Archive | September 16th, 2013

‘Obama knew he wouldn’t attack Syria’

US President Barack Obama had planned “from the beginning that there would be no attack on Syria,” says Mark Glenn, an American author and journalist.

“He created this illusion that America was getting ready to go to war against Syria in order to create this backlash the world over against this attack,” said Glenn who is the co-founder of the Crescent and Cross Solidarity Movement.

“And of course Obama has made sure that Congress will not approve this so that he has a justification for going to [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and saying ‘I’m sorry Mr. Prime Minister but my hands are tied. I cannot initiate this war against Syria because I cannot get rational approval,’” he added.

On Saturday, US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reached an agreement on a framework for Syria to verify it is eliminating all its chemical weapons.

Kerry met with Netanyahu in Jerusalem al-Quds one day after the agreement was reached in Geneva in order to assure Washington’s staunch ally in the Middle East that the deal would be capable of removing Syria’s chemical weapons.

“Kerry’s being in Israel at this time is to explain to Netanyahu that the war plans against Syria are off, that the United States is not going to initiate this attack, and that the United States is not going to initiate any attack against Iran,” Glenn said.

“The United States has demonstrated now for many, many years that it will only attack countries that cannot defend themselves,” he pointed out.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on ‘Obama knew he wouldn’t attack Syria’

On the Warning Track Broadcast

On the Warning Track Broadcast Sept 15, 2013

by crescentandcross


Download Here


Posted in InterviewComments Off on On the Warning Track Broadcast

US-Russia reach landmark deal on destruction of Syria chemical weapons arsenal


Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov talking to US Secretary of State John Kerry in Geneva, Switzerland, on September 14, 2014 (Image by Russia’s Foreign Ministry press service: )

Russia and the United States reached a deal on a framework that will see the destruction or removal of Syria’s chemical weapons by mid- 2014. Under the plan, the Assad government has one week to hand over an inventory of its chemical weapons arsenal.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and his US counterpart John Kerry announced the plan on putting an end to Syria’s chemical weapons program following their third day of negotiations in Geneva, Switzerland.

Kerry outlined several points of the plan, which would see the “rapid assumption of control by the international community” of Syria’s chemical weapons. He further stressed US-Russia commitment to the complete destruction of not only of Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal, but also its production and refinement capabilities.

Syria will also become a party to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which outlaws their production and use. On Saturday, the UN said it had received all documents necessary for Syria to join the chemical weapons convention and that Syria would come under the treaty in 30 days starting on October 14.

Damascus must submit within a week’s time – “and not 30 days” – a complete inventory of related arms, “including names, types, and quantities of its chemical weapons agents, types of munitions, and location and form of storage, production and research and development facilities.”

The Syrian government should provide the OPCW, the UN and other supporting personnel “with the immediate and unfettered right to inspect any and all sites in Syria.” Lavrov later said that security for all international inspectors on the ground should be provided for not only by the government, but opposition forces as well.

It remains undecided who will actually be tasked with destroying the stock, although their destruction“outside of Syria” and under “OPWC supervision” would prove to be optimal.

On the timetable, Kerry said UN inspectors must be on the ground no later than November, while the destruction of chemical weapons must be completed by the middle of 2014.

“Providing this framework is fully implemented it can end the threat these weapons pose not only to the Syrian people but also their neighbors,” Kerry said adding that Russian and US teams of experts had reached “a shared assessment” of the existing stockpile and that Syria must destroy all of its weapons. It was possible that the Syrian rebels have some chemical weapons, he acknowledged.

If Damascus fails to comply with the plan, a response in accordance with UN Charter Chapter 7 will follow, Kerry said, in a reference to the use of military force. The chapter provides for “action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security” in the event other measures fail.


People walk along a damaged street filled with debris in Deir al-Zor September 4, 2013. (Reuters//Khalil Ashawi)People walk along a damaged street filled with debris in Deir al-Zor September 4, 2013. (Reuters//Khalil Ashawi)


But Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, said the agreement did not include any potential use of force against Syria. He however said that deviations from the plan, including attacks on UN inspectors, would be brought to the UN Security Council, which would decide on further action.

There is no prior agreement about what form the Security Council’s measures might take if Syria does not comply, Kerry said.

The joint press conference was rather jovial in nature, contrasting sharply with the public barbs which have been traded between Russian and US officials in recent days.

Kerry in fact concluded the press conference by teasing Lavrov that he “could be a senator” after the Russian FM gave a rather voluble reply to a question posed by a Russian journalist.

Kick starting Geneva II

Meanwhile, both sides reiterated previously stated intentions to meet with Lakhdar Brahimi, the United Nations and Arab League Special Envoy to Syria, on the margins of the UN General Assembly on September 28.

Speaking alongside Kerry and Lavrov in Geneva on Friday, Brahimi said ongoing work to put Syria’s chemical weapons under international control was a necessary step for convening the Geneva II conference. The conference, which is intended to hammer out a political solution to the brutal civil war which has embroiled Syria for over two years, could be held in October, Lavrov told reporters.

On Monday, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is expected to present a report to the Security Council which sources say contains overwhelming evidence that “chemical weapons were used” in an August 21 attack in a Damascus Suburb which killed between 355 and 1,729 people.

The government of Bashar Assad strongly denied government forces were responsible for the attack, while the West overwhelmingly blamed Damascus, prompting US Barack Obama’s threat of military action.

Obama has threatened to strike Syria unilaterally, prompting Russia’s Saturday’s joint proposal which will see Syria’s chemical weapons brought under international control.

Although President Assad immediately acquiesced to the Russian-backed plan, rebel forces have resisted efforts which have staved off Western intervention in the country.

On Saturday,  the Free Syrian Army rejected a US-Russian deal as a stalling tactic and vowed to continue fighting to topple the Assad government.

“The Russian-American initiative does not concern us. It only seeks to gain time,” said Salim Idriss, the chief of the FSA command, said.

“We completely ignore this initiative and will continue to fight to bring down the regime,” he told a press conference Saturday in the Turkish city of Istanbul.

Posted in USA, RussiaComments Off on US-Russia reach landmark deal on destruction of Syria chemical weapons arsenal

Syria is Just Another War for I$raHell


By: Keith Johnson


American Free Press Newspaper

Now that a strike on Syria appears to have been temporarily postponed, it’s incumbent upon the American people to learn who was really responsible for this insane proposal and put a stop to this madness once and for all.

The fact is, Syria never was a target of American imperialism or the military-industrial-complex. This was a Zionist war from the very beginning. And the United States and Obama administration were simply being used to fulfill Israel’s land-grabbing aspirations and prepare the way for a larger conflict with Iran.

The Real Culprits Come Out of the Closet


Fearing a public backlash for leading the United States into another foolish military adventure on behalf of Israel, America’s well organized Zionist community made a concerted effort to convince the world that their support for U.S. “intervention” in Syria had nothing to do with their loyalty to the criminal Jewish state.

Every endorsement for war, from every influential Jewish organization in the country, was carefully worded to leave the impression that U.S. Jewry was only concerned about saving innocent Syrian lives, preventing another so-called “holocaust” and fighting for truth…justice… and the American way.

In a statement issued on September 5, the American Israeli Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC) urged

“Congress to grant the President the authority he has requested to protectAmerica’s national security interests and dissuade the Syrian regime’s further use of unconventional weapons. Simply put, barbarism on a mass scale must not be given a free pass….That is why America must act.”

Notice that AIPAC never addresses Israel’s “national security interests,” only America’s.

In similar fashion, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which represents 52 national Jewish agencies, also released a statement on Syria that deliberately omits Israel from the equation.

“Those who perpetuate such acts of wanton murder must know that they cannot do so with impunity,” they said. “Those who possess or seek weapons of mass destruction, particularlyIran and Hezbollah, must see that there is accountability.”

Both the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) and the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) have also weighed in on Syria, urging congress to authorize the use of force but making no mention of the Jewish state.

While the JCPA claims that “Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad has proven himself unfit to rule his country,” the RJC suggests that “the use of military force against Bashar Al-Assad’s regime” is in America’s “national interest” to avoid losing its “moral standing and diplomatic credibility.”


Jewish Groups Admit Deceptive Practices


To say that the Jewish community is intentionally colluding to exclude Israel from discussions on Syria is no conspiracy theory.

According to a September 3 article from the Jewish Telegraph Agency, “A lingering sensitivity over misrepresentations of the role of the pro-Israel community in the lead-up to the Iraq War in 2003 kept Jewish groups from weighing in on Syria until it was clear that President Obama was determined to strike. Now that same sensitivity is leading them to downplay any mention of Israel.

“Officials of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, finishing up a conference call Tuesday afternoon with top security advisers to Obama, waited until the White House staffers were off the call before urging constituent organizations not to make their statements ‘Israel-centric.’”

This mind-set was also addressed in a recent article from the Washington Post. “There is a desire to not make this about Israel,” said one pro-Israel advocate, who recently spoke to thePost on the condition of anonymity. “When the administration argues to members of Congress that we should do this for Israel’s sake, that has caused deep discomfort in the Jewish community, regardless of where they stand. Israel didn’t ask the U.S. to do this.”

Others, like Anti-Defamation League (ADL) director Abe Foxman, also admit that influential Zionists have made a conscious effort to maintain a low-profile on Syria for fear that they will be identified as the primary source of bellicose rhetoric against the Assad government.

In a recent article for the Jewish Daily Forward, entitled Jewish Community Cautious as U.S. Attack on Syria Looms Large, Nathan Guttman wrote, “Foxman said that he himself supports an American military move in response to the use of chemical weapons. But his organization, like most other Jewish groups, refrained from making public statements on the issue. ‘There is a sensitivity of not jumping ahead of the administration,’ Foxman said, tying this sensitivity to ‘the Jewish community’s experience of being falsely accused of things it hasn’t done.’”

The article goes on to say that these “accusations date back to the 2003 American invasion of Iraq,” and that “[s]similar accusations were made in recent years, when discussing America’s options for dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions”


 A Long History of Jewish American Warmongering


Despite claims made in the Forward piece, all factual research conclusively proves that American Jews played key roles in laying the groundwork for the Iraq invasion.

In a January 25, 2012 essay for Revolt of the Plebs, this American Free Press reporter wrote, “In 1996, Israeli dual citizens Douglas Feith and Richard Perle were both advisors toIsrael’s Likud Party leader Benjamin Netanyahu. During that time, the duo co-authored a policy paper, entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm. In it, they said that Saddam would have to be destroyed, and that Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iranwould all have to be overthrown or destabilized in order for Israel to be truly safe.

“Feith would later become the U.S. Under Secretary of Defense of Policy for the Bush administration. It was through Feith’s Office of Special Plans (OSP) that the Israelis channeled faulty intelligence about Saddam’s so-called ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction.’ These lies led the U.S. Congress to enact the Iraq War Resolution of 2002, which gave George W. Bush carte blanche to wage a bloody conflict that has since claimed the lives of over one million Iraqis and nearly 5,000 American troops.” 

As for the Forward’s claim that American Jews have been “falsely accused” of meddling in recent discussions dealing with “Iran’s nuclear ambitions,” that too is a blatant lie.

As recently as last July, AIPAC issued a video message to its supporters stating “the Islamic Republic casts a dark shadow of hate, terror and oppression in the region….And all the while Iran is racing to build a nuclear weapons capability.”

The video ends with:

We must act now to prevent Iran from becoming even more dangerous. Contact your Member of Congress and urge them to increase sanctions on Iran before it’s too late. That is increase sanctions now to let Iran know that anything [newly elected Iranian President] Rowahani does short of meeting Netanyahu’s demands for total surrender on the nuclear issue is of no interest to us.”

AIPAC is not only the head cheerleader for offensive measures against Iran’s mythical nuclear weapons program; it’s also the chief choreographer.

In a January 2011 article for American Free Press, this reporter wrote, “In 1994, AIPAC drew up their Plan for Action that was designed to impose comprehensive sanctions on Iran. By 1995, AIPAC began an intense lobbying campaign to impose a complete trade embargo against Iran and a boycott of its global trading partners. A year later, Congress passed the Iran-Libyan Sanctions Act of 1996. This legislation took sanctions to a whole new level by imposing extra-territorial measures that infringed upon the sovereignty of other nations.

“Since then, AIPAC has been at the forefront of all sanctions legislation against Iran and have used their assets in the House and Senate to pressure three consecutive administrations into prosecuting their agenda. AIPAC’s own website has admitted that the implementation and enforcement of Iran Sanctions is their ‘chief legislative priority.’”

AIPAC continues to push the hard-line on Iran by including it in their recent campaign against Syria.

According to a September 5 article from Politico– 

“Officials say that some 250 Jewish leaders and AIPAC activists will storm the halls on Capitol Hill beginning next week to persuade lawmakers that Congress must adopt the resolution or risk emboldening Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear weapon. They are expected to lobby virtually every member of Congress, arguing that ‘barbarism’ by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated, and that failing to act would ‘send a message’ to Tehran that the U.S. won’t stand up to hostile countries’ efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction, according to a source with the group.”


“Holocaust” Propaganda Used to Push War on Syria


While some Jewish organizations and politicians make their case for a war on Syria based on illogical national security concerns, others have taken the war propaganda to absurd levels by invoking the ghost of Adolph Hitler and concocting fantastical “holocaust” analogies in an attempt to instill fear in Americans and guilt-trip them into supporting military action.

“Our people have been exterminated by the use of gas,” ADL director Abe Foxman wasquoted as saying in a recent Bloomberg article. “We cannot stand by without a reaction when we see gas being used to kill others.”

Similar language was used by 17 American Rabbis in a recent letter that urged Congress to act on Syria. “We write you as descendants of Holocaust survivors and refugees, whose ancestors were gassed to death in concentration camps,” read the letter sent on the eve of Rosh Hashanah.

“We write you as a people who have faced persecution for many centuries, and are glad to have found a safe refuge where we can thrive in the United States.”

Even Jewish American politicians have gotten in on the act.

“As a Jew, the concept of ‘Never again’ has to mean something,” said Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), a high profile Jewish lawmaker and chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, during a recent interview with CNN.

A more ludicrous statement was made by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry—whose family name is Kohn and is, by Jewish definition and Israel’s immigration laws, a Jew—when he testified before a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on September 3 and relied on fables and hyperbole to justify a military response to the Syrian government’s alleged use of chemical weapons.

“It was used by Adolf Hitler to gas millions of Jews; it was used by Saddam Hussein in order to gas [Iranians and his own people]; and now it has been used by Bashir Assad,” said Kerry. “Three people in all of history. And if the United States, knowing it and knowing that we’ve drawn a line that the world has drawn with us, is unwilling to stand up and confront that, it is an absolute certainty that gas will proliferate.”   

Historical Inaccuracies and Hypocrisy Dominate War Rhetoric against Syria

Reflecting from the pages of fictional history is a common propaganda tactic deployed by Jews and their puppets when making their case for the war-de-jure. Kerry, Wasserman-Schultz, the legion of American Rabbis and other Jewish leaders are no exception. But are their arguments valid?

For the past two decades, dozens of prominent revisionists featured in the pages of The Barnes Review have thoroughly debunked the “holocaust” legend. More recently, American Free Press’ own Victor Thorn dissected every element of this mythology in The Holocaust Hoax Exposed:  Debunking the 20th Centuries Greatest Fabrication.

“Despite decades of propaganda, the Jews that perished in these camps didn’t do so at the hands of some inhuman SS extermination machine,” writes Thorn in the final paragraph of his book. “Rather, they starved and died of diseases orchestrated by the handiwork of their own diabolical Zionist leaders that allowed Allied forces to bomb German supply lines. These elite Jews crafted their own ‘holocaust’ of approximately 100,000 Jews—their own people—at the end of WW II so that the facilitation of a new homeland would be guaranteed. The finger of blame for the blood of these dead Jews can only be pointed in one direction—at the Jews themselves. They were responsible . . . they were wholly responsible.”  

Hitler never used chemical weapons, neither in the battlefield nor against Jews held in re-location facilities. If only America, and its allies, could boast such a clean rap sheet—but it can’t.

Wesley Messamore, writing for, recently compiled a list of “10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn’t Want You to Talk About.”

Messamore begins his piece by stating: “Washington doesn’t merely lack the legal authority for a military intervention in Syria. It lacks the moral authority. We’re talking about a government with a history of using chemical weapons against innocent people far more prolific and deadly than the mere accusations Assad faces from a trigger-happy Western military-industrial complex, bent on stifling further investigation before striking.”

Here are the ten atrocities listed in the report:


  • The U.S. Military Dumped 20 Million Gallons of Chemicals on Vietnam from 1962 – 1971
  • Israel Attacked Palestinian Civilians with White Phosphorus in 2008 – 2009
  • Washington Attacked Iraqi Civilians with White Phosphorus in 2004
  • The CIA Helped Saddam Hussein Massacre Iranians and Kurds with Chemical Weapons in 1988
  • The Army Tested Chemicals on Residents of Poor, Black St. Louis Neighborhoods in The 1950s
  • Police Fired Tear Gas at Occupy Protesters in 2011
  • The FBI Attacked Men, Women, and Children With Tear Gas in Waco in 1993
  • The U.S. Military Littered Iraq with Toxic Depleted Uranium in 2003
  • The U.S. Military Killed Hundreds of Thousands of Japanese Civilians with Napalm from 1944 – 1945
  • The U.S. Government Dropped Nuclear Bombs on Two Japanese Cities in 1945…

War Strategy on Syria is a Jewish Invention

“The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon,” declared Rabbi Fischmann, member of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, during his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry on July 9, 1947.

In his Complete Diaries, Vol. II. p. 711, Theodore Herzl (1860-1904), the founder of Zionism, says that the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”

Syria has been on the Zionist chopping block for well over a hundred years. During the last thirty plus years, multiple strategies have been drawn up by Jewish tacticians in an attempt to claim Syria as their own.

Oded Yinon, once a senior advisor at the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, laid out the blueprints for his ambitious plan in a 1982 paper entitled, A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties, which identified Iraq and Syria as “Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front,” and called for breaking up both nations “into ethnically or religiously unique areas” and for the “dissolution of the military power of those states.”

Expanding on Yinon’s strategy, eminent Jewish Middle East historian and right-wing Zionist Bernard Lewis suggested that Islamic fundamentalists could serve as an effective tool to accelerate the balkanization process.

“Most of the states of the Middle East— Egypt is an obvious exception—are of recent and artificial construction and are vulnerable to such a process,” wrote Lewis in a 1992 article for Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) magazine Foreign Affairs, entitled Rethinking the Middle East. “If the central power is sufficiently weakened, there is no real civil society to hold the polity together, no real sense of common identity. . . . The state then disintegrates—as happened in Lebanon —into a chaos of squabbling, feuding, fighting sects, tribes, regions, and parties.”

More contemporary strategies drawn up by Zionists include the aforementioned A Clean Break document, prepared under the auspices of Israeli think the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, as well as Which Path to Persia?, a 2009 analysis paper produced by Israeli-American billionaire Haim Saban’s The Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institute.


Only Israel Wants War on Syria


People throughout the world are overwhelmingly opposed to a strike on Syria, including those who live in the U.S. government’s most reliable allied nations. A recent survey show that two-thirds of the French people are against U.S. involvement in Syria. And only nineteen percent of British citizens support military action while the vast majority is opposed even if it is proved beyond a doubt that President Bashar al-Assad’s government used chemical weapons on his own people.

In the United States, multiple polls show that most Americans do not want a war with Syria, and U.S. lawmakers are deeply divided on the issue. Even those Americans—who could once be relied on to back any Israeli orchestrated military campaign—are now wary of lending their support.

For decades, AIPAC and America’s evangelical “Christian Zionist” community have been virtually joined at the hip on issues related to U.S. foreign policies in the Middle East. However, in recent days, an overwhelming majority of evangelical leaders have shown an unwillingness to support AIPAC’s latest drive to attack Syria.

On September 3, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), which represents tens of millions of Christian Zionists from 45,000 churches and 40 denominations, conducted a survey among its membership to ask: “Should Congress authorize direct U.S. military intervention inSyria?” The result: sixty two-and-a-half percent said no, while only thirty seven-and-a-half percent said yes.

“I was surprised because I expected the answers would be the other way around,” wrote NAE president Leith Anderson in a statement to Religious News Service.

In contrast, a recent poll conducted by New Wave Research shows that most Israelis do want war with Syria. According to Israeli national Hebrew-language newspaper Israel Hayom, “Israel is perhaps the only Western country where there is widespread support for an American/European attack on Syria. While in the United States and Great Britain, some 90 percent of the publics are opposed to such an attack — in Israel, more than 66% of the Jewish Hebrew-speaking population supports an attack (only 17% opposes).”

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Syria is Just Another War for I$raHell

MKO threatens assassination of Iranian officials

By: Habilian
In an unprecedented move, the spokesperson of the terrorist Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO, also known as MEK and NCRI) threatened terrorist attacks against Iranian and Iraqi officials.

According to a report by Habilian Association, the comments came as the terrorist MKO group suffered a blow on September 1, when a group of Iraqi people and relatives of those who were killed at the hands of the MKO in 1991 attacked the notorious Camp Ashraf, killing some 50 members of the group, including top commanders.

Posted on the website of the grouplet late last week, the spokesperson of the terrorist MKO group threatened that Iranian officials will face the same fate martyrs Lajevardi, Sayyad Shirazi, Ayatollah Dastgheib, Madani, Ashrafi Isfahani, and Hasheminejad, all of them assassinated by the terrorist MKO Organization.

Seyed Asadollah Lajevardi and Sayyad Shirazi were assassinated by MKO members in late 1990s and Ayatollahs Dastgheib, Madani, Ashrafi Esfahani, and Hasheminejad were all victims of MKO’s suicide operations during the 1980s.

It appears that the MKO’s audacity to officially threatening the Iranian authorities is in most part due to the US supports for the terrorist group.


Posted in IranComments Off on MKO threatens assassination of Iranian officials

Greece: Neo-Nazis attack Communists with bats


ed note–remember as you read this that these ‘supporters’ could be anyone, including people working for the other side who are there to make GD look bad.

On the other hand however, given the fact that there are documented cases of GD members engaging in this kind of behavior in the past means that they have set themselves up for being framed in such a way, which is why for us here at TUT there is a huge question mark surrounding GD and what is really going on with them behind the scenes.


Is Greece on the brink of civil war due to the severe economic crisis, political tensions and increasing xenophobia? Thousands participated in rallies in Athens on Friday after members of the country’s communist party (KKE) were attacked by supporters of the Golden Dawn neo-Nazi party. The violent attacks, carried out by black-shirted supporters of the neo-Nazi party, left nine people in hospital with serious injuries.

According to Britain’s Guardian, about 50 men wielding crowbars and bats set upon leftists as they distributed posters in a working-class district of the capital late on Thursday.

A statement by KKE said: “The way in which they acted and the weapons employed… are evidence of the murderous nature of the attack. Among the Golden Dawners, some of whom had covered their faces or wore helmets or (party) shirts, were their leaders, well-known fascists and thugs.”

In last year’s general elections in Greece, the radical Golden Dawn party received 18 of the 300 parliament seats, after receiving more than 6% of the votes, and thus entered the Hellenic Parliament for the first time. The party did so while exploiting, like other small parties, the Greeks’ frustration of the larger parties, which were unable to stabilize the country’s economy.

The party’s pledges to “clear” Greece of foreigners captivated citizens that were afraid of the increase in crime due to the economic crisis. In certain neighborhoods in Athens, Golden Dawn party members were received with much affection due to their common good activities – food donation to needy families and accompanying of senior citizens to ATMs.

Dimitris Psarras, a writer who has chronicled Golden Dawn’s rise over almost four decades since the collapse of military rule, told the Guardian: “Their agenda, clearly, is to create a climate of civil war, a divide where people have to choose between leftists and rightists.”

Psarras argues the attack in the dock-side district of Perama – a Communist stronghold where Golden Dawn has made considerable inroads in recent years on the back of anger over austerity measures – was indicative of that strategy.

“It was very well organized and the most serious incident yet,” he told the Guardian. “They are no longer only targeting immigrants in the middle of the night. They are deliberately increasing tensions, expanding their agenda of hate, by going for leftists.”

The last civil war in Greece took place between rightists and leftists after World War II, and the Mediterranean country now fears the outbreak of another civil war, when it is mired in a sixth year of recession that has seen poverty and unemployment soar as it navigates its worst crisis in modern times.

The Guardian revealed that recent opinion polls have shown that no other party has managed to capitalize on the growing levels of desperation and despair as effectively as the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn.

The Guardian further reported that according to analysts, Thursday’s attack demonstrates Golden Dawn’s growing self-confidence and ability to spread its appeal. They point to the inroads the party is making into middle-class neighborhoods of Athens

Posted in GreeceComments Off on Greece: Neo-Nazis attack Communists with bats

Republicans, Independents Unite on Syria Opposition


General war weariness brings disillusioned independents in line with Obama opponents on foreign policy.


Latest poll shows little or no statistical difference in the responses of Republicans and independents on Syria questions. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)

This week’s United Technologies/National JournalCongressional Connection Poll, which found deep and broad resistance to proposed U.S. military action against the Syrian government, showed the extent to which Republicans and independents are now aligned in their opposition to U.S. foreign intervention under President Obama.

Fifty-five percent of Americans—given four options ranging from doing nothing to a full-scale military strike to help the rebels overthrow Bashar al-Assad’s government—would prefer the U.S. do nothing and stay out of the Syrian civil war. While a strong plurality of Democrats, 48 percent, chose this option, Republicans and independents saw virtually eye-to-eye, with 60 percent and 58 percent, respectively, saying they want the U.S. to do nothing.

Moreover, on each of the other five questions related to the proposed Syrian intervention in the poll, there was little or no statistical difference in the responses of Republicans and independents, while Democrats tended to be more supportive of the Obama administration’s position.

How did Republicans and independents come to occupy the same ground on certain aspects of U.S. foreign policy? It starts with a general sense of war weariness that has acutely affected independents—those Americans who tend to be most disillusioned with politics and government to begin with.

In a CNN/USA Today Gallup poll conducted in late February of 2003, just before the U.S. began a ground and air assault of Iraq, 59 percent of Americans favored going to war with Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein, while 37 percent were opposed. The percentage of independents who favored war (52 percent) was halfway between the percentages of Democrats (22 percent) and Republicans (82 percent) who favored the effort. Since Iraq, independents have soured on U.S. military commitments: They were less approving than Democrats or Republicans of military action in Libya, for example.

So how did Republican support sink to match those who don’t identify with a party? The Syria effort became associated with Obama. Over Labor Day weekend, as the administration began to make its case, support for strikes among Republicans (43 percent) outpaced both Democrats (42 percent) and independents (30 percent) in an ABC News/Washington Post pollA week later, GOP support collapsed to 24 percent, a tick lower than among independents (26 percent).

The latest poll, conducted Sept. 5-8 by Princeton Survey Research Associates International, surveyed 1,002 adults and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.

Get the latest news and analysis delivered to your inbox. Sign up for National Journal’s morning alert, Wake-Up Call, and afternoon newsletter, The Edge. Subscribe here.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Republicans, Independents Unite on Syria Opposition

Turkish prosecutors indict Syrian NATO Rat’s for seeking chemical weapons

Syrian couple mourning in front of bodies wrapped in shrouds ahead of funerals following what Syrian rebels claim to be a toxic gas attack by pro-government forces in eastern Ghouta, on the outskirts of Damascus on August 21, 2013.(AFP Photo / Shaam News Network )Syrian couple mourning in front of bodies wrapped in shrouds ahead of funerals following what Syrian rebels claim to be a toxic gas attack by pro-government forces in eastern Ghouta, on the outskirts of Damascus on August 21, 2013.(AFP Photo / Shaam News Network )

A court indictment by the Turkish prosecutors into the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian rebels has once again highlighted fears this week that sarin toxic gas was used by the opposition and not the Assad government.

The prosecutor in the Turkish city of Adana has issued a 132-page indictment, alleging that six men of the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front and Ahrar ash-Sham tried to seek out chemicals with the intent to produce the nerve agent, sarin gas, a number of Turkish publications reported.

The main suspect in the case, 35-year-old Syrian-national Hytham Qassap has been charged with “being a member of a terrorist organization” and “attempting to acquire weapons for a terrorist organization.” The other 5, all Turkish nationals are being charged with “attempting to acquire weapons for a terrorist organization.”

The indictment alleges that Qassap tried to setup a network in Turkey in order to obtain chemical materials for the al-Nusra Front and Ahrar al-Sham Brigades. Citing telephone calls made by the cell, the prosecution believes that the group ordered at least ten tons of chemicals, Al-Alam News Network reports.

The prosecution also dismissed claims that the suspects were unaware of their wrong doing. “The claim that the suspects didn’t know about the possibility of producing sarin nerve gas from the chemicals they tried to buy is not true which was established when they were testifying,” the document reads.

Meanwhile all six suspects have pleaded not guilty. “The suspects have pleaded not guilty saying that they had not been aware the materials they had tried to obtain could have been used to make sarin gas. Suspects have been consistently providing conflicting and incoherent facts on this matter,” the indictment said.

If convicted, Qassab faces a 25 year prison sentence, while his accomplices face 15 years prison terms.

The six men were a part of a group of 11 people arrested in their safe house in Adana on May 23, 2013. Their apprehension came about after surveillance by Turkish police who’d received a tip that Syrian jihadists were trying to acquire two government-regulated military-grade chemical substances. Five of the detained were released from custody after questioning, background checks and after lab tests proved that chemicals seized during the arrest were not sarin gas.


A woman mourning over a body wrapped in shrouds laid out in a line on the ground with other victims which Syrian rebels claim were killed in a toxic gas attack by pro-government forces in eastern Ghouta, on the outskirts of Damascus on August 21, 2013.(AFP Photo / Shaam News Network )A woman mourning over a body wrapped in shrouds laid out in a line on the ground with other victims which Syrian rebels claim were killed in a toxic gas attack by pro-government forces in eastern Ghouta, on the outskirts of Damascus on August 21, 2013.(AFP Photo / Shaam News Network )

The international community has long been ignoring worrying reports that the rebel fighters in Syria might be capable of carrying out a chemical attack. Russian President, Vladimir Putin also reiterated this week that while no one doubts that poison gas was indeed used in Syria, there is “every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons.”

Evidence that chemical weapons were used by the opposition was also highlighted by the two European hostages that were freed from Syrian rebel captivity last Sunday. In a phone conversation overheard by hostage Pierre Piccinin da Prata, he said it was clear the rebels used gas on civilians in an August 21 attack near Damascus.

“I don’t think that Bashar Al-Assad and the Syrian government are to blame for the chemical attack in Al-Ghouta,” Piccinin told RT. “It would have been absurd for the Syrian government to use chemical weapons.”

The Syrian government has always rejected any accusations of using chemical weapons. After one of the first alleged incidents in Aleppo in March, it was the government that called on UN to send in chemical experts. Another alleged chemical weapons use was reported in Homs in December 2012.

Russian experts flew out to the site of the attack in March to collect samples from the incident. On 9 July 2013, Moscow submitted the results of its inquiry into the use of chemical weapons at Aleppo to the United Nations. Russian scientists analyzing the 19 March 2013 attack found that it was most likely launched by opposition forces, and not the Syrian government.

“It was determined that on March 19 the rebels fired an unguided missile Bashair-3 at the town of Khan al-Assal, which has been under government control. The results of the analysis clearly show that the shell used in Khan al-Assal was not factory made and that it contained sarin,” UN envoy Vitaly Churkin has said.

The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria into the attack in March concluded that no evidence of the use of sarin by Syria’s government troops has so far been uncovered. The lead investigator, Carla Del Ponte, did hint that it was the rebels that most likely used the chemical weapons.

Smoke above buildings following what Syrian rebels claim to be a toxic gas attack by pro-government forces in eastern Ghouta, on the outskirts of Damascus on August 21, 2013.(AFP Photo / Shaam News Network )Smoke above buildings following what Syrian rebels claim to be a toxic gas attack by pro-government forces in eastern Ghouta, on the outskirts of Damascus on August 21, 2013.(AFP Photo / Shaam News Network )


“The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic wishes to clarify that it has not reached conclusive findings as to the use of chemical weapons in Syria by any parties to the conflict.  As a result, the Commission is not in a position to further comment on the allegations at this time,” the statement read.

Meanwhile, the UN chemical weapons inspection team has completed the report on the latest chemical attack in Syria on August 21 and will deliver it to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon over the weekend.

“I believe that the report will be an overwhelming report that chemical weapons (were) used, even though I cannot publicly say at this time before I receive this report,” Moon said.

Although the team was not authorized to draw any conclusions on who was the perpetrator of the attack, a number of US officials speaking to the media on condition of anonymity over the last couple of days indicated that the report would hint the Assad government was responsible.

Posted in Syria, TurkeyComments Off on Turkish prosecutors indict Syrian NATO Rat’s for seeking chemical weapons

Analysis: On Syria, Russia works to check US powers, restore place as pivotal Mideast player


(ITAR-TASS, Presidential Press Service, File/ Associated Press ) – FILE – In this Jan. 25, 2005, file photo Syrian President Bashar Assad, right, and Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, walk during their meeting in the Kremlin in Moscow during for a four-day visit amid Israeli allegations that his government sought to buy Russian missiles. Assad and his father before him have been Moscow’s foremost Arab allies for decades. Currently much of the weaponry Syria deploys against the rebels fighting to the Assad regime comes from Russia. Even as evidence mounts that his military launched the Aug. 21, 2013, chemical attack that the U.S. says killed more than 1,000 people, Russia insists that the rebels used the deadly chemicals.

By Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The U.S. deal with Russia to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons has pulled the Obama administration into deep waters: the Kremlin’s long-standing drive to put the brakes on American power and to restore Moscow to its place as a pivotal Mideast player.

If Syria, which relies on Russian patronage, signs on, then the deal temporarily would solve a big domestic political problem for President Barack Obama. Russian President Vladimir Putin would walk away with two immense prizes, at the least.

Army soldiers and a civilian look out into a flooded street caused by Tropical Storm Manuel in the city of Chilpancingo, Mexico, Sunday Sept. 15, 2013. In the southern Pacific Coast state of Guerrero, rains unleashed by Manuel resulted in the deaths of six people when their SUV lost control on a highway headed for the tourist resort of Acapulco. Another five people died in landslides in Guerrero and Puebla states, while the collapse of a fence killed another person in Acapulco. (AP Photo/Alejandrino Gonzalez)

Spain fashion week, storms batter New Mexico and Colorado, Miss America, righting the Costa Concordia and more.

The framework does not settle the larger issue, ending the civil war that has ravaged Syria for more than two years. Nor does it address Obama’s calls for Syrian President Bashar Assad’s departure and his replacement by democratic order in a country that has never known one.

For Obama, the agreement hammered out in Geneva would buttress his inclination to find answers through diplomacy rather than military means.

It could, for a time, distract Americans who had grown critical, or at least doubtful, about his foreign policy bona fides, given White House waffling and course changes on threatened airstrikes against Syria. That was Obama’s declared response to punish Assad for what the U.S. says was his use of chemical weapons in an attack last month, killing more than 1,400 people.

Putin, on the other hand, will have taken great strides in showing that Russia must play a critical role in the Middle East, something it surrendered with the collapse of the Soviet Union more than two decades ago.

What’s more, Putin has for the time being shored up Assad. Equally important to the Kremlin, Russian intervention will enhance Putin’s stature as a geopolitical counterbalance to American power.

The deal calls for unspecified U.N. penalties against Syria should Assad fail to comply, but stops short of authorizing a military strike. That would leave Obama in a position of ignoring the world body’s directive should he revert to airstrikes.

“It was a brilliant tactical move” for Russia, said Jonathan Adelman, professor at the University of Denver Korbel School of International Studies.

“It makes them the savior of Syria, and the savior of their closest ally. It kind of highlighted the message that the Americans are clearly, totally unreliable,” he said.

To R. Nicholas Burns, professor of international relations at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, the Russian gambit is part of a long-term strategy.

“One of Putin’s abiding objectives for the last decade has been to limit the power and maneuverability of the United States,” said Burns, a former ambassador to NATO and Greece, and a former undersecretary of state for political affairs.

“They don’t want to live in a world where the United States is dominant. If there are opportunities to limit, clip the power of the United States, to harry and harass the United States, they will do it,” said Burns, who served in both Republican and Democratic administration.

Assad and his father before him have been Moscow’s foremost Arab allies for decades. Much of the weaponry Syria deploys against the rebels fighting to overthrow his government comes from Russia.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Analysis: On Syria, Russia works to check US powers, restore place as pivotal Mideast player


The Victory Hour Sept 14, 2013

by crescentandcross

The Victory Hour Russian Front

In a classic move of check-mate, chess  master Vladimir Putin averts war and exposes Israel and America to world wide approbation and buys the rebellion much needed time.

Time to continue the build up of forces and the rallying of whole nations in this, the final countdown of the world against The Beast.

Max and Alexandr show us the Big Board on world news and an interesting talk on the life and times of Joseph Stalin.


Download Here


Posted in Interview, RussiaComments Off on The Victory Hour: VLADIMIR PUTIN AVERTS WAR

Shoah’s pages


September 2013
« Aug   Oct »