Friday, November 29, 2013

Meet the Rebel Commander in Syria That Assad, Russia and the U.S. All Fear

Saved this last week, fortunately. 
Very, very interesting reading and oh how the alarm bells rang and rang.
 Posting it entirely since it is now unavailable, in full, at link.

For months, Syrian government forces hunkered down at a remote air base north of Aleppo, deftly fending off rebel assaults—until one morning a war machine rumbled out of the countryside, announcing that the Chechens had arrived.

The vehicle was notable for its primal scariness: Rebels had welded dozens of oil-drilling pipes to the sides of the armored personnel carrier, and packed it with four tons of high explosives, according to videos released online by the rebels.

It was piloted by a suicide driver, who detonated the vehicle at the base, sending a ground-shaking black cloud into the sky in an attack that analysts said finally cleared the way for rebels to storm the airfield.

The final capture of the airport in August immediately boosted the prestige of its unruly mastermind Tarkhan Batirashvili, according to analysts—an ethnic Chechen whose warring skills, learned in the U.S.-funded Georgian army, are now being put to use by a group deeply at odds with more mainstream Western-backed rebels.

Tarkhan Batirashvili- I have the strangest feeling, going by "the gut" here,  we are going to be hearing and reading more about this man in the near future. "An ethnic Chechen who learned all his war skills in the US funded Georgian Army" but we are supposed to believe he is deeply at odds with the more mainstream rebels (there are no mainstream rebels) Tarkhan Batirashvili or Umar al-Shishani

The jihadi commander has recently emerged from obscurity to be the northern commander in Syria of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham (ISIS), an al Qaeda-connected coalition whose thousands of Arab and foreign fighters have overrun key Syrian military bases, staged public executions and muscled aside American-backed moderate rebel groups trying to topple President Bashar al-Assad.
Conversations with Mr. Batirashvili's relatives and two of his former army commanders reveal a complex portrait of a modern jihadist from the former Soviet Union, motivated by misfortune as much as newly found religious zeal.

Born to a Christian father and Muslim mother, he served in an intelligence unit of the Georgian army before opportunities dried up at home and he left for holy war, friends and former colleagues said.

Efforts to reach Mr. Batirashvili were unsuccessful. And a website,, which boasts of his accomplishments, didn't respond to requests for comment.
The arrival of Mr. Batirashvili, known by his Arab nom de guerre Emir Umar al-Shishani, comes as other ethnic Chechens and Russian-speaking Islamists have for the first time responded in large numbers to the call of an international jihad in Syria.
 Fighting in tight knit groups, the men have awed and repelled fellow jihadists with their military prowess and brutality, talking to one another in Russian or Chechen and to outsiders in the formal Arabic of the Quran, according to accounts of fellow rebels. Some have carved out fiefdoms inside Syria, enraging locals by collecting taxes and imposing Islamic Shariah law.
The Chechen fighters have long had a reputation for brutality.
Even by the gruesome standards of the war in Syria, their rise has become notable for its unusual violence. One rebel from Russia's Dagestan, for instance, was chased out of the country after he appeared in an online video where he beheaded three locals for supporting the Syrian government, according to analysts with ties to the rebel groups. And just last week, Mr. Batirashvili's group apologized for mistakenly beheading a wounded soldier who actually turned out to be an allied rebel commander.
The prominence of the rebels on the battlefield has turned the conflict into a geopolitical struggle between the U.S. and Russia, which has long accused the West of ignoring the danger of Islamists in the troubled Chechen region, where an insurgency has been active for decades
  While people close to Mr. Batirashvili say he views the war as a chance to strike a blow against one of the Kremlin's allies, he has also talked of his hatred of America. In a recent interview with a jihadi website, he described Americans as "the enemies of Allah and the enemies of Islam."

Until recently, Mr. Batirashvili had few outward religious convictions, former colleagues said. But like many Chechens he wanted to fight the Kremlin wherever he had the chance. "He had that kind of hatred for them," said Malkhaz Topuria, a former commander who has watched his onetime subordinate's stardom grow in videos posted on the Internet. "It was in his genes."
Struggle between the US and Russia. A blow against one of the Kremlin allies. Mr Bartirashvili had few outward religious conviction, but, suddenly..................he found god? Or something like that?

 Moscow has mostly crushed its Islamist rebellion in the North Caucasus region, but a top Kremlin official warned last month of the new "terrorist international" in Syria, which could eventually return its focus on the mother country.

U.S. intelligence estimates that as many as 17,000 foreigners are fighting on the side of rebels in Syria. About half fight for the ISIS; of those, officials in Russia say, at least a thousand are from the country's North Caucasus and from Europe, where many Chechens have sought asylum since the collapse of the Soviet Union and hostilities in Chechnya in the 1990s.
While the Russian-speaking Islamists represent a fraction of the total rebels, many have risen to positions of power because of their history of fighting a standing army in Russia, according to analysts.

Kremlin officials say that these fighters are picking up more military experience, as well as contacts to Arab financiers who bankrolled uprisings elsewhere in the Middle East and Africa.
"One day, it's highly likely many of these fighters will return to their home republics in the Caucasus, which will clearly generate a heightened security threat to that region," said Charles Lister, analyst at IHS Jane's Terrorism and Insurgency Centre.
The Chechen region has come under scrutiny lately in the U.S. in the wake of this year's Boston Marathon bombing. The alleged bomber on trial, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, has roots in Chechnya and posted videos online recruiting fighters to Syria. 
Mr. Batirashvili's ability to work with foreign jihadis appears to have been vital to his rise within the ISIS, which has become the main umbrella group for foreign fighters in Syria, including Saudis, Kuwaitis, Egyptians and even Chinese, according to analysts.

The ISIS, originally founded as an umbrella organization for Iraqi jihadists, views the war in Syria as a means not only to overthrow the Assad regime but a historic battleground for a larger holy war and the establishment of a larger Islamic state, Mr. Batirashvili said in an interview recently with a jihadist website.

Some of the men respond to appeals on YouTube under a generic call to fight for an Islamic state under Shariah law, according to analysts. Most fly into Turkey and then slip over the porous border into Syria, according to interviews with fellow Islamists.
Mr. Batirashvili hailed from outside Russia's borders, but hostility to Kremlin rule pulsed around him. His parents were ethnic Chechens from Georgia's Pankisi Gorge, a rugged valley that borders Chechnya that has been a traditional safe haven for fighters opposing Russia.

Mr. Batirashvili got his first exposure to the rebel spirit as a shepherd boy, living in a brick hut with no plumbing in the village of Birkiani, his father Temuri said. There, Mr. Batirashvili helped Chechen rebels cross secretly into Russia and sometimes he joined the fighters on missions against Russian-backed troops, his father said.

After high school, he joined the Georgian army and distinguished himself as master of various weaponry and maps, said Mr. Topuria, his former commander, who recruited him into a special reconnaissance group.
Russia has long accused the U.S. of irresponsibly funding the Georgian army, which it says in turn supports Islamists—a charge the Georgians and the U.S. deny.
Mr Batarashvili was popular and rose fast in the ranks of the army
Mr. Batirashvili was easygoing and popular with fellow soldiers and steered clear of discussing religion, though he did acknowledge his Muslim family, Mr. Topuria said.

Mr. Batirashvili rose fast in the army, being promoted to sergeant in a new intelligence unit, where his monthly salary of about $700 was more than he had ever made in his life, his father and former commanders said.
A representative for the Georgian army confirmed only the basic facts of his service in the army, declining to comment on any other activities.
When Georgian forces were ordered to attack the Russian-backed breakaway province of South Ossetia in 2008, Mr. Batirashvili was near the front line, spying on Russian tank columns and relaying their coordinates to Georgian artillery units, a former commander said. The war lasted five days.
This guy is no rebel commander in the way we are supposed to believe he is. He is definitely commanding the mercenary army, but, not for freedom or anything like that

Two years later Mr. Batirashvili's life began to unravel. He was diagnosed with tuberculosis in 2010 and confined to a military hospital for several months. When he emerged, he was deemed unfit for the military and discharged, the ministry said.

Returning home, Mr. Batirashvili was "very disillusioned," his father said. The local police force wouldn't hire him, and his mother died after having fought cancer for years.
"He was very nervous, and worried about money," a former Georgian army commander said. He said Mr. Batirashvili also appeared to be helping Islamist rebels inside Russia, and asked the former commander for help finding some military-grade maps of Chechnya.

In September 2010, Mr. Batirashvili was arrested for illegally harboring weapons, the defense ministry said, and sentenced to three years in prison.
The ministry refused to provide further details about the case.
-The preceding paragraphs feel live narrative creation. Good soldier gone rogue.....
Mr. Batirashvili's cousin Jabrail said he was released from jail after about 16 months in early 2012 and immediately left the country. "He had plenty of time to sit and think in jail about how he had been treated," his cousin said. "He served in the army in the most dangerous places, and then when he got sick they took his job and then they put him in prison."
In a recent interview with the jihadi website, Mr. Batirashvili said that prison transformed him. "I promised God that if I come out of prison alive, I'll go fight jihad for the sake of God," he said.

Though Mr. Batirashvili announced that he was headed for Istanbul, his father said it was clear he was planning to offer his services to Islamists. Members of the Chechen diaspora in the Turkish capital were ready to recruit him to lead fighters inside Syria, and an older brother had gone there months before, his father said.
"We argued about [his decision] bitterly," he said. "But he was a man with no job, no prospects. So he took the wrong path."

His former army commanders also lost contact with him, and only received word of his whereabouts this spring when Georgia's army intelligence service contacted them.
The army, they said, wanted help identifying a jihadi leader who had appeared lately in videos from Syria. The man spoke Russian with a Georgian accent, they said.
The storyline really helps to portray him as  one bad apple. It disconnects him from his military service, his connections to Georgian military and to the US. And, I personally don't believe it.

When he opened the first video, "I recognized him immediately," one of his commanders said. Mr. Batirashvili had traded in his Georgian army fatigues for a traditional South Asian shalwar kameez shirt and had grown a red beard that reached down to his chest.

But his speech, barely above a mumble, and his habit of staring at the ground as he talked were the same, he said.
In videos, Mr. Batirashvili was first identified as commander of a group calling itself Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar, or "Army of Emigrants and Helpers." He called for donations, claiming jihadists finally had a chance to establish an Islamic state in the Middle East.

This summer, videos identified him as a newly named commander of the ISIS. His speeches, delivered in Russian, are distributed over a website,, which brags of his group's victories and frequently appeals for donations.

In a recent report, International Crisis Group said that Mr. Batirashvili's army has imposed extremist rule of law in areas he controls, shooting into peaceful demonstrations and detaining activists for offenses that include nonviolent dissent and smoking cigarettes during Ramadan.
Mr. Batirashvili's father said he hasn't heard from his son for almost two years and gets news of him mostly through his older brother, who has been fighting with him in Syria. He said he doubts his son's beard was grown out of any religious conviction.
"He just switched armies, and now he's wearing a different hat," he said

Follow up to this post can be found here: Chechens drawn south to fight in Syria

Tjeerd Andringa on Geopolitics and Cognition

Tjeerd Andringa- What can I say? I find the information presented so dam interesting.
So, here he is  yet again. ( I will relink the previous interview from Red Ice Radio at the bottom)
This time being interviewed by James Corbett

"Today on The Corbett Report we are joined by Tjeerd Andringa, Associate Professor in Auditory Cognition at the University of Groningen. Today we discuss his work at where he discusses the intersection of geopolitics and cognitive science. Join us for this in-depth conversation on perception, cognition, politics, authoritarianism, libertarianism, conspiracy theory, and much more"

The image below helps to understand the concepts being discussed
Really good stuff.

Tjeerd's website Geopolitics and Cognition

Previous interview posted here:

Bureaucracy, Cognition & Geopolitics: Authoritarians vs. Libertarians

Both interviews well worth the time to listen. At least in my opinion. How about you? What do you think about the information presented?

Thursday, November 28, 2013

Canada cooperated with U.S. spying during G8 and G20

The Toronto Star headline does not accurately reflect the content of the article

"Canada knew US was spying" just doesn't do it for me. However, the news contained within is not a surprise! Considering the melding/harmonization of Canada and the US under numerous despicable ‘trade’ agreements moving towards the unyielding centralized power structure that will be the essence of the NAU.

The federal government let an American spy agency conduct surveillance in Canada during the G8 and G20 summits in 2010, the CBC reports.

Citing secret documents released by former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, CBC reported Wednesday evening that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government allowed the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct a six-day operation, turning the American embassy in Ottawa into a security command post to spy as dozens of delegates flocked to Canada during the global summits in June 2010.

The documents said the U.S. plans for the G20 in Toronto were “closely co-ordinated with the Canadian partner” — Communications Security Establishment Canada, or CSEC — but do not reveal the targets of the surveillance, according to CBC’s report.

A spokesperson for the prime minister declined to comment on the report.

We do not comment on operational matters related to national security,” Jason MacDonald, Harper’s director of communications, told the Star in an email.   
 No comment? In other words, citizen, taxpayer, voter, you have not right to know!

“Our security organizations have independent oversight mechanisms to ensure that they fulfil their mandate in accordance with the law.”

MacDonald’s comment was echoed by a spokesperson for Communications Security Establishment Canada, who said they do not comment on the “operations or capabilities of Canada or our allies.”
 No comment? Again. How is that freedom and democracy working out for Canada and the US?
 Oh yah, it isn’t!

Lauri Sullivan said that the agency “does not target Canadians anywhere or any person in Canada through its foreign intelligence activities.

“CSEC cannot ask our international partners to act in a way that circumvents Canadian laws,” Sullivan said in an email.      
 Maybe they “cannot” ask but does that mean they don’t?

She said that all of the agency’s activities are subject to review by the CSE Commissioner, “who for 16 years has reported that CSEC continues to act lawfully in the conduct of its activities.”

As if the CSE commissioner would report anything different?
The documents released by Snowden don’t indicate what CSEC’s role was in spying on the G20 but the agency’s co-operation was vital to allowing access to telecommunications systems, CBC reported. The bulk of the document involves security details surrounding the protection of sites and leaders against potential terrorist threats.

Recently, Snowden documents suggested Canada worked with the U.S. and Britain to spy on high-powered attendees at the G20 Summit in London in 2009.

Another leak last month showed CSEC had been spying on Brazil’s Ministry of Mines and Energy, a revelation that outraged the South American country.

Canada’s CSEC is part of a five-member spy organization called “Five Eyes,” consisting of parallel agencies in the U.S., New Zealand, Australia and Britain. It’s responsible for gathering foreign intelligence “from the global information infrastructure” that’s of interest to Canada, according to its website.
 Five very creepy, big brother, authoritarian. Still believing we are free in Canada?

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Jeremy Scahill and Micheal Weiss: Birds of a feather flock together ?

Question: What do Michael Weiss and Jeremy Scahill have in common?
Answer: They both have a big beef with Mother Agnes and TRUTH.
Surprised ? You shouldn’t be.

Excerpts from  William M Boardman at Dissident Voice

Here’s what it looks like when a respected reporter tweets about his blackmail note to an established anti-war organization regarding the organization’s upcoming conference in a tweet on November 15:

<!–[if !vml]–><!–[endif]–>”jeremy scahillVerified account?@jeremyscahill

“I’ve informed organizers of @STWuk that I will not participate in their conference if Mother Agnes is on the platform.”
This change of heart on the part of Scahill came about due to twitter pressure??

RT: An ’Assad apologist’ speaking to a large audience in Britain?! Why, in the name of ‘free speech‘ and ‘democracy‘ it must not be allowed! We must Stop the Nun! Two 'A List’ speakers at the Stop the War event – Owen Jones and Jeremy Scahill were urged by Mother Agnes’ enemies via Twitter not to share a platform with the nun. ‘Dear Owen/Jeremy, do you know who you’re sharing a platform with?’ style tweets were sent. The two were sent links to articles attacking Mother Agnes.
And that is all it took for Mr Scahill and his pal Owen Jones to boycott an anti-war conference?
That's too dam easy. Jeremy Scahill meet Michael Weiss. Israeli mouthpiece extraordinaire. That is if you haven't already? You  both appear to have much in common
BTW: Michael Weiss gets around. He is everywhere.

Michael Weiss, editor-in-chief of the Interpreter, an online journal that translates Russian media into English, and a columnist for NOW Lebanon, said in an interview that Mother Agnes appears to support virtually every position held by the Assad regime. She has helped legitimize Assad’s propaganda campaign, which has portrayed him as the protector of Syrian minorities in the face of attacks by jihadists, he added.
Michael Weiss continues with his demonization/name calling, classic propaganda tactic

“It’s clearly a case of someone who doesn’t work so much with the Syrian regime as for them,” Weiss said.
No proof of that claim.

“The woman is a crackpot, but she’s a sinister crackpot,” he added. “She’s supporting what the world has come to understand as a mass-murdering, totalitarian regime, but she’s doing it under the cloak of a nun.”
No proof of that claim. Just Michael Weiss’s obvious name calling propaganda

“She has been co-opted by the Kremlin as a kind of mouthpiece for the regime’s propaganda,” Weiss said. “They love her take on the chemical weapons.”

He just keeps going and going “catapulting the (name calling) propaganda.

Name Calling

 The name-calling technique links a person, or idea, to a negative symbol. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative symbol, instead of looking at the available evidence.
It is very difficult for me to believe that Jeremy Scahill, a' savvy reporter', would so easily succumb to a campaign of name calling on twitter. I just do not buy that simple narrative.

According to the Dissident voice author- French reporters have written a book linking Mother Agnes to the death of a French cameraman in Homs.

 “French reporters have written a book accusing her of conspiring with the government to kill another French reporter  in 2012. She has sued the authors for libel”

The French cameraman? This was a tale I knew. Having blogged on the news surrounding  the French cameraman’s death at that time. The way the reporting was handled, vague, giving as little details as possible in order to put forth the standard western propaganda meme-
Cameraman from france 2 television dies

Also refresh your memory via a link from

 It was pretty obvious, or plainly obvious,  the western backed mercenary rebels  killed the cameraman necessitating the goulish body snatching by France. Damage control.

The dissident voice piece closes:

Mother Agnes is currently on a six-week speaking tour in North America, largely ignored by most media. In Cleveland on November 14, she received a special peace award from the mayor, a congressman, and a senator. The tour ends December 4.
Jeremy Scahill has yet to explain his own behavior, but columnist Neil Clark, writing for Russia Today, blames “liberal hawks and neo-cons” for silencing the nun because:

    Mother Agnes’ testimony reveals that the so-called ‘War on Terror’ is a sham – that in Syria, the western countries and their regional allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel, are on the same side as the extremist Islamic terror groups that we are told are our greatest enemies.

The war on terror is a sham. It is obvious. Jeremy Scahill will never explain his behaviour. He doesn’t have to. He is part of the war machine. He sucks at the teat of a faux news outlet “Democracy Now”  passes nonsense off as sense at other lefty gatekeeping media outlets.
Jeremy Scahill and Michael Weiss. Can you see a difference? I can't see a difference. When it comes to promoting propaganda and pushing the war agenda there is no difference

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

The battle for Ukraine

The battle for Ukraine
KamNam mentioned the geopolitical situation in Ukraine was about to heat up..Yet, again.
Thanks for the heads up KamNam.!!
Can’t say this turn of events would come as a surprise. No, not a surprise at all.
Some of the featured article is pure spin to justify continued  or new western intervention.
But, there is some factual information present.

After the Soviet Union fell two decades ago, Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote that "without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be an empire, but with Ukraine suborned and then subordinated, Russia automatically becomes an empire." Those are still the stakes in the current struggle over Ukraine.

Last week the government in Kiev took a step back into Russia's orbit when it abandoned plans to sign an "association" trade treaty this Friday with the European Union and announced its intentions to get closer to a Moscow-led trade bloc. The decision by President Viktor Yanukovych followed months of bullying by Moscow.
Following months of bullying by Moscow??As opposed to years of bullying by NATO nations?
Russia's Vladimir Putin has slapped trade sanctions, cut energy supplies and threatened worse for Ukraine and other neighbors that seek closer relations with the West. Armenia caved this summer and joined the Russian customs union. Moldova and Georgia are moving ahead with their EU trade deals.
With a population of 46 million and located along NATO's eastern frontier, Ukraine is the biggest prize. Since retaking the Russian presidency last year, Mr. Putin has turned even more hostile to the West and sought to recreate a Russian sphere of influence over the "near abroad." The Obama Administration's "reset" in relations with Moscow failed to anticipate or stop this.
 The near abroad? Interesting double talk/spin language. The Ukraine is geographically closer to Russia then the US... And a great many residents in Ukraine identify with Russia. A topic that has been covered way back here.

Ukrainian officials say the Russian sanctions cost them $15 billion in lost trade and could run up to half a trillion by signing the EU deal. "Ukraine government suddenly bows deeply to the Kremlin," tweeted the veteran Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt in response to Thursday's reversal in Kiev. "Politics of brutal pressure evidently works."
Mr. Yanukovych contributed to this debacle. A thuggish pol (name calling/demonization tactic) from industrial eastern Ukraine, he tried to steal the 2004 presidential election, but a popular uprising stopped him. The Orange Revolution ensured free elections in 2010, which Mr. Yanukovych won, and he has since taken an authoritarian turn.

The Orange Revolution- just another western created colour revolution. Backed heavily by the now dead oligarch Boris Berezovsky. BBC Documentary excerpt. Boris Berezovsky pours money into the NATO orange revolution, as did George Soros.  I do  believe that the Yanukovych actually won that previous election. Fast forward to the present..

Excerpt from BBC documentary


  Wikipedia  “Former president Leonid Kravchuk accused Russian oligarch, Boris Berezovsky, of financing Yushchenko's campaign on 14 September 2005.[36][nb 3] Yushchenko denied Berezovsky financed his election campaign.[36] Financing of election campaigns by foreign citizens is illegal in Ukraine.[37] At first Berezovsky refused to confirm or deny Kravchuk's allegations, but in November 2005 he did claim that indeed he had heavily financed the Orange Revolution”
  Back to: The battle for Ukraine

Desperate to stem his falling support before elections in 2015, Mr. Yanukovych seized on Russia's offer of trade relief and cheap gas. He has also jailed his chief rival, the Orange leader Yulia Tymoshenko, whom the EU insisted be released for medical treatment in Germany. His allies in parliament last month changed the law that could disqualify, on a technicality, the reigning WBC heavyweight champion and parliamentary opposition leader Vitaly Klitschko from running for president. The polls say the popular Mr. Klitschko would win if the election were held today.

A good deal with Moscow for Mr. Yanukovych is bad for Ukrainians who have made clear they want to get closer to the friendlier, richer West. ( No, they haven’t) Tens of thousands have protested in the Kiev streets in the past few days against Mr. Yanukovych's decision. The country's business elites also oppose joining the Russian customs union, and for now Mr. Yanukovych has resisted Moscow's pressure to start talks. The EU trade deal remains on the table, as the EU emphasized in a Monday statement that also condemned "the external pressure" from Moscow on Ukraine.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel took the wrong step this weekend by proposing EU-Russian talks over the eastern neighbors, as if these countries haven't been sovereign states for 22 years. Germany is also blocking a proposal to offer Georgia a path to NATO membership, while Washington seems little more than a bystander. An independent Ukraine that leans West will lead to a more peaceful Europe and make it harder for Mr. Putin to rebuild a revanchist Russian empire.

It is not an independent Ukraine the West and NATO are after. Because an independent Ukraine would not necessarily lead to a more peaceful Europe or create difficulties for Russia. A truly independent Ukraine will take actions that are in the interest of the Ukraine.

Monday, November 25, 2013

Syrian Peace Talks to Begin on January 22/2014

This is the third date set for the Geneva Peace talks... First was in November. Second was supposed to be next month. Now we have a January 22/2014 date.


The Syrian government and opposition will hold their first negotiations in Geneva on Jan. 22, a spokesman for United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said on Monday after a meeting among American, Russian and U.N. officials.

“We will go to Geneva with a mission of hope,” the spokesman, Martin Nesirky, said in a statement. He added that the aim of the conference would be the creation of a transitional government based on mutual consent and with full executive powers, including authority over the military and security agencies. 

Aaargh! 'Mission of hope' empty touchy feely wording. Gives me such an "Obama" vibe
With an opportunity to assess the readiness of Syria’s rebel factions and of the government of President Bashar al-Assad for long-awaited negotiations on ending the fighting and forming a transitional government.
On Sunday, Lakhdar Brahimi, the U.N. and Arab League special envoy for Syria, discussed arrangements for the conference with members of the Syrian opposition in exile who were to meet officials from U.N. humanitarian agencies in Geneva on Monday, an aide to the special envoy said. 

At a meeting in Istanbul earlier this month, Syria’s fractured opposition coalition agreed to attend a peace conference. That breakthrough enabled officials to begin the process of setting a date for the conference, but progress from that agreement to peace talks still faces considerable challenges that had frustrated efforts to convene the negotiations, known as Geneva II, in December, diplomats said. 

Opposition members briefed Mr. Brahimi on their efforts to broaden support but diplomats said that the opposition was facing fierce resistance from more militant jihadists inside the country fighting government forces and that the coalition was still struggling to put together a credible negotiating team. 

The basis for talks between Syrian rebels and the Assad government also remain unclear. Opposition groups have insisted Mr. Assad must leave office as part of any settlement, but government officials were equally adamant in comments earlier this month that they “are not going to Geneva to hand over power.” 

The question of Iran’s participation in Geneva II also remains undecided. Mr. Brahimi, who believes Iran, as a significant regional player, should be there, had talks with Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, who was in Geneva for the negotiations about Iran’s nuclear program. The agreement reached with the United States and other world powers in those negotiations on Sunday will make Western governments more comfortable with Iran’s presence at Syria talks, a senior diplomat in Geneva said, but Washington and Saudi Arabia have so far opposed Iranian involvement. 

“Nobody knows what they’re going to do but there’s a lot of activity and that’s better than none,” a senior European official in Geneva said, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with diplomatic practice. Mr. Brahimi “has the idea that everybody just needs to start talking and once that happens they will find a way forward,” the official said.

Don't miss the two previous posts regarding Iran and P5 + 1 agreement reached.

 * Pepe Escobar- Follow the Money: How lobby interests are spinning Iran nuclear deal

* P5+1 make a deal with Iran. Israel steams. Clandestine Meetings

 An agreement that won't really settle anything. Not even temporarily.  An agreement, that the US or other nations, but not Iran, will breach as soon as they possibly can. 
It seems safe to say the Israeli and Saudi lobbies have sprung into action. Palms are being greased, so to speak.... *Hawks (and zionists) in US Congress may try and derail deal with Iran

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Pepe Escobar- Follow the Money: How lobby interests are spinning Iran nuclear deal

There is a video available at the link. I can't embed it unfortunately.
Do take the six minutes to watch it
Pepe rightly calls the beginning of the "spin war" and assumes the spin war will continue for the next six months.... I agree
He also states that Iran has no interest in breaking the deal. None. Therefore, they won't.
Reference is made back to the news of clandestine meetings, mentioned in the previous post.
....P5+1 make a deal with Iran. Israel steams. Clandestine Meetings

Anyway........ here is Pepe from RT

Iran’s nuclear deal with the P5+1 group of world powers in Geneva has triggered a spin war which will last for the next 6 months, as many of the parties involved will pursue their own business interests in this situation, journalist Pepe Escobar told RT.

RT: As we see, US Secretary of State John Kerry and Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammed Zarif came out of the talks with different views. Why's there such diversity in the interpretation of the deal? 
Pepe Escobar: Because the spin war started at 3am in Geneva. It’s going to go on for another six months, until May 2014, that’s the duration of this “first step” deal.

[It’s] very important: Kerry had to say [this] so that he could appease the Israel lobby, the US Congress and the Wahhabi petrodollar lobby in the US, not to mention some neocons in the US as well, [who are] still very powerful.

In Iran it’s different. They are saying, “We still have our right to enrich uranium,” and this is correct, because they will keep enriching uranium to 5 percent for the next six months, [while] 20 percent [enrichment] is frozen. They will discuss… the next deal, which will be the definitive deal, starting from May 2014.

And all the 20 percent enriched uranium that they have is going to be diluted, so it cannot be used later on for weapons-grade material.

RT: As you’ve said, the spin war has started, but how that would affect the implementation of the deal now and six months down the road? Who will eventually benefit from it, if the two sides have such diverse opinions? Won’t it stall one day at some point?

PE: No, we have to follow the letter of the agreement. This means enrichment until 5 percent OK, no further enrichment till 20 percent for the next six months, no new centrifuges. If Iran follows this – they are abiding by the deal, no problem.

The thing is, if among these IAEA inspectors [who] should be in Iran practically on a daily basis from now on, if you had the usual Eiffel traders [Parisian residents who fraudulently “sell” the Eiffel Tower to unsuspecting visitors – RT] who start spinning something else.
 I’m sure Iran won’t break their promises, it’s in their own interest not to break any promise.

RT: It's emerged that Washington was engaged in secret talks with Iran long before the Geneva agreement, and even their closest allies were unaware. What do you make of this?
PE: Look, this is an extremely complex negotiation. Can you imagine that you have sherpas going to Geneva a month or three weeks ago, and hammering out the final deal so [that] we have foreign ministers [who] can sign it? It’s impossible. Sherpas usually start such things months in advance and obviously we had America’s sherpas, Iranian sherpas and Russian sherpas, these are the ones that count. Britain and France are spectators; they don’t count at all.
France counts [regarding] the 20 percent [enriched uranium], because they have cornered the market in medical isotopes. If Iran reaches 20 percent enrichment and starts selling their own medical isotopes cheaper, especially to the developing world, it’s not a good deal for France. So for the moment France is protecting its business interests.

RT: Let’s turn to America’s assessment of the situation, specifically what President Obama said. Looking at the Geneva deal, he said this is just a first step to reach a comprehensive solution in the future. What in your opinion would make Washington consider a full agreement?
PE: Obama is correct when he said, “This is the first step.” But, very important, the way he said it was very condescending, in fact even insulting, to Iran. He said nothing about Iranians’ role in the deal, mentioning only the role of absurd sanctions, which should be dismantled, because most of the sanctions bypass the UN, like Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has been saying for months in fact.
Very important, for the next few months: follow the money. The Americans say they are going to unfreeze some of the Iranian money, perhaps $32 billion or even more. There is $10 billion in European banks. These are not going to be unfrozen. If the US unfreezes $4 to $5 billion – Obama can do it by executive order, bypassing the US Congress.

RT: John Kerry believes the sanctions have done their job and were quite helpful in sealing this deal. To what extent do you agree with this?
PE: In fact, it is the Iranian population that is paying the price of the sanctions; the Iranian government has found ways to bypass it. They’re selling, or bartering or trading energy, especially with their Asian customers. You know how much money Iran has [with] mostly Asian clients, China, Japan, Turkey and South Korea? $50 billion, [yet] they still cannot bring that money to Iran, so they have to buy products from these countries. So this is something that must be hammered out in the next agreement.
For the moment we have a breakthrough – it’s going to last for six months. There will be all sorts of interests that will try to bombard this deal; I’m saying especially about Wahhabi petrodollar monarchy interests and the Israeli lobby as well.
But for the moment we have diplomacy in action, something that we haven’t seen, especially between Iran and the US, for 34 years. This is the major breakthrough at the moment. But we have to be vigilant. 


P5+1 make a deal with Iran. Israel steams. Clandestine Meetings

A quick news roundup: And remember the entire world is populated by "anti-semites"..... Out to get the "eternal victims" ;-)

WP: The plan accepted by Iran on Sunday would accomplish something that U.S. governments have sought in vain for more than a decade: A pause, at least, in Iran’s inexorable march to a nuclear-weapons capability.

The historic agreement, described as a first step toward a more comprehensive nuclear deal six months from now, freezes or reverses progress in nearly every aspect of Iran’s nuclear program, from the installation of new centrifuges to work on critical components of a heavy-water reactor that could someday provide Iran with a source of plutonium.
President Obama says the U.S. has agreed to provide Iran with "modest relief" from sanctions as part of a deal on the country's nuclear program.
Kerry said the first six-month phase of the deal would improve the security of U.S. allies in the region while efforts were made to negotiate a more comprehensive agreement. (Meaning this is not over. Not, yet.) “This first step actually rolls back the program from where it is today and enlarges the breakout time,” he said.
Key details of the proposal, which had been kept confidential while the negotiations were underway, were publicly unveiled as diplomats concluded four days of intense bargaining over the final shape of the deal.
The concessions accepted by Iran include numerous curbs on the country’s uranium enrichment program, the source of most Western concerns about Tehran’s nuclear ambitions since the discovery of a partially completed enrichment plant near the city of Natanz.

Under the terms of the deal, Iran would stop installing new centrifuges, and also refrain from using the thousands of centrifuges that have been installed but are not yet enriching uranium —meaning Iran could use only about half of the roughly 18,000 centrifuges it currently possesses.

Those centrifuges would be limited to making only low-enriched uranium, of the kind used in nuclear power plants. While Iran would continue to make the nuclear fuel, its total stockpile in six months would not be allowed to grow beyond current levels. In practice, Iran would face a choice of either halting enrichment or converting its uranium into metal fuel plates.
 In a key concession, Iran agreed to halt all production of so-called 20-percent-enriched uranium, a type of fuel that can be easily converted to highly enriched uranium used in nuclear bombs. Iran’s entire stockpile of 20-percent fuel—just under 450 pounds—would have to be neutralized through conversion into metal or blending with natural uranium to reduce its purity.

A sticking point during the talks involved Iran’s continued work on a partly constructed heavy water reactor near the town of Arak. If allowed to operate, the reactor could supply Iran with a potential source of plutonium, which, like high-enriched uranium, can be used to make nuclear bombs. Under the agreement reached in Geneva, Iran would be required to halt work on building fuel rods or other components for the facility. 

 Iran’s nuclear facilities would be subject to unprecedented monitoring, with daily visits by international inspectors who also would have access to recordings by remote video equipment.

In return, Iran would receive economic incentives that would be initially modest, with the prospects of more substantial sanctions relief under the comprehensive deal to be negotiated by next spring. Western diplomats estimated the value of the relief package at about $7 billion over the six months that the interim agreement is in place.

 Iran would be given access to about $4.2 billion dollars of its foreign currency holdings, now frozen in banks overseas. Western governments also would ease restrictions affecting Iran’s trade in petrochemical products, precious metals, and airplane and automobile parts.

The short-term sanctions would be reversed if Iran fails to comply with the agreement, diplomats said.

  Israel says Iran deal makes world more dangerous

Israeli leaders denounced the interim Iranian nuclear pact signed by the United States and five world powers as an historic mistake that does little to reverse Iran’s nuclear ambitions and instead makes the world a more dangerous place. Israeli officials stressed that they would spend the next six months — the time frame for the interim agreement — seeking to push their friends and especially the White House to reach a deal with Iran that not only curbs Iran’s nuclear ambitions but dismantles their program
Odd. Israel talking historical mistakes.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stressed Sunday that Israel was not a party to the talks that ended with a deal in Geneva early this morning and therefore was not bound by the agreement that provides for the temporary, limited lifting of economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for Iran halting or scaling back parts of its nuclear infrastructure.

"What was achieved last night in Geneva is not an historic agreement, but an historic mistake,” said Netanyahu in remarks before his weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday morning.
I feel it is a historic agreement. But, then I am not much for warmongering.

Today the world has become a much more dangerous place because the most dangerous regime in the world has taken a significant step toward attaining the most dangerous weapon in the world,” the prime minister said.
 Netanyahu repeated a reference to his own red line by stating, “Israel will not allow Iran to develop a military nuclear capability.”

Strange. that comment from Netanyahu about the "most dangerous regime in the world"  From where I sit the most dangerous regimes look to be the US and Israel..............
President Obama plans to speak with Netanyahu on Sunday to discuss the agreement, according to a senior administration official.
 “The last-second amendments put into the agreement are far from satisfactory,” said Israel intelligence minister Yuval Steinitz.
 Asked if the interim deal might lead to military strike by Israel, Lieberman said Israel “would need to make different decisions.”
“This brings us to a new reality in the whole Middle East, including the Saudis. This isn’t just our worry,” Lieberman told Israel Radio. “We’ve found ourselves in a completely new situation.”
Naftali Bennett, Israel’s economic minister and key member of Netanyahu’s governing coalition, said, “if a nuclear suitcase blows up in New York or Madrid five years from now, it will be because of the deal that was signed this morning.”

Is Bennett suggesting Israel would undertake a terrorist attack as retaliation for the world powers signing this agreement? By way of deception and all that?  Reads like that to me.

Also interesting:
Clandestine meetings between US and Iran set stage for nuclear deal

 WASHINGTON - The United States and Iran secretly engaged in a series of high-level, face-to-face talks over the past year, in a high-stakes diplomatic gamble by the Obama administration that paved the way for the historic deal sealed early Sunday in Geneva aimed at slowing Tehran's nuclear program, The Associated Press has learned.

The discussions were kept hidden even from America's closest friends, including its negotiating partners and Israel, until two months ago, and that may explain how the nuclear accord appeared to come together so quickly after years of stalemate and fierce hostility between Iran and the West.

But the secrecy of the talks may also explain some of the tensions between the U.S. and France, which earlier this month balked at a proposed deal, and with Israel, which is furious about the agreement and has angrily denounced the diplomatic outreach to Tehran.

The talks were held in the Middle Eastern nation of Oman and elsewhere with only a tight circle of people in the know, the AP learned. Since March, Deputy Secretary of State William Burns and Jake Sullivan, Vice-President Joe Biden's top foreign policy adviser, have met at least five times with Iranian officials.

The last four clandestine meetings, held since Iran's reform-minded President Hassan Rouhani was inaugurated in August, produced much of the agreement later formally hammered out in negotiations in Geneva among the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, Germany and Iran, said three senior administration officials. All spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss by name the highly sensitive diplomatic effort.

The AP was tipped to the first U.S.-Iranian meeting in March shortly after it occurred, but the White House and State Department disputed elements of the account and the AP could not confirm the meeting. The AP learned of further indications of secret diplomacy in the fall and pressed the White House and other officials further. As the Geneva talks appeared to be reaching their conclusion, senior administration officials confirmed to the AP the details of the extensive outreach.

Read more on the clandestine meetings at the above link

Friday, November 22, 2013

Blocking action on Syria makes an attack on Iran more attractive

Something to consider.............

"Maybe an Israeli strike against the Iranian nuclear program will not inevitably involve the United States, but maybe it will — and maybe it should"

Uberzionist Dennis Ross. An older article, but, one that seems very relevant at this time

The opponents of congressional authorization for military strikes against Syria are focused on one set of concerns: the belief that the costs of action are simply too high and uncertain. Syria for them is a civil war, with few apparent good guys and far too many bad guys. The use of chemical weapons is, in their eyes, terrible, but ultimately it is not our problem — unless, of course, we make it our problem by reacting militarily. If we do, they see a slippery slope in which the initial use of force will inevitably suck us into a conflict that we cannot win. Coming on the heels of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which cost us so much in blood and treasure, the U.S. public, as polls show, is both weary and wary of any further involvement in Middle East conflicts.
The wariness is understandable, but it does not make the cost of inaction any lower. Opponents in Congress, who can be found in both parties, seem to feel that if we simply don’t act, there will be no cost for us. President Obama and Secretary Kerry have pointed out that there will be a great cost to international norms that prohibit the use of terror weapons such as chemical weapons. And surely they are right that if Bashar al-Assad can gas his own people and elicit only harsh words but no punitive action, he will use the weapons again. The price in Syria and the potential for spillover in the region are certain to be high. Additionally, other rogue actors may also draw the conclusion that chemical weapons are not only usable but that there are no circumstances, no outrages, no genocidal actions that would trigger a meaningful reaction from the so-called civilized world.

Still, for the opponents of authorization, these arguments are portrayed as abstractions. Only threats that are immediate and directly affect us should produce U.S. military strikes. Leaving aside the argument that when the threats become immediate, we will be far more likely to have to use our military in a bigger way and under worse conditions, there is another argument to consider: should opponents block authorization and should the president then feel he cannot employ military strikes against Syria, this will almost certainly guarantee that there will be no diplomatic outcome to our conflict with Iran over its nuclear weapons.
I say this for two reasons. First, Iran’s President Rouhani, who continues to send signals that he wants to make a deal on the nuclear program, will inevitably be weakened once it becomes clear that the U.S. cannot use force against Syria. At that point, paradoxically, the hard-liners in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and around the Supreme Leader will be able to claim that there is only an economic cost to pursuing nuclear weapons but no military danger. Their argument will be: Once Iran has nuclear weapons, it will build its leverage in the region; its deterrent will be enhanced; and, most importantly, the rest of the world will see that sanctions have failed, and that it is time to come to terms with Iran.
  Under those circumstances, the sanctions will wither. What will Rouhani argue? That the risk is too high? That the economic costs could threaten regime stability? Today, those arguments may have some effect on the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei precisely because there is also the threat that all U.S. options are on the table and the president has said he will not permit Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. Should he be blocked from using force against Syria, it will be clear that all options are not on the table and that regardless of what we say, we are prepared to live with an Iran that has nuclear arms.
(Part 1) -Israel, however, is not prepared to accept such an eventuality, and that is the second reason that not authorizing strikes against Syria will likely result in the use of force against Iran. Indeed, Israel will feel that it has no reason to wait, no reason to give diplomacy a chance and no reason to believe that the United States will take care of the problem.  (Part 2) Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sees Iran with nuclear weapons as an existential threat and, in his eyes, he must not allow there to be a second Holocaust against the Jewish people. As long as he believes that President Obama is determined to deal with the Iranian threat, he can justify deferring to us. That will soon end if opponents get their way on Syria.
 The second part of the above paragraph is utter baloney! This is the manipulation always used. The guilt. The perception management that has long enabled Israel to run amok in the Middle East. It is tired  over used propaganda. In order to form a nation. Israel. The zionists betrayed their own. Holocausts of any sort do not concern the Israeli elite classes. That much is clear. Any attack perpetrated by Israel has always been about two things. Power and Control.  This is the case today with Iran. Iran has no nuclear weapons. Iran has been inspected every which way. It is Israel that has an abundance of nuclear weapons. It is Israel that has chemical weapons. It is Israel that uses those chemical weapons in a horrific manner against humans in the region. Israel has no problem with holocausts.

Dennis Ross continues..........
Ironically, if these opponent succeed, they may prevent a conflict that President Obama has been determined to keep limited and has the means to do so. After all, even after Israel acted militarily to enforce its red line and prevent Syria’s transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon, Assad, Iran and Hezbollah have been careful to avoid responding. They have little interest in provoking Israeli attacks that would weaken Syrian forces and make them vulnerable to the opposition.
 For all the tough talk about what would happen if the United States struck targets in Syria, the Syrian and Iranian interest in an escalation with the United States is also limited. Can the same be said if Israel feels that it has no choice but to attack the Iranian nuclear infrastructure? Maybe the Iranians will seek to keep that conflict limited; maybe they won’t. Maybe an Israeli strike against the Iranian nuclear program will not inevitably involve the United States, but maybe it will — and maybe it should.
If nothing else, it is time to ask the opponents of authorization of strikes in Syria if they are comfortable with a position that is very likely to rule out any diplomatic outcome on the Iranian nuclear program. Even in their eyes, the costs of inaction may then not appear so low.

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Battlefield gains to boost Assad hand at Geneva talks to be held Dec 12

Yahoo UK
Divisions in rebel ranks and more committed loyalist fighters are helping the Syrian regime notch up military victories that would give it the upper hand at peace talks, analysts and rebels say.

The army's capture this week of the strategic town of Qara, north of Damascus, followed three days of fighting against Al-Nusra Front jihadists.
It comes after a series of government advances in Damascus province and southwest of Aleppo, in northern Syria.

Rebels 'totally demoralised' by US backtracking

International developments have also played a role in the rebels' losses.
A Syrian expert living in Damascus said "the United States turnaround ... totally demoralised the rebels."
Washington late this summer backtracked on threats to strike regime targets in Syria after striking a deal with Russia that would see Damascus hand over its massive chemical arsenal.
The rebels "had hoped such strikes would destroy the regime's military infrastructure and allow them to enter Damascus", said the expert.
Thomas Pierret, a Syria expert at Edinburgh University, said: "It is clear the current loyalist surge is linked to the prospect of Geneva II", a slated peace conference that would bring rebels and the regime to the negotiating table.
And yet the mercs aren't inspired by the peace talks to change the outcome? 
Being "Syrian rebels"... Key word  Syrians,  you would think the push would be on?(facetious)
Instead we are getting the loyalist surge?  Perhaps dedicated loyalists have the largest numbers?
"If the (opposition) National Coalition goes to the talks, it will be in a position of weakness, militarily and diplomatically," said Pierret, adding that the United States has in recent weeks downscaled its assistance to the opposition.
"In any case, Assad's departure is out of the question right now, because neither the Russians nor the Americans want it," he added.

Also this piece I had saved from earlier in the week- Regarding Geneva II

Russia steps up push for Syria peace talks

- Russia hosted Syrian and Iranian delegations for separate rounds of talks on Monday in a renewed diplomatic push for a Syrian peace conference in which Moscow says Tehran must play a role.

President Vladimir Putin, who has stepped up his personal involvement on the Syrian issue, also called Iran's president to discuss the conflict as well as efforts to end the dispute over Tehran's nuclear program.
Moscow wants to show it still has weight in the Middle East and has been emboldened by its success in helping to broker a deal under which Syria will destroy its chemical weapons, but Washington is wary of letting Iran join any peace conference.

"We regard Iran as a very important partner in all Middle Eastern affairs," Interfax news agency quoted Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov saying at the start of talks with Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian.

The meeting "will give us an opportunity to jointly look at how developments in and around Syria unfold," Bogdanov said.

In further evidence of Russia's diplomatic offensive, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Syrian opposition sources both confirmed that Bogdanov had recently held talks in Istanbul with leaders of the opposition National Coalition.
Russia, which strongly backs Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and the United States announced back in May they would try to bring Syria's government and opposition together in such a conference, but a date has so far proved elusive.

Lavrov said it could happen before the end of the year.

 *Geneva peace talks on Syria set for December 12*

"(U.S. Secretary of State John) Kerry and I promised to do all we can to make that happen," Lavrov told Russia's official gazette, Rossiiskaya Gazeta, on Monday, referring to a telephone conversation the two men had on Sunday.


 But Lavrov added that the timing of the conference would "depend on how well our Western partners do their homework of persuading the opposition to reject preconditions".

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

"Right Honourable" PM William Lyon Mackenzie King- A Rockefeller man

Having my fellow Canucks in mind, here is a relink, that deserves much more attention then it originally received. 

PM William Lyon Mackenzie King. Often known as Mackenzie King.
Here in Canada he was PM number 10. Canada's longest serving Prime Minister. This despite the fact he had some strange 'beliefs' Or, perhaps, he employed some occult practices? Of the type  often favoured by the elites? Who knows?
William Lyon Mackenzie King

-"Historians conclude that King remained so long in power because he had developed wide-ranging skills that were appropriate to Canada's needs"

-" He was keenly sensitive to the nuances of public policy"

-"a profound understanding of how society and the economy worked"

I would argue that PM King, being a PUBLIC RELATIONS man, was able to stay in power for so long because he knew how to manage/manipulate the perception of the population.

In fact the descriptions of him fit the bill. 'developed wide ranging skills' -'sensitive to the nuances of public policy'-' profound understanding of society' All attributes of a PR person. He knew how the Canadian populace ticked and  how to play/manipulate Canadian society very efficiently. 

John D Rockefeller Jr. & Mackenzie King 1915- a sanitized version of events

When King retired in 1948, John D., Jr., gave him a gift of about $100,000 in shares and the Rockefeller Foundation contributed $100,000 towards the writing of King's memoirs. This photograph of John D. Rockefeller, Jr. (right) and Mackenzie King is from King's personal collection.

Mackenzie King. The man whose grandfather led the Upper Canada Rebellion against the British.

Mackenzie King was born in 1874 in Kitchener (then Berlin), Ontario, Canada. He was the grandson of the radical newspaperman and Toronto mayor, William Lyon Mackenzie, who ledthe aborted Upper Canadian rebellion against British rule in 1837.
Wouldn't that make the senior Mackenzie King a traitor to the fledgling Canada?

The grandson was intrinsically linked to the US by his Rockefeller work. Becoming Prime Minister shortly after helping Mr Rockefeller calm/pacify the American populace, riled by the bloodbath known as the Ludlow massacre.

Before I relink the pdf concerning PM Lyon Mackenzie King and Rockefeller we will take a gander at two other interesting items. 

 First a general / historical look at PR and it's manipulations.
(This whole article really should be read)

PR Man has conquered the world. He still isn’t satisfied

managing your perception

"Edward Bernays maintained that the alternative to manipulation was chaos"

Second- "The Canada program"

Set up by the Rockefeller family in honour of Canada's 10th Prime Minister and his work for the Rockefeller Family, because the Rockefeller family was so very grateful for the help William Lyon provided in smoothing over the massacre...... It's amazing that a massacre can be smoothed over.

And last, but certainly not the least of all: 
W.L Mackenzie King: Rockefeller's "other" public relations man in Colorado

Sort of gives one the impression that the Prime Ministership of Canada was some kind of 'reward' for Mr King, delivered via the Rockefeller riches

Suicide Bomber targets Egyptian soldiers in Sinai- death toll increases

Yesterday, Lebanon. Today, the Sinai, Egypt.
Sinai, pretty much Israeli occupied........

Egyptian army near Al-Arish in the Sinai peninsula

Suicide bomber in Egypt rams bus carting soldiers, kills 10

At least 10 government soldiers were killed and 35 injured when a suicide bomber rammed his explosive-filled car into a bus that was carting the troops on a roadway in northern Sinai on Wednesday.
The bomber hit one bus head-on, but managed to cause damage to another carrying soldiers that was traveling nearby,

The soldiers were part of a unit that was engaged in some of the fiercest fighting against Islamic rebel forces. They were headed to Cairo.

Nobody claimed immediate responsibility for the attack — but the method is similar to that used by al Qaeda-inspired groups,
 Update 1: Death toll increases to 12

 The toll from a bomb attack on soldiers in North Sinai has risen to 12 dead and 35 injured, state television announced on Wednesday afternoon. A parked car blew up as an army convoy passed by on the road between Al-Arish and Rafah on Wednesday morning, a security source told state news agency MENA.
The soldiers were about to begin their vacation.
 Some of those critically injured were flown to a military hospital in Cairo's Maadi, Al-Ahram Arabic news website reported.
Preliminary examinations show a large amount of TNT explosives was used in the bomb, it added.
Troops and Apache helicopters have been combing the area for the perpetrators.
The attack is the bloodiest since mid-August when gunmen killed 25 policemen in an ambush on a security convoy in Rafah.
The restive peninsula, already suffering a security vacuum since the ouster of autocrat Hosni Mubarak, has seen a spike in militant activity since Mohamed Morsi's ouster. Attacks on security and army targets in the Sinai region have killed over 100 since July.

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Progressive Radio News Hour – Rodney Shakespeare

 PRN- Stephen Lendman

Shakespeare is a Professor of Binary Economics at Trisakti University, Britain where he teaches postgraduate Islamic Economics and Finance.
He’s also a qualified UK Barrister, co-founder of the Global Justice Movement, and distinguished writer, scholar and lecturer, particularly at Islamic conferences on money, the real economy, and social and economic justice.
Major world and national issues will be discussed.
Quite relevant to Iran. The bombing in Beruit. The P5+1. Israel. Syria. And more.
About 60 minutes

Ties in nicely with previous post:
A Saudi oily game? Breaking news: Iran's Embassy in Beirut bombed

A Saudi oily game? Breaking news: Iran's Embassy in Beirut bombed

* Finian Cunningham- Half of  an older piece dated Oct.31/13
 -Written just after the Saudi hissy fit but prior to France doing the bidding of Israel

*Covered here: Israel and Saudi Arabia pressure France to sabotage Iran deal

* h/t to kam nam: from Jerusalem Post rather then RT Mossad working with Saudis on contingency plans for potential attack on Iran  

*Breaking!:  Motorcycle-driving suicide bomber targets Beirut’s Iranian embassy as twin attacks kill 23; Al-Qaeda-linked group claims responsibility

Motorcycle driving suicide bombers- How very Mossad like. Considering the massive interaction between Israel/Saudi Arabia and the terrorists mercs in Syria.......  Saudi Arabia and Israel working together?
Looks like it.

 “Each of the terrorist attacks that strike in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq reek of petrodollars,” a Syrian government statement said, in a clear reference to oil-rich Gulf Arab countries that have sided with the Syrian rebels.
 An unidentified Iranian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman blamed Israel for the attacks while Hezbollah and Syrian officials indirectly blamed Saudi Arabia.
Finian Cunningham:

Following the first round of negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 group in Geneva last month, there was dizzying high praise from Washington and European powers. But ahead of the second round of talks scheduled in Geneva next week, there have been assorted signals that Washington and the Europeans are reverting to playing hardball. 

The Obama administration is saying that there will no sanctions relief any time soon and that Iran will have to present concrete evidence that it is not pursuing nuclear weapons. The US Congress is also preparing to pass a bill that will ratchet up the sanctions regime even more, while the EU is reportedly stepping up enforcement of its embargoes on Iranian shipping and finance. 

The effect of this hardball will make Iran amenable to acceding to political concessions, especially as it gains the tantalizing whiff of sanctions relief. Here Iran has to tread carefully because of its own domestic population who are deeply suspicious of Western intentions. So far, the Rouhani presidency insists that the country’s right to enrich uranium at the 20 per cent level for civilian purposes is non-negotiable. It is inconceivable that the government in Tehran would survive politically if it were to give way on such a redline issue. That raises the question of what other concessions the West might demand from Iran for the latter’s much-needed sanctions relief?

Perhaps the Iranians might be asked to act as an interlocutor to enable the West to extract concessions from the government in Damascus regarding the imposition of a transitional government there.  
In pursuing its political machinations, the West has to proceed smartly and delicately too. For one thing, it has to appear to be giving the Iranians something, otherwise Iran will not engage, or the Iranian masses will demand complete withdrawal from a futile process. 

In that regard, it is significant that the White House is saying that it is considering the unfreezing of Iranian assets worth up to $50 billion. That amount would more than compensate for the loss in oil revenues for Iran over the past year. 
And it seems that Iran is anticipating a return to international oil markets because of the warmer diplomatic climate. The Reuters news agency reported last week: «Iran is reaching out to its old oil buyers and is ready to cut prices if Western sanctions against it are eased.»

The report added: «New Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's ‘charm offensive’ at the United Nations last month, coupled with a historic phone call with US President Barack Obama, revived market hopes that Iranian barrels could return with a vengeance if the diplomatic mood music translates into a breakthrough in the standoff over Tehran's disputed nuclear program.»

Reuters quoted a senior oil trader as saying: «The Iranians are calling around already saying ‘let's talk’ ... You have to be careful, of course, but there is no law against talking.»

Now, here is where the Saudis smarting over US «betrayal» could play havoc with Washington’s tactical engagement with Iran and Syria. 

Iran’s forced withdrawal from oil markets due to Western sanctions has been replaced by a spike in Saudi oil production, which has helped to maintain market prices at around $100 a barrel over the past year. Saudi oil output is said to be at an all-time high, towards its full capacity of 12 million barrels a day. 

For Washington to engage Iran in a political process, even for entirely cynical reasons, it will need to show a certain degree of flexibility in allowing Iran to resume at least a portion of vital oil exports. 

However, that overture is, as it turns out, the prerogative of Saudi Arabia, whose extra oil output has covered the global shortfall from sanctioned Iranian supplies. The Saudis are unlikely to facilitate any resumption of Iranian oil business. 

In that way, the Saudis have the power to throw a very oily spanner in the diplomatic wheels that Washington is trying to turn with Iran.

Was France doing the bidding of the Israeli's and the US when it trashed the talks?
Allowing the US to appear an 'honest broker' something the US has not been regarding much of anything in the ME
Noting the timing of the bombing in Lebanon. What is the message to Iran?
It seems to be connect the dot time..........

UPDATED: Very Interesting that France and Britain, instantaneously condemn this terror attack. Something neither nation did regarding the horrid attacks in Syria, Curious? Or part of that changing narration I have been harping on about?!

Britain, France condemn Beirut bombing

Hague:  “I strongly condemn the shocking terrorist attack on the Iranian embassy in Southern Beirut today that has led to such tragic loss of life. I send my condolences to the families of those killed and injured,”

 France also condemned in the strongest terms the bloody attack near the Iranian Embassy, expressing its deepest condolences to the families of the victims.

Beware the wolves in sheeps clothing