Archive for September 15, 2012

Dirty War on Syria: How the FSA Massacred Citizens of Daraya

by grtv


The mass media are toeing the official warmonger line on Daraya, citing “as yet unconfirmed activist reports” (fake tweets?) blaming “Assad’s forces.” Yet Syrian TV has broadcast eyewitness reports of the massacre perpetrated by the FSA before the Army arrived. Armed gangs roamed the streets, sniping and trying to get into homes. Multiple witnesses testified they did not dare to leave their homes until the Army arrived. One witness tells how civilians were rounded up and shot.

When the Army arrives, the terrorists are driven off, but not before taking a video of their own dead and calling it a ‘civilian massacre.’

The whole operation was evidently coordinated and tailor-made for the MEDIA — the warmongerers of yellow journalism. The time has come to rename the MSM, or Mainstream Media, as the MMM — the Mass Murdering Media. Its purpose, to get NATO members to agree on a strike against Syria.

The USA has official training manuals for creating an insurgency, but they know that the Syrian government is way too popular and most of the Syrian people are way too smart for that. So they shipped foreign jihadists, dupes and mercenaries into Syria to destabilize the country, while the Mass Media continually create the ILLUSION of an uprising, harping on “opposition,” “protesters,” “civil war” and “democracy.” They never mention that on one day last summer, 14 million Syrians out of a population of 22 million demonstrated in SUPPORT of their state against the Evil Empire. But that picture never makes it to the screens of the Orwellian Gulag of War is Peace, Bombing is Humanitarian.

Note to readers and publishers

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Iraq: Inside the Belly of the CIA

Global Research, September 08, 2012


Much to the bitter disappointment of the  international community, a report recently declassified by the CIA reveals that a war that started in the name of democracy in Iraq in 2003 and claimed the lives of more than one million innocent Iraqis and thousands of US-led troops was waged on the basis of an unfortunate series of blatant lies fabricated by CIA.

In a nutshell, the report says the CIA failed to carry out sufficient research into the possibility of WMDs in the hands of the Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein and that without due proof, they concluded that since Saddam was in the habit of lying about WMDs, they guessed he was in possession of weapons and mass destruction and that Iraq had to be reduced to dereliction and misery at the hands of the US military on the strength of a sheer conjecture.

Prominent points in the report are as follows:

1) When the [U.N. and International Atomic Energy Agency] inspections proved more intrusive than expected, the Iraqi leadership appears to have panicked and made a fateful decision to secretly destroy much of the remaining nondeclared items and eliminate the evidence.

2) Iraq’s firmly established “cheat and retreat” pattern made it difficult for U.N. inspectors and Western analysts to accept new Iraqi assertions at face value.

3) A liability of intelligence analysis is that once a party has been proven to be an effective deceiver, that knowledge becomes a heavy factor in the calculation of the analytical observer.

The new report brings to fore and highlights the necessity of an idea audaciously expressed by some in recent past: the trial of Georg Bush and Tony Blair as war criminals for lying about WMDs in Iraq.

Only recently, South African peace activist and Nobel laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu pulled out of a leadership summit in Johannesburg because he refused to share a platform with Mr. Tony Blair whom he considers a war criminal. Loud and clear, Tutu has announced Tony Blair and George W. Bush as war criminals who should be taken to the International Criminal Court in The Hague over the Iraq war for lying about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Besides, Tutu has said the US- and UK-led war against Iraq had brought about conditions for the civil war in Syria and a possible Middle East conflict involving Iran.

“The then leaders of the United States [Mr. Bush] and Great Britain [Mr. Blair] fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand – with the specter of Syria and Iran before us,” he said.

No doubt, Bush and Blair will be eventually tried in a fair court of justice for the crimes they have committed in Iraq in the name of democracy under the hallucination of a divine decree; indeed, that is only a matter of when rather than if. As for Bush, he has explicitly stated that he was on a mission from God to strike Afghanistan and Iraq. Overwhelmed with a maniac feeling of messianic mission, Bush revealed this religious madness four months after the US-led invasion of Iraq in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh in his meeting with a Palestinian delegation during the Israeli-Palestinian summit.

He said, “I am driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, ‘George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan’. And I did. And then God would tell me ‘George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq’. And I did.”

In an unprecedented ruling handed down by the Kuala Lumpur (KL) War Crimes Tribunal in Malaysia in May, George W. Bush and a number of his accomplices including Dick Cheney, former US Vice President, Donald Rumsfeld, former Defense Secretary, and Alberto Gonzales, then Counsel to President Bush were found guilty of war crimes.

Though the Kuala Lumpur Tribunal may not have the authority to try them in practice, it must be regarded as a great step in upholding justice and respecting humanity on a large scale.

Besides, the tribunal evinces a keen sense of public sensitivity to and awareness of a universal quest for truth and justice. It is manifest that global awareness is on the increase in the world and that the truth will emerge from behind the clouds one day.

Day by day, more evidence is building up to put Bush and Blair to abject shame for their crimes and fresh calls for arresting and trying the duo and their accomplices at the international criminal court fall upon the ears from time to time.

International community is waking up to the realities thanks to the efforts of peace activists and the justice-seeking dissidents across the world. It is indeed a good sign that a new age of social and political enlightenment has already begun to dawn and that a new light is in sight. This marks an imminent end to multitudes of atrocities perpetrated by Washington and its allies and the plots hatched by the Zionists to divide and rule the world.

Washington’s monophonic urge to decide for the world is growing weaker and weaker every day with a powerful polyphonic global voice taking the place of the old one. In short, the world is developing greater perceived need for sustainable peace and security.

What the CIA file documents is the fact that Iraq was ferociously devoured in the belly of the CIA beast not as a country with a dictator as its leader but as a nation which was denied the opportunity to hold its fate in its own hands and get rid of its dictator.

The sheer ouster of Saddam Hussein as a dictator barely justifies the innocent blood that was spilled in Iraq and a military invasion of such colossally devastating proportions.

NATO Expansion: Threat to World Peace | Global Research.

NATO Expansion: Threat to World Peace

Review of Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya’s Book

US Attempting to Pull former Soviet Allies into NATO

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is undertaking a dangerous and provocative global expansion that threatens the peace of the world, a distinguished Canadian geopolitical analyst Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya writes in a new book.

By the time Nato started its war on Libya in March, 2011, it was conducting operations in the Atlantic, Arctic and Indian oceans, the Mediterranean and Red seas, and the Gulf of Aden, as well as in countries on four continents that included Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, and the former Yugoslavia, Nazemroaya says.

As part of these adventures, the US and its Nato allies have lowered “a new iron curtain” from the Baltic to the Aegean “to castrate and contain the European core of Russia and its allies in Eastern Europe,” Nazemroaya writes. He points out that Sergey Markov, co-chair of the National Strategic Council of Russia, described the 2008 war between Georgia and South Ossetia as being, in effect, “a US attack on Russia.”

However, “Nato expansion is not just limited to Europe, but is in pursuit of a worldwide capability to expand Washington’s empire under a global confederacy,” writes distinguished Canadian sociologist Nazemroaya in The Globalization of Nato (Clarity Press). He warns the expansion will eventually lead “to East Asia and the borders of the Chinese where the US has been waging a shadow war to box China in and checkmate it.”

“The US and Nato have literally authorized themselves to go to war anywhere in the world,” Nazemroaya continues. The 2010 Strategic Concept of Nato, which was drafted by a committee chaired by Madeleine Albright and vice-chaired by former Royal Dutch Shell CEO Jeroen van der Veer, “also asserts the legitimacy of whatever actions Nato members take to secure energy sources as the US and Nato look towards securing all the world’s energy hubs.”

Besides expanding its area of operations, since the end of the Cold War, Nato’s nuclear strike posture has become more aggressive. “Within Nato and among US allies a consensus has long been established to legitimise and normalize the idea of using nuclear weapons in conventional wars,” Nazemroaya says. “This consensus also aims to pave the way for pre-emptive nuclear strikes against targets like Russia, China, and Iran.”

Most of the world’s countries, he points out, argue the US and its Nato allies have violated Articles 1 and 2 of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), because the Pentagon has a Nato nuclear weapons sharing program. In addition, “Through its continued construction of nuclear weapons the US is the chief violator of the NPT and the chief cause for the development of Russian and Chinese nuclear weapons,” Nazemroaya writes.

He observes that Russia, too, is re-arming itself with nuclear weapons and has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world because Moscow strongly believes its nukes “are what have stood in the way of US attempts to pummel Russia.” What’s more, Russia has copied the adoption of the US/ Nato pre-emptive nuclear attack doctrine.

He goes on to say, “Washington has made it categorically clear that it could attack Iran and North Korea with nukes.” Nazemroaya notes the Obama administration says it will not honor NPT’s provisions barring a nuclear attack on certain non-nuclear states, “meaning Iran and North Korea.” Obama says those two countries aren’t complying with the NPT.

“This was a fallacious claim,” Nazemroaya continues, as in the case of the Iranians, the IAEA “has repeatedly reported that it has not found any evidence that Tehran has a nuclear weapons program and is in breach of NPT.” And North Korea withdrew from the NPT in 2003.

Note to Readers and Publishers

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Violence in Syria Stems from Foreign Aggression

Global Research, September 09, 2012

Interview with Finian Cunningham
By: Kourosh Ziabari

Through his writings, Finian Cunningham has exposed the imposture and hypocrisy of the Western governments in funding and assisting terrorists in Syria.

An anti-war author and journalist, he is opposed to the U.S.-engineered sanctions against Iran and believes that these sanctions constitute crimes against humanity. “These sanctions are illegal. They are without any legal or political foundation. These sanctions reveal clearly the barbarous nature of the Western governments,” he writes.

What follows is the text of Iran Review’s interview with Finian Cunningham in which the ongoing unrest and violence in Syria, West’s plots for starting a new war in the Middle East, the suspension of Syria’s membership in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and Arab League and the anti-Iranian sanctions have been discussed.

Q: the Organization of Islamic Cooperation has just suspended the membership of Syria while only a handful of countries, including Iran and Algeria, contested the decision. What’s your take on that? I read your article in which you stated the Saudi Arabian government brought shame to the Islamic world by bowing down to the demands of the United States and its allies in taking Syria off the OIC. Would you please elaborate on that?

A: It is clear that Saudi Arabia and the Sunni monarchies of the Persian Gulf, Qatar in particular, politicized the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation. This recent extraordinary meeting of the OIC in Saudi Arabia was convened by the House of Saud not to genuinely discuss the conflict in Syria – as it was supposed to do – but rather the meeting was called with the real purpose of isolating and denigrating the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad. In that way, the OIC decision to sanction Syria was reminiscent of the earlier move in November 2011 by the Saudi-dominated Arab League to suspend Syria. These are political maneuvers orchestrated by the Saudis, Qataris and other Persian Gulf dictatorships to undermine and discredit the Syrian government.

The premise of the decisions by OIC and the Al is that the conflict in Syria is attributable to repression by the Syrian authorities against its people, involving human rights violations and a refusal to enact democratic reforms. This is a completely false premise and distortion of the violence in Syria. This is also the portrayal of Syria that is presented over and over again by Western governments, primarily the U.S. and the former Middle East colonial powers Britain and France. Saudi Arabia and Qatar have over the past year emerged more than ever as proxies of the Western governments. The OIC conference was therefore fulfilling the propaganda function of blackening, besmirching and isolating the Syrian government, trying to reinforce the image that it is a pariah state that deserves to be shackled politically, economically, diplomatically and morally. The hidden agenda here was the Western powers’ desire for regime change. The Assad government has for years been a geopolitical thorn in the side of the Western powers and their Zionist and Arab dictator allies.


The cruel irony in all this is that the violence and suffering in Syria over the past 17 months has largely stemmed from covert aggression and sabotage in that country which is being fuelled by the U.S., Britain, France, Turkey, Israel and the Persian Gulf dictatorships. It is an open secret that the mercenaries assailing Syria and committing heinous crimes against humanity are actually armed and assisted by Western powers, Turkey, Israel and the Arab monarchies of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates as well as Jordan. Given these facts, it is reprehensible that the OIC conference should be called by Saudi Arabia in the first place, and secondly that the conference is coerced by the Saudi dictators to sanction Syria. It is doubly reprehensible that Saudi Arabia, which claims to be the custodian of the two holy sites of Islam, Mecca and Medina, is using a mantle of religious authority to perpetrate a treacherous political agenda, and to use the sanctity of Islam to blatantly cover up the crimes, violence and human suffering in Syria that it is so heavily responsible for.

Q: The opponents of the Syrian government, consisted mainly of the United States and its allies in the region, claim that the country’s armed forces have so far killed hundreds of peaceful protesters who demand that President Assad step down. On the other hand, the proponents say that the U.S., Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have armed the terrorists and insurgents in the country and have caused the escalation of the violence and bloodshed. Would you please present us an overview of what’s going on in Syria? Who is really telling the truth?

A: I think that initially the Syrian people were inspired by the genuine fervor of the Arab Spring in early 2011 when other people across the region turned out en masse on the streets to challenge the dictatorial rule in their countries that have prevailed for decades. These authoritarian rulers have only been sustained by massive support from Western powers – militarily, politically and economically. The despotic rulers of the Arab world were put in place by the West to exploit the immense resources of the region and these rulers held power with excruciating repression. The Syrian regime was not in the Western camp, but its people were inspired by the events across the region to similarly demand democratic reforms. The Syrian government of Assad, whose family has ruled over that country for four decades, is not guilty of the same depth of despotism and repression as was seen Tunisia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Bahrain. Nevertheless the people of Syria, I think, were inspired to demand more freedoms from their government as their neighboring nations were. Reports indicate that the Syrian state responded with a violent heavy hand. Recently the President Bashar Assad has said in media interviews that he regretted that response.

However, that said, it is accurately documented that in Syria’s Daraa city on the southern border the initial protests were hijacked by armed mercenaries who had infiltrated that country. Many of the early casualties of the violence were Syrian security forces. This indicates that protests were infiltrated by armed groups. The actions were not those of peaceful, civilian demonstrators, but rather were the actions of armed insurgents. In that way, the events in Syria were markedly different from those of other Arab countries, such as Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan and Bahrain where the protests were largely civilian and peaceful. Subsequent details in Syria and to this day validate the analysis that the so-called uprising is a foreign-backed infiltration of armed groups to destabilize and topple the Assad government. It is well documented that the U.S. and Britain have had plans for regime change in Syria going back to as far as 1957. The Western powers, along with their regional allies Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Israel, manipulated the protests in Syria to enact an armed insurrection using mercenaries from the region in order to violently challenge the Syrian regime. This covert operation is ongoing to this day, and indeed has been greatly amplified to now pose a real, mortal threat to the Syrian authorities. In this way, the events in Syria mirror what happened in Libya. Under the guise of supporting a popular protest movement, the West and its allies have infiltrated an armed insurrection with the objective of overthrowing a government that the West is opposed to. It is a cynical, deceptive game plan of regime change. The West and its regional allies want rid of the Assad government for several geopolitical reasons. One of those reasons is to undermine and isolate the government in Iran. It is quite clear that this is the real, urgent agenda of the West. It has got absolutely got nothing to do with support democratic reforms in Syria or the protection of human rights. The Western powers are the violators of human rights in Syria. Their alliance with the criminal Zionist regime and the despotic dictatorships in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf is proof of their cynical, disingenuous call for democratic reforms in Syria. If the West was really serious about democratic reforms and human rights in the Arab world, they would be primarily focused on Saudi Arabia and relieving the suffering of the Palestinian people. Clearly, they are not.

It has to be noted that the so-called rebels in Syria have emerged to be identified as Jihadist-type mercenaries from various countries: Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Tunisia and Pakistan. These groups have long been used as proxies by the West. They are cultivated and funded by Saudi Arabia with its extremist deformed version of Islam, Wahhabism. It is proof of the foreign-backed nature of the violence in Syria that these groups are committing horrendous acts of violence against Syrian civilians of all religious dominations. It is proof too that the vast majority of ordinary Syrians do not support the mercenary groups. In fact, the ordinary people of Syria are living under a reign of terror by these groups.

Q: Should we accept the premise that the United States and its European and Middle East allies are bolstering unrest and violence in Syria through arming the Free Syrian Army, can we come to the conclusion that the final objective of toppling the Syrian government is to dominate the Middle East in such a way that might lead to a regime change in Iran, an end which the U.S. and other imperial powers have been seeking for so long?

A: Yes, the violence in Syria as in Libya is being fomented and fuelled by the Western powers in their objective of enacting regime change across the region. Iran is the prime target. Recall that the NATO commander Wesley Clark revealed back in 2007 that the Pentagon had a plan from as far back as 2001 to roll out a campaign of regime change in at least seven countries. They were Iraq, then Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and “finishing off with Iran.” Now the order has not transpired exactly. But the thrust is that the U.S. has a long-term game plan for regime change across the oil-rich Middle East and Iran is the top prize. What is going in Syria today is the implementation of that plan as seen in Iraq and Libya.

Q: The Turkish government had assumed a fair and balanced position on the Middle East affairs in the recent years. It supported Iran’s nuclear program in a difficult time when almost all the Western nations had been opposing Iran’s nuclear activities and were pushing for UNSC resolutions and sanctions against Iran. Turkey also played a leading role in countering Israel during the 2008-2009 Gaza massacre and two years later when the IDF soldiers raided on the Freedom Flotilla. So, why has Turkey’s stance on the Middle East issues changed so drastically that it’s now allying with the United States, hell bound on overthrowing Bashar Assad in Syria?

A: Ankara, the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is playing a particularly treacherous role. I recall a visit by Erdogan to Damascus in 2010 where he lavished Bashar Al Assad with “brotherly” greetings. Erdogan has now revealed himself as a disgraceful back stabber. The reasons for this Turkish treachery are not clear. It could be do with ingratiating Turkey with Western governments in order to facilitate long-held Turkish aspirations to join the European Union. It could also be to do with vain, personal reasons of power aggrandizement in the region by joining with what Erdogan perceives as the winning side of NATO. But I think Turkey is playing a very dangerous game in doing this. And I think Ankara knows that. Their hesitation towards pursuing the covert war against Syria betrays deep distrust by the Turkish government about the West. They are afraid of being drawn into a quagmire and left in the sinking dirt by their supposed Western allies. After all a treacherous cheat is always a bit paranoid towards others, mindful that his past treachery could rebound. Also, another danger for Turkey is the instability that it is unleashing inadvertently among its Kurdish population in the Southeast of the country. Turkey is playing with fire by trying to stoke religious and ethnic conflict in Syria.

It should be noted too that there is a substantial dissent among the ordinary Turkish population towards what their government is engaging in Syria. Many Turks find Erdogan’s policies and actions reprehensible. Again, this is a danger for the Turk rulers that they are sowing their own downfall within their country by playing this treacherous role in the Western chess game for regime change.

Q: After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel bombed Syria two times; one being the Ain es Saheb airstrike on October 5, 2003 and the other being the Operation Orchard in which the Syrian nuclear site near the Deir ez-Zor region was destroyed. The international community responded to the attacks passively and turned a blind eye to these violations of international law by Israel. Should Israel have been held accountable? What do you think?

A: Of course, Israel should be held to account for these incidents and many, many others. The state of Israel is a lawless, terrorist regime that stands out as a pariah. The crimes against humanity, the war crimes, the ongoing violation of international law and UN obligations, such as the occupation of Jerusalem, the Golan Heights and the continuation of annexing Palestinian land are all outrageous crimes and affronts to human dignity. The Zionist regime gets away with these atrocities and violations because it has carte blanche from the U.S. and the European powers. Israel is a garrison state whose function is to project Western military power over the Middle East. It is really nonsense to expect the Western powers to hold Israel to account. Israel is functioning exactly as the West wants it to in order for these powers to exert hegemony over the Middle East. Israel is a pillar in the Western architecture of exploitation and domination over the Middle East. In an ideal world, the Israeli leaders and their Western political masters should be prosecuted in an international court for war crimes and crimes against humanity going back to at least 1948 when the illegal state of Israel was first set up by the Western powers.

Q: What do you think about the prospect of conflict and unrest in Syria? Will the government of President Assad succeed in withstanding the internal and external pressures? Hillary Clinton has explicitly stated that the United States seeks a regime change in Syria and nothing else. Will this regime change finally take place?

A: It is a very grim situation. The Syrian authorities, armed forces and the ordinary people are showing tremendous tenacity and courage in confronting these foreign-backed masqueraders. Yet, the Western governments have a long-held plan to get rid of the Syrian government and to install a puppet regime that will be pliable to Western regional objectives of political, economic, military hegemony. The Western powers have stepped up their campaign of sabotage and are itching to find a pretext for more overt intervention. Just recently the U.S. President Barack Obama repeated cynical concerns about the Syrian authorities using chemical weapons of mass destruction, or for these weapons falling into the hands of armed groups like Al Qaeda. The cynicism here is beneath contempt. Here we have a Western leader who has, along with his Western allies, helped to infiltrate Syria with these so-called Al Qaeda mercenaries, and now he is appearing to be voicing concern that such groups may acquire chemical weapons. In this way, Obama is trying to create a false flag of concern that will justify an overt Western military intervention.  His secretary of state Hillary Clinton disclosed during a visit to Turkey last week that there were plans to set up no-fly zones by NATO in Syria. This would be a re-run of the scenario that the NATO powers instigated in Libya last year. The so-called no-fly zones suddenly morphed into an all-out seven-month aerial bombardment by NATO on Libya which led to the overthrow of Gaddafi, just as the Western powers wanted.

It is hard to see how the Western powers can pursue their plans in Syria. Russia and China are not going to be deceived again as they were over Libya. Also the violence and instability across the region from increasing Western intervention can rebound very badly on the West. They must know that, or else they are incredibly stupid.

Having said that, there is a very real danger that the West in its nefarious imperialist gaming could end up sparking a world war. I don’t think Russia, China and Iran are going to sit back and let the West tear apart an ally and all the strategic interests that these powers have in Syria.

It could turn out that the West backs off. However, that would still be a geopolitical gain for the West. Syria has been wrecked and badly weakened in this despicable Western episode of covert sabotage. The people have been traumatized and the economic base of the Syrian government must be decimated. That in itself has been a Western victory of sorts. Of course, that is appalling and heinous. It really is outrageous that the Western powers and their regional allies have gotten away with what they have in Syria. But just from a cold callous point of view, the wreckage of Syrian society can give the Western powers a certain smug satisfaction – even if these powers pack in their nefarious destructive covert war tomorrow and tell their mercenary proxies to go home. Syria, an official enemy of the West, has been devastated.

Q: What’s your assessment of the international pressures on Iran over its nuclear program? Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and thus entitled to the right of enriching uranium for peaceful purposes. However, the Western powers want to deny Iran this right. Should Iran retreat from its position in order to be relived from the pressures?

A: Iran has every right to pursue its nuclear development plans. I believe these plans are for entirely peaceful, civilian purposes and in that way, Iran is perfectly entitled to continue with its plans. I certainly hope that Iran continues because to not do so is submitting to the criminal imperialist powers. A bully must be faced down. That is the only solution. If for talks’ sake Iran was to abandon its nuclear program, the Western imperialist powers will concoct some other agenda or purpose with which to try to subjugate Iran. The issue is not about nuclear power. The West knows that Iran is not trying to weaponize its nuclear capabilities. The nuclear “concerns” that the West continues to cite is a cynical pretext and cover for the West to try to cripple Iran, so as to engineer regime change. The Western imperialists cannot stand the fact that their puppet, the Shah, was kicked out of the country in 1979, and for the last three decades has embarked on a development plan that is independent from Western capitalist control. That is what is at issue. It must be extremely difficult for the people of Iran to be subjected to this foreign aggression, but I would say that they have to stand up to the Western bully, in the way that they have done so far and so admirably. Anyway, the world is changing dramatically and the power of these Western bullies is not what it once was. Their own societies and economies are falling apart. Also, as the Non-Aligned Movement summit in Tehran is demonstrating, there is a groundswell of international support for Iran. Countries in Asia and Latin America are no longer meekly submitting to the dictates of Western elite rule.

Q: The sanctions which have been imposed upon Iran are extremely affecting the daily life of ordinary Iranian citizens, making it unbearably difficult for them to access to foodstuff, medicine and other goods which are usually imported from other countries. Aren’t these sanctions some kind of violation of human rights by those who purportedly advocate these rights?

A: These sanctions are illegal. They are without any legal or political foundation. I defer to the opinion of many international legal experts such as Francis Boyle, who say that these Western engineered sanctions actually constitute a war crime. These sanctions reveal clearly the barbarous nature of the Western governments. They have no respect for international law or human morality. It is entirely appropriate for other countries to ignore these sanctions and treat them with contempt. Iran should file a prosecution against the U.S., Britain, France and others for war crimes of aggression and crimes against humanity. The symbolism of such a procedure would have significant practical repercussions and hopefully relief for the people of Iran.

About the author:


Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. Many of his recent articles appear on the renowned Canadian-based news website He is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in journalism. He specialises in Middle East and East Africa issues and has also given several American radio interviews as well as TV interviews on Press TV and Russia Today. Previously, he was based in Bahrain and witnessed the political upheavals in the Persian Gulf kingdom during 2011 as well as the subsequent Saudi-led brutal crackdown against pro-democracy protests.

Note to Readers and Publishers

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

The UN and General Mood’s “Missing Report” on Conflicting Accounts of Houla Massacre

This is an updated and edited excerpt from a talk I gave in Beijing in July 2012 at a program sponsored by April Media.

The Houla massacre occurred in Syria on May 25, 2012.

This was but a few days before Kofi Annan, who was at the time the joint Arab League-UN envoy, was scheduled to visit Syria.

Immediately after the massacre, there was a media campaign in much of the western media to blame the Syrian government for the deaths. There were 108 deaths reported which included men, women and children. A short time after the massacre, an alternative account was made available by a Russian online media group, Anna News.(1) The day following the massacre, a news team for this online site visited the area where the massacre had occurred. Their report appeared on a number of alternative news sites soon after the massacre.

The reports from the Anna News team, and other netizen news reports, challenged the mainstream western media claims that the Syrian government was responsible for the killings.

Similarly, the Syrian government conducted a preliminary investigation. They provided witnesses that the massacre was carried out by armed insurgents and criminal elements.

The mainstream western media accounts of the massacre (and some Arab satellite tv channels) have mainly presented what they claim is happening from the point of view of the armed opposition in Syria. The armed opposition’s account of events demonizes the Syrian government and campaigns for foreign intervention. There have been a number of instances when the accounts from the armed opposition have been shown to be false.

Differing from the reports in the mainstream western media is information presented by the Syrian government. Also there is the information in the alternative media that I refer to as netizen journalism. Netizen journalism exposes distortions and misrepresentations in the news coverage provided by the mainstream western media, and does the investigation required to present an accurate narrative. For example, in the aftermath of the Houla massacre, a number of articles documenting the role of the armed insurgents in carrying out the Houla massacre appeared on alternative media sites. Similarly there were articles comparing what had happened in Houla with media campaigns advocating foreign intervention in the Yugoslavian conflict in the 1990s. Also there were articles considering what the motive was behind the massacre and the clues this provided toward determining who was responsible.

I want to propose that this form of alternative media is setting up a communication channel different from that of the mainstream western media.

What has been interesting has been to not only consider the two different channels that these different forms of news represent, but also to look at how different actors at the UN relate to these different communication channels.

In April, the UN Security Council authorized a mission of 300 unarmed observers to monitor what was happening in Syria and to try to encourage a cease fire between the conflicting parties. This mission was called the UN Supervisory Mission in Syria (UNSMIS). When the Houla massacre first occurred, UNSMIS observers went to investigate the massacre. The initial response of UNSMIS was that there were two views of what had occurred and who was responsible presented to them. UNSMIS said it was not yet possible to make a determination which was accurate and which was a falsification.

In June, responding to the request from the UN Security Council in the press statement issued after the Houla massacre that UNSMIS do an investigation,(2) Major General Robert Mood, the commander of UNSMIS told journalists that a report had been prepared and submitted to UN headquarters.

In the article “General Mood: ‘Two Versions’ of the Houla Massacre,” John Rosenthal writes, “At the June 15 press conference General Mood went on to say that the mission had assembled a report about the massacre, including the details of witness interviews and that this report had been submitted to UN headquarters in New York. This raises an obvious question,” writes Rosenthal, “Why has this report not been rendered public?”(3) Rosenthal does a service pointing to General Mood’s June 15 press conference in Damascus. The press conference is online only in a video format. I have transcribed the part of the press conference where General Mood talks about the report on the Houla massacre that he says was given to UN headquarters.(4)

Describing the investigation by UNSMIS into the Houla massacre and the report UNSMIS submitted to UN headquarters, General Mood tells journalists:

“The statement we issued after el Houla is still valid.

Which means we have been there with an investigating team.

We have interviews, interviewed locals with one story, and we have interviewed locals that has another story.

The circumstances leading up to el Houla and the detailed circumstances, the facts related to the incident itself, still remains unclear to us.

We have put this together, the facts that we (can) could establish by what we saw on the ground. We have put together the statements, the witness interviews and we have sent that as a report to UN headquarters, New York.

And then the assessment on what’s the way forward. Will there be a different investigation? (This-ed) is a matter for headquarters in this context. But if we are asked, obviously we are on the ground, and could help facilitate that.”

According to General Mood’s statement during this press conference, UNSMIS provided UN headquarters with a report on the Houla massacre. This report included the facts on the ground that UNSMIS was able to establish, and also witness statements and interviews from “locals with one story” and from “locals that has another story.” This report, according to General Mood, was not able to establish “the circumstances leading up to el Houla, and the detailed circumstances, the facts related to the incident itself,” as these still remained “unclear” to UNSMIS.

But General Mood explained that if there was to be “a different investigation,” UNSMIS was “on the ground and could facilitate that.”

UN Security Council members have said that the Security Council did not receive the report nor does it appear that there was general knowledge at the Security Council that this report presented two conflicting accounts of what happened and that UNSMIS, which was on the ground in Syria at the time, was able to help conduct a more expansive investigation to determine who was responsible for the massacre.

The question is raised as to why the UN Secretariat did not make the UNSMIS report available to the Security Council? Why didn’t the UN pursue the course of a further investigation into the circumstances leading up to the Houla massacre and the facts related to the incident itself by taking up the offer that General Mood made to facilitate such an investigation?

When journalists asked the Secretary-General’s spokesperson what happened to Mood’s report and why it wasn’t given to the Security Council, the spokesman told the press the report had been given to various members of the UN Secretariat. But as several people at the UN and online have asked, “Why not to the Security Council?”

One of the original purposes for the UNSMIS mission, according to Kofi Annan, was “to see what is going on” so as to be able to “change the dynamics.”(5)

This past April, outlining the need for UNSMIS, Annan said, “We continue to be hampered by the lack of verified information in assessing the situation….We need eyes and ears on the ground. This will provide the incontrovertible basis the international community needs to act in an effective and unified manner, increasing the momentum for a cessation of violence to be implemented by all sides.” This “eyes and ears on the ground” function was to be filled by UNSMIS. UNSMIS was deployed to Syria and was on the ground at the time of the Houla Massacre and was able to do an investigation.

Yet when UNSMIS submitted a report to UN headquarters documenting its investigation, it was withheld from the Security Council. Though Ban Ki-moon’s spokesperson acknowledged that the report was received, the report was not given to the Security Council. It was not made available to the media and the public. Thus it could not be part of the “eyes and ears on the ground” that Annan said was needed. One can only wonder about the fact that shortly after this report was received by the Secretariat, General Mood left UNSMIS, and not long after that, UNSMIS was ended. The UNSMIS report on Houla did not blame the Syrian government for the massacre, but instead presented two conflicting views of the massacre and offered to facilitate a further investigation.

At least some Security Council members indicated that they wanted the kind of information General Mood explained was in his report. For example, on June 4, at a press conference to mark the beginning of the Chinese Presidency of the Security Council for the month of June 2012, China’s Ambassador Li Baodong, referring to the Houla massacre, said (6):

“Now we have different stories from different angles. Now we have the story from the Syrian government, and from the opposition parties, and from different sources.” Since the Security Council “has a team…on the ground,” he said referring to UNSMIS, “We want to see first-hand information from our own people.” He hoped this would make it possible to put the different pieces of information together and to come “to our own conclusion with our own judgment.”

The acknowledgement by China’s UN Ambassador that there were different views of what had happened in the Houla massacre and that there was a need to get accurate information from an on the ground investigation was an important step for a member of the Security Council to make. This challenged mainstream media claims that their account was the only account of what was happening in Syria. The UNSMIS report was the kind of additional information the Chinese Ambassador indicated he was seeking.

The fact remains, however, that the report from UNSMIS that General Mood presented to Ban Ki-moon’s UN headquarters was withheld from the Security Council, the press and the public. Instead of the UNSMIS report, and any in-depth independent investigation conducted by the UN, which General Mood said UNSMIS could facilitate, on August 3, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution condemning the government of Syria for the violence in Syria. In his speech in support of the resolution, Abdallah Y Al-Mouallini, the Ambassador representing Saudi Arabia at the UN, blamed the Syrian government for the Houla massacre.

Similarly, in August, the Human Rights Council issued a report blaming the Syrian government for the violence in Syria, with no effort to reconcile the conflicting facts or interviews submitted by UNSMIS to the UN, nor any effort to take up the offer made by General Mood that UNSMIS would provide on the ground assistance to do the needed investigation. The report of the Human Rights Council inaccurately claimed that(7):

“The lack of access significantly hampered the commission’s ability to fulfill its mandate. Its access to Government officials and to members of the armed and security forces was negligible. Importantly, victims and witnesses inside the country could not be interviewed in person.”

Such a statement by the Human Rights Council misrepresented the fact that indeed the UN had had observers on the ground in Syria, and that those observers not only gave a report to the UN, but also said that they could facilitate a more thorough investigation if the UN desired to do so. Hence the claims of the Human Rights Council that the UN was unable to conduct an investigation are contrary to General Mood’s statement to the press.

Then in August the Security Council, without being able to review the UNSMIS report or to consider the need for the additional investigation that General Mood said was possible in order to determine who was responsible for the Houla massacre, allowed the mandate authorizing UNSMIS to expire. Though there was an effort by some on the Council to introduce a resolution to extend UNSMIS, others on the Council refused to do so unless Syria was penalized, even though the issue of who was responsible for the violence against civilians, as had happened at Houla, had not been determined by the Security Council nor by any other UN body through an UNSMIS facilitated and impartial investigation.

Commenting on the Security Council action withdrawing UNSMIS from Syria, Archbishop Mario Zenari, the Vatican Nuncio to Syria, said that the withdrawal of UN forces from Syria was “a sad blow. Three or four months ago, there was a good bit of hope for their mission, and now their departure plunges us back into this reality….”(8)

His disappointment is understandable. If the Annan plan was based on having “eyes and ears on the ground” as a way to discourage violence against civilians, the failure of the UN to make the UNSMIS report on Houla available to the Security Council and to the public, and to recognize the need for a more extensive pursuit of the facts of what happened in Houla, was a failure dooming the Annan mission in Syria.

Commenting on what she referred to as “fake” news reports about what is happening in Syria, Mother Agnes Mariam of the Cross, a Superior of the community at the monastery of St James the Mutilated in Qara, Syria, explained that the news reports were “forged with only one side emphasized.”(9) In her comments to the Irish Times, she included a criticism of UN reports that she said, were “one sided and not worthy of that organization.” Though she didn’t specify any particular reports, one would not be surprised if it were particularly the Human Rights Council Report she had in mind.

In a paper titled, “The Role of Netizen Journalism in the Media War at the United Nations” presented in July at the International Relations and Political Science Conference in Beijing, I documented more of the particularities of netizen journalism in the media war at the UN over Syria. (10) There have been many articles and videos posted on a number of web sites challenging the western mainstream media version of the events in Houla and providing facts that make a convincing case that the massacre was carried out by armed insurgents and local criminals.

With these articles acting as a catalyst, the mainstream German newspaper, the Frankfurter Allgemeiner Zeitung published two articles documenting how the armed insurgency was responsible for the Houla massacre. The titles of the articles translated into English were “Syrian Rebels Committed Houla Massacre” and “On the Houla Massacre: The Extermination”.

In my paper on “The Role of Netizen Journalism in the Media War at the UN,” I also consider the netizen journalism coverage of two other examples of conflicts that were under consideration by the Security Council and consider the impact on the Security Council of the netizen journalism on these issues.

II- Conclusion

The problem raised by this preliminary presentation concerns the importance of facilitating an accurate channel of communication about the conflicts under consideration by the Security Council.

In the example of the Syrian conflict, the fact that General Mood’s report on the Houla massacre could be withheld from the Security Council, and UNSMIS ended by the UN Security Council without any consideration of the issues raised by the report, represents a serious dilemma. This indicates that there is a problem with the communication channels at the UN. There is a problem with the integrity of these communication channels. This is an example of what happens when a communication channel can be blocked.

In a press conference held in March of 2011 when China assumed the month long rotating Security Council presidency, Ambassador Li Baodong referred to the international media as the “16th member of the Security Council.”(11)

While Ambassador Li Baodong was then referring to the mainstream media, it is important to recognize that there is a new form of journalism emerging. This new form of journalism is being created by netizens dedicated to doing the research and analysis to expose the interests and actions that are too often hidden from view in the reporting of the news. As a result of the failure at the UN to provide the Security Council with the conflicting facts of the UNSMIS investigation and to take up the UNSMIS offer to help carry out a more substantial investigation on the ground, an impartial investigation, the ability of the Security Council, and ultimately the UN, to determine what is an accurate narrative about the Houla massacre has been blocked.

Such a failure demonstrates ever more urgently the need to uncover the actual forces at work, the interests being served, and what is at stake in the events that make up the news.

This situation demonstrates in a graphic manner, the need for a netizen journalism that can help to create a channel for communication to provide a more accurate understanding of the conflicts the Security Council is considering. Such a journalism can help to make more likely the peaceful resolution of these conflicts.


(1)Anna News- Houla Report
Early reports were on but later many alternative web sites carried Anna Reports
Following is one url for an early report:

(2) Security Council Press Statement on Attacks in Syria, May 27, 2012
”Those responsible for acts of violence must be held accountable. The members of the Security Council requested the Secretary-General, with the involvement of UNSMIS [United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria], to continue to investigate these attacks and report the findings to the Security Council.”

(3) John Rosenthal, “General Mood: ‘Two Versions’ of the Houla Massacre”The Western media was quick to blame Assad. But does an unpublished UN report tell a different story?”, June 26, 2012.
Rosenthal writes: “What is perhaps most remarkable about General Mood’s comments is that they have been almost universally ignored — and this despite the fact that the video of the press conference has been made publicly available by UNSMIS on the mission’s own.”

(4) June 15, 2012, General Mood Press Conference, Video part 2

The section where General Mood describes the UNSMIS report on Houla starts at min: 3:10 to 4:17

(5) See Kofi Annan tells UN “We Need Eyes and Ears on the Ground”, April 26, 2012

(6)Video of Li Baodong press conference marking the Chinese Presidency of Security Council for the month of June 2012. June 4, 2012.

(7) Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria. Human Rights Council, August 15, 2012.

(8) Cindy Wooden and Sarah MacDonald, “Nuncio in Syria: People stunned…worried for the future”, The Tidings, 24 August 2012.

(9)Patsy McGarry, Media “Coverage of Syria violence partial and untrue, says nun,” The Irish times, Monday Aug 13, 2012,

(10) “The Role of Netizen Journalism in the Media War at the UN”
Draft Paper:


(11) Press Conference: Li Baodong (China) President of the Security Council for the month of March, 2 March 2011.

Note: A version of this article appears on my netizenblog:

Al-Qaeda Now a US Ally in Syria

Global Research, September 12, 2012
The Sydney Morning Herald

While we reflect on the 11th anniversary of the al Qaeda attacks on American soil, there is a blinding light that may obscure our view: this sworn enemy now fights hand in hand with the US against the Syrian regime.

The historic State of the Union address by US president George W. Bush on September 20, 2001 is loaded with morals and principles about good and evil.

The president’s ultimatum was clear: either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.

In Syria, there is mounting evidence that Al Qaeda and its allies are actively deploying terror tactics and suicide bombers to overthrow the Assad regime.

Syrian citizens who prefer the secular and stable state to the prospect of an Iraqi-style sectarian state may well be turning this same question around to the US government: are you with us, or with the terrorists?

This week, head of the Salafi jihad and close ally of al Qaeda, Abu Sayyaf, pledged ”deadly attacks” against Syria as ”our fighters are coming to get you” because ”crimes” by the regime ”prompts us to jihad”.

Bush referred to al Qaeda as the enemies of freedom: ”the terrorists’ directive commands them to kill Christians and Jews”. But Sheikh Muhammad al Zughbey proclaimed that ”your jihad against this infidel criminal and his people is a religious duty … Alawites are more infidel than the Jews and Christians”. Because the new jihad targets Alawites rather than Jews and Christians, does this render them better bed fellows?

By his own admission, Bush stated that al Qaeda was ”linked to many other organisations in different countries … They are recruited from their own nations … where they are trained in the tactics of terror … They are sent back to their homes or sent to hide in countries around the world to plot evil and destruction”.

Yet this is precisely how the foreign jihadists in Syria have been described by reporters. They are funded and armed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar. And they collaborate with the Free Syrian Army which is aided and abetted by the US.

Bush condemned the Taliban regime because they were ”sponsoring and sheltering and supplying terrorists. By aiding and abetting murder, the Taliban regime is committing murder”. Eleven years later, the parallels produce an uncomfortable truth.

If only the Syrian uprising was as simple as the Arab Spring narrative where citizens seek democracy and freedom. But those unarmed protests have long since been hijacked by a cocktail of agendas which have little to do with Syrian democracy, and more to do with a proxy war to create a sectarian Sunni state that weakens Shi’te Iran’s main partner in the region.

Bush was correct in claiming that al Qaeda ”want to overthrow existing governments in many Muslim countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan” – who were all US-Israel allies at that time.

But his list stopped short of mentioning Syria or Iraq, the real targets of al Qaeda. Why does overthrowing Syria, using the same terror tactics, fail to attract the same degree of outrage?

Bush continues: ”We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism.”

This pledge appears to have fallen on its own sword, given the funding of the jihadists in Syria. The terrorists have bred and spread across borders, which is the opposite of Bush’s prophecy.

The US administration must come clean about its financial aid. It cannot use one hand to sign a blank cheque to the rebels, and the other hand to cover its eyes to their immoral and illegal tactics. It cannot hide behind ”the end justifies the means” as there are too many innocent lives at stake.

Bush rode off on his high horse: ”We are in a fight for our principles, and our first responsibility is to live by them … may God grant us wisdom”.

If the principles and morality are to be taken seriously, then they need to be applied consistently.

The US regime should be actively and publicly distancing itself from the foreign terrorists and Salafist jihadists that are proliferating within sovereign Syria.

It should be condemning al Qaeda for its militant intervention. It should be condemning the Saudi sheikhs who issue fatwas for an Alawite holocaust.

The wisdom that we see is grief over the al Qaeda crime 11 years ago, yet covert collaboration with this sworn enemy today.

Perhaps the US is applying another principle that they may have learned from their pragmatic Arab allies – the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Joseph Wakim is the founder of Australian Arabic Council.

Thanks to

Note to Readers and Publishers

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

9/11 Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out

Join 23-year architect Richard Gage, AIA, in this feature length documentary with cutting-edge 9/11 evidence from more than 50 top experts in their fields — high-rise architects, structural engineers, physicists, chemical engineers, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, controlled demolition technicians, and more. Each is highly qualified in his/her respective fields. Several have Ph.D’s — including National Medal of Science awardee Lynn Margulis. She, along with the other experts, exposes the fraud of NIST and discusses how the scientific method should have been applied and acknowledges the “overwhelming” evidence of high temperature incendiaries in all dust samples of the WTC. High-rise architects and structural engineers layout the evidence in the features of the destruction of these three high-rises that point inevitably to explosive controlled demolition.

9/11 family members and psychologists ground the technical information with heart centered support for a new investigation and a close look at the psychology of 9/11in this milestone production of AE911Truth:
Note to Readers and Publishers

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


US-Backed Terrorists Murder US Ambassador in Libya

Murdered US Ambassador exposes Libya “progress” propaganda – provides a warning against US meddling in Syria

Global Research, September 12, 2012

“I have met with these brave fighters, and they are not Al-Qaeda. To the contrary: They are Libyan patriots who want to liberate their nation. We should help them do it.” – Senator John McCain in Benghazi, Libya April 22, 2011.


McCain’s “Libyan patriots” have now murdered US Ambassador John Christopher Stevens in the very city McCain spoke these words. An assault on the American consulate in the eastern city of Benghazi, the epicenter of not only last year’s violent subversion and destruction of sovereign Libya, but a decade’s old epicenter of global terrorism, left Ambassador Stevens dead along with two of his aides.

The violence, Western media claims, stems from an anti-Islamic film produced in the US. In reality, the coordinated nature of the attacks on both the US Embassy in Libya, as well as its embassy in Cairo, Egypt, on the 11th anniversary of 9/11, are most likely using the Neo-Conservative Clarion Fund-esque propaganda film as a false pretense for violence long-planned. The Clarion Fund regularly produces anti-Muslim propaganda, like “Iranium,” specifically to maintain a strategy of tension using fear and anger to drive a wedge between Western civilization and Islam to promote perpetual global wars of profit.


Image: Senator John McCain in the terrorist rat nest of Benghazi after marshaling cash, weapons, and political support for militants tied directly to Al Qaeda. McCain’s insistence that the terrorists he helped arm and install into power were “not Al Qaeda” runs contra to the US Army’s own reports which state that Benghazi’s terror brigades officially merged with Al Qaeda in 2007. McCain’s “Libyan patriots” have now killed US Ambassador Stevens with RPG’s most likely procured with cash and logistic networks set up by NATO last year, part of a supranational terror campaign that includes violently subverting Syria – a campaign McCain also supports.


NATO Knowingly Handed Libya to Al Qaeda 

Indeed, the US Army’s West Point Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) noted that Benghazi and the neighboring city of Darnah served a disproportionately high role in supplying foreign fighters to wage terror against the people of Iraq and Afghanistan – foot soldiers brought in to fuel a destructive and divisive sectarian war that undermined a united Sunni-Shi’ia resistance to Western troops who had invaded.

Image: In Benghazi, in front of the very courthouse McCain and other representatives of the West’s corporate-financier driven foreign policy voiced support for Libya’s terror brigades, sectarian extremists took the streets waving the flag of Al Qaeda, even hoisting it atop the Benghazi courthouse itself. Despite a concerted effort by Western media houses to portray Libya as in the hands of progressive democratic secularists, the country was intentionally handed over to extremists to serve as a base of militancy to destabilize and destroy targets of Western interest around the word.


The men McCain was defending were Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) militants, terrorists linked directly with Al Qaeda according to West Point reports (.pdf), and listed to this day by the US State Department, the UK Home Office (.pdf), and the UN as a “foreign terrorist organization.” McCain was not only rhetorically supporting listed terrorists, but calling for material support including weapons, funds, training, and air support in direct violation of USC § 2339A & 2339B, “providing material support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations.”

These same terrorists are now not only the defacto rulers of much of Libya, but are leading death squads in Syria and arming militants in Mali, an exponential expansion made possible by a non-partisan effort including Republicans and Democrats, as well as Bush-era Neo-Conservatives who concurrently lead both anti-Islam propaganda while leading calls to arm the most radical sectarian extremist groups, including groups directly affiliated with Al Qaeda.

Syria is Next 

Not only has US policy been exposed as not “promoting democracy” but purposefully spreading destabilization, violence, and terrorism, but the exact same militants behind the death of the US’ own ambassador are literally leading US efforts to visit the same violence, destabilization, and chaos upon Syria.

Reuters, in their article, “Libyan fighters join Syrian revolt,” reported, that Mahdi al-Harati, “a powerful militia chief from Libya’s western mountains,” who is actually a militant of the US, British, and UN listed terrorist organization Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), “now leads a unit in Syria, made up mainly of Syrians but also including some foreign fighters, including 20 senior members of his own Libyan rebel unit.” Reuters would go on to explain, “the Libyans aiding the Syrian rebels include specialists in communications, logistics, humanitarian issues and heavy weapons,” and that they “operate training bases, teaching fitness and battlefield tactics.”

Image: Libyan Mahdi al-Harati of the US State Department, United Nations, and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf)-listed terrorist organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), addressing fellow terrorists in Syria. Harati is now commanding a Libyan brigade operating inside of Syria attempting to destroy the Syrian government and subjugate the Syrian population. Traditionally, this is known as “foreign invasion.” 


Reuters concedes that the ongoing battle has nothing to do with democracy, but instead is purely a sectarian campaign aimed at “pushing out” Syria’s minorities, perceived to be “oppressing” “Sunni Muslims.”

Reuters’ propaganda piece is rounded off with a Libyan terrorist allegedly threatening that “the militancy would spread across the region as long as the West does not do more to hasten the downfall of Assad,” a talking point plucked straight from the halls of America’s corporate-financier funded think-tanks. In fact, just such a think-tank, the Foreign Policy Initiative, recently published a statement signed by Bush-era Neo-Conservatives stating:

“America’s national security interests are intertwined with the fate of the Syrian people and the wider region.  Indeed, Syria’s escalating conflict now threatens to directly affect the country’s neighbors, including Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Israel, and could provide an opening for terrorist groups like al Qaeda to exploit.”

Along with “War on Terror” proponent John McCain, Al Qaeda’s LIFG and America’s Neo-Con establishment are now operating in tandem, as well as in direct contradiction to a decade of “War on Terror” propaganda. It should be remembered that those who signed this statement, including Elliott Abrams, Max Boot, Ellen Bork, William Kristol, Paul Bremer, Paula Dobriansk, Douglas Feith, Robert Kagan, Clifford D. May, Stephen Rademaker, Michael Weiss, Radwan Ziadeh, were among the very engineers of the fraudulent “War on Terror” that McCain himself is such a fervent supporter of. Radwan Ziadeh, last on the list, is in fact a “Syrian National Council” member – one of several proxies the US State Department is hoping to slip into power in Syria.

Russia, China, Iran, and Others Oppose Terrorism in Syria for a Reason 

With Libya’s “democratic progress” exposed as only tenuously covering up NATO’s creation of a nation-wide safe haven for Al Qaeda terrorists to subsequently be deployed against the West’s political enemies across he Arab World and beyond, it will be even more difficult, if not impossible to continue promoting this same “change” in Syria.  Libya, through direct action of NATO, has been overrun by terrorists. Syria’s government is desperately trying to prevent its people from being likewise overrun.

And even as the US buries its own ambassador, killed by terror brigades it itself armed and thrust into power through covert and direct military intervention, in a nation now wrecked by sectarian and tribal infighting, it insists on replicating its “success” in Syria.

Russia, China, Iran, and a growing number of nations have been opposing this campaign of supranational terrorism – with the death of Ambassador Stevens laying bare the true nature of America’s proxy “freedom fighters,” the list of global opposition will only grow, leaving only the most shameless and deeply invested to defend America’s invasive and bloody foreign policy.

Note to Readers and Publishers

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


The month of September has witnessed an accelerated trend of coordinated attempts in desecrating Islam and tarnishing the image of the Muslims across the globe.

That a blasphemous movie desecrating the person of the holy Prophet of Islam has been released in the United States simultaneously with the 9/11 tragic incident cannot be looked upon as sheer coincidence.

In a coordinated effort, UK channel 4 broadcast a documentary called ‘Islam: The Untold Story’ last week in stark distortion of Islam. Director Tom Holland who is so dismally bereft of any knowledge on Islam claims there is little written contemporary evidence about the origin of Islam and the life of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH). Even barely noted for his vampire and supernatural stories, Holland’s non-fiction books have nothing to do with religious matters or Islam.

In the documentary, he has included Patricia Crone, an infamous pseudo-scholar affiliated to the Institute for…

View original post 882 more words


Israel, US, NATO, EU, Israel, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are the countries arming and funding Al-Qaeda, Suicide Bombers and Terrorist Extremists in Syria.


View original post


UN and Arab League peace envoy Lakhdar Brahimi has arrived in Syria on his first visit to the crisis-hit country since his appointment in mid-August.

Brahimi arrived in Syria and was accompanied by Mokhtar Lamani, who will remain in Damascus to assume his new functions as head of office for the Joint Special Representative for Syria in the capital city.

On his three day visit, Brahimi is scheduled to hold talks with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as well as other government officials and representatives of the Syrian opposition.

The UN Envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, said no one disagrees with the need to stop the bloodshed and restore harmony among the people in Syria.

In a statement upon arrival in Damascus International Airport on Thursday, Brahimi added “We came to Syria for consultation with the brotherly Syrians… There is a crisis and I think it is deteriorating.”

View original post 3 more words


Russia Today
September 12, 2012

There’s been an attack on the US embassy in Beirut. This comes after President Obama confirmed that his ambassador to Libya – and three other officials – were killed in the city of Benghazi. Christopher Stevens was at the US consulate there when an armed mob stormed the compound, in protest at an American film which has been described as an insult to Islam.

A team of US anti-terror marines is reportedly heading to Libya to beef up security for diplomats. RT talks to independent news editor James Corbett.

View original post


Syrian Girl
September 13, 2012

Please turn on annotations: My Previous youtube video was censored! it got 10,000 views on vimeo before it was also taken down. Even LiveLeak rejected it . It is about torture and execution of unarmed prisoners by the FSA.

I make a comment on recent events where the US Ambassador to Libya, one of the spear heads to the war on Libya was ironically lynched by the very same people who he put into power and by the very same people . The plan for a clash of civilizations.
Link to blog i mention:…

View original post



There are reports that the 11 September attack on the US ambassador in Libya was an inside job and that the US Department of State knew of the possibility of the attack up to 48 hours ahead of time, yet chose to do nothing.

Inside Job … – Daily Mail / Revealed: inside story of US envoy’s assassination‎‏

The Independent, citing diplomatic sources, has reported that the US State Department knew, up to 48 hours ahead of the attacks, that the compounds in Benghazi and Cairo could be hit. 

“However, none of the diplomats in either city were given warnings.”
It has been revealed that “the Benghazi consulate was not protected by the contingent of Marines that usually safeguard embassies.”
“I don’t know how they found the place (the safe house) to carry out the attack.
“It was planned, the accuracy with which the mortars…

View original post 466 more words


Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the “uncultured” Zionists have reached the end of the line and are thus grasping at straws to trigger a sectarian war among the followers of different religions.

“I am confident that Zionists are goners and the world will be freed from their existence and justice will be established,” Ahmadinejad said on Friday.

Although Zionists will fail to achieve their goals, all nations should remain vigilant against their plots, he added.

The Iranian president said US decision-makers directing the country’s politics from behind the scene have come to this understanding that the Israeli regime will no longer be beneficial to them. 

View original post 164 more words

The Extinction Protocol

September 14, 2012AFRICAFloods in Niger have killed 81 people since July, the UN Office for Humanitarian Affairs announced Thursday, adding cholera outbreaks have killed a further 81 people. “The last update of the toll of the floods dating from September 11 indicates that 527,471 people have been affected by the bad weather and 81 people have lost their lives,” OCHA said in a statement in Niamey. The previous toll established by the authorities was 68 dead and 485,000 people affected in the Sahel nation in West Africa. Thousands of homes, schools, health centres and mosques have been destroyed, along with large quantities of food supplies, according to the authorities. The UN office also reported outbreaks of cholera, which have claimed 81 lives since the start of the year, mainly in the west of the country.  Cholera is spreading fast in at least four places, making 3,854…

View original post 112 more words

earth change affirmations

…A large solar filament eruption was observed at approximately 06:40 UTC in between Sunspot 1566 and plage region 1567. The associated CME had an estimated speed of 536 km/s and is directed northward so our planet don’t expect significant geomagnetic effects from this event….LINK

View original post

earth change affirmations


Pakistan Hit by Devastating Floods Again…LINK
Niger Floods and Cholera Claim 162 Lives: UN…LINK
Cloudburst in Uttarakhand, India Kills 30, 40 People Missing…LINK
NASA Sees Sanba Develop into a Super Typhoon...LINK

HAARP Weather Modification for Weather Warfare
HAARP (High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program) is the American military’s plan to manipulate the world’s ionosphere, and can create earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis, jam all global communications, disrupt weather systems, interfere with migration patterns, disrupt human mental processes, negatively affect your health and disrupt the upper atmosphere…LINK

View original post


A photo provided by the U.S. Navy, 5th Fleet and dated Aug. 29, 2012, shows USS Navy mine counter measure ships, from right to left, USS Dexrous and USS Sentry get in line to conduct an astern replenishment-at-sea. The United States and more than two dozen allies are gearing up for the largest naval exercises ever in the Middle East focused on countering the threat of anti-ship mines. (AP Photo/U.S. Navy, Toni Burton)

Adam Schreck, AP

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The United States and more than two dozen allies are gearing up for the largest naval exercise ever in the Middle East focused on countering the threat of anti-ship mines. A wary Iran says it will be watching closely.

The maneuvers starting next week are the latest flexing of American military muscle in and around the Persian Gulf, even as Washington tries to convince ally Israel that diplomacy…

View original post 710 more words

The Extinction Protocol

September 14, 2012JAPAN –Something is concealed in spent fuel pool of reactor 3 again. On 9/13/2012, Tepco released the photos of SFP3 but the surface of SFP3 is pixelated. Tepco investigated the inside of SFP of reactor3 for fuel removal from the Upper Part of Unit 3 Reactor Building. They released the pictures taken on 9/13/2012, but the surface of the pool looks pixelated as shown above. –FD
contribution Angelsong

View original post