US Murders Children in Bid to Assassinate Qaddafi (Again)

Ghoulish Hunt for Qaddafi Defines NATO
by Tony Cartalucci

Bangkok, Thailand May 1, 2011 - The very policy of targeted assassinations sidesteps any semblance of law, national or international. By extra-judicially executing people, proper investigations, trials, and justice itself is circumvented, diminished, and ultimately undermined as a whole. The United States in particular has become the greatest purveyor of this perversion of what used to serve as the very foundation of its own constitution and its values as a free nation.

NATO's attack, reported on May 1, 2011, in an attempt to extra-judicially murder Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi has claimed the life of his youngest son Saif al-Arab Qaddafi, as well as several of his grandchildren. The indiscriminate nature of the attack and the killing of children illustrates in its entirety just why civilized nations have long condemned assassination attempts and the indiscriminate use of military force on non-military targets in the first place.

This latest attack is reminiscent of another targeted assassination attempt by the United States in 1986 that missed Qaddafi but managed to kill his 4 year old adopted daughter Hanna. The corporate owned media has since played semantics suggesting Hanna was adopted posthumously, seemingly more content with the idea of the murdered 4 year old having no ties to Qaddafi.

The botched assassination attempt comes just days after several US government figures called for Qaddafi's extra-judicial murder. While these calls are supposedly part of America's ever expanding mission in Libya to "protect civilians," it should be noted that according to even the US Department of Defense, no credible evidence had been produced to justify the current military operations, let alone their expansion.

While most informed readers are under no delusion as to what NATO really represents, a supranational military force carrying out a global corporate-financier agenda, even the uninformed must understand by now that NATO, between its endless occupation in Afghanistan, its provocative encirclement of Russia, and now their senseless siege of Libya, has become a global menace, removed from both the national laws that are supposed to govern the civilized use of member military forces, as well as the contrived international laws they claim they act to uphold.

When NATO isn't butchering children or extra-legally
occupying sovereign nations, it is busy encircling Russia
inviting World War III in the service of global financiers.

While people in the West may apathetically shrug off the grievous evil being perpetrated in Libya, Afghanistan, Pakistan Iraq, Iran, and a growing number of other nations through the actions of the United States, UK, France and their NATO allies, they must realize that it is only a matter of time before this disregard for the very laws that govern their society will eventually be visited upon them. In many ways in America and Europe, this is already incrementally becoming a reality. Just as the world continuously turned a blind eye to Adolf Hilter and his Nazi war machine as it incrementally violated the sovereignty of both the German people and their neighbors, we stand only to embolden this expanding, reckless tyranny by remaining silent and tacitly complicit in our support of the politicians and corporations behind this dark agenda.

We may not be able to physically stop this unfolding crime against humanity, but we surely can undermine it, day-by-day, purchase-by-purchase, by committing ourselves to a full-spectrum boycott of the corporations involved - essentially anything that is not produced locally. We can also undermine the corrupt, fiat financial machine driving this global menace by replacing our currency with physical precious metals and alternative currencies used amongst friends, families, and coalitions of local businesses. Finally, we can begin to grow our own food and support local farmers, as well as taking up trades and constructive pastime pursuits to reconnect to our roots of independence and self-sufficiency that made the West great.

While we can easily sit idly by doing nothing, claiming that it isn't our problem, it isn't our grandchildren being murdered by "precision ordnance," we must reflect on history and realize that indeed, soon it will be, most certainly and undeniably. We can choose to stand up to this now, or we can experience first-hand tomorrow the bitter agony of loss, death, and destruction that is consuming Libya's population, as it has Iraq, Afghanistan, and the myriad of nations past and present to feel the sting of repressive global spanning tyranny.

Syria: Intervention Inevitable

And the greater World War.
by Tony Cartalucci

We are presented with what we are told are isolated crises.
In reality, from Desert Storm to the Eastern European color
revolutions, to the "War on Terror" to the current "Arab Spring,"
we are witnessing one linear campaign for world domination -
the creation of what George Bush Sr. called "the New World Order."

Bangkok, Thailand April 30, 2011 - Regime change in Syria was a foregone conclusion as early as 1991. General Wesley Clark in a 2007 speech in California relayed a 1991 conversation between himself and then Under Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. Wolfowitz indicated that America had 5-10 years to clean up old Soviet "client regimes," namely Syria, Iran, and Iraq, before the next super power rose up to challenge western hegemony. The "next super power" includes ironically Russia, recovering from the treasonous attempted sellout by oligarchs like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and of course a rising China.

Setting the Stage

The entire "Arab Spring" was a preplanned, meticulously engineered foreign-funded operation that began as early as 2008, with the West's imperial network of "civil society" and NGOs in place for decades. The New York Times has recently admitted as much in their article, "US Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprising," implicating the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, the National Endowment for Democracy, Movements.org, and Freedom House for their roles in recruiting, training, and supporting the unrest.

As this plot unfolds, we see in hindsight that each destabilization was triggered and nurtured with a specific order in mind. Tunisia and Egypt were collapsed on either side of Libya while the tremors of destabilization shook the entire region in general, including in Saudi Arabia and Jordan. The newly "reordered" Middle East would be extorted into backing Western military intervention in Libya, which was targeted next. The vulnerable governments of Tunisia and Egypt began serving as conduits for weapons and supplies to reach US-backed rebels in their bid to oust Qaddafi. Likewise, the grand prize in the Middle East being Iran, Syria is being systematically picked apart first to further weaken and isolate Tehran.

Iran itself has been under siege for years by covert operations including US special forces and intelligence operating inside Iran, training, arming and supporting terrorist organizations in activity against the government of Iran, as well as assassinations and sabotage of Iranian infrastructure. All of this has been meticulously documented, planned, and prepared amongst the pages of Brookings Institution's "Which Path to Persia?" report.

The corporate-financier funded think-tanks have reached the general consensus that their unipolar world order of "international law," and "international institutions" have primacy over national sovereignty and the time has come to assert such primacy or lose it. This was stated quite clearly within the corporate lined Brookings Institution report titled, " "Libya's Test of the New International Order" back in February 2011. In it they overtly state that intervening in Libya "is a test that the international community has to pass. Failure would shake further the faith of the people's region in the emerging international order and the primacy of international law."

The globalist International Crisis Group, whose trustee Mohamed ElBaradei played a direct, hands-on role in overthrowing the government of Egypt on behalf of foreign interests, recently reiterated Brookings' sentiments in an article titled, "The Rise and Fall of International Human Rights," where once again "international law" and "international citizenship" is held above national sovereignty. The "responsibility to protect (R2P)" is cited as the impetus to assert such "international law." Considering that R2P is called on after foreign-funded sedition and violence is created within a target nation, we can see "international law" as the poorly dressed euphemism for imperial invasion that it is. The term "international" in fact describes the evolution of the Anglo-American empire as it absorbs and dismantles nation-states across the globe.

The Syrian port of Tartus (highlighted in orange) is set to
serve as a Russian naval base, upgraded this year and to
host Russian warships by 2012. This will allow Russia to
counteract NATO's aggressive encirclement of its borders.

The Build-up Against Syria

Syria is not only a defiant nation unwilling to participate in "globalization," it is also an integral part of both Iran's and Russia's growing counterbalance throughout the region, in direct contrast to Western hegemony. The Syrian port city of Tartus is being renovated and is set to host heavy Russian warships in a bid to establish a significant presence in the Mediterranean. This would counteract NATO's expansion along Russia's borders as well as keep in check Western fleets north of the Suez.

Syria has long served this purpose, with the Tartus facility having originally been opened in 1971 through an agreement with the Soviets. When Paul Wolfowitz was referring to Soviet "client regimes" in his 1991 conversation with Wesley Clark, this sort of challenge to Western hegemony was what he was referring to.

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, Clark was again passed plans drawn to implement regime change throughout the Middle East, specifically to attack and destroy the governments of 7 countries; Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Iran, Lebanon and Libya. In 2002, then US Under Secretary of State John Bolton, would add Syria to the growing "Axis of Evil."

In a recent 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 come after the Washington Post released cables indicating the US has been funding Syrian opposition groups since at least 2005 under the Bush administration and was continued under Obama. As we can see, the campaign against Syria transcended presidential administrations for nearly two decades.

In a recent 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." Posner would add, "They went back and there's a ripple effect."

Lieberman on Syrian intervention.

The ripple effect of course are the uprisings themselves, facilitated by yet more aid, equipment, and the complicity of the corporate owned media, disingenuously portraying the events as "spontaneous," "genuine," and "indigenous." Recent calls have been made by US Senators Mark Kirk and Richard Blumenthal for a "non-military intervention" in Syria, while warmongering puppets Nicolas Sarkozy of France and US Senator Joe Lieberman used Libya's bombardment as a warning aimed specifically at Assad of Syria.

The Intervention Is Beginning

Now, in calls that echo the build-up to Libya's bombardment, US Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Joe Lieberman have made a joint statement that Assad has "lost the legitimacy to remain in power in Syria." They continued by stating, "Rather than hedging our bets or making excuses for the Assad regime, it is time for the United States, together with our allies in Europe and around the world, to align ourselves unequivocally with the Syrian people in their peaceful demand for a democratic government."

The level of deception behind these comments is almost unimaginable, after the US State Department openly admitted to funding, training, organizing, and supporting this unrest to begin with. Compounding the intellectual dishonesty from which these three senators have made their treasonous comments from is the fact that each of them, in addition to their role as "elected representatives," are members of unelected, shadowy organizations that receive funding directly from US tax payers as well as corporate-financier interests to undermine and destroy foreign governments. McCain and Graham are both members of the International Republican Institute, openly implicated by the New York Times for their role in funding the "Arab Spring." Lieberman is a member of the Neo-Conservative war profiteering lobbying firm deceptively named, the "Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)."

FDD features many Project for a New American Century (PNAC) signatories including William Kristol, Richard Perle, James Woolsey, and Paula Dobriansky, as well as CFR members Newt Gingrich and Charles Krauthammer, along with the disingenuous "War on Terror" paid propagandist Bill Roggio of the "Long War Journal." Shockingly, this cabal of warmongering liars, many of whom are responsible for reckless and disingenuous war propaganda films such as "Iranium" openly admits to being funded in part by the US State Department. It is amongst unelected, unaccountable organizations like the IRI and FDD that US foreign policy reaches foregone conclusions, with propaganda like "Iranium" left to sell these conclusions to an unwitting, immensely ignorant public.

The chatter amongst the corporate funded think-tanks such as the Brookings Institution has reached a crescendo in their calls for Assad to step down. As in Libya, the calls are based on unverified, purposefully ambiguous reports of violence squarely blamed on the ruling regime. Regardless of reports of armed groups working amongst the protesters, the corporate owned media and the think-tanks that hand them their talking points maintain that the protests are peaceful and that crackdowns are "repressive."

In Brookings' latest piece, "In Syria, Assad Must Exit the Stage" the cycle of violence initiated by "mysterious gunmen" targeting funerals is cited as the line Assad had crossed which now requires his departure from power. The article states, "With the cycle of ever-increasing protests met by regime violence and then more funerals intensifying in all areas of the country, it is time for Assad, the "Hamlet" of the Arab world, to consider his future. It is time for him and those who influence him abroad to search for a swift and orderly exit." As evidence begins to trickle out confirming Assad's accusations of armed elements amongst the protesters, as well as possible foreign gunmen being employed to create broader unrest, just as in Libya, the West rushes forward to initiate irreversible intervention.

The Greater World War

With the broad level of openly engineered destabilization aimed not only at the Middle East but at Moscow, Beijing and their peripheries as well, there is little chance the West will call off their gambit now. There is no retreat or return to normalcy for a world now locked in increasingly aggressive confrontation between the Anglo-American empire and the remaining nation-states. It is an all or nothing gambit being executed by a financially and strategically precarious West rushing to complete an agenda at least 2 decades in the making. Syria and ultimately Iran will not escape this campaign without confronting and confounding the real force behind the destabilization.

World government is most certainly a conspiracy, but by no means
merely a theory. Here Bush calls for a "New World Order."

This is not an isolated, regional conflict, this is the first step toward greater world war. The destabilization extends from Tunisia to Thailand, from Belarus to Beijing. There are rumblings of confrontation and the positioning of strategic pieces well beyond the current "Arab Spring."

The rest of the world, including the people of the West who will bear the brunt of the West's failure or success with equal destitution, must recognize and reject this megalomania-fueled self-serving campaign. We must begin generating a new consensus based on individual and national sovereignty, reclaim the responsibilities we have pawned off to these mega-corporate-financier interests along with the terrible power they now wield because of our continued complicity, apathy, and ignorance. After Syria and Iran, comes Moscow and Beijing. It is unlikely such conflicts will remain confined to far off regions of the world pictured on our TV screens - just as unlikely those that initiated this confrontation will pay with their own blood and treasure before we the people are all thrown into the crucible of war and consumed entirely.

For more on what we can do on a daily basis to undermine and defeat this nefarious global spanning agenda please read on:

Destroying the Globalists
Self-Sufficiency
Alternative Economics
The Lost Key to Real Revolution
Boycott the Globalists
Naming Names: Your Real Government

Free Markets & Socialism: An Alternative View

Transitioning from socialism to pragmatic, technological solutions.
commentary by Tony Cartalucci

Building things, making things, technological and scientific
progress moves forward the frontier of human knowledge
and makes all that follows in its wake more accessible and
affordable to the average person.

Bangkok, Thailand April 29, 2011 - Why is medical care subsidized by insurance schemes and socialism? The answer is quite obvious in that medical care requires highly trained practitioners and state-of-the-art technology to provide the absolute best care. Such trained practitioners and technology is of limited supply, in great demand and thus incredibly expensive to procure for the average person without financial assistance, be it from insurance schemes or socialist handouts.

However, perpetually subsidizing medical care will never address the underlying cause of its scarcity and in turn, its incredible price. Subsidizing is also unsustainable economically. It requires rationing and difficult "moral" decisions to be made regarding who receives what treatment. Such scenarios belittle both human dignity and the full potential of humanity in general.

Of course no one could seriously suggest people deserve to be denied medical care for the simple fact that they cannot afford it. The sad reality is that many people do not receive the best treatment available, subsidized or not, because neither they nor the state can afford it. So what is the answer? When is it ok to subsidize political solutions and what can be done to find permanent, pragmatic, technical solutions?

The answer is quite simple - perhaps so simple, especially when divorced from political ideology, it eludes understanding in today's political arena. Socialist handouts are tools. Like any tool they are only as good as the people using them. While the intentions of socialist medicine, welfare, education and so on seem noble, in reality they are primarily used by self-serving crooked politicians as bribes handed out in exchange for the voting public's servile dependency on a particular political agenda. Generations of voting blocs have been created using socialist handouts in just this fashion. Pragmatic solutions are never seriously pursued because pragmatic, permanent solutions - while alleviating entirely any particular social problem - would undermine the real purpose of the handouts, namely, building a dependent, servile voting bloc.

However, let us imagine socialist handouts for a particular social problem such as medical care applied in the context of a temporary stop-gap measure. While people are subsidized for care, the commitments are temporary and voluntary only to prevent people from dying without proper treatment. Meanwhile, investments are put into education and biomedical technology with specific benchmarks and time frames in mind. Simultaneously, barriers such as crippling "intellectual property rights" and monopolizing business practices are eliminated to allow real competition to flourish.

By increasing the supply of trained practitioners and biomedical engineers through improved education, and advancing biomedical technology past current levels of precarious scarcity the price for medical care will drop accordingly. With monopolies eliminated, real progress can be effected. If a particular company has a viable, affordable treatment for cancer, no established monopoly will be able to lobby Washington to regulate it out of business to protect their particular racket. Similar solutions could also easily be applied to the inadequate, antiquated, parasitic oil and car industries as well.

We should look around society today and take stock in industries and commodities we take for granted. We do not kill one another over the last chicken leg or leaf of lettuce nor do many people go without basic food. This is not because we have mastered subsidizing socialist handouts to feed our populations, rather we have developed agricultural technology that allows us to create an affordable market nearly anyone can benefit from under normal circumstances.

Likewise, medical technology and other essential industries can and must be advanced to where the market price is affordable to all. This will not happen with socialist handouts or monopolizing regulations in place. It will happen with improved education and healthy competition within the markets, where the only protection given is the rights of entrepreneurs big and small to pursue their trade without being hindered by monopolistic practices. In the meantime, it is sensible to transition away from total, permanent (and pandering) socialist solutions and move toward temporary stop-gaps until this is achieved.

Real, technical education in engineering, design, medicine, and other physical, world shaping trades should be re-prioritized over the degenerate fixation the West has for "administration" and "service sector" occupations. Economies still performing during the current economic depression including Germany, South Korea, and other nations that ply in real industry are proof of the merits of this argument. Engineering, design, and science is what advances the frontiers of human knowledge and makes all that follows in its wake more accessible and affordable to the average person.

Of course, another essential aspect of a fully functioning free market is a well informed consumer base. Without an informed consumer base, monopolistic regulations are easily put and kept in place. Failed business models can perpetually stay in business no matter how horrendously and consistently they fail their consumer base. The entwined relationship between big business and government is allowed to grow unchecked, perpetually to the detriment of the average person.

We can begin today to rectify this problem and begin our journey toward a more promising future by first turning off the crass entertainment that has intentionally lulled us into the ignorant, uninformed stupor within which these corporations operate with impunity. We can instead use our time to teach ourselves in areas where our public education has failed us and reignite our interest in shaping the world rather than watching it pass us by on the sofa. We need not wait for this paradigm to shift nationally. We can begin shifting it locally amongst proactive groups of vigilant, ambitious citizens. In many cases, such as organic farming and home school education, this is already being done. Ultimately if we want change, we must take the responsibility upon ourselves to make it happen pragmatically, not politically.

Obama's Birth Certificate: Not the Issue

by Tony Cartalucci

Bangkok, Thailand April 29, 2011 - Of course, a candidate must meet legal requirements before running for public office. This is a universally agreed upon concept which has been enumerated in laws in every nation, since the beginning of human civilization. However, for those who deeply examine the United States and how it has drifted from a constitutional republic to the corporate-financier oligarchy it is today, they might realize the futility of arguing over "President" Obama's qualifications for an office that has long been ceremonial, if not entirely theatrical.

Like it or not, your real government consists of unelected
bankers and corporate special interests. The argument
that Obama' birth certificate makes-or-breaks his legitimacy
pales in comparison to the realization that the entire office of the
president has been usurped for at least 2 decades.

The corporate-financier agenda transcends presidencies. From Reagan to Obama, US foreign and domestic policy has moved in a continuously linear direction toward increasing corporate-financial monopolies and eroding the role and sovereignty of the US Constitution and the people who are supposed to execute it. In 1991, "Neo-Conservative" war monger Paul Wolfowitz stated that the Middle East would be turned upside down and reordered in America's favor - ironically, this operation which has been piecemeal planned and executed year-by-year since then, is finally unfolding in its entirety under the supposedly "liberal" Obama administration.

Likewise, the seemingly "liberal" free-trade agreements pushed by Clinton, were expanded into the beginnings of the supranational Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America under the supposedly "conservative" Bush administration. Of course, the blueprints for the SPP or the geopolitical reordering of the Middle East weren't drawn up by presidential administrations nor committees amongst America's elected representatives, but rather by unelected corporate-funded think-tanks like the Council on Foreign Relations or the Brookings Institute. These think-tanks represent the collective interests of the largest corporations and financial institutions on earth and are the real, often obscure architects of both American and European foreign and domestic policy.

The only difference one can delineate then, is the brand of propaganda used during each supposedly ideologically differentiated political administration to sell this unipolar, unilateral, continuous agenda to the public as it creeps forward. But even upon examining each presidential administration, we are struck with names and affiliations of members who directly represent these corporate interests. To illustrate how entirely ineffectual and meaningless "Obama" is as a president, let's examine some key members of his administration and what their affiliations are.

Timothy Geithner (Secretary of the Treasury): Group of 30, Council on Foreign Relations, private Federal Reserve
Eric Holder (Attorney General): Covington & Burling lobbying for Merck and representing Chiquita International Brands in lawsuits brought by relatives of people killed by Colombian terrorists.
Eric Shinseki (Secretary of Veteran Affairs): US Army, Council on Foreign Relations, Honeywell director (military contractor), Ducommun director (military contractor).
Rahm Emanuel (former Chief of Staff): Freddie Mac
William Daley (Chief of Staff): JP Morgan executive committee member
Susan Rice (UN Ambassador): McKinsey and Company, Brookings Institute, Council on Foreign Relations
Peter Orszag, (former Budget Director): Citi Group, Council on Foreign Relations
Paul Volcker: Council on Foreign Relations, private Federal Reserve, Group of 30
Ronald Kirk (US Trade Representative): lobbyist, part of Goldman Sachs, Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts, and Texas Pacific Group partnership to buyout Energy Future Holdings.
Lawrence Summers (National Economic Council Director): World Bank, Council on Foreign Relations

Who amongst Obama's administration can we honestly presume has the people's, or even America's best interests at heart? Goldman Sachs bankers? JP Morgan bankers? Corporate lobbyists? Indeed, these are the same banking, corporate, and political interests that guided the agenda under Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr., Regan and so on. While there is some debate over which US president was in fact the last "real" president who exercised an agenda it genuinely could claim ownership over, there is no doubt that over the last two decades the same corporate interests have been entirely steering America's people and their destiny with but the veneer of "democracy."

Had John McCain won the elections in 2008, you could rest assured he would have taken US policy in the exact same direction Obama is going today. In fact, McCain is one of the key players who has helped fund and organize the current unrest sweeping the Middle East, along with a myriad of other "Republicans" and "Neo-Conservatives." The "Arab Spring" itself was planned and being staged before Obama even took office.

Ideologically, President Obama's qualifications are important and many are right to question them. Realistically, they are a red herring, as is his entire presidency. He is in charge of exactly nothing, most likely not even the tie he puts on in the morning and surely not the words that come out of his mouth. His entire function is to perpetuate the facade that America is still run by an elected government and not an illegitimate oligarchy of corporations and financial institutions. Arguing over his birth certificate engenders him with legitimacy in and of itself - suggesting that if he had proper qualifications he would be a "legitimate" president. But he, like his predecessor Bush, are both entirely illegitimate, as is the system they purportedly preside over.

Recognizing this grave reality, and instead concentrating on the corporate-financier interests that have hijacked American politics is essential to restoring a true constitutional republic. For it is not whose hands we think hold the power, it is in whose hands that really hold the power that shapes US policy. Definitively, US policy does not favor the people, definitively the power is not in the people's hands. As long as we grasp to the illusion that through the futile exercise of elections we are somehow "in control," it will remain this way perpetually. The fact that our president is in charge of absolutely nothing and that his duties have long been shifted to an unelected corporate-financier oligarchy is the issue, not his dubious qualifications.

New US Security Appointments

And the dangerous separation of state & military.
by Tony Cartalucci

Bangkok, Thailand April 29, 2011 - The latest game of Washington musical chairs expects to see General David Petraeus head the CIA while current CIA Director Leon Panetta is to take over Robert Gate's position as Secretary of Defense. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) astutely noted that this arrangement further blurs the lines between America's "intelligence community" and the role of the US Armed Forces.

To call the CIA an "intelligence agency" is entirely a misnomer. In reality, the CIA has become an extra-legal private military that has waged secret wars for decades. It has been recently augmenting its repertoire with pilotless drones to carry out air campaigns along the Afghan-Pakistani border. The CIA has also been involved in on-going military operations inside of Iran, Somalia, and now Libya. The CIA's ever expanding budget has long been categorized as "classified" and therefore entirely unaccountable to both the American tax payers and their so-called elected representatives.

The CFR's article, "Crumbling Wall Between the Pentagon and CIA" notes that the CIA's growing influence is due to "its greater integration with the military." This "greater integration" will engender the US military with less oversights and more secrecy as it expands its support for the CIA's growing role in waging global war.

As the lines blur between the US military and this private, secretly funded army we can expect the worst of both worlds to be combined, with the US military already conducting extra-legal operations in Libya in tandem with the CIA, with absolutely no Congressional oversight or even so much as token approval given. If the US military and CIA are not accountable to the American tax payers or their elected representatives, who are they accountable to?

The short answer is global corporate-financier interests. These are the entities that create, fund, and supply a steady stream of resources to private international think-tanks that shape and peddle what ultimately becomes US, and to a greater extent, "Western" foreign and domestic policy. The move toward "international law" and "international institutions" being the ultimate arbiters of Western progress, leaves the future of an increasing number of nations under the control of unelected, often largely unknown corporate-financier oligarchs. General Petraeus himself was a Council on Foreign Relations member as of 2009.

Operations in Libya within the greater "Arab Spring" is just one example of what we can expect, as policy planned in the shadows of secrecy are piecemeal revealed and sold to the public by a complicit corporate-owned media, and carried out by an increasingly unaccountable military-intelligence-industrial complex. The usurpation of personal and national sovereignty is not solely a matter of foreign policy. Americans need only look back to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and the extra-legal collection of legal firearms, the extra-legal deployment of military troops in direct violation of Posse Comitatus, along with entirely illegal and illegitimate private mercenaries roving the streets of New Orleans. This is only the beginning of what is becoming a truly dystopian nightmare.

An actual corporate army for hire: Blackwater, now "Xe" resides in
Dubai, the globalist gangster hideout of choice, to avoid extradition
for their various accused crimes against humanity. Here they roam the
streets of New Orleans on corporate and government payrolls.

As people continue to wake up and call for accountability, even the scant illusion of such accountability will be systematically taken away. Such accountability will continue to ebb as long as the corporate-financier oligarchy continues to hold the power and resources we literally depend on to live. The US Constitution specifically put arms in the hands of citizens and the duty to declare war in the hands of elected representatives to prevent what is happening this very day. This dangerous separation of state and military represents another aspect of American government taking the unmistakable shape of absolute tyranny.

In the face of such unaccountable power mongering, the answer is to usurp in turn the power of these corporate-financier oligarchies, built upon over a century of our own ignorant complicity. By boycotting and replacing their system, purchase-by-purchase, house-by-house, community-by-community, we will erode the foundation upon which they wield such ever-expansive unwarranted influence. From their fiat financial system, to their factory farms, to their monopolistic industrial practices that stand like a brick wall in the way of real technological progress, everything they have commandeered has become a bane to our existence and an exercise of control over us. We have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking these responsibilities back into our own hands, lest this corporate army, unaccountable to the people, becomes the enforcer of this increasingly neo-feudal system.

Assassinate Qaddafi?

Tyrants beware. What goes around might come around.
by Tony Cartalucci

Bangkok, Thailand, April 25, 2011 - Peddling a policy that includes assassinating the leader of a sovereign nation, besieged under blatantly false pretenses, sets a dangerous precedent that may backfire in the faces of the arrogant men calling for it. Lindsey Graham and John McCain, both of the meddling International Republican Institute implicated in funding and fueling the "Arab Spring" to begin with, have called for the assassination of Libya's Qaddafi and members of his inner circle. The London Telegraph also reported that Foreign Secretary William Hague refused to rule out using US drones to assassinate Qaddafi.

No one will miss these people: The elite should think carefully
before raising the stakes. Nation-states may retaliate in kind
to threats of assassination and growing, naked aggression.

With the US now openly admitting to recruiting, training, funding, and equipping armies of "activists" to go back and subvert their nations' governments, and with China and a growing list of other nations pointing the finger for fueling subversion directly at Washington, the global scope of this operation and the meddling hands behind are exposed for the whole world to see. What comes next will be a series of proxy conflicts of increasing violence. It is quite clear that humanitarian concerns are entirely contrived excuses propelling this global campaign along. As this facade of legitimacy crumbles, the imperialist nature of the aggression becomes more overt and we now see what looks more like the opening salvos of World War III than a "wave of democracy" sweeping the world.

Should Syria fall to Western-funded and fueled subversion, Iran will undoubtedly be next. The stakes for Russia and China will be raised still higher, and Iran itself will be backed into a corner it hasn't been in since the brutal and protracted Iran-Iraq War of the 80s. Should the West succeed in assassinating Qaddafi after this regional campaign of naked aggression, they will open the door for similar calls to be made against them by a world awake to their reckless, gluttonous tyranny.

Nation-states could repay the threat in kind

When the violence escalates, do these leaders in America feel confident enough that the people they supposedly lead will come to their aid when calls are made in turn for their heads? Do they really believe the people of America will be galvanized by foreign nations surgically retaliating against these increasingly unpopular figures? Would the world miss or mourn the loss of the bankers, industrialists, geopolitical power brokers or the myriad of other jackals, rats, and cockroaches that hide in the dark of elitist power? Would the average American, many of whom have never heard their names, even make a whimper in protest?

The global elite should tread lightly indeed, for they have created a public who does not see them and will not miss them once they are gone. A skillful nation may decide to leave the feckless buffer of pandering politicians intact, and instead target the corporate-financier oligarchs themselves. These oligarchs may be under the delusion they have nothing to lose, for it is the people that bleed and go bankrupt in their contrived wars, but the reality is that the world has nothing to lose by looking past the battlefields and politics that are bleeding them dry, and into the eyes of the true tormentors of humanity. Russia has already thrown degenerate global elitist Mikhail Khodorkovsky into a Siberian prison, proving that the globalists do have much to lose and are entirely powerless when finally confronted by those who know their game.

Full-spectrum resistance

While it is up to nation-states to decide the execution of force against this now apparent global menace, we as individuals must concentrate on removing and replacing their tentacles in our local communities. From developing our own forms of private currency, to trading and bartering, to growing a simple garden or learning a trade, we can begin eroding the power from which such arrogance is expressed. And while nation-states can use force to swat down these parasites, we the people can begin draining the swamps of ignorance and needy dependence amongst us that have allowed them to flourish for so long.

For decades the global corporate-financier oligarchs have waged full-spectrum war against humanity, the nation-state, the community, the family, and the individual. It is time to face them with full-spectrum resistance.

For ways to battle the globalists by achieving self-sufficiency and freedom through independence please read on:

Destroying the Globalists
Self-Sufficiency
Alternative Economics
The Lost Key to Real Revolution
Boycott the Globalists
Naming Names: Your Real Government

Video Reporting Possible CIA/Saudi Snipers in Syria

NOTE: This post is developing as readers send in information and will be updated and expanded as new information comes in. We need some translations and info on this video, and second opinions from Arab speakers familiar with this network's credibility.

Last Updated April 25, 2011 - No sooner was "Color Revolution's Mystery Gunmen" posted covering the use of provocateurs to escalate foreign-funded color revolutons, when a reader sent in a news clip from Iran's Al-Alam News Network reportedly indicating Saudi/CIA snipers are in Syria taking out protesters. Al-Alam broadcasts throughout the region, in Arabic.



The clip features English text along the bottom stating that Saudi/CIA snipers are operating in Syria, purposefully gunning down protesters in order to expand unrest. It describes a motorcycle driver delivering a sniper to a building before speeding off. Once in position, the sniper fires on protesters. Syrian security forces surround the building and a shootout allegedly takes place. The text concludes stating that the sniper is injured and taken to a hospital.

Another video sent in by a reader shows further evidence that snipers are intentionally shooting protesters, one man caught appears not to be even Arabic at all let alone Syrian. The corporate owned media, meanwhile, continues relying on activist "witness reports."

This report and footage would corroborate both government and eye-witness accounts cited by international media stating that "snipers on rooftops" were shooting at protesters. While "rights activists" assume the snipers are security forces, the government maintains that gunmen have opened fire on protesters and security forces alike. A CNN report from April 5, 2011 cited a Syrian official who stated that "an unknown "armed group" on rooftops shot at protesters and security forces." Activists said they believe the people on the rooftops were snipers from security forces but have put forth no evidence beyond "witness accounts."

Reaction from the Media

China's XinhuaNet reported multiple incidents across Syria where armed gangs had clashed with security forces killing members on both sides. One attack claimed the lives of 8 bystanders. Official state media in Syria presented evidence that groups have been caught with non-Syrian SIM cards in their phones along with equipment used to stage acts of violence.

"The group members also carried clubs, swords and metal implements that were used
during protests against security forces, in addition to bottles full of real blood to be used
in filming fabricated acts of violence and bottles filled with gasoline to start fires." -via SANA.

A recent Ynet News article cites Syrian reports that a Damascus news agency claims security forces recovered digital equipment, bottles of fake blood used by 'criminal group' to falsify photos, and videos depicting acts of violence against protesters. While Ynet claims this is an act of desperation from Assad's regime to downplay violence, it too offers no evidence beyond more "activist witness accounts" to counter these claims. The snipers could just as well be Israeli agents, as Israel has a long, very well documented history of infiltrating the Arabic Palestinian populations along their peripheries.

Israel's government has long collaborated with the global corporate-financier oligarchs in operations throughout the region. The Soros-Brzezinski International Crisis Group hosts an impressive collection of current and former Israeli government and banking personalities as advisers, including current Isreali president, Shimon Peres. Israel had even bombed a facility in Syria in 2007, claimed by the corporate media to be a nuclear facility. While no evidence has been presented thus far implicating Israel, they possess both the motive and the means to contribute to instability in Syria. The current unrest in Syria is on-record being US funded.

Syrian Opposition is US-Funded on Record

In a recent 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." Posner would add, "They went back and there's a ripple effect."

The ripple effect of course are the uprisings themselves, facilitated by yet more aid, equipment, and the complicity of the corporate owned media, disingenuously portraying the events as "spontaneous," "genuine," and "indigenous."

No substantial evidence has been put forward by CNN, AlJazeera, or BBC to verify their constant litany of "witness" hearsay. Their reporters are suspiciously no where to be found in Syria, just as in Libya, giving them ample leeway for reckless and irresponsible reporting that is decidedly pro-demonstrators and anti-Assad. This is to be expected, as the very corporate interests that have plotted against Syria for nearly 2 decades have fully incorporated these media outfits, with the exception of Qatar's AlJazeera.

However, as Dr. Webster Tarpley pointed out in a recent broadcast, Qatar seems to be trying to "ride the tiger" in supporting the Western-funded subversion and upheaval in the Arab world in order to preserve their own tiny kingdom. Qatar has recently led the Arab world in supporting the US/UK/French bombardment of Libya, sending a meager contribution in air power, and according to the New York Times, already funneling weapons into Libyan rebel hands.

Bizarre Training Program for Color Revolution Sponsor "Gen Next."

From the February 11, 2011 report, "Google's Revolution Factory," one of the organizations involved in recruiting, training, and supporting youth activists ahead of the "Arab Spring" was described in detail, including their corporate sponsors who directly took part in training events, conferences, lectures, and support. The organization, Movements.org, or Alliance of Youth Movements, would later be described in a New York Times article admitting to US funding and involvement in the "Arab Spring," starting as early as 2008. While the NYT piece doesn't mention the organization by name, the article links to an official US State Department announcement titled, "Announcement on Alliance of Youth Movements Summit," that most certainly does.

Gen Next is listed as one of the corporate sponsors behind
training the activists now subverting their governments
throughout the Middle East, including in Syria.

The Alliance of Youth Movements is a corporate sponsored "coup college" of sorts, training activists to subvert governments on the US State Department's behalf. Amongst these sponsors is an organization called "Gen Next." Gen Next's partners include former Libyan Al-Qaeda associate Noman Benotman's Quilliam Foundation, the Bill & Malinda Gates Foundation, the US Chamber of Commerce, and of course, listed as well is Movements.org.

Gen Next's activities are par for the course in regards to fomenting and assisting destabilization in target countries, however, it becomes bizarre when examining some of their past programs. One in particular from June 14, 2010 titled, "Gen Next Private Training and Tour with the Navy SEALs " shows participants negotiating military style obstacle courses as well as handling a variety of weapons including high powered sniper rifles.

From Gen Next's own website. This was part of their "Gen Next
Private Training and Tour with the Navy SEALs." Participants are
clearly handling high powered sniper rifles amongst other weapons.

What possible purpose could this "training and tour" serve for an organization that claims to be "an exclusive membership-driven organization of successful individuals aimed at overcoming generational challenges in three areas: economic growth, education and international security," and is led by a variety of corporate-financier personalities? Is it merely a coincidence that the activists they trained and sent back to their homelands to subvert their governments, have come under mysterious sniper fire, and in each case, escalated the protests until reaching critical mass and regime change?

For now, this evidence, though incredibly suspicious, is entirely circumstantial. We should however realize that this training as well as American tax payer money is being given to foreign agents to actively subvert governments in foreign, sovereign nations. This alone is egregiously criminal and an act of war. We should also remember that provocateur gunmen used to purposefully escalate a foreign-funded, staged color revolution is not without precedence.

Previous Gunmen Used to Purposefully Escalate Color Revolutions

Similar claims regarding mysterious gunmen were made and confirmed during Thailand's failed color revolution in April and May of 2010 - especially during the April 10 incident where snipers first assassinated the command unit of riot troops attempting to disperse protesters. Snipers in buildings then turned their guns on protesters, while black-clad gunmen below moved through the streets pursuing army troops as they withdrew, leaving armored personal carriers and equipment behind, obviously in disarray.

The protest head of security had admitted to having 300 armed men trained for ''close encounters'' and carrying M79 grenade launchers, before withdrawing his comment in later interviews. The color revolution's international spokesman, Sean Boonpracong, would also concede that indeed an armed militant wing had intervened in the attempted protest dispersal on their behalf. Despite admitting bloodshed resulted from a militant wing working on the protesters' behalf, Boonpracong would state in an interview that the blood had "tainted" the hands of the government and demanded that it be dissolved and exiled, revealing the purpose behind the violent gambit.

For more information regarding this vivid account of provocateur gunmen, please see, "Color Revolutions' Mystery Gunmen."


Continue checking in as this story develops, and Land Destroyer would like to thank the responses so far from e-mails and tweets that have contributed to this report.

Color Revolution's Mystery Gunmen

Editor's Note: The picture to the left features a UDD militant carrying numerous seized weapons including an M-16 and several Tavors. While wounds consistent with 5.56mm rounds have been squarely blamed on the Thai Army, it is quite clear that at some point during the clash, UDD militants verifiably had 5.56mm chambered weapons in their possession. Here is an article with a photograph of the same man on the UDD/Red Shirt stage after the deadly April 10 clashes.

Cui Bono?
by Tony Cartalucci

Bangkok, Thailand April 24, 2011 - Imagine you are an embattled regime fighting against a rising tide of foreign-funded protesters. The entire world is watching, one nation is already under creeping foreign invasion for "waging war against his own people," your nation has been warned that it is next and has been on a 20 year waiting list for regime change, and your opposition is gathering to bury dead protesters from a recent clash with security forces. What do you do?

Stage concealed snipers in multiple buildings and randomly shoot at mourners ensuring a very public, internationally sensationalized bloodbath that will unequivocally escalate both the protests and international pressure? Bashar al-Assad's regime hasn't ruled Syria for so long because they were careless or foolish. And while regimes could stay in power decades ago through unyielding brutality, often sanctioned by tacitly complicit western partners, regimes today realize the value of finesse and accountability in a new age of humanitarian-justified imperialism.

AlJazeera's article, "'Nine killed' at Syria funeral processions," once again relies solely on eyewitness accounts, many of which are claimed to be "anonymous," to tell the story of a brutal Syrian government crackdown. After AlJazeera's blatant lies and exaggerations during the Egyptian protests, rivaled only by BBC's intellectual dishonesty, these reports must be taken with a grain of salt. However, as with the recent massacres in Yemen and previous funeral processions in Syria, protesters cited mysterious snipers, assumed to be government forces, on rooftops randomly shooting at mourners gathered around the country. The government maintains that "an unknown "armed group" on rooftops shot at protesters and security forces."

AlJazeera also included in the article a report from one of their correspondents on the ground who stated, "[People marching on an overpass] were met with a hail of gunfire, many people certainly wounded directly in front of us, cars turned around, and I can tell you it was an incredibly chaotic scene, and it seems as though pretty much everyone down here in the southern part of the country is now carrying weapons. It is unclear who was firing at whom, that's part of the confusion ... but clearly a very violent incident now being carried out here in the south of the country." Though cryptic, it seems to corroborate the government's assertion that they are not the only ones with guns.

A Reuters report recently quoted a "rights activist" in Syria saying of the violence, "today we will have the funerals, we are worried that during the funerals more blood will be spilt which will provoke more protests and more death. This is becoming like a snowball and getting bigger and bigger every week. Anger is rising, the street is boiling." During the next demonstrations more are likely to be killed, funerals will be held, mystery gunmen will show up shooting mourners and the cycle continues repeating itself, some might hope, until enough anger and momentum creates conditions within the Assad regime to force it to step down or invites armed insurrection and foreign intervention as seen in Libya and in the Ivory Coast.

Perhaps this is an overly cynical analysis, as it may just be a coincidence that two regimes, Syria and Yemen, were forced into tenuous positions and just so happened to both grievously miscalculate and deploy snipers to randomly shoot at protesters, further agitating them, and inviting further scorn and pressure from the West, eager to oust them. But even mainstream media stories seem to pick up on the fact that these "massacres" do more harm than good and do not serve Assad's best interests.

The Sydney Morning Herald article title, "Bloodbath New Threat to Assad" is clear enough. It states that the recent crackdowns have left the regime "staggering." Additionally, it invited "stern" criticism from Obama stating, "'instead of listening to their own people, President Assad is blaming outsiders while seeking Iranian assistance in repressing Syria's citizens through the same brutal tactics that have been used by his Iranian allies.'' Ironically, Assad's assessment that protests are foreign-funded is spot on and Iran's crackdown was also against foreign-funded subversion.

Of course this is not the first time mystery gunmen have showed up at foreign-funded color revolutions to provoke further unrest or attempt to extort a resignation from a government. There is one instructive example where not only is evidence available, but confessions as well. That this example is also a foreign-funded color revolution lends credence to the possibility that these mystery gunmen in Syria and Yemen are provocateurs following a similar playbook, seeking to escalate violence and unrest until regime change is achieved or foreign intervention is justified. By studying this example, we can better discern the cryptic, unverified reports coming from the increasingly violent "Arab Spring," and possibly take this grisly tool out of the hands of the corporate-financier oligarchs.

Mystery Gunmen Revealed

After days of trying to goad Thai security forces into a violent crackdown on US-backed Thaksin Shinawatra's red shirts, protest leaders literally called on their own rank and file to donate blood to be spilled on key government buildings throughout Thailand's capital of Bangkok. This grisly display would foreshadow protest leaders' plans, unbeknown to even their own followers. On April 10, 2010, after the Thai military shut down Thaksin's propaganda network, protest leaders brought 200 men to the gates of Bangkok's 1st Army Region base and tried to storm the facility. The leaders must have realized that storming a military facility has a universally high probability of provoking the use of deadly force. The Thai military however, dispersed the protesters with water cannons and rubber bullets.

The bizarre "blood" drawing protest preceding the April 10, 2010 gunfight.

The decision was made to disperse the protesters at Bangkok's "Democracy Monument" that night. After nightfall, riot troops and protesters faced off in close quarters before troops began to advance while firing blanks into the air. A similar operation a year earlier led by the same commanding officer, Colonel Romklao, dispersed protesters without fatalities (the only fatalities were two civilians gunned down by protesters). This time around, intent on a bloodbath, a group of mysterious gunmen intervened with a combination of grenade attacks and sniper fire that killed Colonel Romklao and 6 other soldiers. Troops immediately fell back in disarray while protesters were divided in confusion and adulation. The mystery gunmen weaved through the protesters firing sporadically at Thai troops who returned fire. In total, 23 would die.

The initial grenade and sniper attack, explained accurately by France24. Indeed soldiers were firing back as they withdrew. For a more detailed look from the protesters' side, please watch the Thaifaq 5 part video series covering the April 10 incident.

CNN's coverage: Despite other admissions in foreign press from protest leaders themselves, CNN leaves viewers with an intentionally ambiguous message. CNN's biased reporting should come as no surprise, but when called on it by an outpouring of anger from the Thai public they conceded that indeed there were armed elements amongst the protesters.


Aljazeera footage featuring the "mystery gunmen" with M-16s & AK-47s.

The protesters were entirely unaware of the gambit, while security guards amongst the protesters appear to have been given compartmentalized orders to keep the protesters kettled in before the attack came. It is unlikely that even the security guards knew the attack was coming, as many immediately rushed in to protect fallen soldiers from aggressive protesters, while gun battles continued elsewhere. There were also most likely members of the militant group amongst the protesters directing fire toward Colonel Romklao and his command unit, as laser markers were seen fixated on the soldiers right before the incoming sniper fire hit.

Image: A freeze frame of the above footage, featured in the Bangkok Post, showing clearly the front sight posts of an M16A2. M-16s were used by opposition militants for the explicit purpose of blaming resulting injuries and deaths on the Thai Army, who used the weapon and the rounds it fired as its primary infantry weapon.

....

Image: An AK-47. Notice the front sight post is located all the way at the end of the weapon's barrel, as well as its more compact, and thicker construction.

....

Image: An M16A2. Notice the front sight post's location next to the hand-guards and the long section of barrel between it and the weapon's compensator.

.....

It was quite clear a highly trained, well prepared third party was involved, and unlike in Syria and Yemen where few foreigners venture and fewer cameras seem to be sending back footage, both foreign and domestic, amateur and professional footage caught the melee on tape. Initial blanket denials by protest leaders quickly became piecemeal confessions as footage of these "men in black" filtered out.

International spokesman for the protesters, Sean Boonpracong, told Reuters elements of the army were with their movement, including the black-clad mystery gunmen that took part in the April 10 bloodbath. He stated, "They are a secret unit within the army that disagrees with what's going on. Without them, the black clad men, there would have been a whole lot more deaths and injuries." The suspected leader of these gunmen, renegade general Khattiya Sawasdipol, known as "Seh Daeng," further damned earlier denials by admitting to commanding 300 armed men trained for ''close encounters'' and carrying M79 grenade launchers, before withdrawing his comment in later interviews.

From April 10, until the widespread arson that marked the end of the protests on May 19, daily and nightly gun battles, grenade attacks, and sniper fire would claim the lives of 91 people. This included 9 soldiers and police, a woman killed by an M79 grenade attack, and at least one protester who died of smoke inhalation while looting a building fellow protesters lit ablaze. The remaining 80 deaths included journalists, bystanders, medical workers, and protesters caught in crossfire. While protester to this day attempt to portray these events as a massacre of "91 protesters," it is quite clear that the military was up against an armed wing working amongst the protesters, admitted by members of the protest leadership themselves.

To explain why such a bloodbath was necessary, Sean Boonpracong after admitting the mystery gunmen were working on his movement's behalf, gave another breathtaking confession in an April 24th interview. When asked why protest leaders had turned down a government offer to hold fresh elections in 9 months, he responded by saying that after the April 10 incident they felt Prime Minister Abhisit's hands were "tainted with blood" and that it would be best if the Thai Parliament was dissolved. He continued by stating the protest's demands had changed to immediate dissolution as well as PM Abhisit's leaving the country.

After admitting an armed wing participated in the April 10 bloodbath protest spokesman Sean Boonpracong gives us insight into the rationale behind the highly orchestrated carnage that took place that night.

If these demands sound familiar, that is because they are the same exact demands made by every single Western-funded, fueled, and directed color revolution, starting with Eastern Europe's Orange and Rose revolutions, the current "Arab Spring," and now of course the red shirt revolution in Thailand. The Thai government ultimately refused these ochlocratic demands and restored order to the country.

Conclusion

Quite clearly, through this vivid example complete with brazen admissions, we can see how "mystery gunmen" fit into the overall mechanics of a color revolution. Their violence serves two purposes; to create enough chaos and bloodshed to force a government to step down, or to justify escalating anger and violence amongst the unsuspecting regular rank and file protesters. In Syria, we see these mystery gunmen fulfilling just this role. In Thailand, red shirt leaders have warned often that should the government fail to yield to their demands, a guerrilla war might begin. As we have seen in Libya and the Ivory Coast that is the next logical step, with foreign intervention not far behind.

Color revolutions are like micro-nations unto themselves. They have their own leadership, support base, ideology, and finances. Just as a nation's leadership exploits its soldiers as pawns toward personal gain, so too do color revolutions. Just as the soldier is unwittingly sent into harms way, so too are these protesters. Would they suspect their leadership of drawing them into a trap for personal gain? Could these "rights activists" who are on record being funded and directed by foreign interests in Syria be leading their followers into trap after trap to increase the cycle of violence to a crescendo capable of ousting Assad from power? It certainly appears that way. As Bangkok's mystery gunmen have proven, it is certainly not without precedent.

Understanding the components of Western-backed color revolution makes it more difficult for them to foist it upon local populations as well as pass it off throughout international media. At the very least, by understanding how they work, we ensure we never fall prey to this deadly, nefarious gambit. Real solutions don't spring forth from a ballot box, the destruction of our cities, or a protest placard. They are derived through education, self-sufficiency, and pragmatic, technical solutions. People should resist the urge to be politicized and divided and instead focus on building up their local communities on a foundation of economic and political independence. Ultimately by doing this, we can prevent entirely the grotesque spectcles now unfolding from Tunisia to Thailand.

Syrian Conflict Escalates

Propagandists seeking US intervention, shift blame on puppet Obama.
by Tony Cartalucci

Bangkok, Thailand April 23, 2011 - It is no secret that Syria has been marked for regime change for at least two decades. In a 2007 speech given by General Wesley Clark regarding what he called a US "policy coup," he relayed a 1991 conversation between himself and then Under Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. Wolfowitz indicated that America had 5-10 years to clean up old Soviet "client regimes," namely Syria, Iran, and Iraq, before the next super power rose up to challenge western hegemony.

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, Clark was again passed plans drawn to implement regime change throughout the Middle East, specifically to attack and destroy the governments of 7 countries; Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Iran, Lebanon and Libya. In 2002, then US Under Secretary of State John Bolton, would add Syria to the growing "Axis of Evil."

Wesley Clark reveals in a 2007 speech that regional
upheaval in the Middle East was planned since 1991.

In a recent 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 come after the Washington Post released cables indicating the US has been funding Syrian opposition groups since at least 2005 under the Bush administration and was continued under Obama. To suggest America is promoting any conceivable form of democracy in Syria, when it itself is ruled by a monopolistic corporate oligarchy within which special interest driven agendas transcend presidential administrations is tenuous if not scandalous. It is quite clear that Wolfowitz' agenda back in 1991 had long ago leaped from the drawing board and into practice, undermining the Syrian government through sanctions and seditious, foreign funded "civil society" networks.

What has ensued in Syria during the also admittedly US-funded "Arab Spring" is a puppet show of sorts, where Obama feigns surprise and confusion over what to do about Syria's unrest. As the violence escalates, the propagandists predictably argue that Obama is doing "nothing" as Syrians yearn for "true democracy and freedom." Undeniably, however, the US has fueled the unrest from the very beginning and most certainly is far from doing "nothing."

In a recent 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." Posner would add, "They went back and there's a ripple effect."

The ripple effect of course are the uprisings themselves, facilitated by yet more aid, equipment, and the complicity of the corporate owned media, disingenuously portraying the events as "spontaneous," "genuine," and "indigenous." Protesters running amok in city streets from Cairo, Egypt to Daraa, Syria carrying out arson and mayhem are described as "peaceful protesters" and any attempt by regimes to restore order is deemed an "acts of repression."

With the preplanned operation to effect regime change in Syria already well underway, propagandists and co-conspirators like Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member Elliot Abrams disingenuously berates Obama for standing idly by. In a recent article published on the CFR's website, Abrams argues that "the Obama Administration should be in no “bind” or “quandary” about Syria," citing "200 peaceful protesters now dead in the streets of Syria’s cities."

Abrams also brings up Iran, and that collapsing Syria's Assad regime would be a step toward isolating and collapsing Iran as well. Also of interest, Abrams reconfirms reports that Libya indeed was amongst one of many nations that supplied fighters to Iraq, funneled through Syria he emphasizes, in an oafish attempt to bolster his argument for removing Assad from power. These fighters were drawn from eastern Libya, where many of them now are part of the US-backed rebellion against Qaddafi.

Abrams' propaganda and similar pieces are meant to create a strategy of tension to herd the people into their political camps, create the illusion of debate, and justify an already foregone conclusion - regime change in Syria. Abrams concludes his piece by stating that the US "should side clearly with the people of Syria, who want an end to the Asad nightmare." Quite obviously, the US already has. Just as one sitting through a bad play they already know the ending of, we too are made to endure a poorly performed act put on by puppet politicians as the corporate-financiers coax us through another leg of their agenda.

We must then look past the puppet show and instead focus on the corporate-financier puppet masters hovering above the stage. We must see them as the problem, and understand that replacing them is the solution.

For more information, see other articles tagged "Syria."