Saturday, August 31, 2013

Unfolding the Future of the Long War: Geostrategic/resource control

Continuing on with the real reason for the war on Syria. Not, the ‘bad man’ who did something very, very bad. That so called bad deed requiring punishment from the benevolent big daddy.
You should have gotten past that stuff in Gr. 2!

We are talking the real reason for the US/Israel/NATO destabilization of Syria, which started long ago. In a land far, far away. The USA.

You read yesterday’s post? Syria: Pipelines, Global Control Tyranny and US dollar hegemony
I know you have a well honed attention span and a sharp eye for good information. So, here is some more of it. No spin. No manipulation. No ad hominem.  Just the facts!
Stumbled across this piece in the Guardian, yesterday. I am ignoring all the spin and cutting to the chase.
Let me digress briefly. How odd to find this in the environmental section? When the whole piece is clearly political.
 (Alleged) Massacres of civilians are being exploited for narrow geopolitical competition to control Mideast oil, gas pipelines
         “Whatever the case, few recall that US agitation against Syria began long before recent atrocities, in the context of wider operations targeting Iranian influence across the Middle East.

In May 2007, a presidential finding revealed that Bush had authorised CIA operations against Iran. Anti-Syria operations were also in full swing around this time as part of this covert programme, according to Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker. A range of US government and intelligence sources told him that the Bush administration had "cooperated with Saudi Arabia's government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations" intended to weaken the Shi'ite Hezbollah in Lebanon. "The US has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria," wrote Hersh, "a byproduct" of which is "the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups" hostile to the United States and "sympathetic to al-Qaeda." He noted that "the Saudi government, with Washington's approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria," with a view to pressure him to be "more conciliatory and open to negotiations" with Israel. One faction receiving covert US "political and financial support" through the Saudis was the exiled Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

According to former French foreign minister Roland Dumas, Britain had planned covert action in Syria as early as 2009: "I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business", he told French television:
  "I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was preparing gunmen to invade Syria."

The 2011 uprisings, it would seem - triggered by a confluence of domestic energy shortages and climate-induced (?) droughts which led to massive food price hikes (?)   

*Since Syria is ‘down stream’ of Turkey, water shortages do not necessarily have to be climate induced and massive food price hikes could have much to do with manipulating the commodities markets.

- came at an opportune moment that was quickly exploited. Leaked emails from the private intelligence firm Stratfor including notes from a meeting with Pentagon officials confirmed US-UK training of Syrian opposition forces since 2011 aimed at eliciting "collapse" of Assad's regime "from within."

Since 2011? No, before 2011!

“So what was this unfolding strategy to undermine Syria and Iran all about? According to retired NATO Secretary General Wesley Clark, a memo from the Office of the US Secretary of Defense just a few weeks after 9/11 revealed plans to "attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years", starting with Iraq and moving on to "Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran." In a subsequent interview, Clark argues that this strategy is fundamentally about control of the region's vast oil and gas resources.
Much of the strategy currently at play was candidly described in a 2008 US Army-funded RAND report, Unfolding the Future of the Long War (pdf).

 The report noted that "the economies of the industrialized states will continue to rely heavily on oil, thus making it a strategically important resource." As most oil will be produced in the Middle East, the US has "motive for maintaining stability in and good relations with Middle Eastern states":

    "The geographic area of proven oil reserves coincides with the power base of much of the Salafi-jihadist network. This creates a linkage between oil supplies and the long war that is not easily broken or simply characterized... For the foreseeable future, world oil production growth and total output will be dominated by Persian Gulf resources... The region will therefore remain a strategic priority, and this priority will interact strongly with that of prosecuting the long war."

In this context, the report identified several potential trajectories for regional policy focused on protecting access to Gulf oil supplies, among which the following are most salient:

    "Divide and Rule focuses on exploiting fault lines between the various Salafi-jihadist groups to turn them against each other and dissipate their energy on internal conflicts. This strategy relies heavily on covert action, information operations (IO), unconventional warfare, and support to indigenous security forces... the United States and its local allies could use the nationalist jihadists to launch proxy IO campaigns to discredit the transnational jihadists in the eyes of the local populace... US leaders could also choose to capitalize on the 'Sustained Shia-Sunni Conflict' trajectory by taking the side of the conservative Sunni regimes against Shiite empowerment movements in the Muslim world.... possibly supporting authoritative Sunni governments against a continuingly hostile Iran."

Exploring different scenarios for this trajectory, the report speculated that the US may concentrate "on shoring up the traditional Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan as a way of containing Iranian power and influence in the Middle East and Persian Gulf." Noting that this could actually empower al-Qaeda jihadists, the report concluded that doing so might work in western interests by bogging down jihadi activity with internal sectarian rivalry rather than targeting the US: (These groups would  not target the US, same as they do not target Israel)

    "One of the oddities of this long war trajectory is that it may actually reduce the al-Qaeda threat to US interests in the short term. The upsurge in Shia identity and confidence seen here would certainly cause serious concern in the Salafi-jihadist community in the Muslim world, including the senior leadership of al-Qaeda. As a result, it is very likely that al-Qaeda might focus its efforts on targeting Iranian interests throughout the Middle East and Persian Gulf while simultaneously cutting back on anti-American and anti-Western operations."

The RAND document contextualised this disturbing strategy with surprisingly prescient recognition of the increasing vulnerability of the US's key allies and enemies - Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, Egypt, Syria, Iran - to a range of converging crises: rapidly rising populations, a 'youth bulge', internal economic inequalities, political frustrations, sectarian tensions, and environmentally-linked water shortages, all of which could destabilise these countries from within or exacerbate inter-state conflicts.

The report noted especially that Syria is among several "downstream countries that are becoming increasingly water scarce as their populations grow", increasing a risk of conflict. Thus, although the RAND document fell far short of recognising the prospect of an 'Arab Spring', it illustrates that three years before the 2011 uprisings, US defence officials were alive to the region's growing instabilities, and concerned by the potential consequences for stability of Gulf oil.
If the US defence officials were alive to the regions growing instabilities, no doubt they could take advantage of and manipulate the situation to aggravate the growing instabilities. Which they did!

These strategic concerns, motivated by fear of expanding Iranian influence, impacted Syria primarily in relation to pipeline geopolitics. In 2009 - the same year former French foreign minister Dumas alleges the British began planning operations in Syria - Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter's North field, contiguous with Iran's South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets - albeit crucially bypassing Russia. Assad's rationale was "to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."

Instead, the following year, Assad pursued negotiations for an alternative $10 billion pipeline plan with Iran, across Iraq to Syria, that would also potentially allow Iran to supply gas to Europe from its South Pars field shared with Qatar. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the project was signed in July 2012 - just as Syria's civil war was spreading to Damascus and Aleppo - and earlier this year Iraq signed a framework agreement for construction of the gas pipelines. ( This pipeline has been discussed on at least two previous occasions here at the blog)
The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan was a "direct slap in the face" to Qatar's plans. No wonder Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, in a failed attempt to bribe Russia to switch sides, told President Vladmir Putin that "whatever regime comes after" Assad, it will be "completely" in Saudi Arabia's hands and will "not sign any agreement allowing any Gulf country to transport its gas across Syria to Europe and compete with Russian gas exports", according to diplomatic sources. When Putin refused, the Prince vowed military action.

It would seem that contradictory self-serving Saudi and Qatari oil interests are pulling the strings of an equally self-serving oil-focused US policy in Syria, if not the wider region. It is this - the problem of establishing a pliable opposition which the US and its oil allies feel confident will play ball, pipeline-style, in a post-Assad Syria - that will determine the nature of any prospective intervention: not concern for Syrian life.

Friday, August 30, 2013

Syria: Pipelines, Global Control Tyranny and US dollar hegemony

Ok, everybody. I have got a doozy of a post for you all. We have talked pipeline politics so many times here.
Pipeline politics and Syria's place in that grand scheme. I have noticed for some time now the 3 part series I had done way back, April 1/2013 has been getting regular hits and being posted at various sites. That series of posts grew legs and walked around the globe! If you are new here and haven't read all 3 parts, let me suggest that you take the time to do so. It might help to clarify why Syria is so important. So pivotal.
It might help to understand why we are, where we are, right now.

Part 3- Cyprus, Israel, Turkey, Syria: NATO and global resource diversion/control” 

Quoting briefly from the intro in that post: 

 Finally, after a brief respite the promised section on Syria. Be warned, it is long. But subjects such as this cannot be covered in a few sentences or a 30 second blurb.
An additional update at the end of the post: Very pertinent reading !!!

Briefly recapping this sordid tale.

We first looked at, in Part 1, the strategic importance of Cyprus.
 In Part 2 we learned about Cyprus’s massive energy resources. Known as the Aphrodite field.
We read, how it isTurkey and Israel fit into this massive manipulation in the Mediterranean.
We understand the EU dealt a crushing blow to Cyprus’s aspirations to market their sovereign resource without involving Turkey. It is clear that the EU, through the cratering of the Cyprus banking infrastructure, has curtailed the island nations ability to fund the development of their vast energy resource.  A move that is most advantageous to Turkey. Israel. And of course, the US .
Where does Syria fit into this whole shifting of the strategic and geopolitical resource map?
Before moving on to what is below read the 3 parts. I put that all together so we, you and I, could  really understand what is going on. Not this nonsense about chemical weapons. Not this saving civilians bullshit.
Or this Assad is a dictator hogwash. Spin. Perception Management. LIES.

The US has used more chemical weapons then just about anyone. They poisoned Fallujah. (And the UN helps to cover that up) They poured so much  Agent Orange  (Dioxin)  on Vietnam that to this very day, this very day August 30/2013, the Vietnamese, and the Iraqis, still suffer horribly from the atrocities visited upon them by the 'good cop'  of the world, the US.

Le Thi Thu, 42, and her daughter, Nguyen Thi Ly, 11, live in a village south of Da Nang, Vietnam. They are second and third generation victims of dioxin exposure
 And John Kerry talks about moral obscenities! He should look at himself and his country.
The US has created many horrid moral obscenities. My god, this is a nation that dropped nuclear bombs on Japan. Twice! John Kerry and all the lying western leaders should 'burn in a lake of fire' for what they have done to so many innocent people the world over. ( Like I said-  timely!)

Syria is not about humanitarianism. Saving civilians. Not love and kindness. It is business, manipulation, control and power. That is the brutal fact of the matter.

OK, ranting over. You are up to speed on Syria, right? You have refreshed on the 3 parts or read them for the first time? And are now ready to move on.
I found this piece very enlightening. It expands on what I had already written and gets into the US petro dollar dominance. OPEC.  And more. Give it a read and share some thoughts. Because an attack on Syria will most likely lead to an all or nothing scenario on the part of the US and Israel.( Hope I am wrong)

I am, not sure how much credence I give to gold backed currencies. Considering the other golden rule?
He who has the gold, makes the rules. However, pipelines, OPEC, US dollar hegemony are all factors in the US gunning for Syria. All wars are banker wars on some level. Keep that in mind and read below.

Syria, Pipeline Politics, OPEC & the US Dollar

Syria is about the last gasp for the Petro-Dollar, the emergence of energy pipeline geopolitics, the rise of the NatGas Coop, the new dominance of Russian Gazprom, the eclipse of OPEC, the fall of the house of Saud, and a grand adjustment process in global commerce and banking. Refer to trade settlement outside the USDollar and diversification away from USTreasury Bond reserves management. It took some time to realize it, but the Cyprus bank incident was a misdirected attack against Gazprom. It failed. The entire Arab Spring movement, an ambitious disruptive project waged with foolhardy ambitions, has turned on itself. Egypt fell, its US puppet discharged. The entire North African region will be in flames soon. The USGovt interfered with a grand industrialization project for European industry, to be placed on North Africa intended to take advantage of cheaper labor, available minerals, nearby resources, and easy shipping. The resentment of Europe will show up in the future. The Middle East and Persian Gulf region is shifting its salute to Russia & China, as the noisy sectarian battles have been a common fixture since long ago. Bahrain has erupted. Saudi is clamping down and converting into an Islamic police state to create the Iran-Saudi repressive bobsey twins. Chaos is the longstanding objective of the USGovt in foreign policy infection, no change in decades.

Syria is about a lot of things, most of which are volatile, many unsolvable. To be sure, the naval port of Tartus is valuable for the Russian Military, always eager to wrest a seaport. Like Lebanon, Syria is a hotbed stronghold for HezBollah, never to be taken lightly. They are mortal enemies to Israel, whose nations have exchanged covert violence for years. Syria might have tight relations with the Shiites of Iran, even some in Iraq. However, Syria represents the crossroads of many important shifting geopolitical roadways that pertain to the global financial structure and commercial systems. Syria is the tipping point for a Grand Global Paradigm Shift. It is the last stand for the Anglo Banker world. Syria will not go easily into the Russian camp, into the Gazprom fold, into the European energy market sphere. For if it does, the entire USDollar system of commerce and the USTreasury Bond system of reserves management will fall by the wayside and open a new era with Eastern dominance. But the Western powers cannot stop it. Clouds of whatever type do not halt pipeline flow, nor pipeline geopolitics.


Syria stands at the door to the emergence of the Eastern Alliance, the new dominant energy pipelines, a new payment system detached from the USDollar and Anglo banks. Syria stands at the door which controls some incremental European energy supply. Syria stands at the door to Gold Trade Settlement, with a transition step that brings more importance to commodity backed currencies and proper valid systems for trade. Syria means the pipelines strangle the USDollar. Syria means the end of the US system of IOU coupons that pollute the global banking system. Syria means the status quo is coming to an abrupt end. Syria represents a clash of East versus West, which has more commercial and bank significance than anything reported by the lapdog press. Notice the direct line from Iran through Iraq to Syria. The natgas of Iran reaches the Mediterranean Sea through Syria.

Syria is the end port for what the Jackass calls the Shiite Gas Pipeline. It begins in Iran and ends at the Mediterranean seaport in Syria. It was designed to terminate at a Shiite friendly nation. Thus my informal name. Ironically, Qatar is fighting against the Syrian Assad loyalists, but the Qatari natural gas will be directed into the same pipeline. In the last year, a giant Persian Gulf gas discovery was made in a joint Iran-Qatar project. Syria is about the last gasp for the Petro-Dollar. It represents a climax in Energy Pipeline Politics. Quietly for the last 15 to 20 years, Russia has been building crude oil pipelines and natural gas pipelines from the Mother Russian lands to points in Europe and China and the Former Soviet Republics. They have been constructing modern LNG gas port facilities. They have been forging contracts to supply energy to countless nations. The US-led plans have been more interference than constructive. They have consistently attempted to obstruct, rather than to build with some justification of common benefit.

The US news networks cannot tell why or how Syria is important relative to the USDollar. Most Americans cannot define money, let alone conceive of a Petro-Dollar defacto standard. They do not comprehend the global banking system having practices as an extension of Saudi crude oil sales in USDollars. They remember nothing of the Kissinger Arab Oil Surplus Recycle Pact into USTreasury Bonds and US big bank stocks. The focus should be on Pipelines and the closely related geopolitics. The focus should be on the eclipse of OPEC. The focus should be on the loss of Western Europe to the Russian fold, where natural gas supply will alter decisions. Notice the UK Parliament did not offer military support for the USGovt in Syria. They might have received a phone call from either Putin at the Kremlin or the CEO of Gazprom. Coming to a world near you is the NatGas Coop led by Gazprom. A regular feature  in geopolitical decisions will be the integration of natgas supply to Europe and Great Britain.

Clearly heading out is OPEC and its influence. The dirty secret for ten years has been the depletion and decline in Saudi oil reserves. The water cut has surpassed 80% on a regular basis at Saudi oilfields. It is the percentage of water in produced "oil" wells. The interior pressures are dissipated. The Saudis are suffering from lost oil surplus, rising government debt, higher domestic energy costs, higher food costs, internal strife, fascist islamic rule, rising political prisoner population, and geriatrics at the throne. It sure would be good to know how King Abdullah returned from a coma after a few months, where his organs were declared defunct. Maybe like Saddam Hussein, he has some handy doubles. The OPEC nations in the last several years have become a loud disorganized gaggle of devious dealers who discount prices and lie on output on a regular basis. The cartel has no unity anymore. Their honorable Saudi core is disintegrating. The Saudi OPEC core is precisely the foundation to the Petro-Dollar and the justification for global banking systems being based in USTreasury Bonds. Coming online is the NatGas Coop. Coming online is gold trade settlement. Coming online is the BRICS Bank. Coming into prominent view is Gazprom, the leader of the NatGas Coop. It has some powerful strange bedfellows who deal in one currency, natural gas.

The news networks told of Cyprus being the site of bank crisis, account confiscations, the bail-in procedures creating a Western model, and resolutions. It took a while to realize, but the Jackass back in the March Hat Trick Letter noted the Gazprom angle and potential motive. The Jackass mapped out a Prima Facie case for motive on the Cyprus bank attack. It was a challenge to Gazprom and the Russian banking system, more than a Bail-in Model. It was an attempt to cut off the Russian encroachment into Europe with their Gazprom weapon, the most disruptive economic weapon seen in decades.

Cyprus used to serve as the primary window for the entire Russian banking system, and the central bank too. All bank transactions from Russia went through Cyprus. The conclusion could be that the Bail-in procedure is a suicide pact for the West. It is a declaration that if accounting rules are to be enforced, and capital requirements enforced, then the big Western banks would slit their throats and force the vanish of private bank accounts. Ditto if the legal prosecution of big bank were to begin in earnest. They cannot pull that switch unless major banks are all dead gone, from grotesque contagion. Since Lehman failed, all the big Western banks are lashed together, much like sailors at sea on deck during a nasty storm. If one goes, all go. The banker elite needed to disguise their attack of Gazprom in Cyprus. They wanted to interrupt the progress made by Russia in Pipeline Politics. The public bought the false story, again, like they always do. They do not think beyond the first visible layer.

The USGovt lost on disruptions to Iran internet and undersea communication lines between 2004 and 2007. To be sure, the planned Iranian island center for trade processing never occurred, a success of sorts. The USGovt lost on Iranian sanctions. The rise of Turkey, India, and Chinese deals with unique payment systems have come to the table. Even the Japanese and South Koreans refused to play along. The entire workaround process served as a training ground for gold trade settlement. It will have a certain blossom, with the full weight of the BRICS nations behind the current initiatives. The US lost on Iran-Pakistan Pipeline, since China stepped forward, guaranteed funding for its completion, and even worked to extend the connected pipelines to the Western border of China for supply. The USGovt lost with its puppet named Mohammed Morsi, who was ousted in Egypt. The unspoken cause was food price inflation, not political discord as reported by the US news network minions. The USGovt won the Qaddafi's gold (144 tons) but with a grand backfire on the Libyan Embassy controversy. The Pentagon does not appreciate the sacrifice of Navy SEALS to deceit and hidden motives. The biggest failure by the USGovt could be the monetary policy at work by the US Federal Reserve. The QE bond purchase program has produced massive broad price inflation globally, in addition to rising energy costs, rising material costs, and rising related follow-on costs. It is difficult to find any USGovt or USFed policy of value, other than to serve the bank syndicate.

The key to the future is seen on the margin of new power. It is the Natural Gas Coop. To date, it has no name. Curiously, its power might lie in the fact that it has no name, no central nexus. It is a de-centralized cooperative. But more accurately, it has a Russian core, a brain trust at Gazprom. It has a certain Kremlin command center, since a newfound strategic weapon. It is their greatest global weapon in decades. The strange bedfellows consist of Russia (home HQ of Gazprom), Turkmenistan (#2 natgas global producer), Iran (giant renegade producer), Qatar (biggest LNG star), and Israel (from Tamar Platform). The presence of Sunni Qatar from the Persian Gulf and US Fascist Ally Israel make for the odd mix. In June, the Israel Govt signed a deal with Russian Gazprom. It called for directing all surplus natgas output from Tamar to the Gazprom pipeline system, and the European market. The Israeli Economy will greatly benefit from the surplus revenue.

Game over for OPEC and a guaranteed demise of the Petro-Dollar. Simply stated, Saudi Arabia is to OPEC, what Russia is to NatGas Coop. The phase out of OPEC is in progress, without much recognition. The emergence of the NatGas Coop is to be better understood in the near future. A tremendously important shift is taking place in energy geopolitics. The consequences will be rapid diversification out of the USTreasury Bond, colossal Indirect Exchange in asset deals, and broad abandonment (aka dumping). In the process, almost no buyers of USGovt debt will be visible, and the USFed will be leaned upon more fully for bond purchases. The Weimar machinery will strain to the limit. The USGovt debt default will occur, as the event has become more visible, a 2008 Hat Trick Letter forecast.

Not 5% of Americans comprehend the defacto Petro-Dollar standard. They will when the Saudis must step aside and permit OPEC to be eclipsed by the NatGas Coop with its expansive global network of pipelines. The great USDollar devaluation will occur when the Petro-Dollar falls by the wayside. The result will be profound price inflation in the USEconomy. The fall of the Saudi regime is guaranteed eventually, and likely soon. The Saudis cannot play both sides (US & Russia) successfully. They will fail with both partners. The NatGas Pipelines are critical, as they wield enormous economic leverage and power. Together, the NatGas Coop phases out OPEC and assures the end of the USDollar as it is currently known and structured. Watch the Saudis soon indicate that non-USDollar payments are accepted for crude oil sales, like accepting GBPounds, Euros, Japanese Yen, even Swiss Francs. Watch the Saudis closely for various signals of impending doom, death signals. As energy sales move gradually, then rapidly, away from the USD settlement, the world will go through a transformation. The banking system will change in their foundations, one nation at a time, with diversification away from USTBonds. It is Game Over!!

Syria is the last line of defense for the USDollar and the exalted position of OPEC. Syria is the potential recognized debut of the NatGas Coop in significance. It is all hidden, except to the Hat Trick Letter. In the new era emerging, Gold will prevail as the Gold Trade Standard is put in place. It will not be done with a stake in the ground from the banking system of the FOREX currency trading arenas. Therefore it is so dangerous to the status quo. My full expectation is that the USGovt will back off in Syria. The retreat will not be seen as a magnanimous gesture, but rather more like a bully backing down. Revelations will be very damaging on chemical weapons and the roles played. Roots to Saddam Hussein will be reviewed. Iran already has tens of thousands killed by chemical weapons over 20 years ago in a war waged with Iraq, with a hand from the Bushes. The United States leadership is in for some cold water in the face. The United States is due for some extreme isolation. The NatGas Coop will change the global map. It will open the door to the Eurasian Trade Zone for commerce, and open the door to the Gold Trade Settlement for finance. Some quantum leaps are in store and soon. Gold will emerge with a new Gold Trade Standard, whose price will shock most observers. Think multiples higher. Syria is a seminal event for gold.

UPDATED Ban Ki Moon & UN. John Kerry to make statement 12:30

UN leader Ban Ki-moon will meet ambassadors from Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States on Friday after cutting short a visit to Europe over the Syria chemical weapons crisis.

"He intends to engage with member states on developments in Syria, starting today at noon (1600 GMT) with a meeting with the permanent members of the Security Council," said UN spokesman Martin Nesirky.

The United States and its allies are considering a military strike on Syria over the attack. Russia and China are fiercely opposed to such a move.

Noon today, yet another meeting?

BREAKING: U.S. to make statement at 12:30 p.m.

 The Spec has a poll for Canadian and anyone else if your interested in voting
Of course, my vote was NO.

I just listened to the second Kerry talk of the week. What struck me was the many and numerous similarities to the first speech.

Here is a transcript of the second diatribe
For your viewing enjoyment and comparative purposes. The first talk can be found in this post from Monday  Use of Force against Syria just days away? It looks that way.

Take note of the sameness of the two speeches. 
The manipulative use of the language etc.,

James Corbett interviews Pepe Escobar on Bandar Bush's role in Syria & more

Roving correspondent and frequent guest Pepe Escobar of Asia Times Online joins us once again to discuss the geopolitical machinations behind the latest developments in Syria. We discuss the possibility of an Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline and how the regional players react to such a proposal, Prince Bandar of Saudi and his role in orchestrating the terror in Syria, the reason why the chemical weapons attack in Syria was a false flag attack and why Syria can’t come out and deny it, the closing window of opportunity for Obama and friends to launch their strike on Assad, and much more. Don’t miss this in-depth interview with one of the world’s most insightful geopolitical analysts.

You may recall a rather large post using the Iran-Iraq- Syria Pipeline article, from Mr Escobar, as the window while dressing it up with additional complimentary info. Frilly curtains if you may?

If you didn't read it then, you can read it today:
Flashback! : War against Iran, Iraq and Syria?

Musical Interlude: Nirvana- Lake of Fire

annie reminded me of this tune- what the hell!
It's timely.

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Syria: The hand of the US will soon be free. Cameron lost. Another fail at the UN

Hands off Syria!                     Hands off Syria!                             Hands off Syria!

Just a quick news round up:

Russia had requested a UN Security Council Meeting: Closed Door

Reports are: no progress was made.

A meeting of the UN Security Council's permanent members today ended quickly with no sign of progress on an agreement over the Syria crisis.

The meeting started breaking up after less than an hour, with the ambassadors of China, France, Britain, Russia and the United States steadily walking out.

It was the second time in two days that the five Security Council powers had left a meeting on Syria with no progress.

On Wednesday, the five countries met to discuss a resolution proposed by Britain to authorise the use of military force against Syria in retaliation for an alleged chemical weapons attack that killed hundreds near the capital, Damascus.

Russia remains firmly opposed to such action, saying there is no evidence that President Bashar Assad's regime was responsible for the attack, as the US and its allies contend.

British Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant looked grim as he walk past reporters today, saying "No comment". The other ambassadors also did not speak to reporters.
A Western diplomat said today's meeting was requested by Russia. Russia's UN mission refused to comment.
US hand may not be stayed much longer-
 It appeared likely that an American military operation could happen without formal authorization from Capitol Hill or the United Nations.

Waiting for British participation would mean holding off on a strike at least until the weekend. Prime Minister David Cameron said his country would not join in military efforts until a U.N. chemical weapons inspection team on the ground in Syria releases its findings.

Some of the U.N. chemical weapons experts will travel directly from Syria on Saturday to different laboratories around Europe to deliver “an extensive amount of material” gathered, U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said. While the mandate of the U.N. team is to determine whether chemical agents were used in the attack, not who was responsible, Haq suggested the evidence — which includes biological samples and witness interviews — might give an indication of who deployed gases.

While Obama declared unequivocally this week that the U.S. had “concluded” that Assad’s government was behind the attack, he presented no definitive proof.

Obama continued making his case for a robust response to world leaders, speaking Thursday with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. With national elections scheduled in Germany for next month, Merkel is unlikely to pull her country into a military conflict.
Speaking of Britain: Thanks for the info Neo

UK Prime Minister Cameron loses Syria war vote 

                     US making case for action against Syria
British Prime Minister David Cameron has lost a vote endorsing military action against Syria by 13 votes, a stunning defeat for a government which had seemed days away from joining the U.S. in possible attacks to punish Bashar Assad's regime over an alleged chemical weapons attack.
Thursday evening's vote was nonbinding, but in practice the rejection of military strikes means Cameron's hands are tied. In a terse statement to Parliament, Cameron said it was clear to him that the British people did not want to see military action.

Speaking of the ‘legal case’ for war?  Quoting Haaretz   

U.S.: If we need legal justification for Syria strike, we'll produce one on our own

Fixing the intelligence to fit the agenda. The usual.  Obama the 'peace' president. A sick joke on the planet.


Obama: Promotes lie of Syrian chemical weapon use against the US!

Which most likely means we should be alert to the potential for a false flag attack this long week-end   

I couldn’t believe what I read, nor what I heard when I took the linked news story in.
If one lie won’t work then lie, lie and lie again. It must be difficult for the Obama junta? I guess that is why Kerry made the comment about the internet making it difficult to govern?
Truth be told the internet doesn't make governing more difficult. What it does is level the playing field by allowing the people to keep tabs on the very governments who are supposed to be serving their populace.
I don't see a problem with that. Do you? The internet also allows the citizens to catch the lies of government easier. I don't see a problem with that. Do you?

Presenting: Obama "catapulting the propaganda"

 President Obama raises the spectre of weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of terrorists bent on attacking the US         


He also declared unequivocally that the United States has "concluded" that the Syrian government carried out a deadly chemical weapons attack on civilians last week.

Mr Obama did not present any direct evidence to back up his assertions.

Obama can declare he is almighty god that does not make it so.
He can declare the sky is purple when it is blue that does not make it so.
He can in fact declare any lie he wishes as true. That does not make even one of his lies the truth.
Obama is relying on “Appeal to Authority. He is the “authority” figure and therefore you and I are to fall in line. That is nonsensical. The US has presented no evidence for the simple reason that  there is no evidence to support his claim. The Russians have presented evidence of exactly who perpetrated the attacks... the rebels. And the lying Obama is aware of this evidence. It was presented to the UN Security Council.

Hands off Syria!                     Hands off Syria!                             Hands off Syria!

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Cameron backs down on urgent Syria strikes

Hands off Syria!                     Hands off Syria!                             Hands off Syria!



David Cameron backed down and agreed to delay a military attack on Syria following a growing revolt over the UK's rushed response to the crisis on Wednesday night.
  The Prime Minister has now said he will wait for a report by United Nations weapons inspectors before seeking the approval of MPs for “direct British involvement” in the Syrian intervention.
Senior sources had previously suggested that Britain would take part in strikes as soon as this weekend which meant an emergency recall of Parliament was necessary on Thursday.
However, following Labour threatening not to support the action and senior military figures expressing concerns over the wisdom of the mission, the Prime Minister on Wednesday night agreed to put British involvement on hold.

The climbdown is likely to be seen as an embarrassment for Mr Cameron as he was determined to play a leading role in British military strikes, which had been expected this weekend.

Cameron had better stick to his word and delay this, indefinitely.

Don't miss two previous posts from today
1st: US/UK/ Israel ally AQ ready to punish Assad for alleged chemical attack
2nd : Is the strike on Syria imminent? Evacuated Damascus, oil prices & UN Fail!

Is the strike on Syria imminent? Evacuated Damascus, oil prices & UN Fail!


In advance of a possible Western military strike, President Bashar Assad's forces appear to have evacuated most personnel from army and security command headquarters in central Damascus, residents and opposition sources said Wednesday. 

Among the buildings that have been partially evacuated are the General Staff Command Building on Umayyad Square, the nearby air force command and the security compounds in the Western Kfar Souseh districts, residents of the area and a Free Syrian Army rebel source said. 
UPDATE # 1                                                                    ????????

More on the news of Syrians leaving Damascus

Residents of Damascus are fleeing the city, as well as other areas, for the nation's borders as the U.S. and its Western allies prepare possible military strikes over alleged chemical weapons attacks by the regime of Bashar Assad.
Pro-opposition website Kulna Shorkaa reported Syrian intelligence branches were moving documents to alternative locations, and the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry said it evacuated 89 people including 75 Russians on Tuesday, with more expected to leave on Wednesday.

RE: oil prices
"Syria in terms of its oil output is relatively de minimis, but in the meantime should it escalate to something where Iran gets involved … [this could lead to] some kind of major supply disruption,"

"It's a bigger risk for Europe than it is for the U.S.," said Mark Luschini, CIO at Janney Montgomery Scott. "As Brent [crude] continues to move higher, that's the big issue—that Europe rolls back over again after we've seen a big rally in those markets in the last six-eight months. That could be a risk here."

Deja Vu: UN asking for more time....same as prior to the attack on Iraq

"Operation Restore Credibility" This is how Germany wants this attack sold


If it does come to a limited military strike without a UN mandate, Germany first of all should press the US and its allies to be honest about the rationale for and justification of any military action. In other words: state clearly and openly that this won't be a humanitarian intervention to protect civilians in Syria.
This would address misgivings voiced by human rights advocates like Kenneth Roth, the head of Human Rights Watch. Just today Roth asked on Twitter "US says it'll try to punish & deter Syria for chemical weapon use. But key is: will it better protect civilians?"

'Operation Restore Credibility'
The honest answer, however, is that the envisaged military action will not offer better protection for civilians in Syria. That's why "Operation Restore Credibility" would be a fitting code name for the coming airstrikes. It would make clear that protecting civilians is not the goal of this mission; protecting Obama's red line against the use of chemical weapons is.
Selling the mission instead under the broad "Responsibility to Protect" label would be disingenuous and hurt the legitimate cause of protecting civilians. While we are at it, we might also acknowledge that so far the international community has failed in its responsibility to protect Syrian civilians and try to draw lessons from our failure.
Berlin should also press Washington and London not to claim that an intervention without Security Council approval is covered by international law. It would be better to admit that the allies chose to act against the prevailing interpretation of international law due to exceptional circumstances. While this is a problematic argument in its own right, it's less pernicious than claiming that military action without a UN mandate is clearly legal.

No 'Kosovo model'
In addition, Germany should advocate against any loose talk of a "Kosovo model" for the Syrian intervention for the simple reason that there is no Kosovo model unless the West wants to actively pursue a partition of Syria and take responsibility for preventing human rights abuses carried out in its respective parts.
Instead, the US and its allies should use the air strikes to pursue a diplomatic solution to the Syrian civil war.


UN Security Council permanent members fail to reach agreement on Syria

 The five permanent members of the UN Security Council failed to reach an agreement Wednesday on a British-proposed resolution that would authorize the use of military force against Syria.
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.
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 UN inspectors currently in Syria to investigate alleged chemical attacks have not endorsed the allegations.

US/UK/ Israel ally AQ ready to punish Assad for alleged chemical attack

You might think this is satire. It isn't. 
  AQ and all other brands of the Islamic NATO/IDF troops have always been allied with the US/UK/Israel/NATO(France) global war machine. 

So here we go, yet again!

Syria: Al-Qaeda vows 'volcano of revenge' for chemical attacks 

Compare this with: France 'ready to punish' Syria over gas attack

Compare this with:US to punish Syria, not push regime

Compare this with:Britain has a responsibility to take action to punish the “morally indefensible” use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime even without a UN mandate

And then there is Al Qaeda throwin' in their support for the US/UK/France and Israel.....

Beirut, 28 August (AKI) - An Al-Qaeda affiliate on Wednesday threatened to unleash a 'volcano' against Syria' government and military to avenge the suspected poison gas attacks in Damascus last week that killed hundreds of civilians.  

The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant said it would target "the main joints of the regime in imprisoned Damascus," after meetings with eight Syrian factions. "Targets include security branches, support and supply points, training centres, and infrastructure,"the message said, cited by the US-based terrorist-tracking website SITE Intelligence.  (SITE is linked to Israel) 

Wow, AQ is ready to hit the very targets that US/UK/NATO/Israel want taken down!! 

Coincidence? NO.

Allies? YES! 

It is that obvious.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Any US strike against Syria likely to last hours not days??

Consider this an update on the earlier post from today. Syrian strikes sooner rather then later: Israeli intel lights the way. Iran? To get up to speed you might want to read there first
If this latest report is accurate, what has changed?
Was it the NATO non assistance?
Fox News and there is a video there you may wish to take in

Any U.S. strike against Syria is “likely to last hours not days” and probably would not come before the British Parliament votes on military action Thursday, a senior U.S. defense official told Fox News.
Sources tell Fox that a strike would be led by the U.S. Navy and its assets positioned in the Eastern Mediterranean and that it would be limited in scope.
Four U.S. Navy destroyers are in position, along with at least one nuclear-powered submarine. A British submarine is also available if Britain’s Parliament approves military action.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel spoke to his British and French counterparts by phone Tuesday during a trip to Asia. In an interview with the BBC, he said the U.S. military was in position and “ready to go.”
According to U.S. military officials, there are no plans in the initial mission to strike or secure President Bashar Assad's chemical weapons, which are spread among 50 different sites, some of which are underground.
Wait a minute, I thought this was punishment for daring to use chemical weapons? You know the ones that Syria didn't use?

In fact it is not even possible, experts say, to use air strikes to carry out surgical strikes on chemical weapons storage facilities, despite suggestions from some U.S. legislators in weekend interviews that that be the preferred action. Air strikes would release those toxic chemicals into the air, potentially causing more mass casualties.

“It seems to me that what we're looking at here is sort of shock and awe light,” said Retired Major General Bob Scales, a Fox News military analyst and former commandant of the Army War College. “That is a simple cruise missile strike from mostly sea-delivered platforms launched outside the umbrella of Syrian air defense intended to strike high visibility targets like command and control or perhaps some missile and weapon placements.”
The current goal, according to a senior U.S. defense official, "is to deter the regime from using chemical weapons in the future and to degrade its capabilities...we have a military solution for that." (baloney)

Pentagon officials confirm that strike plans do not include regime change, so there is little need for waves of air or missile strikes over several days.
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Martin Dempsey has said repeatedly that "there is no military solution" for regime change in Syria.
According to one senior U.S. defense official, in response to reports that a window to strike could open as early as Thursday, "the window to strike is open now from a military perspective. The decision about timing is political."
The decision about timing is political. As I mentioned the other day. In this post: Use of Force against Syria just days away? It looks that way.
Changing the situation on the ground for the NATO IDF Islamic Troops

NATO has called an emergency meeting in Brussels on Wednesday. No decision to strike is likely to be made before then.

Syrian strikes sooner rather then later: Israeli intel lights the way. Iran?


I have been thinking about Syria in terms of the the situation with Iran especially the attack that Israel so urgently wants to make against Iran. Of course, this is also on the minds of Israeli leaders.
Would Israel take the opportunity, under cover of the strikes from the US/UK etc, to strike at Iran? I kind of doubt it myself, but, it is worth considering.
So will Israel strike Iran? We have talked that subject on a number of occasions.
For Israel, US response on Syria may be harbinger for Iran
In Jerusalem, Washington’s resolve in Syria is seen as a crucial litmus test for its readiness to confront another looming Mideast showdown over unconventional weapons.

The prospect of a nuclear Iran is viewed with much greater concern in Israel, though Obama has declined to establish any similar red lines even as he has sought to assure Israel that he is not making empty threats about preventing Iran’s acquisition of a nuclear weapon.

American action in Syria might be enough to persuade Netanyahu the Americans are serious about Iran, Zisser said. But Netanyahu’s comments at his weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday suggested that Israel is prepared to take action on its own.

“The most dangerous regimes in the world must not be allowed to possess the most dangerous weapons in the world,” Netanyahu said. “Our finger must always be on the pulse. Ours is a responsible finger and if necessary, it will also be on the trigger.”
Israel has  a 'responsible finger' on the trigger? We would have to define responsible wouldn't we? Or perhaps redefine it?

What else makes me think that Israel may take an opportunity to strike Iran. This news has me wondering?
  Turkey may open ─░ncirlik base upon NATO decision. If the US and company are going to launch everything from the Mediterranean why would they need the Turkish base? Any one?
And Syria...

The west tells Syrian opposition to expect strike within days
According to sources  who were at a meeting between envoys and the Syrian coalition

    Aim of military strike would be to deter further use of chemical weapons
    Opposition has suggested list of potential targets
    Western powers advise Syrian opposition to prepare for Geneva talks despite impending attack

The attack according to this article will last a couple of days
The timing of such an attack, which would probably last no more than two days and involve sea-launched cruise missiles — or, possibly, long-range bombers — striking military targets not directly related to Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal, would be dependent on three factors: completion of an intelligence report assessing Syrian government culpability in last week’s alleged chemical attack; ongoing consultation with allies and Congress; and determination of a justification under international law.

There is of course no justification under international law, but, as mentioned yesterday the “Obama administration has been very creative” in that department

Oh and guess which nation is providing ‘evidence’ about the chemical attack? Israeli intelligence seen as central to US case against Syria. Yup, Israeli ‘intelligence’ That should say it all.

While Israel would almost certainly take no direct part in a military strike, Israeli intelligence information is widely believed to have played a central role in enabling the US’s adamant conviction that Assad’s regime fired chemical weapons

Supposedly, evidence  regarding the attacks is to be presented today, Tuesday August 27/08.
US to present evidence Tuesday ahead of Syria strike

Provided by Israel as already mentioned. I suspect immediately following this presentation the strikes will begin. And should end before the week-end. If all the information from the main stream media is correct?
Two administration officials said the US was expected to make public a more formal determination of chemical weapons use on Tuesday, with an announcement of Obama’s response likely to follow quickly. The officials insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the internal deliberations.

US action will last only one or two days and originate from American vessels already stationed in the eastern Mediterranean, the Washington Post report said, but won’t take place before the completion of a detailed intelligence assessment and an analysis of the legality of such a move, and before US allies and Congress are consulted.
** I actually do not believe the tripe about the analysis of legality.  The US and Israel care not for legality or international law or human beings for that matter. There disdain for all that and more has been demonstrated abundantly on numerous previous occasions. The US will use the Kosovo meme and that will be that. At least for now, that is how I see this playing out.
On Saturday, a leading German news magazine reported that Israeli intelligence had intercepted Syrian officials discussing the chemical strike (created intelligence?)and that the communications proved that the Assad government was behind the use of nonconventional weapons.

An Israeli team, headed by outgoing National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror, was in Washington Monday for security consultations,( or to give the orders?) with a special emphasis placed on Syria and the consequences and details of a potential US strike. Both Syrian and Iranian officials threatened Monday that if such a strike were to take place, Israel would be targeted in response.       

UPDATE BEGINS: Missile strikes against Syria could be launched 'as early as Thursday'

NBC News is reporting that senior US officials said Tuesday that strikes against Syria could start "as early as Thursday." However, with the team of UN chemical weapons inspectors in Syria scheduled to leave the country on Sunday, questions are being asked whether the attacks could start before Sunday.
The officials said the strikes will last three days and that the aim is not to degrade the Syrian Army's military capabilities but to send a strong signal to Bashar al-Assad that the "international community" would not tolerate chemical weapons use.
  First it was two days and now it is three days.


NATO Secretary General rejects western military role in Syria

 Clearly NATO leadership has heard from Russia/China regarding an attack on Syria. Possibly, Germany is not so hot on the idea?

Monday, August 26, 2013

Use of Force against Syria just days away? It looks that way.

There are several updates at the bottom-scroll down!

Two news stories are causing me a great deal of consternation.
US will make legal case for striking Syria without UN approval 

Sources tell 'Post' the United States is preparing justification for use of force against Syria with allies, which will circumvent Russia, China vows to block military intervention; military action possible in coming days.
WASHINGTON -- The United States is preparing legal justification for the use of force against Syria with allies Britain and France that would circumvent the United Nations Security Council, where Russia and China have vowed to block any resolution authorizing military intervention in the conflict.
The US will detail its case soon, with military action possible in the coming days, sources told The Jerusalem Post on Monday.

But the Obama administration has proven creative in its legal justifications in the past.  

Administration officials have been studying Western intervention in Kosovo as a model for action in Syria, The New York Times reports.

Speaking in Indonesia, US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel refused to detail military contingencies prepared by the Pentagon for the president.

 Britain has readied Royal Navy forces in the Mediterranean to strike with American destroyers should their leaders choose to move forward. A strike would likely involve standoff assets that would avoid entry into foreign air space.

 Senator John McCain, anticipating a limited, symbolic strike on Assad's command and control centers, said Sunday that the president should consider "very serious action, not just launching some cruise missiles."
 France says ‘proportionate response’ brewing after Syria chemical arms attack
The French foreign minister says there will be a “proportionate response” to the alleged chemical weapons attack in a Damascus suburb that he blamed on Syria’s government.
“It will be negotiated in coming days,” Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told Europe 1 radio on Monday. Fabius acknowledged that the lack of a U.N. blessing was problematic. “All the options are open. The only option that I can’t imagine would be to do nothing.”

OK, deep breath. 

I have mulled this over all weekend.  This is just my opinion-  There will be some limited strikes on Syria. Exactly as the psycho Senator McCain is suggesting. This is a very dangerous, dangerous move.
The UN inspectors have gotten into the area of the alleged gas attack that took place last week 

In case you have been under a rock??? The false flag attacks were covered in two posts:  

 "Chemical attack" conveniently staged and timed in Syria. Planned Staged Psy-op.

 Syria: Images of death but NO PROOF of chemical attack

 By time the UN  get the samples, send them out to multiple labs to check and double check, weeks will pass. The NATO nutter nations leaders & Israel cannot wait for the evidence to come back and demonstrate that the rebels committed the crime. Or that the evidence is 'inconclusive'? These psychopathic leaders want to get their war on. It seems to me that the aim here is change the situation on the ground in advance of Geneva 2. This will also be a message to Russia.
As we are all aware Syria has been cleaning house!

Under control: A Syrian soldier walks through the Jobar neighborhood of Damascus on Saturday. State media accused rebels of using chemical arms against government troops trying to storm the contested neighborhood, claiming a major army offensive in recent days had forced the opposition fighters to resort to such weapons 'as their last card.

The signs would seem bad for President Bashar Assad. Blasts echo all day long over the Syrian capital as troops battle rebels entrenched on its eastern doorstep. The government admits the economy is devastated. Allegations of a horrific chemical attack have given new life to calls for international action against his regime.
Yet it appears more confident than ever that it weathered the worst and has gained the upper hand in the country’s civil war, even if it takes years for victory.

 There are multiple reasons for the new sense of assurance. The military scored a string of victories on the ground over the past few months that blunted a rebel surge early in the year. Army offensives stalled or pushed back rebels in Damascus’ suburbs. A rebel drive into a regime heartland in the western province on the Mediterranean coast was swiftly reversed over the past week
  The regime also believes it has shored up its most serious vulnerability: the economy.
 But this summer, Syria’s allies Russia and Iran effectively handed the government a lifeline, with credit lines to buy rice, flour, sugar, petroleum products and other staples. With that, the regime hopes it can keep an exhausted population clothed, fed, warm in the winter — and firmly on its side — enough to endure a long fight.

When asked whether Syria will have to pay back the credit lines in the future, Jamil smiled, saying, “It’s between friends.”

There lies the problem: Syria is ridding itself of NATO/Israeli scum

The NATO nutty nations will say they are 'punishing' Assad the tyrant for gassing his people (bullshit) and use humanitarian rhetoric to justify mass killings of Syrian civilians. Yes, the NATO insane nations will most likely target many civilians. Along with 'command and control' centres. This will increase pressure on Assad in hopes of turning the people and the military against the leadership.

It is not a coincidence that this week end a large shipment of armaments made its way through Turkey to the Islamic NATO/IDF in the north

Gulf-based supporters have sent a 400-ton shipment of arms to Syria's outgunned rebels, one of the biggest to reach them in their two-year-old uprising, opposition sources said on Sunday.

That makes it a good time for a strike of the type McCain is talking about. At least that is how I see it
My thoughts remain as always with the Syrian people.

Don't miss the first post of the day: 

Bashar Assad Interview with Izvestia- Must Read!!

UPDATE update!!! : So, I just watched John Kerry make his statement. There is no doubt that the 'allies' will launch attacksWhen I can get the Kerry lie/hard sell it will be posted. Kerry made a statement about the fabrications and a moral compass. What a disgusting vulgar display of spin.

Grab a barf bag! 


CNN-Missile Strikes on Syria likely

Instead, a limited coalition of NATO partners such as Germany, France and Britain -- all of which have called for action against Syria -- and some Arab League members appeared more likely to provide the political backing needed by Obama to order U.S. missile strikes.
A senior administration official told CNN on Monday that the goals of any coalition military action would be to punish al-Assad and show him that there was a cost for using chemical weapons while preventing him from doing so again.
In addition, a military strike would seek to degrade the Syrian regime's capabilities enough to weaken it without causing it to fall to an opposition considered unprepared to assume power, the official said.
Possible coalition partners include NATO allies Britain, France, Germany and Canada, as well as regional powers Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.


Sergei Lavrov press conference- 

Bashar Assad Interview with Izvestia- Must Read!!

I just had to get this up!
Bashar Assad did an extensive interview with the Russian newspaper Izvestia.

Yes, it is the translate version.  And, yes it has it's shortcomings. But, it is clear enough to understand fully what he is saying, particularly about Israeli involvement.  Israeli involvement has been a reality in the destabilization of Syria. From day one I had made the case Israel was involved. And, through dozens and dozens of posts Israeli involvement/collusion with the terrorists in Syria was crystal clear. Despite all the lying claims to the otherwise made via the msm.

                         Bashar al-Assad: "All contracts concluded with Russia are carried out"

Bashar al-Assad: "All contracts concluded with Russia are carried out"

President of the Syrian Arab Republic in an exclusive interview with "News" - about the threat of invasion by the U.S. and the West, relations with Vladimir Putin and the common destiny of the Russians and the Syrians
Bashar al-Assad: "All contracts concluded with Russia are carried out"

In the midst of the Syrian crisis Alexander Potapov and Yuri Matsarsky met in Damascus with President Bashar Assad. In an exclusive interview with "Izvestia", he said, who is actually using chemical weapons, commented on statements by Western politicians intention to put military pressure on Syria and appreciated the assistance provided by Russia and its president of the Syrian people.

- Mr. President, the most pressing issue today - what is the situation in Syria? What territories remain under the control of the rebels?

Assad- It's not the areas that are under the control of terrorists, and territories under the control of the army. There is some enemy who occupied our land. We are dealing with terrorists infiltrating into the villages and on the outskirts of cities. They are criminals who kill innocent people, destroy infrastructure.

The army, security forces and the police tend to knock them out of the settlements and destroy. Those who manage to survive, move on to other areas and join other gangs. Thus, the essence of our business - it is the destruction of terrorists.

The main reason for the continuation of hostilities - a huge number of constantly arriving in Syria terrorists from abroad. Monthly on our land comes their tens of thousands. In addition, the continued funding of terrorists from abroad and supplying them weapons.

But I assure you that there is a place where not able to enter the government army - she comes in and destroys the terrorists wherever encounters them.

- Western press is often said that the terrorists run about 40 or 70% of the territory of Syria. In fact, as far as the Syrian government controls its territory?


Assad- No army in any country of the world will not be fully operational throughout the country. Terrorists take advantage of this by trying to penetrate everywhere, where there is no army. We purified each province, which included terrorists. Therefore, I repeat, the problem is not in the area where the terrorists, and it changes every day and every hour. The problem in many action movies coming from abroad.

Can the Syrian Arab Army to enter any area occupied by the terrorists and destroy them? I will tell you with certainty, "Yes." The army continues to do so. It takes more time, because that war that was imposed on us, does not end immediately. It takes a relatively long time. And we are paying a heavy price for the war, the destruction of all the terrorists in Syria.

- Are they terrorists, you are talking about, some of separate and distinct groups of radicals or is it part of a huge force, which aims to destabilize the situation in the Middle East, including in Syria?

Assad- We are dealing with individual groups, and with the whole terrorist armies. But they are very similar. First, ideologically. Secondly, they get money from the same sources.

Their ideology - radicalism, can not stand the existence of any other religious beliefs, except professed by the terrorists. They have common ideological leaders such as al-Zawahiri, but each group has its own guide.

Their sponsors, as I have said, are the same, it is often entire states, such as Saudi Arabia.

Despite the disunity of groups, their sponsors and thought leaders have the ability to manipulate each of them by the radical messages. For example, they may say to them: "Muslims are obliged to carry out jihad in Syria." As a result, thousands of militants are sent here to fight.

Sponsors also control the bandit group, supplying arms and funds to specific acts of terrorism.

In addition, the same Saudi Arabia combines the functions and ideologist and sponsor: circulate rebels Wahhabi ideology and support them with money.

- The Syrian government says about the close relationship between Israel and terrorists. But because the mere mention of Israel makes the radical Islamists tantrum. How, in this case the cooperation is possible between the two?

Assad-Why Israel opens fire at our troops when we beat the terrorists at the border? Not in order to to prevent us? And why Israel gives blocked at the border terrorists away from our troops on its territory, and even then attack the Syrian part of the other side? Why Israel several times in recent months attacked parts of the Syrian Arab army?

But the main evidence of cooperation results in Israel itself.

Israel has said several times that the country's hospitals treated dozens of terrorists. If these groups are so hated Israel and one utterance of his name brings them into hysterics and makes them hate, why did these radical groups that are fighting now against Egypt and Syria, throughout its history has never carried out any operations against Israel?

Well, let's remember who originally created these groups? These terrorists recruited and supported by the U.S. and the West, Saudi Arabia has funded them since the early 1980s, in order to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. How, then, these groups started by the West and America, will be able to strike at Israel?

- Our interview with you will be translated into many languages, many world leaders, including those who oppose you, read it. What do you want to say to them?

Assad- Among the heads of state at the present time, many politicians, but few leaders.  ( I could not agree more with that statement!)The fact that they do not know the history and learn from it. Some people forget the recent past.

Have they learned the lessons of the past 50 years? At least through a document of his predecessors, who failed all the wars since Vietnam, and up to now? Whether they have understood that those wars brought nothing but chaos and instability in the Middle East and in other regions of the world?

It is these policies, I would like to explain that terrorism - is not a trump card in his pocket, which you can take out and use whenever you want, and then put back. Terrorism, like a scorpion sting at any time. Accordingly, it can not be for terrorism in Syria and against him in Mali. You can not support terrorism in Chechnya and the fight against it in Afghanistan.

I will clarify what I'm saying it's not about all the leaders, and the heads of some Western countries. They would be worth to stop to climb in the affairs of other countries, creating their own puppet regimes, and to listen to the views of their people, maybe then will Western policy closer to reality.

If you insist that I sent a message to the world, I say, if someone wants to turn Syria into a puppet of the West, then it will not. We are an independent country and will fight against terrorism will be free to build its relations with those countries with which we ourselves wish, for the sake of the Syrian people.
- On Wednesday, the Syrian government has faced accusations by the rebels of using chemical weapons. This accusation was immediately picked up by a number of Western leaders. What is your response to that? Will you allow the UN Special Commission to investigate this case?

Assad- Statements made by politicians in the U.S., the West and in other countries - and an insult to common sense and disregard the public opinion of their people. This is nonsense: first indicted, and only then collect evidence. And it deals with the powerful countries - the United States. That is, on Wednesday we were accused, and only two days later the U.S. government announced the start of gathering evidence. And how do they intend to collect the evidence, while in the distance? We are accused that the army has used chemical weapons in an area that is supposedly under the control of insurgents. In fact, in this area there is no clear front line between the army and militants. And how can the government use chemical or other weapons of mass destruction in a place where concentrated his troops? This is contrary to elementary logic. So this kind of accusations are political, and the reason for this was caused by a series of victories by government forces over the terrorists.

As for the investigation of war crimes in Syria, we are the first who demanded arrival of an international commission. When terrorists fired a rocket with a poisonous gas at Aleppo, soon after numerous statements in the West about the readiness of government forces to use chemical weapons, we requested the visit of foreign experts. This position has been agreed with Russia, we would like to see the U.S., France, Britain were convinced that it was not us, but our opponents are using chemical weapons. Seen in the case of specific facts, not unsubstantiated allegations.

In recent weeks, we have been negotiating with the UN on the work of the commission, at last, the experts came to us (in a few hours after the interview, it became known that the government of Syria and the UN commission agreed on a procedure for joint action to investigate the alleged use of chemical weapons. - "Proceedings "). The results of their work will be presented at the UN.

But you also know that any results can be interpreted in favor of individual countries. Therefore, we expect that Russia will not allow to interpret the documents in the interests of the U.S. and Western policies in general.

- Judging from the statements of U.S. leadership and a number of other Western countries made in the last few days, the Americans do not rule out military action in Syria. You admit that the United States will act in the same manner as operating in Iraq, trying to find a pretext for an invasion?

Assad- The question of military intervention in Syria rises is not the first time. From the very beginning of the crisis the United States, France and Britain were trying to make a military intervention, but to their misfortune, things took a different turn. They tried to convince Russia and China to change its position on the UN Security Council, but it did not work out.

They were unable to convince their people and the world that they have undertaken in the Middle East policy is clever and useful. It was also found that the situation here is different from the situation in Egypt and Tunisia.

The same scenario of "Arab revolution" has ceased to be convincing. They can start any war, but can not know how long it will last and how much territory spreads. They realized that their script was out of control.

Another obstacle to military intervention - the understanding of all that is happening in Syria - it is not the people's revolution and demand reforms. This is terrorism. In this situation, the Western leaders can not tell its citizens: "We are going to Syria in order to support terrorism."

- Mr President, with which the United States will face if they do dare to strike against Syria or even an invasion of the country?

Assad: The U.S. is waiting for failure, as in all previous wars waged by them, from Vietnam to the present day. America participated in numerous wars, but has never been able to achieve their political objectives for which these wars began. She was not able to convince his multi-ethnic people in the righteousness of the war, as well as to instill their ideology to other countries. Yes, indeed, great powers can unleash a war, but can they win?

- Are you in a relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin? Do you communicate with him on the phone? If yes, what issues to discuss?

Assad: We are with President Vladimir Putin's long-standing relationship established long before the Syrian crisis. From time to time we contact them. Of course, over the phone to discuss such complex issues as the Syrian crisis, it is impossible. Relations between our countries are now supported through the Russian decision-makers who visit us, either through their Syrian counterparts, which are sent to Moscow.

- Are you planning to visit Russia in the near future or to invite the Russian president to the country?

- It is certainly possible, but I think that it is necessary to make every effort in the country to solve the Syrian crisis. Now we're losing people every day, but when circumstances improve, then, of course, or I paid a visit to President Putin, or invite him to Damascus.

- In continuation of the Russian theme. You know that Russia opposes U.S. policy and the EU on the Syrian issue. What would happen if Russia will give way to their pressure? Do you allow such a scenario?

- To date, it is important to look at the Russian-American relations, not only through the Syrian crisis, we need a broader view. The difference of positions on the Syrian crisis - just one of the existing contradictions between your countries. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States seemed that Russia destroyed forever. But in the late 1990s with the advent of Vladimir Putin, Russia has gradually gain strength and insistently defend their positions. As a result of a new Cold War for political influence. United States acted on it on several fronts, persistently trying to block Russia's interests in the world.

The U.S. goal - to belittle the role of Russia in the international arena, including by means of pressure on the Syrian issue.

You may ask why Russia supports Syria. And it is very important to explain this point. Russia today is not protecting the president or the government of Bashar al-Assad as the Syrian people can choose any president and any government.

Russia defends the principles that it should be at least a hundred years: the principles of independence and non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. Russia itself has repeatedly suffered from it.

In addition, Russia defends its interests in the region, and it is her right. These interests are not limited to the port of Tartus, for example. Her interests are much deeper: the terrorist strikes on Syria threaten the stability of the entire Middle East. Destabilization here will be reflected on Russia. Guide your country, unlike many leaders of Western countries understand this.

As for the cultural and social situation, we should not forget the thousands of Russian-Syrian families who create cultural, social bridge between the two countries. If Russia were traded, it would have happened a year or two ago, when the political situation was unclear. Today the picture has become absolutely clear to all. Who did not bargain then, there will be traded now.

- Are there any negotiations with Russia for the supply of fuel, goods and weapons? I especially want to ask about the contract to supply S-300 systems - they are delivered to you?

Assad: Of course, no country can claim the existence of certain weapons or sign the contract for their supply - this is part of the secrets of the state and the armed forces.

But I want to say that all the contracts concluded with Russia are carried out. And neither crisis nor pressure from the U.S., Europe and the Gulf countries have not prevented their implementation. Russia supplies Syria's what it takes to protect it and protect its people.

- What kind of help is waiting for Syria from Russia: economic or arms? Syria does not plan to ask for a loan from Russia?

Assad: When national security is weakened, this leads to weakening and economic conditions. And the fact that Russia supplies Syria's military contracts will certainly lead to an improvement of the economic situation in Syria.

Russia's support for our right to assert their independence from the outset helped our economy. A number of states opposing the Syrian people, and inflicted serious damage to our economy, primarily due to the economic blockade, because of which we now suffer. Russia also acted quite differently.

Political support for Russia, and precise execution of military contracts despite U.S. pressure significantly trimmed our economic situation.

And that directly affects the economy - any loan from a friendly country such as Russia, is beneficial for both sides. For Russia it may mean expanding markets and new opportunities for Russian companies, and for Syria - it is an opportunity to raise funds for the development of its own economy.

This is not to mention the already signed contracts with various Russian companies to supply a variety of products.

Once again, I would argue that Russia's political position and its support for Syria's positive effect on the stability and prosperity of the Syrian citizens.

- You can specify the details of the agreement: whether they relate to fuel or food?

Assad: Economic sanctions today are blocking Syrian citizens receive food, medicine and fuel. These are the basic products needed for life. And, accordingly, that the Syrian government is doing now by signing agreements with Russia and other friendly countries, allows software to adjust these products.

- Returning to the Syrian issue - we know that you repeatedly declared amnesty. What are the results? Is there anyone among those amnestied rebels who are fighting in the ranks of government forces?

Assad: Yes, it's true, and amnesty is producing positive results. Especially when the picture of what is happening in Syria has become clear to all.

Many of the rebels laid down their arms and returned to normal life. Many of them went over to the government. These groups are divided into two parts: the first was deceived by the press, the second - those who have been forced under duress to go to the militias because of terrorist threats. Therefore, we always believe that we should leave the door open for those who have decided to go with the road that he went against his country. While many in Syria were opposed amnesty, it paid off and was able to reduce tension in the society.

- Mr President, whom you can call their main allies, but someone - opponents? Syria's relations with some countries in recent collapse - with Qatar and Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. Who is to blame?

Assad- Countries that face us in the world - is Russia and China, and at the regional level - is Iran. But I can say that in the world there is a positive change: some countries that were radically against us, began to change their positions, while others are already restored relations with Syria. And there are countries that do not directly support us.

There are a number of states that supported terrorists in Syria out in the open - it's Qatar and Turkey.

Qatar - sponsor of terrorism, and Turkey trains and provides corridors for them. Now Saudi Arabia has replaced Qatar as a sponsor. Saudi Arabia - a country that has only money, but the one who has the money alone can not create a civilized society and to maintain peace.

If Saudi Arabia acts as the main sponsor, that Turkey has a different position. It is unfortunate that such a state as Turkey, can be controlled by a few dollars. Unfortunately, a vast country with a strategic position and progressive society is controlled by one of the States of the Gulf. Over all this is in the prime minister of Turkey. There is no fault of the Turkish people, with whom we share many of the customs and heritage.

- What's behind the common position of Russia and Syria - only to geopolitical interests or even the similarity of the two nations, which have to contend with the constant threat of terrorism?

Assad-At the Russian-Syrian relations have a lot in common. The first of them - Russia has experienced occupation during the Second World War, and Syria, too, was repeatedly occupied. Second, Russia, like Syria, has suffered from numerous attempts to interfere in its internal affairs. Third - it is terrorism. In Syria we understand that means killing civilians hands of militants in the North Caucasus, know about the hostage-taking in Beslan and the musical "Nord-Ost" in Moscow. Thus, the Russians understand with what we have to do in Syria, because they themselves have experienced terrorism on itself. So when it comes western responsible person who says that there is a bad terrorist, and there are moderate terrorist - the Russians do not believe in it.

There is another similarity between Russia and Syria - is a joint family of which I have previously mentioned. If it were not for the cultural and social and mental similarities, there would be those families that bind the two countries. Add to all this: there are geopolitical interests, which I also mentioned. Instability in Syria and the region as a whole will also affect Russia. She is well aware that he does not understand Europe and the West: The threat of terrorism has no borders. It would be wrong to think that the position of this great state like Russia, is based on one or two principles.

- What do you expect from the conference "Geneva-2"?

Assad: The mission of the Geneva conference - to pave the way for a political solution in Syria. But we can not start a dialogue on the political direction until it stops supporting terrorism abroad. What we expect from Geneva - is putting pressure on those countries that support terrorism in Syria. They need to stop the smuggling of arms and mercenaries, terrorists sent to us. When come to pass this step will be much easier to work on the organization of the political dialogue between all Syrian parties on the future form of government, the law and the Constitution.

Don't Miss: Use of Force against Syria just days away? US and France speaking suggestively