Washington (CNN) — President Obama has decided to nominate Sen. John Kerry to be the next secretary of state and could make a formal announcement as early as next week, a Democrat who spoke to Kerry told CNN Saturday.
The expected nomination follows U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s decision to withdraw her name from consideration for the post. She dropped out of the running Thursday after weeks of criticism from Republicans about statements she made about the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, which left four Americans dead, including Ambassador Chris Stevens.
If confirmed by the Senate, Kerry would replace current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who plans to leave her post within the administration.
News from Syria is grim. Libya 2.0 looms. Fabricating a chemical weapons threat looks like pretext for full-scale war.
On December 8, the Toronto Sun said Foreign Affairs officials urged Canadian citizens to leave Syria. Maybe they know something they’re not explaining.
On December 9, Israel National News said the London Sunday Times said IDF special forces now operate inside Syria. Allegedly they’re trying to locate “non-conventional weapons” and “sabotage” them.
Israel considered ground and/or air attacks to destroy them. Perhaps they’re still planned. The Sunday Times said if evidence suggests Assad used chemical weapons, Washington and Israel “might coordinate to carry out a ground invasion.”
An unnamed military source told the Times that US forces could be ready “rapidly within days” if chemical weapons are used. “The muscle is already there to be flexed.”
On December 9, The Times of Israel headlined “Syrian rebels claim new video shows victims of chemical attack.”
A You Tube clip depicts alleged victims. It shows dead and injured Syrians with disfigured faces. Assad is blamed.
Days earlier, a You Tube video showed Syrian insurgents testing chemical weapons on lab rabbits. Threats to use them against Assad loyalists followed.
Lab equipment and chemical containers were shown. Some containers bore the Turkish chemical company Tekkim name.
An Arabic text wall poster read, “The Almighty Wind Brigade (Kateebat A Reeh Al Sarsar).”
A man shown begins mixing chemicals in a beaker. It emits gas. Rabbits in a glass box have convulsions, collapse and die. The audio states:
“You saw what happened. This will be your fate, you infidel Alawites. I swear by Allah to make you die like these rabbits, one minute after you inhale the gas.”
Earlier reports said insurgents were given gas masks. They suggested a possible chemical attack coming blamed on Assad.
Saudi Arabia allegedly fitted ambulances and other vehicles with anti-gas/anti-chemical filtering systems in preparation for Free Syrian Army chemical attacks blamed on him.
Perhaps a major false flag incident looms. Daily headlines suggest Assad’s days are numbered.
UK Foreign Secretary William Hague claims “some evidence” he saw indicates Assad is readying chemical weapons for use on opposition fighters.
He’s seen nothing, of course, but media scoundrels don’t explain. At the same time, Israeli Vice Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon said “we see no sign that this weaponry is being pointed at us.”
“We are not (discussing) Assad’s fate,” he said. “And all attempts to present the situation in any other way are unscrupulous, even for diplomats from those countries which are well-known for their intention to distort facts in their favor.”
Lavrov accused US officials of spreading false rumors about Russia softening its position on Syria.
“US representatives started to make statements hinting that Russia is changing its position,” he said. “This is not true. We have not changed our position, and only on these conditions we agreed to hold the Geneva meeting.”
“We said we would be ready under one condition: that the basis of such brainstorming sessions will be formed by the Geneva document, without any additions, without any ultimatums, without any preconditions like President Assad’s resignation.”
Lavrov referred to the June Geneva meeting joint statement. It said any future Syrian transition government “could include members of the present government and the opposition and other groups and shall be formed on the basis of mutual consent.”
Washington twisted the language to mean a future Syrian government must exclude Assad. Doing so, of course, disregards the will of most Syrians.
The present government has strong popular support. The longer conflict rages, the more it grows.
On December 9, RIA Novosti headlined “Russia Rules Out Libyan Scenario in Syria.” On Sunday, Lavrov said:
“We’ll not allow the Libyan experience to be reproduced in Syria. Unfortunately our Western partners have departed from the Geneva accords and are seeking the departure of….Assad.”
He added that Syrians alone should choose their government.
Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev said Syrian leaders assured Moscow that chemical weapons are secure and won’t be used.
“The Syrian government is assuring us that it will not allow their spread,” said Patrushev. “We hope that this will be so.”
He and Lavrov expressed more concern about foreign elements using them. They seized a chemical facility near Aleppo. Substances it produces can be used for chemical weapons.
Mossad-connected DEBKAfile (DF) posts regular inflammatory reports. They allege Assad may use chemical weapons. On December 10, it claimed he may have “passed some” to Hezbollah.
Unnamed “Syrian army” defectors alleged “containers were last week removed from Syrian bases at Jabal Kalamon and loaded on vehicles camouflaged as commercial trucks.”
Contents are “thought to have been split up and hidden at different Hizbollah bases to make them harder to attack.”
Israeli US ambassador Michael Oren said he has no information on this. At the same time, he called supplying Hezbollah with chemical weapons a “game changer/red line” for Israel.
“We have a very clear red line about those chemical weapons passing into the wrong hands,” he said. Can you imagine if Hezbollah and its 70,000 rockets would get its hands on chemical weapons? That could kill thousands of people.”
He said nothing about Israel’s powerful nuclear, chemical and biological arsenal. If threatened, it’s willing to use it. Israel menaces the entire region and beyond. Hezbollah, Syria, Iran, and Hamas threaten no one.
DF again alleged a Syrian sarin nerve gas threat. Baseless claims don’t wash but get repeated. It claims chemical weapons are deployed near “at least five air force bases, with evidence of preparations to use them.”
Placing them near warplanes “indicates an intention….to drop poison gas from the air.”
According to unnamed “Western and Israeli intelligence officials,” Assad “directed his troops fighting in and around Damascus to use chemical weapons if” foreign fighters appear able to “seiz(e) any part of Damascus international airport.”
These and similar claims are baseless. For days, they’ve been circulating. Repetition makes people believe them.
Heightened tensions suggests full-scale intervention looms. Ravaging Syria may follow. A potential bloodbath looks possible. It may exceed the worst of Libya.
On December 10, Voice of Russia (VoR) said Islamist rebels claim they seized a key north Syria army base at Sheikh Suleiman.
German Federal Intelligence Service head Gerhard Schindler believes Assad’s government is close to falling. “Armed rebels are coordinating better, which is making their fight….more effective,” he claims.
On Friday, a new unified command was established. Extremist elements are involved. Estimates suggest two-thirds of its representatives are Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist allies.
Washington wants Islamist fascist regimes throughout the region. It goes all-out to prevent democracies.
“Evidence is mounting that the regime in Damascus is now in its final phase,” said Schindler.
On December 10, the Syrian Free Press presented a different view on the ground. “The Armed Forces Continue Targeting Terrorists and Their Hideouts,” it headlined.
Many foreign fighters were killed. The Aleppo al-Bakkarh area was “completely cleared.” Large stocks of weapons and munitions were seized or destroyed.
Fighting continues in other areas. Army units inflicted “heavy losses” on terrorists in Daraya and around Aleppo.
VoR said the Al-Watan news service reported that about 1,000 insurgents were killed in a battle east of Aleppo. Middle East expert Viktor Nadein-Rayevsky said foreign military intervention perhaps is imminent.
It “could be staged in a way to look like the opposition’s offensive with foreign mercenaries taking part in the operation.”
Turkey and other countries bordering Syria may get involved. He stressed that “constructive negotiations are the only way to settle the crisis.”
Washington won’t tolerate them. Conflict was planned long ago to oust Assad. Signs suggest full-scale Western-led intervention looms.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at email@example.com.
His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
Could it have been “the October Surprise” that didn’t work? Crazy as it might sound at this late date in December, could there have really been an October Surprise planned to insure the re-election of Obama to the Presidency? In this day of purportedly fudged Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) regarding the unemployment figures, nothing from this Administration should surprise any of us.
NOTE: Following BLS September jobs report numbers, Reuters wrote in October the revised figure was about one-half the number reported for September. August was also lowered to 76,400 from 189,000. Though BLS claims the mistakes had no political intentions, it sounds fishy to me.
Marketplace* reported specifically, well-respected former GE CEO Jack Welch tweeted this “Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can’t debate so change numbers” referring to the September unemployment numbers.
*[As an aside…Marketplace is a radio program that focuses on business, the economy, and events that influence them. Hosted by Kai Ryssdal, the show is produced and distributed by American Public Media, in association with the University of Southern California Annenberg School of Business (hardly a bastion of conservative thought). With a weekly audience of more than eight million, Marketplace is the most popular business program in America–more popular than those of CNBC, Bloomberg or Nightly Business Report. Marketplace began in 1989, created by Jim Russell. Marketplace is produced in Los Angeles with bureaus in New York; Washington, D.C.; Portland, Oregon; Baltimore, Maryland; London; and Shanghai.]
With this dubious track record of the bureaucrats that rule over us, what can we believe and what is so far-fetched that it can’t possibly be true, but more than likely probably might just be TRUE? What bearing does the fudging of the unemployment figures have on the October Surprise we are going to be discussing? I think the public needs to be aware that often what we hear and read from the media simply is spun so the exact opposite is the truth, and in a country like the United States, that cannot be allowed to happen.
A great anonymous quote:
“No government should be allowed to lie to its citizens. A government exists to serve the people, and only at their pleasure. In order to do this, we already empower them to have greater capabilities than us. Adding the ability to know more than us to the ability to do more than us, is an open invitation to abuse.”
Now, to the far-out, (and impeachable) conspiracy theory in the Ron Paul Forum, which would have indeed, been a perfect October Surprise had it worked. For those who have been living under a rock, Ron Paul, Texas US Representative was a former candidate for the Presidency. It seems so implausible to rational thinking, but upon close examination could well have been concocted by those on Capitol Hill. We’ll take a closer look and let the readers decide. As the only news media investigating the Benghazi issue is FOX, it is doubtful all the pieces will ever be put together.
The Conspiracy Theory
According to sources in the State Department and the CIA, and intercepted communications from the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama “staged” the attack in Benghazi in order to create a monumental “October Surprise” that would guarantee him re-election.
Yes, you read that right, and no, I’m not making this up. Obama, we now know, is and has been working with the Muslim Brotherhood secretly to engineer the release of the “Blind Sheik,” Omar Abdel Rahman, the mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Center attack.
In Obama’s October Surprise, he intentionally set-up the consulate to have no security so that Chris Stevens could be kidnapped, and held for ransom by Al-Qaeda (and the Muslim Brotherhood). Then, several days before the election, the plan was to trade Chris Stevens for the Blind Sheik, making himself look like a hero, and all but guaranteeing re-election.
This was one of the top reasons why Obama was so insistent on the Muslim Brotherhood getting $1.2 Billion in U.S. Aid. They were to have a primary role in getting Obama re-elected. That is why, even though they knew days before the attack that it was going to occur, no effort was made to bolster security. It was intended to be non-existent. The Libyan security forces were intended to quietly slip into the night when the attack began. And they did, just as planned.
That is why, even though 2 C-130U gunships, which were built SPECIFICALLY for this kind of attack, and which could have saved the lives of our people there and were a mere 45 minutes away, were never scrambled at any time during the attack. There was to be no resistance whatsoever. That is why there were not one, but TWO unarmed drones flying over the consulate during the conflagration.
Our CIA operatives on the ground were painting targets because they knew air cover was available. That is why, even though requesting support and backup three times, their requests were NOT ignored, but were intentionally, specifically DENIED three times, and they were told to “stand down,” which basically means to “surrender.” That was part of Obama’s plan.
They were not to fight back. That would potentially undermine the kidnapping effort and cause unnecessary “complications.” That is why, even though the CIA operatives and ex-Navy Seals were on the ground, providing real-time reports, and even though they were “lighting up” the source of the mortars attacking the compound with lasers, no gunships or support ever came. They weren’t supposed to resist.
Resistance wasn’t “part of the plan.” It also wasn’t part of the plan for one of the CIA operatives to intentionally defy Obama’s orders, and who rescued the body of Sean Smith and then stood up against orders, and engaged the enemy that was attacking American soil. It was supposed to be “clean.” …Quick; Efficient; Kidnap the Ambassador and get out.
They didn’t factor in a tiny group of highly trained ex-Navy Seals/CIA operatives… American patriots and heroes, like all trained US military not willing to stand by while attacks against our country are happening right in front of them. Even though they eventually lost their lives in the firefight, they managed to employ the full measure of their skills, and took out over 80 attackers in the process… which enraged the attackers, who were led to believe that they would encounter no resistance.
That is why Ambassador Stevens was raped (sodomized), murdered, and dragged through the streets. In their warped minds, they believed that they had been betrayed by the U.S. yet again. They believed that Obama was their friend. They believed that they were going to get their beloved Blind Sheik back. And yet, here were 80 of their own… dead by American hands.
Obama was asked directly in an interview if he denied the request for military assistance by those on the ground; he refused to answer, and instead droned on with a canned response promising to “bring those responsible to justice”. Yet here we are three months further down the road and the Congressional committee is being stonewalled by Administration version of the events which seem to change daily, and I haven’t heard a single mention of the word PERJURY.
Former CIA and State Department personnel are coming out now with damning evidence that indicts President Obama, and reveals the truth about what was going on. Hillary Clinton, who is now openly laying the blame at the feet of the President, with her eye on running for the Democratic 2016 presidential nomination.
So just how plausible is the Ron Paul Theory?
Going back to the House committee we have gotten far enough into the investigation to determine the staff at the U.S. Consulate in Libya had their request for additional security denied by Washington officials going back five months. Based on information provided to the Committee by individuals with direct knowledge of events in Libya, the attack that claimed the Ambassador Steven’s life was the latest in a long line of attacks on Western diplomats and officials in Libya in the months leading up to September 11, 2012. The committee noted 13 “security threats” in Benghazi, including an attempt to assassinate the British ambassador to Libya. Those 13 threats weren’t just chatter; the US consulate was targeted by two actual bombing attempts leading up to the 9/11 raid. I guess we can say so much for the trumped-up “spontaneous attack lies” about the infamous anti-Muslim video which nobody saw.
A week after the attack, Obama claimed whoever was responsible would be brought to justice…right! CNN was in Benghazi while the FBI was trying to get their act together (I guess they never heard about securing the crime scene and preserving evidence) and turned-up Ambassador Steven’s diary which outlined his repeated requests for security and for barbed wire to be placed along the parameter of the make-shift consulate compound. This was 11 days after the attack!
Meanwhile all the mouthpieces of the administration, the State Department, and the heads of the CIA, knowing full-well the Benghazi attack was a planned terrorist attack reminiscent of the 9-11 attack in New York, tried to promote the attack was a spontaneous attack based on the ridiculous postulation that a demonstration about an obscure anti-Muslim video was to blame. Why? Because Obama wanted the voting public to believe the “War of Terror” was over because Osama Bin Laden was dead. Additionally, the gullible and naïve public actually thought the Obama Middle East policy and foreign policy in general, had restored respect for America in the region.
Even more contentious of the public was parading out UN Ambassador Susan Rice, to outright lie about the video on all the Sunday morning talk-shows. This word track went on for eleven days.
“Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what began as a spontaneous demonstration, simply got out of hand… not a premeditated attack”. The event was witnessed live in real time by drones, and if my contact is to believed at the FBI (this is an inside agent who has 30+ years with the FBI and very familiar with the protocols of information handling at the top levels of government); he tells me the President is never more than 2-3 minutes behind events…that means “he’s never in the shower”, “never out of town and unreachable”, and never NOT MADE AWARE OF SUCH EVENTS.
Rice claims she received information on the video from the National Intelligence Agency but Director, James Clapper initially denied giving Rice her talking points. The left says the Republicans are simply on a witch hunt, but this is not a Watergate instance. Four Americans, including a US Ambassador, were killed, and the whole thing stinks to high heaven. Additionally, one must ask why Rice was the chosen mouthpiece, and in being so selected, is she not bound to speak the truth by the pretense of honesty being a government spokesperson?
To excuse such misleading behavior would be to excuse the Nazi officers accused of genocide because “they were only following orders”.
Rice’s account was directly contradicted almost immediately by Libyan President Mohamed Yousef El-Magariaf, who said he had “no doubt” the attack was pre-planned by individuals from outside Libya. Rice also said there was a “substantial security presence” at the consulate in Benghazi, noting that two of the four Americans killed there were providing security. Two! Unbelievable! DOES THE DATE 9/11 NOT RING A BELL WITH THE ADMINISTRATION?
The four Americans killed were part of the diplomatic mission, but not in the manner originally stated by Administration officials… Sean Smith was in fact a U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer, but Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods were not U.S. embassy security personnel. The former Navy SEAL commandos Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were actually CIA contractors killed defending the mission, not State Department contract security officers, as originally publicly identified.
Then to rub salt in the wounds of the families of those slain, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta talked about “Monday morning quarterbacking” and why the U.S. military didn’t act sooner. He said military assets had been moved, but that the attack on the consulate in Benghazi was over before there was enough good information about what was actually happening. Not knowing exactly what was going on, “we could not put forces at risk in that situation”. More BS from an Administration caught with its pants down. With a live feed from the drones, they could see what was going on, and with live phone calls from those on the ground, there should have been no question, unless one considers the entire fiasco was being managed as a cover-up run by the Keystone Cops.
In addition to the Marine Security Guards deployed at U.S. facilities including Embassies and Consulates, today’s Marines maintain FAST units – Fleet Anti-terrorism Security Teams and RRTs – Rapid Response Teams – to protect American officials, citizens, and interests abroad. There are such a units strategically situated around the globe. They are trained for instances like Benghazi and are ready to be deployed on very short notice. With Signolla, Italy just 1 hr and 30 minutes away, they could have made a big difference regardless of what Panetta’s talking points are. The same is true for the 2 C-130U gunships which could have been on site in less than 1-1/2 hours from Italy.
If one were to believe Panetta that help wasn’t on the way to Benghazi, or that those on the ground were not lead to believe help was on the way, why would Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods be on the roof of the Consulate lighting up targets of opportunity for the drones or gunships. Any trained soldier would not deliberately expose themselves to certain death by doing so.
It is obvious for anyone following this story that there is more information in support of the Ron Paul Theory than against.
Consider all the events leading up to 9/11/12:
Two attacks (April and June) on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi prior to 9/11/12.
Multiple requests for help from the Ambassador prior to his assassination.
We removed 34 special forces site security team over a 6-month period ending in August leading up to the attack, the final 16 were pulled in August.
An August 16 cable sent by the consulate to the state department warned that the consulate could not be protected, warned that terrorist groups, including Anaer al-Sharia and Al Qaeda, were operating in the area.
Britain assessed the situation and pulled their ambassador out of Libya.
The Red Cross also decided they needed to pull out of Libya.
So, the big question really boils down to why were ANY of our people still there?
Prior Knowledge, Stand Down, Cover up… Cui Bono?
Within eight hours of the initial attack on the United States’ diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, the CIA decided to scrub and abandon rather than protect its annex, a military intelligence source told Fox News.
“The defensive posture was no longer sustainable,” the source told Fox News, revealing for the first time how quickly the CIA chose to secure classified material and close down the facility after it took indirect fire from two mortars at about 5:15 a.m. local time Sept. 12.
The adjoining U.S. consulate, by contrast, has never been secured, even three months after the attack.
The process to sanitize the CIA site began on Sept. 11 after the consulate was attacked around 9:35 p.m. local time. The initial stages of the agency’s proscribed evacuation plan kicked in as a precautionary step.
Given the CIA Annex was designated a high-threat posting by the agency and described to Fox News as having an “expeditionary” feel, there was not a lot of classified material to dispose of. Classified communications equipment was also near minimum.
Within two and a half hours of the decision by the CIA chief of base, the agency’s point person in Benghazi, the annex was cleared of all classified material and equipment. Both CIA Director David Petraeus and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who oversees the nation’s 16 intelligence agencies, were notified of the decision, which was made on the ground in Libya and not directed by Washington.
Fox News has previously reported, based on conversations with current and former intelligence officials, that there is significant evidence the terrorist attack in Benghazi was designed to flush out any remaining Western influence in eastern Libya, and specifically the growing CIA presence.
The Benghazi consulate, where Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith were killed, was never secured in the same way. As recently as Nov. 1, six weeks after the terrorist attack and nearly a month after an FBI team briefly collected evidence there, Foreign Policy magazine reported its journalists had found sensitive documents at the consulate, which included unsent memos about “troubling” surveillance by Libyan security guards.
While not commenting on the record, citing the sensitive nature of the information, two congressional sources told Fox News the timeline on the annex shutdown shows that the public exposure of the depth and breadth of the CIA operation in Benghazi was of significant concern to the U.S. intelligence community.
Asked for a response, a CIA spokesperson declined, saying the agency does not comment on operational matters.
December 4, 2012 (LD) – Once again, the US has issued a warning against Syria deploying “chemical weapons” citing “intelligence reports that the Damascus government is preparing such munitions for possible use.” No evidence was provided, nor any reasonable explanation as to why the Syrian government would deploy such weapons when, after over 2 years, the majority of the Syrian people still stand behind the government while terrorist forces flooding over Syria’s borders have been faced with constant tactical and strategic defeat.
Despite attempts to portray Damascus and Aleppo as on the inevitable edge of collapse, now for a full 6 months, both cities are still firmly in the hands of government troops, with only symbolic terror attacks murdering scores of civilians at a time and temporary advances made on isolated bases before promptly being abandoned by NATO-backed terrorists – a pattern not unlike that facing Western forces in NATO-occupied Afghanistan.
The accusations were printed in the Washington Post article, “Obama warns Syria amid rising concern over chemical weapons,” but despite the insinuations, includes the disclaimer (emphasis added), “Syria is thought to have several hundred surface-to-surface ballistic missiles capable of carrying chemical warheads.”
Other nations “thought to have” weapons of mass destruction included Iraq, which in hindsight, after a 10 year war and occupation, following years of crippling sanctions leaving millions dead, turned out not to in fact have such weapons.
It is unlikely that the Syrian government would use such weapons, thus giving the West the excuse it would need to directly intervene militarily, a scenario the West has been attempting to sell for the last 2 years, and particularly so following NATO’s military operations in Libya throughout 2011.
Conversely, NATO’s proxy forces operating in Syria possess both the means and motivation to carry out chemical attacks, therefore blaming Syria’s government and granting the West the impetus needed to intervene more directly.
NATO-backed Terrorists have the Means.
Libya’s arsenal had fallen into the hands of sectarian extremists with NATO assistance last year in the culmination of efforts to overthrow the North African nation . Since then, Libya’s militants led by commanders of Al Qaeda’s Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) have armed sectarian extremists across the Arab World, from as far West as Mali, to as far East as Syria.
In addition to small arms, heavier weapons are also making their way through this extensive network. The Washington Post in their article, “Libyan missiles on the loose,” reported:
“Two former CIA counterterrorism officers told me last week that technicians recently refurbished 800 of these man-portable air-defense systems (known as MANPADS) — some for an African jihadist group called Boko Haram that is often seen as an ally of al-Qaeda — for possible use against commercial jets flying into Niger, Chad and perhaps Nigeria.”
While undoubtedly these weapons are also headed to Niger, Chad, and perhaps Nigeria, they are veritably headed to Syria. Libyan LIFG terrorists are confirmed to be flooding into Syria from Libya. In November 2011, the Telegraph in their article, “Leading Libyan Islamist met Free Syrian Army opposition group,” would report:
Abdulhakim Belhadj, head of the Tripoli Military Council and the former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, “met with Free Syrian Army leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey,” said a military official working with Mr Belhadj. “Mustafa Abdul Jalil (the interim Libyan president) sent him there.”
Another Telegraph article, “Libya’s new rulers offer weapons to Syrian rebels,” would admit
Syrian rebels held secret talks with Libya’s new authorities on Friday, aiming to secure weapons and money for their insurgency against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, The Daily Telegraph has learned.At the meeting, which was held in Istanbul and included Turkish officials, the Syrians requested “assistance” from the Libyan representatives and were offered arms, and potentially volunteers.
“There is something being planned to send weapons and even Libyan fighters to Syria,” said a Libyan source, speaking on condition of anonymity. “There is a military intervention on the way. Within a few weeks you will see.”
Later that month, some 600 Libyan terrorists would be reported to have entered Syria to begin combat operations and have been flooding into the country ever since.
Washington Post’s reported “loose missiles” in Libya are now turning up on the battlefield in Syria. While outfits like the Guardian, in their article “Arms and the Manpads: Syrian rebels get anti-aircraft missiles,” are reporting the missiles as being deployed across Syria, they have attempted to downplay any connection to Libya’s looted arsenal and the Al Qaeda terrorists that have imported them. In contrast, Times has published open admissions from terrorists themselves admitting they are receiving heavy weapons including surface-to-air missiles from Libya.
In Time’s article, “Libya’s Fighters Export Their Revolution to Syria,” it is reported:
Some Syrians are more frank about the assistance the Libyans are providing. “They have heavier weapons than we do,” notes Firas Tamim, who has traveled in rebel-controlled areas to keep tabs on foreign fighters. “They brought these weapons to Syria, and they are being used on the front lines.” Among the arms Tamim has seen are Russian-made surface-to-air missiles, known as the SAM 7.
Libyan fighters largely brush off questions about weapon transfers, but in December they claimed they were doing just that. “We are in the process of collecting arms in Libya,” a Libyan fighter in Syria told the French daily Le Figaro. “Once this is done, we will have to find a way to bring them here.”
Libya’s stockpiles of mustard gas and chemicals used to make weapons are intact and were not stolen during the uprising that toppled Muammar Gaddafi, weapons inspectors have said.
The abandonment or disappearance of some Gaddafi-era weapons has prompted concerns that such firepower could erode regional security if it falls into the hands of Islamist militants or rebels active in north Africa. Some fear they could be used by Gaddafi loyalists to spread instability in Libya.
Last month Human Rights Watch urged Libya’s ruling national transitional council to take action over large numbers of heavy weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, it said were lying unguarded more than two months after Gaddafi was overthrown.
On Wednesday the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, said the UN would send experts to Libya to help ensure nuclear material and chemical weapons did not fall into the wrong hands.
WAR ON SYRIA; 2002 Article Has ‘HIT LIST’ Of Middle East Countries, Iraq War Was Just The Start, ‘SKITTLES THEORY’
The “skittles theory” of the Middle East – that one ball aimed at Iraq can knock down several regimes…
“We fear a state of disorder and chaos may prevail in the region.” – Hosni Mubarak
While searching for something else, I ran across this article from 2002 that I had filed away. After a quick look I realized how interesting this article is considering it was written before the Iraq War and contains a “Hit List” of Middle East countries. This is very reminiscent of General Wesley Clark’s “7 countries in 5 years” hit list (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran) that generated so much attention in certain circles.
While the Guardian article below frames this as an “Israeli Plan” I’d have to strongly argue that the evidence clearly shows the powers behind planning and attacking these Middle East countries comes from the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and is implemented via their mad dog known as NATO.
Here’s the most interesting quote:
The six-year-old plan for Israel’s “strategic environment” remains more or less intact, though two extra skittles – Saudi Arabia and Iran – have joined Iraq, Syria and Lebanon on the hit list.
Interesting, however I must confess, I do not understand the “Skittles” reference, it’s mentioned twice… perhaps some popular culture I missed out on… to me “Skeet” would be more logical. Here is my current evaluation of the countries discussed, how “The Plan” is going…
‘HIT LIST’ COUNTRIES:
Iraq (Destroyed, no Hashemite Monarchy or Kingdom yet)
Iran (Economic warfare, international sanctions, targeted)
Lebanon (Weakened by past Israeli invasions, now receiving spillover from Syria’s foreign insurgency)
Saudi Arabia (Not really on the hit list, not as yet, see below)
Syria (Economic warfare, under attack by foreign insurgency)
PROXY COUNTRIES (NATO PUPPETS):
Jordan (Supplying Syria’s foreign insurgency)
Saudi Arabia (Supplying Syria’s foreign insurgency)
Turkey (Supplying Syria’s foreign insurgency)
Here’s the article (emphasis mine):
Playing Skittles With Saddam
The gameplan among Washington’s hawks has long been to reshape the Middle East along US-Israeli lines, writes Brian Whitaker
In a televised speech last week, President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt predicted devastating consequences for the Middle East if Iraq is attacked.
“We fear a state of disorder and chaos may prevail in the region,” he said. Mr Mubarak is an old-fashioned kind of Arab leader and, in the brave new post-September-11 world, he doesn’t quite get the point.
What on earth did he expect the Pentagon’s hawks to do when they heard his words of warning? Throw up their hands in dismay? – “Gee, thanks, Hosni. We never thought of that. Better call the whole thing off right away.”
They are probably still splitting their sides with laughter in the Pentagon. But Mr Mubarak and the hawks do agree on one thing: war with Iraq could spell disaster for several regimes in the Middle East. Mr Mubarak believes that would be bad. The hawks, though, believe it would be good.
For the hawks, disorder and chaos sweeping through the region would not be an unfortunate side-effect of war with Iraq, but a sign that everything is going according to plan.
In their eyes, Iraq is just the starting point – or, as a recent presentation at the Pentagon put it, “the tactical pivot” – for re-moulding the Middle East on Israeli-American lines.
This reverses the usual approach in international relations where stability is seen as the key to peace, and whether or not you like your neighbours, you have to find ways of living with them. No, say the hawks. If you don’t like the neighbours, get rid of them.
The hawks claim that President Bush has already accepted their plan and made destabilisation of “despotic regimes” a central goal of his foreign policy. They cite passages from his recent speeches as proof of this, though whether Mr Bush really knows what he has accepted is unclear. The “skittles theory” of the Middle East – that one ball aimed at Iraq can knock down several regimes – has been around for some time on the wilder fringes of politics but has come to the fore in the United States on the back of the “war against terrorism”.
Its roots can be traced, at least in part, to a paper published in 1996 by an Israeli thinktank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Entitled “A clean break: a new strategy for securing the realm”, it was intended as a political blueprint for the incoming government of Binyamin Netanyahu. As the title indicates, it advised the right-wing Mr Netanyahu to make a complete break with the past by adopting a strategy “based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism …”
Among other things, it suggested that the recently-signed Oslo accords might be dispensed with – “Israel has no obligations under the Oslo agreements if the PLO does not fulfil its obligations” – and that “alternatives to [Yasser] Arafat’s base of power” could be cultivated. “Jordan has ideas on this,” it added.
It also urged Israel to abandon any thought of trading land for peace with the Arabs, which it described as “cultural, economic, political, diplomatic, and military retreat”.
“Our claim to the land – to which we have clung for hope for 2,000 years – is legitimate and noble,” it continued. “Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights, especially in their territorial dimension, ‘peace for peace’, is a solid basis for the future.”
The paper set out a plan by which Israel would “shape its strategic environment”, beginning with the removal of Saddam Hussein and the installation of a Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad.
With Saddam out of the way and Iraq thus brought under Jordanian Hashemite influence, Jordan and Turkey would form an axis along with Israel to weaken and “roll back” Syria. Jordan, it suggested, could also sort out Lebanon by “weaning” the Shia Muslim population away from Syria and Iran, and re-establishing their former ties with the Shia in the new Hashemite kingdom of Iraq. “Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them”, the paper concluded.
To succeed, the paper stressed, Israel would have to win broad American support for these new policies – and it advised Mr Netanyahu to formulate them “in language familiar to the Americans by tapping into themes of American administrations during the cold war which apply well to Israel”.
At first glance, there’s not much to distinguish the 1996 “Clean Break” paper from the outpourings of other right-wing and ultra-Zionist thinktanks … except for the names of its authors.
The leader of the “prominent opinion makers” who wrote it was Richard Perle – now chairman of the Defence Policy Board at the Pentagon.
Also among the eight-person team was Douglas Feith, a neo-conservative lawyer, who now holds one of the top four posts at the Pentagon as under-secretary of policy.
Mr Feith has objected to most of the peace deals made by Israel over the years, and views the Middle East in the same good-versus-evil terms that he previously viewed the cold war. He regarded the Oslo peace process as nothing more than a unilateral withdrawal which “raises life-and-death issues for the Jewish state”.
Two other opinion-makers in the team were David Wurmser and his wife, Meyrav (see US thinktanks give lessons in foreign policy, August 19). Mrs Wurmser was co-founder of Memri, a Washington-based charity that distributes articles translated from Arabic newspapers portraying Arabs in a bad light. After working with Mr Perle at the American Enterprise Institute, David Wurmser is now at the State Department, as a special assistant to John Bolton, the under-secretary for arms control and international security.
A fifth member of the team was James Colbert, of the Washington-based Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (Jinsa) – a bastion of neo-conservative hawkery whose advisory board was previously graced by Dick Cheney (now US vice-president), John Bolton and Douglas Feith.
One of Jinsa’s stated aims is “to inform the American defence and foreign affairs community about the important role Israel can and does play in bolstering democratic interests in the Mediterranean and the Middle East”. In practice, a lot of its effort goes into sending retired American military brass on jaunts to Israel – after which many of them write suitably hawkish newspaper articles or letters to the editor.
Jinsa’s activities are examined in detail by Jason Vest in the September 2 issue of The Nation. The article notes some interesting business relationships between retired US military officers on Jinsa’s board and American companies supplying weapons to Israel.
With several of the “Clean Break” paper’s authors now holding key positions in Washington, the plan for Israel to “transcend” its foes by reshaping the Middle East looks a good deal more achievable today than it did in 1996. Americans may even be persuaded to give up their lives to achieve it.
The six-year-old plan for Israel’s “strategic environment” remains more or less intact, though two extra skittles – Saudi Arabia and Iran – have joined Iraq, Syria and Lebanon on the hit list.
Whatever members of the Iraqi opposition may think, the plan to replace Saddam Hussein with a Hashemite monarch – descendants of the Prophet Muhammad who rule Jordan – is also very much alive. Evidence of this was strengthened by the surprise arrival of Prince Hassan, former heir to the Jordanian throne, at a meeting of exiled Iraqi officers in London last July.
The task of promoting Prince Hassan as Iraq’s future king has fallen to Michael Rubin, who currently works at the American Enterprise Institute but will shortly take up a new job at the Pentagon, dealing with post-Saddam Iraq.
One of the curious aspects of this neo-conservative intrigue is that so few people outside the United States and Israel take it seriously. Perhaps, like President Mubarak, they can’t imagine that anyone who holds a powerful position in the United States could be quite so reckless.
But nobody can accuse the neo-conservatives of concealing their intentions: they write about them constantly in American newspapers. Just two weeks ago, an article in the Washington Times by Tom Neumann, executive director of Jinsa, spelled out the plan in clear, cold terms:
“Jordan will likely survive the coming war with US assistance, so will some of the sheikhdoms. The current Saudi regime will likely not.
“The Iran dissident movement would be helped enormously by the demise of Saddam, and the Palestinians would have to know that the future lies with the West. Syria’s Ba’athist dictatorship will likely fall unmourned, liberating Lebanon as well.
“Israel and Turkey, the only current democracies in the region, will find themselves in a far better neighbourhood.” Would anyone like to bet on that?
2002.9.3 Playing Skittles With Saddam By Brian Whitaker (guardian.co.uk):
KUCINICH BURGLARY; Dennis Kucinich’s Home ‘Systematically’ Gone Through, ‘Papers Rifled’, BENGHAZI ATTACK CONNECTION?
“Systematically, whoever did this went through the house systematically, and spend a lot of time there…” – Dennis Kucinich
On November 5, just before the election, Dennis Kucinich returned home to Cleveland, from Washington, to find that his home had been burglarized in a rather unique fashion.
Could this have anything to do with Kucinich’s rather harsh testimony at the Benghazi Attack Hearings? Considering that the Benghazi incident seems to be spinning out of control, with the strange resignation of CIA Director David Petraeus just before he was set to testify before Congress, you have to wonder.
Perhaps someone believed Kucinich had some “papers” with evidence about what really occurred in Benghazi, or maybe someone was just looking for dirt on him. It seems quite illogical that regular burglars would risk spending the time to systematically go through papers.
2012.11.8 Kucinich Says His House Was Burglarized (WEWSTV, youtube.com):
CLEVELAND – The Cleveland home of Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) was ransacked and burglarized sometime over the weekend.
“You know, it’s just disappointing at the least and a little bit shocking,” Kucinich said. The intruders turned the inside of his home upside down.
“Systematically, whoever did this went through the house systematically, and spend a lot of time there,” Kucinich said. “Everything has been gone through, papers rifled, just everything.”
Kucinich, the U.S. Representative for the 10th Congressional District, made the disturbing discovery when he returned home from Washington Monday afternoon.
“I opened the door and all of the sudden I saw things were everywhere. I went from one room to another, one floor to another, and the whole place had been ransacked,” Kucinich said.
He said the intruders had to have known it was his home; the congressman has lived there for more than 40 years, and his name and photos are everywhere inside.
“I don’t have any idea what they could have been looking for, but whatever it was, it’s going to take me weeks to figure out what might be missing, and I already know that some things are,” Kucinich said.
He did not say what was stolen.
Kucinich has been in congress since 1997 and ran for president in 2004 and 2008.
This is his last term in congress.
He hopes police catch whoever broke in.
“This has happened to other people I know that and there are people on the East Coast that are suffering badly. They have lost everything. But at the same time, it happened and it’s a little bit shocking and it’s a big cleanup,” Kucinich said.
Anyone with information is urged to contact Cleveland police, 1st District at (216) 623-5100.
2012.11.7 Kucinich Responds To Burglary (fox8.com):
WAR ON SYRIA; NATO’s Free Syrian Army (FSA) Puppets Get First Salary In 6 Months, ‘Crisp US $100 Bills’
They work for free, that’s why they’re called the “Free Syrian Army”…
So NATO and their puppet Islamic States’ strategy of not paying these “95 Percent Foreign Insurgents” for up to 6 months must work out well since they don’t have to pay all the dead ones… you can almost hear the London bankers rubbing their hands together and toasting their brandy glasses.
Countries mentioned by name in the AFP article below as paying the Free Syrian Army (FSA) salaries include Qatar, Turkey, and rather opaquely, “Gulf States” and “Islamic States”. So if this is such a wonderful and righteous cause why don’t they proudly display their names?
Of particular interest is also the mention of the “Revolutionary Military Councils” and the “Association Of Muslim Scholars”.
The US Treasury’s exclusive TERRORISM LICENSEE the Syrian Support Group Inc. (SSG), their Director Of Government Relations (ie, terrorism lobbyist) Brian Sayers admitted in his BBC interview that their group is supplying NATO’s Free Syrian Army (FSA) terrorists with money (crisp US $100 bills?) and weapons via “Revolutionary Military Councils”. Sayers proudly mentions his organizations deep contact and control of these “Military Councils” a number of times in the interview.
The “Association Of Muslim Scholars” must be referring to the International Union For Muslim Scholars (IUMS) run out of London by Oxford Trustee. and Muslim Brotherhood (MB) intellectual leader, Sheikh Yusuf Al Qaradawi. This is the same Al Qaradawi who issued a fatwa against Gadhafi live on Al Jazeera TV (ie, the Qatar propaganda channel) urging the Libyan Army to kill Gadhafi… this was less than a month before the NATO bombings started.
It’s simply amazing how perfectly in sync Sheikh Al Qaradawi was with Britain’s and NATO’s plans for the coup of Libya, and how perfectly in sync he is once again with their desire for a coup of Syria… I’m sure it’s nothing to do with the Sheikh’s status as an Oxford Trustee.
ALEPPO, Syria — After months of fighting without pay, Syrian rebels in Aleppo are receiving their first salaries, paid with money commanders say is at least in part provided by foreign states.
In Aleppo’s old city area, fighters gave their names to defected Syrian military officer Colonel Abdul Salam Humaidi, who searched through lists provided by rebel commanders before paying the men in crisp US $100 bills.
The rebels made thumbprints in ink next to their names to indicate they had been paid.
As the fighters gathered, the crack of rifle fire could be heard from elsewhere in the old city, just one of many areas in Syria’s one-time commercial capital that have become battlegrounds between forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad and rebels fighting to overthrow his regime.
“The revolutionary military councils … are undertaking to distribute monthly salaries to the fighters, especially on the front lines,” Humaidi told AFP.
All fighters are now paid US $150 per month, but this may change in the future, with different salaries given to those who are married and those who are on the front lines, he said.
Humaidi said he “defected from the military after 30 years of service, because the regime is corrupt and sectarian.” He is now a financial official for the rebel Revolutionary Military Council.
He declined to say where the payroll cash was from, but rebel commanders in Aleppo told AFP it came from foreign assistance and from other supporters, though they differed on the specific countries involved.
“The Military Council (is) distributing the salaries, with Qatari support … of US $150 per person registered for two months,” said Haji al-Bab, a commander in the Tawhid Brigade, adding that fighters who are not registered are not being paid.
Ahmed Arur, a commander in the Saqur al-Sham Brigade, said that “international assistance (and) Syrian opposition traders are paying the salaries for the Free Army.”
And Sheikh Mahmud Mujadami, a commander from the Halab al-Shahbaa Brigade, said sources of the money include “Turkey, from the Gulf states, from … Islamic states,” and the Association of Muslim Scholars.
For the fighters battling the Assad regime’s heavy weapons with light arms for which they sometimes even lack ammunition, the money has been a long time coming.
“We obtained salaries in the amount of US $150, and we will use it for pocket money and for the family, for the house,” said Mohammed al-Nasser, who has fought for six months without being paid.
He is married and has a son, but his family was able to get by with aid they received in Turkey. Now, they are back in Syria.
Ahmed al-Shawaf said he was a fighter for five months without a salary, and that while this did not personally cause his family hardship, there are “many difficulties” for a person who is “the only one working, and he stops his work because of the revolution.”
He said that individual battalion commanders can decide to give fighters assistance.
Hussein Ristum defected from the police about three months ago, losing his salary.
“I was depending on the salary for my family, (but) thanks be to God, here in the Tawhid Brigade we do not need anything, food, we receive everything,” he said.
Rebel forces helped his family during the time he served without pay. He said there were “difficulties, but thanks be to God, the Free Army and the guys provided housing.”
2012.10.23 After Months Of Waiting, First Pay Day Comes For Syria Rebels (AFP, chinapost.com.tw):
2012.10.23 ‘US Seeks Afghan Type War In Syria’ (Shows Crisp US $100 Bills) (PressTV, youtube.com):
The United States seeks a rise in the Syrian conflict, attempting to mimic a Soviet Union, Afghanistan -style war, a political analyst tells Press TV.
While an international proposal has been made for a truce in Syria, the insurgents in the Arab country are receiving US dollars and heavy weaponry from their foreign supporters.
Some regional and trans-regional states also provide the armed groups with
sophisticated and heavy machine guns to assist them in fighting against the
Syrian army forces.
This is while UN-Arab League Special Representative for Syria Lakhdar Brahimi called on the Syrian government and the foreign-backed insurgents to unilaterally declare a ceasefire.
The Syrian government says it will support the truce proposal only if the Western countries and their regional allies stop supporting and financing the insurgents.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Ali Al-Ahmed, director, IGA, from Chicago, to further discuss the issue.
WAR ON AFRICA; Mali, UNSC Approves 45 Day Timeline For MILITARY INVASION, France To Fund, Arm & Advise ECOWAS, Operation Sabre Already Active
Arms illegally dropped into Libya by France to overthrow Gadhafi have been used by the anti French colonialist Tuareg Independence Movement to secure themselves an independent state in Northern Mali. France and the US are labeling the Tuareg as “Al Qaeda” (yes, the same group they funded to overthrow Libya) to justify an invasion of Mali that has just been unanimously approved by the UN Security Council (UNSC). One would have to wonder how China and Russia could be so easily “fooled” into going along with this. I believe this is further evidence showing all members of the UNSC are working together to crush any independent country on earth… so that all countries are under the UN’s fascist boot.
The real trick about this French neo colonialism is that they will have African troops from the western controlled puppet Economic Community Of West African States (ECOWAS) to do the invasion for them… yes, just get their black brothers to do an “intervention” and to “help them”… look over there, white man didn’t do a thing, it was ECOWAS!! Except of course there’s the inconvenient fact that France will be running the entire show… they’ve agreed to fund, arm, and support it all. France has already been covertly invading Mali since at least September when it launched “Operation Sabre” which France has been running out of the neighboring countries of Burkina Faso, Chad, Mauritania, and Niger. 
France is simply repeating the same formula it used in the forced overthrow of the Ivory Coast’s government in 2011. This also used the western controlled puppet ECOWAS forces for the ground invasion, backed up by air support and bombings by France… but that didn’t seem to make the news, just like Mali probably won’t make the news.
Also note that last weekend the President of Mauritania was “accidentally shot” by his own troops, and then flown to a French military hospital outside Paris for treatment … hmmm… I wonder if he was refusing to go along with something??… just a thought.
HAS MALI REQUESTED OR HAVE THEY BEEN FORCED TO ACCEPT AN “INTERVENTION”?? :
The United States wants Mali to accept an intervention force from the Economic Community of West African States because the country is incapable of adequately countering AQIM fighters.
“The Malian military has been broken,” Carson told VOA. “It is now in need of restructuring and repair and rehabilitation. It should accept the support, the camaraderie, the mentoring and the friendship of other ECOWAS states as it attempts to get itself together so that it can help address the issues of terrorism in the northern part of the country, as well as humanitarian support.”
Mali has asked the U.N. Security Council for a resolution that would authorize an ECOWAS-led military force to fight rebels in the northern part of the country.
2012.10.16 France’s Push For War In Mali Appears Unstoppable (PressTV, youtube.com):
After insistent French lobbying, the UN Security Council unanimously approved a 45-day timeline to devise a military invasion of Mali. France has promised to fund, arm and advise a purely African force in order reunite its former colony.
Ramin Mazaheri, Press TV, Paris
2012.4.4 French Arms To Libya Used In Mali (PressTV, youtube.com):
The UN Security Council has accepted the French-dominated proposal to end hostilities in Mali’s emerging civil war.
Press TV’s Ramin Mazaheri reports from Paris.
 2012.9.25 France Launches Operation Sabre In West Africa (africareview.com):
 2012.10.14 Mauritania’s President Heads To France For Treatment After Shooting (President Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz) (cnn.com):
 2012.10.3 European Official; Al Qaeda Threat In Northern Africa Spreading (AQIM) (security.blogs.cnn.com):
BENGHAZI ATTACK HEARINGS; Kucinich Blasts Libya Intervention, Al Qaeda Is GROWING, 20K SHOULDER TO AIR MISSILES MISSING
“Their [Al Qaeda] presence grows every day, they are certainly more established [in Libya] than we are…” – Lt. Col. Wood
Note that the Patrick Kennedy being grilled below by Dennis Kucinich is the same Patrick Kennedy from the State Department that admitted “intelligence officials” asked (told) his agency NOT TO DENY A VISA to the underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
2012.10.10 Security Failures Of Benghazi (Kucinich Grills Patrick Kennedy & Lt. Col. Wood) (youtube.com):
This older CNN report below discusses the 20K missiles missing in Libya, and also mentions that “they can be used to make car bombs”… hmmm… I wonder how NATO’s Free Syrian Army (FSA) terrorists are making those huge car bombs in Syria??
2011.9.12 20K Surface To Air Missiles Stolen In Libya (CNN, youtube.com):