Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 11, 2013

Syria: The Axis Of Resistance Must Do More

The first propaganda wave to get U.S. citizen support for regime change in Syria was based on the usual nonsense of "democracy" and "freedom". It took too long because domestic support for the Syrian government was much bigger than anticipated and the Syrian state would not fold. After a while real news reports about the Syrian opposition leaked out and it became obvious that the Syrian government was fighting a bunch of criminals and Jihadis. The U.S. military and U.S. citizens balked against fighting on those folks' side.

A new campaign was needed and the false-flag "chemical weapon" attack in a Damascus suburb was created to launch it. That campaign failed too. First in the British parliament and then in the U.S. congress. The plan was too obvious and the claim of evidence soon tuned out to be empty. Obama had driven himself into a corner. His credibility was at stake and he would probably have launched an open war on Syria even without congressional support.

Putin came to his rescue, Obama blinked and the campaign folded.

A third campaign is now being build, this time over the Syrian-Russian offer to get rid of Syria's chemical weapons. Obama and some Senators are trying to build a new regime change base by declaring any purported delay of hick-up Syria's voluntary disarmament a casus belli.

This campaign is likely to also fail. Russia and China will not agree to any UN resolution that opens even the smallest possibility to be abused for a case against Syria.

But all that does not save Syria. The U.S. led Saudi/Turkish/Israeli support for the insurgency with weapons, ammunition and training continues. It has to be stopped or Syria will be destroyed. The main logistic paths for the insurgency are the southern Turkish border and Jordan.

What has the resistance axis done to close those routes down? Yes, Hizbullah helped to shut down the Lebanese route. But where are the incentives for Jordan and Turkey to stop their support? Where is the pressure that makes them do so? What has been done to induce the insurgent's financiers to stop the money flow?

Russia can for now hold back the United States. But the task of closing the support areas for the Jihadis and to go after their supporters falls to the regional forces.

Come on folks. You already had two years time. Now get this done.

Posted by b on September 11, 2013 at 15:56 UTC | Permalink

« previous page

@98: AFAIK, nobody actually saw the planes. What they saw was the planes on TV.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Sep 12 2013 14:18 utc | 101

It seems September won't be the month to blow the world up, but the Neocon war machine is still unstoppably primed and ready to do so. Syria is the trigger event for a larger war on Iran.

The gas attack was timed to coincide with US Navy readiness. It was a false flag, and the neocons expected to be at war by now, yet their tool Obama is flailing away not knowing what he is doing. I will say that the one thing the Washington Neocons FAILED to take into account was Vlad Putin of Russia, they underestimated Vald by a country mile!

Posted by: Cynthia | Sep 12 2013 14:28 utc | 102

What a bizarre world we find ourselves living in, in 2013

Syrian opposition rejects Russia's chemical weapons plan

and it doesn't even need excerpting because with a headline like that, one pretty much knows all one needs to know about the methods and intentions of the author(s)

Posted by: hmm | Sep 12 2013 14:33 utc | 103

this may be useful in showing us the mindset of the jihadis being used by USrael for regime change
religious psychopathology: fanatics are the lates in colour revolution strategy
one interviewed says he was approached by a group who said Assad was reprssing muslims and he should take up arms and help establish lies are used to recruit

Posted by: brian | Sep 12 2013 14:33 utc | 104

"... But the task of closing the support areas for the Jihadis and to go after their supporters falls to the regional forces."

It is a political question. And it has been hanging over the matter since the "rebels" first appeared, full armed out of Bandar's swollen forehead. The problem with baathism has always been that it pulls its redistributive punches: instead of breaking the power of the feudal and comprador bourgeois classes it seeks to curry their favour. Hence neo-liberal policies domestically, which are ill-calculated to win the enthusiastic support of the masses, and sucking up to the Saudis, the Hashemites and other monarchs in foreign policy.
It has been notable that Syria has been most reluctant, even with Bandar's thugs banging on the gates of Damascus and involved in genocidal rampages in Aleppo and elsewhere, to "tell it like it is" To take the fight, in propaganda terms if not in fact, to the Arab League, to challenge them for the thieves stealing from their own countrymen, and secret zionists, selling out Palestine, that they are. The flag of insurrection should be raised in Arabia, rallying the plundered, betrayed masses around a campaign of national liberation, equal distribution of the vast mineral wealth, including nationalisation of the resources and drawing in the support bof the most oppressed elements, the foreign guestworker/indentured labourers.
The twin Abdullahs would close their borders to the mercenary armies, if they had to do, if pressure was put on them. At the moment the only pressure comes from the Americans, the zionists and the Turks, who suffer no ill consequences for the most obvious state supported terrorism on view in the world.

Posted by: bevin | Sep 12 2013 14:34 utc | 105


"It was a false flag, and the neocons expected to be at war by now"

both of those statements seem to be merely assumptions.

There may even not have been any 'gas attack' at all, from what I have read here from Petri Krohn and others

Also I see no reason to automatically assume that who or whatever is in charge on the GreatPirate-side actually intended to start Overt Military hostilities

so far, despite playing with the positions of boats in the Med, all I have seen are 'threats' to start Military hostilities, and threats are merely words, not actions

Posted by: hmm | Sep 12 2013 14:39 utc | 106

Nobody @ 42: .... Jordan because of Zion and Turkey for the very complex pipeline game unfolding in the Mediterranean

This dimension is missing...a potted history attempt...please correct...

Quatar and Iran share the biggest gas deposit in the world in the Persian Gulf.

Quatar ‘illegally’ pumps more than its 50% share (no sanctions) > Iran threatens to close the Straights of Hormuz, thru which the gas transits. To overcome the obstacle, and for other reasons, Quatar (2009) imagines a pipeline from the Persian G to Turkey, thru (in part) Syria.

The plan was to link it to the Nabucco pipeline > Europe. (1)

2010, Quatar makes a rapprochement with Syria and some kind of defense or cooperation pact (looked it up, a memorandum of understanding) is signed.

Bashar, however, ends up rejecting the Quatari pipeline plan, because it is to the detriment of Russia (Europe depends on Russian gas, also oil, and even some coal - Germany is its biggest EU client) which would see it’s stranglehold weakened.

2011, Bashar signs for a different pipeline, with Iran and Iraq, plus thru Syria and Lebanon, and then planned to be linked to the South Stream, Russian, pipeline. (2)

Quatar (and Turkey) thus wants regime change in Syria. European interests (France ..) are in alleviating nat. gas. dependency on Russia.

However clearly in the present state of affairs no pipelines at all will be built thru Syria. For a long time. Madness.

1. Nabucco. Would go - some confusion: Azerbaijan - Georgia - Turkey - Bulgaria - Romania - Hungary > Austria. The US and the EU backed this plan. Project involves cos. and consortiums (local and international) of a bewildering number.

2. South Stream. Would run from Russia thru the Black Sea, thru Bulgaria and > Austria, and > Italy via a branch into two routes. This is all signed up (afaik and according to wiki) incl. by Turkey as it runs thru Turkish territorial waters. France’s EDF holds a major stake in the project. The main stakeholders are Gazprom and ENI.

Posted by: Noirette | Sep 12 2013 15:05 utc | 107

#Israeli ambassador in Prague admits contacts with gunmen, says Syrian army is still well-armed
Sep 12, 2013
#Prague, (#SANA)- Israeli ambassador in Prague, Gary Koren, admitted that there are contacts between Israeli officials and representatives of what he called "the moderate Syrian opposition", describing the meetings taking place between both sides as "very positive".

In an interview with the Czech news agency, Koren said Israel doesn't want to interfere in the ongoing events in Syria because the Israelis understand that the military intervention would pose a great danger especially because the Syrian army is till well-armed and its ally Hezbollah has thousands of missiles.

He also acknowledged that Israel's strategic goal regarding the crisis in Syria is changing the Syrian leadership, as this, he said, would lead to debilitate Damascus-Tehran-Hezbollah axis, which Israel considers the most dangerous threat to its existence.

The Israeli ambassador pointed out that Israel possesses chemical weapons and has refused to join the Chemical Weapons Convention claiming that it cannot take such a step unilaterally particularly in light of the standing situation in the region.

In addition to its direct involvement in the aggression on Syria, the Israeli entity has provided various forms of support to the armed terrorist groups, including treating injured gunmen in its hospitals and logistic and weapons support.

Many Israeli-made weapons were seized with the terrorist groups in different areas in Syria.

Posted by: brian | Sep 12 2013 15:15 utc | 108

report on Maaloula

Posted by: brian | Sep 12 2013 15:19 utc | 109

Saudi + Israel watch - because MEMRI translated this, claiming to have found it on an official Saudi website

The U.S. Is Not Serious About Combating Terrorism

"The 12th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks – which struck the U.S., shook it, and partly exposed the fragility of its military and intelligence apparatuses – raises a plethora of questions regarding the [future] fate of terrorism, now that the war against it has been globalized and an international coalition has been formed to combat it.

"Prior to 9/11, the scope of terrorism was very limited. The number of operations was small and so was the number of victims and losses. However, after 9/11, the war on terror caused [this phenomenon] to take on dangerous global proportions, cutting across geographical, political and religious boundaries. The U.S. played a central role in transforming terror into a global [phenomenon] and widening its scope of operation – thanks to its new strategy, which is based on the principle of 'creative chaos.'

"This strategy allows [the U.S.] to redraw the map of the Arab countries, as part of what is known as the Greater Middle East [plan], and to sow religious and sectarian war that enables it to control the future of the peoples and their states.

"The U.S. used two tools, different in orientation but similar in their goals, that serve the American strategy. [This is not one of those] conspiracy theories which the Arabs and Muslims [often] regard as an appropriate way of explaining their failures. The facts prove that the U.S. is not serious about the war on terror and about drying up its sources, so much as it supports terrorist elements that serve its agenda.

"A simple comparison between the war on terror that France is leading in northern Mali and the war that the U.S. is waging in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and Somalia is enough to clarify the difference between the two strategies. France successfully eliminated the rule of terror in northern Mali, whose area is equal to that of France and Belgium combined, within three months, and with minimal losses in property and life. Such rapid and efficient elimination of an Islamic emirate in such a wide area of mountainous desert terrain is unprecedented in the history of the war on terror. Moreover, France [even] managed to eliminate the last of the terrorists, destroy their bases, and thwart suicide bombers' [attempts to] carry out their terrorist plans and turn Mali into [their] gateway to Paradise, as the Emirs of Bloodshed promised.[3] It is determination and [strength of] will that enabled France to achieve this shining victory over the terrorists in Mali, not [its] equipment or logistics.

"The U.S., on the other hand, in order to realize its agendas, devises mechanisms which do not place it in direct confrontation with the terrorist organizations, but which allow it to use them to blackmail and invade [countries] or achieve hegemony [over them]."

Terrorist Organizations Serve The American Strategy

"The U.S. and the terrorists have overlapping interests on a number of levels. The most basic level [involves] undermining the stability of the target states, and the highest [involves] providing the Americans with an opportunity to impose their agenda on existing or emerging regimes in conflict areas that the extremists have raided, as a prelude to an American takeover…

"Terror cannot be expected to vanish as long as the terror organizations continue to serve the American strategy, because [the terror organizations] are the most useful tool [that America possesses] to undermine stability and threaten regimes and states, which are [thereby] compelled to receive American assistance in their war on terror. That is how [American] hegemony [over these states] begins.

"The second tool devised by American intelligence, in disregard of the Arab peoples and regimes, is the so-called 'Arab Spring revolutions,' which a large number of politicians, researchers, and experts believe to be popular revolutions against oppression and for liberty, dignity and democracy…

"Terror and these 'revolutions,' then... are tools that allow the U.S. to realize a strategy for securing its own interests…

"That is why the U.S. supports the terror of the extremists in Syria, but fights them in Afghanistan, strengthens them in Iraq, bribes them in Pakistan, and plots with them in the Sinai, Libya, the Sahel and the Sahara.

"The events of 9/11 effectively marked the beginning of the second stage in the war on terror – [a war] that transforms terror into [an American] tool for redrawing the map of the Greater Middle East and gaining hegemony over the entities within it."


Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2013 15:37 utc | 110

So it is the little rat Fabious that leak info about the UN report? Well that shows how biased the report team really are..

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 12 2013 15:49 utc | 111

@110: The pot/kettle qualities of that are so obvious that one looks for a hidden agenda. Possibly one aim is to lend credibility to the claim/assumption that the French conflict with AQIM was genuine, unlike all the US conflicts upon which doubt is fairly thoroughly thrown. Then, by extension, they can claim that the AQ-like entities which in fact they themselves support in Syria & elsewhere are also real, whereas certain other pseudo-'terrorist' forces (like the FSA?) are nothing but US constructs.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Sep 12 2013 15:56 utc | 112

112) I think they are beginning to vent their hatred of neoconservatives:
Michael Ledeen quote

Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law. Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity, which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace. Seeing America undo traditional societies, they fear us, for they do not wish to be undone. They cannot feel secure so long as we are there, for our very existence—our existence, not our politics—threatens their legitimacy. They must attack us in order to survive, just as we must destroy them to advance our historic mission.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2013 16:06 utc | 113

In the meantime, we can read on FP:

"Exclusive: U.N. Report Will Point to Assad Regime in Massive Chemical Attack

U.N. inspectors have collected a "wealth" of evidence on the use of nerve agents that points to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons against his own people, according to a senior Western official.

The inspection team, which is expected on Monday to present U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon with a highly anticipated report on a suspected Aug. 21 nerve agent attack in the suburbs of Damascus, will not directly accuse the Syrian regime of gassing its own people, according to three U.N.-based diplomats familiar with the investigation. But it will provide a strong circumstantial case -- based on an examination of spent rocket casings, ammunition, and laboratory tests of soil, blood, and urine samples -- that points strongly in the direction of Syrian government culpability.

"I know they have gotten very rich samples -- biomedical and environmental -- and they have interviewed victims, doctors and nurses," said the Western official. "It seems they are very happy with the wealth of evidence they got." The official, who declined to speak on the record because of the secrecy surrounding the U.N. investigation, could not identify the specific agents detected by the inspector team, but said, "You can conclude from the type of evidence the [identity of the] author."

The U.N. team, which is led by the Swedish scientist Ake Sellström, traveled to Damascus last month to begin an investigation into the alleged use of chemical weapons. During that trip, according to the United States and other Western powers, Syrian forces launched a chemical weapons attack that killed more than 1,400 people in the al Ghouta suburb of Damascus.

A montage of video clips posted by Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, on her Twitter page depicted horrific scenes of purported victims writhing in agony, and gasping for breath. Rows of dead children, their faces blue from apparent suffocation, were lined up in morbid rows, white sheets covering their tiny bodies.

Syria and Russia have denied that the government in Damascus carried out the attack, saying it was the work of Syrian rebels seeking to persuade the West to intervene militarily on their behalf. In an interview with Charlie Rose, Assad denied his government used chemical weapons -- and compared the U.S. case against Syria to former Secretary of State Colin Powell's flawed presentation against Saddam Hussein's Iraq. In Syria, Assad said, "the Russians have completely opposite evidence: that missiles [were] thrown from areas that the rebels controlled."

Syria and Russia, meanwhile, have highlighted several other alleged chemical weapons attacks that wound up hitting Syrian forces. The Syrian government initially invited U.N. inspectors to Syria to investigate an alleged March 19 sarin attack in the town of Khan al Assal, near Aleppo. While the inspectors were in Damascus, Syria's U.N. ambassador Bashar al Jaafari, requested that investigators look at three other cases of alleged chemical weapons use in late August against Syrian forces. On their final day in Damascus, the U.N. inspection team visited a military hospital in Damascus to examine alleged chemical weapons victims.

Diplomats say that Sellström's inspection team is only planning to report next week on the al Ghouta attacks. The team plans to return to Damascus at a later date to complete its investigations into the other incidents, including the March incident at Khan al Assal.

Under the terms of its mandate, however, the U.N. inspectors are only authorized to conclude whether chemical weapons have been used in Syria, not assign responsibility for their use.

While Western diplomats say they are confident that U.N. report would strengthen the case against the Syrian government, they said they expected the case would not fundamentally alter the course of diplomatic efforts to contain the chemical weapons threat in Syria. "It's not a game changer," said one diplomat.

On Tuesday, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem, admitted his country operated a clandestine chemical weapons program, and vowed to open them up to international scrutiny as part of a Russian-brokered deal to place Syria's chemical agents under international control. "We are ready to reveal the locations of the chemical weapon sites and to stop producing chemical weapons and make these sites available for inspection by representatives of Russia, other countries and the United Nations," Moallem said in a statement.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, meanwhile, headed to Geneva to see if they could reach agreement on a plan to control and ultimately destroy Syria's chemical weapons. Secretary-General Ban, for his part, appeared to be moving beyond the Sellström investigation. "I have not yet received the report from Dr. Sellström, nor do I know what it will contain," Ban told reporters Monday. But "I'm considering urging the Security Council to demand the immediate transfer of Syria's chemical weapons and chemical precursor stocks to places inside Syria where they can be safely stored and destroyed."

Posted by: g_h | Sep 12 2013 16:20 utc | 114

@bevin #105 - your description of baathism sheds some light on the situation on the ground, and fits well with my own considerations

Posted by: claudio | Sep 12 2013 17:15 utc | 115

@115: When I read it I thought, this is dogmatic revolutionary boilerplate. There is no social and political basis in most of these countries for Communist parties to campaign for the revolutionary overthrow of bourgeois nationalist governments. There was no such basis even in the days of the Cold War, though to some extent this was because of the policies of Moscow, which was more interested in realistic relations with the bourgeois nationalist governments than it was in making enemies of them by encouraging Communist agitation there. Nowadays the situation is even more adverse, because:
(a) there is no Soviet Union at all;
(b) China does not have an ideologically oriented foreign policy; and
(c) the religious revival draws off almost all the peasant discontent and much of that among the less educated urban residents.
Bourgeois nationalism is a more realistic anti-imperialist policy at this stage than Communism is. It allows class solidarity against the neocolonial powers. It suppresses radical trade unionism in the name of national strength, and because often it pursues an import substitution drive which requires considerably increased domestic production. The anti-imperialist priority is to encourage nationalism, no matter how bourgeois it is, against religious reaction. Anything beyond that is premature and counter-productive. These countries have to get onto their own feet, not be swamped by internationalism whether proletarian or religious. That's why I support Assad in Syria, and would support anything that looked like Nasserism in Egypt. But there is a certain type of pseudo-Marxist who is prepared to fight the class war to the last worker, from far away.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Sep 12 2013 17:52 utc | 116

Saudi-Israel watch ISN Security Watch - ETH Zürich

Saudi Arabia’s National Security Relies on a New Deal with the US
... he development of cooperative relationships with the region’s most fragile states will also be a critical imperative. Specifically, as Saudi Arabia develops Yanbu and other ports on the Red Sea as the focal point for its oil exports it will have to work closely with Somalia and Yemen to counter the threat of piracy and terrorism. Saudi cooperation with these states will have three key facets. First, there will have to be formal military coordination and communication to facilitate a significant and continuous Saudi naval and air presence in the Gulf of Aden. In the case of Yemen, military cooperation would include coordinated patrols (troops as well as drones) to prevent insurgent activity from spilling over to Saudi Arabia. Second, as widespread poverty in both Somalia and Yemen is the root cause of piracy and terrorism, Saudi Arabia will have to resort to “checkbook diplomacy” and underwrite major economic development programs (ideally in cooperation with multilateral development institutions such as the World Bank) to help turn around these failing states. Third, as the US is heavily involved in combating Somali piracy and al Qaeda insurgents in Somalia and Yemen, Saudi Arabia will have to ensure that there is clear communication and coordination among the various parties to avoid confusion and misunderstanding.

Finally, Saudi Arabia should disengage from any military involvement - albeit by proxy - in the Levant and instead redouble its efforts on tackling the security challenges it faces closer to home. Saudi involvement in proxy conflicts in Syria and Lebanon does not advance its vital national interests, but does run the very real risk of threatening Israel. It is plausible that military aid granted by the kingdom to Sunni rebel groups fighting to oust the Iranian-backed President Bashar al Assad might fall into the hands of al Qaeda affiliated Sunni extremists. This raises the prospect of diverted military aid being used against Israel in an attempt to regain the Golan Heights, Syrian territory lost as a result of the June 1967 Israeli-Arab War. A crisis in US-Saudi relations and Israeli retaliation would perhaps be inevitable.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2013 18:00 utc | 117

Everything in that FP report is simply a misleading restatement of much of the propaganda we have been subjected to for the past few weeks, mixed in with some new lies regarding what the UN-report, which no one seen yet, is allegedly going to say, attributed to completely anonymous, possibly non-existant, sources

The FP reportis itself a piece of propaganda.

Posted by: hmm | Sep 12 2013 18:38 utc | 118

About the UN team, werent they given samples by the opposition that apparently held that area?

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 12 2013 18:42 utc | 119

119) They took samples themselves, they have to ensure the chain of custody.

Hürriyet, Turkey Syrian rebel groups sought to buy materials for chemical weapons, prosecutors say

A public prosecutor completed his indictment as part of the probe into the chemicals seized in the southern province of Hatay on Sept. 12, claiming that jihadist Syrian rebel groups were seeking to buy materials that could be used to produce highly toxic sarin gas.

The indictment, which included transcripts of several phone conversations between the suspects involved, said that a 35-year-old Syrian citizen, identified as Hytham Qassap, established a connection with a network in Turkey in order to procure chemical materials for the al-Nusra Front and jihadist Ahrar al-Sham Brigades.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2013 18:47 utc | 120


Sure they took the samples personally but since the rebels held the area how do we now that the evidence on the ground etc havent been put there or edited with by the rebels?

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 12 2013 19:08 utc | 121

121) the people who took the samples are scientists ...

Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2013 19:26 utc | 122


. . . . . . AND?

Posted by: hmm | Sep 12 2013 19:32 utc | 123

@Rowan Berkeley #116

I agree that nationalism must be the basis of anti-imperialism; but keeping in mind that rhetoric often doesn't match reality: under the banner of communism have prospered great examples of nationalism, like China; while the banner of nationalism often provides cover for imperialist ventures

As for deciding the boundaries of "useful" nationalism, I agree that any form of sectarianism weakens the state; but:

(1) international ideologies must be judged on a case-by-case basis; for example, in Iran, shiitism (?) is a pillar of the actual, nationalistic regime; and

(2) class warfare helps build inclusiveness and therefore strengthen the state; it's the selfishness of the rich that undermines the state, from Machiavelli onwards this is a basic tenet of classical political science (today forgotten...)

Finally, I don't think bevin's post was "dogmatic revolutionary boilerplate"; rather, it helped explain the alienation of significant parts of society from the regime, which Assad still hasn't been able to repair

Posted by: claudio | Sep 12 2013 20:09 utc | 124


As "hmm" said, and?

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 12 2013 20:11 utc | 125

To those who replied to my criticism of the post's claims about false flag operations, you disappoint. Fact is, you can make an equally strong argument why local commanders in Assad's army used CW. I can give you links. At this point, none of us knows for sure. It's speculation. Your inability to comprehend the need to distinguish between fact and speculation hurts your cause -- and I say this as someone opposed to Western intervention in Libya and Syria. You guys sound like cranks.

Posted by: bobs | Sep 12 2013 21:10 utc | 126

@Rowan Berkeley(97)

I may have missed something re context, but if not, it appears from your post you
are one of those who ridicule people who reject the idiotic story offered by the US government about 9-11.
If that is the case, it's you who is 'ignorant of basic physics'.
A solid documentary exposing ZUSAs government BS on 9/11 is '9/11:EXPLOSIVE EVIDENCE - THE EXPERTS SPEAK OUT (Final Version 2012)'

A variety of experts demonstrate the official narrative has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. Unfortunately re 9/11, there are some people who denounce it but who offer poor critiques or merely disinfo. The first are well meaning but unprepared
and the second group is made up by people who seek to discredit the serious work that has been done to expose the official rotten dossie. Gordon Duff of 'Veterans Today' comes to mind as an example of the second group.

Posted by: Luca K | Sep 12 2013 21:12 utc | 127

@ 90 -- Brian, please forward these links to NPR; they seem unable to have researched any such info on their own over there....

Thanks much! I have only limited time on the internet here at my local library. I mean, thank dog for the library's internet, but it does limit time on a PC if there's anyone waiting. I would go crazy without the blesses library.

Posted by: jawbone | Sep 12 2013 21:24 utc | 128

And(again)thank you for the link.
I think this is where it starts to get deeper into the whole matter.This is from the same Source( same guy.

"Over the next decade, the United States will have to rethink its grand strategy as it addresses the challenge of maintaining its primacy as a global power in an increasingly multipolar world whose center of gravity has shifted to Asia. The task will be all the more daunting because significant fiscal and economic constraints imposed by a federal government debt that has mushroomed to nearly $16 trillion or about 100 percent of GDP, and a continuing economic slowdown that has been the deepest and longest since the Great Depression will force difficult tradeoffs as the United States seeks to realign and streamline vital national interests with limited resources.The overarching national security objective of the United States must be crystal clear: to counterbalance and contain a rising China determined to be the dominant economic, political, and military power in Asia....

...If the United States is to counterbalance China successfully, it must be able to threaten China’s energy security. Ideally, the United States should be in a position in which it can persuade the Persian Gulf oil producers, if necessary, to turn off the tap and decline to supply China with oil and gas. Furthermore, the United States must be able to put in place anti-access, area denial strategies (a) in the eastern Indian Ocean and Bay of Bengal to blockade the Malacca, Sunda and Lambok Straits; and (b) in the western Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea to blockade the arc between the Bab el Mandab to the Strait of Hormuz. Indonesia, India, and Iran will be critical to the success of a recalibrated American grand strategy to contain China."

IF there is a strategy.

Posted by: Some1 | Sep 12 2013 21:47 utc | 129

@ 101 -- I was listening to WNYC, NYC's public radio station, as the planes hit. I heard the on-air person, Brian Lehrer, iirc, talk to one of the station's bookkeepers, maybe a higher up financial guy for the station. The station was located in the City Hall Building, with the business offices higher than the station's studios.

The initial reports were that a small plane had hit one of the WTC tower's, which had happened to an Upper East Side apartment building a year or so earlier...when a pilot misjudged his position and crashed into an apartment.

The bookkeeper came down to tell the listening public that he had had heard an amazingly loud airplane noise, looked out his window to see an airliner, absolutely not a small plane, flying way too low. I can't recall which street is was flying over, but it was clearly a jet liner. Amyway, it was about even with his eyes. It was clearly a large jet passenger plane. I don't recall if he had caught the brand name on the plane.

But, from my experience of what was happening at the time, yes, real planes were seen, by real people who reported what they'd seen. That I can attest to.

Now, what I cannot address is whether there were missiles also being used.

Posted by: jawbone | Sep 12 2013 22:05 utc | 130

As to 9-11,the real story hasn't been told yet,and might never be,but to believe MSM serial liars(since1948)about anything,is the height of stupidity,and seems to be some type of misdirection,because the real facts might lead to places those who obscure might not like.
It's reminds me of one of those old WW2 war movies,where the guy gets a letter from his wife saying "I found a baby on the doorstep,and amazingly,it looks just like me",and the idoit(sic) keeps saying," I believe it".

Posted by: dahoit | Sep 12 2013 22:19 utc | 131

Given the Syrian government's long history of spying on its citizens and torturing prisoners (neither of which has appeared to bother our government), I hate to suggest further comparisons with East Germany; but maybe what Syria needs is a wall. However, to highlight that its purpose is not to keep dissidents in, but to keep invading hordes out, since Assad has indicated that his government already has signed some reconstruction contracts, perhaps China could assist in constructing such a wall. Since forces that America is openly training are in Jordan and the SAA has relatively more control of the border with Jordan than with Turkey, that would be a good location to begin construction. Even if the American-backed forces blow it up (over and over), it would be a good visual symbol of Syria's resistance to outside invasion.

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Sep 12 2013 23:58 utc | 132

Iranian FM did an extended interview on PressTV last night. Well worth watching.

Posted by: guest77 | Sep 13 2013 0:00 utc | 133

@Rowan Berkeley re:Al Akhbar (more off-site than off-topic):

I too think that AbuKhalil's commentary on Syria and AIPAC is off-base for many of the reasons that you elaborate. I take issue though with your assessment of AbuKhalil and Al Akhbar.

1) Just because AbuKhalil's assessment of AIPAC is off, it doesn't necessarily follow that he is an Israeli agent. His area of expertise is the Middle East (especially Lebanon), not Washington. Even though his posts can be subjective, if not emotional (he does call himself "the Angry Arab"), his perspective is always worth including among daily reads.

2) The editorial policy of Al Akhbar includes a variety of leftist voices, even though the editor is strongly supportive of Hezbollah. If you are looking for Hezbollah's party line, that's a different Lebanese publication.

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Sep 13 2013 0:42 utc | 134


Posted by: guest77 | Sep 13 2013 0:50 utc | 135

remember the 'israeli' missile? it seems the ballistic missiles were launched by US
September 13, 2013 at 7:05pm

Daoud Rammal from Assafir Newspaper, Beirut. 13 September 2013
(from a link on Al Manar) * Please note Al Manar is very careful to only publish valid, verified information
Translated/Interpreted by Ghassan Kadi and Intibah Wakeup:

The Offensive Came to an End When the Two Ballistic Missiles Fell in the Mediterranean.

A well informed diplomatic source has revealed to Assafir very serious information that is relevant to the development of the Syrian crisis which clearly shows, first and foremost, Russia’s military capability and secondly, its diplomatic one in playing this game. It has placed the American aspirations and options subject to the ethical standing of the Russian administration which is exhibiting an icy Siberian temper, rationality and clear knowledge of what it wants and where it’s heading to.

The source reveals that the American war on Syria has already started and ended the moment two ballistic missiles were launched, the full story of which remained subject to conflicting reports, Israeli denial and Russian confirmation. This culminated in an official Israeli report claiming that they were a part of a joint American-Israeli exercise and that they fell in the sea and had nothing to do with the Syrian conflict.

But what’s the true story that is pertinent in this event? Are there any other relevant matters that were not brought out to the surface because of serious considerations, the most pertinent of which perhaps is the struggle on world domination after the monopoly of the United States ruled supreme in the New World Order?

The same source reveals, assuredly, that those two missiles were launched by American forces from a NATO base in Spain. They were detected by Russia’s early warning systems and Russian defences were immediately launched to intercept them. One was shot down in mid-air whilst the other was deviated from its course and fell into the sea.

The source added: the Russian Ministry of Defence Report, which refers to two ballistic missiles having been launched towards the eastern Mediterranean, has deliberately ignored two issues: the first, the source of the launch and the second one, shooting them down. Why? Because, as soon as this happened, the chief of Russian Intelligence contacted the American Intelligence and told them that targeting Damascus is tantamount to targeting Moscow. He added that they have deliberately omitted from the Report any reference to shooting down the missiles because they did not want to damage the (Russian- American) bilateral relationship and to prevent further escalation. He added that America needed to quickly reconsider its policies, directions and intentions about the Syrian conflict and they could rest assured that Russia cannot be kept out of the Mediterranean.

The source added: this direct and undeclared confrontation between Moscow and Washington has further compounded Obama’s administration and its certainty that Russia will go all the way until the end in the Syrian crisis, and that there is no way out of this trap for America except through a Russian initiative that will save America’s face. It further means that there is no peace or war in Syria that excludes Russia, he said.

The source also added that: to avoid further American embarrassment, and after Israel denied any knowledge about those two missiles in its first statement, which was the truth, Washington asked Tel Aviv to adopt the story in a way that saves America’s face before the international community. This was particularly because those two missiles were meant to be the first of a series of attacks last week and a signal for launching the American operation. Obama was then supposed to go to the G20 afterwards to negotiate with Russia (from a position of power) and make negotiations concerning the head of the President of Syria, Bashar al Assad and, instead, found himself going there looking for a way out of this trap.

The source indicated that after the American-Russian missile confrontation, Moscow increased the number of its military experts inside Syria and bolstered its presence in the Mediterranean by sending more vessels. It further chose the timing of its initiative concerning the prevention of attack on Syria after the G20. Many meetings occurred during the period of the Summit which were followed by two consecutive visits (to Moscow) one by the deputy Iranian Foreign Minister and the other by the Syrian Foreign Minister. During these meetings the Russian initiative was cooked up with Syrian pre-approval suggesting the handing over supervision of Syrian chemicals to International Observers and assuring Syria’s willingness to sign up to the UN Chemical Weapons Convention.

The source argues that one of the first results of the American-Russian ballistic confrontation was the UK House of Common’s “No” vote against partaking of war against Syria which was followed by several similar Europeans stands, the most prominent being that expressed by the German Chancellor Angela Merkel."
Unlike · 1 · 7 hours ago

Posted by: brian | Sep 13 2013 9:20 utc | 136

Every quote in what you posted is from an anonymous source, who may not even exist, brian

Posted by: hmm | Sep 13 2013 9:44 utc | 137

Every quote in what you posted is from an anonymous source, who may not even exist, brian

Posted by: hmm | Sep 13, 2013 5:44:42 AM | 137

Hmmm u exist?

Posted by: brian | Sep 13 2013 9:49 utc | 138

You're doing philosophy, now, brian?

Posted by: hmm | Sep 13 2013 9:52 utc | 139

George Galloway does it again..

The warmongering hags in the show are just too much..

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 13 2013 10:15 utc | 140

Putin draws his red line:

Russia to expand Mediterranean fleet to 10 warships – Navy chief – RT, September 13, 2013

“The task is crystal clear: to avoid a slightest threat to the security of the state. This is a general practice of all fleets around the world, to be there when a tension level increases. They are all going to act on operational command plan of the offshore maritime zone,” Chirkov told journalists on Friday. "Russia will be building up its Mediterranean fleet until it is deemed sufficient to perform the task set."

I have been speculating as to what are Putin's secret orders to the fleet. I think this is the clearest statement yet that Russia is prepared to start a shooting war with US and sink any ship involved in illegal aggression. Would they go through with this? Who knows. The point of deterrence is that it must work before the attack. Whatever happens afterward is irrelevant – you have already lost.

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Sep 13 2013 10:25 utc | 141

Posted by: brian | Sep 13, 2013 5:20:16 AM | 136

Verifiable or not, that story makes a lot more sense than the silly "Israel did it" trope which the MSM agreed to feed us. Just for starters the timeline fits various out-of-the-blue about-face reactions in the West. There's also the fact that Russia detected the 'Israel Med test' from Russia and said so, including the unnecessarily fullsome details about temporary red-alert. But the killer for me is that there is no doubt that Putin (and probably Obama) have told Bibi to stfu - or else. And 'testing' an 'Israeli' interceptor missile seemed somewhat at odds with Russia's, if not Obama's, stfu warning.
We should all be goading our local, spineless, media stenographers into asking a Yankee why no-one is talking about the Russian Med fleet.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 13 2013 12:24 utc | 142

Whatever happens afterward is irrelevant – you have already lost.
Not wrong.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 13 2013 12:32 utc | 143


"remember the 'israeli' missile? it seems the ballistic missiles were launched by US".

According to the Syrian general staff, this operation’s goal was to test the radar frequencies used by the Syrian anti-air defence.

@somebody i was refering to "117"

Posted by: some1 | Sep 13 2013 12:41 utc | 144

"Verifiable or not, that story makes a lot more sense"

yeah but a 'story' told by some 'anonymous', long after an event, (in internet terms this happened yonks ago) doesn't really carry a lot of weight, no matter how many loose ends you want to tie it too.

I love the "verifiable or not" bit though. A classic.

"Argumentum ad "nah-nah-nah"-nem?"

Posted by: hmm | Sep 13 2013 12:44 utc | 145

@Rowan Berkeley(97) I may have missed something re context, but if not, it appears from your post you are one of those who ridicule people who reject the idiotic story offered by the US government about 9-11. If that is the case, it's you who is 'ignorant of basic physics'. A variety of experts demonstrate the official narrative has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. Unfortunately re 9/11, there are some people who denounce it but who offer poor critiques or merely disinfo. The first are well meaning but unprepared and the second group is made up by people who seek to discredit the serious work that has been done to expose the official rotten dossie. Gordon Duff of 'Veterans Today' comes to mind as an example of the second group. Posted by: Luca K | Sep 12, 2013 5:12:26 PM | 127
No, I was being sarcastic (something I said I wouldn't do, when I was arguing with JSorrentine). My personal belief is that whether planes or missiles or whatever actually flew into the towers is secondary, because the towers were certainly pre-wired with cutting charges, and I think this implicates the owners, Larry Silverstein & Frank Lowy (both heavy hitters in the zionist area, by the way). I follow the exposition of Gordon Ross, which shows that all the core columns were accessible from the liftshafts. Therefore, obviously, squads of demolition experts disguised as lift repairmen placed the hundreds of charges over a period of weeks or so. I suspect the Israeli advanced sapper division (it's large, highly advanced and super-secret): Sayeret Yahalom.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Sep 13 2013 13:03 utc | 146

Too bad the countries that make up the CSTO can't just send "peacekeepers" to guard or keep seperate the combatants. Why can't China set up a "coalition of the willing" Venezuelan, Bolivian, Nicaraguan, Cuban & North Korean troops could be part & send them to Syria patrol those borders.
This would truly make the status quo powers tremble.
This demonstration of support would provide the stimulus of aid and comfort to the Syrian people.
"We are not alone"
It would relieve the pressure on Iran and Syria armed forces.
This is really China's moment to shine and poke a big finger in the eye of the west.
It will also delay and hurt USgov so called "pivot" to asia as well.

Posted by: Fernando | Sep 13 2013 13:57 utc | 147

absolutely...just quoting ,cause: this american journo cant resist:

'President Obama must promise not to arm rebel forces or Syrian dictator Bashar Assad will not hand over his chemical weapons, the embattled leader told a Russian state media outlet today while demanding that Israel also surrender its nuclear arsenal.'

calling president Assad 'dictator'., when Assad has the support of his people and Obama has not

Posted by: brian | Sep 13 2013 14:47 utc | 148

To those who replied to my criticism of the post's claims about false flag operations, you disappoint. bobs at 126

I didn’t read all the replies so I’m maybe not up to speed.

But branding the 21 Aug alleged CW attack around Damascus as false flag right off is premature.

It has to be proved that anything at all happened. I fully expect the UN inspectors will come up with *something.* (If they state, nothing was shown, I will send them Xmas cards and cookies.)

However, the seriousness, the nos. of attested deaths, the perpetrators, all that will remain open.

I very much doubt the PTB - who, NOTE - report what the inspectors found - will be honest. But that is just me. Whatever the experts conclude will spun in careful, minimal, prudent language. (They know how to keep their jobs.) All will be hyped up once again and questioned, etc.

From my pov., some small? semi serious? ... incident *might* have taken place. Who instigated it, or planned it as theatre, or whether it was an accident, or due to other causes, will not reach the light of day. Divide and rule in the opinion sphere will overtake any rigorous analysis. (Like: He Hit Her! no, She Abused Him!)

Imho it was planned by the ‘rebels‘ as a coup monté - the French expression is great, meaning a ‘set up’, ‘an arranged theatrical scene‘ and if analysed with any rigor that would show that up. Just my opinion. So false flag in that sense.

Hysteria prop about CW - and the In’tl laws about it - will see to it that more outrage in the public froths and no rigorous investigation will take place.

Which serves to mask the real issues, which are about energy resources in the ME.

Posted by: Noirette | Sep 13 2013 16:45 utc | 149

I love the "verifiable or not" bit though. A classic.

Yeah. You're right. It was at the wrong end of the dumb thermometer.
"Verified or not" would have been better.
But not much...

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 13 2013 18:32 utc | 150

@Rowan Berkeley | Sep 13, 2013 9:03:51 AM | (146)

My bad then, sorry. As for the Israelis, there is a book by Christopher Bollyn "Solving 9/11: the deception that changed the world', that seems to go in that direction. Its supposed to be good, have not had the time to read it yet.
Best wishes

Posted by: Luca K | Sep 13 2013 19:55 utc | 151

"@115: When I read it I thought, this is dogmatic revolutionary boilerplate. There is no social and political basis in most of these countries for Communist parties to campaign for the revolutionary overthrow of bourgeois nationalist governments..."

Sneer away Rowan, but you would do well, on a thread such as this one, to import a modicum of honesty into your arguments.
The most cursory review of my post reveals that far from calling for Communist parties to overthrow nationalist governments, I am actually urging such governments to arm themselves with the support of the poor and to take the fight to the feudalists and comprador agents of imperialism.
How "Marxism for Beginners" characterises that I neither know nor care, though no doubt straw men everywhere rest uneasily at night, knowing that you are on the prowl.

Your post, @116, is a classic example of projection, right down to the peroration, addressed, I suspect accusingly to the bathroom mirror:
"But there is a certain type of pseudo-Marxist who is prepared to fight the class war to the last worker, from far away."

It is a pity that you are so soaked in the sectarian poison of a political culture that has led the working class into more ambushes and massacres than its worse enemies dared dream of, that instead of recognising the common ground in my post and your "response" (common ground that does not include your gross overestimation of the importance of religion in leading people away from socialism), you saw the opportunity to indulge yourself in the cheap thrill of a pompous put-down and there was no more hesitation than a ferret would show at the sight of a rabbit.

You demean yourself.

Posted by: bevin | Sep 15 2013 23:30 utc | 152

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.