Le jasmin damascène ne cessera jamais de fleurir...

Mis en ligne le 30/11/2012

Témoignage Aéroport de Beyrouth. Cette fois-ci je n’atterrissais pas à Damas pour rentrer chez moi. Suite aux sanctions, les pays voisins sont devenus un passage nécessaire si l’on veut se rendre en Syrie. Après deux heures de route, me voici à la frontière où se mêlent familles revenant d’un séjour au Liban, étudiants, travailleurs mais aussi des personnes fuyant les combats. Certains ont fait des kilomètres à pied en n’emportant avec eux que le strict minimum, à l’écart d’autres étaient entassés dans des bus. Un sentiment d’impuissance et de désolation prit le dessus sur la joie de retrouver mon pays. Alors que moi je revenais par choix, eux étaient contraints de partir. Sur le chemin de Damas, je réalisais combien ce pays m’avait manqué et je venais de comprendre qu’il continuerait à me manquer même en y étant présente. Ce pays, blessé, que j’ai vu évoluer au fil des années et qui un jour peut-être pardonnera pour tout ce qu’on lui fait subir. Les multiples check points de l’armée régulière, contrôlant véhicules et identités au plus vite afin d’éviter de longues files où le danger peut surgir de partout, m’ont vite ramenée à la triste réalité. Ce voyage ne serait pas comme tous les précédents, on m’avait prévenue. Plus rien n’était comme avant. Damas était plongée dans un calme oppressant, contrastant avec l’habituel brouhaha des rues animées auquel j’avais toujours été habituée. Tout était calme, trop calme. La vie semblait continuer son cours, mais à chaque visage croisé des questions se bousculaient dans ma tête. Est-il possible que parmi ces gens il y en ait qui seraient prêts à porter atteinte à ce qu’il nous reste de sécurité et qui contribuent à la destruction de notre pays, ou bien sont-ils comme la majorité des Syriens écorchés, fatigués, et profondément écœurés par tout ce qui est en train de nous arriver ? Maintenant, tout nous paraît suspect, on se méfie d’une voiture mal garée, d’une personne se rapprochant trop près de nous. Le sens d’observation s’aiguise au fur et à mesure que la méfiance grandit. Tout parcours anodin devient dangereux. Ça peut sauter n’importe quand, n’importe où et emporter n’importe qui ou quoi en l’espace d’une seconde. On vit constamment dans la probabilité, tout en étant sûrs d’une unique chose, celle que plus rien n’est comme avant. Malgré le calme trompeur et le risque continuel, Damas grouille de gens. Les Syriens, las de vingt mois de crise ont besoin de continuer à vivre, à respirer. Les cafés ne désemplissent pas jusqu’à la tombée de la nuit, à l’heure où les magasins abaissent leurs rideaux de fer. Schizophrénie d’un pays en guerre. Les commerçants tentent d’appâter les clients mais même si les gens flânent dans les ruelles des souks, ils n’achètent plus comme avant. La majorité de la population, victime de l’inflation galopante n’a plus les mêmes moyens financiers. L’économie a été sévèrement touchée, les prix ont plus que doublé suite à l’insécurité et aux diverses sanctions qui aggravent le quotidien de milliers de personnes. Sanctions censées punir le gouvernement, mais qui étouffent surtout le peuple syrien, que la plupart des chancelleries se sont donné pour mission de "sauver". Contradiction entre les buts fixés et les résultats qui en découlent. A cette pauvreté grandissante, s’ajoute une délocalisation interne importante. Des personnes contraintes de tout quitter trouvent alors refuge dans d’autres régions du pays. Ces déplacés ne veulent pas être considérés comme réfugiés, dépendants des aides extérieures, afin de continuer à vivre. Des jardins publics ainsi que des écoles sont transformés en lieux plus sûrs pour ces déplacés internes, oubliés des médias internationaux, n’ayant plus où aller. Assurément, plus rien n’est comme avant. Les premiers soirs, au loin, j’entendais les hélicoptères, les explosions, les tirs, mais ne sachant pas qui a visé quoi ou qui, je me demandais combien d’infrastructures ont été détruites, combien de personnes ont été blessées ou tuées, combien de vies ont été brisées et traumatisées à jamais. Mais au fur et à mesure que les jours passent, je commence à être comme ceux qui subissent cette pression continue depuis déjà presque deux ans. Les sentiments se transforment en lassitude et la compassion en haine parfois. Une haine envers ceux qui nous ont menés à cette situation, ceux qui en bénéficient et ceux qui nous détruisent lentement tout en nous faisant croire qu’ils veulent notre bien. Tous. Notre perception du bruit a changé, maintenant nous nous méfions du calme et les bombardements et rafales de tirs deviennent la bande son de notre vie qui se dessine au jour le jour, en se demandant chaque nuit ce que nous cache le lendemain et chaque matin ce que nous réservent les prochaines heures. Les multiples attentats, les assassinats ciblés, les kidnappings, les exactions les plus abjectes commises sans aucune humanité et en complète violation de tous les traités internationaux, le pillage de notre patrimoine historique millénaire, l’impuissance face à la souffrance indescriptible des habitants d’Alep, Homs, Daraya et de la Syrie tout entière font désormais partie de notre quotidien. Aucun mot, aucun sentiment ne sont assez forts pour exprimer ce que nous ressentons. Plus rien ne sera plus jamais comme avant, nous ne serons plus jamais comme avant. Au nom du "Printemps arabe", notre ciel bleu a été envahi par le gris de la fumée et la noirceur s’est emparée de nos cœurs. Au nom de la liberté, on nous a confisqué notre liberté et privés de notre sécurité. Au nom de la religion, ils bafouent la religion. Ils déchirent notre tissu social, ils sèment et alimentent la haine et trouvent légitime de tuer l’Autre. Ils remplacent l’odeur du jasmin par celle du sang, ils espèrent accéder au paradis alors qu’ils ne méritent que l’enfer. Au nom des droits de l’Homme, on viole les droits de l’homme, de la femme et de l’enfant, on nous désinforme, on élimine nos scientifiques, nos intellectuels, on détruit notre patrimoine historique, on souille nos lieux de culte, on brûle nos écoles et on pousse notre jeunesse à s’exiler. Au nom d’intérêts géostratégiques, ils soutiennent leurs ennemis d’hier et de demain en se servant d’eux aujourd’hui, ils nous ôtent nos choix politiques, ils se permettent de décider de notre avenir et s’approprient notre futur, ils s’affrontent dans les instances internationales au risque de faire éclater un conflit régional, ils peuvent répéter les erreurs sanglantes du passé, ils font fi de nos vies car nous ne sommes plus que des pions dans une guerre qui se joue quotidiennement au prix de notre sang. Ils volent la Syrie à la Syrie. Mais au nom de la Syrie, malgré la douleur et la colère et par respect pour nos martyrs nous résisterons, comme la fleur de jasmin - symbole de Damas - répondant au fusil qui la menace qu’elle ne le craint pas. Tout comme elle n’a pas craint avant lui ni la massue ni le fer de l’épée et encore moins la force de la pluie, car tous ces dangers ont tour à tour disparu alors que le jasmin damascène, lui, n’a jamais cessé et ne cessera jamais de fleurir.

Myrna Nabhan

Broadwell would do well to heed her dad...

 The post-Christian Zioconned Western society has basically degenerated to the point where it is unable to articulate anything around the concepts of "right" or "wrong". A society begins by declaring that "God is dead" and you end up having "leaders of the free world" like Clinton, his infamous "cigar"...and his most infamous White House Murder INC,...
Leaders, Real men are by definition always deeply moral and principled in all their actions, be it as officers, as husbands, fathers or friends.  Ideas such as "God is dead" or "beyond good and evil" sound very "cool", but their practical application always means the decay and eventual death of the entity which attempts to live by such fallacies.  You begin with such nonsense, and you end up being ruled by an entire generation of ass-kissing chickenshits...all over the Globe...


The discovery of Broadwell's license in Rock Creek Park in DC is a mystery... It has been determined that she is hiding out at her brother's house near the park. But why would Broadwell, the most easily-recognized woman in Washington, DC, risk being confronted by the public while jogging in Rock Creek Park. There is the possibility that Broadwell's license was stolen and was placed in the park as a veiled warning for the 40-year old not to talk about details of her affair with Petreaus and her other "connections." Broadwell must be fully aware of what Rock Creek Park and mistresses mean to everyone in Washington, DC: it is the place where Chandra Levy's remains were discovered a year after she disappeared. We previously reported that Levy was murdered because she began telling friends what Condit, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, had told her about the upcoming terrorist attack using passenger airplanes on the United States. Condit insisted that Levy not fly back to California but that she should take Amtrak. The discovery of Khawam's in-laws' lobbying connections to America's airline, communications, electronic warfare, and intelligence industries should make Broadwell stop and think what coded messages about Levy's fate and the barbaric inside Job of 9/11 are being sent her way. Of course, the Khawam in-laws also have connections to the thousand pound elephant in the 9/11 room: Israel... And that should focus attention on Cantor, Binyamin Netanyahu's old pal Mitt Romney, and other members of Congress who were hoping for a Jimmy Carter-like October Surprise for Obama arising from the Benghazi diplomatic compound attack.

Broadwell's father, Paul Kranz, of Bismarck, North Dakota, has said, "This is about something else entirely, and the truth will come out." Broadwell would do well to heed her dad...

And as for professional women who ply themselves to the rich and powerful, Washington, DC was the scene of an escort service that used highly-intelligent women to bed down politicians, Pentagon brass, and diplomats. After going public with her clients' phone list, Pamela Martin & Associates proprietor Deborah Jeane Palfrey was found hanging in her mother's laundry room in Florida. Levy and Palfrey: two names to keep in mind as the Petraeus scandal unfolds...

The FBI agent friend of Jill Kelley has been identified as Frederick W. Humphries, 47 and married. Assigned to Tampa, he has been described as "obsessive" in pursuit of Arab and Muslim terrorist suspects. In other words, he fits the bill as an Islamophobe and blends in nicely with the cabal that was out to set up Obama in an October Surprise, including the Lebanese Maronite Christian Kelley, nee Khawam. It was Humphries who sent "shirtless" photos of himself to Kelley, described by Humphries' de facto union general counsel Lawrence Berger of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers' Association as a "joke." Kelley has been described as a liaison between Central Command and the representatives of various Middle East nations. Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, both involved in supporting the Libyan rebels who attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, have officers assigned to CENTCOM at MacDill Air Force Base. Kelley has had her "Friends of MacDill" social pass for the base revoked...

Although Humphries allegedly spoke to Rep. Reichert in Washington, it was an FBI colleague of Humphries who reportedly spoke to Eric Cantor. The rabbit hole gets deeper....

http://youtu.be/C_NRqW348UM

Members Of Romney For President Military Advisory Council (or is that Emergency COMmunications CONtrol -- ECOMCON -- from "Seven Days in May?"... 

 

Stanley McChrystal isn't on this list of Ziocons.... He may know a lot, an awful lot....LOL

Admiral James B. Busey, USN, (Ret.)
General James T. Conway, USMC, (Ret.)
General Terrence R. Dake, USMC, (Ret)
Admiral James O. Ellis, USN, (Ret.)
Admiral Mark Fitzgerald, USM, (Ret.)
General Ronald R. Fogleman, USAF, (Ret)
Admiral S. Robert Foley Jr.,USN, (Ret.)
General Tommy Franks, USA, (Ret)
General Alfred Hansen, USAF, (Ret)
Admiral Ronald Jackson Hays, USN, (Ret)
Admiral Thomas Bibb Hayward, USN, (Ret)
General Chuck Albert Horner, USAF, (Ret)
Admiral Jerome LaMarr Johnson, USN, (Ret)
Admiral Timothy J. Keating, USN, (Ret)
General Paul X. Kelley, USMC, (Ret)
General William Kernan, USA, (Ret)
Admiral George E.R. Kinnear II, USN, (Ret)
General William L. Kirk, USAF, (Ret)
General James J. Lindsay, USA, (Ret)
General William R. Looney III, USAF, (Ret)
Admiral Hank Mauz, USN, (Ret)
General Robert Magnus, USMC, (Ret)
Admiral Paul David Miller, USN, (Ret)
General Robert C. Oaks, USAF, (Ret.)
General Henry Hugh Shelton, USA, (Ret)
General Lance Smith, USAF, (Ret)
Admiral Leighton Smith, Jr., USN, (Ret)
General Ronald W. Yates, USAF, (Ret)
Admiral Ronald J. Zlatoper, USN, (Ret)
Lieutenant General James Abrahamson, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Teddy G. Allen, USA, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Edgar Anderson, Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Marcus A. Anderson, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Buck Bedard, USMC, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral A. Bruce Beran, USCG, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Lyle Bien, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Harold Blot, USMC, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General H. Steven Blum, USA, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Mike Bowman III, USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Mike Bucchi, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Walter E. Buchanan III, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Richard A. Burpee, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General William Campbell, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General James E. Chambers, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Edward W. Clexton, Jr., USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General John B. Conaway, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Marvin Covault, USA, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Terry M. Cross, USCG, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral William Adam Dougherty, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Brett Dula, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral William Earner, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General John S. Fairfield, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Gordon E. Fornell, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral David Frost, USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Henry C. Giffin III, USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Peter M. Hekman, USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Richard D. Herr, USCG, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Thomas J Hickey, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Walter S. Hogle, Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Ronald W. Iverson, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Donald W. Jones, USA, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Douglas J. Katz, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Jay W. Kelley, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Tom Kilcline, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Timothy A. Kinnan, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Harold Koenig, M.D., USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Albert H. Konetzni, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Buford Derald Lary, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Frank Libutti, USMC, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Stephen Loftus, USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Michael Malone, USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Edward H. Martin, USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral John J. Mazach, USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Justin D. McCarthy, USN, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral William McCauley, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Fred McCorkle, USMC, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Thomas G. McInerney, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Joseph S. Mobley, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Carol Mutter, USMC, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Ira Owens, USA, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Dave R. Palmer, USA, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral John Theodore "Ted" Parker, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Garry L. Parks, USMC, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Charles Henry "Chuck" Pitman, USMC, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Steven R. Polk, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral William E. Ramsey, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Joseph J. Redden, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Clifford H. "Ted" Rees, Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Edward Rowny, USA (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Dutch Schultz, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Charles J.  Searock, Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General E. G. "Buck" Shuler, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Alexander M. "Rusty" Sloan, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Edward M. Straw, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General David J. Teal, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Billy M. Thomas, USA, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Donald C. "Deese" Thompson, USCG, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Alan S.  Thompson, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Herman O. "Tommy" Thomson, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Howard B. Thorsen, USCG, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General William Thurman, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Robert Allen "R.A." Tiebout, USMC, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral John B. Totushek, USNR, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General George J. Trautman, USMC, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Garry R. Trexler, USAF, (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Jerry O. Tuttle, USN, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Claudius "Bud" Watts, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General William "Bill" Welser, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Thad A. Wolfe, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General C. Norman Wood, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Michael W. Wooley, USAF, (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Richard "Rick" Zilmer, USMC, (Ret.)
Major General Chris Adams, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Henry Amos, USN (Ret.)
Major General Nora Alice Astafan, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Almon Bowen Ballard, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General James F. Barnette, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Robert W. Barrow, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John R. Batlzer, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Jon W. Bayless, USN, (Ret.)
Major General John E. Bianchi, USA, (Ret.)
Major General David F. Bice, USMC, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Linda J. Bird, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James H. Black, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Peter A. Bondi, USN, (Ret.)
Major General John L. Borling, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Tom Braaten, USMC, (Ret.)
Major General Patrick H. Brady, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Robert J. Brandt, USA, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Jerry C. Breast, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Bruce B. Bremner, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Thomas F. Brown III, USN, (Ret.)
Major General David P. Burford, USA, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John F. Calvert, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Jay A. Campbell, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Henry Canterbury, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James J. Carey, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Nevin Carr, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Stephen K. Chadwick, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral W. Lewis Chatham, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Jeffrey G. Cliver, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Casey Coane, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Isaiah C. Cole, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Stephen Condon, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Richard C. Cosgrave, USANG, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Robert Cowley, USN, (Ret.)
Major General J.T. Coyne, USMC, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Robert C. Crates, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Tommy F. Crawford, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Gerald A. Daniel, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James P. Davidson, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Kevin F. Delaney, USN, (Ret.)
Major General James D. Delk, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Robert E. Dempsey, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Jay Ronald Denney, USNR, (Ret.)
Major General Robert S. Dickman, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James C. Doebler, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Douglas O. Dollar, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Hunt Downer, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Thomas A. Dyches, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Jay T. Edwards, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General John R. Farrington, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Francis L. Filipiak, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James H. Flatley III, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Charles Fletcher,  USA, (Ret.)
Major General Bobby O. Floyd, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Veronica Froman, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Vance H. Fry, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral R. Byron Fuller, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral George M. Furlong, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Frank Gallo, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Ben F. Gaumer, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Harry E. Gerhard Jr., USN, (Ret.)
Major General Daniel J. Gibson, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Andrew A. Giordano, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Richard N. Goddard, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Fred Golove, USCGR, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Harold Eric Grant, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Jeff Grime, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Robert Kent Guest, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Tim Haake, USAR, (Ret.)
Major General Otto K. Habedank, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Thomas F. Hall, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Donald P. Harvey, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Leonard W. Hegland, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John Hekman, USN, (Ret.)
Major General John A. Hemphill, USA, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Larry Hereth, USCG, (Ret.)
Major General Wilfred Hessert, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Don Hickman, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Geoffrey Higginbotham, USMC, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Grant Hollett, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Jerry D. Holmes, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Weldon F. Honeycutt, USA, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Steve Israel, USN, (Ret.)
Major General James T. Jackson, USA, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John S. Jenkins, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Tim Jenkins, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Ron Jesberg, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Pierce J. Johnson, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Steven B. Kantrowitz, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John T. Kavanaugh, USN, (Ret.)
Major General George W. Keefe, ANG, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Stephen T. Keith, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Dennis M. Kenneally, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Michael Kerby, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral David Kunkel, USCG, (Ret.)
Major General Geoffrey C. Lambert, USA, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Arthur Langston, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Thomas G. Lilly, USN, (Ret.)
Major General James E. Livingston, USMC, (Ret.)
Major General Al Logan, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General John D. Logeman Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Noah H. Long Jr, USNR, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Don Loren, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Andy Love, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Thomas C. Lynch, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Steven Wells Maas, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Robert M. Marquette, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Larry Marsh, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Clark W. Martin, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General William M. Matz, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Gerard Mauer, USN, (Ret.)
Major General James C. McCombs, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral William J. McDaniel, MD, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral E.S. McGinley II, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Henry C. McKinney, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Robert Messerli, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Douglas S. Metcalf, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James E. Miller, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John W. Miller, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Patrick David Moneymaker, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Mario Montero, USA, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Douglas M. Moore, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Walter Bruce Moore, USA, (Ret.)
Major General William Moore, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Burton R. Moore, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James A. Morgart, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Stanton R. Musser, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John T. Natter, USN, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Michael Neil, USMCR, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Edward Nelson, Jr., USCG, (Ret.)
Major General Robert A. Nester, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General George W. Norwood, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Robert C. Olsen, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James D. Olson, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Raymund E. O’Mara, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Robert S. Owens, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John F. Paddock, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Robert W. Paret, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Robert O. Passmore, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Earl G. Peck, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Richard E. Perraut Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Gerald F. Perryman, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral W.W. Pickavance, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John J. Prendergast, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Fenton F. Priest, USN, (Ret.)
Major General David C. Ralston, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Bentley B. Rayburn, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Harold Rich, USN , (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Roland Rieve, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Tommy F. Rinard, USN , (Ret.)
Major General Richard H. Roellig, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Michael S. Roesner, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Davis Rohr, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral William J. Ryan, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Loran C. Schnaidt, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Carl Schneider, USAF , (Ret.)
Major General John P. Schoeppner, Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Edison E. Scholes, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Robert H. Shumaker, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral William S. Schwob, USCG, (Ret.)
Major General David J. Scott, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Hugh P. Scott, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Richard Secord, USAF, (Ret.) (where have we heard that name before? The first "October Surprise" that targeted President Jimmy Carter).
Rear Admiral William H. Shawcross, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Joseph K. Simeone, USAF and ANG , (Ret.)
Major General Darwin Simpson, ANG , (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Greg Slavonic, USN , (Ret.)
Rear Admiral David Oliver "D.O." Smart, USNR, (Ret.)
Major General David R. Smith, USAF (Ret.)
Major General Richard D. Smith, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Donald Bruce Smith, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Paul O. Soderberg, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Stan Spears, ANG, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Robert H. "Bob" Spiro, USN, (Ret.)
Major General Henry B. Stelling, Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Daniel H. Stone, USN, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Joseph Stringham, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Ansel M. Stroud, Jr., USA, (Ret.)
Major General William A. Studer, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Hamlin Tallent, USN, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Hugh Banks Tant III, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Larry S. Taylor, USMC, (Ret.)
Major General J.B. Taylor, USA, (Ret.)
Major General Thomas R. Tempel, USA , (Ret.)
Major General Richard L. Testa, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Jere Thompson, USN (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Byron E. Tobin, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Roger W. Triftshauser, USNR, (Ret.)
Major General Larry Twitchell, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Russell L. Violett, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General John G. Waggener, USA, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Edward K. Walker, Jr., USN, (Ret.)
Major General David E.B. "DEB" Ward, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Charles J. Wax, USAF, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Donald Weatherson, USN, (Ret.)
Major General John Welde, USAF, (Ret.)
Major General Gary Whipple, USA , (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James B. Whittaker, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Charles Williams, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral H. Denny Wisely, USN, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Theodore J. Wojnar, USCG, (Ret.)
Rear Admiral George R. Worthington, USN, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Arthur Abercrombie, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General John R. Allen, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Loring R. Astorino, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Richard Averitt, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Garry S. Bahling, USANG, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Donald E. Barnhart, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Charles L. Bishop, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Clayton Bridges, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Jeremiah J. Brophy, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General R. Thomas Browning, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General David A. Brubaker, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Chalmers R. Carr, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Fred F. Castle, USAFR, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Robert V. Clements, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Christopher T Cline, USAR, (Ret.)
Brigadier General George Peyton Cole, Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Richard A. Coleman, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Mike Cushman, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Peter Dawkins, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Sam. G. DeGeneres, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General George Demers, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Howard G. DeWolf, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Arthur F. Diehl, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General David Bob Edmonds, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Anthony Farrington, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Norm Gaddis, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General E.J. Giering III, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Robert H. Harkins, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Thomas W. Honeywill, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Stanley V. Hood, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General James J. Hourin, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Jack C. Ihle, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Thomas G. Jeter, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General William Herbert Johnson, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Kenneth F. Keller, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Wayne W. Lambert, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Jerry L. Laws, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Thomas J. Lennon, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General John M. Lotz, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Robert S. Mangum, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Frank Martin, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Joe Mensching, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Richard L. Meyer, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Lawrence A. Mitchell, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Michael P. Mulqueen, USMC, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Ben Nelson, Jr., USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Jack W. Nicholson, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Maria C. Owens, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Dave Papak, USMC, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Gary A. Pappas, USANG, (Ret.)
Brigadier General John G. Pappas, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Robert V. Paschon, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Allen K. Rachel, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Jon Reynolds, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Edward F. Rodriguez, Jr., USAFR, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Harold W. Rudolph, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Roger Scearce, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Dennis Schulstad, USAFR, (Ret.)
Brigadier General John Serur, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Joseph L. Shaefer, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Graham Shirley, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Raymond Shulstad, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Stan Smith, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Ralph S. Smith, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Donald Smith, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General David M. Snyder, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Michael Joseph Tashjian, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Richard Louis Ursone, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Earl Van Inwegen, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Robert V. Woods, USAF (Ret.)
Brigadier General Terrence P. Woods, USAF, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Mitchell Zais, USA, (Ret.)
Brigadier General Allan Ralph Zenowitz, USA, (Ret.)

Why I Dislike Israel, by Philip Giraldi...

Why I Dislike Israel, by Philip Giraldi
                                                           . http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2012/10/03/why-i-dislike-israel/

October 04, 2012                                  .
                                                           .
Even those pundits who seem to want to distance U.S. foreign policy from
Tel Aviv's demands and begin treating Israel like any other country
sometimes feel compelled to make excuses and apologies before getting
down to the nitty-gritty. The self-lacerating prologues generally
describe how much the writer really has a lot of Jewish friends and how
he or she thinks Israelis are great people and that Israel is a
wonderful country before launching into what is usually a fairly mild
critique.
                                                            .
Well, I don't feel that way. I don't like Israel very much. Whether or
not I have Jewish friends does not define how I see Israel and is
irrelevant to the argument.
                                                            .
And as for the Israelis, when I was a CIA officer overseas, I certainly
encountered many of them. Some were fine people and some were not so
fine, just like the general run of people everywhere else in the world.
But even the existence of good upstanding Israelis doesn't alter the
fact that the governments that they have elected are essentially part of
a long-running criminal enterprise judging by the serial convictions of
former presidents and prime ministers. Most recently, former President
Moshe Katsav was convicted of rape, while almost every recent head of
government, including the current one, has been investigated for
corruption. Further, the Israeli government is a rogue regime by most
international standards, engaging as it does in torture, arbitrary
imprisonment, and continued occupation of territories seized by its
military. Worse still, it has successfully manipulated my country, the
United States, and has done terrible damage both to our political system
and to the American people, a crime that I just cannot forgive, condone,
or explain away.
                                                         . 
The most recent outrage is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's
direct interference in U.S. domestic politics through his appearance in
a television ad appearing in Florida that serves as an endorsement of
Republican candidate Mitt Romney. The Netanyahu ad and his involvement
in the election has been widely reported in the media and has even been
condemned by several leading Jewish congressmen, but it has elicited no
response from either Obama or Romney.
                                                            .
Both should be condemning in the strongest terms the completely
unprecedented intervention by a foreign head of government in an
American election. That they are saying nothing is a testament to the
power that Israel and its friends in Congress and the media have over
the U.S. political establishment. Romney might even privately approve of
the ads, as he has basically promised to cede to Netanyahu the right to
set the limits for U.S. policy in the Middle East.
                                                          . 
And why is Benjamin Netanyahu in such a lather? It is because President
Barack Obama will not concede to him a 'red line' that would
automatically trigger a U.S. attack on Iran. Consider for a moment the
hubris of Netanyahu in demanding that Washington meet his conditions for
going to war with Iran, a nation that for all its frequently described
faults has not attacked anyone, has not threatened to attack anyone, and
has not made the political decision to acquire a nuclear weapon in spite
of what one reads in the U.S. press. At the U.N., Netanyahu's chart
showing a cartoon bomb with a sputtering fuse reminiscent of something
that might have been employed by an anarchist in the 1870s failed to
pass any credibility test even for the inevitable cheerleaders in the
U.S. media. If the U.S. is to go to war based on a Netanyahu cartoon
then it deserves everything it gets when the venture turns sour, most
likely Iraq Redux, only 10 times worse.
                                                          .
Even more outrageous, and a lot less reported in the media, were the
comments made by Patrick Clawson, director of research for the
Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), an organization
founded by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). WINEP
is widely viewed as a major component of the Israel Lobby in Washington
and is closely tied to the Israeli government, with which it
communicates on a regular basis.
                                                          .
Clawson heads WINEP's Iran Security Initiative. At a briefing on Sept.
24 he said, "I frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough, and
it's very hard for me to see how the United States ' uh' president can
get us to war with Iran." The traditional way America gets to war is
what would be best for U.S. interests."
                                                          .
Note that Clawson states his conviction that initiating a crisis to get
the U.S. involved in a war with Iran and thereby fooling the American
people into thinking that it is the right thing to do is actually a
"U.S. interest." He cites Pearl Harbor, Fort Sumter, the Lusitania,
and the Gulf of Tonkin as models for how to get engaged. .

Which inevitably leads to Clawson's solution: "if the Iranians aren't
going to compromise it would be best if someone else started the war"
Iranian submarines periodically go down. Some day one of them may not
come up. We are in the
game of using covert means against the Iranians. We could get nastier at
that.- Clawson is clearly approving of Israel's staging an incident
that would lead to war, possibly even a false-flag operation carried out
by Israel that would implicate the United States directly, or he is
urging the White House to do the job itself.
                                                           .
Clawson not surprisingly has never served in the U.S. military and has a
Ph.D. in economics from the New School for Social Research, which would
at first glance seem to disqualify him from figuring out how to set up a
covert operation to sink a submarine and thereby start a war. He might
be seen as moderately ridiculous, but like many of his neoconservative
colleagues he is well wired into the system. He writes regularly for The
Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal;
appears on television as an "expert" and is a colleague at WINEP of the
ubiquitous Dennis Ross, sometimes called "Israel's lawyer," who was
until recently President Obama's point man on the Middle East. Clawson
is a useful idiot who would be registered as an agent of the Israeli
government if the Justice Department were doing its job, but instead he
is feted as a man who tells it like it is in terms of American
interests. The distortion of the foreign-policy decision-making in this
country is something that can be attributed to Clawson and his host of
fellow travelers, all of whom promote Israel's perceived interests at
the expense of the United States. And they do it with their eyes wide
open.
                                                           .
I will deliberately avoid belaboring another Israel Firster Pamela
Geller and her New York subway posters calling Palestinians savages and
Israelis civilized, as I am sure the point has been made about how any
lie that can serve the cause of Israel will be aggressively defended as
"free speech." A poster excoriating Jews or blacks in similar terms as
"savages" would not have seen the light of day in New York City,
another indication of the power of the Lobby and its friends to control
the debate about the Middle East and game the system.
                                                          .
And then there are the reasons to dislike Israel and what it represents
that go way back. In 1952's Lavon Affair, the Israelis were prepared to
blow up a U.S. Information Center in Alexandria and blame it on the
Egyptians. In 1967, the Israelis attacked and nearly sank the USS
Liberty, killing 34 crewmen, and then used their power over President
Lyndon Johnson to block an investigation into what had occurred. In
1987, Jonathan Pollard was convicted of spying for Israel with
investigators determining that he had been the most damaging spy in the
history of the United States. In the 1960s, Israelis stole uranium from
a lab in Pennsylvania to construct a secret nuclear arsenal. And the
spying and theft of U.S. technology continues. Israel is the most active
'friendly nation' when it comes to stealing U.S. secrets, and when its
spies are caught, they are either sent home or, if they are Americans,
receive a slap on the wrist.
                                                           .
And Israel gets away with killing American citizens - literally - in the
cases of Rachel Corrie and Furkan Dogan of the Mavi Marmara. And let's
not forget Israel's treatment of the Palestinians which has made the
United States complicit in a crime against humanity. Tel Aviv has also
played a key role in Washington's going to war against Iraq, in
promulgating a U.S.-led global war on terror against the Muslim world,
and in crying wolf over Iran, all of which have served no U.S. interest.
Through it all, Congress and the media are oblivious to what is taking
place. Israel is a net recipient of over $123 billion in U.S. aid and
continues to get $3 billion a year even though its per capita income is
higher than that of Spain or Italy. No one questions anything having to
do with Israel while Congress rubber-stamps resolution after resolution
virtually promising to go to war on Israel's behalf.
                                                            .
I have to admit that I don't like what my own government is doing these
days, but I like Israel even less and it is past time to do something
about it. No more money, no more political support, no more tolerance of
spying, and no more having to listen to demands for red lines to go to
war. No more favorable press when the demented Benjamin Netanyahu holds
up a cartoon at the U.N. The United States government exists to serve
the American people, no more, no less, and it is time that our elected
representatives begin to remember that fact.                
                    ____                                .
Read more by Philip Giraldi                   .
                                
The Ubiquitous New Yorker - September 26th, 2012       
                            
Rumors of Wars - September 19th, 2012
                             
Once More Into the Breach - September 12th, 2012
                          
What Bibi Wants - September 5th, 2012
                                      
Where Do We Go Next? - August 29th, 2012




 http://kennysideshow.blogspot.fr/2012/10/no-more-myths.html

9/11 again and again and again.....

http://rtr.org/vid/1510/general-of-all-american-intelligence-911-was-a-fraud

Zio-CNN Celebrating America and “Al-CIAda” Alliance Against the Unbelievers...

Zio-CNN Celebrating America and “Al-CIAda” Alliance Against the Unbelievers...

11 09 2012

[So the guy who ran the heroin/guns/militant smuggling pipeline in the former Yugoslavia for the Pentagon and the CIA, Mohamed al Zawahiri, brother of commander-in-chief of "Al-CIA-da," Ayman al Zawahiri, goes on CNN, offering to bring the intelligence agency operation out of the closet, in the service of the "Greater Good." What effect will this little news item have on ordinary Americans who view it?]

[This is the part in the great continuing drama, where we are asked to reconsider the virulent hatred of these alleged International "Islamists" that we have made part of our daily lives, over the 911 attacks, the embassies, USS Cole, etc., in order that we may join together with them, to defeat the unbelievers. With the help of the American Brainwashing Company, Central Brainwashing Service and National Brain Control, the national narrative will be reversed, right before our eyes, and nary a peep of protest will be heard on those same networks, as a result of this national "flip-flop" (favorite media word).

This is the point in the psychological operation where Americans should normally come forth by the thousands to protest this plan, along with the national media which has been pandering the government's demented product, to a gullible public that is largely, longing to be lied to. But no one will come forth, to save us from ourselves. People like me, here in the alternative universe, might see what is happening, or what will happen, but we will never a way to make it NOT HAPPEN. Scholars and honest researchers, like Stephen Lendman, who has poured his heart and soul into forging a new national understanding of who "America" really is, by appeals made to reason, to patriotism, to ideals, to fear, and to our basic undertanding right and wrong, only to come-up empty-handed, for the most part. In the end, reality is the one thing that is farthest from the minds of most Americans, since we wrap ourselves in a blanket of our favorite illusions, so that there is very little chance of us ever facing reality until it smacks us all in the faces.

The unacceptable reality is that there are thousands of people just like the Zawahiri brothers, who have been on the US payroll for many years, some of them for decades. The power of the Imperial dream-weavers to drip-feed our bad habits into us is so great that we cannot hope to break the spell, or the psychological hold that the power of suggestion holds over us. Our only hope lies in a total collapse of the various supply lines of addiction, like TV, or any other modern device. People will not break free from the hypnotic allure of network news and TV, until they are physically separated from it. Until the people are freed from the poison flowing from CNN and the rest, there is a very strong possibility that they will actually buy into this new narrative that has been being beamed into so many heads, in a classic dialectic reversal (SEE: Hegelian Dialectic).

We have reached the point, in the war on terror discourse, where the evil of "Al-CIA-da" has supposedly been eclipsed by the greater evil, of the "anti-democratic" forces, who stand between us and the ideal "democratic" New World Order. News people, like this Nic Robertson of CNN will sell us on this idea of a new, improved, rehabilitated image of "Mujahedeen," NOT terrorists, counting on the American people to be so sick of war by now, that we will embrace the Zawahiris and invite them to fight our battles for us, right alongside all of those private American contractors (who are really servicemen, who claim to have "retired" from active duty, in order to reap the rewards of the improved wages of privatized war.

The national media of the United States have willingly become the single greatest threat to democracy we face today. It would be best for all of us if all national news sources were stopped, whatever it took to do that. It would be far better for us all to wage war against the brainwashing services and not against the government itself, since only a small part of government is involved in this great plot against American democracy (most of the bureaucracy serves the common good). It is urgent that the alternative news sources (which recognize the manufactured stories, such as the one about "rehabilitated Al Qaeda") expose the lies and contradictions to the unsuspecting American people, so that they might get a glimpse beyond the mirror held before them.

With the exposure of the lies used in Libya and then again in Syria, the American people can see for themselves that the so-called "Islamists" in the American stable of mercenaries fit smoothly into American war plans, almost as if they were part of the plan all along. This is where it is up to us to make at least some of the people see the timeless truth of this statement, that this has always been an employer/employee relationship, all along. It is the latest incarnation of a repeating plan to use guns, drugs and money to build private armies from indigenous peoples, for the American government to use in overthrowing the governments of those people. The plan has been followed in non-Muslim countries, by empowering local drug dealers, vast wealth has been created for them, bringing the need for many guns, creating a functioning "pipeline" for contraband. By then introduction of armed insurgencies, like FARC in Columbia (SEE: Yair Klein Reveals That He Was “Asked by the Colombian government to help train FARC.”), or by introducing factionalism, like the Zetas against the other Mexican cartels, by militarizing their competition, then the conflict is created. Once the blood really begins to flow, then "managing the conflict" becomes possible. In the end, American hands appear clean, their intentions seem pure, as US military forces then proceed to "rescue" the victimized countries, spreading their tentacles of control in the process.

It takes real Genius to fuck-up the world like we have, especially when the key to their success has been for America to simply throw everything away. Pack everything up and ship it overseas. All that we once were so proud of--our world-renowned craftsmanship, our advances in science, even our human compassion--were all to be tossed aside, in order to make room for the new American-dominated world order. When all that we hear, over and over, is -- "Never was so much owed by so many to so few"-- then how could we, as good Americans, do any less? This is the approach which has been used to motivate young brothers and sons of former servicemen to serve in a foreign cause that considers torture and terrorism to be useful tools.

The cause that America is now fighting for will one day be the cause that all men of good conscience fight against....

Putin Is Demonized While Democracy Fails In Amerika ....

~ Paul Craig Roberts

The latest “rights group” to jump on Russia’s President Putin about Pussy Riot is RootsAction. Following the propaganda line that Washington has established, RootsAction’s appeal for money and petition signers states that the three Russian women were sentenced to two years in prison “for the ‘crime’ of performing a song against Russia’s president Vladimir Putin in a Moscow church.”

This statement is a propagandistic misrepresentation of the offense for which the women were tried and convicted.

I have expressed my sympathies for the convicted women, and as a member of Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union, I support human rights.

But I do not support the use of human rights organizations in behalf of Washington’s propaganda.

If Putin or some other official has the power to commute the sentences, I hope he uses it. But I do not think that the concerted Western propaganda campaign against Putin encourages that result. Twice as many Russians support the sentence than oppose it.

If the sentence is commuted in response to the Western propaganda campaign against Putin, Russian nationalists will depict Putin as a weak leader unable to stand up to Western intimidation. The more internal dissension there is in Russia, the easier for Washington to marginalize the country and kick it out of Washington’s path to the overthrow of Syria and Iran by brutal human-rights-violating violence, such as Washington has applied to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya.

The State Department, the EU, and human rights groups are sufficiently politically astute to be aware of this fact. Yet, the propaganda continues.

As Putin has said, “we know what Comrade Wolf is up to.” But what about the human rights organizations? What are they up to? Have they been incorporated into Washington’s propaganda machine, like the Western media, or are they latching on to Pussy Riot as a visibility and fundraising issue for themselves?

Do-good organizations hurt for money, because compassion for others is not in abundant supply. Pussy Riot is a fundraising opportunity. If the Russian government succumbs to the propaganda, it provides an opportunity for human rights organizations to tout their influence. In other words, human rights organizations have independent reasons to align with Washington’s propaganda. Their alignment does not necessarily mean that they are conscious tools of Washington.

You can bet your last dollar that Washington, which dismisses as “collateral damage” the hundreds of thousands of women, children, and village elders murdered in Washington’s wars against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, and Syria, is not concerned with the three Pussy Riot women’s 2-year prison sentence.

Washington has kept the American hero, Bradley Manning in prison for two years without a trial. Washington claims the power, strictly prohibited by the US Constitution, that “scrap of paper,” to hold US citizens indefinitely in prison without due process of law and to murder them on suspicion alone without due process of law. Does any sentient person really believe that such a government gives a hoot about a two-year prison sentence for three Russian women?

The Western media is silent about the collapse of the United States into tyranny. But, on cue from Washington, the Western media is loud about the dire plight of Pussy Riot.

For example, this from the UK’s The Week with First Post: “Beyond Pussy Riot: slow death of freedom in Putin’s Russia.” Louisa Loveluck introduces her report: “The Russian government’s distaste for freedom of expression has been in the headlines recently thanks to the trial and subsequent imprisonment of three members of punk collective Pussy Riot. But the persecution of these women forms only a small part of a much broader crackdown on civil liberties in President Vladimir Putin’s Russia.”

Has Putin, like the Amerikan presidents Bush and Obama, declared that he has the power to throw Russian citizens in a dungeon for life without ever presenting evidence in a court? No, he has not.

Has Putin, like the Amerikan president Obama, declared that he has the power to assassinate Russian citizens without due process of law? No, he has not.

Has Putin, like the Amerikan president Obama, declared that he has the legal authority to invade any country of which he disapproves and to overthrow its government? No, he has not.

So why is the UK’s Louisa Loveluck going on about a two-year prison sentence in Russia when the UK government, in defiance of international law and in obedience to its Amerikan master, refuses safe passage to Ecuador for Julian Assange, who has been granted political asylum? Even “authoritarian” China grants safe passage to those granted asylum.

The hypocrisy of the West, including the rank hypocrisy of human rights organizations, is nauseating. It makes one ashamed.

Julian Assange faces life imprisonment in the Ecuadoran Embassy in London because the puppet UK government is helping Washington make an example of what happens to journalists who dare to publish the truth about Washington’s mendacity and war crimes.

Is Washington paying Louisa Loveluck’s salary or is she, along with the First Post, simply terrified of Washington’s power? Or are Ms. Loveluck and the First Post simply going with the flow and avoiding criticism by not differing from the propaganda line?

No one will investigate, so we will never know.

Meanwhile in “freedom and democracy” america, at their Tampa, Florida, nominating convention, the Republican Party showed its true colors. It is a Brownshirt Party.

The tyrannical Republican machine refused to allow Ron Paul’s name to be mentioned or his delegate count to be presented.

Reports from the Republican nomination convention read like reports of Stalin’s takeover of the Communist Party or the Nazi takeover of the German state. Rules adopted at the convention eliminate any grass roots input. The Republican politburo is supreme. The party is subservient, and the members’ voices are eliminated. Mimicking Lenin, the Republicans declared that Republican rule “means neither more nor less than unlimited power, resting directly on force, not limited by anything, not restricted by any laws, nor any absolute rules. Nothing else but that.”

As Mother Jones reported, Ron Paul supporters shouted from the convention floor, “Fuck You, Tyrants!” http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/ron-paul-supporters-rebel-convention-floor-fuck-you-tyrants

The Republicans are the party of “freedom and democracy.” The Republicans are the party most controlled by the neoconservatives, who are strongly allied with Israel’s far right-wing government and are most hostile to the US Constitution. The Republicans are the party that gave us the PATRIOT Act, the first massive assault on the US Constitution. The Republicans are the party that gave us 9/11. The Republicans are the party that gave us the $3 trillion war against Iraq based on the Republican party’s lies about “weapons of mass destruction.” The Republicans are the party that gave us the $3 trillion war in Afghanistan based on lies about Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. The Republicans are the party that gave us the supremacy of the President over both the US Constitution and US statutory law; the executive branch is bound by neither according to the Republican Federalist Society members of the US Department of Justice (sic).

Obama is a despicable patsy, a front man for powerful private interests, and Democrats should be totally ashamed to have elevated such a cowardly lowlife. But as awful as Obama is, a vote for Republicans is a vote for Hitler or Stalin. Indeed, the election of Romney and Ryan would be worse than either.

The SVR-FSB-GRU trio and Russia's overt and covert wars...

The SVR-FSB-GRU trio and Russia's overt and covert wars...

In a recent comments thread it was pointed out that there is a campaign to murder non-Wahabi Muslims in Russia to which someone added that "perhaps it should be Russian policy to seek the overthrow of the Saudi royal family. Perhaps not openly stated, but maybe the should start a covert program of destabilization against KSA. Surely there are some former KGB officers who remember how to do these things? At the very least in retaliation for each incident that occurs in Russia."

That is an interesting idea. Needless to say, I have no access to any decision-making on such topics which are of the prerogative of some key elements the Presidential Administration, probably a restricted sub-group of key individuals of the Security Council of the Russian Federation and which could task either the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) or the Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU), or both, to engage in a destabilization campaign in the KSA. That is in theory. In practice, things are far more complicated than that.

First, it is crucial to understand that between 1988 and 1991 (Gorbachev years) and, even more so, between 1991 and 1991 (Eltsin years) the Russian security services were comprehensively smashed to smithereens. The politically correct expressions for this process of quasi-annihilation are "reformed" or "democratized". One could write an entire PhD thesis on the magnitude of this cataclysm, I will just offer an order-of-magnitude figure which is nothing more than my guesstimate of how much was destroyed. I would estimate that roughly 90% of the global capabilities of the ex-Soviet (and then Russian) security services were destroyed under the rule of these "democratic leaders".

Since Putin's election in 2000 this process has been reversed, there is no doubt about that, but the current Russian security services are still far from having recovered from the "democratic apocalypse" of the 1980s and 1990s.

Furthermore, I would personally argue that the security services of the former USSR were largely bloated and ineffective. I personally was involved in many types of "anti-Soviet" activities for many years and I can attest that the KGB was no nearly as formidable as some imagined it to be. Let's just say that Brezhnev's KGB was nothing like Stalin's NKVD/MGB. Sure within the KGB itself the branch tasked with Foreign Intelligence (the PGU KGB SSSR or First Main Directorate of the KGB) was an elite of a much higher level than the rest of the KGB, but nonetheless, even the PGU was not the all-knowing, all-understanding and almighty Ueber-spy-service some imagined it to be. Bottom line: when Putin came to power his task was not to simply resurrect the former KGB, but to design a new security establishment suitable for post-Communist Russia, an immensely complicated task which he had to tackle in extremely difficult, if not critical, circumstances.

Nowadays the major Russian intelligence and security services include the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), the Federal Security Service (FSB), the Federal Protective Service (FSO) and the Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU). There are a few more services such as several departments of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD), the Federal Border Service (FTS), the small and shadowy Security Service of the President of the Russian Federation (SPB), or the Anti-Terrorism Center of the CIS (ATTsSNG) which all have some intelligence and security functions, but the big players are obviously the SVR-FSB-GRU trio. While their areas of responsibility are roughly similar to the one of their Soviet era counterparts (the SVR's inherited the functions of the 1st Main Directorate of the KGB, the FSB inherited the functions of the 2nd Main Directorate of the KGB (and a few other Directorates), while the current GRU inherited the functions of the old GRU GSh SSSR) this is a misleading comparison because the fundamental missions of the modern SVR-FSB-GRU trio have changed dramatically.

This is hardly surprising. The USSR fancied itself as a global empire, a superpower which would challenge the capitalist world in every corner of the planet in a global zero-sum game. As for the Soviet security services, not only were they tasked with protecting the state, there were also tasked with protecting the Soviet regime and even the Communist ideology. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent democratic apocalypse, the Russian internal security services were given a dramatically different set of tasks including such things as the protecting the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation from foreign infiltration and home gown separatist movements, the struggle against Western-backed financial interests or the protection of non-Wahabi Islamic clergy from terror attacks. The good bad old KGB never had to deal with such tasks. As for the SVR and the GRU, they put the early detection of World War III on the back-burner and they turned to such matters as economic intelligence and lucrative weapons export contacts.

As for the "conceptual map" of the planet as seen by the Russian security and intelligence establishment it looks like this: the territory of the Russian Federation itself which needs to be protected from economic, social and political crises, the "Near Abroad" (countries of the former USSR) and the "Far Abroad" (the rest of the planet). The absolutely vital territory to defend was, of course, the Russian Federation itself. From this realization came the need to also get directly, if covertly, involved in the "Near Abroad" because developments in this "Near Abroad" directly and immediately affected the national security of the Russian Federation. The Georgian war of 08.08.08 clearly proved beyond any doubt that the entire realm of the "Near Abroad" had to be considered as a real of vital Russian interest. But what about the "Far Abroad", the rest of the planet?

I would argue that Russia made the correct call in deciding that it simply did not have the resources to once again become a global player. In other words, the Russian regime took a monumental, truly historical decision: it decided that Russia would never be an Empire again, that it would take the very deliberate decision to "restrict" itself to being a large but "normal" country whose security would be best promoted by an insistence on the respect for international law and a well-developed system of alliances in a (hopefully) multi-polar world in which other such "non-global" or "non-imperial" countries could join efforts and mutually assist each other.

It is quite true that most of us when we hear the words "respect for international law" or "alliances of equals in a multi-polar world" almost instinctively dismiss them as crude propaganda simply because we have heard them used over and over again the disguise or justify US imperial or Western neo-colonial policies and it is now very hard to believe ex-Communists like Putin when they use them. And yet it is absolutely essential to understand that these expressions are not a means to "sell" Russian policies but the instruments chosen by Russia to promote its national security interests. In other words, its not that Putin "believes" in international law, its that Putin believes that a policy of systematic insistence that international law be respected is greatly advantageous for Russia.

In this context, the option to embark on a campaign to destabilize Saudi Arabia or, for that matter, any other country, does not seem compatible with the overall national security strategy of Russia. That does not mean that the Russian regime would not like to pay back the KSA for its multi-billion dollar campaign in support of Wahabi terrorism in Russia - I am sure it would - rather it simply means that Russia does not believe that the appropriate response to the Saudi terror campaign would be to try to retaliate in kind.

The Russian anti-Wahabi-terror campaign is, I believe, organized around the following global national security policies:

Policies inside the Russian Federation:

a) Strengthening as much as possible the Russian internal security services on all levels, from the Federal FSB to the local rookie police officer on the beat in the streets of Makhachkala.

b) Seeking to identify and promote local leaders - such as Ramzan Kadyrov - capable of dealing with terrorism while developing the local economies.

c) Embark on a systematic campaign of support for non-Wahabi (traditional) forms of Islam in all of Russia, including the capital and all the major Russian cities

d) Developing and maintaining a very powerful military "fist" capable of immediate response (2 hours or less) to any major armed attack.

e) Adopting of a body of laws which strictly punish any forms of national, ethnic or religious discrimination, hatred or hooliganism and the systematic use of such law to punish groups or individuals (Russian and non-Russian) violating these laws.

f) Adopting a system of laws which will gradually "choke" and eventually bring down to a minimum the activities of covert US/EU/NATO assets in Russia, from the likes of Khodorkovsky to the Pussy Riots crazies, and including a whole galaxy of individuals, movements, organizations and parties, all of which, if taken together, would account to something like 1% to 2% (max) of the Russian population.

g) Covert internal efforts to prevent the appearance of a real, non Kremlin-controlled, opposition movement or party; the potential interest for such a real opposition to the current regime in power is probably rather strong as the real power-base of dedicated Putin supporters is probably only somewhere in the 40%-50% of the population (Putin got so brilliantly re-elected not so much because all of those who voted for him loved him as because of the fact that there simply is currently no credible opposition or alternative to Putin).

Policies in the Near Abroad

a) Economic support in terms of grants, credits or preferential pricing policies for those regimes in the Near Abroad who either are supportive of Russia or, at least, not directly hostile.

b) Security assistance in all forms for those regimes in the Near Abroad who either are supportive of Russia or, at least, not directly hostile.

c) Economic and political isolation of anti-Russian regimes in the near abroad

d) Development and maintenance of armed forces structured into four autonomous and self-sufficient "strategic directions" each controlling a sufficient number ground, naval and air forces to immediately respond to any local conflict or external aggression.

e) Overt political support for political parties or movement in opposition to the anti-Russian regime in power.

Policies in the Far Abroad

a) Using the Russian power at the UN Security Council to block any unilateral use of force or any unilateral intervention by the US Empire and its subsets (NATO, EU, Anglosphere, Israel, Colombia, etc.)

b) Insistence that any international crisis be handled by a representative segment of the international community (and not just US puppet regimes) and by all the parties to the conflict (and not just those supported by the USA).

c) Development of new international institutions such as BRICS, CSTO, SCO and others which can strengthen a multi-polar world and thereby oppose a worldwide US hegemony

d) Keeping the Russian armed forces in general and the Strategic Rocket Forces powerful enough to make a direct military aggression against Russia by anybody, including first and foremost the USA, absolutely unthinkable.

Policies common to all levels

a) Prepare for the inevitable global financial collapse by such means as reducing the amount of US Treasury holdings, dollars, Western stocks, etc, owned by Russia or Russian interests (many, if not most, Russian experts predict this collapse for 2013 already).

b) Re-orienting the Russian economy towards Asia while keeping Europe dependent on Russian energy exports.

c) Reducing as much as can be the current dependence of the Russian economy and state budget on energy and raw-material exports aboard by the revitalization of high-technology, aerospace, medical, industrial, information technology and other sectors of the Russian economy.

It is the fundamental mission of the Russian security and intelligence forces to support the implementation of all these policies on their respective levels, a far more complex and diverse task than that which was given by the Soviet leadership to the KGB.

Does that mean that Russia will never use KGB-style techniques to destabilize a regime or use covert operations against an enemy? No, not at all.

For example, it is likely that the SVR is keeping a very close eye on the political struggle between Saakashvili and Nino Burdzhanadze and it would be reasonable to expect the SVR to do whatever it can to assist her, but only covertly, of course. Similarly, I am sure that the contact between the Russian and Iranian security services are very close and that the Russian GRU has a very good idea of what Iran might, or might not, be doing in Syria or Bahrain. Finally, I would not be surprised at all if we learned one day that GRU agent had succeeded in infiltrating the CENTCOM's Joint Intelligence Center in Tampa Bay. But neither would I be surprised if I learned that the GRU has succeeded in infiltrating somebody in the J.P. Morgan Chase Computer Security Incident Response Team (CSIRT) or in the staff of the China Policy Department of the US Chamber of Commerce. These new targets reflect new realities and new missions.

What I do not see at all is the SVR or the GRU putting the time, effort and money to build up a covert network of agents inside such a tough target country like the KSA not because it fundamentally could not do so, it probably could, but because that would entail fantastic opportunity costs and a redirection of urgently needed resources from far more important priories. And even if there are still "former KGB officers around who remember how to do these things" I suspect that they would nowadays be used either as teachers in the various specialized academies or as advisers to the new leaders.

Ever since the crisis in Syria began I have been clamoring Urbi et Orbi that the Russians are not, repeat, not coming!! ... In these articles I was referring to a possible military intervention, but today I hope that I have explained why the Russian security and intelligence organizations are not coming either, at least not with any type of covert operation to support Assad or overthrow the House of Saud.

I will conclude here by saying that I am personally very happy that the Russians are not "coming". First, Russia does not have any more justifiable reasons than the USA to be policing the planet, regardless of whether it has the means to do so or not. I oppose all "global cops" - regardless of who they are. Second, nobody in the Middle-East has asked for the Russians to "come" and, frankly, even if they did, I don't believe that Russia has any obligation or even any logical reason to agree to such demands. Why? Simple: if Russia was in a deep crisis, do you seriously believe the Syrians, Saudis or Iranians would "come" to "help" Russia? Of course not! Third, the best Russia can do for the people of the Middle-East is take upon itself to shoulder responsibilities commensurate with the real, actual, Russian capabilities. What point is there to "come" only to be defeated? Why make empty promises of support which one cannot deliver upon? Russia did take a very clear and firm stance on Syria and it did that where it mattered the most, at the UN Security Council, where Russia could actually deliver on its promises.

Lastly, and unlike the ruling "1%" Western plutocracies who wage constant wars of choice against the clear will of their own public opinions, the Kremlin cannot ignore the fact that a vast majority of the Russian public would be categorically opposed to a Russian military or covert operation into a conflict so far from Russia or the Russian Near Abroad, and in defense of a very dubious ally like Assad. The fact is that the Kremlin is far more democratic than all the western "democracies", at least if by "democratic" we understand "ruling in accordance to the will of a majority of people".

Makes you wonder where the real "Free World" really is, does it not?

The Saker

PS: come to think about it, there is one realm in which the Russians will use the good old "cloak and dagger" type of operations: the elimination of terrorist leaders in the Caucasus. In fact, the Russians openly admit, with some pride, that they killed many Chechen insurgency leaders including Dudaev, Basaev, Khattab, Maskhadov and many, many others. Dokku Umarov has, so far, succeeded in avoiding the Russian killer teams and I wonder if that is not because the Kremlin is more than happy to have him in the role of a "Russian Bin-Laden". Whatever may be the case, there is no doubt in my mind that the Russian security services will hunt down and execute any Wahabi terrorist leader reckless enough to enter the territory of the Russian Federation. I do not, however, believe that the Russians will attempt to kill them abroad even though western sources have claimed that the Russian security services were involved in the murders of Yandarbiev, which I do not believe to be true (nor do I believe that they were involved in the murders of Yamadaev for that matter). The worst instances of terrorism in Russia are currently taking place in Dagestan, which is were I expect the Russian killer teams to be the most active....

The problem is that most of the media *INSIDE* Russia is very anti-regime, some in a rabid fashion (Ekho Moskvy) some is a more subtle manner (NTV). So, again, it is hard for Russia to fight an offensive information campaign against Saudi Arabia at the time when it has to fight a *defensive* media campaign inside Russia.

Russia should find out who the biggest donors to Wahabi terrorism are and...assassinate them?...No need. Just call them out in public....

The Russians know *exactly* who pays for the terrorism in Russia, but Russia simply cannot openly accuse the House of Saud, much less so the MI6 or the Pentagon...


But I still think that Russia should ally closer with countries that support traditional Islam and oppose Wahhabism, and considering that the greatest opponents of Wahhabis are the Shia, it would be only natural to strengthen relations to Iran and have close contacts with Shia movements in other countries (Iraq, Lebanon, Bahrain, even with the Shia minority in KSA).

AMEN! And, as you well know, I have tried to push that argument forward in this blog as much as I could. And I can also tell you that I did the same with some of the right people to talk to in Russia in the past. There is one caveat to this concept. Not all Shia have the same conceptual clarity about Wahabism. In the case of Iran I would say that yes, absolutely, they "get it" and I know for a fact that they act on it. However, there are still many Shia who have what I call the "my Umma right or wrong" knee-jerk reaction which brings then to automatically side with their "fellow Muslim" against the "Kufar" even when that "fellow Muslim" is a crazed Wahabi maniac who will slit their throat at the first opportunity.

This is one of the reasons why the regime in Russia is putting so much efforts in traditional Islamic education: because only a lack of education will trigger the type of primitive knee-jerk responses we so much deplore.

But yes, only Iran "got" Chechnya right from day one. ALL the other naively fell right into the Anglo trap...