Esa intensidad que significa que no hay combates de tanques y aviones, ni una guerra declarada, es sin embargo una forma antigua de hacer la guerra. Se llama terrorismo.
Se llama matar a gente y sembrar el terror por doquier.
No hay guerra declarada, pero de facto hay una guerra en marcha, con dos lados armados. Por un lado, un estado soberano y por otro gente armada por el imperio para derrocar ese gobierno.
Nadie se esconde ya: el objetivo ha sido y sigue siendo derrocar al gobierno sirio.
El fin justifica los medios?
Desde que los ministros de Rajoy, en especial Montoro y Ana Mato, decidieron explicar didácticamente los porqués de la demolición del Estado, entendemos las cosas mucho mejor. He aquí un resumen, claro como el agua, de sus argumentos: Se pone precio a la sanidad para que continúe siendo gratuita y se expulsa de ella a determinados colectivos para que siga siendo universal. Se liquidan las leyes laborales para salvaguardar los derechos de los trabajadores y se penaliza al jubilado y al enfermo para proteger a los colectivos más vulnerables. En cuanto a la educación, ponemos las tasas universitarias por las nubes para defender la igualdad de oportunidades y estimulamos su privatización para que continúe siendo pública. No es todo, ya que al objeto de mantener el orden público amnistiamos a los delincuentes grandes, ofrecemos salidas fiscales a los defraudadores ambiciosos y metemos cuatro años en la cárcel al que rompa una farola. Todo este programa reformador de gran calado no puede ponerse en marcha sin mentir, de modo que mentimos, sí, pero al modo de los novelistas: para que la verdad resplandezca. Dentro de esta lógica implacable, huimos de los periodistas para dar la cara y convocamos ruedas de prensa sin turno de preguntas para responder a todo. Nadie que tenga un poco de buena voluntad pondrá en duda por tanto que hemos autorizado la subida del gas y de la luz a fin de que resulten más baratos y que obedecemos sin rechistar a Merkel para no perder soberanía. A no tardar mucho, quizá dispongamos que los aviones salgan con más retraso para que lleguen puntuales. Convencidos de que el derecho a la información es sagrado en toda democracia que se precie, vamos a tomar RTVE al asalto para mantener la pluralidad informativa. A nadie extrañe que para garantizar la libertad, tengamos que suprimir las libertades.
En 1922, est fondée la société YPF en Argentine. C’est la première compagnie pétrolière publique en Ibéro-Amérique. Elle doit alors devenir un catalyseur stratégique pour le développement industriel du pays. En 1993, elle est privatisée par le président Carlos Menem, puis vendue à Repsol en 1998.
Liée entre autres aux intérêts britanniques, la direction espagnole de Repsol décida de dépouiller cette société. Fait admis par leFinancial Times de Londres reconnaissant “que l’espagnole l’utilisait comme une vache à lait afin de réinvestir les profits ailleurs dans le monde”. L’absence d’investissement et de nouveaux forages avait créé une telle pénurie de pétrole et de gaz que l’Argentine fut obligée, en 2011 et ce pour la première fois en 17 ans, d’importer l’un et l’autre, en dépit de ses ressources abondantes. (EIR).
Le 16 avril 2012, la présidente argentine Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner a annoncé qu’elle venait de signer un décret expropriant 51% de la compagnie pétrolière YFP sur les 56% détenus par la société espagnole Repsol depuis 1998. Ceci afin de permettre au pays de retrouver sa “souveraineté en matière d’hydrocarbures” et d’assurer le développement futur de la nation. « Les actions de la Présidente rappellent celles prises par feu son mari, l’ancien président Nestor Kirchner, en 2005, lorsqu’il annonça une restructuration de la dette imposant aux créanciers une réduction de 75%, faisant valoir que le peuple passait avant les créanciers internationaux. En 2006, Kirchner a fini par rembourser les fonds dus par l’Argentine au FMI, déclarant qu’’il existe une vie après le FMI, et cette vie est bonne’ ».
Cette décision courageuse sera-t-elle suivie par d’autres pays comme la Grèce et l’Espagne (et bien d’autres qui seront dans une situation similaire prochainement), qui passent sous le rouleau compresseur des pieuvres du cartel bancaire ? Est-ce le début d’une révolte des dirigeants contre les sociétés secrètes qui mènent notre monde ? Tout dépend du courage de ceux qui mènent (officiellement) ces pays mais qui ont souvent fait allégeance pour exercer des fonctions gouvernementales. S’agissant de l’Argentine, cela fait déjà pas mal d’années que la Haute finance anonyme et vagabonde a quelques soucis avec ses dirigeants.
Pas étonnant, dans ce paradigme, que cette bonne employée du cartel bancaire qu’est C. Lagarde soit montée au créneau de la présidence du FMI pour qualifier d’’’odieuses’’ toute comparaison entre la Grèce et l’Argentine ou l’idée que la Grèce adopte une restructuration similaire de sa dette. Dans la foulée, les pions politiques du cartel ont reçu une piqûre de rappel pour exprimer leur allégeance en menaçant d’isoler l’Argentine et de la laisser se débrouiller toute seule. Pour cette classe politique européenne corvéable, qui s’en met plein les poches (peu importe leur étiquette): servir la communauté bancaire est bien plus important que se soucier du bien commun des populations.
C’est ainsi que «le secrétaire du Foreign Office William Hague a promis que la Grande-Bretagne coopérerait avec l’Espagne et nos partenaires de l’UE pour s’assurer que les autorités argentines respectent leurs obligations et engagements internationaux». (Ainsi, ceux-là mêmes qui exigent une austérité meurtrière en Espagne volent au secours des intérêts financiers espagnols.) (Source : Strategic Alert)
Cuando pienso en el agujero famoso de la capa de ozono no dejo de asociarlo a todo el negocio que generó.
Me acuerdo de los CFC, y de todo el movimiento comercial que generó para neveras, aires acondicionados y demás máquinas.
Con ese agujero como consecuencia, encontramos los malos, y como en las películas, a los malos hay que matarlos.
Con el calentamiento global pasa lo mismo, y con más cosas.
Aquí otro ejemplo de lo que nos venden
Pero ya no sólo que tengamos que pagar la tasa para beneficio de algunos, sino que pagamos para beneficio de unos que dicen que hay calentamiento, y los otros que dicen que todo lo contrario.
Así generando incertidumbre y miedo, va el mundo poquito a poco.
Según Al Gore, ese aspirante a presidente que se quedó en pregonero del sistema, la causa del calentamiento global es humana.
Da por sentado que hay calentamiento global, cuando eso queda por lo menos en entredicho.
Mientras le dan un oscar por su maniobra propagandista, aviones con gases y sistemas de control de la ionosfera intentan hacer pensar que es así.http://www.galileomovement.com.au/political_scam_exposed.php
Gilad Atzmon apunta bien diciendo que el peligro no es Irán, sino Israel. Ya somos mucha gente en pensar que el peligro no es Irán, sino el estado loco y belicoso de Israel.
Pero aún quedan demasiados que creen lo contrario: los manipulados, vendidos, o comprados.
Se encuentra, Rajoy Berlusconi y la reina de Inglaterra en el infierno... Berlusconi le contaba a la reina de Inglaterra que había un teléfono rojo en el infierno y que iba a hablar con el diablo para pedirle autorización para usarlo. Rápidamente, fue y le pidió al diablo permiso para hacer una llamada a Italia, para saber como quedaba el país después de su partida. El diablo le concedió la llamada y habló durante 2 minutos. Al colgar, el diablo le dijo que el costo de la llamada eran 3 millones de dólares, y Berlusconi le pagó.
Al enterarse de esto, la reina de Inglaterra quiso hacer lo mismo y llamó a Inglaterra durante 5 minutos. El diablo le pasó una cuenta de 10 millones de libras.
Rajoy también sintió ganas de llamar a España para ver como había dejado el país, y habló durante 3 horas. Cuando colgó, el diablo le dijo que eran 25 céntimos de Euro. > Marianico se quedó atónito, pues había visto el costo de las llamadas de los demás, así que le preguntó por qué era tan barato llamar a España... Y el diablo le respondió:
- Mira, barbas, con la cantidad de parados, las huelgas, los problemas en los hospitales públicos madrileños, los problemas educativos, la prima de riesgo, la Gurtel, la inmigración, la falta de justicia, , la impunidad y corrupción política, la inseguridad ciudadana, el desgobierno, Camps, los incendios, la bolsa , la chuleria chascarrillera de Esperanza Aguirre, los problemas de vivienda, la Rudi, Soraya y Cospedal, Gallardón y el inefable Aznar desde las FAES, la reforma laboral, la banca corrupta, la familia real, el yerno mangarín, España será un caos, un infierno... ¡Y de infierno a infierno la llamada es LOCAL!
El expresidente de EE.UU. George W. Bush emitió un ultimátum a Sadam Hussein antes de bombardear e invadir Irak.
Nueve años después, el presidente de EE.UU. Barack Obama ha emitido un ultimátum a los dirigentes de Teherán Teherán antes de… establecer condiciones óptimas para un ejercicio de “todas las opciones sobre la mesa”.
Obama ofrece a Teherán la “negociación” de su programa nuclear, antes de las muy retardadas conversaciones entre los "Seis de Irán" (P5+1, los cinco miembros permanentes del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU -EE.UU., Reino Unido, China, Rusia y Francia, más alemania) e Irán programada para el sábado en Estambul.
Para comenzar, no es una oferta; es una lista de exigencias, incluso antes de que tenga lugar ninguna negociación. Y esas concesiones “a medio plazo” están embaladas –según la propia retórica del presidente– como una “última oportunidad”.
En los tiempos modernos, esto se solía considerar un ultimátum. En la era post-todo se considera la "diplomacia internacional".
Obama quiere que Teherán cierre y de hecho destruya la planta de enriquecimiento Fordow, construida bajo una montaña en las afueras de la ciudad sagrada de Qom; quiere que Teherán renuncie definitivamente y “entregue” todas sus reservas de uranio enriquecido al 20%; que detenga todo tipo de enriquecimiento, incluso hasta un inofensivo 5% (lo que significa que Irán renuncie a todo su programa nuclear civil, al cual tiene derecho según el Tratado de No Proliferación Nuclear); que permita el pleno acceso de los inspectores del organismo Internacional de Energía Atómica (OIEA) a todas las instalaciones nucleares iraníes (ya lo tienen); y que permita que los inspectores hablen con todos los máximos científicos nucleares iraníes (no es exactamente posible; bastantes han sido asesinados por el Mossad israelí).
Por lo tanto, bienvenidos a la escuela de diplomacia de “date la vuelta y muérete” tal como ha sido perfeccionada por el gobierno de Obama, con una contribución vital del lobby de Israel en Washington. Es nuestro lado de la carretera. Y la carretera es al infierno, al sonido de “Bombardead, bombardead Irán”.
Otra guerra para el 1%
No es sorprendente que los proverbiales “funcionarios israelíes” estén deleitados de que Irán –a través de su Ministerio de Exteriores– haya rechazado esas exigencias como “irracionales”; para Tel Aviv, la respuesta iraní es “buena”.
“Buena” quiere decir que la lista de exigencias significa el inevitable fracaso de las conversaciones, que es el núcleo de la estrategia israelí. Después Obama podrá utilizar (lo utilizará) el fracaso como la excusa perfecta para aplicar sanciones aún más duras y quién sabe qué más.
Durante meses todo el aparato oficial israelí ha estado lavando los cerebros de la opinión pública israelí, estadounidense y europea a favor de la guerra contra Irán por todos los medios necesarios, manipulando todo desde una absurda “amenaza existencial” a la llegada de un “segundo Holocausto”.
Ahora toda la controversia con respecto a Fordow está vinculada al sesgo israelí de otro concepto tenebroso conocido como “esfera de inmunidad”. Tel Aviv insiste en que Fordow permitirá que Irán proteja los elementos más delicados de su programa nuclear, literalmente dentro de una montaña inmune a las más poderosas bombas revienta-búnkeres GBU-28 (que Obama, a propósito, aceptó vender a Israel).
Es una tontería absoluta. Tel Aviv inventó esa cortina de humo de la “esfera de inmunidad” después de que la actividad nuclear civil ya tenía lugar en Fordow, bajo supervisión del OIEA.
Sin embargo la cola vuelve a menear al perro. Washington vuelve a actuar bajo control remoto de Tel Aviv.
Los sondeos han mostrado que una mayoría de los israelíes –¿una demostración fabulosa de altruismo?– solo quiere una guerra contra Irán si el Gran Hermano EE.UU. la encabeza (y enfrenta las peores consecuencias). Y no importa que la nebulosa de la inteligencia israelí esté dividida.
El contexto es clave. Los 500 israelíes más ricos representan un valor de aproximadamente 75.000 millones de dólares. Eso en un país con un Producto Interno Bruto de solo 205.000 millones de dólares.
Las 20 familias israelíes más ricas controlan casi la mitad del mercado bursátil. En conjunto su riqueza es un 25% superior al presupuesto de Israel de 2011. ¿Y adivináis quiénes son? Los máximos partidarios de la coalición en el poder de Likud-Ysrael Beitenu, con el primer ministro Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu al timón. (Ysrael Beitenu está dirigido por el ministro de Exteriores Avigdor Lieberman).
Por lo tanto es la crema del 1% israelí la que quiere la guerra contra Irán, así como bastantes cucharadas de la crema del 1% de EE.UU.
La cuestión en todo este teatro de sombras de la “negociación” nuclear es vender a la opinión pública estadounidense –y mundial– la noción de que Irán vuelve a andarse con rodeos; tiene mucho que ocultar; y simplemente no se puede confiar en que participe en alguna negociación “seria”.
Los medios corporativos de EE.UU. ya han invalidado las negociaciones con los usuales misiles retóricos, lo que deleita a los belicistas de poltrona del Congreso de EE.UU. y a vastos sectores del complejo militar-industrial. Los que apoyan “Bombardead Irán” harán todo lo posible por sumar la “última oportunidad” de Obama a los ensordecedores tambores de la guerra.
No deja de sorprenderme la capacidad que existe en EE.UU(Israel) de crear fundaciones, organizaciones, ONGs y demás pantallas propagandísticas que se puedan usar para justificar lo injustificable.
Lo que sigue es un ejemplo:
This memo lays out six options for the United States to consider to achieve Asad’s overthrow, should it choose to do so:
1. Removing the regime via diplomacy;
2. Coercing the regime via sanctions and diplomatic isolation;
3. Arming the Syrian opposition to overthrow the regime;
4. Engaging in a Libya-like air campaign to help an opposition army gain victory;
5. Invading Syria with U.S.-led forces and toppling the regime directly; and
6. Participating in a multilateral, NATO-led effort to oust Asad and rebuild Syria.
No está sacado de ningún informe secreto de la CIA ni del departamento de estado americano.
En su página web sección about-us, tampoco se esconden, dándole apariencia de más normalidad.
Y lo que es normal, no es peligroso ni sospechoso.
Pero leer que un tal Haim Saban lo financia, y pide más financiación, que los directores son judíos, y que tienen muchas relaciones con todo el mundo judío, Israel, el shin-bet etc, pero opinan y dan lecciones sobre oriente medio, no deja de ser preocupante.
Meter a unos cuantos arabes de por miedo no deja de ser una artimaña para neófitos, igual que decir que ha sido patrocinado por la casa real jordana.
Ya se han cumplido más de 100 dias desde que ganó Mariano Rajoy las elecciones. Más de 100 dias que es presidente del gobierno.
Pues bien, en esos 100 dias no cesa de jugar al gato y al ratón con la prensa para no hacer ninguna declaración pública.
Él no hace declaraciones, su partido tampoco le deja o se lo permite. Es lo que tiene la mayoría absoluta en política o los monopólios en el mercado: haces lo que te da la gana.
Lo malo que esto es una democracia, y este señor se debe a los españoles, le hayan o no votado. Ni se debe a su partido ni a sus asesores de imágen, ni amiguetes.
Lo único que le honra, o que se le puede intuir al señor Rajoy es un sentido de vergüenza profundo que le impide seguir dando la cara por haber mentido. Por haber difamado a sus contrincantes, y por ser un cínico y darse cuenta de ello ahora.
No digo que los que gobernaban cuando él era la oposición fueran mejores, pero engañaron mejor.
En este caso se les ha visto el plumero a Rajoy, su partido, su gobierno, y a sus ministros. Ya es público el amiguismo sin tapujos.
El rey de España de Safari se va en plena tormenta financiera a cazar elefantes.
Su yerno anda desfalcando a través de unas pseudo empresas / Oenegistas dinero público con la bendición de su señora.
Su nieto, se dispara en los pies, y el padre de este se va de juicio por imprudente.
Una ensalada perfecta de la casa real en tiempos bajos para centrar la atención del público nacional e internacional.
Arden las redes sociales. Los políticos de cualquier signo, se mojan, insinúan o defienden la realeza.
Las portadas de los periódicos están cubiertas de Safaris, de elefantes, de nietos, de yernos, y parece que lo único que preocupa a España es la casa de Borbón.
Mientras esto ocurre, España se va a una ruina económica, financiera y social como nunca se había visto antes.
El veterano Iñaki Gabilondo habla de "conjura" contra la casa real, pero hay que ser torpe para pensar que esa realeza vaya a caer ahora y menos por eso. Podría caer por la participación del Rey en el 23-F, pero de eso ya no se habla ni se quiere hablar.
Tampoco se quiere hablar de la cruda realidad que rodea a España, que es un saqueo sistemático de las instituciones democráticas y su sociedad del bienestar.
De la corrupción generalizada tanto de un bando como de otros que han dejado este país en pelotas.
Se desinforma sobre las guerras y se manipulan los datos económicos para beneficio de quien los maneje.
Se recortan derechos. Aumenta la censura. Se privatiza lo público. Desaparece la igualdad, pero en España se es anti monarquía aunque se muera uno y su familia de hambre.
Amnesty International Propaganda Targets Russia & Syria
Shameless propaganda stunt by US State Department run, Soros-funded front Amenesty International.
by Tony Cartalucci
April 13, 2012 - The Amnesty International "infographic" titled, "Shocking Facts About Who’s Arming Human Rights Abusers," portraying Russia's arming of Syria as "fueling the most bloodshed" is not "shocking" at all when one realizes the disingenuous human rights advocacy organization is run by US State Department officials and is funded by convicted criminal George Soros' Open Society Institute (annual report page 8) as well as the UK Department for International Development (page 8), the European Commission, and other corporate-funded foundations. The "infographic," in this context, clearly becomes a case of shameless, politically motivated propaganda using the Amnesty International "brand" to give it the legitimacy its increasingly distrusted sponsors lack.
Image: Amnesty International's "infographic" aimed at the lowest possible intellectual denominator in their target audience. While Syria might be the biggest enemy of the US currently, it is by no means the greatest human rights violator - Ugandan "president-for-life" Museveni displaces entire populations of tens of thousands of people in single US-British land grabs and has led regional military campaigns that have killed millions - yet he receivesmillions in military aid and arms from the West. Such hypocrisy reveals Amnesty International as the politically-motivated front it ultimately is. (click here to enlarge)
....
The graphic is so inaccurate, so full of such overt, easily refuted lies, it must be aimed at the most ignorant, impressionable members of Western society. It also contains glaring inexplicable hypocrisy. For instance, while Russia defends its arming of Syria's government by citing documented evidence that the unrest is being fomented by foreign-funded, well armed terrorists committing a multitude of atrocities, even according to Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International's sister organization, what imaginable excuse could France, Germany, the US, or the UK have for arming Syria, Bahrain, Yemen, or Libya past or present - especially when these same nations have justified the total summation of their foreign meddling and military interventionism with acting upon "humanitarian concerns?"
The UN number was likewise based on hearsay, taken from opposition members in Geneva and compiled by Fortune 500 think-tank director, Karen Koning AbuZayd. AbuZayd sits on theWashington D.C. based Middle East Policy Council, along side current and former associates of Exxon, the US military, the CIA, the Saudi Binladin Group, the US-Qatari Business Counciland both former and current members of the US government. Clearly, by representing the very interests who have been trying to reorder the Arab World for their own convenience for decades, AbuZayd's involvement compromises the entire UN report as well as the credibility of the UN itself.
Image: Amnesty International using the same "activism 2.0" gags employed by their junior partners at Invisible Children, the perpetrators of the Kony 2012 scam. Note the "Donate Now: Fight bad guys with every dollar," and how like Invisible Children, Amnesty addresses its audience as if they are children - a tried and true method employed by propagandists. Ironically, Amnesty and Invisible Children also both so happen to cultivate a myriad of connections with the US State Department and corporate interests.
....
But perhaps what is most offensive of all, is not the intelligence-insulting lies told by Amnesty International, but rather the information they failed to include in their "infographic." This includes information like the 60-billion dollar arms deal the US signed with notorious human rights abuser Saudi Arabia - the largest arms deal in US history - and the billions upon endless billions of dollars sent to the Israeli government to maintain its belligerent regional posture as well as maintain their nation-sized concentration camp, sometimes called "Palestine."
At best, the only difference between Russia's arming the legitimate government of Syria, and the US arming Libyan terrorists, Saudi despots, and Israeli megalomaniacs is clever Western propaganda used to mischaracterize each instance, justifying it when it suits the West, and demonizing it when arms dealing works against them. At worst, the difference is in fact that Russia is arming standing governments while the US and its NATO-Arab League partners are veritably arming notorious terrorist organizations, many listed on both British and US government lists of "foreign terrorist organizations." This includes the Iraqi-Iranian Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), the aforementioned LIFG, and Baluchi terrorists on the Iranian-Pakistani border.
The purpose of this arming of terrorists is to do exactly what Amnesty International accuses Russia of doing, fueling bloodshed. In fact, as the West demanded Syria's President Bashar al-Assad to withdraw troops from Syrian cities according to a UN brokered "peace plan," the West's proxy rebels openly denounced the deal and promised to fight on. Instead of berating the rebels, the West along with their Arab League partners pledged cash and weapons to the rebels encouraging them to flaunt the "peace deal" and indeed perpetuate the bloodshed.
And this is only the latest in a long series of politically-motivated stunts pulled by Amnesty International specifically targeting both Russia and Syria. Whatever credibility Amnesty International might have had left after its participation in the destruction of Libya and indeed its own "fueling of bloodshed" in North Africa, it has completely buried under the battlefields of Syria.
A mi me suena desde el principio a un 11S cualquiera. Digo cualquiera porque ha habido tantos ataques de bandera falsa (false flag attacks) a lo largo de los recientes decenios que uno no deja de dudar.
Entre guerras preventivas justificadas con mentiras y otras en pos de la democracia yo ya dejo de fiarme de las notcias como son.
Hay que colocarlas en el contexto. Hay que ver a quienes afectan. Hay que ver a quienes y cómo les benefician.
Como siempre, el que sale beneficiado es el culpable.
Las víctimas si es posible, que sean las vítcimas por excelencia: primero judíos, y luego el resto de la humanidad. Si son niños, además que sean judíos. Si son mujeres lo mismo.
Jugando con la fibra sensible del personal se consiguen efectos insospechados. Es más, se consigue justo lo que se necesita, que es, manipular a la opinión pública para unos fines, y que apruebe las medidas que se adoptan.
Es todo tan novelesco en el caso de Toulouse con Mareh a la cabeza que desde el principio apestaba a manipulación.
Era de película.
Tanto, que conozco a gente que estaba enganchada a los medios para saber el desarrollo de todo, como si fuera la típica serie norteamericana de suspense y acción.
Mis serias dudas empezaron cuando inicialmente matan a dos paracaidistas y luego a unos judíos.
Con los recientes antecedentes de Sarko en Libia y Siria. Con unas elecciones que no están seguros de ganar. Con los escándalos de sus operaciones especiales, y cuando el tan temido y odiado enemigo como son los rusos y los chinos, les tienen bien pillados, no me extraña que de repente ocurran estas cosas.
Israeli press reported this evening that French gunman Mohamed Merah had been on a trip to Israel in the past.
According to the report, Merah's passport had Israeli stamps in it. The purpose of his visit is unknown. Israeli analysts suspect he was either trying to visit the Palestinian territories or preparing for a terror attack.
However, I won’t rule out the possibility that Merah was actually trained by Israeli forces. Marah may have conducted a false flag operation. By way of deception is, after all, the Mossad’s motto.
Read the story of Naeim Giladi, an Israeli agent operating in Iraq in the late 1940’s.
“On May 10, at 3 a.m., a grenade was tossed in the direction of the display window of the Jewish-owned Beit-Lawi Automobile Company, destroying part of the building. No casualties were reported.
On June 3, 1950, another grenade was tossed from a speeding car in the El-Batawin area of Baghdad where most rich Jews and middle class Iraqis lived. No one was hurt, but following the explosion Zionist activists sent telegrams to Israel requesting that the quota for immigration from Iraq be increased.
On June 5, at 2:30 a.m., a bomb exploded next to the Jewish-owned Stanley Shashua building on El-Rashid street, resulting in property damage but no casualties.
On January 14, 1951, at 7 p.m., a grenade was thrown at a group of Jews outside the Masouda Shem-Tov Synagogue. The explosive struck a high-voltage cable, electrocuting three Jews, one a young boy, Itzhak Elmacher, and wounding over 30 others. Following the attack, the exodus of Jews jumped to between 600-700 per day.
Zionist propagandists still maintain that the bombs in Iraq were set off by anti-Jewish Iraqis who wanted Jews out of their country. The terrible truth is that the grenades that killed and maimed Iraqi Jews and damaged their property were thrown by Zionist Jews.”
First the shooting suspect was supposed to be an ex-military with "neo-Nazi" conections then all of the sudden the media started calling him a Muslim with links to Al Qaeda.
Mohammed Merah, the suspect in the killing of seven people outside a Jewish school in Toulouse, France, fits the pattern of an al-Qaeda intelligence asset. According to the BBC, he was on the radar of French authorities because of visits he made to Afghanistan and the "militant stronghold" of Waziristan in Pakistan (edit and Jordan, India and Israel).
More specifically, Merah was handled by France's DCRI intelligence service "for years," according to Claude Gueant, the interior minister.
Merah, a French citizen of Algerian origin, was arrested on December 19, 2007, and was sentenced to three years in jail for planting bombs in the southern province of Kandahar in Afghanistan.
In April of 2011, the United States admitted it has operated secret military prisons in Afghanistan where suspected terrorists are held and interrogated without charges.
The notorious Bagram airbase detention center is operated by the Joint Special Operations Command and the DIA's Defense Counterintelligence and Human Intelligence Center (DCHC).
The DCHC "will be responsible for developing an 'offensive counterintelligence operations'... capability for the Department of Defense, which may entail efforts to penetrate, deceive and disable foreign intelligence activities directed against U.S. forces," Secrecy News reported in 2008 after the government announced the creation of DCHC.
The Pentagon and the CIA specialize in creating terrorists as part of a so-called covert and unconventional war doctrine dating back to the end of the Second World War (see Michael McClintock's Instruments of Statecraft: U.S. Guerilla Warfare, Counterinsurgency, and Counterterrorism, 1940-1990 for an in-depth examination).
Although virtually ignored by the corporate media, it is an established fact that the CIA and Pakistani intelligence created what is now known as al-Qaeda out of the remnants of the Afghan mujahideen following the CIA's covert three billion dollar war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
It was the so-called Safari Club - organized under the CIA and with the participation of intelligence agencies in France, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco and (under the Shah) Iran - that ramped up the largely contrived threat of international terrorism prior to and during the CIA's manufactured war in Afghanistan (see Peter Dale Scott, Launching the U.S. Terror War: the CIA, 9/11, Afghanistan, and Central Asia).
Intelligence agencies have specialized in the covert - and not so covert - creation of terrorists which are then used to provide a cynical raison d'être for launching military intervention around the world and also providing a pretext to build and expand a domestic surveillance police state.
A textbook example of this process is the Christmas Day, 2009, underwear bomber fiasco - subsequently exposed as a false flag event - that was exploited to push for installing dangerous radiation-emitting naked body porno scanners at U.S. airports.
Mohammed Merah, the suspect in the killing of seven people outside a Jewish school in Toulouse, France, fits the pattern of an al-Qaeda intelligence asset. According to the BBC, he was on the radar of French authorities because of visits he made to Afghanistan and the "militant stronghold" of Waziristan in Pakistan.
More specifically, Merah was handled by France's DCRI intelligence service "for years," according to Claude Gueant, the interior minister.
Merah, a French citizen of Algerian origin, was arrested on December 19, 2007, and was sentenced to three years in jail for planting bombs in the southern province of Kandahar in Afghanistan.
In April of 2011, the United States admitted it has operated secret military prisons in Afghanistan where suspected terrorists are held and interrogated without charges.
The DCHC "will be responsible for developing an 'offensive counterintelligence operations'... capability for the Department of Defense, which may entail efforts to penetrate, deceive and disable foreign intelligence activities directed against U.S. forces," Secrecy News reported in 2008 after the government announced the creation of DCHC.
Although virtually ignored by the corporate media, it is an established fact that the CIA and Pakistani intelligence created what is now known as al-Qaeda out of the remnants of the Afghan mujahideen following the CIA's covert three billion dollar war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
It was the so-called Safari Club - organized under the CIA and with the participation of intelligence agencies in France, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco and (under the Shah) Iran - that ramped up the largely contrived threat of international terrorism prior to and during the CIA's manufactured war in Afghanistan (see Peter Dale Scott, Launching the U.S. Terror War: the CIA, 9/11, Afghanistan, and Central Asia).
Intelligence agencies have specialized in the covert - and not so covert - creation of terrorists which are then used to provide a cynical raison d'être for launching military intervention around the world and also providing a pretext to build and expand a domestic surveillance police state.
A textbook example of this process is the Christmas Day, 2009, underwear bomber fiasco - subsequently exposed as a false flag event - that was exploited to push for installing dangerous radiation-emitting naked body porno scanners at U.S. airports.
The fact Mohammed Merah was in the custody of the Joint Special Operations Command in Afghanistan - and his supposed jail break at the Sarposa Prison was reportedly orchestrated by the Taliban (also cretaed by the CIA and Pakistan's ISI) - certainly raises questions about the attack in France, where a national election will soon be held.
The Telegraph reports that the attacks of the supposedly al-Qaeda connected Merah will play into the election bid of National Front candidate Marine Le Pen, who is unlikely to ever become the president of France.
for an in-depth examination).
It has, however, provided Nicolas Sarkozy with a pretext to put the southern part of the nation on high alert and cancel the campaigns of presidential contenders. Sarkozy stands to benefit from the terror attacks and play the role of a strong leader during a national crisis.
In the short term it is likely that President Nicolas Sarkozy will benefit. Very quickly he took charge. He rushed to the scene. He suspended his campaign. He spoke as the president of the republic," writes Gavin Hewitt for the BBC.
To vote or not to vote, that is the question. Whether it is better to try and overturn a corrupt system by using the tools of that system to effect change or to completely discard what we know to be a lie, is a choice that each American must make. To that end, please look at the following videos that provide proof that election results can be stolen quite easily, especially when the people behind the system have everything to gain by doing so.
The first video shows who is behind the election management system. This name should ring a bell – Goldman Sachs.
This next video shows exactly how the electronic voting system can be manipulated quite easily.
Whether or not you decide to participate in the upcoming elections, be aware that the system is rigged.
As warmongers plot to destroy Syria, Syrians face only one choice.
by Tony Cartalucci
Editor's Note: Before considering the US military options in Syria, it would be instructive to re-read this article from March 21, 2011 titled, "Libyan War: Globalists Bluffing their way to Victory," to understand the true purpose of these current military options and how they were used effectively to win the otherwise unwinnable military campaign in Libya. Through terror and fear, the West was able to fold superior fighting forces that could have held out for years had they stood united.
March 19, 2012 - Corporate-funded think-tank and purveyor of US foreign policy, the Brookings Institution, had in 2009 literally blueprinted the strategy with which the West would slowly strangle and topple the government of Iran. Throughout the pages of their report, "Which Path to Persia?" everything from sanctions, to purposefully provoking war with Iran, to stoking US-backed uprisings, to funding, training, and arming US State Department-listed terror organizations was plotted before being promptly executed.
Amongst those signing their names to this treasonous conspiracy to commit mass-murder against a sovereign nation was Michael O'Hanlon. Besides contributing extensively to the West's corporate-media, he has no operational experience to speak of militarily, economically, or even administratively. He has never once shouldered a rifle for his nation, nor truly jeopardized his life for any cause he seemingly has no problem having tens of thousands of others die for in his stead. He is the quintessential imperial scribe.
Image: Also out of the Brookings Institution, Middle East Memo #21 "Assessing Options for Regime Change (.pdf)," makes no secret that "responsibility to protect" is but a pretext for long-planned regime change. Admissions that Syria's rebels are carrying out an increasing amount of sectarian violence (page 8), that Kofi Annan's mission to Syria is in fact to establish an occupied "safe haven" on Syrian territory to launch further attacks (page 4), as well as the involvement of Al Qaeda on the side of rebels are noteworthy points. The report would also state in reference to arming the rebels, "alternatively, the United States might calculate that it is still worthwhile to pin down the Asad regime and bleed it, keeping a regional adversary weak, while avoiding the costs of direct intervention," which contradicts the entire premise of the "humanitarian war" and the "responsibility to protect (R2P)" by purposefully prolonging violent conflict.
.....
O'Hanlon's most recent work involves spelling out the "military options" the US has in regards to Syria in an op-ed aptly titled, "What Are Our Military Options in Syria?"
The West purposefully destabilized Syria, and is currently perpetuating extensive bloodshed through militant proxies funded, trained, and armed by the West and operating on Syria's borders as well as within Syria itself. As the bloodshed mounts, the West is now insidiously using the carnage to justify more overt intervention to execute long planned regime change.
Just as it was spelled out and promptly executed in O'Hanlon's "Which Path to Persia?," the operation in Syria involves almost identical elements altered only slightly to suit Syria's geopolitical predisposition. US-backed uprisings, armed militants, and sanctions have all already been set in motion with overt military options being all that is left on the table.
The military options O'Hanlon envisions to achieve the overthrow of Syria's government include:
1. A punitive naval or air operation to encourage a coup against Assad: An outright act of war designed to completely cut off Syria, including its millions of civilians, from importing or exporting anything. There are also planned airstrikes designed to psychologically shake Assad's allies and panic them into defecting and instead "share power" with the US-backed opposition.
Of course, O'Hanlon must perceive the Syrian government as supreme ignoramuses to have seen how "sharing" was carried out inanother Brookings project, Libya, and still count this as a viable alternative to holding fast against foreign-funded militants. It was during NATO's campaign against Libya that many defectors ended up dead the absolute first moment theirservices were no longer required -or sometimes even beforehand. Case in point, General Abdul Fattah Younis.
Image: General Abdul Fattah Younis' reward for accepting offers to "power share" with the Libyan rebels was his assassination.
....
2. A broader Balkans-like campaign to help depose Assad. And by this, O'Hanlon of course means, a "Libyan-like campaign," but would rather focus on the Balkans because it is further in hindsight and much more has been done to rewrite its historical outcome as "favorable." Evoking the NATO-led genocidal killing spree that just unfolded in Libya, complete with the destruction of several major cities, would again remind potential defectors in Syria the cost of allowing their nation to fall into NATO hands.
That cost would be the plunging of Syria into perpetual division, instability, violence, and an uncertain political future that could see any defector a hero one minute and at the wrong end of a rifle the next. There will be no power sharing, there will be no seats at the table for "defectors," and as Libya has proven, it is very unlikely there will even be a table for seats to be placed around in the first place.
3. Creation of a safe zone for Syrian civilians: O'Hanlon indirectly admits that this would only be done as a means to eventually include one or both of the above mentioned options. This was already stated in "Genocidal Turkish Government Eyes Syria," where it appears that NATO-member Turkey has been elected to create just such a zone from which increasing hostilities could be conducted.
What O'Hanlon is really saying...
What must be remembered is that O'Hanlon is not writing this for the consideration of the Pentagon. Instead, he is specifically writing this so that pundits and media outlets can repeat what is essentially extortion directed at Syria's establishment. The purpose of this exercise is to prey on the fear of Assad's political allies and those across Syria's business community who have so far stood behind their nation's government.
It is hoped that the West can bluff their way into folding opposition by presenting them with a difficult and costly military campaign verses the alternative of "power sharing." Unfortunately for O'Hanlon and his superiors, Syria has already seen the dead end "power sharing" led to in Libya, a dead end Libya will remain in well into the foreseeable future. The rationale of businessmen capitulating to see UN sanctions relieved is also absurd considering the inevitable fracturing and perpetual destabilization that will wreck both the country and its economy should the current government fall.
Syria's opposition is entirely dependent on foreign fighters, foreign arms, foreign funds, and an international consensus that allows such foreign resources to continue flowing to them unabated. Already cracks have begun to show and now the West's only chance is to psychologically break Assad's power base through threats and perhaps even a limited military incursion. The catch is, should Syria remain united, order can be restored and nothing short of total war waged by the West could prevent it.
Syria has only one option.
Imperialism's favorite trick throughout time has been to purposefully mire a targeted nation in internal strife to weaken it before preying on, and ruling over, both sides. This can be seen encapsulated in the following ancient Chinese stratagem:
When a country is beset by internal conflicts, when disease and famine ravage the population, when corruption and crime are rampant, then it will be unable to deal with an outside threat. This is the time to attack. -The 36 Strategies, #5 Loot a Burning House
While it would likewise suit Assad's opponents, it is particularly important for those who have made the decision to stand by Syria's ruling government to stay the course of restoring order and pursuing political solutions.
The West has gone too far, its credibility and operational capacity waning by the day, it has no choice but to continue pushing forward in hopes that all before it lack the fortitude to stand up and fight. The West will not stop until either Syria is divided and destroyed or the West itself crumbles in the midst of its untenable imperial conquest. Defection, capitulation, and failure are not options. Syria's fate will be that of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, or worse if it falls. Unity is Syria's only option.
Kony 2012, hyped on the backs of celebrities and do-gooders, is revealed for what it is– a propaganda salvo for a continent wide invasion of Africa. Yes, the mantra War is Peace is once again drumming U.S. soldiers into further conflict.
It is not only War in the name of “Peace,” but an attempt to empower the International Criminal Court under the influence of NGOs and other related globalist corporate interests.
Nobel Peace Prize “winner” Barack Obama has already deployed 100 special forces troops to the central African region back in October 2011, and a resolution in Congress– on the heels of KONY 2012′s viral views of at lest 80 million– seeks to send more forces there for an all out invasion on the pretext of hunting down a shadowy warlord with less blood on his hands than an average African despot.
Top celebrities vying for greater power including CFR member and UN goodwill ambassadorAngelina Jolie, actor George Clooney, media baroness Oprah Winfrey, as well as Africa-obsessed Bill Gates and Bono, have all come out in front of this issue.
But behind KONY’s apparent urgency are the usual suspects, the hidden hands behind uprisings and color revolutions including the Arab Spring and Libyan invasion. A key World Net Daily investigation makes clear that George Soros and his International Crisis Group, headed by former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, and the likes of Samantha Power, a key member of Obama’s National Security Council advancing “humanitarian” causes, have significantly framed and shaped the manufactured crisis surrounding the now-famous head of the Lord’s Resistance Army. Like Libya, the Responsibility to Protect doctrine– created and advanced by Soros, Samantha Power and other power players– gives the impetus for intervention in the conflict. Groups like Invisible Children, who produced KONY 2012, are pawns in their game.
services were no longer required -or sometimes even beforehand. Case in point, 