Jump to content
The Education Forum

NATO-backed “pro-democracy” activists commit brutal atrocities

Recommended Posts

NATO-backed “pro-democracy” activists commit brutal atrocities

Shocking Videos Reveal Truth Behind Syrian “Freedom Fighters”

by Paul Joseph Watson

Despite the fact that parties on both sides of the conflict in Syria have been responsible for violence, the international NATO-aligned media has hyped often dubious accusations of Assad-sponsored massacres while virtually ignoring massacres, beheadings and other acts of brutality carried out by rebel insurgents.

WARNING: Many of the following clips are graphic – viewer discretion is advised.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm a NATO backed media hack, then I'm going to send NATO a bill for my services.

I'll give a good percentage to Steven if he can collect it for me.

Here's some more sober words:

John F. Kennedy – From “The Strategy of Peace” Chapter 13. The Middle East

The Middle East today is a monument to Western misunderstanding. During the last eight years the West has ignominiously presided over the liquidation of its power in the whole region, while the U.S.S.R. has gained important footholds. American policy has wavered and wobbled as much, if not more, than any other Western country…

But the main problem was and is understanding the driving forces and central needs of the region as a whole and devising an appropriate farsighted American policy….

Our mistakes in the Middle East, it seems to me, were primarily mistakes of attitude. We tended to deal with this area almost exclusively in the context of the East-West struggle – in terms of our own battle against international Communism. Their own issues of nationalism, of economic development, and local political hostilities were dismissed by our policy-makers as being of secondary importance.

This is not to say that we were necessarily wrong in saying that Communism was their greatest enemy – but we were wrong in believing that we could convince them that it was. We were wrong in believing that what was so clear to us could be made equally compelling to other peoples with problems very different from our own – people with a much lower standard of living, a much greater pride in neutrality and a much more cent history of foreign exploitation. The Arabs knew that their lands had never been occupied by Soviet troops – but they had been occupied by Western troops – and they were not ready to submerge either their nationalism or their neutrality in an alliance with the Western nations.

We made other grave errors in the Middle East. We overestimated our own strength and underestimated the force of nationalism. We failed to perceive when we had lost control of events – and failed to act accordingly once it became clear. We gave our support to regimes instead of to people – and too often we tied our future to the fortunes of unpopular and ultimately overthrown governments and rulers.

We believed that those governments which were friendly to us and hostile to Communists were therefore good governments – and we believed that we could make unpopular policies acceptable through our own propaganda programs. Without question some of these governments were good governments – genuinely devoted to the welfare of their people and the development of their economies – but logic and fact are not the same as what people believe. The mutilated body of Iraqi Premier Nuri As-said, to cite one vivid example, hanging from a Bagjhdad lamp post a year ago last July, became the symbol of what happened to our policy in Iraq.

Is it not ironic that today – after considerable expenditure, turmoil, Communist gains and Western defeats – we are striving to achieve for the Middle East the very status of neutrality on which we turned our backs some three years ago?

In short, from here on out, the question is not whether we should accept the neutralist tendencies of the Arabs, but how we can work with them. The question is not whether we should recognize the force of Arab nationalism, but how we can help to channel it along constructive lines.

The mistaken attitudes of the past – our previous misconceptions and psychological barriers – must all be junked – for the sake of the Arabs and for our own sake as well. Where our approach was once trite and traditional, it must now be imaginative, progressive, and practical. Above all, it must recognize things as they are and not just as we would have them to be for our convenience. We must talk in terms that go beyond the vocabulary of Cold War – terms that translate themselves into tangible values and self-interest for the Arabs as well as ourselves.

It is not enough to talk only in terms of guns and money – for guns and money are not the basic need in the Middle East. It is not enough to approach their problems on a piecemeal basis. It is not enough to merely ride with a very shaky status quo. It is not enough to recall the Baghdad Pact or the Eisenhower Doctrine – it is not enough to rely on the Voice of America or the Sixth Fleet. The approaches have failed.

But if we can learn from the lessons of the past – if we can refrain from pressing our case so hard that the Arabs feel their neutrality and nationalism are threatened – if we can talk with them in terms of their problems, not ours – then I am convinced that the Middle East can become an area of strength and hope. Let us make clear that we will never turn our back on our steadfast friends in Israel, whose adherence to the democratic way must be admired by all friends of freedom. But let us also make clear throughout the Middle East that we want friendship, not satellites – and we are interested in their prosperity as well as ours. To do this job, to do it right, requires the combination of imagination and restraint which we have thus far not demonstrated in the Middle East. But the time to do so is now.

While we, along with the leaders of our nation and the world, are concerned tonight with the daily developments in the Middle East, I think my comments should be directed toward a longer-range view of the situation. It would be worth while for all of us now while negotiations proceed to examine the problems that will still be present once hostilities have ceased, borders have been redrawn, and alliances rebuilt.

Much in the Middle East, of course, is the same as it was a generation ago; much will remain the same: the special importance of the Middle East to the great religions of the world, Jewish, Moslem and Christian; the economic interests of Britain and France in the area, present today as they were a generation ago; the traditional rivalries between the various Arab blocs, between the Saudis and the Hashimites, beween the Nile and the Euphraties-Tigris valleys, between northern Arabs and Southern Arabs, rich states and poor.

But let us consider the new trends and developments which have altered the character and significance of the Middle East and its problems, and with which we will be reckoning long after the present crisis has ended. There are, it seems to me, seven such facts.

  • First is the highly strategic position occupied by the Middle East in the world’s political, ideological and military battles…the Middle East has consequently assumed an importance in the Cold War out of proportion to its size, strength and previous significance.
  • The second permanent factor in the Middle East of which we must never lose sight is oil. The dependence of the world upon Middle Eastern oil and its transportation through the Suez Canal has been made abundantly clear. Whatever political and military settlements are made, whatever tensions are lifted and problems solved, we must remember that Europe’s dependence upon these oil supplies will continue – and continue indefinitely, regardless of our developments in atomic energy.
  • The third fact which will remain once the dust of the present battle has settled and the smoke has cleared away will be the unprecedented success of Soviet penetration in the Middle East….
  • Fourth, we must never consider the problems of the nations of the Middle East apart from the economic and social conditions which surround them. Life in the Middle East, it has been said, is a perpetual fight against the desert, and always the desert has won in the past – with poverty and illiteracy and disease and underdevelopment dominating an area where only a few enjoy the benefits of great oil and land holdings. Indeed, the increase in outside capital poured into the area to exploit its oil and other resources has only aggravated the problems of unequal distribution of wealth and inadequate development of human resources. These are problems with which the new nations of the Middle East must struggle for the next generation; and no amount of nationalistic oratory can create the scientific and technological revolution necessary to raise the standard of living of their people. Nor is such a revolution easily purchased by oil royalties. It requires the closest associations and assistance of either Western Europe, who is mistrusted, or the Soviet Union, or the United States. This decision will be a continuing one facing our nation and the nations of the Middle East for many years after the close of the present hostilities.
  • Another factor is the rise of Arab nationalism, the revolt in the Middle East against Western colonialism. In Morrocco, Algeria, and Tunisia; in Jordan, Yemen, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Aden, and in Egypt and throughout the entire area, the desire to be free from direct or indirect Western influence has become a powerful and sometimes violent force. Policies of repression have only fanned the flames of discontent; and the close ties between this nation, home of the Declaration of Independence, and the great colonial powers have caused Arab spokesmen to warn our State Department that the nations of the Middle East were beginning to regard America as a supporter of colonialism. In recent weeks, particularly with respect to the present crisis, we have proclaimed our independence from our traditional allies on issues affected by the colonialism-nationalism struggle, but it is not yet clear that we have recognized this factor to be the most powerful, dynamic force for good or evil in the Middle East today.
  • A sixth factor, related to but separate from the growing force of Arab nationalism, has been the emergence of Egypt as the leader of the Arab bloc, the champion of Arab unity, and the chief provocator against the West…it’s roots are in the history of Egypt’s bitter relations with the British….and in a series of more recent Western actions in the area which Egypt regarded either as an affront or a threat to its prestige…
  • Seventh, the character of the Middle East will be shaped for generations to come by one more factor which was not present a generation ago – the State of Israel. It is time for all the nations of the world, in the Middle East and elsewhere, realized that Israel is here to stay. Surrounded on every side by violent hate and prejudice, living each day in an atmosphere of constant tension and fear, Israel is certain to survive the present crisis and all future crisis; and all negotiations between the United States and Arab nations should accept that fact.

The future of the Middle East will be based upon the interrelation of these seven factors. We now realize that there is no problem in the Middle East in which the security of the United States is not involved and to the solution of which we don not have some responsibility. But we shall fulfill those responsibilities with lasting benefits for ourselves and the world only if we develop a Middle Eastern policy of our own; and only if we base that policy upon a long-range point of view – upon the interlocking and interaction of the above facts and factors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill, its not a West vs Commie war now..its BANKS vs the worlds people

with US & NATO doing their work

Going Rogue: America's Unconventional Warfare in the Middle East


The Ugly American just got uglier. And within these intifadas raging in the region, any Arab population that does not shut itself off from this foreign infiltration risks becoming a foot soldier in an unconventional war against themselves.


by Sharmine Narwani 5/25/12


"The intent of U.S. [unconventional Warfare] UW efforts is to exploit a hostile power’s political, military, economic, and psychological vulnerabilities by developing and sustaining resistance forces to accomplish U.S. strategic objectives…For the foreseeable future, U.S. forces will predominantly engage in irregular warfare (IW) operations."

So begins the 2010 Unconventional Warfare (UW) Manual of the US Military’s Special Forces. The manual attached here (TC 18-01) is an interim publication, developed to address the definition of Unconventional Warfare and some other inconsistencies in UW Doctrine. The new UW document (ATP 3-05.1) is in the initial draft and not yet available, though sources tell me it is unlikely to differ much from TC 18-01.

But most of us have not had the pleasure of leafing through this truly revelatory blueprint that shows how America wages its dirty wars. These are the secret wars that have neither been approved by Congress, nor by the inhabitants of nations whose lives – if not bodies – are mauled by the directives on these pages.

A quote from President John F. Kennedy in 1962 opens the document. These few lines illustrate a core Washington belief that US forces have the right to destabilize, infiltrate, assassinate, subvert – all in service of questionable foreign policy objectives, with no evident consideration of a sovereign state’s preparedness or desire for change:

There is another type of warfare—new in its intensity, ancient in its origin—war by guerrillas, subversives, insurgents, assassins; war by ambush instead of by combat, by infiltration instead of aggression, seeking victory by eroding and exhausting the enemy instead of engaging him. It preys on unrest.

Target: Middle East

The Bush Doctrine paved the way for the mainstreaming of unconventional warfare by establishing the principle of pre-emptive actions against a state that may one day pose a threat to American interests. It didn’t offer any specific criteria to gauge those threats, nor did it attempt to explain why anyone outside the United States should be held accountable for US “interests” – be they commercial, security or political.

The doctrine went largely unchallenged, and has been played out with disastrous results throughout the Middle East in the past decade. The prime targets of UW have traditionally been nations and groups that oppose US primacy in the region – mainly the Resistance Axis consisting of Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas – but UW has been carried out to some degree in virtually any nation where this Axis carries some influence.

The most nefarious aspect of UW - aside from the obvious violations of international law pertaining to sovereignty, territorial integrity and loss of human life/property, etc – is the proactive and aggressive effort to psychologically sway a population against its government. It is at this entry point where UW fails every American test of “values.”

The Arab Intifadas of 2011 provided a unique opportunity – amidst regional and sometimes domestic chaos – to ramp up UW activities in “hostile” states, whether or not populations sought regime change. Prime examples are Iran, Syria and Libya – all of which have been UW targets in the past year, at different levels of infiltration and with markedly different results.

Here is a chart from the Special Forces UW manual that demonstrates the scope of activity at the early stages:

Click to enlarge (GO TO TOP LINK TO SEE)

February 14 was supposed to be the kick-off in Iran, but the Islamic Republic was already on guard, having gained experience with UW subversion in the aftermath of the 2009 Iranian presidential elections.

The use of social media to coordinate protests and widely disseminate anti-regime narratives in Iran’s post-election period marked a new era in the internet revolution globally. The Pentagon lost no time in claiming cyberspace as an “operational domain” and in the past year has substantially increased its budgetary allocation to subversion activities on the web.

Last July – as I wrote in this article - the technology arm of the Department of Defense, DARPA, announced a $42 million program to enable the U.S. military to “detect, classify, measure and track the formation, development and spread of ideas and concepts (memes)” within social media.

Wired magazine calls the project the Pentagon’s “social media propaganda machine” because of its plans for “counter messaging of detected adversary influence operations.”

In order to “allow more agile use of information in support of [military] operations” and “defend” against “adverse outcomes,” the project will enable the automation of processes to “identify participants and intent, measure effects of persuasion campaigns,” and ultimately, infiltrate and redirect social media-based campaigns overseas, when deemed necessary.

The UW campaign in Iran appears to more or less have faltered at technology sabotage, social media infiltration and assassinations. Libya is at the other extreme – and the following chart gives a bird’s eye view of the UW manual’s playbook for operations of that magnitude:

Click to enlarge (GO TO TOP LINK TO SEE)

The Libyan scenario of course was slightly different in that it was conducted under NATO cover, with the US military “leading from behind.” In addition, the large-scale UW operation’s success relied less on ground combat than on air cover and intelligence-sharing for attacks conducted largely by Libyan rebels.

Target: Regime Change in Syria

In Syria, the UW task would have been a mix of the two. Because of the domestic popularity and strength of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad revealed here in a 2006 Wikileaks Cable, UW activities would necessarily need to start with some subversion of the population before graduating to a Libyan-style scenario.

Just as the Wikileaks cable recommends identifying “opportunities” to expose “vulnerabilities” in the Syrian regime and cause sectarian/ethnic division, discord within the military/security apparatus and economic hardship, the UW manual also instructs special forces to “exploit a hostile power’s political, military, economic, and psychological vulnerabilities.”

The Syrian demographic landscape is reflected in the UW manual: “In almost every scenario, resistance movements face a population with an active minority supporting the government and an equally small militant faction supporting the resistance movement. For the resistance to succeed, it must convince the uncommitted middle population…to accept it as a legitimate entity. A passive population is sometimes all a well-supported insurgency needs to seize political power.”

To turn the “uncommitted middle population” into supporting insurgency, UW recommends the “creation of atmosphere of wider discontent through propaganda and political and psychological efforts to discredit the government.”

As conflict escalates, so should the “intensification of propaganda; psychological preparation of the population for rebellion.”

First, there should be local and national “agitation” – the organization of boycotts, strikes, and other efforts to suggest public discontent. Then, the “infiltration of foreign organizers and advisors and foreign propaganda, material, money, weapons and equipment.”

The next level of operations would be to establish “national front organizations [i.e. the Syrian National Council] and liberation movements [i.e. the Free Syrian Army]” that would move larger segments of the population toward accepting “increased political violence and sabotage” – and encourage the mentoring of “individuals or groups that conduct acts of sabotage in urban centers.”

Now, how and why would an uncommitted – and ostensibly peaceful - majority of the population respond to the introduction of violence by opposition groups? The UW manual tells us there is an easy way to spin this one:

If retaliation [by the target government] occurs, the resistance can exploit the negative consequences to garner more sympathy and support from the population by emphasizing the sacrifices and hardship the resistance is enduring on behalf of “the people.” If retaliation is ineffective or does not occur, the resistance can use this as proof of its ability to wage effect combat against the enemy. In addition, the resistance can portray the inability or reluctance of the enemy to retaliate as a weakness, which will demoralize enemy forces and instill a belief in their eventual defeat.

And so on, and so forth.

The Bush Doctrine today has morphed under President Barack Obama into new “packaging.” Whether under the guidance of the recently-created "Atrocity Prevention Board" or trussed up as “humanitarian intervention,” the goals remain the same – destabilization of lives and nations in the service of political and economic domination, i.e., “American interests.”

When Arab governments yell "foreign conspiracy," whether or not they are popular leaders they are surely right. There are virtually no domains left in key Arab countries - from the innocuous-sounding "civil society" filled to the brim with US-funded NGOs to the military/intelligence apparatuses of these nations to the Facebook pages of ordinary citizens - that are untouched by American "interests."

The Ugly American just got uglier. And within these intifadas raging in the region, any Arab population that does not shut itself off from this foreign infiltration risks becoming a foot soldier in an unconventional war against themselves.

Click here for the Arabic version of this article. (GO TO TOP LINK )

Sharmine Narwani is a commentary writer and political analyst covering the Middle East. You can follow Sharmine on twitter @snarwani.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...


CIA Terrorists In Syria Hang Child In Public After Executing His Family



CIA Terrorists Kidnap And Execute Syria TV Host



Syria Terrorists Attack Palestenian Refugee Camp With Mortar Fire In Damascus



Video: NATO's Syria Terrorists Savagely Executes Family Leader And His Men



Robert Fisk: Syria's ancient treasures pulverised - The Independent



Cold-Blood Mass Murder in Syria by the West’s "Pro-Democracy Opposition"



War Crime! Syrian Rebels Mass Execute Civilians – GRAPHIC VIDEO


Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL once I wonder if Gaal bothers to read the links he posts here. Most as per his norm come from obscure sites and authors that offer little if anything in terms of documentation. Gaal's favorite source now is Alexander Higgins whose favorite source is himself. Most of the links from the first article lead to other pages from Higgins' site. He claimed “the Vatican have come out against the US using Al Qaeda terrorists in Syria to execute civilians” but when we finally get to the primary source we see that isn't quite the case.

One of only two links not to Higgins was an article from Global Research. The author claimed “New video footage [1] obtained by Agence France Presse shows a gruesome scene of cold-blooded murder of unarmed Syrians” but there is no evidence the video clip comes from AFP or any other media outlet. Rather he linked a YouTube video. According to the description:

Those men were sentenced to death by the relatives of the brutally killed soldiers of the Free Syrian Army; they were killed for killing innocent civilians. Not only this, they were the main cause of arrest and torture of many innocent Syrian people including men women and children. besides, they were the main source of corruption in Syria: smuggling, prostitution, drugs, etc...

Now even if the above is true I doubt the men were given fair trials but the CT implied the men were innocent civilians but his own source contradicted this.

In the one where Gaal cited a legitimate journalist [Fisk in the Independent] one really has to wonder if he read the article. The 1st and 3rd paragraphs, emphasis mine:

The priceless treasures of Syria's history – of Crusader castles, ancient mosques and churches, Roman mosaics, the renowned "Dead Cities" of the north and museums stuffed with antiquities – have fallen prey to looters and destruction by armed rebels AND GOVERNMENT MILITIAS as fighting envelops the country. While the monuments and museums of the two great cities of Damascus and Aleppo have so far largely been spared, reports from across Syria tell of irreparable damage to heritage sites that have no equal in the Middle East. Even the magnificent castle of Krak des Chevaliers – described by Lawrence of Arabia as "perhaps the best preserved and most wholly admirable castle in the world" and which Saladin could not capture – HAS BEEN SHELLED BY THE SYRIAN ARMY, damaging the Crusader chapel inside.


In many cases, armed rebels have sought sanctuary behind the thick walls of ancient castles only to find that THE SYRIAN MILITARY HAVE NOT HESITATED TO BLAST AWAY AT THESE HISTORICAL BUILDINGS to destroy their enemies. Pitched battles have been fought between rebels and Syrian troops amid the "Dead Cities", the hundreds of long-abandoned Graeco-Roman towns that litter the countryside outside Aleppo, which once formed the heart of ancient Syria. Syrian troops have occupied the Castle of Ibn Maan above the Roman city of Palmyra and parked tanks and armoured vehicles in the Valley of the Tombs to the west of the old city. THE GOVERNMENT ARMY ARE REPORTED TO HAVE DUG A DEEP DEFENSIVE TRENCH WITHIN THE ROMAN RUINS.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US has invaded 152 countries since 1850. How many has Iran invaded?

(Gaal,quote blog Yahoo Answers)

Gee a report from PressTV which uncritically takes the word of Syrian Army officers and offers no other evidence, I'm convinced.




I believe the less agressive side.(Gaal)

blog Yahoo Answers

The US has invaded 152 countries since 1850. How many has Iran invaded?

Since 1850, the United States has invaded 152 nations

- has suppressed countless uprisings and revolutions (Phillipines, Nicaragua, Bolivia, attempted Cuba, etc)

- has engaged in countless CIA-backed attempts at overthrowing legitimate governments

- has given open support to countless brutal dictators with a history of human rights abuses (going all the way back to Porfirio Diaz of Mexico)

- has employed torture and massacring in order to achieve political and economic ends (Phillipines)

- has engaged in, and continues to engage in, imperialist activities (Guam, Phillipines, American Samoa, Hawaii)

- has invaded more than one country on false premises (Iraq, Vietnam; activity in the Balkans)

- all of this is done with pressure from arms manufacturers' lobbies

US militarization/deployment Africa,recent Paraguay & Honduran coups & Future Venezuela coup via NGOS.(Gaal)


NATO's War against Yugoslavia was based on Lies

- by Blokhin Timur, Vukotic Iovanna - 2012-08-11


7 Muslim Countries Were On U.S. War List: Wesley Clark


"What a mistake! I reflected…as though the terrorism were simply coming

from these states," Clark wrote

WASHINGTON, September 22 (IslamOnline.net) - U.S. Presidential hopeful

Wesley Clark, the former general who led NATO forces during the Kosovo

campaign, revealed on Monday, September 22, that the Bush administration

had set-up a five-year plan to invade seven Muslim countries after the

9/11 attacks, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran,

Somalia, and finally Sudan.

In his book "The Clark Critique" excerpts of which were published by

this week's Newsweek edition, the four-star retired general wrote that

following the September attacks, the U.S. administration became

preoccupied with the idea of "state sponsorship" and "draining the swamp" of terrorism.

"In the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, many in the Bush

administration seemed most focused on a prospective move against Iraq.

This was the old idea of state sponsorship-even though there was no

evidence of Iraqi sponsorship of 9/11 whatsoever," the anti-Iraqi war

Democrat said



War On All Fronts

Washington's three-front war: Syria, Lebanon, Iran in the Middle East, China in the Far East, Russia in Europe...

- by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts - 2012-07-18

An over-confident US government is determined to have a three-front war: Syria, Lebanon, and Iran in the Middle East, China in the Far East, and Russia in Europe.

The Russian government has finally caught on that its political opposition is being financed by the US taxpayer-funded National Endowment for Democracy and other CIA/State Department fronts in an attempt to subvert the Russian government and install an American puppet state in the geographically largest country on earth, the one country with a nuclear arsenal sufficient to deter Washington’s aggression.

Just as earlier this year Egypt expelled hundreds of people associated with foreign-funded “non-governmental organizations” (NGOs) for “instilling dissent and meddling in domestic policies,” the Russian Duma (parliament) has just passed a law that Putin is expected to sign that requires political organizations that receive foreign funding to register as foreign agents. The law is based on the US law requiring the registration of foreign agents.

Much of the Russian political opposition consists of foreign-paid agents, and once the law passes leading elements of the Russian political opposition will have to sign in with the Russian Ministry of Justice as foreign agents of Washington. The Itar-Tass News Agency reported on July 3 that there are about 1,000 organizations in Russia that are funded from abroad and engaged in political activity. Try to imagine the outcry if the Russians were funding 1,000 organizations in the US engaged in an effort to turn America into a Russian puppet state. (In the US the Russians would find a lot of competition from Israel.)

The Washington-funded Russian political opposition masquerades behind “human rights” and says it works to “open Russia.” What the disloyal and treasonous Washington-funded Russian “political opposition” means by “open Russia” is to open Russia for brainwashing by Western propaganda, to open Russia to economic plunder by the West, and to open Russia to having its domestic and foreign policies determined by Washington.

“Non-governmental organizations” are very governmental. They have played pivotal roles in both financing and running the various “color revolutions” that have established American puppet states in former constituent parts of the Soviet Empire. NGOs have been called “coup d’etat machines,” and they have served Washington well in this role. They are currently working in Venezuela against Chavez.

Of course, Washington is infuriated that its plans for achieving hegemony over a country too dangerous to attack militarily have been derailed by Russia’s awakening, after two decades, to the threat of being politically subverted by Washington-financed NGOs. Washington requires foreign-funded organizations to register as foreign agents (unless they are Israeli funded). However, this fact doesn’t stop Washington from denouncing the new Russian law as “anti-democratic,” “police state,” blah-blah. Caught with its hand in subversion, Washington calls Putin names. The pity is that most of the brainwashed West will fall for Washington’s lies, and we will hear more about “gangster state Russia.”

China is also in Washington’s crosshairs. China’s rapid rise as an economic power is perceived in Washington as a dire threat. China must be contained. Obama’s US Trade Representative has been secretly negotiating for the last 2 or 3 years a Trans Pacific Partnership, whose purpose is to derail China’s natural economic leadership in its own sphere of influence and replace it with Washington’s leadership.

Washington is also pushing to form new military alliances in Asia and to establish new military bases in the Philippines, S. Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere.

Washington quickly inserted itself into disputes between China and Vietnam and China and the Philippines. Washington aligned with its former Vietnamese enemy in Vietnam’s dispute with China over the resource rich Paracel and Spratly islands and with the Philippines in its dispute with China over the resource rich Scarborough Shoal.

Thus, like England’s interference in the dispute between Poland and National Socialist Germany over the return to Germany of German territories that were given to Poland as World War I booty, Washington sets the stage for war.

China has been cooperative with Washington, because the offshoring of the US economy to China was an important component in China’s unprecedented high rate of economic development. American capitalists got their short-run profits, and China got the capital and technology to build an economy that in another 2 or 3 years will have surpassed the sinking US economy. Jobs offshoring, mistaken for free trade by free market economists, has built China and destroyed America.

Washington’s growing interference in Chinese affairs has convinced China’s government that military countermeasures are required to neutralize Washington’s announced intentions to build its military presence in China’s sphere of influence. Washington’s view is that only Washington, no one else, has a sphere of influence, and

Washington’s sphere of influence is the entire world.

On July 14 China’s official news agency, Xinhua, said that Washington was interfering in Chinese affairs and making China’s disputes with Vietnam and the Philippines impossible to resolve.

It looks as if an over-confident US government is determined to have a three-front war: Syria, Lebanon, and Iran in the Middle East, China in the Far East, and Russia in Europe. This would appear to be an ambitious agenda for a government whose military was unable to occupy Iraq after nine years or to defeat the lightly-armed Taliban after eleven years, and whose economy and those of its NATO puppets are in trouble and decline with corresponding rising internal unrest and loss of confidence in political leadership.



US-NATO Sea-based Missile System Threatens Russia

A sophisticated multilayered missile defense architecture is being created in the immediate vicinity of Russia...

- by Vladimir Kozin - 2012-03-31

A sophisticated multilayered and multi-echelon missile defense architecture is being created in the immediate vicinity of Russia, encompassing Europe and Asia. It’s major specific feature is that in any emergency on the international scene, the architecture is going to interact most closely with US and NATO tactical and strategic nuclear potentials.

NEW COLD WAR? Russia "Concerned" Over Washington's Plans To Ship Arms To Georgia

- 2012-03-28

"Trusted Messengers" and "Humanitarian Groups" Target Russia and China, Endorse the US-NATO Mandate

- by Richard Nogueira - 2012-03-15

The Anglo-US Drive into Eurasia and the Demonization of Russia

Reframing the History of World War II

- by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2009-10-02

Reframing the History of World War II

U.S. Redeploys Missile Shield: The Geopolitical Encirclment of Russia

- by Rick Rozoff - 2009-09



The Scramble for Africa: Another U.S. Battleground To Challenge, Supplant China

- by Boris Volkhonsky - 2012-08-08

MILITARIZATION OF ASIA-PACIFIC: America Revives And Expands Cold War Military Alliances Against China

- by Rick Rozoff - 2012-06-09

Military build-up in Indo-Pacific region: US “pivot” to Asia threatens war with China

- by Peter Symonds - 2012-06-06

US-Australia plans for war on China

- by James Cogan - 2012-06-04

THREATENING CHINA: South China Sea: U.S.-Japan Military Deployments Put Region At Risk

US-Philippine military exercises directed against China

- by Peter Symonds - 2012-04-26



The "Great Game" and the Conquest of Eurasia: Towards a World War III Scenario?

Mackinder's Geo-Strategic Nightmare

- by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2010-11-30

Eurasia's Global Counter-Alliance to US-NATO expansionism

The US clashes with Russia and China: Kyrgyzstan And The Great Game For Central Asia

- by M K Bhadrakumar - 2010-09-26

DRUG-FINANCED SALAFI JIHADISM: The Afghan Drug Trade, A Threat to Russia and U.S.-Russian Relations

- by Prof. Peter Dale Scott - 2012-05-23

NATO Strengthens Position In Central Asia Against Russia, China

- by Roman Mamonov, Yulia Ashcheulova - 2012-05-18

“In brief, for the United States, Eurasian geo-strategy involves the purposeful management of geo-strategically dynamic states…To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geo-strategy are to prevent collusion and to

maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.” 12

The “barbarians” that Brzezinski refers to are China and Russia and all in between. The Brzezinski term “imperial geo-strategy” refers to US strategic foreign policy. The “vassals” he identifies in the book as countries like Germany, Japan and other NATO “allies” of the US. That Brzezinski geopolitical notion remains US foreign policy today. 13


12 Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, 1997, Basic Books, p. 40. See F. William Engdahl, A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, Wiesbaden, 2011, edition.engdahl, for details of the role of the German Baghdad rail link in World War I.

13 Zbigniew Brzezinski, op. cit. p.40.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites


None of the above is relevant to the reliability of a PressTV report about the Syrian Civil War based on the accounts of Syrian Army officers. Funny that you wasted so much time putting your post together. // end Colby

In the real world tens of millions are suffering.

The REAL World HELLO !!

Dupe really ??

I know you are but what am I?

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites


None of the above is relevant to the reliability of a PressTV report about the Syrian Civil War based on the accounts of Syrian Army officers. Funny that you wasted so much time putting your post together. // end Colby

In the real world tens of millions are suffering.

That's certainly true but still has no relevance to the claims made above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Published on Aug 15, 2012 by RussiaToday

The main Syrian rebel group say they're behind a powerful blast that ripped through central Damascus. The explosion struck just outside a hotel being used by the UN observers' mission and an RT crew. Independent journalist James Corbett believes rebels are unliklely to draw condemnation from some foreign countries for the latest attack in Damascus.

Don't expect West to condemn Syria terror attacks'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Corbett is not a journalist, he is a Canadian English teacher in Japan with a truther/CT blog. Like most truthers he has no demonstrable expertise/experience AND is habitually misinformed.

The rebels struck a legitimate target, a military compund, that happened to be near a hotel hosting UN officials and RT. No UN or RT personnel were injured, there are no reports of damage to UN or RT property. I know of no evidence they were targeted. The hotel itself only suffered minor damage. The UN and RT knowingly sent their people and property to a war zone, collateral damage is to be expected but in this case did not occur.

The explosion wounded three people, but international observers tasked with monitoring the situation in Syria are safe and unharmed, state media said. Khaled al-Masri, a U.N. spokesman in Damascus, confirmed that U.N. observers were staying in the hotel but could not immediately confirm their condition.

Sander van Hoorn, a correspondent for NOS Dutch radio and TV, told CNN the blast came from small fuel truck inside a military compound and the hotel sustained minor damage. He was about 400 meters, or a quarter mile, away from the blast.


Burnt vehicles are seen after a bomb exploded at a military site near a hotel used by United Nations observers in Damascus on Wednesday


The Syrian regime so loved by Corbett, RT and the forum's resident bible thumper, attacked and killed civilians today, but they are heathens so the latter is unlikely to object:

AZAZ, Syria — The Syrian fighter jets swooped in low over the rebel-held town of Azaz Wednesday in two bombing runs that sent panicked civilians fleeing for cover and reduced homes to rubble. Associated Press reporters who witnessed the air raids near the Turkish border saw at least eight dead including a baby and dozens wounded, most of them women and children.

One man was pulled bloodied but alive from the wreckage of destroyed homes.

"God is great! God is great!" yelled his rescuers as he emerged. Then they laid him in a blanket and carried him to a pickup truck.

Nearby, a woman sat on the pile of bricks that once was her home, cradling a dead baby. Two other bodies lay next to her, covered in blankets.


Some 15 simple, concrete homes were reduced to a huge expanse of rubble. Scores of men ran to the area, digging for people buried underneath the debris. One group brought a generator and an electrical saw to cut through rebar. A short time later, they found a man, his clothes torn and limbs covered with blood.


Wednesday's bombings did not appear to hit specific rebel targets, though one of the sites was about one kilometer (mile) away from the local rebels' political and media offices.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

POST #8 The bully has many that say its isnt a bully.....21 Trillion is secret accounts and its the bully.......of course there are many paid off newspundits and false bloggers....(Gaal)


Interview By Nun In Ireland Reveals Atrocities Against Christians In Syria (MUST WATCH VIDEO)



Syrian troops free journalists kidnapped by rebels


Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Create New...