The British Daily Star = Western Troops are inside Syria

[Steven Gaal]

_{There's A Reason Why All Of The Reports About Benghazi Are So Confusing}

_{Michael Kelley | Nov. 3, 2012, 10:28 PM}

_{Read more: http://www.businessi...1#ixzz2BFcaopsK}

_{At this point it's clear that the U.S. had something to hide at Benghazi, and that's why reports coming out of the Libyan city have been so confusing.}

_{Two key details about the the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans cannot be underestimated.}

_{"The U.S. effort in Benghazi was at its heart a CIA operation," officials briefed on intelligence told the Wall Street Journal, and there's evidence that U.S. agents—particularly murdered U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens—were at least aware of heavy weapons moving from Libya to Syrian rebels.}

_{WSJ reports that the State Department presence in Benghazi "provided diplomatic cover" for the previously hidden CIA mission, which involved finding and repurchasing heavy weaponry looted from Libyan government arsenals. These weapons are presumably from Muammar Gaddafi's stock of about 20,000 portable heat-seeking missiles, the bulk of which were}

_{surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles.}

_{What's odd is that a Libyan ship—which reportedly weighed 400 tons and included SA-7s—docked in southern Turkey on Sept. 6 and its cargo ended up in the hands of Syrian rebels. The man who organized that shipment, Tripoli Military Council head Abdelhakim Belhadj, worked directly with Stevens during the Libyan revolution.}

_{Stevens' last meeting on Sept. 11 was with Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin, and a source told Fox News that Stevens was in Benghazi "tonegotiate a weapons transfer in an effort to get SA-7 missiles out of the hands of Libya-based extremists."}

_{Since Stevens and his staff served as "diplomatic cover" for the CIA—only seven of more than 30 Americans evacuated from Benghazi worked for the State Department—the spy agency would certainly know about heavy weapons and Libyan jihadists flooding into Syria if Stevens did.}

_{Given that most of the weapons going to hard-line jihadists in Syria are U.S.-made and are being handed out by the CIA, it's not a stretch to wonder if the CIA is indirectly arming Syrian rebels with heavy weapons as well.}

_{If President Obama's position is to refrain from arming rebels with heavy weapons, but regime change in Syria is advantageous, then a covert CIA operation with plausible deniability seems to be the only answer. It's a dicey dance, especially if it's exposed.}

_{In an article titled "Petraeus’s Quieter Style at C.I.A. Leaves Void on Libya Furor," Scott Shane of the The New York Times notes that CIA Director David Petraeus has "managed the delicate task of supporting rebels in Syria’s civil war while trying to prevent the arming of anti-American extremists."}

_{In regards to Benghazi, Petraeus has "stayed away in an effort to conceal the agency's role in collecting intelligence and providing security," the WSJ reported, noting that during the attack "some officials at State and the Pentagon were largely in the dark about the CIA's role."}

_{SEE ALSO: How US Ambassador Chris Stevens May Have Been Linked To Jihadist Rebels In Syria >}

_{Read more: http://www.businessi...1#ixzz2BFcRLdhl}

Edited November 4, 2012 by Steven Gaal

[Len Colby]

And?

[Steven Gaal]

_{Now we have CIA arming FSA in a a non-MSM limited hangout. So whats the big deal ?? Cause Libya hub-hub leads to AQ rat lines to Syria ( pointed out in this thread). So the politics of Libya hubbub is a cover for CIA/AQ connections in Syria. As we speak State Dept is pulling away from current Anti -Assad Syrian movement. If however this leaves AQ in charge in Syria and Romney wins we have the greatist of all political charges....who lost China ?,who lost Cuba ? ,who lost Vietnam ?,who lost Iran ? ..WHO LOST SYRIA ???? ...the muslim from Africa who hates America}

_#########

_{"tonegotiate a weapons transfer in an effort to get SA-7 missiles out of the hands of Libya-based extremists." (to give to AQ in Syria,GAAL IMHO)}

Edited November 13, 2012 by Steven Gaal

[Steven Gaal]

November 12, 2012

source ALA

British SAS Training Rebels For Assassination of Assad

As British Prime Minister David Cameron prepares to use the Royal Air Force (RAF) in Syria to put an end to the massacres the Syrian regime is committing throughout the country, British Special Forces are training rebels to assassinate the Syrian president and his commanders, the London Daily Star reported.

UK government sources told the newspaper that British assassination squads are in Syria to train rebels on how to target President Bashar al-Assad and his warlords. Some troops hailing from Britain Special Air Service (SAS), Special Boat Section (SBS) and the Airborne Infantry of the British Army (Paras) are also in the country to teach Anti-Assad fighters techniques on the accurate use of weapons and explosives against Assad regime forces, the sources said.

Unlike the previous position of the United States and Western countries not to arm the Syrian rebels, U.S. president Barack Obama and Cameron are considering to intervene in Syria and to enforce a no-fly zone, the sources added.

Earlier this week, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad showed defiance when he appeared on Russian television warning against any intervention. Assad promised to take the fight till the end. “I’m Syrian, I was made in Syrian and I have to live in Syria and die in Syria,” he said.

During his visit to Syrian refugee camps in Jordan, Cameron urged the United States to pressure the international community to offer more help to Syrians who were forced to leave their country due to ongoing violence.

“Right here in Jordan I am hearing appalling stories of what has happened inside Syria and one of the first things I want to talk to Obama about is how we must do more to try and solve this crisis,” Cameron said.

Since March 2011, an overall death toll of more than 37,000 was recorded by the monitoring group, the Observatory of Human Rights. The New York Times said more than 20,000 members of the Syrian army have defected and joined the Free Syrian Army across the country.

[Len Colby]

And?

[Steven Gaal]

And?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Is Colby making a USA TV ad joke ??

Britain could intervene militarily in Syria in months, UK's top general suggests

Britain could intervene militarily in Syria in the next few months, the country’s most senior general has said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9670289/Britain-could-intervene-militarily-in-Syria-in-months-UKs-top-general-suggests.html

[Len Colby]

And?

[Steven Gaal]

^{Why Americans Must End America’s Self-Generating Wars}

^{by Peter Dale Scott}

^{Drawing on historical precedents, Peter Dale Scott exposes the contradictions and perverse effects of the "war on terror", which adds insecurity to instability and increases the number of terrorists it pretends to be fighting.}

^{The most urgent political challenge to the world today is how to prevent the so-called “pax Americana” from progressively degenerating, like the 19th-century so-called “pax Britannica” before it, into major global warfare. I say “so-called,” because each “pax,” in its final stages, became less and less peaceful, less and less orderly, more and more a naked imposition of belligerent competitive power based on inequality.}

^{To define this prevention of war as an achievable goal may sound pretentious. But the necessary steps to be taken are above all achievable here at home in America. And what is needed is not some radical and untested new policy, but a much-needed realistic reassessment and progressive scaling back of two discredited policies that are themselves new, and demonstrably counterproductive.}

^{I am referring above all to America’s so-called War on Terror. American politics, both foreign and domestic, are being increasingly deformed by a war on terrorism that is counter-productive, actually increasing the number of perpetrators and victims of terrorist attacks. It is also profoundly dishonest, in that Washington’s policies actually contribute to the funding and arming of the jihadists that it nominally opposes.}

^{Above all the War on Terror is a self-generating war, because, as many experts have warned, it produces more terrorists than it eliminates. And it has become inextricably combined with America’s earlier self-generating and hopelessly unwinnable war, the so-called War on Drugs.}

^{The two self-generating wars have in effect become one. By launching a War on Drugs in Colombia and Mexico, America has contributed to a parastate of organized terror in Colombia (the so-called AUC, United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia) and an even bloodier reign of terror in Mexico (with 50,000 killed in the last six years). [1] By launching a War on Terror in Afghanistan in 2001, America has contributed to a doubling of opium production there, making Afghanistan now the source of 90 percent of the world’s heroin and most of the world’s hashish. [2]}

^{Americans should be aware of the overall pattern that drug production repeatedly rises where America intervenes militarily – Southeast Asia in the 1950s and 60s, Colombia and Afghanistan since then. (Opium cultivation also increased in Iraq after the 2003 US invasion.) [3] And the opposite is also true: where America ceases to intervene militarily, notably in Southeast Asia since the 1970s, drug production declines. [4]}

^{Both of America’s self-generating wars are lucrative to the private interests that lobby for their continuance. [5] At the same time, both of these self-generating wars contribute to increasing insecurity and destabilization in America and in the world.}

^{Thus, by a paradoxical dialectic, America’s New World Order degenerates progressively into a New World Disorder. And at home the seemingly indomitable national security state, beset by the problems of poverty, income disparity, and drugs, becomes, progressively, a national insecurity state and one gripped by political gridlock.}

^{The purpose of this paper is to argue, using the analogy of British errors in the late 19th century, for a progressive return to a more stable and just international order, by a series of concrete steps, some of them incremental. Using the decline of Britain as an example, I hope to demonstrate that the solution cannot be expected from the current party political system, but must come from people outside that system.}

^{MORE SEE LINK http://www.voltairen...icle176501.html}

Edited November 14, 2012 by Steven Gaal