By Greg Palast
Monday, 15. September 2014
[Dear American reader: This is about Scotland, whose capital is not "Brigadoon," It is a country but not a nation, voting next week on whether to dis-unite from The United Kingdom, though it wishes to keep the King (or Queen as may be). Alex Salmond, First Minister of the not-a-nation, wants to unhook from Britain but keep British coinage—and keep Scotland in the European Union. So, I ask…]
I mean, what’s the bloody point? Why pretend to declare your independence only to chain yourself to a coin with a British snout on it and simultaneously beg to become a colony of Angela Merkel’s Fifth Reich, aka the European Union?
I realize that, as an American and an economist, I carry into this debate a double dollop of disrespect from Scottish readers. But, with thousands of miles of salt water separating me equally from London and Edinburgh, I think I can see clearly what you miss from having your head inside the fish bowl.
There are two overwhelming and undeniable advantages for Scotland to declare its sovereign independence: to end both Scotland’s damaging enchainment to the British pound and the debilitating tyranny of European Union membership.
Yet, weirdly, inexplicably and inexcusably, Alex Salmond promises to throw away the two most valuable benefits of national self-determination.
First, the pound. In all the hoo-hah over whether Scotland can keep the coin with the Queen’s schnozzola on it, no one seems to have asked, Why in the world would Scotland want this foreign coinage?
The Bank of England’s singular task at this moment is to figure out how to counteract the disastrous macroeconomic consequences of George Osborne’s austerity fixations and the bleating demands of City bankers. The only time when the Bank of England gives any consideration to Scotland’s economy is when a BOE governor checks the little gauge which tells them how much of Scotland’s oil they have left to spend.
Why should the interest rates, exchange rates and monetary supply of a resource nation like Scotland be subject to the needs and whimsies of the rusting realm to your south? According to the well-accepted theory of Optimum Currency Areas, Scotland would be best off adopting the Canadian dollar, also a damp, salmon-choked oil exporter or, better yet, the Vietnamese dong.
No nation controls its economic destiny until it controls its currency—a concept easier to understand if you read it in Greek.
And Scotland’s own coin, backed by taxing power over its oil extractors, would undoubtedly be stronger than sterling and more flexible alone. Control over its own currency will enable Scotland to cut interest rates when local manufacturing falters while the Bank of England is raising rates to fight a speculative bubble in The City.
To give you a head start, my daughter has designed your new currency (above).
Second, why this pathological need to remain subjugated by the European Union? Is there some extraordinarily wise legislation crafted by the solons of the European Parliament? Does Scotland need the guiding hand of Angela Merkel, Marie LePen and the Italian premier du jour? Does Scotland fear a sudden shortage of Bulgarian plumbers?
The USA trades with Europe without giving Lithuania veto power over trade terms. And as Swiss nationals will tell you, a lack of an EU passport will not cause you to be strip-searched on your way to the Costa del Sol. Disadvantages of EU membership: loss of control over terms of trade, and policies of industrial regulation, immigration and environmental control. And sorry, Mr. Salmond, you will indeed have to join the euro, at which point, Germany’s finance minister will draft your budgets.
So that is my question to my friends north of Hadrian’s wall. Why demand your independence from Britain only to insist on keeping your shackles? If you too find attachment to your chains nonsensical, then shouldn’t your first referendum be a vote to declare Scottish independence from Alex Salmond?
Read MORE here
Documents Revealed: ISIS Caliphate working for America and Israel.
Since 2011, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) has waged a relentless war within Syrian territory against what it has said from the very beginning was an invasion of heavily armed, foreign-backed sectarian extremists. In retrospect, the transparently ludicrous nature of articles like the Guardian’s “Syria’s rebels unite to oust Assad and push for democracy” is self-evident. The article would lay out Syria’s claims side by side with the West’s narrative by stating:
In one of the fiercest clashes of the insurrection, Syrian troops finally took control of the town of Rastan after five days of intense fighting with army defectors who sided with protesters. Syrian authorities said they were fighting armed terrorist gangs.
In retrospect, and upon examining the obvious lay of Syria’s battlefields today, it is clear Syrian authorities were right.
Shortly after NATO carried out successful “regime change” in Libya in 2011 under the false pretext of a “humanitarian intervention,” sectarian-driven mercenaries it armed, funded, and provided air cover for in Libya began steadily streaming into Syria via its northern border with NATO-member Turkey.
Terrorists from the US State Department designated terrorist organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) officially made contact with terrorists fighting in Syria to offer them weapons, cash, training, and fighters. The London Telegraph would report in their article, “Leading Libyan Islamist met Free Syrian Army opposition group,” that:
The meetings came as a sign of a growing ties between Libya’s fledgling government and the Syrian opposition. The Daily Telegraph on Saturday revealed that the new Libyan authorities had offered money and weapons to the growing insurgency against Bashar al-Assad.
Mr Belhaj also discussed sending Libyan fighters to train troops, the source said.
Indeed, at the highest levels, even as far back as 2011-2012, the so-called “moderate rebels” were entwined with Al Qaeda, vindicating the Syrian government’s statements regarding its struggle against foreign-backed terrorism, not a “pro-democracy uprising.”
Today, the West has expunged all rhetoric regarding “pro-democracy,” with sectarian extremism clearly driving militancy across both sides of Syria’s borders with Lebanon and Iraq. Instead, the West has been resigned to attempts in differentiating between groups like Al Qaeda’s al Nusra franchise and its Islamic State (ISIS) counterparts – claiming the latter must be addressed more urgently, even at the cost of cooperating with the former – yet another US State Department designated terrorist organization.
Syria’s Long War
And while the fierce fighting in Syria may have began in 2011, the war on foreign-backed sectarian extremism began a generation ago. From 1976 to 1982, Syrian President Bashar al Assad’s father, Hafez al-Assad, waged war on the heavily militarized Muslim Brotherhood. Upon breaking the back of the organization in Syria, it fled and was later reconstituted by the United States and Saudi Arabia into what would become Al Qaeda in the mountains of Afghanistan to fight the Soviet Union.
In the US Army’s West Point Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) 2008 report titled, “Bombers, Bank Accounts and Bleedout: al-Qa’ida’s Road In and Out of Iraq,” it stated unequivocally that (emphasis added):
During the first half of the 1980s the role of foreign fighters in Afghanistan was negligible and was largely un‐noticed by outside observers. The flow of volunteers from the Arab heartland countries was just a trickle in the early 1980s, though there were more significant links between the mujahidin and Central Asian Muslims—especially Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Kazakhs. Individuals like the above‐mentioned Abu’l‐Walid were recruited in the early years via ad hoc outreach campaigns initiated from within Afghanistan, but by 1984, the resources being poured into the conflict by other countries—especially Saudi Arabia and the United States—had become much greater, as had the effectiveness and sophistication of the recruitment efforts. Only then did foreign observers begin to remark on the presence of outside volunteers.
The repression of Islamist movements in the Middle East contributed to the acceleration of Arab fighters leaving for Afghanistan. One important process was the Syrian regime of Hafez Assad’s brutal campaign against the Jihadi movement in Syria, led by the “Fighting Vanguard” (al‐Tali’a al‐Muqatila) of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood. The crackdown initiated an exodus of Vanguard militants to neighboring Arab states. By 1984, large numbers of these men began making their way from exile in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Jordan toward southeastern Afghanistan to fight the Soviets.
Despite terms like “repression” and “brutal campaign,” it is clear that the CTC is referring to heavily armed, militarized, extremist movements the US itself has allegedly waged “repressive, brutal” campaigns against across the planet, including in neighboring Iraq. It is also clear that Syria has been fighting sectarian extremism for decades, with the current protracted violence simply being the latest chapter. It is also clear that the United States and Saudi Arabia have, admittedly so, been propping up regional extremism in the form of both the Muslim Brotherhood and its various armed factions, as well as Al Qaeda, and now most recently, ISIS.
Syria is battling a long war against proxy imperialism brought upon it through heavily armed terrorists who serve both as a mercenary force, as well as a pretext, if all else fails, for its state-sponsors to intervene directly to stop widespread chaos of their own design.
There is Only One Logical Ally in the War on ISIS
If the West was truly interested in fighting ISIS, it can find only one ally in the region – the Syrian Arab Army that has fought ISIS and its affiliates fiercely since 2011, and its predecessors for decades.
That the West instead proposes further arming and funding so-called “moderates” from which ISIS, Al Nusra and an innumerable amount of other extremist factions have risen from exposes a lack of sincerity and in fact, utter duplicity amidst its intentions in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. It is a geopolitical arsonist seeking to extinguish the flames of its crime by emptying a barrel of gasoline directly upon the raging inferno.
Indeed, since 2011, the so-called “moderates” of the “Free Syrian Army” were openly collaborating with LIFG, a US designated terrorist organization. It would also be confirmed that the “Free Syrian Army” was fighting alongside (if not entirely a component of) Al Qaeda’s al Nusra franchise all throughout territory now allegedly held by ISIS. ISIS in fact did not mutate from idealistic moderates – only the narrative covering up the existence and extent of ISIS’ foreign-backed operation in Syria and now in Iraq and Lebanon has changed. From the very beginning, and in fact, proceeding the ongoing war in Syria, a sectarian driven, genocidal mercenary force designed for ravaging the entire region on behalf of the US and its regional partners was the stated plan as early as 2007.
Veteran journalist and Pulitzer Prize-winner Seymour Hersh warned in a prophetic 2007 New Yorker article titled, “The Redirection Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” that (emphasis added):
To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
It can no longer be denied that the West is the cause of, not the solution for, the ongoing chaos now slowly burning the entire Middle East and beyond.
It can also not be denied that the only true force in the region fighting Al Qaeda and the myriad of aliases it is operating under, is the Syrian government with the backing of its allies in Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, and even as far as Russia. For the West to pose as “fighting” ISIS by creating a coalition consisting of the very nations sponsoring the terrorist organization, illustrates the audacity afforded to the West by its immense unwarranted power and influence – power and influence that must be ultimately reckoned with in order to truly resolve the violence in the Middle East and prevent similar chaos from being instigated elsewhere around the world.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
Read MORE at: : http://journal-neo.org/2014/09/15/someone-s-already-fighting-isis-the-syrian-arab-army/
More at WHO WHAT WHY
A group that wants New York City voters to authorize a new investigation into the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11 won a significant victory this week.
The City of New York conceded that the High-Rise Safety Initiative has enough signatures to qualify its petition for an investigation of all high-rise building collapses since the 9/11 attacks. Any credible inquiry would include WTC Building 7. (For our earlier story on the initiative, please click here)
The victory comes as part of a trial which started last month. The High-Rise Safety Initiative sued to overturn the City’s determination that not enough of the signatures it collected were bona fide, and that the legal language of the petition is not valid.
So with the first reason for the City’s rejection out of the way, the High-Rise Building Initiative now must persuade the court that its petition language is legitimate.
If it can, then voters will decide on the November ballot whether the baffling collapse of Building 7 will get another look. That could answer nagging questions about the building, including how fires caused the building to fall to the ground so swiftly.
|Image: Despite the NSA’s immense resources and all encompassing
spying activities both abroad and domestically, it appears to miss many
even obvious world events unfolding. It is likely this “ignorance” is
feigned to afford plausible deniability between global chaos and US
The U.S. government is tracking and gathering intelligence on as many as 300 Americans who are fighting side by side with the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria and are poised to become a major threat to the homeland, according to senior U.S. officials.
Officials say concern is widespread in Washington that radicalized foreign fighters could return to the homeland and commit terrorist attacks with skills acquired overseas, according to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the information. Those concerns were heightened by the disclosure Tuesday that a California man was killed fighting alongside militants with the group, also known as ISIS.
It is incredible because the United States’ National Security Agency (NSA) has not only been tapping and recording phone conversations of Americans for years, but also tracking phone locations as well . How is it that this massive, invasive, illegal, abhorrent surveillance control grid can be put in place, sold to the public as a necessity to “protect Americans” and “national security,” yet miss entire battalions of Americans signing up for and joining overseas, a terrorist organization like the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS)?
If the very scenarios the NSA uses to justify its abhorrent means have unfolded unimpeded, revealed only by “chance” with the passport of an American turning up in the pockets of dead terrorists upon an alleged battlefield in Syria, either the NSA’s existence serves another purpose, or the narrative we are being fed regarding the true nature of ISIS is a lie, or the most likely scenario – both.
Not the First Fit of Feigned Ignorance
|Image: A tank flying Al Qaeda’s flag – it is difficult to believe the US when
it claims it did not foresee ISIS’ emergence when the CIA itself had been
operating in ISIS territory for the past 3-4 years.
The very appearance of ISIS on the battlefields of Iraq and Syria allegedly took the US intelligence community by surprise. The unlikely narrative was designed entirely to maintain plausible deniability between ISIS mercenaries and their paymasters in Washington, London, Brussels, Riyadh, Doha, and Ankara respectively. In reality, headlines over the past 3-4 years such as, “C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition ,” “First Syria rebels armed and trained by CIA ‘on way to battlefield’ ,” “Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A. ,” and “Official says CIA-funded weapons have begun to reach Syrian rebels; rebels deny receipt ,” indicate precisely how and from where the immense, multinational ISIS mercenary force originated.
The US has yet to account how its CIA could be operating within territory held by ISIS – including all along the Turkish-Syrian border and within Turkish territory itself – and neither know the existence, movements, or intentions of ISIS forces.
Between NSA surveillance at home, and the CIA operating side-by-side with ISIS and other Al Qaeda-linked terrorist organizations, the sudden revelations that Americans are fighting within ISIS’ ranks seem to be more a matter of politically-motivated propaganda, timed perfectly to justify US military intervention in Syria, than a case of yet another convenient lapse in American intelligence.
Washington Menacing America With Its Own Mercenaries
Indeed, in order for the US to begin military operations in Syria under the guise of fighting ISIS forces, it must first demonstrate the threat ISIS poses to America. Already, likely false flags serving ISIS no benefit, but giving the US the green light to begin military operations in Syria have begun making their rounds across Western media. A CBS/Associated Press story titled, “Former Deputy CIA Director: ‘I Would Not Be Surprised’ If ISIS Member Shows Up To US Mall Tomorrow With AK-47 ,” claims:
“The short-term concern is the Americans that have gone to fight with ISIS and the west Europeans that have gone to fight with ISIS could be trained and directed by ISIS to come to the United States to conduct small-scale attacks,” Morell stated. “If an ISIS member showed up at a mall in the United States tomorrow with an AK-47 and killed a number of Americans, I would not be surprised.”
Morell warned that over the long-term the extremist group could be planning for a 9/11-style attack that killed thousands of Americans.
The same report would also claim:
The United States launched a new barrage of airstrikes Wednesday against the Islamic State extremist group that beheaded American journalist James Foley and that has seized a swath of territory across Iraq and Syria. President Barack Obama vowed relentless pursuit of the terrorists and the White House revealed that the U.S. had launched a secret rescue mission inside Syria earlier this summer that failed to rescue Foley and other Americans still being held hostage.
The current justification for ongoing preparations against Syria has been the Foley execution video, which experts have agreed upon was staged. The London Telegraph in its article, “Foley murder video ‘may have been staged’,” would state:
Analysts believe the British jihadi in the video may not have been James Foley’s killer, although it is accepted that the journalist was murdered.
Of course, if the video was staged, and every claim about it made by ISIS thus far proven a fabrication, no evidence at all suggests when and where, or even if Foley was murdered. If he was, no evidence suggests by whom. And despite this revelation, the US continues building momentum to intervene in Syria.
Imperialism Hiding Behind Righteousness
|Image: Image accompanying Seymour Hersh’s
prophetic 2007 report, “The Redirection ,” exposing
a US-Saudi-Israeli conspiracy to arm terrorists
aligned to Al Qaeda to fight Iran and its allies in a
cataclysmic regional sectarian bloodbath – a
scenario now fully realized.
Several years and hundreds of millions of dollars later, ISIS is clearly the product of long-laid Western designs to overthrow the Syrian government and reorder the Middle East as warned by the prophetic 2007 9-page report titled, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism? ,” written by Seymour Hersh and published in the New Yorker. In it Hersh warned about a cataclysmic sectarian war that would ravage the entire region, targeting not only Syria and neighboring Lebanon, but also Iran. He also warned that it was an intentionally engineered conspiracy between the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, with many smaller regional players serving in supporting roles.
With the emergence of ISIS creating the very cataclysmic sectarian conflagration warned about in Hersh’s 2007 report, with no other credible explanation to account for ISIS’ incredible size, strength, and success beyond multinational state-sponsorship, Hersh’s reportage has once again been vindicated.
It is clear that the US has created ISIS, and is to this day using it as both a means to target and attack its enemies across the Middle East, as well as serve as a pretext for direct US military intervention when proxy wars flounder. It is also being used in a third context – on the domestic front – as a manufactured and perpetual threat with which to further justify the militarization and centralization of America’s police forces and the continued expansion of the NSA’s invasive domestic spying.
It is also clear that all of this adds up not to promoting freedom and democracy abroad while ensuring national security at home, but rather achieving full-spectrum domination in regions abroad and over the population at home. It is naked hegemony and imperialism playing dress-up in the wardrobe of righteousness.
Read More HERE
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “ New Eastern Outlook” .
Odessa police pays no attention to man shooting at the football fans.
by Stephen Lendman
Ukraine is the epicenter of European fascist reemergence. May’s Odessa massacre revealed its ugly face.
Kiev bore full responsibility. What happened was no-holds-barred barbarism.
Reports at the time suppressed. Premeditated mass murder was committed as planned. More on this below.
On September 9, Itar Tass said Odessa-based media accused Kiev of fabricating its report.
“(W)itnesses’ evidence proving the involvement of National Security and Defense Council head Andryi Paruby” was excluded.
Kiev’s report suppressed “evidence of numerous witnesses about involvement in the riots of about 500 (Maidan) radicals…”
Regional governor Vladimir Nemrovsky “accommodated (them) in Odessa.”
Kiev’s report excluded Odessa branch Center Right Ukraine Democratic Alliance for Reform (UDAR) leadership names.
Former world heavyweight boxing champion/current Kiev major Vitali Klitschko heads it.
Other names are omitted. They include Maidan veteran Andrei Yusov and other Maidan leaders.
“…Radical nationalists…set ablaze a tent camp of pro-federalism activists and the House of Trade Unions (TUH).”
Kiev wrongfully blamed “pro-Russian activists” for neo-Nazi-infested Maidan radicals’ crimes.
Its report lied calling it “impossible” to determine cause of death of Odessa victims “due to the lack of state-of-the-art equipment.”
Verifiable evidence proves otherwise. Neo-Nazi Right Sector thugs set Odessa’s Trade Union House (TUH) ablaze.
People were trapped inside. Dozens were massacred. Scores more were injured. Many were missing.
They were either dead or in neo-Nazi hands. Early reports way underestimated what happened. It was multiples worse than reported.
Neo-Nazis isolated Odessans inside the TUH. A largely unwitnessed massacre followed.
Setting the building ablaze was strategy. It was done to conceal mass murder. Ordinary Ukrainians were slaughtered in cold blood.
Nearby tents were set on fire. Doing so preceded what followed. Right Sector thugs positioned themselves inside the TUH. They were there in advance.
They were armed and dangerous. Police did nothing to intervene. They conspired with fascist killers. So did Odessan firefighters.
They only appeared when TUH’s entrance doors burned through. Its building was five stories. From outside, fire was only visible in a single room.
Bodies were shown on upper floors untouched by fire. How did they get there? Who bore responsibility?
They were murdered in advance. Things were staged. They were made to seem like fire consumed them.
Corpses were dragged from where they died. People perished inside from gunshot wounds, strangling and beatings.
Some were thrown from windows. They didn’t jump. It bears repeating. Setting TUH ablaze masked what happened. Fire didn’t kill activists inside. Neo-Nazi hoodlums did.
Some corpses had burnt heads and shoulders only. Clothes they wore showed no signs of fire.
Someone doused their shoulders and heads with “flammable stuff.” Hands and wrists were burned to the bone.
Photos showed strange whitewash floor markings. It was powder from extinguishers.
Right Sector thugs used it on people they killed. They did so to protect themselves from fire and carbon monoxide poisoning.
Hardwood floors showed no signs of fire damage. Victims were murdered other ways.
Photographic evidence was damning. So were independent videos. They showed mass murder by means other than fire and/or carbon monoxide poisoning.
Some bodies had multiple gun shot wounds to the head. They were executed in cold blood at point blank range.
A pregnant woman was strangled with an electric wire. Hundreds were killed. As many as 300 or more.
Most were hacked to death with axes or clubbed to death with bats. Some were shot. Others were thrown from windows.
Survivor Tatyana Ivananko said anti-Kiev activists tried hiding from Right Sector thugs. They barricaded themselves for protection.
Right Sector thugs were inside the TUH before fire started. They wouldn’t let anyone out.
Most floors weren’t affected by fire. Victims died by other means, said Tatyanya.
At the time, damning videos circulated online. One showed a woman atop the TUH. She screamed for help.
Street-level thugs mocked her. She’s “not a woman,” they said. “She’s a separatist. Beat the s..t out of her so she finally shuts up.”
Acting prosecuting general Oleg Makhnitsky lied. It’s too early to know who set the building ablaze, he said.
Clear evidence proved otherwise. Coverup and Big Lies concealed it. Mass murder was ignored. Accountability remains denied.
Fascists operate this way. America is a hotbed of injustice. So is Ukraine. No-holds-barred barbarism reflects official policy.
Washington manipulates things covertly. Coup-appointed putschists are convenient stooges.
They committed gruesome atrocities. They murdered hundreds of Odessans in cold blood.
Survivors won’t forget May 2. Neo-Nazi Right Sector thugs planned well in advance. Western leaders buried truth. So did MSM scoundrels.
A survivor explained what she saw. “When I was on the Cathedral Square, I personally saw with my own eyes how a man of maybe around 40 – they cut his throat.”
“They pushed him on the ground and cut his throat – and they shouted, ‘Glory to Ukraine.’ ”
“Everything happened so quickly. Someone said that
we all have to get inside the Trades Union building.”
“Everyone quickly began carrying everything into the building
and reinforcing everything inside.”
“When I was on the second floor, I saw many of the pro-Maidan (supporters) gathering around. They surrounded us.”
“They were all around the building.” A fire was “ignited…I went downstairs and heard shooting inside the building.”
A man “was shouting that the Right Sector was coming. Everybody run.”
“I ran into an office. Two men were brought in. They had suffocated. They were dead.”
“There was not a sound other than the shots. (A) couple of minutes passed. People inside said “(l)et us in. Let us in. We are with you. They are killing us.”
“I was in such a shock. I can’t even describe this to you. I did not expect that anyone could rejoice so much over killing someone.”
“My ears were wringing. We were screaming. We were just begging them not to kill us.”
“They killed everyone they saw. Everyone at once. A man was lying right by my feet. He was covered in blood. They beat him with bats.”
“They took one woman away. I don’t know where. Then as soon as they took me out of an office, I begged them to let me go because I have a small child.”
“They could not care less…I stood there. I saw everything. They were dragging people. I don’t know where they were taking them.”
“When they took me out of an office, I was walking on corpses. Then we went on the stairs and there I only saw blood.”
“I saw bodies in the hallway. They were dragging them. They began shooting.”
“People inside tried to get out to safety. Some of them were shot.”
Somehow the eyewitness survived. Most inside the TUH perished. Most others who got out were murdered.
It bears repeating. Right Sector thugs killed hundreds of Odessans in cold blood.
They shot them. They hacked them to death with axes. They beat them to death with bats.
They threw people out windows. Survivors able to escape were attacked outside. Most were murdered in cold blood.
Official accounts suppressed what happened. MSM scoundrels regurgitated official Big Lies.
Whitewash substituted for truth and full disclosure. Fascist regimes operate this way. America’s newest colony is one of the worst.
It bears repeating. It’s the epicenter of European fascist reemergence.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached firstname.lastname@example.org.
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com .
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.
by Stephen Lendman
Washington wants control over all former Soviet republics and Warsaw Pact countries.
It wants pro-Western governance replacing sovereign Russian independence.
It’s part of its longstanding world dominance agenda. It wants all challengers eliminated.
On Monday, Vladimir Putin and Petro Poroshenko met in Minsk. It was their first official bilateral meeting.
They discussed relevant geopolitical issues. Key is resolving Southeastern Ukraine’s ongoing conflict.
Putin urges doing it peacefully. Poroshenko’s continues war without mercy. He deplores democracy.
He wants freedom fighting self-defense forces crushed. He wants unchallenged hardline rule.
He lied saying his visit was “to stop the bloodshed and to start the process of finding a political compromise. The interests of the people of Donbass should and will be taken into account.”
His actions speak louder than words. Peace is an executive decision away.
He can make it by calling off his dogs. He can choose diplomacy over confrontation.
He can order a ceasefire. He can do so straightaway. He can meet face-to-face with Southeastern Ukrainian leaders. He can respect their democratic credentials. He can listen to their demands.
Washington supports and encourages his dirty war. Its February coup helped elevate him to power.
He’s a billionaire war criminal. He’s anti-democratic, fascist, neoliberal, belligerent and lawless.
He’s opposite what Ukrainians deserve. He OK’d war without mercy. He did so straightaway in office.
He’s beholden to Western interests. Behind the scenes, Washington pulls the strings. He supports its anti-Russian policy.
Monday talks went nowhere. It didn’t surprise. Ukraine’s coup-appointed prime minister Aseniy Yatsenyuk called bilateral ones with Putin fruitless.
He called NATO “our partner. We expect the Western countries and NATO to provide practical assistance,” he said.
“We also expect decisions to be made at the (September 4-5) NATO summit” in Wales.
Putin’s worldview is polar opposite Poroshenkno’s. His Minsk’s speech stressed Russian respect for inviolable national sovereignty.
“Russia has always respected the sovereign choice of any nation to organize its political life and make all sorts of unions, both military and economic, and we will continue to do so,” he said.
“However, we hope that this will not be detrimental to other participants in international communication, and not at our cost.”
He believes crisis conditions “can’t be resolved by further escalation of the military scenario, without considering the best interests of the southeastern regions of the country, without a peace dialogue with their representatives.”
“(W)e are ready to have an exchange on (Ukraine’s) critical situation…which, I am certain, cannot be resolved…without a peaceful dialogue with these regions’ representatives.”
Talks produced no significant breakthroughs. They weren’t expected. Not when Washington sabotaged them without even attending.
Not when it prioritizes Russia bashing. Not when it considers Putin public enemy No. 1.
Not when it chooses confrontation over peaceful conflict resolution. Not when it wants Russia marginalized, weakened, isolated, contained and co-opted.
Not when it wants pro-Western governance replacing its sovereign independence. Not when it risks war to achieve it.
Putin pledged all-out efforts for peace. It “must be launched as soon as possible,” he stressed.
He acts in good faith. He wants to build trust. At the same time, it’s not Moscow’s prerogative to propose ceasefire terms between Kiev and Southeastern self-defense forces.
“We didn’t substantively discuss that, and we, Russia, can’t substantively discuss the conditions for a ceasefire, or agreements between Kiev, Donetsk and Luhansk, ” he stressed.
“That’s not our business. It’s up to Ukraine itself. Certain agreements were reached, he added.
He discussed the urgency of providing Lugansk and Donetsk with humanitarian aid.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov expects Russia to send another convoy this week. He suggested more may follow.
Dire conditions demand it. Many lives are at stake. It remains to be seen if Kiev will obstruct and delay like last time.
Given how often it falsely accuses Russia of directly aiding Southeastern Ukraine freedom fighters, it’s hard imagining things will go smoothly.
On Monday, Ukrainian NSDC Information-Analytical Center spokesman Andriy Lysenko said:
“Yesterday, violation of the airspace of Ukraine was recorded by the army aviation of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in the area of the settlement of Chervony Chaban, Kherson region, where three helicopters of the Russian Federation flew up to 500 meters from the territory of Crimea to the mainland of Ukraine.”
He accused Moscow of spying. At the same time, Yatsenyuk ludicrously said Russia wants Ukraine “fully cut” off from energy supplies.
“We know about (Russia’s) plans…to cut transit in winter – even for the EU member countries,” he said.
He accused Moscow of “global military and global energy security” benefitting Russia at the expense of Ukraine.
He lied claiming “Ukrainian border guards were shelled with unguided rockets from two Mi-24 combat helicopters of the Russian Armed Forces.”
Four border guards were killed and three wounded, he added. Maybe Ukrainian forces killed their own. Maybe self-defense forces deserve credit.
On Wednesday, Lysenko said Russian soldiers illegally crossed Ukraine’s border in armored vehicles and a truck not far from where 10 others were detained on Monday.
Videos were released. They showed men in so-called “camouflage” clothing. Ukraine’s Defense Minister Valeriy Heletey’s Facebook’s post lied, saying:
“Officially, they are on military exercises in various corners of Russia. In reality they are involved in military aggression against Ukraine.”
Areas of the Russian/Ukrainian border aren’t clearly demarcated. Nationals on both sides often cross over unwittingly.
Ukrainian soldiers did so recently. They’ve done it before. Russian authorities send them home without incident.
According to a Russian defense source:
“The servicemen in question were indeed patrolling the Russian-Ukrainian border.”
“They had probably crossed it by mistake through an area which wasn’t manned.”
“As far as we know, there was no resistance during their arrest.”
Putin hadn’t yet received an official Defense Ministry report. “From what I heard,” he said, “they patrolled the border so could have ended up on Ukrainian territory” by mistake.
“But they crossed to us, too, Ukrainian soldiers in armored vehicles. And no problems arose.” Putin hopes Kiev will reciprocate in kind.
If Moscow’s intent was hostile, large numbers of heavily armed forces would have invaded. Nothing of the kind happened.
Western media Big Lies followed. The New York Times said “camouflage(d) (men) identified themselves as members of a Russian airborne division who had been sent into Ukraine in unmarked vehicles.”
“Analysis by Western officials indicates that Russia is orchestrating a multipronged offensive against Ukrainian forces.”
Moscow is “trying to help separatists in eastern Ukraine break the siege of Luhansk…and open a corridor to…Donetsk.”
Fact: Throughout months of conflict, Russia has been discretely neutral.
Fact: No evidence whatever suggests it’s helping Southeastern Ukrainian self-defense forces.
Fact: None shows it’s supplying them weapons and munitions.
Fact: None indicates Russian forces are involved.
Fact: Moscow has gone all-out for peaceful conflict resolution.
Fact: Kiev wages dirty war.
Fact: Washington supports and encourages it.
Fact: Moscow’s involvement sticks to diplomacy and delivering urgently needed humanitarian aid.
Fact: Claims otherwise are false. They stoke conflict in lieu of attempts to resolve it responsibly.
A same day NYT editorial featured Big Lies. It unjustifiably accused Russia of “pretending that it is not in the fray.”
Moscow “blithely denies it is involved in the fighting at all, despite incontrovertible evidence that it is, and seems prepared to stoke the fires until Kiev accepts a political arrangement that would give the eastern regions a veto over any moves toward the West.”
“Mr. Poroshenko is right to avoid an unconditional cease-fire at this time.”
His “challenge…and the West(‘s) is how to persuade Mr. Putin that Russia cannot impose it will on Ukraine through economic and military pressures…”
Fact: Times editors repeatedly turn truth on its head.
Fact: Spurious accusations falsely accuse Moscow of involvement in Southeastern Ukraine fighting.
Fact: Verifiable proof is absent.
Fact: None exists.
Fact: Times editors know it.
Fact: They “blithely” claim otherwise.
Fact: In Minsk, Putin was clear and unequivocal.
Fact: Russia respects Ukrainian sovereignty.
Fact: Putin won’t interfere in its internal affairs.
Fact: “It’s not Moscow’s prerogative to propose ceasefire terms between Kiev and Southeastern self-defense forces,” he said.
Fact: He hasn’t and won’t.
Don’t expect Times editors to explain. Big Lies substitute for accurate reporting and analysis.
Times editors are on the wrong side of history. Western leaders must support Ukraine, they insist.
They should pile on more “sanctions against Russian businesses and financial institutions…”
Endorsing Poroshenko’s opposition to ceasefire shows Times support for premeditated Ukrainian aggression.
It doesn’t surprise. When America wages war or plans one, Times editors march in lockstep.
They back Israel’s genocidal Gaza wars. They support mass murder and destruction.
They ignore rule of law principles. They endorse wrong over right.
They ignore Kiev’s putschist governance. They treat ruling fascists like democrats.
They claim Southeastern Ukrainian freedom fighters are pro-Russian separatist terrorists.
They repeat one Big Lie after another. They keep their readers misinformed.
They betray them in the process. All major Western media print and electronic media operate the same way.
Managed news misinformation substitutes for what readers and viewers need to know. Fiction substitutes for facts.
News is carefully filtered. Dissent is marginalized. Monied interests matter more than popular ones.
Imperial wars are called liberating ones. Human suffering is a small price to pay.
Human rights and civil liberties are suppressed for our own good.
Patriotism means supporting lawless governance. Democracy is pure fantasy.
Ukraine’s war without mercy continues. So does Russia bashing. “(L)ong before (Ukrainian crisis conditions erupted), the West’s attacks on Russia assumed an irrational form,” said Lavrov.
“We are not interested in confrontation. We are not interested in” sanctions wars.
Western leaders lie. They “incite public opinion, and then claim it is the people who are forcing them to take anti-Russian measures.”
Relentless pressure on Russia stems from its forthrightness to express opinions candidly, Lavrov believes. It’s speaking frankly about its interests.
Moscow values its independence. It listens “open(ly) to others.” It deserves likeminded treatment.
Washington and other Western countries are “going against the course of history.” Some try “to restrain the emergence of an egalitarian international arena.”
Russia will respond in kind to more unjustifiable sanctions. US-led Western countries create more problems than they solve.
“Cold War blocs” aren’t relevant in today’s multipolar world.
Moscow supports the right of Southeastern Ukrainians to live like their ancestors, “speaking Russian, teaching their children in Russian schools, and electing their own governors, as well as having the chance to retain some of the taxes they pay as a result of their economic activities,” said Lavrov.
They’re entitled to democratic rights. They deserve better than Kiev-imposed diktats. Especially ones imposed “under the cover of bomb blasts.”
Washington’s agenda is polar opposite. Its orchestrated coup installed fascist rule.
It wants internal challengers crushed. It wants democracy in name only. It wants what freedom-loving people deplore.
We’re all Southeastern Ukrainian freedom fighters. They’re on the right side of history. Their struggle is ours.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached email@example.com.
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com .
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.
Screenshot of James Foley “execution” video
James Foley’s beheading made him into something no journalist wants to be: a part of the story.
Not only has his murder by ISIS terrorists made him part of the story, it has made the freelancer for GlobalPost a central figure in the story about America going back to war in Iraq.
In what has become a grim kabuki theater since the beheading of Daniel Pearl by al-Qaeda, Foley’s death was apparently recorded in high definition and broadcast globally on social media.
Now the question of whether Foley’s killing was staged for the cameras has arisen, the suggestion being that his murder took place off-camera . The analysis holds that his apparent beheading by a British-accented jihadi was merely a show. The big question is why, and why would that matter?
Let’s start off with one major premise that those stories missed. Foley’s death was absolutely staged for the cameras. The very nature of terrorism is that it is staged. What separates ordinary barbarity from terrorism is that the latter is by definition a gruesome performance art.
Terrorism is about headlines.
So why would ISIS fake it? Firstly, and it’s only speculation, is the possibility that Foley and his killers struck a deal: He reads their message to America clearly for maximum impact and plays along with the cameras in exchange for a quick death later.
What does ISIS gain from that? A huge propaganda victory that grabs the attention of the Western, and particularly, American, media. If they did negotiate a “humane death” in exchange for getting their message out, then it represents a whole other level of sophisticated evil. Ordinary terrorists operate in absolutes and don’t usually negotiate with a focus on perfecting their propaganda.
The sad part is that Foley is another victim in the post-9/11 war. He is perhaps even the victim of a second-generation jihadi , the son of a man involved in Osama Bin Laden’s bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.
There is still a spate of coverage about his killing, including the analysis of his video, enduring and questionable criticisms about how freelancers like him face risks that staff journalists for big companies don’t , and the typical post-event questions about how President Obama handled the situation . There is even a debate on whether the U.S. should follow its European counterparts in paying ransoms to terrorists.
All of this ignores an elemental question about the news coverage of Foley’s deaths and others like his.
If terrorists derive power, propaganda value and even recruiting strength from the publication and media coverage of their atrocities, then are journalists who cover their unfortunately newsworthy atrocities encouraging the very people who target them for death?
Read the Rest HERE
The phony nature of the video has created 1000’s of skeptics around the world. This article / tactic, is meant to confront that skepticism by admitting that the video is staged, and that “the execution may have happened after the camera was stopped”.
(Artist Rendition by Anthony Freda)
THE beheading of American journalist, James Foley, at the hands of ISIS militants shocked the world but forensic experts have revealed the video was probably staged, with the murder happening off camera.
The UK Times reported that an international forensic science company, which has worked for police forces across Britain, said there is no question Foley was beheaded(?) but that camera trickery and post-production techniques look to have been used.
“I think it has been staged,” said one expert in visual forensics, after he was commissioned by The UK Times to examine the footage.
“My feeling is that the execution may have happened after the camera was stopped.” (Guessing)
Aymenn al-Tamimi, a fellow at the Middle East Forum think-tank, said over the years ISIS militants have improved the production quality of their videos.
The analysis by experts has highlighted a number of inconsistencies that could suggest that the beheading of Foley, which was seen on the video, was not his actual death.
Firstly, no blood can be seen, even though the knife is drawn across the neck area at least six times. Secondly, sounds allegedly made by Foley do not appear consistent with what may be expected.
The forensic analysis expert said that no incision could be seen on Foley’s neck, though the right hand of the jihadist partially blocked the shot.
While the forensics company, which asked to remain anonymous, did not reach a definitive answer they did conclude that at some point an execution of Foley did take place.
This comes as a heartbreaking last letter from Foley to his family has been revealed on the Free James Foley Facebook tribute page.
While Foley was not permitted to send the letter, a fellow hostage, Danish photographer Daniel Rye Ottosen, memorised it word for word.
The 25-year-old spent 13 months imprisoned with Foley and when released in June his first call was to Foley’s mother, Diane, where he dictated every word.
Foley describes fond memories with his family and how he and the eighteen other hostages being held with him are coping.
“I know you are thinking of me and praying for me. And I am so thankful. I feel you all especially when I pray. I pray for you to stay strong and to believe. I really feel I can touch you even in this darkness when I pray,” Foley said in the letter.
“I have had weak and strong days. We are so grateful when anyone is freed; but of course, yearn for our own freedom. We try to encourage each other and share strength. We are being fed better now and daily. We have tea, occasional coffee. I have regained most of my weight lost last year.”
Foley goes on to describe his hopes of attending his sister’s wedding and his plans to take his grandmother out when he returns home.
“Grammy, please take your medicine, take walks and keep dancing. I plan to take you out to Margarita’s when I get home. Stay strong because I am going to need your help to reclaim my life.”
The full letter can be read here.
“I want to celebrate a life of bearing witness,” his mother Diane said.
“So many people are suffering in the Middle East right now, and there are many hostages being held captive, so this is a mass for all of those who are hoping for peace, and also in Jim’s memory.”
Diane’s husband John said: “We pray for the surviving hostages and in particular Steven Sotloff. We’re just hopeful that something can be done to avoid Jim’s end.”
The couple were given a prolonged standing ovation by several hundred well-wishers after the service, many clearly moved by their dignified response after the cruel end to a long ordeal.
Mrs Foley revealed that her family had been distressed when James, who had been held hostage for several weeks in Libya, decided to go back to first Libya then to Syria.
She recalled in late 2012, before his last departure, pleading with him to “at least stay until Christmas”.
“He said, ‘Oh, Ma, I’ll be back for Christmas, but I’ve got to go.’ He felt he had work to do,” she said.
Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary recently tweeted a photo of himself holding up a severed head. Source: Supplied
Yesterday, British security services MI5 and MI6 reportedly identified a British hip-hop artist as the key suspect in the hunt for the killer who beheaded Foley.
The Sunday Times newspaper said Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary, from Maida Vale in West London, had become a crucial part of the investigation.
The paper attributed the information to “senior government sources.”
Bary, 23, is the son of an Egyptian-born militant who is awaiting trial on terror charges in New York tied to the deadly 1998 bombings of embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
Former hostages held by ISIS have said he is one of several jihadists they nicknamed “the Beatles” due to their British accents, with two of his cronies referred to as “George” and “Ringo.”
Bary — who recently tweeted a photo of himself holding up a severed head — was among three Brits identified as possibly being the masked killer known as “John”.
In June, The Sunday Times revealed a threat made by Bary on Twitter. “The lions are coming for you soon you filthy kuffs (infidels),” he wrote. “Beheadings in your own backyard soon.”
Bary, who went to Syria last year to fight in its bloody civil war, has a build, skin tone and accent all similar to those of “John,” according to The Telegraph.
Before becoming a jihadist, he was an aspiring rapper known as “L Jinny,” whose music was played on BBC Radio 1.
Bary also appeared in music videos posted on YouTube for songs titled Overdose,Flying High and Dreamer.
But he was reportedly radicalised by followers of firebrand Islamic preacher Anjem Choudary and walked out of his family’s plush West London home last year, saying he was “leaving everything for the sake of Allah.”
Earlier this month, he was seen in a photo posted to Twitter wearing camouflage clothing and a black balaclava while holding a severed head with his left hand — the same hand “John” is seen using to draw a knife across Foley’s throat in his execution video.
Also under investigation are Abu Hussain Al-Britani, 20, a computer hacker from Birmingham, and Abu Abdullah al-Britani, in his 20s, from Portsmouth, theMailOnline reported.
Mail Online reported that al-Britani was jailed in 2012 for stealing personal information from former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Since joining ISIS’ brutal campaign in Syria al-Britani, real name Junaid Hussian, has worked to fund the ISIS war chest by mounting jihadist cyber attacks on British banks and celebrities.
The Twitter profile pic of Abu Hussain Al-Britani, 20, a computer hacker from Birmingham. Picture: Twitter Source: Supplied
Abu Abdullah Al-Britani, meanwhile, is active on social media using Twitter to post pro-ISIS propaganda. According to Mail Online, he is believed to be behind an account on the ask.fm social media site giving young people advice on how to travel to Syria and Iraq and encouraging them to join the jihad.
Other possible identities for “John” include the brother of a British doctor once charged with kidnapping two Western war correspondents, and a former gang member who converted to Islam and travelled to Syria, Britain’s Telegraph newspaper reported.
A dozen American counterterrorism experts are expected to fly to the UK “within days” to help identify Foley’s killer, the Daily Mail reported.
PAPER: Foley video with Briton was staged, experts say…
#StevensHeadinObamasHands: ISIS Uses Captive TIME Journalist in New Propaganda War…
Video Shows ISIS Has Surveillance Drone…
Carter to Give Keynote at Muslim Convention in Detroit…
McCain’s Army at it again…. ISIS speaks very good English…. Foley reads death statement word for word.
Tony Caralucci / NEO
With the alleged brutal murder of American journalist James Wright Foley, a wave of anger and aggression across Western audiences has been generated. Upon that wave rides two objectives. One is to create plausible deniability for the West which created the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq (ISIS), the other is to create a further pretext to justify a resurgence of direct US military intervention across the region.
While the focus has been on ISIS in Iraq, there is still another war -linked directly to Iraq’s current conflict – being waged across the border in Syria. Syrian forces have continued making gains across the country, routing NATO-backed terrorist forces and restoring order in cities and towns that have been ravaged by war for years. ISIS strongholds in the eastern Syrian city of Raqqa, have until now long escaped the focus of Syrian forces occupied by more urgent campaigns around Hama, Homs, Damascus, Daraa, Idlib, and Aleppo. Now, the Syrian Army is shifting forces east.
While the West feigns an adversarial position regarding ISIS, it was the West itself that created it, specifically to confront the Iranian arc of influence stretching from Tehran, through Baghdad, Damascus and along the Mediterranean in Lebanon. The elimination of ISIS and other terrorist organizations fighting under or alongside its banner without first achieving regime change in Damascus would effectively mean defeat for the United States and its collaborators in the Middle East.
To intervene before the deathblow is delivered to NATO-backed terrorists in Syria and before the tide is turned against them in Iraq, the West may attempt to provoke, stage, or otherwise create a pretext to militarily intervene in Syria, and expand its operations in Iraq.
More Dead Journalists, Another Downed Airliner…
The alleged death of James Wright Foley has created significant outrage amongst public opinion. It has created the illusion of confrontation between ISIS and the United States, and has served to further vilify ISIS itself. The Western media is still struggling to maintain the illusion that ISIS stands apart from other terrorists operating in Syria, and with that narrative, the West is simultaneously bolstering ISIS in Syria under the guise of arming and aiding “moderates,” while it conducts token airstrikes on ISIS in Iraq.
At the end of the video production featuring Foley’s death, it was revealed that ISIS was also holding missing TIME reporter Steven Sotloff. He was last seen in Aleppo and is believed to have been held in the now besieged Syrian city of Raqqa. The Epoch Times reported in an article titled, “Steven Sotloff: Missing TIME Journalist Steven Joel Sotloff Has been Threatened by ISIS, Report Says,”stated:
According to The Wire, he went missing near Aleppo, Syria, on Aug. 4, and his family said they were aware of the situation but did not want to publicize the information. He was being held in Raqqa.
Another dead American reporter could perhaps tip the scales in terms of public support for a possible US military intervention in Syria at a critical juncture in the near future. Within the same report, an AP update indicated that (emphasis added):
Warnings from an international research group and the Federal Aviation Administration underscore the rising threat to commercial aircraft posed by hundreds of anti-aircraft weapons that are now in the arsenals of armed groups in Syria and could easily be diverted to extremist factions.
Armed groups opposing the Assad regime in Syria have already amassed an estimated several hundred portable anti-aircraft missiles that are highly mobile, difficult to track and accurate enough to destroy low-flying passenger planes, according to a new report by Small Arms Survey, a respected Switzerland-based research organization that analyzes the global flow of weapons.
Of course, while AP attempts to continue differentiating between armed groups and “extremist factions,” the fact that “extremist faction” ISIS had captured Sotloff in Aleppo where these alleged “armed groups” are supposedly operating, indicates that it has been “extremists” fighting Damascus all along and that it is “extremists” who now possess a large number of anti-aircraft weapons, thanks to the US, Europe, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar.
Warnings that these weapons might be “diverted to extremist factions” when they have been in their hands for years, portends a possible gambit involving the downing of yet another civilian airliner to serve as a pretext to further advance the West’s agenda. The tragic MH17 disaster in Ukraine has long been buried and forgotten by the Western media after baseless accusations against Russia allowed the West to push forward further sanctions against Moscow and further military aid for the regime in Kiev.
The potential downing of a civilian aircraft in the Middle East – or anywhere in the world – attributed to “extremists” operating in Syria and Iraq would give the West a pretext to possibly intervene with direct military force in either country.
The West has proven that it will stop at nothing to advance its agenda in even the most incremental ways. The loss of human life is of no more of consequence to them and their hegemonic designs than the loss of a pawn is in a chess game. That their staged provocations still manipulate large segments of the population and still effectively manipulate public perception is precisely why these tragedies continue on in earnest. Exposing them and disarming global hegemons of this weapon is essential in preventing more tragedies like MH17 and the senseless death of Foley, and thousands of Syrians and Iraqis who have died like him, in the near future.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
Skyscrapers don’t commit suicide…..
By Russ Baker on Aug 14, 2014
Who What Why
I was standing blocks from Building 7 of the World Trade Center complex and staring directly at it when it collapsed.
Working for the Los Angeles Times, I had arrived at the World Trade Center as the South and North Tower were making their rapid and deadly descents in the morning. That afternoon, I called in a series of reports to a staffer in the New York bureau.
I was literally on the phone with the office at 5:21 p.m., describing the fires burning in the structure as the building began—and completed— its remarkably fast, smooth descent to the ground. I described the building neatly pancaking, and the Pulitzer Prize winner on the other end taking my dictation declared: “That sounds like a controlled demolition.”
In fact, I have seen controlled demolitions before and since—and indeed, that was exactly what the destruction of Building 7 looked like, except perhaps for a marginally slower collapse of the top portion
As with most people, I was baffled by how Building 7—a smaller, 47-story tower that had not been hit by a plane and was separated from the Twin Towers by low-rise buildings–would come down at all. It just made no sense.
How exactly the building did come down has never been properly explained. An investigation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology concluded that the building was hit by debris from the collapsing North Tower that started fires. However, it ruled out diesel fuel, structural damage from the debris and structural elements (trusses, girders, and cantilever overhangs) as causes of the collapse. It said the lack of water to the sprinkler system was an important factor in allowing fires to rage all afternoon. But the panel declined to state how the fires could bring down the building—and in such a rapid manner.
For many years, those who have been troubled by things that did not make sense regarding the 9/11 attacks have been marginalized as kooks. To be sure, some entertain enormously elaborate, complex scenarios that assume unspeakable evil carried out by a bewildering number of individuals, nations, and institutions.
However, fair-minded people who have carefully studied the evidence are troubled by the “official story,” just as they are troubled by the official explanations of the assassinations of American leaders over half a century, and other traumas ranging from the Oklahoma City bombing to the Boston Marathon bombing.
There is a reason so many people don’t trust the security apparatus and its allies in government, academia and the media, or the reassuring stories they tell us time after time that “there’s nothing to see here, folks.”Or to allow even the most reasonable question into the public discourse.
That kind of question hasn’t been possible with the mystery of Building 7. Until now.
A small group, NYC Coalition for Accountability Now (NYC CAN), run and largely staffed by a young man named Ted Walter, has come up with a solution: Get the public to legislate a formal inquiry into building collapses.
Noting that no high-rise building has ever collapsed as a result of fire, and seizing on the official position that the destruction of Building 7 cannot be definitively explained, Walter’s group has proposed that the city explore all building collapses since and including 9/11. The proposed inquiry pointedly excludes Buildings 1 and 2, the collapses of which have been much investigated and debated. It does not explicitly mention Building 7—but then it does not have to. Building 7 is unique in that it was not hit by a plane. Any serious investigation of building collapses would start with Building 7.
The mechanism for this is to seek to have New Yorkers vote on a ballot measure, the High-Rise Safety Initiative. Its supporters face a tough challenge ahead, and have already hit some formidable road blocks. Still they persevere.
Not Your Run-of-the-Mill “Kooks”
Ted Walter does not fit the caricature of the unshaven, grumpy, shouting activist. He’s a calm, thoughtful, precise fellow. He grew up in Wisconsin and Mozambique, where his father was an official of a private aid group, got a BA at New York University and a Masters in Public Policy at UC Berkeley, and then worked for San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors.
He’d arrived in New York from Mozambique at age 19 to attend college two weeks before the attacks. “9/11 was essentially my introduction to New York,” he says.
The first thing that struck him was to wonder why, so long after the first planes hit the World Trade Center, another plane was unimpeded in hitting the Pentagon. Where were the U.S.’s vaunted defenses?
He also found it odd that a building collapse would involve entire structures virtually vaporizing in the air.
It was not until the spring of 2006 that Walter began determinedly researching the events. “During the course of a couple months of reading everything I could find, I came to the conclusion that the official account of 9/11 was false,” he says.
In 2008, others launched something called the NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative. Walter volunteered as a petitioner, then managed paid canvassers. The next year, he founded a group, NYC CAN, along with some family members of 9/11 victims, and assumed control of the ballot initiative. Although they submitted 80,000 signatures, more than the required number, the city successfully challenged the initiative in court and kept it off the ballot.
This was hardly surprising. In certain parts of the country, especially in many Western states and municipalities, major policy is often legislated directly at the polls. Not so in New York City, which has long made it virtually impossible to qualify such a measure for the ballot. In fact, New York City voters have only seen two of them in half a century.
Nonetheless, in the spring of 2013, Walter and his group talked with a top New York City election attorney, decided there might be a chance at prevailing despite the long odds, and began moving forward with another attempt. It became the High-Rise Safety Initiative.
Between May 1 and July 31, they gathered more than 100,000 signatures, far more than the 30,000 required to gain a place on the ballot. They submitted the first 67,000 of those on July 3, and plan to submit the remaining 33,000 on Sept. 4, which is more than double what’s required to override the City Council.
As anticipated, the City challenged the petition—claiming that not enough signatures are valid, and that the petition language is not legally valid. Walter and company filed suit against the City to have that determination annulled, and were due to go into court on Aug. 14.
The group believes that it has overcome the usual issue of invalid signatures by filing so many—and because even in its 2009 effort, it was able to prove that enough signatures did pass muster. Now, it must pass the arcane statutory hurdles the city created exactly to prevent such measures. Walter thinks they have a chance.
The case should be decided by mid-September. If the initiative is successful, it will be on the November ballot.
The mayor, a liberal named Bill DeBlasio, has not had kind things to say about the effort—presumably not unlike what his predecessors, Michael Bloomberg and Rudy Giuliani, might have had to say. As reported by Crain’s New York Business:
“From what I’ve heard it’s absolutely ridiculous,” a peeved Mr. de Blasio said in response to a reporter’s question. “And it’s inappropriate, after all the suffering that went on 9/11 and since. It seems to be this is a very insensitive and inappropriate action.”
Crain’s itself couldn’t help referring to the group as “conspiracy theorists,” an unfortunate term that instantly assumes no credibility to those asking what may in fact be legitimate—if uncomfortable—questions.
The speaker of the New York City Council, Melissa Mark-Viverito, a close ally of the mayor, lashed out: “Instead of wasting New Yorkers’ time and hard-earned taxpayer dollars humoring conspiracy theorists with wild fantasies, the City Council will continue to focus on passing sound legislation.”
A Skilled Communicator
Read the Rest at WHO WHAT WHY
« Previous Page — Next Page »