Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The AFL-CIO’s Covert Ops in Venezuela

The Corrupting Influence of the NED

By ALBERTO C. RUIZ | CounterPunch | December 9, 2011

In 2002, the AFL-CIO’s international arm known as the “Solidarity Center” was greatly embarrassed when it came to light that it had been supporting actors in Venezuela participated in the short-lived coup against President Hugo Chavez.  As a number of authors and publications noted at the time, the Solidarity Center, with money donated from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), gave support to the Confederation of Venezuelan Workers (“CTV”) which in turn was instrumental in the coup against Chavez which, as the reader may call, involved the kidnapping of Hugo Chavez.

For example, the New York Times explained in an article entitled, “U.S. Bankrolling Is Under Scrutiny for Ties to Chavez Ouster,” that”[o]f particular concern is $154,377 given by the endowment to the American Center for International Labor Solidarity, the international arm of the AFL-CIO, to assist the main Venezuelan labor union in advancing labor rights.” As the Times noted, “The Venezuelan union, the Confederation of Venezuelan Workers, led the work stoppages that galvanized the opposition to Mr. Chavez. The union’s leader, Carlos Ortega, worked closely with Pedro Carmona Estanga, the businessman who briefly took over from Mr. Chavez, in challenging the government.”

And what’s more, it turns out that the Solidarity Center played a critical role, just before the coup, in bringing the CTV together with FEDECAMARAS (the Venezuelan chamber of commerce).  This is important because the CTV and FEDECAMARAS went on to plan and carry out the coup together.   However, quite curiously, the Solidarity Center did not stick around long enough to see how the coup ended up.  This is because it moved its office (which is in charge of the entire Andean Region) from Caracas, Venezuela to Bogota, Colombia just three weeks before the coup took place.

The Solidarity Center attempted to defend itself against charges that it was up to its old Cold War tricks of working with the U.S. government to overthrow progressive, nationalist governments in the Third World – e.g., in the overthrow of Allende in Chile and Arbenz in Guatemala – by denying that the CTV, which it supported up to and indeed through the time of the coup, had anything to do with the coup.  As the Boston Globe later noted in an article entitled, “US Tax Dollars Helped Finance Some Chavez Foes, Review Finds,” this denial had a hollow ring to it in light of the fact that “the Venezuelan media broadcast a recorded telephone conversation between [exiled former president Carlos Andres] Perez and Carlos Ortega, president of the Confederation of Venezuelan Workers [CTV], in which the pair plotted against Chavez.”   In the end, the AFL-CIO later privately conceded that the CTV leadership did actively participate in the coup against Chavez.  The same Boston Globe story concluded that the Solidarity Center’s other defense – that it was merely helping the CTV with matters of internal democratization – were also proven to be false.

This brings us to today.   If one concerned over such bad practices goes to the Solidarity Center website and clicks on the “Where We Work” link, one might feel relieved to see that Venezuela is notably absent from the list of countries in which the Solidarity Center does business.   Similarly, the Solidarity Center mentions nothing about Venezuela in its most recent Annual Report.   However, if one goes to the website of one of the Solidarity Center’s biggest patrons, the NED, one will find that this is misleading. Thus, the NED, in a section entitled, “Latin America Regional,” explains that it recently gave $400,000 to the Solidarity Center to carry out work both in Colombia and Venezuela.  I note that this amount is in addition to another $2 million the NED — which on its website openly expresses contempt for “21st Century Socialism” — gave to the Solidarity Center for other Latin American work.  And, as the NED explains, “in Venezuela, the SC will build on its ongoing work with partners . . . .” – quite ominous words given the nature of the work and partners the Solidarity Center has hitherto been involved with in Venezuela.

It is not publicly known what the AFL-CIO’s Solidarity Center – which receives nearly all of its funding from federal grants ($28 million out of its total annual budget of $30 million), including from such sources as the NED, the U.S. State Department and the USAID – is currently doing in Venezuela.  Sources in the Venezuelan Embassy in D.C. are aware that the AFL-CIO is in Venezuela and suspect that it is actively helping opposition groups in their attempt to unseat President Chavez in the upcoming elections for President.   Again, the truth is uncertain, but given the AFL-CIO’s horrendous track record in Latin America, and in Venezuela in the very recent past; given that it is intentionally concealing the fact that it is even working in Venezuela in the first place; and given that it continues to be heavily dependent upon funding from the U.S. government and NED  — two sources openly hostile to the current government in Venezuela – it is fair to have suspicions that the AFL-CIO is up to questionable deeds in Venezuela.

In the end, the only way to quell such suspicions is for the AFL-CIO to come clean to its membership and to the public by giving an accounting for its current activities in Venezuela and all 60 countries in which it is involved.   The problem all along has been that the AFL-CIO has refused calls to be accountable for its Third World activities, and instead has preferred to operate in the shadows internationally – many times on behalf of U.S. foreign policy interests.

The time for such secrecy must end.   Yet, I am not optimistic that it will, mostly because there is much for the AFL-CIO to hide about its international dealings.   Indeed, the best explanation of this fact came from a former staff member of AIFLD (the predecessor of the Solidarity Center) who addressed calls for the AFL-CIO to “clear the air” about its international affairs.  This individual, who gave this statement on the promise of anonymity, explained the following about the AFL-CIO’s policies of labor imperialism:

In reality the AFL-CIO has a lot to hide about the late 70’s and 80’s in relation to their international institutes.  . . .  The AFL always fared better in getting grants from republican presidents during this period because of communist insurgencies around the world or, at least, perceived communist insurgencies.  As you are aware, I was part of the most active period for three years in Central America and the Caribbean.   Some things I can relate and some things I can’t because of the potential for prosecution.  I can say that there is a lot of dirty laundry.  Some of the funding was related to what I would call covert operations though this was a very small part of the total operation globally.   Most of the activity was related to telling embassies and the State Department what they wanted to hear and that was the labor unions in all developing economies were under threat of communist and extreme left subversion even though in most instances it was nothing more that [sic.] extreme nationalism and not communist inspired.  In any event, that was how you got operating program grants and that is how the institutes built their power, with money and staff.   Each country program director did the same thing, money, prestige, power, influence mover and shaker.

There is [sic] obvious reasons for not dealing with the past, classified information, loss of grants and, some people are still on staff though most were cleaned out.   . . .

And, while the AFL-CIO’s international trajectory was supposed to have changed upon the succession of John Sweeney to the presidency in 1995, this same source made it clear that this was not altogether the case because of the very nature of the AFL-CIO’s international work and those who sponsor it.   As he explained:

Some people at the AFL were co-opted by the process.   John Sweeney was one of the favorites for being on these high-level delegations that participated in fact finding and solidarity missions all over the world.  And, I might add, stayed in the best hotels and it was sort of like a high class tour group.   . . .   The positions themselves though can corrupt and are high profile internationally.

I write this article with the hope that the AFL-CIO might take a good hard look at itself and its role in the world; that it might re-evaluate the corrupting influence of taking millions of dollars from the NED and U.S. State Department – money which inevitably makes them captive to U.S. foreign policy interests even while the AFL-CIO, in the height of irony and hypocrisy, purports to fight what it perceives to be “government-dominated” unions in such countries as China and Cuba.   And, in the short term, I hope that by calling into question its current, covert activities in Venezuela, the AFL-CIO will simply decide to leave that country for good, or at least until it decides to help countries like Venezuela in their struggle against U.S. dominance.

Alberto C. Ruiz is a long-time unionist and peace activist.

December 10, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

Who will watch the watchdog?

The pro-Israel NGO behind NATO’s war on Libya is targeting Syria

By Maidhc Ó Cathail | December 10, 2011

On December 2, the Geneva-based UN Watch welcomed that day’s “strong condemnation” of Syria by a UN Human Rights Council emergency session, and its establishment of a special rapporteur to monitor the situation there following what it called “a global campaign to create the post by a coalition of prominent democracy dissidents and human rights groups” led by UN Watch itself. The non-governmental organization, whose self-appointed mandate is “to monitor the performance of the United Nations by the yardstick of its own Charter,” expressed regret, however, that the UNHRC resolution “paid special deference” to Syria’s “territorial integrity” and “political independence,” decrying the provision as “a clear jab at NATO’s intervention in Libya, and a pre-emptive strike against the principle of the international community’s responsibility to protect civilians under assault.”

On the same day, UN Watch delivered a speech to the Human Rights Council plenary session in which it denounced the UN Security Council’s “shocking silence on Syria’s atrocities,” calling on it to take “urgent action to protect the civilian population before thousands more are beaten, tortured and killed.” It also urged UNESCO to reverse its recent decision to elect Syria to two human rights committees. Submitting that day’s UNHRC resolution to UNESCO’s Executive Board, the NGO demanded that they “expel the Assad government from those panels immediately.” The statement went on to berate the UNHRC for its “longtime policy, and that of the old Commission, of turning a blind eye to Syria’s gross and systematic violations.” Also “wrong and harmful,” in UN Watch’s view, was the UN body’s “policy of supporting Syria’s cynical and transparent ploy each year to condemn Israel for alleged violations of human rights, which should not be repeated this March.”

For those familiar with the NGO’s unmistakable governmental ties, it will come as no surprise that UN Watch could downplay Israel’s extensively documented human rights abuses as “alleged” while at the same time confidently asserting that “the facts are clear” regarding Syria’s “gross and systematic violations of human rights.” As Ian Williams, a former president of the United Nations Correspondents Association, wrote in a 2007 Guardian opinion piece, “UN Watch is an organization whose main purpose is to attack the United Nations in general, and its human rights council in particular, for alleged bias against Israel.”

Founded in 1993 under the chairmanship of Ambassador Morris B. Abram, the former US permanent representative to the United Nations in Geneva, UN Watch is affiliated with the American Jewish Committee. Described by one expert on US-Israeli relations as “the foreign policy arm of the Israel lobby,” the AJC also takes a keen interest in the UN’s alleged bias against Israel. According to a 2003 article in the Jewish Daily Forward, a “sustained effort” by the lobby’s foreign policy arm resulted in the United States “embarking on the most comprehensive campaign in years to reduce the number of anti-Israel resolutions routinely passed by the United Nations General Assembly.”

In February, UN Watch organized 70 “rights groups” to send a letter to President Obama, EU High Representative Catherine Ashton, and UN Secretary-General Ban-ki Moon demanding international action against Libya by invoking the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine. Speaking to the Jerusalem Post at the time, the NGO’s executive director, Hillel Neuer, said that “the muted response of the US and the EU to the Libyan atrocities is not only a let-down to the many Libyans risking their lives for freedom, but a shirking of their obligations, as members of the Security Council and the Human Rights Council, to protect peace and human rights and to prevent war crimes.” Despite the unsubstantiated nature of its allegations,” UN Watch’s “Urgent Appeal to Stop Atrocities in Libya” proved sufficient to get Libya suspended from the Human Rights Council before being referred to the Security Council, and ultimately provided the spurious justification for NATO’s eight-month “humanitarian” bombing of the country.

Undoubtedly the most significant signatory of the UN Watch-sponsored letter was Carl Gershman, president of the “misnamed” National Endowment for Democracy. Funded by American taxpayers but outside Congressional oversight, the Endowment has been meddling in other countries’ internal politics since its inception in 1983. As Allen Weinstein, NED’s architect and first acting president, famously told the Washington Post in 1991, “a lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.” A lot of what NED does today can also be understood by observing its longtime president’s career path. A former head of the neo-Trotskyite Social Democrats-USA who steadily evolved into neoconservatives, Gershman is no stranger to pro-Israel lobbying, having worked in the research department of the Anti-Defamation League in 1968 and served on the governing council of the American Jewish Committee in the early 1970s.

Although UN Watch purports to believe in the United Nations’ mission to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,” the pro-Israel NGO bears significant responsibility for inducing a devastating war on the current generation in one Arab country already this year and is clearly determined to repeat the carnage in another. As long as UN Watch’s motto of “Monitoring the United Nations, Promoting Human Rights” continues to obscure its real mission of “Manipulating the United Nations, Promoting Israel’s Interests,” the warning of a Roman poet becomes increasingly pertinent: “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”

~

Maidhc Ó Cathail is a political analyst and editor of The Passionate Attachment.

December 10, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

7/7: Crime and Prejudice

 77Archive 

A brand new investigative and analytical documentary from the maker of 7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction – which looked at outstanding questions and conspiracy theories. 7/7: Crime and Prejudice explores the 7/7 cold case via new evidence from the recent inquests and discusses the war on terror in the context of numerous miscarriages of justice and acts of violence committed by the state.

The first section of the film examines the history of the British state’s use of double agents, from the Victorian Anarchists through WW2 to the war in Northern Ireland. It concludes by examining contemporary cases of injustice and violence carried out as part of the war of terror against Muslims.

The second section of the film is a multi-dimensional study of the new evidence made available at the recent inquests. It looks at the evidence of a wider conspiracy and the fundamental flaws in the official narrative and the police investigation. It also discusses why the dialogue about ‘intelligence failures’ itself fails to address the very real possibility of state involvement in the attacks.

The final section of the film returns to the Anarchists and the case of Martial Bourdin, Britain’s first suicide bomber, in 1894. The mythology surrounding Bourdin is used as a foundation for examining the numerous films, tv shows training exercises and real life events that either predicted 7/7 or were influenced by the attacks. The question of conspiracy theories is addressed through an original analysis unique to this film.

7/7 Crime and Prejudice combines a presentation of the cutting edge of July 7th research with a deeply contextual analysis that casts light on largely unexamined aspects of the war on terror.

For further information about 7/7 please visit the website of the July 7th Truth Campaign and their dedicated 7/7 Inquests blog:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/
http://77inquests.blogspot.com/

To watch or download 7/7: Crime and Prejudice in .avi format please visit these links:
http://stagevu.com/video/xqnboijxmgoo
http://movbay.org/t5u6062o0aa9.html
http://movreel.com/7k5hyr3zw7sm
http://www.vidbux.com/ifs9zkyrk4jz/7-7_Crime_and_Prejudice.avi.html
http://www.vidxden.com/mzs2mh1oel8z/7-7_Crime_and_Prejudice.avi.html

December 9, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment

I’ll Never Do It Again

kenny’s sideshow | December 8, 2011

Like a little kid who just got caught stealing and begs his mama not to spank him, Eric Holder stated in the House Judicial Hearing that “the tactics used during operation Fast and Furious would never be used again by the Justice Department” and that on the distinction between lying and misleading Congress, Holder said it was a matter of a person’s “state of mind.”

That’s reassuring.

Holder earned his stripes as a cover up agent in the Clinton administration working under Janet Reno to stifle the truth about the Oklahoma City bombing and the related murder of Kenneth Trentadue. Holder’s role in Clinton’s pardon of Mossad asset billionaire criminal Marc Rich shows how eagerly he will bow to Israeli lobbying and bribery.

Holder was one of many to be interviewed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and as Attorney General continues the coverup of that event to this day. Commentary from this video:

Eric Holder was chosen because they planned to rape justice and Eric is the right kind of criminal. The person in charge of the Justice system in America is the same person that runs {aids} Al-CIAeda planning to attack Americans on Christmas in Portland or Detroit. The reason you will never see justice for the real crimes being committed against Americans is because Eric represents another form of “justice.” Obama runs Al-CIAeda, and Eric Holder is Al-CIAeda’s lawyer. Eric Holder protected the Mumbai mastermind with a fake trial in Chicago. Eric Holder staged a fake spy swap for the media, using the justice system as a game for a show. Eric Holder was part of the Lockerbie bombers legal paperwork “release.” Eric Holder is a top “inside job” suspect, for 9/11, The USS Cole, and the Bombings at the US Embassy’s in Africa, front and center starring in the whole Bin Laden show.

What is pathetic about the house ‘furious’ hearing is that some are using it as an agenda for more gun regulations against honest Americans in the name of stemming the flow of weapons to Mexico. Although Holder said he will pursue prosecutions of those under his watch if laws were broken, the administration’s ultimate policy is to disarm citizens out of fear that one day they may feel the need to take a stand against the police state’s disregard of the constitution and Bill of Rights and overall government criminality.

As serious as this ‘gunwalker’ issue is, and make no mistake – this was not a sting operation but deliberate trafficking for reasons yet not clear, the house hearing was a sham. We will not be seeing hearings about the money draining scam of the ‘War on Drugs,’ the ever expanding drug running of the CIA and other governmental agencies with protection of Afghan opium crops and heroin producing facilities, drug money laundering by all of the big banks and the kickbacks to politicians who allow it all to happen. We won’t be hearing a word from Congress about Obama and Holder’s promise to end the Bush-era attacks on sellers of medicinal marijuana and the patients who use it which turned into nothing but lies.

Holder and cronies make Rod Blagojevich look like an amateur. Few of the top criminals are even investigated much less go to jail.  ‘Walking’ is what those do who are so entrenched in the corrupt system that they are above the law.  The ‘gunwalking’ is minor compared to wall street and war crimes in terms of both lives and theft.

Another crime boss, Jon Corzine, also testified before Congress today on the MF Global ‘failure.’ Not being under indictment he didn’t exactly say he would never do it again but did blame it on his his predecessors’ bad financial decisions, said that he never intended to break rules requiring to safeguard client funds and that he doesn’t know what happened to an estimated $1.2 billion that went missing.

I think his testimony qualifies him to be the next chairman of the Federal Reserve.

There’s one guy who will not say “I’ll never do it again.”  That would be the Newt. He will do it again and again, especially when it comes to his subservience to Israel and Jewish money.

He’s working to free Jonathan Pollard, would relocate the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and promised to reappoint war whore John Bolton. Newt is falling all over himself to outdo Romney for more of the Jewish pot of gold.

As with so many who have sold out and are Israel firsters, Newt has his 9/11 connection.

From Michael Collins Piper:

Gingrich has an unusual connection to Larry Silverstein, a controversial figure whose name has been in the forefront of the circumstances surrounding the cover-up of 9-11.

While in Congress, Gingrich benefited from the lucrative Israeli-connected activities of his then-second wife, Marianne, who was on the payroll of the Israel Export Development Company (IEDCO), which promoted the importation into the United States of Israeli products—even as Gingrich was using his influence as a member of Congress to advance U.S.-Israeli trade.

The aforementioned IEDCO was an operation run by mob-connected Silverstein, the billionaire owner of the World Trade Center towers at the time of the 9-11 tragedy.

IEDCO’s Silverstein once even admitted to The Wall Street Journal that Gingrich was one of a number of members of Congress who was lobbied to support Silverstein’s company’s proposals—when his wife was on Silverstein’s payroll. more     {Marianne Gingrich Denies Israel Job Is a “Political Payoff” 1995}

Please … someone reassure me that the primaries won’t be rigged to give Gingrich the nomination, that Corzine won’t walk free to steal again and that Holder and Obama and Congress will be held in check and not allowed to sabotage what’s left of this country.

I know, you can’t. The whole political system is a crime scene and for lack of a better answer … it’s our fault.

December 9, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Progressive Hypocrite | Leave a comment

Climate FAIL from A to Z presented at Durban

By Marc Morano  –  Climate Depot

INTRODUCTION:

Many of the proponents of man-made global warming are now claiming that climate change is worse than they predicted. According to an October 18, 2011 Daily Climate article, global warming activists claim that the “evidence builds that scientists underplay climate impacts” and “if anything, global climate disruption is likely to be significantly worse than has been suggested.”

But this exclusive Climate Depot exhaustive A-Z Climate Reality Check report on the scientific reality of the failure of man-made global warming shatters any such illusions that the climate is “worse than we thought.” As the real world evidence mounts that global warming claims are failing, the climate activists have ramped up predictions of future climate change impacts to declare that it is “worse than we thought.” But a prediction or projection of 50-100 years into the future is not “evidence.” Recent scientific data and developments reveal that Mother Nature is playing a cruel joke on the promoters of man-made climate fears.

The scientific reality is that on virtually every claim — from A-Z — the claims of the promoters of man-made climate fears are failing, and in many instances the claims are moving in the opposite direction. The global warming movement is suffering the scientific death of a thousand cuts. This Climate Depot special report categorizes and indexes the full range of climate developments in a handy A-Z reference guide. The A-Z report includes key facts, peer-reviewed studies and the latest data and developments with links for further reading, on an exhaustive range of man-made global warming claims.

The Antarctic sea ice extent has been at or near record extent in the past few summers and the ice is expanding, the Arctic has rebounded in recent years since the low point in 2007, polar bears are thriving, sea level is not showing acceleration and is actually dropping, Cholera and Malaria are failing to follow global warming predictions, Mount Kilimanjaro melt fears are being made a mockery by gains in snow cover, global temperatures have been holding steady for a decade or more and many scientists are predicting global cooling is ahead, deaths due to extreme weather are radically declining, global tropical cyclone activity is near historic lows, the frequency of major U.S. hurricanes has declined, the oceans are missing their predicted heat content, big tornados have dramatically declined since the 1970s, droughts are not historically unusual nor caused by mankind, there is no evidence we are currently having unusual weather, scandals continue to rock the climate fear movement, the UN IPCC has been exposed as being a hotbed of environmental activists, former Vice President Al Gore is now under siege by his fellow global warming activists for attempting to link every bad weather event to man-made global warming and scientists from around the world continue to dissent from man-made climate fears at a rapid pace.

Climate Depot’s new A-Z report reveals that the great man-made global warming catastrophe that was predicted – has been cancelled.

In addition to the scientific collapse of anthropogenic global warming fears, the political collapse has been just as stunning. President Obama has been criticized by former Vice President Al Gore for failing to do enough when it comes to climate change legislation. The now defunct and “scientifically meaningless” Congressional climate bill failed because the Democrats realized it was political suicide. The new political expediency in Washington is global warming skepticism. The UN global warming treaty process lay in shambles. See: Democrat Walter Russell Mead analyzes Gore: Gore steered the green movement ‘into a tsunami of defeat that…will loom as one of the greatest failures of civil society in all time.’
Proponents of anthropogenic climate change have been reduced to making outlandish claims of a mythical 97% or 98% consensus. See: Global Warming: A ’98% Consensus Of Nothing’: ‘Only shameless activists or statistically ignorant claim that survey of 77 anonymous scientists’ is proof of 98% ‘consensus’. Once esteemed science groups like the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) have now corrupted and have used taxpayer money to lobby for the passage of climate bills. See: Ralph Cicerone’s Shame: NAS Urges Carbon Tax, Becomes Advocacy Group — ‘political appointees heading politicized scientific institutions that are virtually 100% dependent on gov’t funding’ & NAS Pres. Ralph Cicerone Turns Science Org. into political advocacy group: $6 million NAS study is used to lobby for global warming bill & MIT’s Richard Lindzen: ‘Cicerone of NAS is saying that regardless of evidence the answer is predetermined. If gov’t wants carbon control, that is the answer that the NAS will provide’

Movement ‘was bound to fail’

A movement that had Al Gore – one of the most divisive political figures – as the face of the movement, was bound to fail. A movement that utilized the scandal ridden United Nations – which is massively distrusted by the American people – as the repository of science, was doomed to fail. Gore and the UN IPCC are now reduced to pointing to every storm, flood, hurricane or tornado as proof of man-made global warming. The UN has been reduced to blaming man-made global warming for prostitution. See: Climate Astrology — ‘It Has Been Foretold’ of Extreme Weather: ‘UN IPCC science has a status similar to interpretations of Nostradamus and the Mayan calendars’ & Climate Astrology borrows from the past: ‘Before That Witch Moved Into The Neighborhood, We Never Had Bad Weather Or Disease’

But a scientific moment of clarity is now prevailing: The UN and the U.S. Congress do not have the power to legislate, tax or regulate the weather. See: Princeton University Physicist Dr. Will Happer: ‘The idea that Congress can stop climate change is just hilarious’ – Warns of ‘climate change cult’ – July 8, 2009 – Prominent scientists continue to challenge the alleged “consensus.” See: Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Who Endorsed Obama Dissents! Dr. Ivar Giaever Resigns from American Physical Society Over Group’s Promotion of Man-Made Global Warming

‘Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables’

The idea that CO2, a trace essential gas in the atmosphere that humans exhale from their mouths, is the main climate driver is now being challenged by peer-reviewed studies, data and scientists from around the globe. It is not simply, the sun or CO2 when looking at global temperatures, it is the Sun, volcanoes, tilt of the Earth’s axis, water vapor, methane, clouds, ocean cycles, plate tectonics, albedo, atmospheric dust, Atmospheric Circulation, cosmic rays, particulates like Carbon Soot, forests and land use, etc. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, not just CO2.

Professor Emeritus of Biogeography Philip Stott of the University of London explained the crux of the entire global warming debate when he rebutted the notion that CO2 is the main climate driver.

“As I have said, over and over again, the fundamental point has always been this: climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically-selected factor (CO2), is as misguided as it gets,” Stott wrote.

Even the global warming activists at RealClimate.org admitted to this key climate reality in a September 20, 2008 article. “The actual temperature rise is an emergent property resulting from interactions among hundreds of factors,” RealClimate.org explained.

The global warming movement continues to lose scientists, many formerly with the UN IPCC. See: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims – Challenge UN IPCC & Gore

The future does not look bright for global warming activists as more scandals continue to rock the movement. See: Climate Depot’s Exclusive Round Up of Climategate 2.0 – Read about the most comprehensive report on the latest global warming scandal – Even warmists are lamenting that Climate 2.o may be ‘devastating’: ‘These [emails] sound worse than I thought at first – their impact will be devastating’

MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen has observed that “Ordinary people see through man-made climate fears — but educated people are very vulnerable.”

Full PDF report is available here.

December 8, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | Leave a comment

Russia raps US for inciting unrest

Press TV – December 8, 2011

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has accused US officials of provoking post-election unrest in his country, saying “no one wanted to see chaos” in Russia.

Putin said on Thursday that US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has given signals to the Russian opposition to pour into streets to challenge the results of the recent parliamentary elections in the country.

US officials’ disapproval of the elections” had set the tone for some people inside the country and given a signal,” said the Russian premier, quoted in an AFP report.

He added that hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign funds have been used to influence the recent elections.

Calling for dialog between the opposition and authorities, Putin said that law-breakers must face full force of the law.

“If somebody breaks the law then the security forces must implement the law with full legal means,” Putin said.

His comments come after mass protests contested the results of Sunday’s polls in which Putin’s party won almost half the votes. Around 1,000 protesters have been arrested in the days following the polls.

Clinton has alleged that Russia’s parliamentary vote was rigged, demanding a full investigation. In response, Russia has accused the US and its allies of meddling in Moscow’s internal affairs.

December 8, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Leave a comment

STL Not Interested in Evidence Implicating Israel

By Omar Nashabe | Al-Akhbar | December 7, 2011

The controversial tribunal investigating the assassination of the former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri continues to refuse looking into claims Israeli had role in the crime despite mounting evidence.

“The submission made by Attorney Marwan Dalal in October does not obligate us in any way,” an official of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) told al-Akhbar Monday by telephone from The Hague.

He was referring to the memorandum which Dalal, introducing himself as “an attorney and citizen of the State of Israel,” presented to the tribunal, in which he made the case that the Israelis may have been involved in Hariri’s murder.

“Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare has employed investigative procedures that are consistent with international standards,” the official continued, “and the investigations led to the collection of sufficient evidence to charge the four individuals (Mustafa Badreddine, Salim Ayyash, Hussein Oneissi, and Assad Sabra) with the crime of assassinating Hariri.”

Asked whether the criminal investigations carried out by the International Independent Investigation Commission since 2005, and by the STL prosecutor’s office since 2009, had considered the mere possibility that the Israelis may have been involved in the crime, the official answered “No.”

After a pause, he added: “There was no need. The results of the investigations pointed to the four individuals and did not indicate any Israeli involvement in the crime.”

But why hasn’t the possibility of Israeli involvement been taken seriously since the start of the probe, or since the STL prosecutor’s office was established?

And professionally speaking, isn’t one supposed to avoid reaching conclusions before investigations have been completed?

The official avoided answering these two questions by reiterating that Bellemare adheres to international standards.

However, the STL did confirm that it has made no attempt to gather information from occupied Palestine about possible Israeli involvement in the 14 February 2005 car-bombing that killed Hariri.

This came in the form of a written answer provided on Monday by the STL’s official spokesman, Marten Youssef, to a question submitted by al-Akhbar.

He was asked: Given that any exchange of information between the STL and the Israelis would require an agreement between the two sides, did the STL ask Israel to sign a cooperation agreement with it, and if so, when, and with what outcome?

The reply was: “No. Israel was never approached by the STL to sign a cooperation agreement. The STL only has cooperation agreements with Lebanon and the Netherlands. ”

Youssef noted that any information about the investigators’ work – including whether or not they had visited Israel or met Israeli officials to seek information related to the Hariri assassination – would have to be provided by the prosecutor’s office.

He said he had passed on al-Akhbar’s questions in this regard. There had been no reply by press-time.

But the topic about which Bellemare is reluctant to respond was discussed at length last year by Israeli security and intelligence analyst Yossi Melman.

He wrote in the daily Haaretz on 23 November 2010: “The UN commission’s resources have been relatively limited…The potential countries that have spy agencies with the necessary technology is also limited, and includes the National Security Agency in the United States, British, and French intelligence, and undoubtedly, Israeli intelligence.”

If that is the case, and seeing as the STL has officially said it has no cooperation agreement with Israel, then Melman’s report would appear to reveal that Bellemare and his team have been violating STL rules, and that Israeli officials have been violating Israeli law.

Two observations need to be made in this context:

First, Israeli intelligence would not cooperate with any foreign party, or provide it with information about monitored or intercepted communications in Lebanon, except under clear orders from the highest Israeli political authorities.

Secondly, it is – at the very least – unlikely that the motives for this ‘irregular’ cooperation can be separated from the conclusion reached by Bellemare’s investigation, namely that Hezbollah officials were involved in Hariri’s assassination.

And at most, it is not unlikely that Israeli intelligence could have collaborated with Western agencies in the hi-tech fabrication of electronic evidence for Bellemare to base his indictment on.

December 7, 2011 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | Leave a comment

Obama: The “Trust-Buster” Who Never Busted a Trust

A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford | December 7, 2011

President Obama thinks he can win reelection by running the same hoax on his Democratic base as he did in 2008: flavoring his speeches with progressive sounding rhetoric while tightening the bankers’ grip on government and continuing his pursuit a “grand bargain” with the Republicans. In his speech on Tuesday in Kansas, Obama depicted himself as the reincarnation of President Teddy Roosevelt, known as a corporate “trust-buster” at the turn of the 20th century. But Obama is no trust-buster. He has never busted a corporate monopoly. His administration approved the merger of Comcast and NBC, consolidating even an bigger monopoly and giving the lie to his 2008 campaign promise to reinvigorate anti-trust enforcement.

The Obama m.o. is to talk a progressive game and then do just the opposite. He claims he found it “infuriating” to rescue the banks from collapse when he came to office. If that’s the case, then the best thing that could happen to Black people would be for Obama to get absolutely furious at us – and then the trillions would flow. When Obama supposedly got furious at the banks, he put the whole government and the Federal Reserve at their beck and call and funneled more than $16 trillion into their accounts. Apparently, it pays big time to get Barack Obama “infuriated.” If he gets mad enough at you, he’ll open up the windows at the Federal Reserve and hand out trillions of dollars in interest-free loans. Then, if you’re a bank that he’s really mad at, you can take the people’s money and buy U.S. Treasury bonds and get a healthy return on your cost-free investment.

In Kansas, Obama claimed that his so-called banking reform legislation will funnel money to “families who want to buy a home or send their kids to college.” We’ve seen no evidence of that happening. But Obama did make sure that his “reforms” did nothing to upset the Wall Street derivatives casino that is now notionally valued at at least $600 trillion – about the same as it was before the 2008 meltdown and bailout. $600 trillion is roughly ten times the value of all the yearly goods and services produced by every man woman and child in the world. It is a ticking time bomb that will inevitably bring down the real world economy if it is not defused. Apparently, that makes Obama absolutely paralyzed with rage.

Obama says the banks “should be remedying past mortgage abuses that led to the financial crisis, and working to keep responsible homeowners in their home.” It’s nice to hear what he thinks banks “should” be doing, but he didn’t use his presidential clout to compel them to do much of anything to change their ways, even when he could, back when Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress. And Obama’s own pitiful program to keep families in their homes was a colossal failure that helped only a fraction. Perhaps Obama is now infuriated with himself.

Throughout his Wizard of Oz Kansas speech, Obama attempted to put moral and philosophical distance between himself and the Republicans. But this is not 2008. Anyone with eyes and ears and a memory now knows that Obama is a true believer in the old time deficit cutting religion, a disciple of austerity, a man who wants nothing more than to join hands with the GOP to gut Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare. Obama is a charlatan who cites the deeds of dead presidents but pursues policies that are directly the opposite. In other words, he is a very elaborate liar.

December 7, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Economics, Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

Libya Still a Killing Zone

A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford | December 7, 2011

At least 7,000 prisoners are held without benefit of law, suspected of having connections to slain leader Muammar Gaddafi by various armed elements in Libya. According to a report by the office of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, most of the prisoners are black migrant workers from sub-Saharan Africa. Others are black Libyans. The new regime, that was bombed into power by NATO after a green light from the UN Security Council, doesn’t make distinctions between black Libyan citizens and foreign blacks – they are all “slaves” and inferiors as far as the former rebels are concerned.

A doctor who is among the prisoners told reporters that detainees have been burned with cigarettes, beaten on their feet, hung by their arms, had their finger and toenails pulled out, and otherwise tortured. Those who were captured may be considered to be the lucky ones. Untold thousands have been massacred or simply disappeared. As one Nigerian man who lives in Libya said, “The Libyan rebels consider the blacks as their enemies and decided to kill any black man they come across.” A black Libyan who lived in Bani Walid, one of the last outposts of resistance to NATO and the rebels, said: “Anyone who tells the truth in Libya gets slaughtered.”

The former rebels cling to the lie, that Colonel Gaddafi employed legions of black mercenaries to keep him in power. Even the human rights groups that vilified Gaddafi’s regime now admit the mercenary stories were false, fictions that were reported as fact by virtually all of the western corporate media.

There is no real government in Libya, no central authority to safeguard the lives of prisoners held because of their politics, or their color, or for no clear reason at all. Rebel military units from various cities hold the prisoners in makeshift jails and detention centers. Among the most aggressive armed factions hails from Misurata, whose brigades waged a long siege of the black town of Tawurgha, once home to 30,000 people. Tawurgha has now disappeared, its people dispersed or detained or dead.

The UN Secretary General says he believes, in the absence of any evidence, that “the leaders of the new Libya are indeed committed to building a society based on respect for human rights.” The International Criminal Court, which was brandishing warrants for the arrest of Gaddafi and members of his government months before NATO established control over the country, is blind to the blatant ethnic cleansing, political persecutions and imprisonments, and rapes of displaced women that are ongoing in Libya. The same goes for most of the European and North American media, many of which continue to insist that NATO’s Libyan allies are freedom fighters, even though many of the one-time rebels are clearly Islamic jihadists who reject any formula for governing Libya that bears any resemblance to western notions of democracy.

Six hundred Libyan gunmen are said to have traveled to Syria to wage war against the government, there. Meanwhile, the UN Human Rights Council has demanded measures to “protect” the Syrian people from their own government, language reminiscent of the UN Security Council resolution that ultimately plunged Libya into hell. And the Security Council has just tightened sanctions against Eritrea, in the Horn of Africa, another nation marked for regime change by the United States.

December 7, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | Leave a comment

Pre-Election Polls Confirm Russian Election Results

Moon of Alabama | December 6, 2011

“Western” organizations and media are alleging irregularities in Sunday’s elections in Russia.

Western observers reported Monday that the results of Russia’s parliamentary elections were seriously distorted by ballot stuffing and a lack of transparency, which suggests that the ruling United Russia party did even worse than the official count showed.

The election leading and currently governing United Russia Party gets accused of manipulating the votes in its favor. These allegations seem to be based on some dubious youtube videos, anecdotal stories and a small demonstration by some opposition members in Moscow.

There is always a good test when such allegations come up. Do the results of the election fit with the prediction of independent pollsters issued before the election?

Before Sunday’s vote the Associated Press wrote:

A poll released Friday predicts that Vladimir Putin’s party will receive 53 percent of the vote in Russia’s parliamentary election, now a little over a week away.While still a majority, this would be a significant drop for United Russia and deprive it of the two-thirds majority that has allowed it to amend the constitution without seeking the support of the three other parties in parliament.

Russia TV reported:

The All-Russian Public Opinion Centre polls predicts United Russia is set to get between 55-58% of votes, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation 16-19%, the Liberal Democratic Party 11-14% and Fair Russia 6.5-9.5%

AFP added:

Two polls published ahead of the elections showed United Russia is expected to keep its current majority but win no more than 262 seats in the 450-member Duma.

Now let’s look at the election results:

According to preliminary results released by the Central Elections Commission on Tuesday, the United Russia Party got almost 50 percent of the vote which translated into 238 of 450 seats in the Duma. The Communist Party came second with about 20 percent of the votes and a total of 92 parliamentary seats. A Just Russia Party is in the third place with more than 13 percent and 64 seats. The Liberal Democratic Party got 56 seats, while three parties – Yabloko, Right Cause and Patriots of Russia – failed to make it to the Duma.

United Russia’s share of the vote was slightly worse than all the independent polls predicted. If the party or the government it leads really manipulated the election, why would that be the case?

Russia is a big country. It is likely that there were some irregularities in this or that polling station. But given the total result it is not plausible that such were organized or in favor of United Russia.

Stoking up rumors and creating unrest in Moscow is still a wet dream for “western” cold-war warriors, neocons and their “liberal” allies in Russia. They wish back the days of Yelzin when they robbed Russia blind. But as the election showed those times are over and Russians will no longer fall for their false promises.

December 6, 2011 Posted by | Deception | Leave a comment

A Revolution Against Resistance?

By Ibrahim al-Amin | Al-Akhbar | December 4, 2011

The foreign powers intervening in Syria to bring down President Bashar Assad want to speed things up. This has compelled oppositionists to show their hand, stripping them of yet more cards.

It has long been clear that the most influential bloc in the Syrian offshore opposition had effectively joined forces with an American-led western alliance that is hostile to Arab resistance aimed at liberating occupied territory – whether from Israeli or American occupation.

The bulk of these groups used to flaunt their patriotism by accusing the regime of not wanting to recover the Syrian territory occupied by Israel.

But on Friday, the Syrian National Council’s chief spokesman, Burhan Ghalioun, was forced (and there is no other explanation for it) to come clean about the nature of the payback required of the Syrian opposition by its US, Turkish, Gulf, and European supporters.

Ghalioun told the The Wall Street Journal in an interview that under a new opposition-led government, “there will be no special relationship with Iran…Breaking the exceptional relationship means breaking the strategic military alliance.” He added that “Hezbollah after the fall of the Syrian regime will not be the same.” Describing the relationship between the Syrian regime and Iran as “abnormal,” Ghalioun said an SNC-led government would oversee a broad reorientation of Syria’s foreign policy towards an alliance with the principal Arab powers. Syria would remain committed to recovering the occupied Golan Heights from Israel, albeit via negotiations rather than resorting to armed conflict.

What do His Excellency President Burhan Pasha’s remarks mean?

They explain why the word ‘Israel’ was not mentioned in the political program issued by the Syria National Council (SNC). They explain why this program, and the vast majority of statements made by SNC leaders, focus on the domestic situation in Syria, deeming it a priority unconnected to any regional questions. It explains why they speak in general terms of the need for political, economic, and social reconstruction in the manner of March 14 in Lebanon – i.e. in the manner of the unseated Hosni Mubarak, who, along with Zine al-Abidine Ben-Ali, used to justify his foreign policy by claiming he was putting his country’s interests ”first.”

Very well. Burhan Pasha is telling us what he, and a good number of those working for governments belonging to the foreign alliance opposing the regime in Syria, secretly think. They oppose the idea of resistance to liberate the land, and in practice want to achieve peace with Israel. He is telling us that the Camp David, Wadi Araba, and Oslo models provide the right means for dealing with the Israeli occupation. In other words, he is promising his people the same things that the Egyptians, the Jordanians, and the Palestinians have suffered for the past three decades as a consequence of this isolationist approach. It is an illusory isolationism, and amounts in practice – as in the case of the Lebanese Right – to deferring to the US-led alliance which safeguards Israel’s interests in the region.

Burhan Ghalioun means to say that the Syrian people do not attach undue importance to their sovereignty, independence, or broader Arab national identity. Burhan Pasha is telling us that the New Syria wanted by the Syrian people is one that will aim to indulge the US in Iraq and the region, to relieve Israel of the burden of a Northern Front and the Lebanon and Gaza fronts, and to put the Gulf states – with the US behind them – at ease on two counts. First, with regard to their obsession about the relationship that has evolved between Iran and Syria. Secondly, about the aftermath of Iraq’s impending liberation from the US’ occupation forces and its dominant influence over political decision-making in the country.

There is no need to read between the lines of what Ghalioun said, as some reports sought to do, or add any explanations. He made clear that his outfit will take Syria out of the regional alliance of which it is an essential part – the alliance comprising the resistance and its supporters – and into another alliance, the one currently striving to topple the current regime in Syria. The latter opposes the resistance, and defers to the US and Israel’s demands to deny support to the forces of resistance in Lebanon and Palestine. As for Ghalioun’s desire to turn to the ‘international community’ to recover the Golan Heights, that simply replays the tune of all who sought peace as supplicants, and thus negotiated agreements that brought shame and poverty to over 100 million people.

Ghalioun also referred in his interview with the American paper to his SNC’s relationship with the Free Syrian Army. He spoke of an agreement to “focus their operations on the protection of civilians and not to perform offensive attacks.” Can we therefore await explanations from him of what is happening on the ground? He went on to declare: “We do not want, after the fall of the regime in Syria, armed militias outside the control of the state.” He might do well in this regard to consider the experience of Libya, during and since the overthrow of the tyrant Muammar Gaddafi. He could then teach his students courses on Creative Chaos in the Cause of the Caliphate, by the learned scholar Bin-Belhadj.

Ibrahim al-Amin is editor-in-chief of al-Akhbar.

December 6, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | Leave a comment

Dubious Dealings: Syria and the Arab League

By Sharmine Narwani | Al-Akhbar | December 5, 2011

The ongoing diplomatic tug of war between Syria and the Arab League took an unexpected turn Monday with rumors of a potential breakthrough. A positive outcome would signal a major political – not procedural – change of heart at the Arab League, whose earlier dealings with Syria showed little room for compromise.

Last week, the Arab League broke with its own charter for the second time this year, voting to impose far-reaching economic sanctions on member-state Syria, eight months after backing a no-fly zone over member-state Libya.

The charter, which was written in the early post-colonial period, placed great stock in the inviolability of “a state’s independence, sovereignty, or territorial integrity.”

Article V of the League’s charter clearly stipulates: “Any resort to force in order to resolve disputes between two or more member-states of the League is prohibited. If there should arise among them a difference which does not concern a state’s independence, sovereignty, or territorial integrity [my italics], and if the parties to the dispute have recourse to the Council for the settlement of this difference, the decision of the Council shall then be enforceable and obligatory.”

A recently-departed senior Arab League official told me: “We have taken strong measures before only in relation to foreign policy issues or disputes between Arab countries. But on these last two occasions, this is a historic departure in relation to the practice of the Arab League. For the first time measures were taken against an Arab country because of its internal situation – the way a government is treating its own people.”

He continued, “When people are dying I don’t care about reconciling this with the charter – that’s my priority. If there are legal issues that contravene, I’m happy to bend them.”

But what about the tens of thousands of civilians slaughtered in member-state Somalia this year alone, with nary a peep from the Arab League? Or of the League’s non-intervention policy in Yemen and Bahrain, where protests continue to this day?

So why did the League single out Syria for sanctions?

Ostensibly, it is because Damascus refused an Arab League observer mission to Syria, but that is not exactly true. The Syrians counter-proposed a series of amendments to the mission “Protocol” to accommodate their sovereignty concerns. It was the League that rejected these outright on November 27, although they appear to have reopened negotiations quietly in the past few days.

Consider this: The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) – now effectively at the helm of Syrian issues in the Arab League – spent seven months negotiating an exit for the despotic Yemeni President Ali Abdallah Saleh.

When asked about double-standards in the treatment of Syria versus other Arab member-states, the recently-departed senior League official admitted, “I think the position taken by the Arab countries in relation with Bahrain is a very sad one – we should have been more firm.”

On Yemen however, his response was curious, “Yemen – it is being handled by the GCC, and doesn’t need the Arab League’s help right now.”

But the same players refused to spend even seven days on Syria. The League dropped the sanctions gauntlet a mere three days after Syria offered its amended proposal, claiming these would “affect the core of the document and would radically change the nature of the mission.”

But is that true? Would Syria’s amendments sink the project as some League members alleged?

Much ado has been made about Syria’s amendments in Arab League statements, but other than a brief reference to a couple of provisions in Al-Hayat newspaper, these have not been made public.

Below is a much more comprehensive outline of Syria’s counter-proposal obtained from a well-connected, non-Syrian source. There is little in the document that could not have been negotiated to accommodate both Syria’s desire to maintain sovereignty in this process and the Arab League’s determination to carry out its mission:

Syria’s Amendments to the Arab League Monitoring Mission (November 2011)

Clause I

“An independent mission is to be formed, composed of Arab military and civilian personnel nominated by Arab states and organizations involved in human rights and the provision of protection to civilians, to be sent to the Syrian Arab Republic. It will be known as the Arab League Monitoring Mission and operate within its framework. It is assigned with monitoring implementation of the Arab plan for resolving the Syrian crisis and providing protection to Syrian civilians.”Syrian amendment:

“An independent Mission is to be formed, composed of Arab military and civilian personnel nominated by Arab states, to be sent to the Syrian Arab Republic. It will be known as the Arab League Monitoring Mission and operate within its framework. It is assigned with monitoring implementation of the clauses of the Arab plan for resolving the current crisis in Syria. The Syrian side will be provided with a list comprising the names, status, ranks and nationalities of the Mission’s members.”

Clause II

“The Mission will start work immediately after Syria signs this Protocol. It will initially dispatch a delegation consisting of the Head of the Mission and an adequate number of monitors (between 30 and 50), supported by an appropriate number of administrative staff and sufficient security personnel to provide personal protection to members of the Mission.”

Syrian amendment:

“The Mission will start work immediately after Syria signs this Protocol. It will initially dispatch a delegation consisting of the Head of the Mission and an adequate number of monitors, supported by an appropriate number of administrative staff.”

Clause II – Subclause

“The number of monitors will be determined by the Head of the Mission, in consultation with the Secretary-General, in accordance with his assessment of the Mission’s requirements to perform its task of monitoring the Syrian government’s compliance with its commitments to protecting civilians in the fullest manner. The Secretary-General may call on technical assistance and observers from Arab, Islamic and friendly states in carrying out the tasks assigned to the Mission.”

Syrian amendment:

“The number of monitors will be determined by the Head of the Mission, in consultation with the Secretary-General and in coordination with Syria, in accordance with his assessment of the Mission’s requirements in performing its task of monitoring the Syrian government’s compliance with its commitments in the fullest manner. The Secretary-General may call on technical assistance and observers from Arab states in carrying out the tasks assigned to the Mission.”

Clause III, Subclause 3

“To verify the release of those detained due to the current events.”

Syrian amendment:

“To verify the phased release of those detained due to the current events who were not involved in crimes of murder or acts of sabotage.”

Clause III, Subclause 4

“To confirm the withdrawal and evacuation of military and armed forces from cities and residential areas which witnessed, or are witnessing, demonstrations and protests.”

Syrian amendment:

“To confirm the withdrawal and evacuation of military and armed forces from cities and residential areas.”

Clause III, Subclause 7

“The Mission will have full freedom of movement, and the freedom to make whatever visits or contacts it considers appropriate, in relation to matters pertaining to its tasks and modus operandi with regard to the provision of protection for civilians.”

Syrian amendment:

“The Mission will have full freedom of movement, and the freedom to make whatever visits or contacts it considers appropriate, in relation to matters pertaining to its tasks and modus operandi, in coordination with the Syrian side.”

Clause IV, Subclause 2

“Access and freedom of movement will be granted to all members of the Mission to all parts of the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic at the times specified by the Mission.”

Syrian amendment:

“Access and freedom of movement will be granted to all members of the Mission in coordination with the Syrian side.”

Clause IV, Subclause 5

“To guarantee that no person, or member of their family, will be punished, harassed or compromised — in any form whatsoever — as a result of having contact with the Mission or providing it with testimony or information.”

Syrian amendment:

“To guarantee that no person will be punished or subjected to pressure — in any form whatsoever — as a result of having contact with the Mission or providing it with testimony or information.”

In addition, the Syrian government wanted the following two points added to the Protocol:

1.“This protocol is valid for two months from the date of signature, renewable with the consent of both sides”

2. “The Syrian government will not incur any financial costs as a result of the Mission performing its task.”

If some of these provisions were problematic, the Syrian authorities seemed willing to find a possible compromise. When Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem contacted Arab League Secretary General Nabil Elaraby a few months back, it was “to try to gain some time to find a way out of this crisis,” according to a Syrian source.

A senior Arab League official who would not speak on the record, claims that the Syria initiative was steered away from its original form by “some of the ministers who didn’t like the direction and started dictating certain ideas that they knew Syria would not accept.”

Qatar, whose Foreign Minister Hamad bin Jassim Al-Thani chairs the Arab League’s committee on Syria, could have produced a more constructive outcome, if it wished.

Instead, says the official, the “Protocol” to create a League observer delegation was forwarded with an “ultimatum” in a short time, which we have never experienced in the history of diplomacy at the Arab League.

Why not do this right? This is needed not only for Syria – why not a plan for everywhere in the region?”

“The whole process was meant to gain a refusal, to move to the second stage of this game,” warns the official.

What is this next stage? Al-Thani himself may have offered that answer when he hinted that the League could seek international intervention “if the Syrians do not take us seriously.”

Nobody is guiding the Arab League’s actions today more than this one-man Qatari show.

Qatar stands out as the one Arab nation to have formulated a proactive plan to deal with these revolts. It has thrown money, clout and military force behind ensuring desirable outcomes. So far its goal appears to be two-fold: backing Islamists to replace secular regimes, and thwarting the influence of all other competing regional power centers while it goes about its plans.

Unlike Saudi Arabia, its long-term rival in the Persian Gulf, the tiny Emirate kingdom is not trying to thwart change at all. Rather, it is proactively leading a selective strategy to remake the wider Middle East in its own image.

The Arabic-language press was agog with the tongue-lashing Al-Thani delivered his Algerian counterpart at a Syria-related Arab League meeting on November 12:

“Stop defending Syria because when your turn comes you may need us!” he allegedly roared at Algerian Foreign Minister Mourad Medelci when the latter registered an objection.

Yet the Qatari PM managed to feign regret in public when he announced last weekend, “Today, we are very sad to hold such a meeting as the Syrian government has not signed the observer mission.”

The League needs to start as it means to continue. Consistent, lawful and devoid of double standards.We are witnessing a dangerous willingness in the global political elite to circumvent rule of law, territorial integrity and sovereignty to jostle for positioning in the new emerging Middle East order.

Tolerating aerial bombardment of civilians by foreign forces and dragging the body of a deposed head of state through the streets are an indication of creeping lawlessness – much of which appears to be tacitly accepted by the “international community.”

This is unquestionably a new era in the Arab League. The organization is being thrust into a regional decision making role – without any history of competence or effectiveness – during a time when the Arab world is experiencing seismic shifts. Is the Arab League capable of rising to this challenge? Or will it remain an institution that rubber-stamps the policies of its most powerful members?

~

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

December 6, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »