Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

‘US terrorist-labeling is a form of bullying on a grand scale’

RT | April 11, 2018

The Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) label is a powerful tool used by the US; it is as a form of hostage-taking in a political sense, says Brian Becker, national coordinator at the Answer Coalition.

The leader of the Lebanese political party and militant group, Hezbollah, has revealed that Washington offered to remove it from the terrorism watch-list and give the group financial aid if it dropped its resistance to Israel.

“Following the 2000 victory, the Israeli enemy, along with the US, had realized that Lebanon’s real power lies within its resistance, which has managed to force the Israeli occupation out of Lebanon without any condition,” Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said on Sunday, as cited by Iran’s Press TV. “We were offered money and to be part of the authority in Lebanon on condition that we cede resistance,” he continued, adding that it was his fault at that time that he “didn’t accept to take his paper, so that it would be a proof now.”

According to Nasrallah, the offer was made by former vice-president Dick Cheney via US-Lebanese businessman George Nader.

RT asked Brian Becker how he could comment on what – according to Nasrallah – was the US’ attempt to “bribe” Hezbollah.

“I think the report from the Lebanese resistance Hezbollah leadership is extremely instructive and revealing. The designation by the US government of an organization or a country as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO) is a form of hostage-taking in a political sense,” he said.

“When the US makes that designation, which is largely for political purposes, it puts the entity that has been designated into a terrible position: no one can do business with it, they can’t trade with it, it is persona non grata diplomatically, its leaders could be arrested and sent to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. And then the US can say ‘But, if you do what we want you to do or for some other political purpose we choose to lift this designation, then you are no longer subject to all of these economic, social and even criminal penalties.’ It is really just a weapon, it is a tool, it is an instrument, a blunt tool used by the US diplomacy. It shows that is not very diplomatic,” Becker explained.

For the US government to designate another country or organization as a foreign terrorist organization is an immensely powerful instrument, yet, it’s purely political. “It is a form of bullying on a grand scale,” Becker explained.

“It doesn’t really say anything about terrorism or about the people who are sanctioned under the FTO label,” Becker told RT. “The label doesn’t really correspond or correlate to reality, it is purely a political exercise.”

Often entities that have been designated as foreign terrorist organizations by the US are “the governments that seek to be independent from the US or have challenged US hegemony in their area or in their country,” the analyst said. At the same time, he noted, some of the terrorist organizations like the MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization), “in the case of Iraq, as long as they are fighting Iran, then the US says ‘It is ok, they are fighting our enemies.”

“So, even though they have an FTO label, it is not really applied. They have a sort of immunity from application. It is completely discreet or discretionary on the part of the US powerful government about how it should be used and who it should be used against,” Becker said.

April 11, 2018 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Why military escalation in Syria is not in US interest

By Frederick Kuo | Asia Times | April 11, 2018

The images flooding US news sources are the stuff of nightmares. Children gasping for air, their chests heaving in pain, strange foam flooding from their mouths. This time, the images are coming out of Douma, one of the last strongholds of the opposition rebels resisting the Assad regime’s reconquest of Syrian territory.

Already, as if singing in chorus, shrill cries are flooding throughout all of the mainstream US news outlets and self-righteous rhetoric employed in lengthy articles, all calling in unison for a new war in Syria on the basis of moral outrage with the ultimate goal of regime change.

On Monday, a few days after announcing that the US would be pulling its troops out of the Syrian theater, President Donald Trump castigated the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad and its Russian and Iranian allies and promised a swift and powerful military response to this attack.

All this as the offices of his lawyer, Michael Cohen, were raided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Meanwhile Israeli jets pounded the T4 airbase used by Syrian and Russian forces as war cries were echoed by France and the United Kingdom.

It is precisely during times like this when the fog of emotion is being deployed so hysterically by powerful political and media forces to build public consent, that it is absolutely critical to step back and analyze the narrative being thrusted upon us Americans and examine precisely our interests in fighting another war in the Middle East.

Deja vu

What is clear is that the sequence of these events nearly mirror the circumstances of previous attacks attributed to Assad back in 2017 in Khan Shaykhun and in 2013 in Ghouta. During each incident, Assad was immediately castigated as the guilty party before any facts were proved and indeed, against all logical motives on his part. Along with this judgment came a loud chorus calling for a massive and immediate military intervention to remove his regime from power.

However, despite the enormous pressure applied on the White House for a hawkish response, both Barack Obama and Trump respectively resisted deepening American involvement in a conflict. Their actions were vindicated months later in each instance by the results of United Nations inspection teams who, in both instances, determined that there did not exist any evidence that Assad had deployed chemical weapons, thus supporting allegations that these attacks were false-flag operations planted by the rebel forces in order to elicit Western military support.

Assad’s regime and his Russian allies have made significant ground in the last few years in winning the long-running Syrian civil war. In Douma, the opposition is surrounded and desperately putting in a last act of resistance before the Syrian government’s impending victory. A chemical attack by Assad at this point, which would only open the door for Western military punishment, would be political suicide and defeat all logical motives.

The voices calling for war completely ignore this simple logic and instead insist on further demonizing Assad. However, even demons would want to win, and a chemical attack by Assad at this time would only threaten his impending victory. There is absolutely no compelling motive for Assad to use chemical weapons.

Today in Washington, we are faced with an unpredictable situation in which an embattled President Trump, who as candidate blasted the very type of military intervention he now purportedly supports, is facing a historically unprecedented challenge to his office by the very government organs in which he supposedly presides over.

Weakened by endless scandals tied to allegations of collusion with the Russians and details of his sordid sexual past, the recent raid on the offices of Michael Cohen and the violation of attorney-client privileges open the gates to his possible impeachment.

These events coincide with the recent elevation of John Bolton, a renowned warmonger obsessed with endless conflict, as the new national security adviser. Thus the ground is set for a prolonged escalation of US military involvement in the Syria theater.

Not in the US interest

This is the moment when every American citizen must ask themselves, what exactly is our interest in a Syria war? Will American security, or indeed, security in the West, be improved with military escalation in Syria?

Clearly, the evidence of years prior when turmoil in Syria created waves of migrants entering Europe at German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s behest has proved otherwise. A strong body of evidence from recent history demonstrates that war will only create more refugees, more chaos, more radicalism and more opportunities for terrorism.

Will the removal of Assad’s regime improve peace in the region? Again, the evidence points otherwise. Despite all of his faults, Assad’s regime is a force for secularism in a region where religious extremism is rife.

A Syria without Assad will likely be a theater of chaos where ISIS and other Islamist extremists will fill the power vacuum and turn the country into a training ground for future terrorists – terrorists who may very well come to haunt us within our own shores. We have seen this cycle innumerable times before, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya – let’s not make the same mistake again.

Will an invasion of Syria increase American prosperity? Again, we only need to remind ourselves of the US$6 trillion that was spent in the calamitous debacle known as the Iraq war, likely one of the greatest geopolitical mistakes in recent history.

According to the 2017 US federal budget, spending on Medicare and health totaled $1.17 trillion, transportation was $109 billion, education was $85 billion and science was $32 billion. These numbers are all dwarfed by the amount that we spent on the Iraq war. That amount would have been able to pay for universal medical coverage, a national high-speed-rail system, revamping of our education system and enhanced government support for scientific research many times over.

The hubris of empire

During this period in history where US national debt is soaring past $21 trillion, growing economic insecurity amid ever growing costs of living and unprecedented social and economic divisions are challenging American society, a war in Syria should not even make it to the list of national priorities.

Another war in the Middle East, one in which we depose another secular regime to create a power vacuum for Islamist extremists, will not improve the security of the American public but will endanger it.

Another war in the Middle East will not enhance American prosperity but will only damage it. It will significantly increase American national debt and detract valuable resources away from investing in crucial infrastructure that will be necessary to maintain economic competitiveness.

Another war in the Middle East will bring us face to face to the brink of war with Russia, a major nuclear power, and for what? So we can play judge and kingmaker in the endless geopolitical struggles among Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel in a region that is thousands of kilometers away from our shores?

As any student of history knows, it is through arrogance and hubris that empires fall. It is through the over-extension of power and reckless adventurism, often perpetrated by manipulative elites who use the smokescreens of emotion and anger to fuel public support to further their own goals, that empires are led to the long journey of their own demise.

With the rise of the information age and the vast resource of alternative narratives, there is no excuse for ignorance. There is no excuse for a citizenry to support a national effort that so threatens their own interests.

A war in Syria is clearly not in the American interest, and a major military escalation will only lead to disastrous consequences.

April 11, 2018 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

US to Launch a Sustained Operation in Syria

By Arkady SAVITSKY | Strategic Culture Foundation | 11.04.2018

The events in Syria are likely to escalate into a regional conflict. USS Donald Cook already deployed in the Mediterranean can deliver a limited missile attack against Syria but a large-scale operation is unlikely to be launched until USS Harry S. Truman carrier strike group (CSG) arrives in roughly 10-14 days. The CSG left the home base in Norfolk on April 11. The land strike-capable USS Porter can reach the Syria’s shore pretty soon. USS Laboon and USS Carney, two more Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, as well as USS Georgia and USS John Warner submarines, are in close proximity to add more punch if an order to strike is given.

The composition of the carrier group includes at least five warships (one cruiser and 4 destroyers) capable of cruise missile attacks against land targets. Each US destroyer or cruiser can carry over 50 land attack missiles. It could be more, depending on the mission. USS Georgia is an Ohio class submarine (SSGN) to carry 154 land attack missiles. USS John Warner is a Virginia-class submarine to carry 12 Tomahawks. The USS Iwo Jima amphibious strike group can deploy to Syria in a few days from the Arabian Sea.

The UK, France, perhaps some other NATO and Middle East allies, including Israel, will join a US-led operation in Syria. The British Air Force can operate from Cyprus. A RAF KC2 air tanker is already there. The talks between the US, the UK and France are underway. Syrian armed forces are taking precautionary measures expecting strikes any time now.

US Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Hailey, sounds like if a sustained operation, not a one-off strike, is a done deal. The envoy says America will strike with or without a UN resolution. The voices are heard calling for striking Syrian command and control sites as well as “regime’s political centers”, despite the fact that where Russian advisers could be there. That’s something the US military has not done before.

A proposal to invoke Article 5 of the Washington Treaty to contain Moscow without military actions has been floated. No actual war, but Russia will be considered an enemy. John Bolton’s warnings that an Islamic State ouster would allow Syrian President Assad to remain in power, with Iranian influence intact in Iraq are remembered to bolster the calls for action. In 2015, the newly appointed national security adviser called for carving out an independent Sunni Muslim state in northeastern Syria and western Iraq. He has his chance now.

A US-led multinational operation in Syria has become a predominant idea in Washington. On April 10, President Trump postponed his visit to Latin America because of the events in Syria. One can assume that the provocation in Douma was staged to make President Trump reconsider the decision to pull forces out in favor of confronting Russia, Syria and Iran. Those who did it hoped the US president would bite it. And bite he did.

There is no way to get rid of Assad but launch an international invasion. Washington’s global standing has received a strong blow after the unimpressive operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. A US-led intervention could boost it if it were a success. America would present itself as a defender of Syrians suffering from the “atrocities of Assad’s dictatorship”. Heading an international coalition would help restore America’s image as the world leader. This is the way to make Washington a friend of Sunni Muslims who allegedly need protection from Tehran.

Invading Syria is the way to weaken Iran’s influence in Iraq. Such an operation would meet the goals of the Russia containment policy. An intervention could bring the US-led force and Turkey together in their desire to oust Assad. That would distance Ankara from Moscow, which will not leave its Syrian ally in lurch. From Washington’s view, these are the pros to bolster the plan to invade.

And now about the cons. After the failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, you name it, the US would once again get tied up in the messy situation in the region. It may need to go beyond the Syria’s borders. For instance, the US-led coalition would have to strike Hezbollah in Lebanon. There is a big chance the US and its allies would get involved in another protracted bloody war with no final victory in sight.

Suppose, the intervention ends up as a quick, victorious operation in purely military terms, what about the prospects of winning war to lose peace, like in Iraq? Washington will be responsible for the outcome of nation building in a country divided along religious and ethnical lines. The US will be rebuked for failure and accused of depriving Syria of the chance provided by the Astana peace process. Invading Syria means fighting Iranians. The Washington’s goal is to incite them to rebellion. An invasion of Syria could backlash to make all Iranian people united behind the ayatollahs’ regime.

Finally, invading Syria is a great risk as Russia would not stand idly if the lives of its servicemen were threatened there. The possibility of clash will grow immensely. But if the US-coalition applies de-confliction efforts, there will be no containment. To the contrary, the world will see that Moscow cannot be ignored. It isn’t now. Despite all the tensions souring, Russia’s Chief of General Staff will meet the NATO Supreme Commander in a few days. No doubt, they will discuss Syria.

If Iran gets united and stronger, Russia remains to be an actor to reckon with, nation building fails and Assad keeps on fighting back to make the coalition suffer casualties, then there will be only cons with no pros. And that will take place against the background of failures in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Risks are too great to ask the question – why should the US get involved in the faraway Syria’s conflict at all? By no stretch of imagination could such an operation be considered a move to enhance US and West’s security and meet the goals of “America First” policy.

April 11, 2018 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Militarism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

‘We don’t do Twitter diplomacy, need serious approach’ – Putin’s spokesman to Trump over Syria rant

© Jaap Arriens / Global Look Press
RT | April 11, 2018

Vladimir Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissed Donald Trump’s attempts to talk to Russia through a barrage of tweets on Wednesday, and warned that the US president risked worsening “an already fragile situation.”

“We don’t do Twitter diplomacy. We are proponents of a serious approach,” Peskov told the media in Moscow. “We still think it is important to avoid steps that could harm what is already a fragile situation.”

In his earlier missives, Trump veered between intimidation and encouragement towards Moscow. He warned Russia to “get ready” for “nice, new and ‘smart’” missiles as a result of supporting Bashar Assad, who he described as “a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it.” This suggested that a US military response to the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria on April 7 is imminent.

However, Trump later wrote that there is “no reason” for the relationship between the Kremlin and the White House to be “worse now than it has ever been,” and asked “all nations to work together.” He also enjoyed a sideswipe at the “Fake & Corrupt Russia Investigation” for causing “much of the bad blood with Russia.”

April 11, 2018 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli Occupying Forces kill 32 Palestinians since 30 March 2018

Al-Haq | April 11, 2018

Since Friday 30 March 2018, thousands of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have protested across the Gaza Strip in commemoration of Land Day, demanding an end to the 11-year long closure, and reaffirming their right of return. In response, the Israeli Occupying Forces (IOF) deployed additional forces and equipment in the area, and issued explicit orders to use live fire against Palestinian protestors. Hundreds of fully armed IOF members, including tens of snipers and military vehicles, spread behind the border area in these locations. The IOF resorted to excessive and lethal force, by shooting live ammunition, rubber bullets, heavy tear gas fired by drones and military vehicles, targeting Palestinian protestors. Since Friday 30 March, 32 Palestinians have been killed in the Gaza Strip, 25 during the protests, and thousands have been injured, hundreds with live ammunition.

Age-restricted video (based on Community Guidelines)

April 11, 2018 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli airstrike on Syrian T-4 airbase ‘yet another provocation to trigger confrontation with Iran’

Sputnik – April 11, 2018

Israel’s attack on the Syrian Arab Air Force’s (SyAAF) Tiyas airbase in Homs province was nothing less than a provocation, Turkish analysts opined, drawing attention to the fact that the airstrike occurred following unconfirmed reports about the alleged chemical attack in the Syrian town of Douma in Eastern Ghouta.

“While Damascus’ position and its influence in Syria is growing and Syrian government forces are making considerable progress on the fronts, it is completely unconvincing and illogical to claim that the Syrian authorities conducted a chemical attack,” ex-Lieutenant General of the Turkish Armed Forces, Erdogan Karakus, told Sputnik Turkey. “Israel is doing everything possible to destabilize and confuse the situation in the region. These steps are part of yet another provocation on the part of the West.”

Karakus drew parallels between the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 under a false pretext and the reported chemical attack in Eastern Ghouta. On April 7, a number of media outlets accused Damascus of using chemical arms in the town of Douma, citing sources among Syrian jihadi militants. The next day the Trump administration dropped the hint that it did not rule out the military option as a response to the supposed incident.

Moscow denied the allegations, referring to the fact that the Russian Defense Ministry had repeatedly warned about upcoming chemical provocations in the region amid the Syrian Arab Army’s (SAA) successful advance. The Russian Foreign Ministry highlighted that “that military intervention under far-fetched and fabricated pretexts in Syria… is absolutely unacceptable and might lead to very severe consequences.”

The retired lieutenant general pointed out that the West is hiding the real state of affairs while spreading false information as the truth.

“There is a serious struggle for power and influence, which affects the UN,” he said. “Turkey, Russia and Iran are on the one side. On the opposite side are the West, the US and Israel.”

‘Israel Seeking to Provoke War Between US and Iran’

Major General Beyazit Karatas, a retired Turkish Air Force officer who previously served as a military attaché in Washington, recalled that it is not the first time that Israel has attacked the Tiyas (T-4) airbase, where Iranian unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are reportedly located.

“Israel’s major task for a long period of time has been to provoke a war between the US and Iran,” Karatas opined. “This desire of Israel is supported by Saudi Arabia. But the United States behaves cautiously, taking into account the potential reaction of Russia, Turkey, Iran and China. Therefore, they [the US] do not engage in clashes in the region directly, but provide support to local players, using them for their own purposes.”

Why Alleged Douma Attack Appears to Be a Staged Provocation

The retired major general called the claims about the alleged chemical attack in Douma “ridiculous.”

“It is presumed that the sarin gas was used that during the [alleged] chemical attack, but in fact it was not used,” Karatas said. “If you look at the photos published in Western media, you will clearly see that it was a staged event. If, as it claimed, sarin was used [in Douma], neither the father depicted in the photo could take the child in his hands, nor anyone actually could take these pictures. This is a staged farce.”

The former Turkish military official highlighted that the Russian Defense Ministry had repeatedly warned about possible staged provocations in the region.

At the same time, the US, Israel and their Western allies are trying to present chlorine as a chemical weapon, Karatas continued. According to the retired major general, these claims do not hold water: Being a toxic substance, gaseous chlorine is by no means a weapon of mass destruction, he says.

“In order to kill people located in one building, you will need to use at least 50 tons of chlorine. In a word, this is not a substance that can be used as a weapon of mass destruction,” he explained.

As for sarin, if this gas was actually used in Eastern Ghouta, no one could be there in ordinary masks, without special protective gear, as they would have died from poisoning, Karatas stressed.

“All of the above shows that the allegations and photographs are nothing more than a staged performance,” he pointed out. “As you know, Russia has been previously accused by the West of poisoning [former spy Sergei] Skripal. However, it turned out to be a lie. Today few people in the world believe the West’s false statements.”

The retired major general underscored that it is quite obvious for “reasonable people” that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would never use chemical weapons under current conditions.

“In addition, if sarin — a gas with high volatility — was used, the biggest losses would be suffered by the Syrian military [deployed in the region] in the first place,” Karatas elaborated.

On April 9, two Israeli Air Force F-15 fighter jets attacked the T-4 airfield from Lebanese airspace, according to the Russian Defense Ministry. The ministry pointed out that five out of eight strikes were repelled by Syrian air defenses. Israel’s envoy to Russia was summoned by the Russian Foreign Ministry on April 10 over the incident.

See also:

Moscow Wants Independent Experts to Reaffirm Claims on Chemical Weapons Use in Douma

April 11, 2018 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mueller is Desperate — But For What?

By Thomas L. Knapp – The Garrison Center – April 10, 2018

On April 9, federal agents raided the office, home and hotel room of Michael Cohen, personal attorney to US president Donald Trump. Cohen has come under fire, with potential legal implications, for paying  $130k to silence adult film actress and alleged Trump paramour Stephanie Clifford, better known as “Stormy Daniels.”

That hush money seems to be the excuse for the raids, but as the Washington Post reports, they are “part of an investigation referred by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III to federal prosecutors in New York …”

Poor  Mueller. After nearly a year as special counsel in the “Russiagate” probe, he has yet to accomplish either of his missions.

His putative job is to expose “Russian meddling” in the 2016 presidential election, especially with respect to possible collusion between the campaign of now-president Donald Trump and the regime of Vladimir Putin.

His real goal, of course, is to overturn that election by “getting” Trump on something — anything will do — that Congress can treat, and that the public will accept, as  impeachable/indictable.

So far Mueller’s secured indictments of a few Trump associates on charges having little or nothing to do with his overt mission, and of a few Russians for running an Internet “troll farm” that posted some cheesy social media ads. But he has yet to put real meat on his mandate and doesn’t seem to be getting much closer to Trump himself than when he started.

Now he’s hitching his wagon to Stormy Daniels’s star. Why? There are two plausible reasons.

One is that he hopes to get Trump on something other than “collusion with Russia.” Trump has publicly denied the affair with Daniels, and has also denied knowledge of Cohen’s payment to Daniels. If he’s lying, and if the payment violated any laws, proof of that might be enough to get impeachment proceedings rolling in Congress and move a grand jury to indict.

The other possibility is that Mueller is baiting Trump to fire him, something sure to be followed by  the usual suspects crying “obstruction!” and “constitutional crisis!” then demanding Trump’s head on a platter, and possibly getting it.

No one is likely to mistake me for a Trump supporter. I wouldn’t be at all sorry to see him go. But there are larger and more troubling implications here.

If attorney-client privilege can be so casually breached versus the president of the United States, just how secure do you think it will remain for the rest of us?

And if this president is successfully removed, will there ever again be a presidential election that isn’t immediately followed by an open-ended “find something, anything” probe like Mueller’s?

The decline and fall of the American empire seems to be speeding up.

April 11, 2018 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Britain and its Deadly Chemical Games

By Martin Berger – New Eastern Outlook – 10.04.2018

There’s no arguing that recently we’ve witnessed an abrupt increase of public interest in chemical weapons and the top-secret British laboratory Porton Down due to the alleged poisoning of Sergei Skripal in the so-called Salisbury incident.

Back in 2004, the Guardian would announce that this laboratory had conducted experiments on people using weaponized chemical agents, including highly volatile ones.

In this regard, it must be recalled that the United Kingdom began using chemical weapons almost immediately after the invention of this weapon. England would unleash deadly chemical attacks during the First World War, only to take advantage of the experience it accumulated of the process to utilize mustard gas against Arab insurgents in the 1920s. Moreover, historic documents show that London had an intention of using chemical agents against Germany’s densely populated cities during the Second World War.

The First World War was the time when the UK created the top-secret Porton Down chemical weapons laboratory. Over the course of its existence, more than 20,000 people were subjects of thousands of chemical and biological agents, as well as all sorts of drugs. According to various estimates, at least 8,000 people were exposed to the effect of mustard gas, and more than 3,000 people to sarin nerve gas poisoning. A renowned British historian Ulf Schmidt would explore the story of “survivors of Porton Down” in his book “Secret Science: A Century of Poison Warfare.”

By 1918, a quarter of all English shells would contain poisonous substances – phosgene, diphosgene, mustard, and chloropicrin, bringing the total amount of chemical weapons that British troops had at their disposal to 25,400 tons. In 1919, the British Royal Air Force in a bid to suppress the Bolsheviks in northern regions of Russia would unload diphenylchloroarsine on their heads, a highly toxic substance that causes severe suffocation.

In 1920, Winston Churchill ordered the suppression of Muslim uprisings in Iraq with the help of mustard gas. Some analysts still remember the phrase he used in a secret memorandum :

I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes…

As a consequence, Iraqi villages populated by “uncivilized” people that dared to revolt against the British Empire were wiped out with the use of mustard gas. Seventy years after these events, the survivors said that their villages were bombed three times a day. In addition to mustard gas, British troops would also deploy napalm against peaceful Iraqis along with new types of high-explosive and phosphorous bombs.

From 1930 to 1940, Britain tested the effect of mustard gas on Indian soldiers. Later these inhumane tests were dubbed “Rawalpindi experiments”, even though the area referred to in this name is now a part of the Punjab province in Pakistan. The purpose of these “experiments” was to study the effects and establish the dosages of mustard gas that could be used in combat operations. In the course of these “experiments” Indian soldiers were locked in gas chambers and then poisoned with mustard gas. After 10 years of continuous torture of Indian soldiers hundreds suffered from the consequence of severe exposure to mustard gas.

In 1942, the British developed the so-called Operation Vegetarian. They planned to scatter linseed cakes infected with anthrax spores over German pastures. The UK “baked” over 5 millions of such cakes for the attack. However, before launching it the UK decided to test their effectiveness on the Scottish Gruinard Island, the anthrax exposure was so “successful” that until 1990 any access to the island was strictly forbidden, but even today the consequences of this “experiment” haven’t been studied.

From 1939 to 1989, the United Kingdom was engaged in the development and research of new chemical warfare agents which became a pivotal part of the work done at the Porton Down chemical weapons laboratory. It was experts from this same laboratory that had subjected Indian soldiers to mustard gas exposure in the 1930s.

However, the tests of chemical agents on people within the confinements of Porton Down wasn’t something out of the ordinary. According to the El Pais newspaper, in 1963 this research center decided to test how vulnerable public infrastructure was to chemical and biological attacks. To do this, they unleashed an unknown bacteria in the London Underground, that was originally considered harmless, but later turned out to be capable of causing sepsis. However, no one was held responsible for such  inhumane “research”.

One can also recall the experiments conducted in 1963 that studied the effect of LSD drugs on British soldiers.

There’s been hundreds of former subjects of such “chemical experiments” that have demanded London to tell the truth about what is happening behind the closed doors of Porton Down, and to compensate for the harm inflicted by such “experiments”. In 2008, British authorities recognized individual facts of all sorts of harmful incidents and issued compensations to 359 of nearly 22,000 soldiers who were subjected to tests at Porton Down.

Recently, the British Medical Association (BMA) has released a report on the use of drugs as weapons, after examining the ongoing militarization of drugs. This has been a matter of grave public concern for decades now, but the highly technical nature of the above mentioned report has been kept out of the public eye.

It’s curious that according to various reports, the US Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency has been funding a number of military projects performed by the chemical weapons laboratory of Porton Down. Among them: experimental respiratory infection with Anthrax, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus, Western equine encephalitis virus, and Eastern equine encephalitis virus. 

As for the latest reports about British chemical projects, it’s noteworthy that last year Syrian armed forces came across ISIS warehouses  filled with weaponized chemical substances produced by the US and UK. Syria’s Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad would announce that the poisonous substances found at the said warehouses were produced by such American and British companies as Federal Laboratories, Cherming Defense UK and NonLethal Technologies. According to his reports, Syrian soldiers retrieved hand grenades and grenade launchers filled with CS and CN toxins. Such warehouses were located in the liberated city of Aleppo and the eastern suburb of Damascus.

But, in addition to the documented use of chemical weapons, Britain is well known for its false-flag provocations in this field. Among them is the so-called White Helmets organization in Syria. When Britain needs to blame Russia, Iran or the Syrian armed forces for the ongoing bombing of allegedly peaceful international radical terrorists, it orders them to destroy hospitals and schools, while using alleged chemical weapons in the process before carrying out “rescue operations” under direct supervision of British special services. Injured children are always on hand as props, with professional cameramen capturing the staged events. It is noteworthy that the founder of this group was James Le Mesurier, a British military intelligence officer with an impressive track record. He’s a graduate of the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, who saw deployment in some well-known military operations, including in Bosnia and Kosovo, as well as in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine. In general, he’s been everywhere the West needed to stage a humanitarian catastrophe, with a subsequent “humanitarian intervention” leading to long sought after Western geopolitical objectives. He is still in the service of Her Majesty, to be more specific –  British military intelligence.

So, after a careful examination of the role chemical weapons play in the operations ordered by the UK, including false-flag attacks, everything becomes clear. Therefore, there can hardly be any doubts about the responsibility of British special services in the staging of the Salisbury incident which was designed to be yet another anti-Russian provocation, just as false-flag Syrian attacks have been.

It is unlikely that in this regard, Britain and its ruling political elite will be able to publicly refute the facts mentioned above in any way.

April 11, 2018 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Bashar Jaafari Challenges Nikki Haley On WMD

Syriana Analysis | April 10, 2018

Syria’s permanent representative to the UN, Dr. Bashar Jaafari raises important questions during UNSC session on Monday, 9 April 2018 to discuss reports of an alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria.

April 10, 2018 Posted by | Deception, Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli Media Urges Command to Assassinate President Assad

Al-Manar | April 10, 2018

Israeli media outlets promoted the Zionist aggression on Syria on Monday, stressing dealing a blow to Syrian president in order to curb the military achievements in that country.

Maariv newspaper provoked the Zionist command to assassinate the Syrian president Bashar Assad due to the recent achievements made by the Syrian army, considering that utilizing the chemical allegations can be a chance to carry out such an operation.

Haaretz revealed the pressures exerted by the Zionist intelligence department on the command to strike T4 military airbase in Syria “to curb the ‘Iranian deployment’” in the base.

For its part, Yediot Ahronot reported Zionist concerns about the Iranian military, political and economic achievements in Syria, considering that the US withdrawal from that country will mean ‘Israel’ will be unable to confront Iran.

April 10, 2018 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

UK military action in Syria met with enthusiasm by liberal hawks, but ‘dissenters’ remain skeptical

RT | April 10, 2018

The ratcheting up of warlike rhetoric from the UK government has been increasingly welcomed by interventionists in the media establishment. Though the prospect of military action in Syria looks likely, dissenting voices remain.

Since UK Prime Minister Theresa May refused to rule out military action in Syria as a response to the alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma, a formerly rebel-held suburb of Damascus, there has been a fervent hawkish clamor from the usual suspects across the media establishment.

Guardian journalist Simon Tisdall has written an op-ed piece titled, ‘After Douma, the west’s response to Syria’s regime must be military,’ in which he calls for military action to proceed before an OPCW investigation into the incident.

According to Tisdall, the culprits behind the supposed chemical attack are obvious: the Syrian government and its ally, Russia. “Calls to wait for yet another UN investigation amount to irresponsible obfuscation. Only the Syrian regime and its Russian backers have the assets and the motivation to launch such merciless attacks on civilian targets.”

In a reaction that wouldn’t be out of place in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq War, Tisdall concludes: “Allied military intervention, better late than never, is necessary to avoid future atrocities, [and] spare innocent lives.”

In turn, right-wing UK broadsheet the Telegraph pleads for the UK not to be left on the periphery if the US and France decide to take military action in Syria. Its editorial concludes: “If America and France are to act, Mrs May needs to ensure that the UK is not left on the sidelines unwilling to join in the punitive action she has rightly identified as necessary.”

Political commentators on Twitter such as Mark Curtis are not so convinced military intervention is the solution to the Syrian conflict: “Maybe Iran should strike Tel Aviv to halt atrocities in Gaza? Moscow to strike Riyadh to stop Saudi atrocities in Yemen? How about Jordan striking Ankara to stop atrocities in Afrin?”

The Mail Online’s Peter Hitchens – in a blog article titled ‘The Guns of April : Are we in a pre-War era, right now?’ – suggests that those such as himself who oppose military action are seen as betraying their country in favor of foreign, enemy powers. Hitchens writes: “This is an invariable symptom of a country whose elite is bent on war.”

Simon Jenkins, a colleague of Tisdall’s at the Guardian, shares the view that Assad is responsible for chemical weapons violations in his own country. However, he insists bombing Syria is not the solution, saying: “For the moment, western military intervention is utterly pointless. We must kick the habit of trying to rule the world.” This, perhaps, is a nod to Britain’s colonial past that some in government want to resurrect to help reassert itself on the global stage.

In Jenkins’ concluding remarks, he highlights the hypocrisy of nations such as the US when it comes to the laws of war: “The laws of war are enveloped in hypocrisy, largely because they are written by the winners. The US has still not signed the convention against delayed-action cluster bombs, one of the most immoral weapons ever devised.”

The drumbeat of war is increasingly being sounded among the political and media hawks. The question is, will this translate into something more tangible? The ‘dissenters’ will be hoping it does not.

April 10, 2018 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

‘Israel made a mistake by striking Syria & jeopardizing relations with Russia’

RT | April 9, 2018

Israel’s airstrike on a Syrian airbase was a strategic error that’d be hard to explain to Russia, as the aggressive act can’t be classified in any other way than aiding terrorists, political scientist Vyacheslav Matuzov told RT.

“The Israelis, I think, have made a strategic mistake because, by picking up the role of a warmongering client of the US, they put into question the whole Israeli-Russian relations,” Matuzov said. “The T-4 airfield that was bombed by the Israeli Air Force hosted a number of Russian aircraft, including Mi-8, Ka-52 helicopters. There were Russian servicemen, Russian pilots there.”

The Israeli military isn’t denying the attack, but refusing to comment on the issue, “which is the same as acknowledging it,” Matuzov, who’s also the head of the Russian-Arab Friendship and Business Cooperation Society, believes. “But the Russian military, having all the special means in their possession, clearly identified who fired the missiles.”

Early on Monday, Russia’s Defense Ministry said that two Israeli F-15 fighters had targeted Syria’s T-4 airbase in Homs province. They fired eight guided missiles, with three of them avoiding Syrian air defenses and striking the landing field. The attack was carried out from over Lebanese airspace, with Beirut later confirming the breach by Israeli jets.

The fact that no Russian personnel and hardware was lost in the attack “doesn’t make the situation easier for Israel because, when an airfield is struck like this, anything can happen,” Matuzov said.

“Now the mechanism of diplomatic and military consultations – traditionally maintained between Russia and Israel – has been launched. I think it’ll be hard for Israel to explain this aggressive act. The Syrian army is fighting terrorism and what Israel did can’t be classified any other way [than] as aiding the terrorists, who are close to defeat in Eastern Ghouta,” the expert said.

“I have great doubts over the statements by some Russian political experts, who say that that Israel is the only reliable ally of Russia in the Middle East, but not the Arab countries. I think this point of view doesn’t stand up to criticism,” he added.

Israel is interested in a continued conflict in Syria as it is striving to prevent its main geopolitical rival and President Bashar Assad’s ally, Iran, “from strengthening its position in the region, which will certainly happen after the end of the Syrian war. In order to do this, Israel must drain the Syrian army of blood and… help the Americans in achieving their task of bringing down the Syrian regime,” Matuzov explained.

Airstrikes aren’t the only way the Jewish State is meddling in Syria as “the Kurdish units on the eastern shore of [the] Euphrates are closely connected to and supported by the Israeli and US military,” he pointed out.

Matuzov said it’s hard to speculate if Israel carried out the airstrike because “the US delegated their dirty work to it” or if it decided to take action on its own, after realizing that the Americans were reluctant to fulfill Donald Trump’s threats of vengeance after reports of chemical attacks in Syria.

Anti-government activists, including the controversial White Helmets civil defense group, on Saturday accused the Syrian authorities of using chemical weapons in the militant-held town of Douma in the Damascus suburb of Eastern Ghouta, saying that dozens of civilians were killed and hundreds more affected.

The reports led to renewed calls for a Western intervention of Syria, despite Damascus saying they were a “fabrication” and Russia’s Foreign Ministry describing them as “fake news.” Moscow also warned that any military action taken against Syria would be “absolutely unacceptable” and could lead to “dire consequences.”

April 10, 2018 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »