As warmongers plot to destroy Syria, Syrians face only one choice. by Tony Cartalucci
Editor's Note: Before considering the US military options in Syria, it would be instructive to re-read this article from March 21, 2011 titled, "Libyan War: Globalists Bluffing their way to Victory," to understand the true purpose of these current military options and how they were used effectively to win the otherwise unwinnable military campaign in Libya. Through terror and fear, the West was able to fold superior fighting forces that could have held out for years had they stood united.
March 19, 2012 - Corporate-funded think-tank and purveyor of US foreign policy, the Brookings Institution, had in 2009 literally blueprinted the strategy with which the West would slowly strangle and topple the government of Iran. Throughout the pages of their report, "Which Path to Persia?" everything from sanctions, to purposefully provoking war with Iran, to stoking US-backed uprisings, to funding, training, and arming US State Department-listed terror organizations was plotted before being promptly executed.
Amongst those signing their names to this treasonous conspiracy to commit mass-murder against a sovereign nation was Michael O'Hanlon. Besides contributing extensively to the West's corporate-media, he has no operational experience to speak of militarily, economically, or even administratively. He has never once shouldered a rifle for his nation, nor truly jeopardized his life for any cause he seemingly has no problem having tens of thousands of others die for in his stead. He is the quintessential imperial scribe.
O'Hanlon's most recent work involves spelling out the "military options" the US has in regards to Syria in an op-ed aptly titled, "What Are Our Military Options in Syria?"
The West purposefully destabilized Syria, and is currently perpetuating extensive bloodshed through militant proxies funded, trained, and armed by the West and operating on Syria's borders as well as within Syria itself. As the bloodshed mounts, the West is now insidiously using the carnage to justify more overt intervention to execute long planned regime change.
Just as it was spelled out and promptly executed in O'Hanlon's "Which Path to Persia?," the operation in Syria involves almost identical elements altered only slightly to suit Syria's geopolitical predisposition. US-backed uprisings, armed militants, and sanctions have all already been set in motion with overt military options being all that is left on the table.
The military options O'Hanlon envisions to achieve the overthrow of Syria's government include:
1.A punitive naval or air operation to encourage a coup against Assad: An outright act of war designed to completely cut off Syria, including its millions of civilians, from importing or exporting anything. There are also planned airstrikes designed to psychologically shake Assad's allies and panic them into defecting and instead "share power" with the US-backed opposition.
Of course, O'Hanlon must perceive the Syrian government as supreme ignoramuses to have seen how "sharing" was carried out in another Brookings project, Libya, and still count this as a viable alternative to holding fast against foreign-funded militants. It was during NATO's campaign against Libya that many defectors ended up dead the absolute first moment their services were no longer required -or sometimes even beforehand. Case in point, General Abdul Fattah Younis.
Image: General Abdul Fattah Younis' reward for accepting offers to "power share" with the Libyan rebels was his assassination.
....
2. A broader Balkans-like campaign to help depose Assad. And by this, O'Hanlon of course means, a "Libyan-like campaign," but would rather focus on the Balkans because it is further in hindsight and much more has been done to rewrite its historical outcome as "favorable." Evoking the NATO-led genocidal killing spree that just unfolded in Libya, complete with the destruction of several major cities, would again remind potential defectors in Syria the cost of allowing their nation to fall into NATO hands.
That cost would be the plunging of Syria into perpetual division, instability, violence, and an uncertain political future that could see any defector a hero one minute and at the wrong end of a rifle the next. There will be no power sharing, there will be no seats at the table for "defectors," and as Libya has proven, it is very unlikely there will even be a table for seats to be placed around in the first place.
3. Creation of a safe zone for Syrian civilians: O'Hanlon indirectly admits that this would only be done as a means to eventually include one or both of the above mentioned options. This was already stated in "Genocidal Turkish Government Eyes Syria," where it appears that NATO-member Turkey has been elected to create just such a zone from which increasing hostilities could be conducted.
What O'Hanlon is really saying...
What must be remembered is that O'Hanlon is not writing this for the consideration of the Pentagon. Instead, he is specifically writing this so that pundits and media outlets can repeat what is essentially extortion directed at Syria's establishment. The purpose of this exercise is to prey on the fear of Assad's political allies and those across Syria's business community who have so far stood behind their nation's government.
It is hoped that the West can bluff their way into folding opposition by presenting them with a difficult and costly military campaign verses the alternative of "power sharing." Unfortunately for O'Hanlon and his superiors, Syria has already seen the dead end "power sharing" led to in Libya, a dead end Libya will remain in well into the foreseeable future. The rationale of businessmen capitulating to see UN sanctions relieved is also absurd considering the inevitable fracturing and perpetual destabilization that will wreck both the country and its economy should the current government fall.
Syria's opposition is entirely dependent on foreign fighters, foreign arms, foreign funds, and an international consensus that allows such foreign resources to continue flowing to them unabated. Already cracks have begun to show and now the West's only chance is to psychologically break Assad's power base through threats and perhaps even a limited military incursion. The catch is, should Syria remain united, order can be restored and nothing short of total war waged by the West could prevent it.
Syria has only one option.
Imperialism's favorite trick throughout time has been to purposefully mire a targeted nation in internal strife to weaken it before preying on, and ruling over, both sides. This can be seen encapsulated in the following ancient Chinese stratagem:
When a country is beset by internal conflicts, when disease and famine ravage the population, when corruption and crime are rampant, then it will be unable to deal with an outside threat. This is the time to attack. -The 36 Strategies, #5 Loot a Burning House
While it would likewise suit Assad's opponents, it is particularly important for those who have made the decision to stand by Syria's ruling government to stay the course of restoring order and pursuing political solutions.
The West has gone too far, its credibility and operational capacity waning by the day, it has no choice but to continue pushing forward in hopes that all before it lack the fortitude to stand up and fight. The West will not stop until either Syria is divided and destroyed or the West itself crumbles in the midst of its untenable imperial conquest. Defection, capitulation, and failure are not options. Syria's fate will be that of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, or worse if it falls. Unity is Syria's only option.
Latest terrorist attack in Damascus illustrates illegitimacy of both Syria's rebels & the UN/NATO backing them. by Tony Cartalucci
Update: March 19, 2012 - It is now confirmed that Saudi Arabia is shipping arms to foreign fighters and Syrian rebels operating out of Jordan. The Australian reports in their article, "Bombs in Syria as Saudis 'send arms to rebels'," that "Saudi military equipment is on its way to Jordan to arm the Free Syrian Army," quoting an Arab diplomat. Of course, as reported below, the "Free Syrian Army" is led not by Syrians, but by NATO-backed Libyan militants from the US State Department-listed terrorist organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.
March 18, 2012 - A twin terrorist bombing in the Syrian capital of Damascus, allegedly targeting government buildings, ripped through a Christian neighborhood killing an estimated 27, mostly civilians. A third bomb exploded, killing only the driver of the car it was placed in, in what was apparently an attempted triple suicide bombing. CBS News reports (1) that after other similar attacks, U.S. officials suggest Al Qaeda terrorists "may be" amongst the Syrian rebels. However, while the West attempts to portray this as an unexpected development, we shall see that it not only was likely, but in fact the premeditated modus operandi of Western-backed destabilization efforts directed at upturning not only Syria, but the entire Arab World.
Pentagon's Premeditated Arab World Blitzkrieg.
From the beginning the United States has been directly behind the unrest in Syria. In fact, America's involvement in destabilizing Syria began years before the admittedly US-engineered Arab Spring (2) even unfolded in a premeditated plot to upturn the entire Arab World and reorder it according to their own corporate-financier and hegemonic geopolitical interests.
In a 2007 speech given to the Commonwealth Club of California (3), US Army General Wesley Clark would state that in 1991, then Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz said the US had 5-10 years to clean up the old Soviet "client regimes" before the next super power rose up and challenged western hegemony. Clark claimed that this, along with the aftermath of 9/11 constituted a policy coup where Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and the other members of the of Project for a New American Century had hijacked US foreign policy to destabilize and turn the nations of the Middle East upside down - much the way they are now.
Clark would go on to say that shortly after September 11, 2001, while at the Pentagon, a document handed down from the Office of the Secretary of Defense indicated plans to attack and destroy the governments of 7 countries; Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Iran, Lebanon and Libya.
Clearly the United States has already "attacked and destroyed" Iraq, which in 2003 was invaded and subsequently occupied for nearly a decade at the cost of nearly a million lives including over 4,400 US soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines, and trillions of dollars of taxpayer money. Likewise Libya was destabilized and invaded by proxy through a combination of US-led NATO forces and US State Department listed terrorist organizations including the (Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (listed #27) lead by Abdul Hakim Belhaj.
Somalia has been the victim of repeated US-backed invasions by Ethiopia (4), Uganda, Kenya (5), and systematic air (6) and drone campaigns (7) carried out by the recently established US Africa Command (AFRICOM), while neighboring Sudan has been carved into two separate states, isolating the oil-rich south (8) with further intervention pending as public support is built by stunts including the fraudulent Kony 2012 video and George Clooney's pro-imperial intervention advocacy.
US designs toward Iran serve as a model for Syria.
Iran has likewise been under systematic premeditated attack for years, including brutal sanctions, and the training, arming, and funding of US State Department-listed foreign terror organization (listed #29), Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) to carry out terrorist attacks within Iran, as well as the constant threat of unilateral attack by either Israel or the US, or both - all of which was described in minute detail in 2009 amongst the pages of US policy think-tank Brookings Institution's "Which Path to Persia?" report (9).
In their report, they openly conspire to use what is an admitted terrorist organization as a "US proxy" (emphasis added):
"Perhaps the most prominent (and certainly the most controversial) opposition group that has attracted attention as a potential U.S. proxy is the NCRI (National Council of Resistance of Iran), the political movement established by the MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq). Critics believe the group to be undemocratic and unpopular, and indeed anti-American.
In contrast, the group’s champions contend that the movement’s long-standing opposition to the Iranian regime and record of successful attacks on and intelligence-gathering operations against the regime make it worthy of U.S. support. They also argue that the group is no longer anti-American and question the merit of earlier accusations. Raymond Tanter, one of the group’s supporters in the United States, contends that the MEK and the NCRI are allies for regime change in Tehran and also act as a useful proxy for gathering intelligence. The MEK’s greatest intelligence coup was the provision of intelligence in 2002 that led to the discovery of a secret site in Iran for enriching uranium.
Despite its defenders’ claims, the MEK remains on the U.S. government list of foreign terrorist organizations. In the 1970s, the group killed three U.S. officers and three civilian contractors in Iran. During the 1979-1980 hostage crisis, the group praised the decision to take America hostages and Elaine Sciolino reported that while group leaders publicly condemned the 9/11 attacks, within the group celebrations were widespread.
Undeniably, the group has conducted terrorist attacks—often excused by the MEK’s advocates because they are directed against the Iranian government. For example, in 1981, the group bombed the headquarters of the Islamic Republic Party, which was then the clerical leadership’s main political organization, killing an estimated 70 senior officials. More recently, the group has claimed credit for over a dozen mortar attacks, assassinations, and other assaults on Iranian civilian and military targets between 1998 and 2001. At the very least, to work more closely with the group (at least in an overt manner), Washington would need to remove it from the list of foreign terrorist organizations."
It was also revealed in Seymour Hersh's 2008 New Yorker article "Preparing the Battlefield," that not only had MEK been considered for their role as a possible proxy, but that the US had already begun arming and financing them to wage war inside Iran:
"The M.E.K. has been on the State Department’s terrorist list for more than a decade, yet in recent years the group has received arms and intelligence, directly or indirectly, from the United States. Some of the newly authorized covert funds, the Pentagon consultant told me, may well end up in M.E.K. coffers. “The new task force will work with the M.E.K. The Administration is desperate for results.” He added, “The M.E.K. has no C.P.A. auditing the books, and its leaders are thought to have been lining their pockets for years. If people only knew what the M.E.K. is getting, and how much is going to its bank accounts—and yet it is almost useless for the purposes the Administration intends.”
More recently, the British Daily Mail published a stunning admission in their report titled, "Mossad training terrorists to kill Iran's nuclear scientists, U.S. officials claim... but is Israel's real target Obama?" by "US officials" that Israel is currently funding, training, arming, and working directly with MEK. The Daily Mail article states, "U.S. officials confirmed today that Israel has been funding and training Iranian dissidents to assassinate nuclear scientists involved in Iran's nuclear program." The article continues by claiming, "Washington insiders confirmed there is a close relationship between Mossad and MEK."
Quite clearly then, the use of listed terrorist organizations is not an unfortunate or unexpected development in the midst of Western backed regime change operations - they are a central pillar in their planning and execution.
This leaves only Lebanon and Syria - Lebanon having suffered a brutal air assault by Israel (10) who ultimately failed to rout Hezbollah forces in the summer of 2006. Breaking the back of the Iranian-Syrian alliance that allegedly serves as the foundation of Hezbollah's strength would next be targeted. The overthrow of Syria's government is a premeditated US plot.
A concerted campaign to isolate, destabilize and overthrow the government of Syria began in 2002, a year after Clark was informed of the Pentagon's plan to blitzkrieg through the Middle East. It was then that Secretary of State John Bolton added Syria to the growing "Axis of Evil (11)." It would be later revealed that Bolton's threats against Syria manifested themselves as covert funding and support for opposition groups inside of Syria spanning both the Bush and Obama administrations.
In an April 2011 CNN article (12), acting State Department spokesman Mark Toner stated, "We're not working to undermine that [Syrian] government. What we are trying to do in Syria, through our civil society support, is to build the kind of democratic institutions, frankly, that we're trying to do in countries around the globe. What's different, I think, in this situation is that the Syrian government perceives this kind of assistance as a threat to its control over the Syrian people."
Toner's remarks came after the Washington Post released cables (13) indicating the US has been funding Syrian opposition groups since at least 2005 and continued until today.
In an April 2011 AFP report (14), Michael Posner, the assistant US Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor, stated that the "US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments."
The report went on to explain that the US "organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there," (emphasis added). Posner would add, "They went back and there's a ripple effect." That ripple effect of course is the "Arab Spring," and in Syria's case, the impetus for the current unrest threatening to unhinge the nation and invite in foreign intervention."
More recently, revelations that Syrian militants are in fact being armed, trained, funded, and even joined on the battlefield by Libya's Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), a US State Department-listed foreign terrorist organization (listed as #27) (15) only further highlights the necessity of Syria's government under President Assad to attempt to restore order at all costs. The Telegraph would report in November 2011 (16) that LIFG leader, Abdul Belhaj met with senior leaders of the "Free Syrian Army" on the Turkish-Syrian border. It was reported that Belhaj was pledging weapons and money (both of which he receives from NATO) as well as sending LIFG fighters to train and fight alongside Syrian militants.
VoltaireNet.org would confirm (17) Belhaj and his LIFG's role in not just assisting Syrian militants but in fact leading them in NATO's armed destabilization of Syria. US-led NATO and the UN are backing terrorists in the midst of military conquest disguised as "humanitarian intervention."
Now, with terrorist bombing campaigns targeting civilians and ripping through Damascus, we see just as it was planned for in Iran, the deployment of terrorist elements and tactics to bolster Western efforts to topple the Syrian government. The corporate media in tandem with Pentagon officials feign ignorance in an attempt to maintain plausible deniability before a public they assume are far too ignorant to have read or comprehended their designs articulated in documents like "Which Path to Persia?"
It is confirmed that the UN's casualty reports are based solely on opposition "activist" accounts and not on any verifiable facts. The UN's November 2011 human rights report was based solely on such accounts, recorded not in Syria or the surrounding region, but rather in Geneva. The report itself was compiled by Karen Koning AbuZayd who is concurrently a member of the Washington D.C. based Middle East Policy Council (18), along side current and former associates of Exxon, the US military, the CIA, the Saudi Binladin Group, the US-Qatari Business Council (19) and both former and current members of the US government.
Image: Just some of the corporate members of the US-Qatar Business Council, whose president just so happens to sit on the same board of directors of the Middle East Policy Center as Karen AbuZayd, co-author of the conveniently timed UN Human Rights Council report on Syria.
....
Likewise, other "human right advocates" like Amnesty International are similarly compromised - Amnesty being headed literally by a former US State Department official, Suzanne Nossel, Executive Director (20). Nossel had just finished a stint as Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Organizations at the U.S. Department of State before being appointed as head of Amnesty (21). She was also vice-president of strategy and operations for the Wall Street Journal and a media and entertainment consultant at McKinsey & Company (a Council on Foreign Relations "founding" corporate member (22)).
Amnesty International also receives funding from Wall Street speculator George Soros' Open Society Institute (annual report page 8)(23) as well as the UK Department for International Development (page 8), the European Commission and other corporate-funded foundations.
Clearly "humanitarian concerns" are a disingenuous justification for continued meddling in Syria, with all involved notorious fabricators and harboring a staggering array of demonstratively conflicting interests.
With the addition of evidence proving the premeditated use of terrorist elements in the overthrow of sovereign foreign nations in US policy planning, the West's efforts, as well as those of their proxies carrying their agenda out on the ground in Syria, are exposed as illegitimate criminality of vastly unprecedented proportions.
The ravaging of Africa will still proceed as scheduled. by Tony Cartalucci
March 17, 2012 - Over the past week, as Invisible Children and their corporate sponsors performed desperate damage control, ties between the alleged "charity" and the US State Department, Wall Street speculator George Soros and his Open Society Institute, and a myriad of corporate-funded foundations began surfacing and spreading just as quickly as their documentary Kony 2012 rose to fame.
Image: (via Infowars) A visual representation of Invisible Children's true backers and master minds. They will gladly shed their front group in the name of self-preservation and making a clean escape.
....
Perhaps most importantly, the term AFRICOM began gaining wider notoriety as did the mission of AFRICOM - the neo-colonial plundering of all of Africa. And as this single backfiring propaganda stunt threatened to unhinge a continent-spanning corporate-military industrial campaign, the plug was abruptly pulled with news of Invisible Children's director Jason Russell being arrested for lewd behavior in public.
Image: The coat of arms of the British South Africa Company (BSAC) - a predecessor of modern neo-imperialism. The BSAC was a company chartered by the British Empire, lent the resources and capabilities of the Empire, to help loot the natural wealth of Africa. This mirrors exactly AFRICOM and the legion of corporations and NGOs carrying out the modern-day looting of Africa. Note the terms "justice" and "freedom" used upon the company's coat of arms. Clearly masking exploitation with good intentions is nothing new.
....
Video: "Colonialism in 10 Minutes: The Scramble For Africa" explains why Africa is the way it is and that the "scramble" is still very much ongoing up until today. AFRICOM and Kony 2012 are just the latest tricks and perpetrators of what can easily be described as the rape of a continent.
....
The growing legions of critics and skeptics arrayed against this latest Wall Street-London psychological operation will undoubtedly seize this irresistible bait laid out, either by chance or by design, to focus on finishing off the already mortally wounded "Invisible Children" organization. It is already turning out to be a spectacular crash and burn.
And as satisfying as many will find it to stomp Invisible Children out of existence for intentionally misleading them, preying on their emotions, insulting their intelligence, and literally lying to them, they must remember that all they've managed to do is hack away but a tentacle of a much larger monster. While we have a firm grip on Invisible Children, let's pull up the whole monster from its murky lair.
Let us expose the International Criminal Court and its fraudulent head, Luis Moreno-Ocampo who enthusiastically supported the fraud that is Kony 2012. And the Hollywood propagandists who abused their fame and the misplaced trust of millions to promote Invisible Children, as well as other, more established but equally fraudulent NGOs like Soros-funded (annual report page 8) Amnesty International and the Neo-Con run Freedom House who skillfully rode the wave of publicity Invisible Children created, but ran concurrent anti-Kony/pro-AFRICOM invasion campaigns of their own, safely isolated from what they knew was experimental, unpredictable, and potentially disastrous propaganda.
As the plug is pulled on Invisible Children, the system will gladly sacrifice an easily replaceable tentacle in exchange for its overall self-preservation. Do not allow the writhing tentacle pulled into the boat distract us from the grander prize at hand.
NATO member Turkey, guilty of a century of mass murder, seeks "humanitarian intervention" in Syria. by Tony Cartalucci
March 16, 2012 - Once again Turkey, a NATO member since 1952, is considering the partial military invasion of Syria to give foreign terrorists and extremist militants attempting to overthrow the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a reprieve in their failing campaign.
Cross-border mass murder is a routine procedure for Turkey, who has been carrying out a very real genocidal campaign against the Kurd minority within and beyond its own borders for decades - this after the early 1900's Armenian genocide which the government of Turkey to this day still denies.
Photo: Turkish tanks entering Iraq to raid Kurdish towns and hunt suspected rebels in 2008. More recently, Turkey has been bombing "suspected" rebel bases in both Turkey and Iraq, as well as conducting mass nationwide arrests. Strangely, as Turkey verifiably does what Libya's Qaddafi and Syria's Assad have been accused of doing, the West's myriad of disingenuous rights advocacy groups are quiet as is the Wall Street/London beholden UN Security Council and the West's corporate media editorials.
....
Turkey is currently strafing and rolling tanks over its own people.
Turkey has been waging a decades-long bloody campaign against its own armed uprising in predominately Kurdish areas bordering Syria, Iraq, and Iran. In fact, at one point, the US allowed Turkish tanks to cross into American-occupied Iraq to attack villages suspected of harboring armed Kurdish separatists in 2008, mirroring the very tactics Erdogan is now condemning Syria for. The Guardian reported in their 2008 article, "Iraq demands Turkey withdraw from border conflict with Kurds," that the conflict had been raging since 1984 and had cost the lives of 40,000 people - dwarfing the UN's fabricated death toll for Syria's current conflict.
More recently, as Turkey's prime minister lectures neighboring Syria on its bid to crush foreign-funded, armed militants, the Turkish government is preparing to augment its compliment of Israeli drones with a deployment of US Predator drones on its soil. The Associated Press reported in an article titled, "Turkey: US likely to deploy Predator drones," that Turkey has been "pressing for the drones in an escalating war against Kurdish rebels." Turkey, in addition to rolling tanks into towns suspected of harboring militants, and the deployment of drones, has also strafed suspected rebel stronghold with airstrikes and conducted sweeping nationwide mass arrests. In other words Turkey is doing everything Syria is accused of doing, plus what Qaddafi in Libya was accused of doing, only fully sanctioned by the West, with arms supplied by the West, and under the muted coverage provided by the Western media.
Yet Turkey, with its genocidal history and its current ongoing campaign against the Kurdish people, has been welcomed with open arms by NATO and has been leading efforts currently to funnel NATO resources into the hands of militants working to destabilize and overthrow Syria. Now it appears that the West has elected their genocidal junior member to fall on its own sword for the cause of continuing Wall Street and London's reordering of the Middle East, a Middle East Turkey mistakenly believes it will have a leading role in.
A Turkish intervention risks wider regional war.
Reuters reports in their article, "Turkey considers buffer zone along Syria border," that "Turkey is considering setting up a buffer zone inside Syria to tackle a growing flow of refugees fleeing the conflict there." Noting that the buffer zone would indeed be on Syrian soil and require an armed Turkish presence to maintain it, the prospect of open war between Turkish and Syrian forces is all but certain.
Just like Israel's planned attack on Iran is designed to allow the United States to appear a "reluctant" participant in the ensuing war, so too is Turkey's designs of entering and occupying Syrian territory. It will provide the perfect pretext for an escalation of both Turkish military operations as well as the participation by other NATO members, including of course Washington, London, and Paris.
What is clear is that Turkey, with a century of genocide under its belt, is the least qualified candidate in or around the Middle East to claim "humanitarian concerns" as justification for any geopolitical maneuver. Additionally, Turkey's planned invasion of Syria will only increase the bloodshed and possibly trigger a regional war at the cost of potentially millions of lives. Just the very suggestion of such an act illustrates the disingenuous, detached, dangerous, and immensely hypocritical nature of the West's campaign-by-proxy verses Syria.
Turkey's decision to bend to Wall Street.
Turkey must ask itself, as it struggles against the ghosts of its past and the crimes it is still committing against its own people, if they can really afford another catastrophic death toll owed to them and their meddling throughout the region. Turkey must ask itself if such a move truly benefits them, or is simply a means for other NATO members to mitigate and shift blame onto them, yet again. There are no seats at the table for Turkey, who is scorned by a European Union they seek to join, and used as a tool by the NATO alliance they count themselves a member of.
Whatever was promised to the leadership in Turkey, they must realize by now by the betrayals of nations all around them, from Saddam in Iraq, to Qaddafi in Libya, to Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, that when the day comes they too will be destabilized, divided, destroyed, and pillaged either by the IMF or Kurdish separatists armed and funded by the next eager Western client-state.
Turkey does however have an opportunity for a clean break, an act of defiance against the West it is seemingly, irrationally beholden to. They can end the conflict in Syria by another means - denying foreign fighters, arms, and equipment from crossing their border and allowing their neighbors in Syria to restore order in their cities and countrysides.
However, clearly the world was deceived by the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, the United States government, the British and French governments, and of course NATO in the execution of their "responsibility to protect" mission. To allow a repeat of the vast criminality that has irreparably ravaged Libya would be unconscionable. Yet that is exactly what Amnesty International is demanding of the Russian Federation.
Image: Amnesty International using the same "activism 2.0" gags employed by their junior partners at Invisible Children, the perpetrators of the Kony 2012 scam. Note the "Donate Now: Fight bad guys with every dollar," and how like Invisible Children, Amnesty addresses its audience as if they are children. Ironically, Amnesty and Invisible Children also both so happen to cultivate a myriad of connections with the US State Department and corporate interests.
....
Titled "Russia: No More Excuses, Stand Up Against Bloodshed in Syria," Amnesty perversely attempts to twist around violence and unrest clearly fomented by the West inside Syria as somehow the result of Russia's refusal to capitulate in the face of another NATO intervention. An intervention, it must be added, that is sure to create widespread violence, ethnic divisions and bloodletting across Syria, as well as the plundering by Western corporations eager to fill the void left when Syria's nationalist establishment is violently excised as it was in Libya.
The Amnesty report cites the fabricated death toll produced by the UN based solely on Syrian opposition claims, before bemoaning the positioning of Syrian troops and equipment in and around the city of Homs, which was until recently admittedly the base of operations of heavily armed militants. Amnesty then rhetorically asks, "how many more victims must suffer before Russia takes a decisive stance against crimes against humanity in Syria?" One could easily ask in response, how many more victims must suffer before the world takes a decisive stance against Wall Street and London in their global murder spree stretching from Libya to Syria, into Iran, across Iraq, and in the mountains and villages of Afghanistan?
Amnesty concludes their ultimatum by demanding Russia end its arms sales to Syria, even as Western governments through NATO and its Arab client states steadily supply arms, funds, and even foreign fighters to their proxy opposition movement.
Amnesty is funded & run by the US State Department & big business.
One might wonder why Amnesty International is clearly working in contradiction to their own mission statement to "protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied." Our first clue comes from who currently runs Amnesty International - Suzanne Nossel, Executive Director.
Nossel had just finished a stint as Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Organizations at the U.S. Department of State before being appointed as head of Amnesty. She was also vice-president of strategy and operations for the Wall Street Journal and a media and entertainment consultant at McKinsey & Company (a Council on Foreign Relations "founding" corporate member). Clearly manipulating public perception is a specialty of hers, one certainly being put into good use now regarding Syria.
Video: Nossel, while at the State Department, speaks about the US-engineered "Arab Spring" and the US' role in supporting opposition groups. She is speaking at the National Iranian American Council, and specifically cites the Brookings Institution to make her case about human rights abuses in Iran. One wonders if Nossel also thumbed through Brookings' "Which Path to Persia?" report which openly conspires to overthrow Iran via covertly backed "color revolutions," arming listed terrorist groups (as the US is now doing in Syria), and provoking Iran into a war it does not want. Nossel is obviously continuing her work of undermining sovereign nations by leveraging the cause of human rights at Amnesty International.
....
How Amnesty International can be considered impartial when it is run by a woman who is clearly a representative of American foreign interests, both in government and across its corporate-financier establishment, is astounding. What's worse is that Amnesty International is also indeed funded by government and big business. Amnesty International receives funding from Wall Street speculator George Soros' Open Society Institute (annual report page 8) as well as the UK Department for International Development (page 8), the European Commission and other corporate-funded foundations.
Amnesty International is compromised by a staggering conflict of interest where its organization is disproportionately funded and run by representatives of Wall Street and London. It is clear that not only is Amnesty International compromised, they are also disingenuously leveraging the noble cause of human rights to carry out a self-serving political agenda, which in Syria's case consists of regime change in favor of creating a Western client state.
The unrest in Syria is US-backed and has been long planned.
Syria has been slated for regime change since as early as 1991. In 2002, then US Under Secretary of State John Bolton added Syria to the growing "Axis of Evil." It would be later revealed that Bolton's threats against Syria manifested themselves as covert funding and support for opposition groups inside of Syria spanning both the Bush and Obama administrations.
In an April 2011 CNN article, acting State Department spokesman Mark Toner stated, "We're not working to undermine that [Syrian] government. What we are trying to do in Syria, through our civil society support, is to build the kind of democratic institutions, frankly, that we're trying to do in countries around the globe. What's different, I think, in this situation is that the Syrian government perceives this kind of assistance as a threat to its control over the Syrian people."
Toner's remarks came after the Washington Post released cables indicating the US has been funding Syrian opposition groups since at least 2005 and continued until today.
In an April 2011 AFP report, Michael Posner, the assistant US Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor, stated that the "US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments."
The report went on to explain that the US "organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there," (emphasis added). Posner would add, "They went back and there's a ripple effect." That ripple effect of course is the "Arab Spring," and in Syria's case, the impetus for the current unrest threatening to unhinge the nation and invite in foreign intervention."
More recently, revelations that Syrian militants are in fact being armed, trained, funded, and even joined on the battlefield by Libya's Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), a US State Department-listed foreign terrorist organization (#27) only further highlights the necessity of Syria's government under President Assad to attempt to restore order at all costs. The Telegraph would report in November 2011 that LIFG leader, Abdul Belhaj met with senior leaders of the "Free Syrian Army" on the Turkish-Syrian border. It was reported that Belhaj was pledging weapons and money (both of which he receives from NATO) as well as sending LIFG fighters to train and fight alongside Syrian militants.
VoltaireNet.org would confirm Belhaj and his LIFG's role in not just assisting Syrian militants but in fact leading them in NATO's armed destabilization of Syria.
Judging by the last 10 years of global war waged by the United States in the name of fighting "terrorists" one would wonder why they and Amnesty International are protesting and not applauding Russia's attempts to bolster Assad's position against verified foreign terrorists destabilizing a secular nation. Again, like in Libya, it appears the world is being deceived by what is increasingly a compromised, illegitimate geopolitical circus centered around Wall Street and London.
Amnesty speaks for Wall Street & London, not human rights.
Who will sign Amnesty's petition to support their demands toward Russia? Could it possibly be the same impressionable people lured into the now imploding Kony 2012 scam? Ironically enough, Amnesty International had long settled in upon that sinking ship, with their petition addressed to President Obama titled, "End the use of child soldiers," which in part states, "I commend the U.S. Government for assisting efforts to apprehend Joseph Kony. I urge you to also send a strong message other armed groups and governments in the region so that they understand that the recruitment and use of children in armed conflict will not be tolerated."
Amnesty took Invisible Children's war propaganda flick and ran with it, not just giving AFRICOM an excuse to establish a presence in Uganda, but warning that all armed groups "in the region" stand the chance of being used to justify AFRICOM's expansion across the continent.
There is no reason why Russia should heed the words of Amnesty International, which has simply repackaged the demands and desires of Wall Street and London's corporate-financiers, under the guise of disingenuous "humanitarian concerns."
Guardian skewers own credibility with hamfisted Wikileaks knock-off aimed at Syria. editorial by Tony Cartalucci
Update: Apparently, the Guardian claims, Syrian President Assad's father-in-law suggested the president read an article from Land Destroyer titled, "British Propaganda Aims at Triggering Syrian Genocide." The Guardian has still failed categorically to confirm the veracity of their latest, incredibly irresponsible propaganda stunt aimed not at truth, but at further destabilizing Syria and compounding the tragic loss of life the West has purposefully triggered.
"It is impossible to rule out the possibility of fakes in the email cache, but..." "The Assad E-Mails," London Guardian, March 14, 2012.
This sentence right here should have immediately halted the publication of anything revolving around an alleged cache of e-mails provided to the Guardian by the obviously compromised "Syrian opposition." The source is clearly biased, politically motivated, and their information unconfirmed. Yet the Guardian decided to run with the story anyway, casting doubt on their own objectivity, journalistic integrity, and their true motivation, which now is clearly not "journalism."
The Guardian, in their explanation as to why they decided to publish unconfirmed information included the following statement, "we believe the more detailed picture of the workings of Assad's inner circle that emerges from the mails, and the extent to which he and his wife have managed to sustain their luxurious lifestyle, are also of public interest." A "more detailed picture" that is in fact unverified and most likely a politically motivated fabrication is indeed of "public interest" if you are trying to sell a particular narrative regardless of the actual facts.
The job of a journalist is to report the facts impartially to help inform the public and enable them to make accurate decisions in regards to a vast array of issues that affect their daily lives as well as the collective well-being of their communities and nations. A journalist is not to irresponsibly publish anything that comes across their desk, applying sensational headlines while making incredible innuendos only to post disclaimers halfway down the page that the information they are attempting to foist upon the public as fact and "truth," "may not be verified or true."
That is propaganda, deceit, manipulation, and above all, fraud. Of course, in the Guardian's quest to "verify" these alleged e-mails, they contact other propagandists within the same circle of corporate-media outfits, including ABC News (whose Barber Walters' interview with Assad was a humiliating disgraceful display of how far America's journalistic establishment has sunk.) Another source contacted to "confirm" whether or not at least some of the e-mails were genuine was former British Ambassador to Syria "Sir" Andrew Green, whose former employer, the British Foreign Ministry, is a viciously adamant opponent of Assad's government working directly with Syrian opposition harbored in London, with members of the notorious Syrian Observatory for Human Rights literally passing in and out of Foreign Secretary William Hague's office.
So in the Guardian's quest to verify what they claim "would be difficult for even the best resourced hoaxer or intelligence agency to gather or fabricate," they contact two vast organizations who just so happen to possess not only the capacity to fabricate such lies, but the motive and a demonstrative history of working actively against the Syrian government to undermine and ultimately oust it from power.
Both the Western corporate-media and the British Foreign Ministry are more than capable of using their official contacts with Bashar Al-Assad to bolster otherwise fabricated e-mails, as well as hand over the "cache" to activists they work with on a daily basis. In fact, it is most likely during these daily meetings that Syrian activists helped refine the cache's fabricated contents to ensure a credible narrative was produced to match what the Syrian public already knows about the Assad family.
Wikileaks performed a similar function during the onset of the Tunisian and Egyptian "Arab Spring" unrest. Now fully confirmed to be a US-engineered geopolitical destabilization planned years in advance, it is clear that Wikileaks is a creation and tool of the US State Department, leveraged by the corporate establishment-media with whom "anti-establishment" Julian Assange works so closely with, to help augment, not hinder the agenda of Wall Street and London. The impact of Wikileaks has been severely diminished by deceitful "journalists" and corporate lobbyists who have been exposed using the less than reputable word of the US State Department and its ambassadors to sell the US State Department's very own agenda to the public.
The Syrian opposition itself, has been mired from the very beginning in one scandal after another, as their attempts to manipulate the perception of the world in tandem with their foreign sponsors is exposed repeatedly, beginning with "Gay Girl in Damascus" who turned out to be a 40 year old American man living in the UK, to "Syrian Danny" who was recently caught staging fake gunfire off camera and getting into character before giving a hysterical casualty report to CNN's Anderson Cooper. Cooper would go on to admit that Western coverage of events in Syria is entirely based on unverified, biased accounts provided solely by the Syrian opposition and exposed liars like "Danny."
With cities being restored to order now in quick succession, and Russia and China steadfastly denying Wall Street and London another opportunity to repeat their craven atrocities committed in Libya, the stops are being pulled out and every imaginable gambit is being pursued, even rehashes of already worn-out gambits like Wikileaks-style e-mail caches.
Since the Guardian wants to play the game of speculation, we can in turn speculate about their latest reportage on "The Assad E-mails." It appears that the Guardian is working in tandem with other members of the Western media and the British Foreign Ministry to undermine the Assad family and his support across Syria which has just recently manifested itself in nation-wide pro-Assad rallies, bitterly renounced by the media who is supposed to simply report the facts.
The Guardian, by doing so, has resigned its journalistic integrity while their staff members, including Robert Booth, Luke Harding, Angelique Chrisafis, and Matthew Taylor who signed off on this "junk journalism," should never be considered, believed, trusted or labeled as anything but propagandists again. They have willfully violated the trust their credentials erroneously lend them and have further eroded Western journalism in what appears to be a process of irreparable decay.
Whether or not the e-mails are legitimate is not really even the issue - the issue is the untenable, unjournalistic process with which this alleged information was approached and handled. Would the Guardian give equal consideration to a cache of e-mails produced by the Assad government regarding Syrian opposition leaders actively collaborating with NATO, the US and British government as well as terrorists from Iraq and Libya?
Certainly not, especially when outright admissions by the opposition themselves are glossed over by Western propagandists. The Guardian has established they have an agenda, that is to undermine and remove Assad from power, with the truth being nothing more than another barrier to remove in the process.
services were no longer required -or sometimes even beforehand. Case in point, General Abdul Fattah Younis. 
