Archive | September 3rd, 2013

NATO chief ‘convinced’ Assad ordered chemical attack


Anders Fogh Rasmussen says strong international reaction needed, but alliance won’t take military action

Times of Israel

The Secretary General of NATO said Monday he wass “convinced” chemical weapons were used by the Syrian forces in an attack last month that left hundreds dead, and called for a “firm” international response.

Speaking at a news conference, Anders Fogh Rasmussen said NATO had received overwhelming evidence pointing to the fact that Syrian soldiers loyal to president Bashar Assad had carried out the deadly assault on August 21.

“I have been presented with concrete information and, without going into details, I can tell you that personally I am convinced, not only that a chemical attack has taken place… but I am also convinced that the Syrian regime is responsible,” Rasmussen said.

The NATO chief said a strong international reaction to the attack was needed in order to show dictators around the world that such weapons cannot be used with impunity.

“We need a firm international response in order to avoid that chemical attacks take place in the future. It would send, I would say, a dangerous signal to dictators all over the world if we stand idly by and don’t react,” he said.

His comment came two days after US President Barack Obama backed off imminent military action against Syria, instead opting to await Congressional approval.

Rasmussen said the alliance would not take part in any military action, but maintained that it would remain a strong defender of Turkey in case the member state was attacked as part of the Syria crisis, and NATO would remain a forum for allies to consult about action.

“If a response to what has happened in Syria were to be a military operation, I’d envisage a very short, measured, targeted operation, and you don’t need the NATO command and control system to conduct such a short, measured, tailored, military operation,” he said.

Earlier this year NATO deployed several Patriot anti-missile batteries to the Turkish Syrian border at Ankara’s request.

Rasmussen’s comments joined a growing chorus of international leaders who have blamed Assad for the attack. On Sunday, US Secretary of State John Kerry said the chemical used in the attack, which Washington says killed over 1,400 people, had signatures of sarin gas.

He said that a “case is building” for a military attack.

“This case is going to build stronger and stronger,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” But he also said he thinks “the people of America should be celebrating that the president is not acting unilaterally.”

Britain recently pulled back from joining a military response, after Parliament nixed the idea, handing Prime Minister David Cameron a stinging defeat. French President Francois Hollande has said it will also wait for lawmakers’ approval before considering military action.

Posted in Europe, SyriaComments Off on NATO chief ‘convinced’ Assad ordered chemical attack

President Gains McCain’s Backing on Syria Attack


Pedro Ali Alves

wars for israhell…
Administration officials said the influential pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC was already at work pressing for military action against Assad, fearing that if Syria escapes US retribution for its use of chemical weapons, Iran might be emboldened in the future to attack Israel. House majority leader Eric Cantor, the only Jewish Republican in Congress, has long worked to challenge Democrats’ traditional base among Jews. One administration official called AIPAC “the 800 lb gorilla in the room,” and said its allies in Congress had to be saying: If the White House is not capable of enforcing this red line against the catastrophic use of chemical weapons, we’re in trouble.

Abo Shuja/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

A Syrian rebel fighter and a child attempt to cross a damaged bridge in Deir Ezzor, in northeastern Syria on Monday.

WASHINGTON — The White House’s aggressive push for Congressional approval of an attack on Syria appeared to have won the tentative support of one of President Obama’s most hawkish critics, Senator John McCain, who said Monday that he would back a limited strike if the president did more to arm the Syrian rebels and the attack was punishing enough to weaken the Syrian military.

Representative Gerald E. Connolly of Virginia before a security briefing on Syria on Sunday.

In an hourlong meeting at the White House, said Mr. McCain, Republican of Arizona, Mr. Obama gave general support to doing more for the Syrian rebels, although no specifics were agreed upon. Officials said that in the same conversation, which included Senator Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican, Mr. Obama indicated that a covert effort by the United States to arm and train Syrian rebels was beginning to yield results: the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria.

There appeared to be broad agreement with the president, Mr. McCain and Mr. Graham said, that any attack on Syria should be to “degrade” the Syrian government’s delivery systems. Such a strike could include aircraft, artillery and the kind of rockets that the Obama administration says the forces of President Bashar al-Assad used to carry out an Aug. 21 sarin attack in the Damascus suburbs that killed more than 1,400 people.

The senators said they planned to meet with Susan E. Rice, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, to discuss the strategy in greater depth.

“It is all in the details, but I left the meeting feeling better than I felt before about what happens the day after and that the purpose of the attack is going to be a little more robust than I thought,” Mr. Graham said in an interview.

But Mr. McCain said in an interview that Mr. Obama did not say specifically what weapons might be provided to the opposition or discuss in detail what Syrian targets might be attacked.

“There was no concrete agreement, ‘O.K., we got a deal,’ ” Mr. McCain said. “Like a lot of things, the devil is in the details.”

In remarks to reporters outside the West Wing, he called the meeting “encouraging,” urged lawmakers to support Mr. Obama in his plan for military action in Syria and said a no vote in Congress would be “catastrophic” for the United States and its credibility in the world. Mr. McCain said he believed after his conversation with the president that any strikes would be “very serious” and not “cosmetic.”

Although the words from Mr. McCain and Mr. Graham were a positive development for Mr. Obama and a critical part of the administration’s lobbying blitz on Syria on Monday, the White House still faces a tough fight in Congress. Many lawmakers entirely oppose a strike, and others favor a resolution that would provide for more limited military action than what is in a draft resolution that the White House has sent to Capitol Hill. The conflict of opinion underscores Mr. Obama’s challenge in winning votes in the House and Senate next week and avoiding personal defeat.

A Labor Day conference call with five of Mr. Obama’s highest-ranking security advisers drew 127 House Democrats, nearly two-thirds their total number, after 83 lawmakers of both parties attended a classified briefing on Sunday. Pertinent committees are returning to Washington early from a Congressional recess for hearings this week, starting Tuesday with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which will hear from Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

“The debate is shifting away from ‘Did he use chemical weapons?’ to ‘What should be done about it?’ ” said Representative Adam B. Schiff, a California Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, in an interview after the Monday conference call.

The push in Washington came as reaction continued around the world to the president’s abrupt decision over the weekend to change course and postpone a military strike to seek authorization from Congress first.

In France, the only nation to offer vigorous support for an American attack, there were rising calls for a parliamentary vote like the one last week in Britain, where lawmakers jolted the White House with a rejection of a British military attack. But the French government, in an effort to bolster its case, released a declassified summary of French intelligence that it said ties Mr. Assad’s government to the use of chemical weapons on Aug. 21.

In Russia, Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov dismissed as unconvincing the evidence presented by Mr. Kerry of chemical weapons use by the Syrian government. “We were shown certain pieces of evidence that did not contain anything concrete, neither geographical locations, nor names, nor evidence that samples had been taken by professionals,” Mr. Lavrov said in a speech at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations.

In Israel, President Shimon Peres offered strong support for Mr. Obama’s decision to seek the backing of Congress, saying he had faith in the president’s “moral and operational” position. “I recommend patience,” Mr. Peres said in an interview on Army Radio. “I am confident that the United States will respond appropriately to Syria.”

In Washington, the White House’s “flood the zone” effort, as one official called it, will continue. Classified briefings will be held for all House members and senators on Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.

On Tuesday, Mr. Obama has invited the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate defense, foreign affairs and intelligence committees to the White House. But that night, he will depart on a long-planned foreign trip, first to Sweden and then to Russia for the annual Group of 20 summit meeting of major industrialized and developing nations, a forum that is sure to be dominated by talk of Syria, and bring Mr. Obama face to face with Mr. Assad’s chief ally and arms supplier, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

House Democrats on the conference call with administration officials, which lasted 70 minutes, said Mr. Kerry, who has been the most aggressive and public prosecutor for military action, took the lead. Democrats said he had portrayed not only the horrors of chemical weapons inflicted on Syrian civilians in the Aug. 21 attacks outside Damascus, but also the potential threat, if left unanswered, that such weapons posed to regional allies like Israel, Jordan and Turkey.

Mr. Kerry argued that inaction could embolden Iran or nonstate terrorists to strike those allies, and further encourage Iran and North Korea to press ahead with their nuclear programs.

“One of the important propositions that Kerry put to members was, are you willing to live with the consequences of doing nothing?” said Representative Gerald E. Connolly, a Virginia Democrat.

The secretary of state addressed lawmakers’ concern that the United States should have international support. “The United States will not go it alone,” he said at one point, according to a senior Democrat who declined to be identified. Offers of “military assets” have come from France, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, he said, without identifying the assets, and more are expected.

In the week since the Obama administration began moving toward a military strike on the Assad government, Mr. Kerry said, the Syrian military has had about 100 defections, including 80 officers.

General Dempsey reviewed the range of possible targets and how the Pentagon is planning strikes that would minimize risk to civilians. Despite reports that Syrian commanders were moving troops and equipment into civilian neighborhoods, General Dempsey told lawmakers, as he had assured Mr. Obama, that delaying military action would not weaken the effectiveness of any military attack. He suggested that military officials would adjust their targets to address changes on the ground.

The general acknowledged that the United States could not prevent the Assad government from using chemical weapons again, but said the military had “additional options” should a first missile strike not deter a retaliatory strike by Mr. Assad, including in defense of critical allies, presumably Israel, Jordan and Turkey. That possibility, however, describes just the escalating conflict some opponents fear.

“My constituents are skeptical that a limited effort will not mushroom into a full-blown boots on the ground,” said Representative Elijah E. Cummings, a Maryland Democrat.

Mr. McCain, who has been arguing for two years that the United States should support a moderate Syrian opposition, said he strongly urged the president on Monday to provide anti-tank and antiaircraft systems to the opposition and to attack the Syrian Air Force.

Mr. Obama indicated that “he favorably viewed the degrading of Bashar al-Assad’s capabilities as well as upgrading the Free Syrian Army,” Mr. McCain said in an interview.

Administration officials have told Congress that the C.I.A.’s program to arm the rebels would be deliberately limited at first to allow a trial run for American officials to monitor it before ramping up to a larger, more aggressive campaign. American officials have been wary that arms provided to the rebels could end up in the hands of Islamic extremists with ties to Al Qaeda.

Posted in USA, SyriaComments Off on President Gains McCain’s Backing on Syria Attack

An I$raHell Intelligence Assessment: If U.S. Punishes Syria a Bit vs. Trying to Topple Assad — What’s Better? What’s More Dangerous to I$raHell?

 While not openly taking sides with anyone in the civil war in neighboring Syria, Israel does believe that it’s “very important” that President Bashar al-Assad not be the ultimate winner — because he is a close ally of Iran and Hezbollah. That declaration is clear in a policy snapshot by retired air force general Amos Yadlin — who until 2011 was head of Israel’s Military Intelligence (Aman), the largest agency in the Israeli intelligence community. Yadlin has co-authored an assessment of what would be best for Israel: a short and limited campaign of airstrikes by the United States against chemical-weapons-related targets in Syria? or a wider, much more emphatic effort to topple Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Damascus? Yadlin published his conclusions through the Institute for National Security Studies (in Tel Aviv), which he heads, along with a colleague, Avner Golov. It’s highly likely that Gen. Yadlin’s frame of analysis and conclusions are similar to those of the top Israeli intelligence analysts now delivering their classified conclusions to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Clearly this point of view is rooting for President Obama to carry out airstrikes on Syria — an event that is, at the very least, delayed now until Congress debates and votes on the matter.[[[[Yadlin and Golov write that’s it’s in Israel’s interests that… (a) The U.S. show unequivocally that there is a high price to pay for using non-conventional weapons. (b) The U.S. restore its strategic deterrence and credibility in the Middle East. (c) Israel do everything possible not to be dragged into Syria’s civil war. (d) Iran should see “that (zionist ran)Washington is determined to uphold the President’s promises. President Obama’s actions and the cooperation he achieves with Western and regional allies will have implications for the Iranian nuclear issue.” Yadlin mentions that one happy outcome of the Syrian civil war, in the end, could be the establishment of a pro-Western, moderate government in Damascus]]]]]. [[[[[Then Syria’s support for terrorist organizations would almost surely end. Yadlin’s study says Israel — in the past — considered giving up the Golan Heights in order to achieve that. Now it might be achieved without handing over territory.]]]]]] [[[[[Big U.S. Attack or a Small One? Yadlin and Golov write that if the U.S. strikes, say, 50 targets for two days, “A limited but successful attack that is backed up by U.S. determination to prevent the use of non-conventional weapons would restore some American deterrent power against the use of chemical weapons and to a certain extent would enhance American standing in the region. “Such an attack could also influence decisionmaking in Tehran. Thus, the expected [smaller] scenario regarding an American attack would promote some of Israel’s interests, especially those connected with U.S. deterrent power in the region, albeit to a limited extent only.”]]]]] [[[[And what if the U.S., perhaps propelled by sentiments expressed by Congress next week, decides to bomb a lot more extensively — with a goal of destabilizing and forcing out the Assad regime? That would do a lot more restore America’s credibility and “deterrent power” — “and would convey a clear message of American determination to Tehran,” in Yadlin’s words — but there would also be two significant risks to Israel.]]]] Quoting the INSS study: [[[[[[[“The first and immediate risk is that Assad might decide to launch ground-to-ground missiles at Israel, and perhaps even arm them with chemical weapons. However, given Israel’s deterrent power and the limited effectiveness of chemical weapons, there is little likelihood of this scenario taking place — although it is more likely here than in the punishment scenario described above. “Moreover, despite the low probability, its severity requires that the Israeli government prevent such an attack, or if it fails, that it limit its consequences.”]]]]]The other risk is that if Assad is unstable or gone, terrorism threats to Israel could actually grow. Yadlin says terrorist groups in Syria (which he makes a point of saying are funded mainly by Qatar — to some a moderate country that owns Al Jazeera TV, for instance) would likely seize control of areas that they could use as bases for attacks into Israel. In part of the conclusions by Yadlin and Golov, they write: [[[[[[“Israel has the power to cope with the potential challenges discussed above, and in particular, the non-conventional threat and the threat of terrorism from Syria]]]]].[ed notes;of course he says israhell could deal with that so called potential front,because qatar who runs them is a puppet client regime of zionist west,so once zionist west tells them not to attack,they wont… 
 To this end, Israel should adhere to a policy in which it is not a party to the turmoil in Syria and does not plan to intervene in the civil war. “The government of Israel has maintained this posture thus far, and it is very important that this continue, even if there is some provocation on the northern border.”[ed notes;israhell has not maintaned a disassociation policy at all,on contrary its been attacking Syria govt,helping rebels,and caling for regime change from beggining…see

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, SyriaComments Off on An I$raHell Intelligence Assessment: If U.S. Punishes Syria a Bit vs. Trying to Topple Assad — What’s Better? What’s More Dangerous to I$raHell?

Talk, Don’t Bomb, Former U.N. Officials Urge in Appeal on Syria

Former high-ranking U.N. officials urged the United States and others Monday to refrain from bombing Syria over a devastating chemical attack, and instead work harder to broker a political solution in the war-torn country. Former deputy chief of the United Nations Hans-Christof von Sponeck launched the appeal in Swiss daily Le Temps’ online edition, with support from his former U.N. colleagues Denis Halliday, Said Zulficar, Samir Radwan and Samir Basta. “True courage does not consist in sending in cruise missiles, … it consists in radically breaking from this murderous logic,” wrote von Sponeck, who coordinated the U.N.’s humanitarian actions in Iraq from 1998 to 2000. [[[[Even if Western governments provide proof that the Syrian regime is to blame for the attack,]]]]”[[[there is reason to remain skeptical and to remember all the questionable or fabricated pretexts used to justify previous wars”, von Sponeck wrote, referring implicitly to the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq on the basis of false intelligence. “The time when the United States and the few allies it still has acted as the world police is over. The world has become more multifaceted and the people of the world want more sovereignty, not less,” he stressed. “The Syrian, Iranian and Russian governments have made proposals to negotiate, which have been treated with disdain by the West]]]. “Those who say: ‘We cannot talk or negotiate with Assad’ forget that people said the same thing” about a range of regimes and revolutionary movements like the Soviet Union, the Palestinian PLO, Irish IRA and former South African president Nelson Mandela and his ANC movement, among others,” he pointed out. Instead going into conflicts with bombs blazing, Western powers should focus on helping the parties settle their differences.“For Israel to negotiate in good faith with the Palestinians, organise the Geneva 2 conference (to end the conflict in) Syria, and talk with the Iranians about their nuclear program,” von Sponeck suggested.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Talk, Don’t Bomb, Former U.N. Officials Urge in Appeal on Syria

Cuba Rejects US Threats on Syria: Statement via Liliana Ximena

HAVANA, Cuba, Sep 2 (acn) The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cuba issued a statement rejecting U.S. threats against Syria, which we reproduce in full below:The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cuba has learned with deep concern, the statement made on August 31by the President of the United States, Barack Obama, in which he announced his decision to take military action against Syria.Without leaving any room for the ongoing attempts to reach a political solution to the conflict, or presenting any evidence and with total disregard of the opinions of many countries, including some of its major allies, and the United Nations, the President of the United States has announced its determination to perform acts in violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations to cause more death and destruction and lead, inevitably, to the intensification of the conflict the Arab nation is going through.The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cuba is calling on members of the Security Council to fulfill its mandate to prevent any breach of the peace and stop military intervention that threatens international security in this volatile region of the worldCuba considers that the General Assembly, the only UN body which represents all countries, is also responsible for the stopping of the aggression, especially when it is foreseeable that the Security Council, due to the predominance of the United States in that organ cannot make a decision. The Assembly, in exercising its powers, should meet urgently and take necessary measures.The Secretary General of the United Nations should become directly involved in preventing acts that the President of the United States described as almost inevitable facts. It would be his job to make urgent and vigorous diplomatic efforts with the U.S. government to try to save the overwhelming responsibility of his office towards peace and global stability.The Group of 20 will meet in St. Petersburg, Russia, on September 5-6. That instance, with the participation of many of the world leaders could not avoid the obligation to discuss with the President of the United States the current situation and to take concrete action in this regard.If the truth wasn’t being hid from the American people and it wasn’t constantly inundated with biased, manipulated and incomplete information, they, who in successive wars from Vietnam to date has suffered the death of tens of thousands of its youngsters, would not remain indifferent to a new conflagration that will produce greater loss of life and, eventually reclaim its responsibility from corrupt politicians and mendacious media.The question now arises of what will the U.S. Congress do when it resumes its session on September 9 and have to decide between the start of a new war and the preservation of international peace, between life and death.If, like the British Parliament, it rejects the attempts of aggression announced by the President, it will have made a surprising and valuable contribution to world peace and questioned their country’s political system. If approved, it will have to bear the consequences in the relentless history records.Cuba also appeals to the opinion leaders of the United States and the world to keep the law of the jungle from prevailing over sanity, prevent illegal and illegitimate attacks to be launched against other countries, and attempt to supplant diplomacy with war.Cuba also calls upon the pacifist, religious, youth and students, workers, artists and intellectuals, social movements, progressive forces leaders and all those who reject the war, to mobilize to oppose the decision of the President of the United States to attack the Arab nation.The Foreign Ministry also calls for preservation of the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Syria and the right to self-determination of his people, and the promotion of the resolution of conflict through diplomatic channels without further bloodshed.

Posted in South AmericaComments Off on Cuba Rejects US Threats on Syria: Statement via Liliana Ximena

Syrian “gas rockets” appear homemade and incapable of flying 5-10 miles to target.

dem underground

“Photos of devices allegedly used to carry Sarin gas show they appear to be homemade and are clearly incapable of accurately reaching targets 5-10 miles away. That is crucially important because the State Department report asserts that the gas barrage was launched from gov’t controlled territory. But the map (below) that accompanied that report shows that several of the targets were miles away from the area in pink shown to be under the control of government forces.

These rockets have only the crudest stabilizers, no guidance systems, and would be highly inaccurate at any significant distance, which is why they are unlikely to have been the weapon used in the attack of 8/21, if the US target map is accurate along with the statement that they were launched from government-held territory.”
[There seems to be a lot of misinformation posted in this forum post—the first mistake was in misidentifying the rocket as a common Soviet-era BM-14 rocket-launching system,
then claiming that it was firing projectiles modelled on an old USARMY fuel-air-explosive mine-clearing system
SLUFAE fuel air explosive USA1
posting videos of previous FSA homemade projectiles found and similar ones being fired, mislabled as “Syrian Army,” even though the Syrian military fires professionally-made Soviet-era rockets, which look exactly like any other type of rocket.  Why would professional rocketeers experiment with these top-heavy “albatross” weapons (which are more than likely to kill the operators than any intended targets), except perhaps, if they were building a convincing copy of an FSA weapon.  The following video posted is of a similar type of weapon, packed with high-explosives, an obvious dud.]
[Below is a video of a much larger version of the same weapon being fired from a truck launcher.  Notice the very large rocket lying on the bed of the crane truck.]

[In the following snapshots from the video, we see the true size of the weapon being fired from the converted crane truck launcher.

Chemical rocket a
Compared to the men who are loading/arming the damned thing, it appears that the tank end, as well as the nozzle end of the rocket is close to 3′ in diameter, indicating that this design is for a tube-type launcher only.
Chemical rocket1a 
Chemical rocket4a
Notice the length of the pipe section bearing the rocket fuel is several feet longer than an approximately 6′ tall man.]
(from Democratic Underground)  Here’s the State Dept. map of the 12 alleged targets in the North Damascus suburbs. Note the distances of some of the targeted neighborhoods from government-held territory (in pink):

Posted in Syria2 Comments

Investment banks up to their old tricks

A multinational enterprise (Coca Cola) that purchases aluminium and an individual have accused the Investment Banks Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan and the mining firm Glencore Xstrata of speculation (1). This is according to a collective denunciation accusing them of an illegal pact for warehousing aluminium, presented to the Federal Court of the Northern District of Florida (2).
The accusations point out that the investment banks, through warehousing, can stretch the waiting time for the delivery of the metal up to 16 months. In this way they create an artificial shortage, increase the income from warehousing, as warrants for the value of stocks on hand, and finally, obtin monopoly profits (3). Since Goldman Sachs bought warehouses in Detroit in 2010, they decided to engage in the warehousing of commodities. From that moment the price of aluminium began to rise; it is estimated that since 2010 it has risen by 2 dollars. In the United States there is an annual consumption of about 90 billion aluminium cans (4). This has given a monopolistic benefit to the banks of a little more than five billion dollars (5). A question for the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), a regulatory organ of the U.S. Stock Market, is whether the financial transaction includes operations in the commodity markets. There is no doubt that this is an increasingly frequent practice for investment banks. Both banks have already been charged for similar cases. In July of this year, JPMorgan was accused by FERC, the energy regulatory agency in the United States, of manipulating electricity prices in California (6). Three years ago Goldman Sachs was accused by the SEC of manipulating petroleum prices. It should be understood that while there is no change in legislation against the intervention of investment banks in different branches of financial, and now productive activity; and maintaining the union of commercial and investment banks, storage, insurance and real estate, these monopolistic practices will continue. In the gold market there is a question regarding the responsibility for the abrupt fall in the month of April, when the price fell from 1,500 dollars an ounce to 1,200, affecting the oft criticized gold mining sector and the economic growth of developing countries that export this metal.[[[Apparently, commodity prices are now determined, not by real offer and demand, but by the offer and demand of investment banks and their manipulation of the real market, which is a significant distortion of the meaning of what is a “market” and what is an “investment bank”. Meanwhile the fines continue to accumulate.]]]]

Posted in Campaigns, PoliticsComments Off on Investment banks up to their old tricks

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard: MEK Deaths in Iraq ‘Divine Vengeance’

The People’s Mujahedeen Organization of Iran (PMOI) said on Sunday that Iraqi forces had killed 52 of their members in a raid at Camp Ashraf, the group’s longtime base in Diyala, Iraq. The Mujahadeen-e-Khalq (MEK), which is how they are known in Iran, was a leftist-Islamist group which left Iran after the 1979 revolution over a power struggle with Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. During the Iran-Iraq war, the MEK took refuge in Iraq. Immediately after the announcement of a cease-fire between Iran and Iraq, the group, with initial air support from Iraq, invaded Iran, but eventually retreated after thousands of its members were killed. Many of the group’s members are believed to have been executed in Iran in 1988. The Iranian government blames the MEK for acts of terrorism in the 1980s against government officials and for the assassination of Iran’s nuclear scientists over the last several years.
According to the Associated Press, a spokesman for the Iraqi government confirmed that residents were killed but attributed the deaths to infighting between camp residents. According to Agence France-Presse, however, Iraqi officials believe that either a mortar attack caused an explosion or that perhaps there was a gas explosion. He also denied reports that Iraqi forces entered the camp. In a written statement, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) called the deaths “divine vengeance.” The statement read: “Finally, it’s with a divine fate that the children of the martyred Iraqi fighters, with a revolutionary act, in a historical revenge on the hypocrites’ spider’s nest, for a joint crime by [late Iraqi president] Saddam [Hussein] and the hypocrites for the Shaban intifada [a 1991 Iraqi uprising against Saddam] in which thousands of innocent Iraqi women and children were martyred, and proved an immortal lesson and a lasting courage. “This step led to the death of near seventy bodies of the cadres of the corrupt hypocrites, among them seven of the leadership council and intelligence and operations officials of the hypocrite organization with a history of more than thirty years of crimes. Certainly this is a great relief to the Muslim ummah and the families of the great martyrs, especially the families of the great martyrs who have been assassinated. “Without a doubt, the two Muslim nations of Iran and Iraq will never forget the bitter memory of the betrayals and crimes of the filthy hypocrites and the inevitable fate of the hypocrites will be nothing but hardship, displacement, helplessness and complete destruction. “Sepah [IRGC] knows this divine vengeance to be a promise from the almighty God who granted this on the anniversary of the martyrdom of the righteous, martyrs Rajaei and Bahonar.” The “martyrs” here represent Iran’s second president Mohammad Ali Rajaei and prime minister Mohammad Javad Bahonar, who were both killed in a bombing on Aug. 30, 1981. The term “hypocrite” is what Iranian officials and media use for the MEK. Websites close to the MEK have released unconfirmed videos of what they claim to be Iraqi soldiers entering their camp and ofhandcuffed bodies that appear to have been shot at close range.
[ed notes:lets wait and see what ann singleton says about incident these coming days…i suspect mek leaders are once again cleaning ranks and blaming Iraqi officials and army in their usual tactics..recall the last so called incident 2 years ago revealed mek members were attacking Iraqi army with projectiles according to the members of family members stationed outside camp who demanded mek eladers release their hostge family members..

Posted in IranComments Off on Iran’s Revolutionary Guard: MEK Deaths in Iraq ‘Divine Vengeance’

Iran’s chemical weapon survivors show twin horrors of WMD and sanctions


by Narges Bajoghli (source: Guardian / Tehran Bureau) September 2, 2013

Ahmad, a survivor of chemical warfare during the Iran–Iraq war of 1980-88, has already had more than 50 operations on his eyes. He uses multiple inhalers every day to alleviate the pain from his lungs, 60% of which were burned, and he takes a multitude of pills just to stay alive.His story, which exemplifies the consequences of warfare conducted with weapons of mass destruction, is complicated by the fact that western sanctions against Iran have added an additional layer to the suffering: the shortage of medicine. ››read more

Obama, Syria, and Iran: The (Lonely and Declining) Empire Prepares to Strike Back (Self-Destructively and for No Strategic Purpo

by Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett (source: Going to Tehran) August 31, 2013 As the Obama administration proceeds with its tragi-comic preparations for military strikes against Syria, with no domestic or international legitimacy, it is losing allies and partners at an impressively rapid pace—faster than even the George W. Bush administration was able to achieve at its most egregiously offensive. The Arab League, in the end, declined to endorse military action against Syria, Britain decided not to go on this particular martial walk with its American master, and, for once, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) is not the only member of Congress raising his voice against the prospect of another illegal and strategically use of military force yet another U.S. administration. ››read more

Posted in IranComments Off on Iran’s chemical weapon survivors show twin horrors of WMD and sanctions

A Sample of Jewish Philosophy From an Assimilated One



I received yet another hate screed from what appears to be a chosen one a few days ago:

From: ayinchet [at] yahoo [dot] com
To: kawther [dot] salam [at] gmail [dot] com
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 12:56:07
Subject: Palestine Civil Administration Explanations
Dear Kawther, 
one question about the text published on this site, before I have a look on the others:
(click here)
What’s that fucking shitty crap that’s written in a lower-than-lowest standard of English about the civil administration in the Westbank area? It’s like, are you serious about the shit you’re writing? 

Should I really have a look at the rest of it or is it the same type of crap?
My curiosity is sincere.

By the way, the place of Beit El is mentioned in the Bible you guys are supposed to believe in, too, and there’s no such thing as Biten (except for Bite in your ass, maybe…)
So keep cool and rather step off your journalistic duty, cause you don’t really improve the reputation of Alhayat and Alquds. 
Kind regards

Since I am a Palestinian and a journalist, I am used to receive base and hate-filled words from the so-called “God’s chosen people” from time to time. I am the target of their hatred as a Palestinian because these hateful, self-proclaimed chosen ones are racists like nobody else, because they hate any human being who is not jewish. As a journalist I am target of their hatred because I have never been silenced in my condemnation of their vile crimes against my people and myself.
So here came “Natal”, and by his writing it was immediately discernible that he (or she) is a jewish philosopher, as all the breadth and depth of their philosophy consists in heaping scorn and insult on anyone who is not one of them, what is apparent in above piece of thinly veiled hate speech.

I wondered who this could be and, sure enough, I soon found that this masterpiece of jewish philosophy had been sent from, an IP address which is assigned to Bezeqint, an Israeli internet provider. I then asked myself what could have inspired “Natal” to put together above master piece of jewish philosophy, and I found that he originally came to my website through a Google search for Fuad Halhal (סגן אלוף פואד חלחל) and on last 29 August 2013 he came again and read several pages about the “Brief Notes From Palestine and The Ongoing Nakhba and Fuad Halhal “The Military Officer Who Sent Me a Husband before sending me above screed.

Jewish Philosophy

Fuad Halhal-2011

Fuad Halhal is nasty a piece of work in his own right. He is a Druze officer of the IDF who has been involved in a whole string of war crimes, crimes against humanity and other dishonorable activities. He was involved as a coordinating officer in the genocidal razing of the center of Jenin in 2002, where several hundreds of Palestinians were buried alive by a bulldozer brigade sent in after massive shelling and shooting on part of the IDF. Halhal has also been involved in a string of thefts of land from Palestinian families in the West Bank, falsifying documents to “legitimize” property thefts in favor of American and European jews in Nablus, Hebron and Jenin, plain murder of Palestinians, a string of events of ethnic cleansing across the West Bank, etc., etc.I met Halhal personally when he was stationed in Hebron working for the DCL, a branch of the COGAT, the Israeli occupation and colonization office. At that time, Halhal tried to marry me to a psychiatric patient in order to make me stop writing. When he didn’t succeed, he resorted to spread rumors in order to discredit me, and he didn’t succeed either.
 Continue reading: A Sample of Jewish Philosophy From an Assimilated One

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on A Sample of Jewish Philosophy From an Assimilated One

Shoah’s pages


September 2013
« Aug   Oct »