,” meaning that western attacks will almost inevitably mean more loss of life, not to mention the wider threat of a new war in the Middle East.

Syrians have now begun hoarding supplies, including water, batteries, and food, with “the fear in people’s eyes” all too visible, while banks have been inundated with customers attempting to withdraw all their money.

People are fleeing in an effort to rent houses away from military sites, but many cannot afford skyrocketing prices in safer areas.

“What about my friend?” asked a woman whose family was lucky enough to be lent a house in a safe area. “Her whole family lives in this neighborhood. There is no place for them to go.”

With Syria about to become the 7th country to be on the receiving end of the Peace Prize winner’s humanitarian lovefest, let us not forget the fantastic success that this policy of taking a complex political problem and bombing it had in Libya.

Just as it did in Libya, the US is about to become “Al-Qaeda’s air force,” paving the way for extremist jihadists to seize power and turn Syria into their personal thug-rule thiefdom.

Two years after Obama’s love bombs rained down in Tripoli, Libya is now plagued by violence and chaos, has seen its economy collapse, is controlled by brutal tribes who imprison and torture their alleged political adversaries, and has become “the main base for Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb.”

Now it’s Syria’s turn to experience what happens to countries who dare assert their sovereignty by attempting to fight back against an invasion of NATO and Gulf state-supplied terrorists.

Those Syrians who do manage to hide from Obama and Cameron’s humanitarian love bombs may escape death but the future of their country might not be much worth living for.

 

Farage: UK govt keenest of all on Syria intervention, decision already made

RT
August 29, 2013

The British government is the most enthusiastic country in the entire international community to get involved in Syria, and the decision on intervention has already been made, believes leader of UK Independence Party Nigel Farage.

 

U.S. Admits It Has No Idea WHO Carried Out Syrian Chemical Weapons Attack

Washington’s Blog
August 29, 2013

Even though the U.S. government claims that the Syrian government is the perpetrator of the chemical weapons attack, it admits that it has no idea who in the government ordered the attack. It could have been a rogue, low-level military officer.

Credit: Sgt. Andrew D. Pendracki via Flickr

Credit: Sgt. Andrew D. Pendracki via Flickr

Foreign Policy reports:

With the United States barreling toward a strike on Syria, U.S. officials say they are completely certain that Bashar al-Assad’s government is responsible for last week’s chemical weapons attack. They just don’t know who in the Syrian government is to blame.

On Wednesday, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf admitted as much. “The commander-in-chief of any military is ultimately responsible for decisions made under their leadership, even if … he’s not the one that pushes the button or said, ‘Go,’ on this,” Harf said. “I don’t know what the facts are here….”

On Tuesday, The Cable reported that U.S. officials are basing theirassessment that the Assad regime bears responsibility for the strike largely on an intercepted phone call between a panicked Ministry of Defense official and a commander of a Syrian chemical weapons unit. But that intelligence does not resolve the question of who in the government ordered the strike ….

***

Because of that lack of clarity, Harf took a beating on Wednesday. In a testy exchange during her daily briefing, Harf very nearly admitted that it makes no difference who in the Syrian government ordered the attack, a reflection of the lack of certainty that still shrouds U.S. understanding of the chemical attack that may have left as many as 1,000 people dead.

In effect, Harf was left arguing that because no one else could have carried out the attack, it must have been the Syrian government. “The world doesn’t need a classified U.S. intelligence assessment to see the photos and the videos of these people and to know that the only possible entity in Syria that could do this to their own people is the regime,” she said.

Given that U.N. inspectors with a mandate to investigate chemical weapons use were on the ground when the attack happened, the decision to deploy what appears to have been a nerve agent in a suburb east of Damascus has puzzled many observers. Why would Syria do such a thing when it is fully aware that the mass use of chemical weapons is the one thing that might require the United States to take military action against it? That’s a question U.S. intelligence analysts are puzzling over as well. “We don’t know exactly why it happened,” the intelligence official said. “We just know it was pretty fucking stupid.”

Pressed on whether the United States would still consider itself justified in launching a punitive strike if the chemical weapons were deployed by a “rogue officer,” Harf said, “yes,” before quickly adding a caveat: “But that’s also a wildly conjecturous question.”

Given that American, British and other Western soldiers have pleaded guilty to massacring civilians and committing war crimes, should we condemn the entire Syrian regime if it turns out to be a crime carried out by one rogue officer?

 

Here’s What Candidate Obama Said About Military Intervention In 2007

Mike Krieger
Liberty Blitzkrieg
August 29, 2013

Q. In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites — a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)

Obama with his Nobel Peace Prize (Photo: Public Domain)

Obama with his Nobel Peace Prize (Photo: Public Domain)

Obama:  The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.

– Interview with Charlie Savage, December 20, 2007 (full text here)

Ok, so Obama lied again…what’s new.

Well what’s new is that launching missiles into Syria right now could lead to a much wider global conflagration, i.e. World War III.

I don’t think anybody wants that.

Or do they?

It actually seems as if the sociopaths in charge of these United States DO want this, and therefore we must do everything we can to prevent it from happening.

Not only is it key to inform people how ridiculous it is to say a chemical weapons attack is a reason for war when the U.S. government itself aided Saddam Hussein in chemical warfare in the 1980′s, but we must also explain to people that use of force in Syria is entirely unconstitutional.

While candidate Obama clearly understood this, President Obama is suffering from another case of chronic constitutional amnesia, a condition he developed on or around January 19, 2009.

This maniac, who we call President, is suddenly parading around like this war is his to start.

As if he is some sort of Emperor.

Well it is not, and he is not.

Somehow the Big O, our precious “constitutional scholar,” must have skipped over Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. If you need a reminder, here it goes:

U.S. Constitution – Article 1 Section 8

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;–And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Got that Barry? Go to Congress.

In Liberty,
Mike

 

Will War With Syria Cause The Price Of Oil To Explode Higher?

Michael Snyder
Economic Collapse
August 29, 2013

Are you ready to pay four, five or possibly even six dollars for a gallon of gasoline?

Credit: Flcelloguy via Wikimedia Commons

Credit: Flcelloguy via Wikimedia Commons

War has consequences, and a conflict with Syria has the potential to escalate wildly out of control very rapidly.

The Obama administration is pledging that the upcoming attack on Syria will be “brief and limited” and that the steady flow of oil out of the Middle East will not be interrupted.

But what happens if Syria strikes back?

What happens if Syrian missiles startraining down on Tel Aviv?

What happens if Hezbollah or Iran starts attacking U.S. or Israeli targets?

Unless Syria, Hezbollah and Iran all stand down and refuse to fight back, we could very easily be looking at a major regional war in the Middle East, and that could cause the price of oil to explode higher.

Syria is not a major oil producer, but approximately a third of all of the crude oil in the world is produced in the Middle East.

If the Suez Canal or the Persian Gulf (or both) get shut down for an extended period of time, the consequences would be dramatic.

The price of oil has already risen about 15% so far this summer, and war in the Middle East could potentially send it soaring into record territory.

We can always hope that cooler heads prevail and that a conflict is avoided, but at this point it does not look like that is going to happen.  In fact, according to Richard Engel of NBC News, a senior U.S. official has admitted that “we’re past the point of return” and that a strike on Syria can be expected within days.

Obama is promising that the U.S. will “take limited, tailored approaches”, and that we will not be “getting drawn into a long conflict, not a repetition of, you know, Iraq, which I know a lot of people are worried about”, but how in the world can he guarantee that?

Syria, Iran and Hezbollah have all threatened to attack Israel if the U.S. attacks Syria.

If missiles start raining down on Israeli cities, the Israelis are not just going to sit there and take it like they did during the first Gulf War.  In fact, according to the Los Angeles Times, “Israeli leaders are making it clear that they have no intention of standing down this time if attacked”.

If Israel is attacked, their military response will be absolutely massive.

And then we will have the major regional war in the Middle East that so many people have been warning about for so many years.  Hundreds of thousands of people will die and the global economy will be paralyzed.

So what will Obama do in such a situation?

Will he pack up and go home?

Of course not.  We would be committed to fighting a brutal, horrific war that there was absolutely no reason tostart in the first place.

And we are already starting to feel the effect of rising tensions in the Middle East.  This week, the price of oil rose to a 10-month high

U.S. oil prices soared to an 18-month high as traders worried that a potential military strike against Syria could disrupt the region’s oil supplies.

October crude futures surged 2.9%, to $109.01 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, their highest close since February 2012. Brent futures ended up 3.2% at $114.28 a barrel, a six-month high.

Posted below is a chart that shows how the price of oil has moved over the past several decades.  Could we soon break the all-time record of $147 a barrel that was set back in 2008?…

The Price Of Oil

And of course we all remember what happened when the price of oil got that high back in 2008.  The global economy was plunged into the worst downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

A major conflict in the Middle East, especially if it goes on for an extended period of time, could send the price of oil to absolutely ridiculous levels.

Every single day, a massive amount of oil is moved through the Suez Canal.  The following is from a recent Wall Street Journal article

To the southwest is the Suez Canal, one such chokepoint, which connects the Red Sea and the Gulf of the Suez with the Mediterranean Sea. The canal transports about 800,000 barrels of crude and 1.4 million barrels of petroleum products daily, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Another regional oil shipping route potentially threatened by the Syria crisis is the Sumed, or Suez-Mediterranean, pipeline, also in Egypt, which moves oil from the Persian Gulf region to the Mediterranean. The Sumed handles 1.7 million barrels of crude oil per day, the EIA said.

And of course an enormous amount of oil moves through the Persian Gulf each day as well.  If the Suez Canal and/or the Persian Gulf were to be shut down, there would almost immediately be global supply problems.

So how high could the price of oil go?

Well, according to CNBC, some analysts believe that $150 a barrel could easily be hit if the U.S. attacks Syria…

Some analysts believe even U.S. crude, West Texas Intermediate (WTI crude) could get close to the $150 zone. “If oil prices spike on the Syria attack, and surge above $120, the next logical upside target is going to be the 2008 high of $147, which could easily be taken out,” said John Kilduff of Again Capital. “It’s the retaliation to the retaliation that we have to be worried about.”

If the price of oil soars up to that level and keeps going, we could see the price of gasoline go up to four, five or maybe even six dollars a gallon in some areas of the country.

You better start saving up lots of gas money.

It looks like you are going to need it.

 

Russia Sends Warships to Mediterranean; Denies Syria Link

Missile cruiser & anti-submarine ship head to troubled region

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
August 29, 2013

The Russian Navy has denied that the dispatch of two warships to the eastern Mediterranean is linked to western military action against Syria, despite Interfax quoting a source in the armed forces’ general staff who said the deployment was in response to the “well-known situation”.

Image: Wikimedia Commons

As part of plans to have five or six vessels stationed in the region, initial reports stated that Russia had sent an anti-submarine ship and a missile cruiser to waters near Syria because the crisis “required us to make some adjustments” in the naval force, according to Interfax.

However, within hours a Russian Naval spokesperson told RIA Novosti that the maneuvers were part of planned rotation and not linked to the worsening situation in Syria.

“The vessels in the Mediterranean, like those in other parts of the world, act under plans by the Russian Naval Command and General Staff, and fulfil tasks set,” the Naval spokesperson said.

“On completion of these tasks, the vessels then either return to their bases, or are replaced by other vessels to complete the tasks set,” the spokesperson said, adding “This does not amount to a renewal of any grouping or groupings, it is a planned rotation.”

According to Ariel Cohen, a senior research fellow at the US think tank the Heritage Foundation, a western attack on Syria would prompt Russia to “deploy a permanent naval squadron in the Mediterranean and accelerate the search for naval bases and anchorages, such as Tartus and Latakiyeh in Syria.”

Russia has consistently supported the Syrian government and repeatedly vetoed efforts by Britain and the US to secure the green light for military intervention via the UN Security Council. Efforts by Downing Street to propose a new draft resolution that would have greased the skids for cruise missile attacks were rebuffed by Russia and China yesterday.

Both Russia and China have warned that a military attack on Syria would have “catastrophic consequences” for the region.

Obama’s Syria Attack Rationale Crumbles

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 29, 2013

New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice, stated the obvious on Wednesday — under the Constitution, only Congress can declare war.

Obama says he has not made a decision on attacking Syria.

Mr. Nadler’s concern was reflected in the following statement issued as Obama and a handful of warmongers, most notably Arizona Senator John McCain and South Carolina Senator Linsey Graham, prepared to attack Syria despite overwhelming opposition by the American people and Obama’s apparent vacillation:

The Constitution requires that, barring an attack on the United States or an imminent threat to the U.S., any decision to use military force can only be made by Congress — not by the President. The decision to go to war — and we should be clear, launching a military strike on another country, justified or not, is an act of war — is reserved by the Constitution to the American people acting through their elected representatives in Congress.

Since there is no imminent threat to the United States, there is no legal justification for bypassing the Constitutionally-required Congressional authorization. “Consultation” with Congress is not sufficient. The Constitution requires Congressional authorization.

The American people deserve to have this decision debated and made in the open, with all the facts and arguments laid out for public review and debate, followed by a Congressional vote. If the President believes that military action against Syria is necessary, he should immediately call Congress back into session and seek the Constitutionally-required authorization.

Meanwhile, House Speaker John Boehner has called on Obama to provide a rationale for attacking Syria. Boehner and a growing number of other members of Congress are demanding an explanation ahead of a military attack. Obama needs to provide “a clear, unambiguous explanation of how military action — which is a means, not a policy — will secure U.S. Objectives,” Boehner said in a letter to Obama.

“We should ascertain who used the weapons and we should have an open debate in Congress over whether the situation warrants U.S. involvement. The Constitution grants the power to declare war to Congress, not the president,” said Kentucky Senator Rand Paul on Wednesday.

Congress is currently on recess and will have the option of connecting to a briefing on Thursday by the Obamaadministration on the planned attack via a secured line.

Officialdom Admits No Evidence of Syrian Complicity in Chemical Attack Exists

Intelligence officialdom in the United States now believes the claim that the Syrian government used chemical weapons on civilians is not a “slam dunk,” a basketball phrase used by former CIA director George Tenet in 2002 to describe Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction that in fact did not exist and the government knew didn’t exist.

On Thursday, congressional committees were briefed on a report “thick with caveats” from the Office of the Director for National Intelligence making a case that al-Assad’s military used chemical weapons. Despite Secretary of State John Kerry’s assertion earlier this week that it is “undeniable” al-Assad used chemical weapons, the report states there is no direct evidence the Syrian military is responsible for the attack.

“U.S. intelligence officials are not so certain that the suspected chemical attack was carried out on Assad’s orders, or even completely sure it was carried out by government forces, the officials said,” the Associated Press reports today.

The New York Times admitted the Obama administration faces “steep hurdles” as it “prepares to make the most important public intelligence presentation since February 2003, when Secretary of State Colin L. Powell made a dramatic and detailed case for war to the United Nations Security Council using intelligence — later discredited — about Iraq’s weapons programs.”

As usual, the New York Times is letting a demonstrated war criminal off the hook easy. Powell in fact knew Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction and not only embellished dubious intelligence reports, but outright lied about them as Bob Woodward noted in his book, Plan of Attack.

If the New York Times is around in ten years – and it might go away because dead tree dinosaurs eventually reach their nadir – it will probably conjure up likewise excuses for Secretary of State John Kerry and his “undeniable” evidence that is now crumbling.

Syria resolution authorizing military force fails in U.N. Security Council

Updated at 4:48 p.m. ET

UNITED NATIONS The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council failed to reach an agreement Wednesday on a British-proposed resolution that would authorize the use of military force against Syria, as the U.N. chief pleaded for more time for diplomacy.

Play VIDEO

Family flees Syria for third time

Play VIDEO

Would U.S. strike Syria without the U.N.?

Play VIDEO

U.S. strengthens case for military strike against Syria

Play VIDEO

Intercepted communications, tissue samples prove Syrian regime responsible for gas attack

Play VIDEO

Syrian opposition ready for U.S. intervention

The draft resolution — if it were to be put to a vote — would almost certainly be vetoed by Russia and China, which have blocked past attempts to sanction President Bashar Assad’s regime.

Late Wednesday, Britain’s mission to the U.N. said no decision had been made on moving forward with its resolution, CBS News foreign affairs analyst Pamela Falk reports from U.N. headquarters in New York.

After the council fell short of reaching an agreement, State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf told reporters in Washington that the U.S. sees "no avenue forward" given Russia’s past opposition to action by the council on Syria.

"We’ve consistently said that we support U.N. Security Council action," Harf told reporters. "Instead, what we’ve seen, not just today, not just last week, but over the course of many months, is the Russians at every move doing things to fail to hold the Syrian regime accountable."

Britain put forth the proposal Wednesday as momentum seemed to be building among Western allies for a strike against Syria. U.S. officials, including Vice President Joe Biden, have charged that Assad’s government used deadly chemical weapons near Damascus last week.

The U.S. has not presented concrete proof, and U.N. inspectors currently in Syria to investigate alleged chemical attacks have not endorsed the allegations.

The American government’s assessment is based on the circumstantial evidence from videos posted on the Internet, and, as CBS News correspondent David Martin reported Tuesday, intelligence – much of it still classified – ranging from intercepted Syrian communications to tests of tissue samples taken from victims.

The U.N. envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, said Wednesday that evidence suggests some kind of "substance" was used that killed hundreds on Aug. 21.

Falk reports that the five permanent members of the Security Council met in a closed-door, informal meeting to discuss the U.K. resolution Wednesday morning, with Russia and China leaving after an hour and the U.S., France and the U.K. remaining for another hour.

None of the countries’ representatives, including U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power and British Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant, commented on a plan to move forward.

After the ambassadors met, the draft resolution was being sent back to their governments for consultations, according to a Western diplomat, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private.

The diplomat said Russia reiterated its objections to international intervention in the Syrian crisis.

A spokesman for British Prime Minister David Cameron said in London that the British draft resolution would authorize "all necessary measures under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter to protect civilians from chemical weapons."

Chapter 7 allows the use of international armed force to back up U.N. decisions.

12 PHOTOS

Portraits of Syria’s displaced

Speaking Wednesday from The Hague, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said no action should be taken until the U.N. chemical weapons inspectors finish their work.

"Let them conclude … their work for four days and then we will have to analyze scientifically" their findings and send a report to the Security Council, he said.

The U.N. said the analysis would be done "as quickly as possible."

Ban also pleaded for more time to give diplomacy another chance to end the more than two-year conflict that has killed more than 100,000 people.

But the secretary-general added that the Security Council must not go "missing in action."

Meanwhile, U.N. chemical weapons experts on Wednesday took biological samples from several victims of last week’s purported attack, activists said Wednesday.

11 PHOTOS

Syrian refugees – what they carried

Fear of a dramatic escalation in the two-and-a-half-year conflict prompted some 6,000 Syrians to flee into Lebanon over a 24-hour period, or more than six times the average daily flow.

A jittery Israel ordered a special call-up of reserve troops Wednesday as residents lined up at gas-mask distribution centers, preparing for possible hostilities with Syria.

A week after the purported attack, momentum has been building for a possible strike by the U.S. and its allies against the Assad regime.

At the same time, Syria’s main allies Russia and Iran warned of dire consequences for the region if a military intervention is launched.

Syria, which sits on one of the world’s largest stockpiles of chemical weapons, has denied the charges.

Local opposition activists told CBS News that a convoy of U.N. inspectors had reached the town of Mleiha, in the sprawling Ghouta area, and videos posted online by the activists showed them interviewing patients at clinics in Mleiha and the nearby town of Zamalka.

One video showed the inspectors visiting a clinic and interviewing a man through a translator. Two inspectors were present as a nurse leaned over a man lying on an exam table. One of the experts is heard in the video saying he and his team members have collected blood, urine and hair samples.

One activist said the team took hair and skin samples of five suspected victims in Zamalka during a 90-minute visit. He spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of regime reprisals.

The U.N. team in Syria did not issue a statement about Wednesday’s trip.

26 PHOTOS

The toll of Syria’s war

Marking the centenary of a venue for peaceful conflict resolution, the U.N.’s Ban said: "Here in the Peace Palace, let us say: Give peace a chance. Give diplomacy a chance. Stop fighting and start talking."

The growing fear of escalation sent wider ripples across the region.

Lebanese security officials in the country’s Bekaa Valley near the border with Syria said at least 6,000 Syrians have crossed into Lebanon in the past 24 hours through the main Masnaa border crossing, including an estimated 4,000 on Wednesday.

The normal daily rate is 500 to 1,000 Syrian refugees coming to Lebanon, depending on the level of fighting.

20 PHOTOS

Two years of strife in Syria

Witnesses said they saw long lines of cars packed with families and belongings at the crossing. There was also traffic in the other direction — a security official said around 2,000 crossed into Syria on Wednesday — but many of them said they were going in to evacuate relatives from Syria.

Um Ahmad, 45, crossed to Lebanon with her five children Wednesday, fearing U.S. strikes on Damascus.

"Isn’t it enough, all the violence and fighting that we already have in the country, now America wants to bomb us, too?" she said, declining to give her full name for security concerns.

Her husband said they have no one in Lebanon but came anyway because of their children. "What will we do here, where will we go? I don’t know — but hopefully we’ll be safe."

Nearly 2 million Syrians have fled their country since the crisis began in March 2011, and millions more are displaced inside Syria.

14 PHOTOS

Wounded Syrians treated in Israel

In Israel, the government ordered a "limited" call-up of reserve units to beef up civil defense preparations and to operate air-defense units near the border. Officials said the call-up is anticipated to bring in "hundreds" of troops.

Israel fears that Syria may respond by attacking the Jewish state, a close American ally. While Israeli officials believe the chances of a Syrian strike remain slim, people were clearly preparing for the possibility.

Large crowds lined up at gas-mask distribution centers. Maya Avishai of the Israeli postal service, which oversees gas mask distribution, said demand has tripled in recent days. About five million Israelis, roughly 60 percent of the population, now have gas masks, she said.

Jordan, meanwhile, said it will not be used as a launching pad for attacks on Syriaand the kingdom favors a diplomatic solution to the crisis. A U.S.-led strike would involve cruise missile attacks from the sea, which would not need to cross or make use of Jordanian territory.

But the remarks underline the U.S. ally’s efforts to avoid further friction with its larger neighbor for fear that Assad or his Iranian backers could retaliate.

The remarks come a day after Jordan hosted a meeting of top commanders from Western and Middle Eastern countries, including some that are likely to participate in a military action.

"Jordan will not be a launching pad for any military action against Syria," said Information Minister Mohammad Momani.

NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in a statement that any use of chemical weapons is unacceptable and a threat to international peace and security.

He stopped short, however, of squarely putting the responsibility on the Assad regime, citing only "information available from a wide variety of sources" as pointing to the Syrian regime as being behind the attack.

Two of Syria’s staunchest backers, Iran and Russia, warned of dire consequences if the U.S. and its allies attack in Syria.

Such strikes "will lead to the long-term destabilization of the situation in the country and the region," said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Wednesday that attacking Syria would be catastrophic for the entire Middle East.

"Intervention of foreign and extra-regional powers in a country has no result other than sparking fire," Iran’s state TV quoted Khamenei as saying. "Waging a war is like a spark in a gunpowder store … its dimensions and consequences can’t be predicted."

Thousands Of Companies Have Been Handing Over Your Personal Data To The NSA


Thousands Of Companies Have Been Handing Over Your Personal Data To The NSA

mural_logos_24

Michael Snyder
Economic Collapse
June 15, 2013

It isn’t just Internet and phone companies that are giving your personal information to the U.S. government.  According to an astounding reportby Bloomberg, “four people familiar with the process” say that “makers of hardware and software, banks, Internet security providers, satellite telecommunications companies” and a whole host of other sources are handing over your personal data to federal agencies.  The truth is that there is so much more to this NSA snooping scandal than the American people know so far.  When U.S. Representative Loretta Sanchez said that what Edward Snowden had revealed was “just the tip of the iceberg“, she wasn’t kidding.  The U.S. government is trying to collect as much information about everyone on the planet as it possibly can.  And this incredibly powerful intelligence machine is not going to go away just because a few activists get upset about it.  The United States government spendsmore than 80 billion dollars a year on intelligence programs.  Those that have spent their careersconstructing this monolithic intelligence apparatus are doing to defend it to the bitter end, as will the corporate partners in the private sector that rake in enormous profits thanks to big fat government contracts.  But if the American people don’t stand up and demand change now, it is going to be a signal to those doing the snooping that they can push the envelope even more because nobody is going to stop them.

So why are thousands of companies handing over your personal data to the NSA?  Well, according to Bloomberg they are getting things in return…

Thousands of technology, finance and manufacturing companies are working closely with U.S. national security agencies, providing sensitive information and in return receiving benefits that include access to classified intelligence, four people familiar with the process said.

These programs, whose participants are known as trusted partners, extend far beyond what was revealed by Edward Snowden, a computer technician who did work for the National Security Agency. The role of private companies has come under intense scrutiny since his disclosure this month that the NSA is collecting millions of U.S. residents’ telephone records and the computer communications of foreigners from Google Inc (GOOG). and other Internet companies under court order.

Thanks to the recent revelations by Edward Snowden, much of the focus so far has been on the information that the NSA gets from Internet and telecommunications companies, but apparently government agencies collect information about all of us from a vast array of sources…

Makers of hardware and software, banks, Internet security providers, satellite telecommunications companies and many other companies also participate in the government programs. In some cases, the information gathered may be used not just to defend the nation but to help infiltrate computersof its adversaries.

Along with the NSA, the Central Intelligence Agency (0112917D), the Federal Bureau of Investigation and branches of the U.S. military have agreements with such companies to gather data that might seem innocuous but could be highly useful in the hands of U.S. intelligence or cyber warfare units, according to the people, who have either worked for the government or are in companies that have these accords.

We have become a “surveillance society”, and this is exactly the sort of thing that the Fourth Amendment was supposed to protect us against.  The government is only supposed to invade our privacy and investigate us when there is probable cause to do so.

But now the government is trying to collect as much information about all of us as it possibly can even though the vast majority of us will never be charged with any crime.

There seems to be no limit when it comes to how much personal data the government wants to gather on all of us.  As I have written about previously, the chief technology officer at the CIA says that they “fundamentally try to collect everything and hang onto it forever.”

And this does not just apply to American citizens.  The U.S. government is compiling data on everyone on the planet.  And since such a high percentage of Internet traffic flows through U.S. networks and U.S. companies, that gives the U.S. intelligence community a tremendous “home-field advantage”.  The following is from a recent piece authored by Ronald Deibert, a professor of political science at the University of Toronto…

While cyberspace may be global, its infrastructure most definitely is not.

For example, a huge proportion of global Internet traffic flows through networks controlled by the United States, simply because eight of 15 global tier 1 telecommunications companies are American — companies like AT&T, CenturyLink, XO Communications and, significantly, Verizon.

The social media services that many of us take for granted are also mostly provided by giants headquartered in the United States, like Google, Facebook, Yahoo! and Twitter. All of these companies are subject to U.S. law, including the provisions of the U.S. Patriot Act, no matter where their services are offered or their servers located. Having the world’s Internet traffic routed through the U.S. and having those companies under its jurisdiction give U.S. national security agencies an enormous home-field advantage that few other countries enjoy.

But what is really the point of all of this intelligence gathering?

Is it to make us a little bit safer?

If so, we are making a massive mistake.

Benjamin Franklin once wrote the following: “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Are you willing to give up your Fourth Amendment rights in order to feel a little more safe?

I hope not.

The U.S. Constitution never guaranteed us safety.  But it is supposed to guarantee our privacy.

Fortunately, it appears that at this point public opinion is very much against all of the snooping that the government has been doing.  According to the Guardian, most of the recent surveys that have been done are coming up with very consistent results…

Thursday, the Guardian released a poll conducted on Monday and Tuesday nights by Public Policy Polling looking at America’s reaction to the National Security Agency (NSA) controversy. The public appears to be reacting negatively to the revelations – and it seems to be hurting President Obama.

We found 50% of American voters believe the NSA should not be collecting telephone or internet records, compared to the 44% who think they should. The results hold even when respondents were told that the data the government is collecting is “metadata” (and not necessarily actual content of communications).

These results are consistent with a CBS News poll,Fox News poll, and YouGov survey that showed only 38%, 32%, and 35% of Americans respectively approved of phone record collection in order to reduce the chance of a terrorist attack. A Gallup poll was consistent with these, showing only 37% approved monitoring of Americans’ phone and internet use.

And Americans also seem to be very suspicious about what the government will do with our personal data once they have it.

In fact, according to a new Rasmussen survey, 57 percent of Americans believe that the government will use the information that it collects “to harass political opponents”.

And of course many of the recent scandals that have erupted this year involve the government harassing political opponents.  We have seen this with the IRS scandal, and we have seen this with the spying on reporters scandal.

Just this week it was reported that CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson has had her computers hacked repeatedly.  If you are not familiar with Attkisson, she is the one reporter in the mainstream media that has been relentless when it has come to pursuing the Operation Fast and Furious and Benghazi stories.  Now we are learning that a “sophisticated” intruder hacked into her computer “on multiple occasions” in late 2012

CBS News announced Friday that correspondent Sharyl Attkisson’s computer was hacked by “an unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions,” confirming Attkisson’s previous revelation of the hacking.

CBS News spokeswoman Sonya McNair said that a cybersecurity firm hired by CBS News “has determined through forensic analysis” that “Attkisson’s computer was accessed by an unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions in late 2012.”

“Evidence suggests this party performed all access remotely using Attkisson’s accounts. While no malicious code was found, forensic analysis revealed an intruder had executed commands that appeared to involve search and exfiltration of data. This party also used sophisticated methods to remove all possible indications of unauthorized activity, and alter system times to cause further confusion. CBS News is taking steps to identify the responsible party and their method of access.”

Meanwhile, in a desperate attempt to deflect attention away from all of these scandals, Barack Obama is starting a war with Syria.

In this war, we are actually going to be helping al-Qaeda rebels that arebeheading Christians to take over Syria.

If you aren’t aware of the deep connection between al-Qaeda and the Syrian rebels, just read the recent USA Today article entitled “Syrian rebels pledge loyalty to al-Qaeda” or any of the dozens of other articles that you can find on the Internet that document this very clearly.

And the sick thing is that a large number of Republicans are actually applauding Barack Obama for teaming up with al-Qaeda.

Has it suddenly become “conservative” to help al-Qaeda?

What in the world is going on?

And you know what?

The truth was that our troops were in position long before Barack Obama made his “stunning announcement” on Thursday.  In fact, it hasbeen confirmed that U.S. troops are already in Jordan along the Syrian border.

And could this conflict with Syria actually set the stage for a much larger conflict?

The Russians have been providing “mortars, light artillery, antiaircraft guns, antitank weapons and ammunition” to the Syrian government and they have loudly denounced the latest moves by the Obama administration.

Yes, the Assad government is horrible, but what Obama is doing in Syria is a terrible, terrible mistake.

If the U.S. takes down the Assad government, forces loyal to al-Qaeda and other radical jihadists are going to take over and we will have made Russia and China very angry.  If the U.S. is unsuccessful in removing the Assad government, it will be considered a crushing defeat for the United States.

Either way, we lose.

 

Democrats and Republicans Agree: America’s Stasi Surveillance State is a Good Thing

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
June 15, 2013

On Friday Rasmussen Reports released a poll finding that nearly 60 percent of Americans think the government will use data illegally collected by the NSA to go after political opponents. It also found that there “is little public support for the sweeping and unaccountable nature of the National Security Agency surveillance program along with concerns about how the data will be used.”

If we accept the validity of this latest poll – or any establishment poll – it would be fair to say most Americans understand that surveillance is not used to protect us from foreign enemies in the fake war on terrorism.

Earlier in the week this is exactly what Rep. Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican, and the Republican senator from Georgia Saxby Chambliss, told us. Rogers said that converting the United States into a high-tech version of Stasi Germany has resulted in “changes we can already see being made by the folks who wish to do us harm, and our allies harm.” Rogers added that recent revelations by Booz Allen Hamilton analyst Edward Snowden “make it harder to track bad guys trying to harm U.S. citizens in the United States.”

The American people might be opposed to the NSA surveillance program, but there is overwhelming consensus in favor of it in Washington. The Democrat intelligentsia in the Mockingbird media, especially the Obama partisans, have lined up in favor of trampling on the rights of American citizens.

“I’ve been amazed and disappointed for a long time at how the most slavishly partisan media Democrats who pretended to care so much about these issues when doing so helped undermine George Bush are now the loudest apologists and cheerleaders for these very same policies,” Glenn Greenwald, who broke the NSA story, said on Tuesday. “If they started a club called Liberal Pundits to Defend the National Security State, no auditorium in the country would be large enough to accommodate them.”

This was underscored on Monday when another poll showed that Democrats love the Stasi state. Support for tyranny depends on what side of the establishment party is in the White House. “With President Obama in the White House, Democrats stand in support of the NSA’s methods, 49% to 40% in the Gallupsurvey. Republicans were opposed 63% to 32%. When President George W. Bush was in office, Republicans were supportive of government surveillance efforts and Democrats opposed,” the Los Angeles Times reports.

This is not surprising, writes Justin Raimondo. “Now it is the liberals’ turn to justify the demolition of the Constitution, and especially to give the final push to take down that once-mighty and now greatly eroded bulwark against tyranny, the Bill of Rights. Anyone who is surprised by the alacrity with which they have taken up this task is unfamiliar with the history of American liberalism and the left in general.”

This takes us back to the Rasmussen Reports poll cited above. Most Americans know the surveillance state is used against political enemies, not phantasmal terrorists in caves. They understand that whatever side of the party is in power, it will use surveillance and dirty tricks to undermine the competition. In regard to enemies beyond the walls and out in the political hinterland, it will use the surveillance apparatus like a cudgel to destroy them. History is replete with examples of this from the FBI’s COINTELPRO and the CIA’s Operation CHAOS back to the dawning days of the nation when Federalist John Adams attempted to sabotage the Bill of Rights by signing the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 into law. (See Timeline of US Govt. Surveillance and Spying for more information on how the surveillance state has been used to harass and persecute political opponents.)

Rush Limbaugh may say the real danger is Obama, but that is a diversion. In early 2006, Limbaugh characterized illegal surveillance under Bush as “intercepts of the enemy” and said opponents were supporting an “al-Qaeda bill of rights.” Democrats and Republicans will continue to play political football in a larger game shaped by the establishment’s false left-right paradigm. Both support what the NSA is doing and the Stasi state will grow and flourish so long as Democrats and Republicans share power.

We are now very close to witnessing the final extinction of the Bill of Rights. This has been the goal of one-world totalitarians for some time. Over the last few years, we have documented the effort by the globalist intelligentsia – led by globalist operative Fareed Zakaria – to destroy the Constitution.

The NSA spy grid is designed to monitor and undermine the political activity of those of us who want to preserve the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It has absolutely nothing to do with al-Qaeda, a largely imaginary terrorist group that only surfaces in the United States due to a concerted patsy and public propaganda program led by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security.

 

The Next NSA Spying Shoe to Drop: “Pre-Crime” Artificial Intelligence

Washington’s Blog
June 17, 2013

NSA spying whistleblower Edward Snowden’s statements have been verified.    Reporter Glenn Greenwald has promised numerous additional disclosures from Snowden.

What other revelations are coming?

We reported in 2008:

A new article by investigative reporter Christopher Ketcham reveals, a governmental unit operating in secret and with no oversight whatsoever is gathering massive amounts of data on every American and running artificial intelligence software to predict each American’s behavior, including “what the target will do, where the target will go, who it will turn to for help”.

The same governmental unit is responsible for suspending the Constitution and implementing martial law in the event that anything is deemed by the White House in its sole discretion to constitute a threat to the United States. (this is formally known as implementing “Continuity of Government” plans). [Background here.]

As Ketcham’s article makes clear, these same folks and their predecessors have been been busy dreaming up plans to imprison countless “trouble-making” Americans without trial in case of any real or imagined emergency.  What kind of Americans? Ketcham describes it this way:

“Dissidents and activists of various stripes, political and tax protestors, lawyers and professors, publishers and journalists, gun owners, illegal aliens, foreign nationals, and a great many other harmless, average people.”

Do we want the same small group of folks who have the power to suspend the Constitution, implement martial law, and imprison normal citizens to also be gathering information on all Americans and running AI programs to be able to predict where American citizens will go for help and what they will do in case of an emergency? Don’t we want the government to — um, I don’t know — help us in case of an emergency?

Bear in mind that the Pentagon is also running an AI program to see how people will react to propaganda and to government-inflicted terror. The program is called Sentient World Simulation:

“U.S defense, intel and homeland security officials are constructing a parallel world, on a computer, which the agencies will use to test propaganda messages and military strategies.Called the Sentient World Simulation, the program uses AI routines based upon the psychological theories of Marty Seligman, among others. (Seligman introduced the theory of ‘learned helplessness’ in the 1960s, after shocking beagles until they cowered, urinating, on the bottom of their cages.)

Yank a country’s water supply. Stage a military coup. SWS will tell you what happens next.

The sim will feature an AR avatar for each person in the real world, based upon data collected about us from government records and the internet.”

The continuity of government folks’ AI program and the Pentagon’s AI program may or may not be linked, but they both indicate massive spying and artificial intelligence in order to manipulate the American public, to concentrate power, to take away the liberties and freedoms of average Americans, and — worst of all — to induce chaos in order to achieve these ends.

PBS Nova reported in 2009:

The National Security Agency (NSA) is developing a tool that George Orwell’s Thought Police might have found useful: an artificial intelligence system designed to gain insight into what people are thinking.

With the entire Internet and thousands of databases for a brain, the device will be able to respond almost instantaneously to complex questions posed by intelligence analysts. As more and more data is collected—through phone calls, credit card receipts, social networks like Facebook and MySpace, GPS tracks, cell phone geolocation, Internet searches, Amazon book purchases, even E-Z Pass toll records—it may one day be possible to know not just where people are and what they are doing, but what and how they think.

The system is so potentially intrusive that at least one researcher has quit, citing concerns over the dangers in placing such a powerful weapon in the hands of a top-secret agency with little accountability.

Known as Aquaint, which stands for “Advanced QUestion Answering for INTelligence” [which is run by the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA)], part of the new M Square Research Park in College Park, Maryland. A mammoth two million-square-foot, 128-acre complex, it is operated in collaboration with the University of Maryland. “Their budget is classified, but I understand it’s very well funded,” said Brian Darmody, the University of Maryland’s assistant vice president of research and economic development, referring to IARPA. “They’ll be in their own building here, and they’re going to grow. Their mission is expanding.”

***

In a 2004 pilot project, a mass of data was gathered from news stories taken from theNew York Times, the AP news wire, and the English portion of the Chinese Xinhua news wire covering 1998 to 2000. Then, 13 U.S. military intelligence analysts searched the data and came up with a number of scenarios based on the material. Finally, using those scenarios, an NSA analyst developed 50 topics, and in each of those topics created a series of questions for Aquaint’s computerized brain to answer. “Will the Japanese use force to defend the Senkakus?” was one. “What types of disputes or conflict between the PLA [People’s Liberation Army] and Hong Kong residents have been reported?” was another. And “Who were the participants in this spy ring, and how are they related to each other?” was a third. Since then, the NSA has attempted to build both on the complexity of the system—more essay-like answers rather than yes or no—and on attacking greater volumes of data.

“The technology behaves like a robot, understanding and answering complex questions,” said a former Aquaint researcher. “Think of 2001: A Space Odyssey and the most memorable character, HAL 9000, having a conversation with David. We are essentially building this system. We are building HAL.” A naturalized U.S. citizen who received her Ph.D. from Columbia, the researcher worked on the program for several years but eventually left due to moral concerns. “The system can answer the question, ‘What does X think about Y?’” she said. “Working for the government is great, but I don’t like looking into other people’s secrets.

A supersmart search engine, capable of answering complex questions such as “What were the major issues in the last 10 presidential elections?” would be very useful for the public. But that same capability in the hands of an agency like the NSA—absolutely secret, often above the law, resistant to oversight, and with access to petabytes of private information about Americans—could be a privacy and civil liberties nightmare. “We must not forget that the ultimate goal is to transfer research results into operational use,” said Aquaint project leader John Prange, in charge of information exploitation for IARPA.

Once up and running, the database of old newspapers could quickly be expanded to include an inland sea of personal information scooped up by the agency’s warrantless data suction hoses. Unregulated, they could ask it to determine which Americans might likely pose a security risk—or have sympathies toward a particular cause, such as the antiwar movement, as was done during the 1960s and 1970s. The Aquaint robospy might then base its decision on the type of books a person purchased online, or chat room talk, or websites visited—or a similar combination of data. Such a system would have an enormous chilling effect on everyone’s everyday activities—what will the Aquaint computer think if I buy this book, or go to that website, or make this comment? Will I be suspected of being a terrorist or a spy or a subversive?

World Net Daily’s Aaron Klein reported earlier this month:

In February, the Sydney Morning Herald reported the Massachusetts-based multinational corporation, Raytheon – the world’s fifth largest defense contractor – had developed a “Google for Spies” operation.

Herald reporter Ryan Gallagher wrote that Raytheon had “secretly developed software capable of tracking people’s movements and predicting future behavior by mining data from social networking websites” like Facebook, Twitter, and Foursquare.

The software is called RIOT, or Rapid Information Overlay Technology.

Raytheon told the Herald it has not sold RIOT to any clients but admitted that, in 2010, it had shared the program’s software technology with the U.S. government as part of a “joint research and development effort … to help build a national security system capable of analyzing ‘trillions of entities’ from cyberspace.”

In April, RIOT was reportedly showcased at a U.S. government and industry national security conference for secretive, classified innovations, where it was listed under the category “big data – analytics, algorithms.”

Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst for the ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project,argued …  that among the many problems with government large-scale analytics of social network information “is the prospect that government agencies will blunderingly use these techniques to tag, target and watchlist people coughed up by programs such as RIOT, or to target them for further invasions of privacy based on incorrect inferences.”

“The chilling effects of such activities,” he concluded, “while perhaps gradual, would be tremendous.”

Ginger McCall, attorney and director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s Open Government program, told NBC in February, “This sort of software allows the government to surveil everyone.

“It scoops up a bunch of information about totally innocent people. There seems to be no legitimate reason to get this, other than that they can.”

As for RIOT’s ability to help catch terrorists, McCall called it “a lot of white noise.”  [True … Big data doesn’t work to keep us safe.]

The London Guardian further obtained a four-minute video that shows how the RIOT software uses photographs on social networks. The images, sometimes containing latitude and longitude details, are “automatically embedded by smartphones within so-called ‘exif header data.’

RIOT pulls out this information, analyzing not only the photographs posted by individuals, but also the location where these images were taken,” the Guardian reported.
Such sweeping data collection and analysis to predict future activity may further explain some of what the government is doing with the phone records of millions of Verizon customers. [Background here.]

***

“In the increasingly popular language of network theory, individuals are “nodes,” and relationships and interactions form the “links” binding them together; by mapping those connections, network scientists try to expose patterns that might not otherwise be apparent,” reported the Times.[Background here.]

In February 2006, more than a year after Obama was sworn as a U.S. senator, it was revealed the “supposedly defunct” Total Information Awareness data-mining and profiling program had been acquired by the NSA.

The Total Information Awareness program was first announced in 2002 as an early effort to mine large volumes of data for hidden connections.

Aaron Klein reported last week that Snowden might have worked at the NSA’s artificial intelligence unit at the University of Maryland:

Edward Snowden, the whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations, told the London Guardian newspaper that he previously worked as a security guard for what the publication carefully described as “one of the agency’s covert facilities at the University of Maryland.”

***

Brian Ullmann, the university’s assistant vice president for marketing and communications, was asked for comment. He would not address the query, posed twice to his department by KleinOnline, about whether the NSA operates covert facilities in conjunction with the university.

Ullmann’s only comment was to affirm that Snowden was employed as a security guard at the university’s Center for the Advanced Study of Languages in 2005.

This is especially concerning given that the people who created the NSA spying program in the first place say that information gained through spying will be used to frame Americans that the government takes a dislike to.

Winston Churchill: War Hero or War Criminal?


Winston Churchill: War Hero or War Criminal?

Debate continues to rage about iconic leader

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
June 15, 2013

Winston Churchill led Britain to victory against the Nazi war machine, but debate continues to rage about whether he was responsible for overseeing atrocities that rival those ordered by Adolf Hitler.

History is written by the winners. Although there is lots to admire about Churchill’s bulldog spirit – and Brits are eternally grateful for his tenacious fight against the Nazis – much of Churchill’s dark past has been airbrushed out of history.

FURTHER READING

Rethinking Churchill

To gain any understanding of Churchill, we must go beyond the heroic images propagated for over half a century.

Churchill in ‘war crimes’ row

British bombing raids killed a thousand German civilians a day when World War II was already won, says the historian sparking debate on whether Churchill was a war criminal.

Germans call Churchill a war criminal

Winston Churchill was effectively a war criminal who sanctioned the extermination of Germany’s civilian population through indiscriminate bombing of towns and cities, an article in the country’s biggest-circulation newspaper claimed yesterday.

The bombing of Dresden

The morality of the Allied bombing campaign during the Second World War is still hotly debated. What should we feel about the decision to attack Dresden?

Why did the British start bombing civilians?

The RAF began the war with the policy of targeting enemy military or industrial targets. But then, early in 1942, that policy suddenly changed to embrace the deliberate destruction of civilians. Why?

CHURCHILL IN HIS OWN WORDS

(During first World War): “Perhaps the next time round the way to do it will be to kill women, children and the civilian population.”

Churchill on defending the morality of bombing from the air: “Now everyone’s at it. It’s simply a question of fashion – similar to that of whether short or long dresses are in.”

“I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes.”
Writing as president of the Air Council, 1919.

“It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the east, striding half naked up the steps of the viceregal palace, while he is still organising and conducting a campaign of civil disobedience, to parlay on equal terms with the representative of the Emperor-King.”
Commenting on Gandhi’s meeting with the Viceroy of India, 1931.

“I do not admit… that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia… by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race… has come in and taken its place.”
Churchill to Palestine Royal Commission, 1937.

“The choice was clearly open: crush them with vain and unstinted force, or try to give them what they want. These were the only alternatives and most people were unprepared for either. Here indeed was the Irish spectre – horrid and inexorcisable.”
Writing in The World Crisis and the Aftermath, 1923-31.

“The unnatural and increasingly rapid growth of the feeble-minded and insane classes, coupled as it is with a steady restriction among all the thrifty, energetic and superior stocks, constitutes a national and race danger which it is impossible to exaggerate… I feel that the source from which the stream of madness is fed should be cut off and sealed up before another year has passed.”
Churchill to Asquith, 1910.

“One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations.”
From his Great Contemporaries, 1937.

“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”

ICONIC QUOTES

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”

“You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.”

“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”

“A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”

“Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.”

“The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”

“Never, never, never give up.”

“We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.”

*********************

Arrest Obama Under NDAA For Supporting Terrorists in Syria


Arrest Obama Under NDAA For Supporting Terrorists in Syria

President has violated section 1021 of act he signed into law

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
June 14, 2013

Under the terms of the National Defense Authorization Act that he personally signed into law, President Barack Obama should immediately be arrested and indefinitely detained for providing support to Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria.

President Barack Obama

Section 1021(b)(2) of the NDAA law allows for the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens on “suspicion of providing substantial support” to groups engaged in hostilities against the U.S. such as al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

The indefinite detention provision also applies to Americans who have given “substantial support” to terrorists or other “associated groups”.

Although the administration has attempted to differentiate between FSA militants and Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria, the two groups have become one and the same. Even if you make a distinction between the FSA and Jabhat al-Nusra terrorists in Syria, the FSA is still clearly an “associated group” under the terms of the NDAA.

By announcing that his administration will arm the Syrian rebels in anticipation of a no fly zone being imposed over areas of the country, President Barack Obama is giving direct support, aid and comfort to terrorists. Obama and his top administration officials clearly represent a national security threat to the interests of the United States and should immediately be arrested and detained under the NDAA.

The evidence that FSA militants in Syria are being led by Al-Qaeda terrorists and are carrying out terrorist atrocities is overwhelming.

– Jabhat al-Nusra is now the leading front line fighting force in Syria and is commanding the other rebel groups.

– In April, the head of Jabhat al-Nusra pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri.

– FSA rebels are defecting to Jabhat al-Nusra in droves.

– Jabhat al-Nusra killed U.S. troops in Iraq.

– Immediately after the State Department declared Jabhat al-Nusra a terrorist organization, 29 different FSA rebel outfits pledged allegiance to the Al-Qaeda group.

– FSA rebels have vowed to “fight the U.S.” once they finish with Bashar Al-Assad.

– FSA rebels have been filmed burning US and Israeli flags on more than one occasion.

– FSA rebels have been filmed singing songs that glorify Osama Bin Laden and the 9/11 attacks.

– One FSA group even calls its fighting unit the “Osama Bin Laden” brigade.

– Another video shows FSA rebels chanting, “We are all with Osama bin Laden!”

– FSA rebels have voiced their desire to see the Al-Qaeda flag fly over the White House once the rebels are victorious across the region.

– FSA rebels have been filmed cutting out people’s hearts on camera and eating them while chanting “Allahu Akbar”.

– FSA rebels have been responsible for innumerable beheadings over the course of the conflict, chanting “Allahu Akbar” as they decapitate their victims.

– FSA rebels have committed innumerable sectarian murders, including beheading a man for being a Christian and feeding him to the dogs.

– FSA rebels have also forced children to behead people and carry out other atrocities.

– FSA rebels have ransacked Christian churches.

– FSA rebels have massacred entire villages of Christians.

– Earlier this week, FSA rebels slaughtered a 14-year-old boy for supposedly insulting Mohammed.

– FSA rebels have murdered numerous journalists in targeted killings, including Maya Nasser and most recently Yara Abbas.

– FSA rebels have been pictured numerous times flying the black flag of Al-Qaeda and wearing uniforms with Al-Qaeda insignia.

– FSA rebels have been caught on camera preparing chemical weapons attacks.

– In March, UN human rights investigator Carla del Ponte said FSA rebels had used chemical weapons.

– FSA rebels have forced prisoners to become suicide bombers.

– According to eyewitnesses on the ground, at least half of the so-called “Syrian rebels” aren’t even Syrian and are foreign jihadists sent by the likes of Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

In announcing that his administration will provide arms to Al-Qaeda terrorists and associated groups like the FSA, Obama has violated his oath to protect and defend America against its enemies and should at the very least be subject to immediate impeachment proceedings, if not detained under the NDAA which clearly outlines the illegality of providing support to terrorist organizations.

*********************

Ontario Agent Orange probe finally arrives


FINALLY AFTER ALMOST 30 YEARS

Ontario Agent Orange probe finally arrives

Now-notorious chemical mix used by forestry and hydro workers in decades past.

 

NDP MPP Gilles Bisson says the government is trying to avoid public scrutiny of the report.

/

NDP MPP Gilles Bisson says the government is trying to avoid public scrutiny of the report.

By: Diana Zlomislic News reporter, Published on Thu Jun 13 2013

 

On Thursday morning, the provincial government will release the long-awaited results of an investigation into Ontario’s widespread use of a notorious herbicide that has been linked to birth defects, various forms of cancer and skin disorders.

The probe was commissioned in March, 2011 after aToronto Star investigation revealed that forestry and hydro workers were ordered to use a chemical mix now commonly known as Agent Orange to clear large plots of land across the province from the 1950s to the 1980s.

The Star tracked down hundreds of government-archived documents that illustrated the province’s historic use of the powerful herbicide.

RELATED: Star Exclusive – Agent Orange ‘soaked’ Ontario teens

In Kapuskasing, Ont., teenage “balloon boys” employed by logging companies guided low-flying spray planes with helium-inflated red rubber sacs. The boys’ job was to point out the areas where less-profitable “weed trees” like birch, maple and poplar grew so the areas could be defoliated to make room for more lucrative spruce. They got soaked in the process. The Star spoke with dozens of former hydro and forestry workers who, decades after handling the potent chemicals, found themselves sterile, suffering from hard-to-treat skin conditions or cancers.

Don Romanowich lead some of those timber crews in the 1960s and 1970s.

He’s 66 now and has spent the past few years of retirement tracking down ex-colleagues to alert them to what they may have been exposed to.

“They just quietly stopped using it,” said Romanowich, who is now living with stage-four follicular cancer, a type of lymphoma his oncologist linked to herbicide exposure. “What disturbs me the most is . . . there were people in serious positions of responsibility who understood what we were using and they said nothing.”

Hydro’s own records, obtained by the Star, boast that in one 12-year period, the power company dropped enough chemicals in Ontario to cut a 30-metre-wide swath travelling “four-fifths the distance around the world.”

Romanowich said he gave up hope the report would surface until Natural Resources Minister David Orazietti called him yesterday morning to assure it would be made public on Thursday at 11 a.m.

“I had tears over it,” Romanowich said, noting the report was supposed to be released last summer before being put off after the chair of the fact-finding panel reported his research yielded “thousands of records spanning more than four decades.”

Orazietti had received a “high-level briefing” on the contents of the report a few weeks ago, a spokesperson told the Star.

NDP MPP Gilles Bisson, whose Timmins office has fielded calls from workers concerned about potential exposure, criticized Orazietti’s timing — just several days after legislature has broken for the summer. It’s an attempt to “avoid public scrutiny,” Bisson said.

The independent committee was mandated to examine where, when and how much 2,4,5-T — the primary herbicide in Agent Orange — was used in the province by government ministries and agencies. It looked at the use of the herbicide alone and mixed with other chemicals and their health impact.

Agent Orange gained notoriety during the 1960s for its use by the U.S. military during the Vietnam War, when it was used to clear jungles to expose enemy territory. The colourless mixture got its name from a stripe painted on the containers it came in. Its use was discontinued in 1971 after scientists found it contained dioxin, which causes severe health problems.

“There was no categorical brand called Agent Orange,” explained Dr. Wayne Dwernychuk, noting it was nothing more than a mix of 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D. For more than 15 years, he conducted extensive research on the impact of the chemical mix in Vietnam.

Dwernychuk is looking forward to hearing the results of the Ontario probe. He described committee member Jeanne Stellman, a public health expert from New York’s Columbia University, as a “pillar in the Agent Orange fight for justice.”

The committee was chaired by Dr. Len Ritter, a leading Canadian toxicology expert who assisted the federal government’s 2006-2007 investigation into the use of 2,4,5-T at CFB Gagetown in New Brunswick, where U.S. military conducted Canada-approved spraying exercises. The Gagetown inquiry resulted in the federal government paying roughly 5,000 Canadians more than $100 million in total compensation.

Read more about: Agent Orange

 

Star Exclusive: Agent Orange “soaked” Ontario teens

Cancer-causing toxins used to strip the jungles of Vietnam were also employed to clear massive plots of Crown land in Northern Ontario.

Don Romanowich has been diagnosed with a type of cancer common in people exposed to harmful herbicides.

GLENN LOWSON / TORONTO STAR

Don Romanowich has been diagnosed with a type of cancer common in people exposed to harmful herbicides.

By: Diana Zlomislic Staff Reporter, Published on Thu Feb 17 2011

Cancer-causing toxins used to strip the jungles of Vietnam were also employed to clear massive plots of Crown land in Northern Ontario, government documents obtained by theToronto Star reveal.

Records from the 1950s, 60s and 70s show forestry workers, often students and junior rangers, spent weeks at a time as human markers holding red, helium-filled balloons on fishing lines while low-flying planes sprayed toxic herbicides including an infamous chemical mixture known as Agent Orange on the brush and the boys below.

“We were saturated in chemicals,” said Don Romanowich, 63, a former supervisor of an aerial spraying program in Kapuskasing, Ont., who was recently diagnosed with a slow-growing cancer that can be caused by herbicide exposure. “We were told not to drink the stuff but we had no idea.”

A Star investigation examined hundreds of boxes of forestry documents and found the provincial government began experimenting with a powerful hormone-based chemical called 2,4,5-T — the dioxin-laced component of Agent Orange — in Hearst, Ont., in 1957.

The documents, filed at the Archives of Ontario, describe how WWII-era Stearman biplanes were kitted with 140-gallon tanks containing the chemicals, which were usually diluted in a mix of fuel oil and water.

Less than 10 years later, the Department of Lands and Forests (now the Ministry of Natural Resources) authorized the use of a more potent mixture of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T for aerial spraying. The combination of those two herbicides in equal parts comprised Agent Orange — the most widely used chemical in the Vietnam War.

Over the years, spraying was done by both the province and timber companies. Hundreds of forestry workers were involved, but the documents do not give an exact number.

After the Star presented its findings to the natural resources ministry — including copies of the government’s own records and research based on interviews with ailing forestry workers now scattered across Canada — a spokesperson said the government is investigating and has notified Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health.

“We can acknowledge that a mixture of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T under various brand names were used in Ontario,” ministry spokesman Greg MacNeil wrote the Star in an email. Though he confirmed the use of a mixture known commonly as Agent Orange, MacNeil said the government never used a “product” called “Agent Orange.”

Dr. Wayne Dwernychuk, a world-renowned expert on Agent Orange, said the government is “throwing up a smokescreen.”

“There was no categorical brand called Agent Orange,” said Dwernychuk, who for more than 15 years conducted extensive research on the impact of toxic defoliants in Vietnam. “There was nothing coming out of any of the chemical companies in a barrel that had Agent Orange written on it. That’s laughable.

“If it’s got 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D as a mixture, it’s Agent Orange and it has dioxin — I guarantee it,” said Dwernychuk, who recently retired as chief scientist from Vancouver-based Hatfield Consultants.

Medical studies have determined the type of dioxin found in Agent Orange latches on to fat cells and can remain in the body for decades. Exposure may lead to skin disorders, liver problems, certain types of cancers and impaired immune, endocrine and reproductive functions.

Agent Orange may have been employed earlier than 1964 in Northern Ontario but theStar was told access to additional records is guarded by privacy legislation. The ministry said it does not have centralized spraying records prior to 1977 and suggested the newspaper “follow the procedures set up in the freedom of information act” to get a “complete picture of the data.”

The Star’s investigation exposes the first widespread use of these chemicals in Canada outside of a military spraying operation.

The Ministry of Natural Resources said it is working with the ministries of Health, Labour and Environment “to ensure this matter is thoroughly investigated and that worker health and safety is protected.”

The only other case on record of Agent Orange and other toxic defoliants being used en masse in Canada occurred in New Brunswick.

The U.S. military tested defoliants including Agent Orange at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in 1966 and 1967, according to a federal government inquiry that occurred 40 years later.

As of Dec. 22, 2010, the Canadian government has issued 3,137, $20,000 tax-free, compensation payments to people who lived or worked at CFB Gagetown during the years when spraying occurred and were diagnosed with of one of 12 medical conditionsassociated with exposure as identified by the Institute of Medicine. The federal government expects to approve thousands of additional applications for compensation before the June 30 deadline.

The U.S. military began spraying “hormone herbicides” like Agent Orange in South Vietnam in 1961.

Agent Orange was one of a rainbow of poisonous warfare chemicals that got its name from a band of colour painted on the barrels it was shipped in. The mixture itself was colourless.

“The U.S. military called it orange herbicide,” Dwernychuk said. “It was the American press that labelled it ‘Agent Orange’ because it was more sexy.”

The mixture ate through vast swaths of jungle, exposing Viet Cong strongholds.

Nearly 20,000 kilometres away in Northern Ontario, toxic herbicides were employed to disable a different kind of enemy.

The chemicals targeted what forestry reports described as “weed trees” — including birch, maple, poplar and shrubs — which stole sunlight and soil nutrients from young, profitable spruce species. The hormones in the defoliants caused the broad leaves on these weed trees to grow so quickly they starved to death.

In 1956, with the government’s blessing, Spruce Falls Power and Paper Company in Kapuskasing pioneered the aerial spraying of herbicides in Northern Ontario. The New York Times, which co-owned Spruce Falls with Kimberly-Clark and the Washington Star, printed its Sunday edition on black spruce, renowned for its tough fibres. (Tembec, a company that purchased Spruce Falls in 1991, did not respond to interview requests).

Aerial spraying programs were considered a cheap, fast and effective way to alter the landscape of Ontario’s forests for maximum profit. Timber companies and the government worked together to increase the output of money-making trees like white and black spruce while culling nearly everything else that got in their way.

In the mid-1960s, Spruce Falls held about 4 million acres of forest land under lease from the Ontario government and owned an additional 180,000 acres. The incomplete documents don’t provide a total number of acres sprayed.

After a bone marrow test confirmed he had non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Romanowich, who worked for Spruce Falls during the 1960s and 1970s, said his first thought was to track down former colleagues.

“My oncologist asked me about heavy exposure to herbicides before I mentioned my work at Spruce Falls,” said the retired maintenance manager who lives in the Niagara region. “There is no absolute confirmation of this type of exposure being the cause but a very strong correlation that should be taken seriously. I am fortunate in that I will now be monitored on a regular basis with CAT scans and blood tests to watch for the inevitable flare-ups that can be treated with chemotherapy.”

He wants others who worked on these spraying programs to have the same chance to receive thorough medical exams based on their exposure.

He contacted the Ministry of Natural Resources in October with no response until late last month, nearly four weeks after the Star began its own investigation.

The government records list the names of five supervisors who worked on spraying programs in Northern Ontario during the 1950s and 1960s. Four of the five have either been diagnosed with or died of cancer. Their job included mixing chemicals and standing in the fields supervising spray campaigns. Teenaged workers are also listed in the records and the Star is working to track them down.

One of them on the list, David Buchanan always wondered what was inside the 45-gallon oil drums he worked with as a 15-year-old at Spruce Falls Power and Paper Company in 1964.

“Even then, it didn’t seem right,” said Buchanan, now a 61-year-old dentist in Sackville, N.S., who has suffered from a series of illnesses doctors couldn’t diagnose. Body-covering hives. Persistent bouts of dizziness. A sperm count so low he couldn’t have children.

“I have had every test known to mankind,” he said.

“I often wondered if some of my symptoms were related to something that happened in my childhood.”

His job as a summer student was to hand-pump vats of brush-and-tree-killing chemicals into the airplane sprayer.

“We got soaked,” Buchanan said. “I can’t remember what we did with our clothes but we stayed in the bush camp during spraying for weeks on end.” He does recall wearing a black rubber apron, brown rubber gloves and rubber boots while mixing and pumping the chemicals.

One document from 1962 recommended keeping an extra supply of rubber balloons handy because “the balloons do deteriorate from the spray mixture.”

As a college student, Paul Fawcett, now 62, also worked on Spruce Falls’ aerial spraying program. He was a 21-year-old “balloon man” during the summer of 1969. His father Don worked for the ministry as a district forester in Kapuskasing.

There was no uniform, Fawcett said, just jeans and a shirt — usually long-sleeves because of mosquitoes and flies. He recalls being covered in a fine mist or droplets from the spray plane.

“It was a lot of fun,” he said. “We would walk from station to station with red helium-filled balloons on fishing lines and the planes would swoop down.”

He recalled researchers from University of Toronto dropping in on his camp to survey how much spray was getting to the ground.

“They had us lay down ridged, filter papers on the ground or brush while the plane sprayed. We laid them down in a row covering four or five feet.”

Fawcett, now a welder in Hamilton, said he never heard about the results of that study.

Government forestry documents refer to extensive studies that were being conducted on spraying programs at a research facility in Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., but these reports are either missing or misfiled.

Fawcett, whose doctor recently ordered an ultrasound to look into bladder problems, said he had no idea he was working with anything toxic. Aside from the bladder issues, Fawcett said he feels fine.

“It did a good job — what we wanted it to do,” said Clifford Emblin, a former government forestry manager who oversaw chemical spraying programs. “They were using those chemicals in Vietnam, too, for defoliation. Yeah, it was the same stuff. I don’t think anybody knew about the long-term effects.”

The U.S. military stopped using Agent Orange in 1970 after a study for the National Institutes of Health showed that the dioxin-tainted 2,4,5-T caused birth defects in laboratory animals. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs now recognizes more than 50 diseases and medical conditions

associated with exposure.

Emblin, a former district manager for the Hearst and Hornepayne areas during the 1960s, recalled one of his forestry employees throwing a fit after his truck got caught directly beneath a spray plane’s flight line.

“The truck got sprayed and the paint came off the truck,” Emblin said, chuckling.

Emblin said his ministry didn’t know it was using Agent Orange until “four or five years after we quit using it, I guess, in the 70s.

“We had five sawmills that were depending on the growth of the (spruce) forest in Hearst to make a living,” he said. “That’s why we were doing it. We managed the land and they paid.”

Diana Zlomislic can be reached by email at dzlomislic@thestar.ca or by phone at 416-869-4472

The Government Criminals involved in this and all others – corporate criminals  should all be brought to swift severe Justice for this Despicable Crime against all Citizens of Ontario and Canada

Agent Orange hotline set up

1-888-338-3364

The province has set up a new Agent Orange hotline to field concerns and questions from people who may have been exposed to the toxic herbicides.

By: Diana Zlomislic Staff Reporter, Published on Tue Feb 22 2011

 

The province has set up a new Agent Orange hotline to field concerns and questions from people who may have been exposed to toxic herbicides in Ontario during the 1950s, ’60s and ’70s.

Minister of Natural Resources Linda Jeffrey said Tuesday she will also create an “independent fact-finding panel” to probe the government’s use of Agent Orange and other toxic herbicides on Crown land.

The initiatives come less than a week after a Toronto Star investigation revealed that the same cancer-causing toxins used to strip jungles and expose Viet Cong troops during the Vietnam War were also employed by the Ontario government and timber companies to clear massive plots of Crown land.

Spraying reports obtained by the Star revealed that high school students and junior rangers acted as human markers for the ministry and timber companies in Northern Ontario. They would hold red, helium-filled balloons on fishing lines while low-flying airplanes sprayed thousands of gallons of the chemical cocktail.

The chemicals were designed to kill what forestry reports called “weed trees” — including birch and poplar. Timber companies and the ministry wanted to promote the growth of the commercially viable spruce tree in Northern Ontario, which meant killing most everything else that competed for soil nutrients and sunlight.

Government records filed at the Archives of Ontario showed the province began experimenting with a powerful herbicide called 2,4,5-T — the dioxin-laced component of Agent Orange — as early as 1957 in Hearst, Ont. Less than 10 years later, the ministry authorized the use of a more potent mix of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T for use in aerial spraying. The combination of those two herbicides in equal parts comprised Agent Orange — the most widely used toxin in the Vietnam War.

Exposure to this chemical cocktail has been associated with more than 50 diseases and medical conditions by the United States Department of Veteran Affairs.

The Star has received hundreds of calls and emails from former forestry workers and residents of towns affected by toxic aerial spraying.

Many wonder if the chemicals they were exposed to decades ago are responsible for their low-sperm count, multiple miscarriages, cancers or curious growths covering their bodies.

Minister Jeffrey said she has notified Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health.

The ministry is creating an internal “herbicide spray program project team” that will lead the cross-government investigation, Jeffrey said Tuesday. The ministries of Environment and Labour have also been asked to co-operate with the probe.

At the moment, Jeffrey said she has no idea how many people may have been affected by the spraying.

“I couldn’t hazard a guess,” she said. “I think the trouble is there were a lot of summer students hired and it is hard to know . . . and there a lot of old paper records. We are still trying to collect that information.”

With files from Tanya Talaga

For More Information

A toll-free number will be available starting Tuesday afternoon for anyone who has concerns about potential exposure to herbicides during the 1950s, 60s and 70s. The toll-free number is 1-888-338-3364.

The Workplace Safety and Insurance Board has provided an updated contact number for employee questions about potential work-related illnesses due to herbicide exposure. The new number is 1-800-387-0750. Press 1 for English or 2 for French; 1 to enter the direct line and then the extension 4163444440.

Callers into this number may have to leave a message for their call to be returned if the line is busy. Calls will be returned within one business day.

Information about these numbers and the Ministry of Natural Resource’s progress on this issue will continue to be posted on the ministry’s website at www.mnr.gov.on.ca.

Agent Orange Logo

Exposure to Herbicides May Cause the Following Affliction
(Agent Orange)

TYPES OF CANCER WITH NO TIME REQUIREMENTS FOR MANIFESTATION
Cancer of the bronchus
Cancer of the larynx
Lung Cancer
Prostate cancer
Cancer of the trachea
Hodgkin’s disease
Multiple myeloma
Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia
TYPES OF SOFT TISSUE SARCOMA WITH NO TIME
REQUIREMENTS FOR MANIFESTATION
Adult Fibrosarcoma
Alveolar Soft Part Sarcoma
Angiosarcoma
Clear Cell Sarcoma of Aponeuroses
Clear Cell Sarcoma of Tendons and
Aponeuroses
Congenital Fibrosarcoma
Dermatofibrosarcoma Protuberans
Ectomesenchymoma
Epithelioid Malignant Leiomyosarcoma
Epithelioid and Glandular Malignant
Schwannomas
Epithelioid Sarcoma
Extraskeletal Ewing’s Sarcoma
Hemangiosarcoma
Infantile Fibrosarcoma
Leiomyosarcoma
Liposarcoma
Lymphangiosarcoma
Malignant Fibrous Histiocytoma
Malignant Giant Cell Tumor of the
Tendon Sheath
Malignant Glandular Schwannoma
Malignant Glomus Tumor
Malignant Hemangiopericytoma
Malignant Mesenchymoma
Malignant Ganglioneuroma
Malignant Granular Cell Tumor
Malignant Leiomyoblastoma
Malignant Synovioma
Malignant Schwannoma with Rhabdomyoblastic Differentiation
Proliferating (systemic)
Angiendotheliomatosis
Rhabdomyosarcoma
Synovial Sarcoma
DISEASES OTHER THAN CANCER WITH VARIOUS TIME REQUIREMENTS
Periperal neuropathy (acute or subacute)
Chloracne
Porphyria Cutanea Tarda

DISEASES OTHER THAN CANCER WITH NO TIME REQUIREMENT FOR MANIFESTATION

Type 2 Diabetes (Also known as Diabetes Mellitus)
DISABILITIES IN CHILDREN OF VIETNAM VETERANS
Spina Bifida,Certain Birth Defects in Children of VN Veterans

Reading Infowars.com? You’re Probably on the Main Core List


Reading Infowars.com? You’re Probably on the Main Core List

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
June 12, 2013

Michael Snyder has provided details on Main Core, a list of some 8 million or more names compiled by the CIA and U.S. intelligence. The individuals on the Main Core list, he writes, will be rounded up after the Constitution is suspended and and martial law imposed.

Main Core is not a secret. Snyder points to a Wikipedia entry describing the database:

Main Core is the code name of a database maintained since the 1980s by the federal government of the United States. Main Core contains personal and financial data of millions of U.S. citizens believed to be threats to national security. The data, which comes from the NSA, FBI, CIA, and other sources, is collected and stored without warrants or court orders. The database’s name derives from the fact that it contains “copies of the ‘main core’ or essence of each item of intelligence information on Americans produced by the FBI and the other agencies of the U.S. intelligence community.”

Senator Feinstein, Rep. Mike Rogers and the apologists for high-tech tyranny insist the NSA’s Prism and and Boundless Informant are about protecting us from terrorists. If you are a student of history, however, you will realize this is nonsense. If you know anything about Continuity of Government measures implemented following September 11, 2001 and earlier programs like Rex 84 and Operation Garden Plot, you already have a sneaking suspicion the NSA’s massive surveillance operation has nothing to do with al-Qaeda. It’s about collecting data on American citizens, specifically the eight or so million compiled in the Main Core database.

Following Edward Snowden’s revelations on the NSA, Washington’s Blog posted a quote from investigative journalist Christopher Ketcham, who wrote five years ago that our private information

…seems to be fair game for collection without a warrant: the e-mail addresses you send to and receive from, and the subject lines of those messages; the phone numbers you dial, the numbers that dial in to your line, and the durations of the calls; the Internet sites you visit and the keywords in your Web searches; the destinations of the airline tickets you buy; the amounts and locations of your ATM withdrawals; and the goods and services you purchase on credit cards. All of this information is archived on government supercomputers and, according to sources, also fed into the Main Core database.

Ketcham of Radar Magazine arrived at the following conclusion, well before the New York Times and the rest of the corporate media reported the latest revelation about the NSA and peddled the lame excuse that it is all about saving us from stereotypical Muslim terrorists who hate us for our freedom:

There exists a database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic, might be incarcerated. The database can identify and locate perceived “enemies of the state” almost instantaneously. He and other sources tell Radar that the database is sometimes referred to by the code name Main Core. One knowledgeable source claims that 8 million Americans are now listed in Main Core as potentially suspect. In the event of a national emergency, these people could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention.

The NSA’s Prism and Boundless Informant represent only the latest details of a story stretching back decades. The national security state has spent years and expended billions of dollars in a coordinated effort to categorize and monitor enemies of the state.

“Investigations this past winter by groups such as the ACLU and some media outlets have revealed numerous occasions of FBI, Defense Department, and local police infiltration and monitoring of domestic peace groups,” Andy Dunn wrote in March, 2006. “Further, some of the details surrounding the NSA program and other surveillance operations point to a new paradigm in intelligence operations, which involve massive ‘datamining’ reminiscent of the government’s supposedly shelved Total Information Awareness program.”

Dunn notes that the state, beginning with the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, has consistently spied upon and regularly persecuted a large number of official political enemies, an effort that realized its nadir with the FBI’s COINTELPRO beginning in the 1960s, a counter intelligence program consisting of illegal, violent and unethical tactics designed to stifle legitimate political activism in the United States. Evidence reveals that COINTELPRO was not dismantled, as the FBI and the government maintained, but was continued.

“Additionally, the now huge ‘national security state’ of dozens of federal and military intelligence agencies conducted similar acts, sometimes coordinated with and sometimes competing against COINTELPRO,” Dunn writes. “The names of these operations sound like something from a 1960s spy show, like ‘The Man From Uncle’: Operation CHAOS, Projects RESISTANCE, MERRIMAC, MINARET, and SHAMROCK.”

Of course, the establishment media fails to draw the correct conclusion when it purports to cover the NSA surveillance program. Instead of national security state bureaucrats gone wild in a zealous drive to ferret out al-Qaeda and other bad guys, the massive NSA surveillance program is about discovering domestic enemies of the state that will be dealt with after martial law is declared under the ruse of a false flag attack or a catastrophic natural emergency.

 

Spy vs Spy 1

Main Core

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article’s listed sources may not meet Wikipedia’s guidelines for reliable sources. (July 2012)

Main Core is the code name of a database maintained since the 1980s by the federal government of the United States. Main Core contains personal and financial data of millions of U.S. citizens believed to be threats to national security.[1] The data, which comes from the NSA, FBI, CIA, and other sources,[1] is collected and stored without warrants or court orders.[1] The database’s name derives from the fact that it contains "copies of the ‘main core’ or essence of each item of intelligence information on Americans produced by the FBI and the other agencies of the U.S. intelligence community."[1]

The Main Core database is believed to have originated with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 1982, following Ronald Reagan‘s Continuity of Operations plan outlined in the National Security Directive (NSD) 69 / National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 55, entitled "Enduring National Leadership," implemented on September 14, 1982.[1][2]

As of 2008 there were reportedly eight million Americans listed in the database as possible threats, often for trivial reasons, whom the government may choose to track, question, or detain in a time of crisis.[3]

The existence of the database was first reported on in May 2008 by Christopher Ketcham and in July 2008 by Tim Shorrock.[2]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e Shorrock, Tim (July 23, 2008). "Exposing Bush’s historic abuse of power". Salon.com. Retrieved 2010-12-19.
  2. ^ a b Goodman, Amy (July 25, 2008). "Main Core: New Evidence Reveals Top Secret". Democracy Now. Retrieved 2010-12-19.

External links[edit]

Stub icon
This United States-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

%d bloggers like this: