Syria, a pawn on the grand chessboard of global geopolitics
By Eduardo Vasco | Strategic Culture Foundation | December 10, 2024
Very few people really know what happened – and is still happening – in Syria. We may never know what really happened. All most of us can do is speculate and analyze based on public information and logic. Sometimes logic is more accurate than information.
What we need to keep in mind is that Donald Trump’s election has changed everything. The American Deep State does not accept that he can put into practice what he has been talking about for a long time: withdrawing (or at least reducing the participation of) the United States from the great global geopolitical game. This would be a near-fatal blow not only to the imperialist domination of the United States, which has lasted almost 80 years, but to the entire international imperialist system that has been in force since the beginning of the last century.
That is why the Deep State made a very dangerous move – although it could turn out to be a masterstroke: it launched a series of offensives to leave the United States in a situation that Trump will not be able to reverse. This could even lead to a new world war, including a nuclear one.
Interconnected episodes of great magnitude then occurred at critical points in the Cold War (which is becoming less and less cold) with the Russians and the Chinese:
- The authorization for Ukraine to use ATACMS against Russian territory;
- The first use of ATACMS by Ukrainians inside Russia;
- The attempted military coup in South Korea;
- The devastating offensive by the “rebels” in Syria.
The advance on the Donbass front and the revelation of the Oreshnik are certainly important cards for the Russians to deter [US offensives]. However, there is a feeling in the government that the war needs to end as soon as possible and the risk of two new all-out wars in the vicinity of its territory (Syria and Korea) have raised the alarm in the Kremlin. At the same time, the frantic announcements of $725 million and $988 million, respectively, in military aid to Ukraine in the coming weeks, as well as $841 billion in defense spending for 2025, have shown the Russians that the Deep State is indeed capable of taking action and starting World War III.
Knowing that Vladimir Putin has already demonstrated that he is willing to fight for Ukraine, whatever the cost, and realizing the advantage the Russians have on the ground, the escalation at the end of Joe Biden’s administration would have served as a strong bargaining chip for imperialism to secure dominance on other fronts. For the first time, Vladimir Zelensky spoke of accepting dialogue with Russia and even seeking an agreed peace. In Paris, Trump met with the Ukrainian leader and reaffirmed Kiev’s surprising willingness to seek a possible peaceful solution in the short term.
It is possible that the Deep State exerted all this pressure to force Putin to give up Syria if it wants peace in Ukraine. The imperialists showed Moscow that they were willing to set the world on fire to protect their interests, and the Russians had to give up positions in the Middle East in exchange for guarantees in Eastern Europe.
After all, it would be extremely costly to maintain Bashar al-Assad’s regime. After 13 years of resisting imperialist aggression, Syria was already tired. Assad was not very popular among the population or among the state bureaucracy and the national bourgeoisie. The economic crisis was distressing and the armed forces were devastated. The Russians would only have to lose by intervening if the Americans really wanted to overthrow Assad once and for all. Russia would not be able to fight two wars at the same time.
Everything indicates that the Assad regime was indeed crumbling. All it took was a blow. And it came in an overwhelming way, with an alliance between the US, Turkey, Israel and Qatar. The Russians and Iranians had to accept it. But at least the Russians were able to take part in the agreement. They repelled the “rebel” forces near Latakia and Tartus, to protect their naval and air bases, but intelligence certainly knew that Assad would fall without Russian intervention and helped him escape. While the Iranian embassy was stormed and destroyed by the terrorists, the Russian embassy was unharmed.
The new regime has already announced that it will treat Russia as a partner like any other. Reports indicate that the military bases will be maintained. The Russian media no longer calls the terrorists terrorists, as it had done until the end of the week. It now calls them the “armed opposition”. The flag of the new regime has already been raised over the Syrian embassy in Moscow, without any inconvenience. Contrary to the trend in several countries whose regimes imperialism wants to overthrow, the Syrian opposition has not shown itself to be anti-Russian at any time during this fatal offensive. Compare what we see in Georgia, where a government much less influenced by Moscow is labeled a puppet of the Kremlin and protesters try to beat up anyone who speaks Russian.
Most of the state bureaucracy of the old regime (including diplomats in Russia) will be preserved. Prime Minister Mohammed Ghazi al-Jalali will remain in office. He was appointed by Assad on September 24, and I do not rule out the possibility that there was already a move to change the regime “peacefully.” His continued presence in office may have been a condition for the Russians to allow Assad to leave.
The situation for the Russians is not the same as it was in 2015. The necessary intervention in Ukraine took a lot of its military and economy. It was not possible to save Assad once again. Between Syria and Ukraine, the Russians would obviously choose Ukraine. The Russians have always had dialogue with many parties wherever they are, and in Syria it is no different. Assad was the first option, but not the only one. Now they will try to preserve their interests to a minimum, especially on the Mediterranean coast, and neutralize the United States as much as possible. We will see what happens in Georgia, which is nearby.
The Soviet legacy, since Stalin, is also highly valued by the current Russian bureaucracy. When it was necessary to sell off an allied country in order to preserve a more important one, Moscow never hesitated. The most famous example was the handover of Italy, mainly, and some other Western European countries, to the United States and the European imperialist bourgeoisie, saving them from the proletarian revolution, in order to obtain from them the guarantee that they would not interfere in Eastern Europe. In fact, the division of the world after the Second World War into zones of influence was a hallmark of Soviet diplomacy to preserve the interests of Moscow’s bureaucratic caste.
That was a betrayal by Stalin of the peoples of the world. But it would guarantee the survival of the Soviet bureaucracy for another 45 years. Putin’s current government is not founded on the foundations of a proletarian state, the fruit of a socialist revolution. Therefore, it has no obligation to save anyone. It fights for the interests of the new Russian state, which is weaker than Stalin’s Soviet one. It is understandable – even if one does not agree – that he gave up Syria to defend his positions in Ukraine against NATO aggression.
This does not mean that it was not a mistake. Much less that it was not a very important defeat. Nor does it mean that it contained the warlike and chaotic impulses of American imperialism.
Iranian supreme leader names powers behind Assad’s ouster
RT | December 11, 2024
Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has pointed the finger at the US and Israel over the ouster of former Syrian President Bashar Assad. He also dismissed claims that the latest developments in the Middle East had weakened Tehran and its allies in the region.
Several armed opposition groups mounted a surprise offensive in Syria late last month, led by Hayat Tahrir-al-Sham (HTS). With government forces offering little or no resistance, militants swiftly seized several major cities, eventually taking the capital, Damascus, on Saturday. Assad with his family fled to Russia, where they were granted asylum.
Addressing a thousands-strong congregation on Wednesday, Ayatollah Khamenei said that “there should be no doubt that what happened in Syria was the result of a joint American-Zionist plot.” Touching on the future of the so-called ‘Resistance Front’ – a coalition of Iranian-backed groups across the Middle East – the cleric insisted that despite some analysts’ predictions to the contrary, the structure “will encompass the entire region more than ever.”
“Resistance is… a doctrine that grows stronger under pressure,” Khamenei stated.
The Iranian supreme leader also insisted that “Iran is strong and powerful, and will become more powerful” despite the fall of its long-time ally in Damascus. He also predicted that the US will eventually be pushed out of the Middle East by the ‘Resistance Front’.
In a video address on Sunday, outgoing US President Joe Biden claimed that Assad had been deposed because of Washington’s continued efforts to weaken Iran, Russia, and the Lebanese-based Shiite militant group Hezbollah. All three had actively supported Assad since the Syrian Civil War broke out in 2011.
Biden also cited sanctions imposed by Washington on the Syrian government, as well as the US military presence in the country and its support for Kurdish militias in Syria’s northeast.
“Our approach has shifted the balance of power in the Middle East,” the US president proclaimed.
The same day, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu similarly claimed that Assad’s ouster had been a “direct result of the blows we have inflicted on Iran and Hezbollah.”
The Israeli military has in recent days seized control of the demilitarized buffer zone on the border with Syria, which was established as part of the 1974 disengagement agreement not far from the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. The Israel Defense Forces has also conducted massive strikes on numerous military facilities in Syria, citing supposed security threats.
FDA Has Authority to Recall COVID Vaccines — A Growing Number of Scientists Are Demanding Swift Action
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | December 9, 2024
“It’s time for a recall” of the COVID-19 vaccines, epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher argued on a recent episode of “Brannon Howse Live.” The mounting evidence that the COVID-19 vaccines caused death and other serious injuries are grounds for “Class I recall” by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Hulscher said.
Hulscher is one of the growing chorus of voices among public health officials, scientists and researchers demanding public health officials hit the pause button on the shots until definitive safety studies are performed.
The latest round of calls began in January when Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo called for a “halt in the use of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines” over safety concerns that the mRNA technology is delivering DNA contaminants into people’s cells.
A few weeks later, the journal Cureus published the first peer-reviewed paper to call for a moratorium on the COVID-19 vaccines. The paper included a sweeping review of “lessons learned” from the clinical trial data and the many adverse events associated with the shots.
Just last week, elected officials, organizations — including the World Council for Health and Door to Freedom — and hundreds of doctors and researchers sent a letter to the heads of state of 10 European countries calling for a suspension of the “modified mRNA vaccines,” citing serious health concerns associated with the shots.
Calls for a moratorium or a recall have been widely controversial. Ladapo was accused by The New York Times of peddling “misinformation.” The Washington Post said he had a pattern of making “debunked claim[s],” and FactCheck.org accused him of relying on “faulty science.”
Cureus retracted the “lessons learned” paper in what co-author Dr. Peter McCullough called, a “stunning act of scientific censorship.” The paper was later republished in two parts in a different peer-reviewed journal.
Despite efforts to censor and discredit medical professionals and researchers who draw attention to the harms associated with the vaccines, even mainstream publications have conceded that the COVID-19 vaccines can cause serious injuries and that vaccine-injured people have been ignored. Yet, they continue to push the shots.
Hulscher told The Defender that the mainstream media’s refusal to seriously report on calls to pull the vaccines from the market has serious implications for public health. It’s “a contributing factor to excess mortality” among global populations, he said.
“The FDA has failed to protect Americans from unsafe products because they suffer from corporate capture,” he added.
M. Nathaniel Mead, lead author of the “Lessons Learned” paper, told The Defender the FDA never should have authorized the vaccines in the first place. The “usual safety testing protocols and toxicology requirements were bypassed” and a reanalysis of the trial data showed serious adverse effects. “The ‘safe and effective’ narrative has always been a farce,” he said.
Freedom of Information Act requests have uncovered evidence that top officials at the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention knew about COVID-19 vaccine injuries early in 2021 — long before making the information public.
Still, U.S. public health agencies continue to authorize and recommend new boosters.
The FDA could easily respond to calls to halt vaccination, Hulscher said, by issuing a Class I recall, where a drug is recalled because it is likely that its use will cause serious health consequences or death — which he said nine studies and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data show.
“Because criteria for a Class I recall have been far exceeded, it should be an easy and effective way to halt the COVID-19 injection program and begin the process of compensating those who were harmed.”
Hulscher said he expects that calls will grow to withdraw the vaccines from the market until the regulatory authorities finally take action.
How does a Class I recall work?
Drug recalls are mechanisms to remove or amend pharmaceutical products that violate laws under the purview of the FDA.
Recalls range from minor to serious. In a minor case, companies issue a public alert that a medical device may cause harm in some situations or temporarily withdraw a product from the market while addressing a rule violation.
More serious recalls come into play in the case of pharmaceutical products that may, or likely will, cause harm to human health. A Class I recall, the most serious type, typically involves withdrawing a drug from the market completely.
In most cases, the FDA doesn’t recall the product, the company does — either by its own initiative or at the FDA’s recommendation — and the FDA oversees the recall process.
In the case of vaccines and other biologics, medical devices and controlled substances, the FDA has the authority to compel a company to recall a drug.
If a determination is made that a batch, lot or other quantity of a product licensed under the Public Health Service Act presents an imminent threat to public health, the FDA can issue an immediate recall.
However, for most drugs, the FDA doesn’t have the authority to force a company to recall products that violate FDA rules — it can only recommend the drugmaker recall its product.
Federal lawmakers have periodically introduced legislation to provide the FDA with mandatory recall authority for any and all faulty or unsafe prescription and over-the-counter drugs. However, Congress has not yet passed a bill giving the FDA that authority.
In the past, drugmakers have initiated vaccine recalls and informed distributors and facilities that may have purchased a vaccine about issues with the product.
In 2007, Merck recalled 1.2 million doses of Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib B) vaccines due to concerns the vaccine was contaminated with the Bacillus cereus bacterium. The CDC analyzed VAERS from April 2007 to February 2008 and identified 75 reports related to the Hib B vaccines, including five deaths. The agency said the deaths weren’t related to the reported B. cereus.
Merck also recalled one lot of Gardasil in 2013 because it contained glass.
In 1999, the FDA-approved RotaShield vaccine, meant to prevent rotavirus gastroenteritis, was found to be causing intussusception in infants, an often excruciating and potentially fatal condition in which part of the intestine telescopes into itself.
The CDC withdrew its recommendation after identifying more than 100 reports in VAERS of intussusception following vaccination with RotaShield. Wyeth, now Pfizer, withdrew the vaccine from the market.
The FDA had approved that vaccine as safe, even though the clinical trials showed increased incidences of intussusception in vaccinated infants.
A congressional investigation showed that many of the FDA and CDC advisers who recommended the vaccine had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies developing rotavirus vaccines.
Thousands of FDA-approved drugs and devices are recalled each year, and the number of Class I recalls has been trending upward. Details of each recall are listed on an obscure FDA “enforcement report” website.
There have been some limited recalls for vaccines in 2024, including for COVID-19 vaccines, but these have been Class III recalls of limited lots, and in those cases, the product was deemed unlikely to cause harm.
For example, in November, Pfizer issued a Class III recall of four lots of its Comirnaty vaccine that were shipped at temperatures exceeding refrigeration requirements. The lots went to Alaska and U.S. Pacific island territories.
McKesson Medical Supply issued Class III recalls for lots of polio, Tdap, Hepatitis A and B, shingles, flu and other vaccines after their walk-in refrigerator failed.
The FDA did not respond to The Defender’s request for comment on calls for a Class I recall of COVID-19 vaccines.
Researchers say evidence supports Class I recall of COVID vaccines
Last week, two new peer-reviewed studies presented evidence supporting a moratorium or recall for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.
A study published in Science, Health Policy and the Law detected DNA contamination in the COVID-19 vaccines, at levels three-to-four times higher than regulatory limits. The study added to previous findings by other researchers that were also the basis for Ladapo’s concerns. Such contamination could be grounds for a recall.
“The recent paper by Kammerer et al. is another in a series of papers that show very high levels of DNA contamination in modified mRNA vaccines,” Children’s Health Defense Chief Scientific Officer Brian Hooker told The Defender.
“In light of this and the already exhaustive body of literature on the toxicity of these jabs, they need to be recalled as soon as possible and the myriad injuries caused by the shots need to be addressed,” he added.
Another study published last week analyzed COVID-19 vaccine and booster safety data. The authors concluded that “at minimum,” health officials should institute a moratorium on the shots. “But ideally, they should be removed from the market and their use in humans should be stopped.”
In addition to the 38,190 deaths after the COVID-19 vaccine reported to VAERS as of Nov. 29, Hulscher also pointed to recent studies that taken as a whole he said provides enough evidence to trigger a recall.
Analyses have linked 3.1 million excess deaths to vaccines and lockdowns in 47 countries between 2020 and 2022, and 17 million excess deaths globally from vaccines and other pandemic response measures.
A 2023 article in BMC Infectious Diseases, later retracted by the journal, estimated that 278,000 Americans may have died from the COVID-19 vaccine by December 2021. Similarly, Pantazatos and Seligman estimated between 146,000 and 187,000 possible vaccine-associated deaths by August 2021.
Another 2023 study published in the Asian Pacific Journal of Health Sciences found that higher COVID-19 vaccine uptake was associated with increased all-cause mortality. Another recent study published in Bulgarian Medicine found a positive correlation between COVID-19 vaccination rates and excess mortality.
A recent study published in Microorganisms found that all-cause death risk was higher among people who had received the COVID-19 vaccine than those who hadn’t.
Hulscher and colleagues also recently published a study estimating 49,240 excess cardiac deaths possibly due to the COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S. from 2021-2023.
Hulscher and co-authors published a systematic review in Science, Public Health Policy and the Law on Nov. 17 of autopsy-related literature following COVID-19 vaccination. They found that 73.9% of the 325 deaths were linked to the shots, suggesting “a high likelihood of a causal link” between the shots and death.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Current Pfizer Board Member and Former Trump Appointed FDA Commissioner, Dr. Scott Gottlieb
His loyalty to Pfizer is so strong he’s willing to be publicly disloyal to Trump and attack Trump’s pick for HHS Secretary with false claims about vaccines
Injecting Freedom by Aaron Siri | December 1, 2024
Pfizer board member and former Trump appointed FDA commissioner, Scott Gottlieb, went on the air to attack Trump’s nomination for HHS Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Here is my response, posted on X, to his comments:
Pfizer board member, @ScottGottliebMD, you look foolish attacking @RobertKennedyJr on CNBC (links to clips below) because it’s clear you lack basic knowledge regarding vaccines. For example:
- Your claim that in “early 2000s … FDA reformulate[d] the existing MMR vaccine to take some of the preservatives out,” is false. Never happened. You are likely thinking about the removal of thimerosal in the early 2000s from various vaccines but as even CDC explains, “Measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccines do not and never did contain thimerosal.” https://www.cdc.gov/vaccine-safety/about/thimerosal.html
- Your claim that a child “can’t get vaccinated [for MMR] until age 2” is simply false. MMR is routinely given at one year of age and sometimes even earlier. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/imz-schedules/index.html
- Your claims regarding pertussis vaccines nonsensically ignore the fact that these products do not prevent transmission of the pertussis bacteria – they only provide, at best, personal protection. As a recent consensus paper of industry pertussis vaccine “experts” explained, “aPVs [pertussis vaccine] … cannot avoid infection and transmission. … aPV pertussis vaccines do not prevent colonization. Consequently, they do not reduce the circulation of B. pertussis and do not exert any herd immunity effect.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31333640/
- Your claims regarding polio nonsensically ignore the fact that the last wild case of polio in the U.S. was in 1979 and that the only polio vaccine used in the U.S. for the last 24 years only provides, at best, personal protection and does not prevent transmission of the polio virus. As CDC explains: “IPV [inactivated polio vaccine] … does not stop transmission of the virus.” https://www.cdc.gov/poliovirus-containment/diseaseandvirus/index.html
- You claimed that “we [Pfizer] don’t make the pediatric vaccines, Pfizer is not in that market” to deflect the claim that, as a board member of Pfizer, you have a serious conflict of interest in attacking RFK Jr. regarding pediatric vaccines. But, as you no doubt know, Pfizer does sell pediatric vaccines, including the Prevnar vaccine given to babies at 2, 4, 6, and 12 months of age, which was one of Pfizer’s top three selling products in 2023. https://www.pfizer.com/sites/default/files/investors/financial_reports/annual_reports/2023/ Your claim is either a lie or reveals deep ignorance.
- Your claim regarding measles mortality is based on dubious and unreliable data and ignores the facts that (1) approximately 400 people total died annually in the U.S. in the years before the first measles vaccine in 1963 (amounting to around 1 death for every 500,000 Americans), and (2) mortality from measles declined by over 98% from 1900 to 1960 before the vaccine and was continuing to decline. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/6200. In any event, you dutifully ignore the fact that RFK Jr. has made clear he has no intention of taking away vaccines from anyone who wants them.
- You claim RFK Jr. will cost lives, but I would argue that ignorance regarding vaccine products does and has cost lives. I welcome a public debate in which we can discuss the number of lives ignorance about vaccines has cost versus your speculations about those RFK Jr. will supposedly cause (a man who has actually devoted his life to saving the lives of children).
Your knowledge regarding these products is only matched by your track record as a public “health” official. The plummeting decline in childhood health from the early 1980s (from less than 13% with chronic disease to now well over 50%) continued unabated while you were FDA commissioner. Respectfully, you lack authority or a track record, let alone basic knowledge, to speak on the subjects you address in this interview (let alone to discuss this topic with Senators to dissuade them from confirming RFK Jr.)
If you were being honest, you would reveal that your real concern, as a board member of Pfizer, is that Pfizer’s golden gooses – Covid-19 vaccines, Prevnar vaccines, RSV vaccines, etc. – will have to face the reality of the devastating harms they have caused to families across America. Your interview stinks of self-interest. The time for selling out America’s children so pharma and its leaders, like you, can line their pockets has come to an end.
The above responds to a recent CNBC segment on which you recently appeared and which you tweeted out in two parts:
Syria after 13 years of U.S. state terrorism… what do you expect?
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | December 10, 2024
In less than 13 days, a coalition of U.S.-backed jihadist militant groups took over Syria. The offensive, which began on November 27, culminated in Syrian President Bashar al-Assad hastily stepping down and fleeing to Russia. Assad and his wife were confirmed to be in Moscow by December 9.
Assad said he made his decision to preserve the peace in Syria. Russia said it was not involved in his decision-making.
The gloating by American and European politicians reflects the years of investment by the Western powers for regime change in Syria. An investment that seems to have paid off, finally.
It is misplaced to speculate that there may have been some kind of betrayal or “deal” by Assad and his allies in Russia and Iran to let the country go. Yes, the Syrian army and authorities capitulated in breath-taking short order. But it is callow to conjecture about a more devious move behind the scenes, such as Russia or Iran leaving its Syrian ally to the mercy of insurgents.
Syria was simply broken and exhausted by years of Western aggression and attrition. There was little that Russia or Iran could do to salvage an allied country.
The final collapse of Syria did not come after a 13-day blitzkrieg. It came after 13 years of non-stop state terrorism by the United States and its European NATO allies. The earlier phase of U.S.-sponsored proxy terrorism (2011 to 2020) was checked by the intervention of Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah. But the West’s proxies weren’t defeated definitively. In retrospect, that may be seen as a fateful strategic blunder.
The continuation of the proxy war after 2020 relied on the imposition of crippling economic and trade sanctions on Syria by the U.S. and the European Union. War by other means also involved the American and Turkish military forces illegally occupying Syrian territory in the north, east, and south, which enabled the theft of Syria’s oil and wheat exports. During Trump’s previous presidency, he openly bragged about “stealing Syria’s oil.”
So, from 2011, when the Obama administration targeted Syria for regime change, until the fall of Damascus at the weekend, the nation has endured a 13-year war of attrition. Even after the relative peace obtained due to Russia and Iran’s intervention from around 2020 onwards, Syrians have been starved of food, medicines and fuel. Over half its population suffered displacement from their homes. The Syrian economy was in ruins. Its currency had become worthless, adjusting for inflation by the hour. When the Western-backed insurgents launched their offensive on November 27 from the northern Idlib enclave, there was nothing left of the Syrian state to put up resistance. Aleppo, Hama, Homs and the capital fell like dominoes.
The main insurgent faction is Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), led by Mohammed al-Jawlani. HTS is an internationally proscribed terrorist organization that even the U.S. officially designates as an outlawed group. Its leader has a bounty of $10 million on his head offered by the State Department.
But in the shell game of U.S. proxy war, HTS and its leader are Washington’s assets. From 2011, the Americans and their NATO partners used Al Qaeda, ISIS, Jabhat al Nusra Front (later HTS) with ratlines of weapons and fighters from Libya, Turkey and all over the world to descend on Syria to inflict horrors. The Western media propagated the charade by cynically referring to the terrorist proxies as “moderate rebels.” The Pentagon-run military base at Al Tanf in southern Syria is said to be for training “moderate rebels” when, in reality, it is jihadist extremists who are weaponized.
Only last week before the final push on the Syria capital, Damascus, Al-Jawlani, the HTS commander, was given a primetime interview/platform by CNN, the U.S. news channel, to rehabilitate his image as a statesman-like leader instead of being a wanted terrorist. Al-Jawlani says the days when he and his organization were associates of ISIS and Al Qaeda are long gone. And CNN and other Western media do their best to make the claim sound plausible. Ah, such a happy ending!
It’s not clear at this early stage if Syria will now be plunged into sectarian bloodletting, reprisals, and murderous mayhem that characterized the earlier phase of U.S.-sponsored proxy war in Syria when Shia, Alawites, and Christians were beheaded for being “apostates and infidels.”
Ominously, the United States and Israel immediately started bombing the country, cynically claiming that they were trying to stabilize the situation.
The rapid events in Syria have taken aback the whole world. Who would have thought only two weeks ago that Assad would end up exiled in Moscow? The reaction of the U.S., Israel and other Western leaders is almost disbelief in what they see as their great luck.
Russia and Iran seem to have been genuinely blindsided. The NATO proxy war in Ukraine on Russia’s doorstep has no doubt taken a toll on Russian military resources. Iran is preoccupied with securing its own country from Israeli aggression.
American President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke excitedly about the new “opportunity” in Syria. Both claimed to have had a hand in the triumph of a terrorist insurgency. Netanyahu took credit for his genocidal war on Gaza and Lebanon for weakening Syria’s allies in Hezbollah and Iran.
Biden was even more shameless in spelling out how U.S. state terrorism destroyed Syria and paved the way for its takeover by terrorist proxies. He said: “Our approach has shifted the balance of power in the Middle East through a combination of support for our partners, sanctions, diplomacy [sic], and targeted military force.”
In Washington’s double-speak, “support for partners, sanctions and targeted military force” translates as sponsoring terrorists to traumatize a nation, economic warfare to grind it down, and illegal aggression to force final submission.
The destruction of Syria is another vast crime by the U.S.-led imperialist West.
US backs Israeli invasion of Syria
RT | December 10, 2024
Washington has defended Israel’s military incursion into Syria, with State Department spokesman Matthew Miller stressing that the operation is in self-defense. At a press briefing on Monday, Miller claimed that the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) advance to the Syrian side of the Golan Heights was done to prevent Syrian-based militants from taking over the border areas and launching an offensive into Israel in the future.
Israeli troops moved into the demilitarized buffer zone in the occupied Golan Heights on Sunday, after Syrian opposition forces seized Damascus and forced former President Bashar Assad to flee the country. On Monday, Israeli forces moved beyond the buffer zone and into Syria proper, with Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz saying they intend to create a new “security area” there that would be clear of “heavy strategic weapons and terrorist infrastructure.”
According to Miller, by abandoning its positions in the area around the buffer zone, the Syrian Army “potentially created a vacuum” that could be filled by terrorist organizations.
“That would threaten the state of Israel and would threaten civilians inside Israel. Every country has the right to take action against terrorist organizations,” Miller stated, adding that “ultimately, it’s important that there is security along that border,” which, according to him, the Israeli military can now ensure.
Miller noted, however, that Washington expects the Israeli occupation to be temporary.
“This is a temporary action that they have taken in response to actions by the Syrian military to withdraw from that area… We want to see the 1974 disengagement agreement upheld, and that includes the terms of the buffer zones, which includes Israel withdrawing to its previous positions,” he stated, referring to Israel’s 1974 agreement with Syria to establish a demilitarized strip in the Golan Heights.
Miller’s words run counter to remarks made earlier by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. While West Jerusalem told the UN Security Council that its incursion into Syria is a “limited and temporary measure” at a press conference on Monday night, Netanyahu declared that “the Golan Heights will forever be an inseparable part of the state of Israel.” He previously argued that Israel’s disengagement agreement with Syria effectively “collapsed” once Syrian troops “abandoned their positions” in the buffer zone.
The UN has criticized Israel for the incursion, saying it violates the disengagement agreement and stressing that “there should be no military forces or activities in the area of separation.” A number of Middle Eastern countries have also condemned Israel’s advance past the Golan Heights, accusing West Jerusalem of orchestrating an illegal land grab. In a statement on Monday, Qatar’s Foreign Ministry slammed the move as “a blatant attack on Syria’s sovereignty and unity” and “a flagrant violation of international law.” Similar remarks were made by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan.
Russia’s Demands in Peace Negotiations
Dmitri Polyanskiy, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen on the Duran
Glenn Diesen | December 7, 2024
We had a conversation with Dmitri Polyanskiy, the First Deputy Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations. Polyanskiy shared the Russian perspective on recent escalations with NATO and the requirements for a peaceful settlement.
As Ukrainian frontlines are collapsing, the US can either escalate or start negotiations. The decision by the Biden administration to attack Russia with long-range ATACMS crossed Russia’s red lines, and the response was the Oreshnik missile. The Oreshnik missile was intended as a warning shot by not attaching a warhead. Russia demands an end to NATO expansion, territorial concessions, and restoring minority rights in Ukraine.
View video at Odysee
The Real Scandal of Hunter‘s Pardon
By Ron Paul | December 9, 2024
Politicians and pundits spent much of last week commenting on President Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter for lying on a federal gun purchase form, failing to pay taxes, and any other offenses he may have committed over the past decade. Much of the controversy is because President Biden repeatedly pledged that he would never pardon his son.
Some have also observed that the pardon’s timeline starts the year Hunter Biden joined the board of the Ukraine energy company Burisma. This has led to speculation that President Biden is trying to block any investigation into links between his son’s business dealings and President Biden’s Ukraine policy.
What has not been widely discussed is the fact that Hunter Biden may be the only American President Biden has pardoned for violating unconstitutional federal gun and drug laws.
Hunter Biden was convicted of lying on federal Form 4473. This is a form Americans must fill out to get federal government “permission” to purchase a firearm. Specifically, Hunter Biden gave a false answer to the question, “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”
The Second Amendment forbids the federal government from limiting the ability of any American to exercise his natural right to own a firearm. Furthermore, federal drug laws are themselves unconstitutional.
The Constitution only creates three federal crimes: treason, piracy, and counterfeiting. All other crimes are under the jurisdiction of state and local governments. So, the required use of this form is a constitutional violation of the rights of Hunter Biden and all other Americans who are subjected to it when they seek to obtain a gun.
Form 4473 warns Americans that “the use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.” Thus, someone could be prevented from exercising his Second Amendment right because of his activities that are perfectly legal in his state. This turns federalism on its head.
Hunter Biden was also convicted of, and pardoned for, tax evasion and the filing of fraudulent tax returns. It is hard for anyone who values liberty to get upset at those who violate the tax laws since the income tax is a form of theft by the government of people’s hard-earned income.
An outrage of Hunter Biden’s pardon is President Biden’s hypocrisy. When he served as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the 1990s, then-Senator Biden played a major role in getting through Congress the Brady Law that created the federal gun purchase background check system that Hunter Biden was convicted of violating. Senator Biden also was a leading drug warrior who led the fight to pass the 1994 crime bill and was a champion of mandatory minimums and other infringements of civil liberties in the name of the war on drugs. President Biden also supported hiring more IRS agents to squeeze more money from taxpayers.
Then-Senator Biden wrote large parts of the PATRIOT Act. As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Biden also led the effort to pass the unconstitutional (and disastrous) “authorization for use of military force” against Iraq.
President Biden should spend his last month in office pardoning more Americans for violations of unconstitutional drug and gun laws. This would serve as a small gesture of atonement for a political career spent advocating policies destructive of peace, prosperity, and liberty.
US Bill Would Reverse ATACMS Order
By Joe Lauria | Consortium News | December 7, 2024
Capitol Hill, Washington – A bill introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) would prohibit the U.S. from sending long-range ATACMS missiles to Ukraine to be fired into Russia.
As U.S. personnel and satellites are required to fire the missiles from Ukrainian territory, Moscow considers it a direct U.S. attack on Russia putting it in a state of war with the U.S. which could lead to nuclear conflict.
To remove the potential of nuclear war, the proposed legislation seeks to end ATACMS launches into Russia. The bill reads:
(a) Prohibition. —For the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending at the close of January 20, 2025, notwithstanding any other provision of law, during any period for which a state of conflict exists between Ukraine and the Russian Federation—
1) no Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) may be transferred to Ukraine; and
(2) U.S. Military Services or intelligence agencies may not provide support to Ukrainian units operating High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HMARS) platforms utilizing ATACMS munitions to strike outside of internationally recognized Ukrainian territorial borders—
(A) targeting intelligence support;
(B) mission planning support; and
(C) any other type of support.
Several members of Congress and their staff said they were taken off guard by President Joe Biden’s reversal of his previous decision not to allow the use of ATACMS to be fired into Russia from Ukraine.
The members and their staff made these remarks during meetings on Thursday on Capitol Hill with former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter and activists of Code Pink, led by Medea Benjamin.
Biden Breaks With Realists
Biden had twice before sided with the Pentagon to avoid direct war with Russia. In March 2022 he overruled his Secretary of State Antony Blinken to scotch plans for a NATO no-fly zone over Ukraine, which could have lead to direct conflict with Russia.
Biden opposed the no-fly zone, he said at the time, because “that’s called World War III, okay? Let’s get it straight here, guys. We will not fight the third world war in Ukraine.”
Then in September Biden deferred to the realists in the Pentagon to oppose long-range British Storm Shadow missiles from being fired by Ukraine deep into Russia out of fear it would also lead to a direct NATO-Russia military confrontation with all that that entails.
Putin warned at the time that because British soldiers on the ground in Ukraine would actually launch the British missiles into Russia with U.S. geostrategic support, it “will mean that NATO countries — the United States and European countries — are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us.”
That was a clear warning that British and U.S. targets could be hit. Biden thus wisely backed off.
But after he was driven from the race and his party lost the White House last month, Biden suddenly switched gears allowing not only British, but also U.S. long-range ATACMS missiles to be fired into Russia. It’s not clear that the White House ever informed the Pentagon in advance.
Higgin’s bill was introduced as H.R. 10218 on Nov. 21, but none of the other House members that Ritter and Benjamin met with on Capitol Hill had heard of it. Nor was it reported in the mainstream media.
“We found that commonsense is actually alive and living here in the halls of Congress,” Ritter told Consortium News. “Members of Congress and their staffs understand the danger of nuclear war. We found that there was a bill already written … that sought to achieve what we were trying to get them to do.”
Benjamin said: “We are excited to push this bill, which we just found out about. … It will not pass, but the idea is to get momentum for it so that message is coming out there that there are members of Congress who want to see this reversed and that in the next Congress, they will introduce it again with a lot more momentum.”
“To stop a nuclear war comes down to one issue,” Ritter said:
“The United States has to stop attacking Russian soil with American-made ATACMS missiles. Even though we use a Ukrainian cutout, it’s American provided, American targets and American intelligence. It’s the Americans attacking Russia. From the Russian perspective, the United States is at war with Russia … which has triggered their nuclear doctrine.”
Kiev reveals terms of $20 billion US loan
RT | December 9, 2024
The Ukrainian government has approved the terms of a conditional agreement with the US Federal Financing Bank (FFB) for a 40-year loan of $20 billion which will be backed by profits from frozen Russian state assets.
It’s part of a broader $50 billion G7 loan deal, which includes a separate $20 billion EU commitment, and $10 billion to be split by G7 members Britain, Japan and Canada.
The money will be transferred to the Facilitation of Resources to Invest in Strengthening Ukraine Financial Intermediary Fund, established by the World Bank on October 10, “for the sake of the state,” a resolution issued by Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers on Friday stated.
The transfer will be based on a Certificate Purchase Agreement between Ukraine, the FFB, and the US Agency for International Development (USAID), along with a loan guarantee and repayment agreement between Ukraine and USAID.
Under the deal, Ukraine’s Finance Ministry will issue a certificate of indebtedness to the FFB, guaranteed by USAID, the government resolution said.
The loan, which has an annual interest rate of 1.3% plus the current average rate for one-year US Treasury bills, will be repaid using interest earned from immobilized Russian sovereign assets.
The US and its allies froze an estimated $300 billion in assets belonging to the Russian central bank following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. In June, G7 members pledged a $50 billion loan for Kiev, with the frozen Russian assets to be used as collateral, to help Kiev buy weapons and rebuild damaged infrastructure. The agreement was finalized in October.
Moscow has repeatedly denounced the asset freeze as “theft” and argued that tapping into these funds would be illegal and set a dangerous precedent. The Russian Finance Ministry has warned that it will initiate retaliatory measures mirroring the West’s actions against resources of Western investors held in the country.
The latest move is part of the current US administration’s last-minute strategy to bolster Kiev’s war effort, which includes a new $725 million military aid package to Kiev and another round of sanctions against Russia. It comes as uncertainty grows over Washington’s commitments under the upcoming presidency of Donald Trump, particularly after US House Speaker Mike Johnson dismissed President Joe Biden’s request to include $24 billion in additional aid to Ukraine in a government funding bill last week.
Biden claims credit for toppling Syria’s Assad
RT | December 9, 2024
Outgoing US President Joe Biden has claimed credit for the fall of Damascus to a coalition of armed groups, including jihadists from Hayat Tahrir-al-Sham (HTS). Washington had weakened the supporters of former Syrian President Bashar Assad, the American leader has said.
The result of the lightning offensive of anti-government militants in the past two weeks was a “fundamental act of justice” and a “moment of historic opportunity for the long-suffering citizens of Syria,” Biden said in a video address from the White House on Sunday.
“For years, the main backers of Assad have been Iran, [the Lebanese-based militant movement] Hezbollah, and Russia. But over the last week, their support collapsed, all three of them. Because all three of them are far weaker today than they were when I took office,” Biden said.
Washington has been pushing for the ouster of Assad since 2011, when mass protests spiraled into a devastating civil war, in which foreign-armed Islamists emerged as dominant players among anti-government forces. HTS, one of the groups that took over Damascus on Sunday, was formerly known as Jabhat al-Nusra, a Syrian Al-Qaeda affiliate. The war was exacerbated further in 2014 when the terrorist group Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) rose as a regional threat amid the collapse of security in Syria.
In his speech, Biden highlighted the sanctions on Syria, as well as the US military presence in the country and its support for Kurdish militias in the northeast, which denied Damascus access to fertile lands and oil fields under their control. The US has also supported Israel in its military campaigns in Gaza and Lebanon and its direct confrontation with Iran, Biden added.
“Our approach has shifted the balance of power in the Middle East,” Biden said, mirroring similar remarks by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“Through this combination of support of our partners, sanctions, diplomacy, and targeted military force where necessary, we now see new opportunities opening up for the people of Syria and for the entire region.”
The US president claimed that Washington was clear-eyed about HTS and its “grim record of terrorism and human right abuses.” Washington will “assess not just their words, but their actions,” he stated. Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said on Sunday that HTS’ history of terrorism and atrocities is a concern for the US.
Abu Mohammed al-Julani, the current leader of HTS, has had a $10 million bounty posted on his head by the US since 2013. According to the US government, the fighters he led were responsible for kidnappings and massacres of civilians.
Syria falls to rebels who are “a tool of NATO, Israel and Turkey” with US role included
By Uriel Araujo | December 9, 2024
After combating terrorism and rebel groups for over twelve years, the former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad fled the capital of Damascus with his family on December 7, shortly before it fell to the rebels. The victorious insurgents are the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) organization along with an umbrella group called the Syrian National Army.
Craig Murray (former British ambassador to Uzbekistan), in a panel about “the end of pluralism in the Middle East”, described the “Syrian rebels” as “a tool of NATO, Israel and Turkey”. This is a complex description for a complex situation indeed. Of the three, many analysts are focusing on the Israeli and Turkish angle—not so much on the American angle, though.
To recap, since the 2011 armed rebellion, Syria has counted on military aid from its allies Iran and Russia. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard, as well as the (Tehran-backed) Lebanese Hezbollah have in fact been the main anti-terrorist actors in the Levant, by deterring the expansion of terrorist group ISIS (Daesh) and thereby making the region safer for Christians and other minorities. Islamic Wahhabi/Salafi extremists were, after all, beheading some of them while kidnapping others and selling women as slaves.
The fact is that the rebels who have won in Syria now are not of a very different persuasion, and it is no wonder many are now concerned. Archbishop Ieronymos of Athens for one has urged the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs to aid the Christian population in Syria. He wrote: “The advance of extremist armed groups and the capture of Aleppo threaten… the interfaith composition of the region’s population… there is now a looming danger of the complete eradication… of Greek Orthodoxy and Christianity from the wider region.”
Such concerns are well founded. One should bear in mind that (Saudi-born) Abu Mohammed al-Julani, the very leader of Turkish-backed HTS, the group who has captured Aleppo (Syria’s second largest city), joined Al-Qaeda in Iraq in 2003, later establishing its split branch in Syria, the so-called al-Nusra Front. This group, under al-Julani, cooperated with the infamous Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of Al-Qaeda’s split offshoot called “Islamic State in Iraq”, later known as ISIL (ISIS) or Daesh.
Al-Julani’s own later split from al-Qaeda and creation of the aforementioned HTS has been described as merely a “bid” to “stress his group’s national, as opposed to transnational, ambitions.” In other words, the group is just another re-branded offshoot of ISIS/Al-Qaeda. And those are the people who have now conquered Syria.
One might disapprove of Assad’s ruling but such a development can hardly be described by most as anything other than a disaster. Turkey (who aids the rebels) and Israel, as already mentioned, do benefit from this outcome, however, for their own reasons—and much is already being talked about that. But not so many analysts are highlighting the American role in all of it.
For example, the US-backed Syrian Free Army (a coalition which has taken control of Hom’s Palmyra district) announced that they are “open to friendship with everyone in the region – including Israel. We don’t have enemies other than the Assad regime, Hezbollah and Iran. What Israel did against Hezbollah in Lebanon helped us a great deal” – while claiming they are not allied with Turkey. The group, being increasingly dependent on Turkey, is a close ally of the United States, and was even hosted at the American military base at al-Tanf. Turkey, despite its differences with Washington is of course also, let us not forget, a NATO member.
The future of Syria and the concerned parties is far from clear now, there being lots of room for infighting among the different rebel factions. Turkey, which has long occupied northern Syria, has taken advantage of the ceasefire in Lebanon to give the rebels the green-light for launching an offensive (with Iran weakened in Syria and Hezbollah cornered in Lebanon). However Turkish-American differences pertaining to the Kurdish question are to remain a focal point for tensions.
HTS is indeed Turkish-backed but, as mentioned, its roots can be traced to Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other such groups empowered by Washington’s policy. One should not forget the fact that there are still around 900 US troops in Syria (mostly in the northeast, near Turkish strongholds) which witnessed the rebel victory. This has led some analysts to comment that “whether the Pentagon wants to admit it or not”, these troops are “likely involved in the broader conflict unfolding there right now.”
Moreover, there is nothing new about the West praising and empowering brutal terrorism and radicals when such is deemed geopolitically convenient: if former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton under President Barack Obama had achieved her stated goals, Syria would be in a similar situation to Libya since 2011 – in Libya, coincidence or not, arms provided by the US to rebels there also “ended up” in ISIS hands, according to Amnesty reports.
Back to the Levant region, it is a well-established fact that Washington played a key role in the empowerment of ISIS (or Daesh) both in Syria and Iraq (as well as other brutal radicals), with the Pentagon and the CIA arming mostly foreign Islamic militias that ended up even fighting among themselves. This is consistent with American foreign policy elsewhere too. The infamous Clinton emails also show how the US was aware of their allies Qatar and Saudi Arabia supporting Daesh terror.
The White House National Security Council (NSC) spokesperson Sean Savett said in a recent statement that Washington “has nothing to do with this offensive.” Considering all of the above, one can certainly be justified in taking such statements with a grain of salt. For Washington, further destabilizing Syria might also serve the role of “countering” Russia in the region. The US has consistently aided, funded, armed and trained Fundamentalist rebels who operate in the Levant for over a decade and there is no reason to assume anything is different now with the newest developments.
Finally, still on the topic of the Christian minority, US foreign policy—for a variety of reasons—has actually often involved dividing or destabilizing Eastern Christian (both Orthodox and Miaphysitist) populations or sometimes even aiding or turning a blind eye to the ethnic-religious cleansing of such groups or of Christians in general in the Levant region, for that matter.
This is of course quite ironic for a country such as the US who often hails itself as “one nation under God” or as a “Christian nation”– this being the Republican party line at least. Trump for one has posted that “Syria is a mess, but is not our friend”.
Uriel Araujo, PhD is an anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.
