Archive | October 25th, 2014

Proto-Nazism on Exhibition: Met Protest Over “Klinghoffer”

NOVANEWS

by NORMAN POLLACK

Israel’s policies and actions toward the Palestinians has been a principal incitement of international terrorism. To say that, does not excuse the latter, but does help to explain it. Had Israel chosen a different path from its founding (Arno Mayer’s Ploughshares into Swords records in detail the events of 1945-48 demonstrating the Zionist paradigm of ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Arab population, with few dissenting voices, such as Martin Buber and Judah Magnes), one can speculate that the historical outcome would have been a different spirit and structure of the Middle East, far more promoting of Jewish security certainly than in the present. The irony of history: authoritarianism feeds upon itself, force against force, hatred fully reciprocated. The original fault lies with a totalitarian Zionism which refused to credit the humanity of those it sought to displace, rather than live peacefully among—hubris hiding behind the fig leaf of providing a refuge for the victims of the Holocaust.

The Holocaust was the systematic execution voicing World Evil, mercilessly planned and carried out on a hitherto unknown scale of human depravity. Survivors and descendants would bear the scars. Yet rather than engender compassion embracing the whole of humanity and life itself, the reaction was that of vengeance, of seeking power, however ruthless the consequences, as a self-protective shield with the inscription, “Never again”. At first, that seemed natural, and even commanded world respect following World War II. But the psychology of suffering was so intense as though breaking into another realm, what I am calling the introjection of the mentality of the Nazi executioner, perhaps not even realizing it.

How otherwise view the history of modern Israel with respect to its own militarism, cult of superiority, reactionary stance in world politics, discouragement of internal dissent, and, obviously, treatment of the Palestinians, an Occupation not unlike what Europe experienced decades earlier? Humiliation, check-points, bulldozers, terrorist-like arrests in the middle of the night, the ever-present blockade, all-in-all a studied effort at imposing degradation on a people, the better (presumably) to enforce social control.

From IDF shootings of adolescents to the scene in New York, Monday, October 20, at the Metropolitan Opera is a straight-line projection, nominally, to protest the performance of John Adams’s “Klinghoffer,” but far more, having nothing to do with the opera, rising to the occasion of absolutist self-justification of all Israel has done and everything it stands for. For the most part, world Jewry supports that record and finds only goodness in Israel, making Judaism and Israel indissoluble in meaning and moral value. There I disagree strongly. Israel is not Judaism, and, indeed, is fast becoming a curse on Judaism, by its wanton killings, arrogance, willingness to cause universal calamity to satisfy its policies. Bomb Iran. Bomb Assad. Bomb, bomb, bomb, power stations, water treatment plants, schools, shelters. Invincibility, the national disease. And AIPAC, hosannas to the heavens—American Jewry fearful of its own shadow, not from external forces, but congregational unanimity lest one be declared the Self-Hating Jew.

***

Michael Cooper’s NYT article, “Protests Greet Met Opera’s Premiere of “Klinghoffer,’” (Oct. 21), provides some sense of the scene, not the usual Met opening—tuxedos and gowns, but there the resemblance ends: “[At the opening] men and women in evening attire walked through a maze of police barricades, while protesters shouted ‘Shame!’ and ‘Terror is not art!” One demonstrator held aloft a white handkerchief splattered with red. Others, in wheelchairs [Klinghoffer, the passenger on a cruise ship hijacked by Palestine Liberation Front terrorists, confined to wheelchair and murdered] set up for the occasion, lined Columbus Avenue.” Let’s stop a moment. Demonstration: as one who has participated in many over the years, and even if I hadn’t, I would defend its right to exist and occurrence to the hilt. Objective: one doesn’t have to agree with the content and purpose of every exercise of free speech, here, a falsification of the composer’s position AND itself an attack on the civil liberties of others, i.e., closing down an opera as well as, in principle, censoring artistic (and all other) expression. Free speech was taking a beating last night (Oct. 20) in the name of free speech. I cannot let the moment pass, and be steamrolled over by what amounts to a hidden or implied argument on behalf of Israel policy and conduct.

Of course, free speech can have an ugly side: Cooper reports that “after months of escalating protest, including threats of opera officials and online harassment of the cast,” the opera went on “only a few minutes late.” Inside the hall, quite uneventful: “By the time [the] opera ended, with a roar of cheers when Mr. Adams took the stage, there had been two major disruptions: Before the intermission, a man shouted ‘The murder of Klinghoffer will never be forgiven’ several times before being escorted out, and during the second half, just after the character of Leon Klinghoffer was murdered, a woman cried out a vulgarity and left, accompanied by ushers.”

The opera, he writes, “considered a masterpiece by some critics, has long aroused passions,” given its subject matter, the murder of a helpless Jewish passenger, but in addition, he continues, “the 1991 opera arrived at the Met at a moment when many Jews are anguished by anti-Semitic episodes in Europe and reactions to the conflict this summer in Gaza. [See my Comment below.] It also ignited what sounded at times like a revival of the culture wars of the 1990s, in which works of art became fodder for intense political debate.”

In other words, the opera was not allowed to stand on its own; instead, Adams was charged with giving the terrorists a podium. Rudy Giuliani was among the protesters, but, perhaps to his credit, unlike most others, he wanted to register disapproval (calling the work “a distorted view of history”) but not cancel the performance, while Bill de Blasio “defended the Met’s right to perform” the opera, and pointed out how Giuliani, as mayor, in 1999 wanted to stop funding the Brooklyn Museum of Art because of a show he found offensive. De Blasio: “I think the American way is to respect freedom of speech. Simple as that.” There was tight security, uniformed police, “all bags checked,” and at the final dress rehearsal the previous Friday, Peter Gelb, the general manager of the Met, reassured the “performers and musicians… about enhanced security measures.”

The rally’s master of ceremonies (yes, quite organized), Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, said he did not expect the protesters “to react inappropriately,” yet his own remarks were hardly less than accusatory: “But you can’t be responsible when the Metropolitan Opera advocates terrorism and incites violence—you can’t know what will happen.” Incitement by whom? The onus is placed on Gelb: “And anything that happens, that has besmirched this Metropolitan Opera, and besmirched Lincoln Center, is to be laid at the foot of Peter Gelb.” Not to be outdone, Cooper quotes a pediatric nurse who “believed the opera made an excuse for terrorism”—in her words, “By putting this on a stage in the middle of Manhattan, the message is, ‘Go out, murder someone, be a terrorist and we’ll write a play about you.’” The reporter concludes, “The protests were initially led by several smaller Jewish groups and conservative religious organizations. The larger Anti-Defamation League brokered a compromise with the Met… in which plans to show the opera to a wider audience in movie theaters were dropped, but the New York production would otherwise go on. Leaders in the more liberal Reform Judaism movement have condemned the opera, but did not call for its cancellation.”

My New York Times Comment on the article, same date, follows:

Wouldst the protesters show as much concern for the Gazans, men, women, children, murdered by Israel in the bombing and shelling of a densely populated area. Wouldst they show as much concern over the Israeli hooligans who broke up peace demonstrations in Tel Aviv or the Israelis of Siderot gathered on a hillside, sofas and munchies at hand, cheering the explosions on the Gaza side (all of which had been reported in The Times).

Israel’s conduct is creating anti-Semitism in Europe, not the other way around. Israel has been a dead weight on World Jewry by its flagrant violation of the Torah, which commands us (yes, I am proudly Jewish, not, as vipers would have it, a self-hating Jew because I criticize Israel) to respect the stranger and reach out to the poor.

What we saw in New York was proto-Nazism in microcosm–nothing will stop this ferocious campaign of swinging out promiscuously against all who do not follow the strict party line. It had nothing to do with Mr. Klinghoffer’s death, but merely a striking out of supreme self-justification of Israeli policy, no matter what–the “what” being the commission of war crimes, and the corrosion of Judaism itself.

God will get a hand on the situation someday, and punish those who hide behind Adonei to kill and maim for reasons of a vulgarized “Chosen People” doctrine as license to be transmogrified from oppressed to oppressor. The psychodynamics for what has happened is dark, introjection of the mindset of the persecutors.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Proto-Nazism on Exhibition: Met Protest Over “Klinghoffer”

Canada and the War on Terror: The Ottawa Shootings, What Really Happened?

NOVANEWS
Global Research
Ottawa Lockdown (22 Oct 2014 - TD Photo)

Prime Minister Steven Harper and the Canadian federal government are using the shooting rampage on Parliament Hill as a justification for imposing surveillance and detainment measures that they were already implementing and going forward with.

On October 22, 2014 a solitary gunman named Michael Zehaf-Bibeau (originally Michael Joseph Hall) from the city of Laval, Quebec went on a shooting spree in downtown Ottawa, the capital of Canada.

Firstly, it was reported that there were shootings in the Rideau Centre which from the northern side of the Mackenzie King Bridge faces National Defence Headquarters (NDHQ), the nerve of Canada’s Department of National Defence (DND). This proved to be false or wrong. The gunman had killed a reservist guard in front of the National War Memorial and then made his way northward to Parliament Hill.

Secondly, it was reported that there were multiple gunmen. As a result all government employees were not allowed to enter or leave their respective buildings throughout the interprovincial National Capital Region, which includes the city of Gatineau. Although the police did the right thing in taking precautions to make sure that there were no other gunmen and declined to give explanations, the public was led to believe that there were multiple shooters. This justified the lockdown and suspension of mobility that took place for hours.

A lot of important questions also remain unanswered. NBC News reported on October 8, 2014 that US intelligence officials told it «that Canadian authorities have heard would-be terrorists discussing potential ISIS-inspired ‘knife and gun’ attacks» inside Canada. Canadian officials, however, dismissed the report. Did US intelligence know something that its Canadian counterparts did not know? Why the contradictions?

Another important question is the following: how could an armed gunman that had already started a rampage make his way into the Centre Bloc of the Canadian Parliament unchallenged? Anyone that has been to Parliament Hill knows that there is a relatively large armed presence on the whole area and, specifically, at the entranceway and doors which is comprised of Canada’s national police force (the Royal Canadian Mounted Police), the local municipal police (the Ottawa Police Services), and two special federal forces (the House of Commons Security Services and Senate Security).

Framing: Media Discourse and Government Policy Links

Also, if he was indeed in touch with terrorist groups, how was he communicating with them?

Complicating the picture is the case of Martin Couture-Rouleau. Couture-Rouleau is a French-Canadian who became a Muslim in 2013. He deliberately hit two Canadian soldiers with his car in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Quebec on October 20, 2014. One of the soldiers would later die.

Couture-Rouleau would be chased by the police and then gunned down after his hit-and-run attack. Although the fatal hit-and-run murder in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu is a criminal act, it has been presented as terrorism and linked to Canada’s involvement in the fighting in the Middle East.

The two attacks respectively in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Ottawa have no connection whatsoever, but have been portrayed as part of some coordinated attack plan. The hit-and-run attacks have been added to the narrative of what happened on October 22 to construct the image of an all-out battle. This is part of what sociologists call a moral panic.

What exactly motivated the gunman in Ottawa? It appears that Michael Zehaf-Bibeau was not part of some intricate plot against Canada by the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). He had a criminal record and appeared to be psychologically deteriorating from increasing narcotics usage. He was troubled by hallucinations and heavy drugs, and became a Muslim relatively recently. According to information coming from people who knew him, it appears that he was upset with «the government» for not leaving him alone. This anger could be tied to the social workers and parole officers in his life and a suffocating feeling of being caught in a downward spiral.

Michael Zehaf-Bibeau had been staying at the Ottawa Mission, a homeless shelter, between two weeks and a month. Before he went on his rampage, he told other people at the homeless shelter to pray because the world was coming to an end. In this context, it is also important to ask: how a psychologically troubled man staying at the Ottawa Mission homeless shelter could get a weapon?

Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, however, has been portrayed to varying degrees as an ISIL member, which is being used to support the narrative that Canadians are under immediate threat from the ISIL by societal actors that sociologists call «moral entrepreneurs». The goals of moral entrepreneurs is to change societal norms, values, laws, and regulations. In this case the moral entrepreneurs want to sell a security agenda.

Although the gunman that attacked Parliament Hill was a French-Canadian (with the last name of his Arab-Canadian father -who had adopted him- and his French-Canadian mother’s maiden name) that spent most of his life as a Roman Catholic  (starting off as a devout Christian and then falling out of practice over the years), he has been portrayed or framed differently. From the start there was a tacit drive to give him an Arab and Muslim persona. Even when his identity was discovered, his Arab-Canadian father who had adopted him was portrayed as his biological father. The adoption of his father’s Arabic last name was tacitly presented as a marker of his Muslim identity, even though he was a Christian when he adopted the Arabic last name alongside his mother’s maiden name for legal reasons.

Very telling was how the media initially described Zehaf-Bibeau. He was referred to as a «Canadian-born man.» This is very deceptive language and discourse that needs to be critically analyzed. When someone is called «Canadian-born» it means that they are not really Canadian, but are merely born in Canada. Referring to a Canadian citizen in these terms conceptually strips them of their Canadian identity and otherizes them as a foreigner that does not belong to the collective.

The Media Reaction

Many Canadians are proud of their media’s reaction and have contrasted it to the sensationalism of US media. Although the media in Canada was much calmer than how the US media would have reacted under similar circumstances if the same incident took place in the United States, it was still emotionally charging the atmosphere with a sense of siege on Ottawa. Headlines and news broadcasts included titles like «Ottawa under attack.» Ottawans were liberally afraid that the ISIL was attacking Canada’s shores.

Speculation about a Middle East connection kept being raised throughout the day. By the time that Prime Minister Harper spoke in the evening, it was clear that he wanted to link the events in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Ottawa to the Middle East and the terrorism panic to justify his national  security agenda. When Harper said that Canada would not be intimidated, it was hollow posturing against an enemy being constructed in the imagination of Canadians.

The media coverage, the massive lockdown in Ottawa’s downtown core, and the national measures taken by the federal government created an atmosphere of panic in Ottawa and across Canada. Under this type of atmosphere, people can act unpredictability or abnormally and they are willing to make concessions to the government that they would not normally agree with making. In other words, when societies are gripped by fear many of their members are willing to forfeit their civil liberties and let them be stripped by the authorities.

The New Normal and the Striping of Civil Liberties

When the Rideau Centre was stormed by three armed robbers in 2003 and half the local police force’s fleet was sent after two of them who had  escaped, the same panic did not exist nor did the media give it as much urgency or attention. Arguably the danger to safety was much greater then, even though an important national institution was not being attacked.

Legally speaking, Martin Couture-Rouleau and Michael Zehaf-Bibeau are murderers. Instead of treating them as criminals, the politicized and psychologically-charged terms of «terrorism» and «terrorist» are being applied. All the laws to deal with these criminals are in place in Canada, but new legislation is instead being made that also has the potential to be used against legitimate dissenters who oppose government policy.

Moreover, the police are being militarized under the new security paradigm of fighting terrorism. The day after the attack on Parliament Hill, on October 23, the severity of the police reaction to a homeless man crossing a yellow police line is testimony to the change in security habitus and tensions among the police in Ottawa. The measures that the Harper Government wants to normalize also include control and censorship over the internet, the unconstitutional and illegal act of taking citizenship away, and removing the mobility rights granted by the Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms. The last measure has already begun with the confiscation of passports.

All Canadians have the right to leave and enter Canada freely, unless they have committed a crime. The government wants to have the legal authority to confiscate passports on mere suspicion without evidence. In the case of Martin Couture-Rouleau, he was detained and had his passport taken away when he wanted to go to Turkey in June or July 2014. The police could not arrest him and had to let him go, because of his views. «We could not arrest someone for having radical thoughts. It’s not a crime in Canada,» RCMP Superintendent Martine Fontaine explained in an October 21, 2014 press conference.

The position of the RCMP says a lot about where the Harper Government wants to go with its new security paradigm. It wants the ability to arrest people for their views.

Revoking Citizenships?

Even more dangerous is the flirtation with the idea of revoking citizenship. Already unconstitutional precedents are being set for removing it among the so-called Western coalition of countries that consistently pay lip service to democracy and then stand shoulder to shoulder with dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordan, and Qatar. For example, the British Parliament took steps to remove British-born Asma Al-Assad’s British citizenship in 2012 simply on the account of the fact that she was Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s wife.

The Canadian legal system does not treat everyone equally and all people are not equal in the court system. Non-citizens are disadvantaged compared to Canadian citizens. In this context, the threat of stripping citizenship away is being viewed instrumentally as a way of circumventing the domestic laws and rights protecting citizens. Without these rights the government can indefinitely detain someone without charge, put them on trial in special security courts where they will not even be told what the evidence against them is, and be prevented from accessing a lawyer. This has been the case of some non-citizens living inside Canada that have been held on security certificates for years.

The idea of taking citizenship away is also a political issue being used to politically cater to segments of different societies in various countries that have xenophobic views and dislike certain strata in their societies for various reasons.

Ignoring the Roots of the Problem

There is an old saying that society gets all the criminals it deserves. What is meant by this is that many criminals arise out of a structural problem in society.

It is no coincidence that Michael Zehaf-Bibeau once asked to be detained to fight his cocaine and crack addiction. Both attackers in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Ottawa were drug users and had psychological problems that needed to be helped. In the case of the gunman in Ottawa, he tried reaching out for help and felt a toxic feeling of hopelessness and not belonging.

Instead of looking overseas or blaming outside forces, Canada needs to look inside. The roots of the problem include the declining social services of Canada that have progressively faced government cutbacks and austerity measures. By blaming the ISIL and the internet the government is also refusing to acknowledge this failure and the marginalization of many members of Canadian society that are not getting the help they need.

The Slippery Slope and the Harper Government’s Dirty Hands

There is a call for Canadians to be vigilant against an inflated terrorist threat from the ISIL. This is why Prime Minister Steven Harper and his government are doing their best to portray the events in Canada as an extension of the front in the Middle East. Redefining criminals as terrorists is helping reinforce this perception. Canadians and the citizens of other countries, however, should be vigilant over their rights and freedoms that took centuries of struggle to obtain.

Changing the criterion for the granting of citizenship is a whole different topic, but its removal is a dangerous and slippery slope. Although the claims are that these type of measures are for the greater good or public safety, the historic record has shown that the suspension of civil liberties has been used for ulterior motives.

As a final note, the same people inflating fears of terrorism in Canada have also supported it overseas. It should never be forgotten that Prime Minister Steven Harper and his cabinet supported the «terrorists» they now claim to oppose. The Harper Government tacitly encouraged Canadians to go fight in places like Libya and Syria for the sake of assisting Washington’s foreign policy of regime change. Canada even armed the militants linked to Al-Qaeda in Libya with drones and weapons in 2011 and allowed private security firms (mercenaries) to assist them. This should not be overlooked when people question how such a state of affairs has arisen.

ADDENDUM 

Important details have emerged that strengthen the case against the Harper Government as intellectually dishonest opportunists.

(1) The Toronto Star originally reported on October 20, 2014 that multiple witnesses confirmed that Martin Couture-Rouleau’s hands were in the air in surrender when he was shot. Here is a passage from the article:

«Witnesses who spoke with the TVA network Monday afternoon said they saw a man emerge from the flipped vehicle that was lying in a ditch on the side of the road. The man had his hands in the air and was walking toward police when at least one officer opened fire on the suspect. The witnesses said they heard up to seven gunshots.»

Later the article would redact this and be re-edited.

(2) A Canadian investigative journalism webpage (FreeThePressCanada.org), noticed that before the scene was secured in Ottawa at 10:54 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) that the US news network CBS reported the following:

«The gunmen has been identified by U.S. officials to CBS News as Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, a Canadian national born in 1982.»

This was many hours before Canadians were even told the gunman’s identity or that he was alone. The CBS article would even be edited to remove Zehaf-Bibeau’s name or any mention that the US government was aware of it. Although security can be cited for this, it can also be looked at politically as part of a means of keeping the public in suspense and allowing a state of shock to reverberate across Canada so that the Harper Government can justify its foreign policy and security initiatives.

Posted in CanadaComments Off on Canada and the War on Terror: The Ottawa Shootings, What Really Happened?

Why Obama Rejected Peace With Iran

NOVANEWS
Global Research
usa-iran 2

How did Obama manage to botch U.S. foreign policy so stunningly? The promising speeches he gave in 2008 earned him the Nobel Peace Prize. But his inspiring words have since been buried in the rubble of Libya, Palestine, Iraq, and Syria. The region that once viewed Obama as a peace messiah now rejects him as a warmonger. And with every new foreign policy zigzag Obama only finds fresh “threats” while never managing to find the path to peace.

Obama would like peace in theory, but doing so requires he shake up his Middle East alliances. The U.S. stands pigeonholed in tightly-wound alliances with the most hated regimes in the world, sandwiched between the global pariah Israel and the brutal totalitarian dictatorship of Saudi Arabia. The other important U.S. ally is war-hungry expansionist Turkey, while the smaller U.S. allies are the remaining Gulf state monarchy dictatorships.

Allies like these make peace impossible. Obama recognizes that these friends restrict the ability of the U.S. to retain regional credibility. Consequently, there has been much speculation about a massive shift in U.S. alliances that hinges on peace with Iran, possibly supplemented by strengthening the alliance with Iraqi Kurds.

Americans and Iranians would celebrate a peace between nations, but this scenario now seems off the table. After “talking” peace with Iran for the first time in decades, Obama chose the warpath yet again.

This decision was finalized recently when the “ISIS deal” was struck between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, again cementing this ugly alliance. In exchange for Saudi Arabia attacking ISIS, the U.S. would commit to war against the Syrian government, which the Saudis want toppled to undermine their rival Iran. The Syrian rebels that Saudi Arabia agreed to train — with $500 million from U.S. taxpayers — will be used against the Syrian government, not to fight ISIS. The U.S. allies in the region understand the war against the Syrian government as a first step to war against Iran.  Even if a nuclear deal is struck between the U.S. and Iran the path to war will have been set.

Economics is a key reason that U.S. allies want Iran destroyed. Iran stands as a competitor for markets and investment throughout the region, and the destruction of Syria and Iran would open up new markets for the vulture-like U.S. allies. The economic oil war between Saudi Arabia and Iran has recently heated up, with Saudi Arabia selling oil at extra low prices to put political pressure on Iran. This, coupled with the ongoing economic war that Obama is waging, has the potential to weaken Iran via internal chaos, softening it up to possible invasion if the Syrian government falls.

Iran’s military is another reason the U.S. wants regime change. There are U.S. military bases scattered around the Middle East, though none in Iran, which has a powerful regional military force that patrols the strategic Strait of Hormuz, jointly controlled by Iran and Oman. It’s intolerable for the U.S. and Saudi Arabia that one fifth of the world’s oil production must pass through this Iranian controlled area.

Iran’s regional power is bolstered by its political and religious connections throughout the Middle East. Not only does Shia Muslim Iran exert automatic authority over Shia majority Iraq, but also over Shia Hezbollah and Shia-led Syria. This region-wide dynamic is often referred to as the “Shia Crescent.” There also exist sizable oppressed Shia populations in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Yemen, and Turkey that act as intrinsic political thorns in the sides of these Sunni sectarian governments, giving Iran a powerful political base in each case.

For example, when Saudi Arabia recently announced a death sentence for a popular Shia cleric, Iran responded that there would be consequences if the sentence were carried out, thus re-enforcing Iran’s self-portrayed position as “defender of the Shia.”

In Yemen there already exists a strong Shia insurgency against the pro-U.S. Sunni government that is using al-Qaeda-linked fighters against the Shia; the results of the conflict will either empower Iran or weaken it.

These regional religious tensions have been exponentially deepened by the U.S.-led coalition against the Syrian government, which has relied on systematic Sunni Islamic sectarianism to attract jihadist fighters and a flood of Sunni Gulf state donations.

The Sunni fundamentalism in Syria — loosely based on the Saudi fundamentalist version of Islam — views Shia Muslims as heretics worthy of death. The executions of Shia in Syria have reverberated throughout the Middle East, acting as an implicit threat to Shia Iran while increasing tensions in the Shia populations of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and beyond. The regional Shia backlash against the Sunni fundamentalists have strengthened Iran’s regional influence, one likely reason why Obama made the peace-killing deal with Saudi Arabia against ISIS and the Syrian government.

Saudi Arabia and Israel are adamant that the U.S. make no peace with Iran. Both sent strong messages after Obama’s 2013 last minute decision not to bomb the Syrian government, and his brief flirtation with Iran.  Saudi Arabia went as far as refusing a seat on the UN Security Council.  Israel protested the decision too, after it had lobbied heavily in the U.S. Congress through AIPAC to ensure the bombing took place.

The Kurdish Question

Turkey has long assisted the U.S. in attempting to topple the Syrian government, and has recently been insisting on a U.S. enforced “no-fly zone” in northern Syria, which would be directed against the Syrian government, since ISIS has no air force. Turkey has no good intentions in Syria, and has long wanted to grab easy oil-rich land for itself; which happens to be where the Kurdish population in Syria resides.

The call to enforce a no-fly zone to “protect the Kurds” on Turkey’s border, if achieved, will be similar to the no-fly zone in Libya — to create a “humanitarian corridor” — that was used instead to create a massive U.S.-led bombing campaign for regime change.

The Kurdish people face the same situation they’ve faced for hundreds of years: other nations have used the Kurds for their own self-interest. The Kurdish people want and deserve their own independent nation state, but they’ve been betrayed countless times in the past and the situation now seems no different. Promises are made and arms given to the “good” pro-U.S. Iraqi Kurds, while across the border in Turkey another faction of Kurds are labeled terrorists and repressed by the government.

Recently, the Kurdish Syrian town on the border of Turkey was invaded by ISIS and militarily defended by the “bad Kurds” of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) an affiliate of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) who are based in Turkey. The Turkish military watched across the border as ISIS relentlessly attacked Kobani, while the Turks used military force to prevent Turkish Kurds from crossing the border into Syria to help defend the Kurdish city.

This reinforced perceptions that ISIS was, in part, a Turkish creation, since Turkey’s border has long been an uncontested point of entry for foreign jihadists to enter Syria. Turkey defended its actions by essentially equating the Kurdish PYD and PKK with ISIS, dismissing all of them as “terrorists.” In Turkey, Kurdish protests erupted against the government’s actions and inactions in Kobani, leaving 40 dead. Protests also occurred in other Kurdish regions including Iran.

Turkey ultimately proved that it fears the Kurds more than ISIS, and further proved that negotiations with its domestic Kurdish population will never result in an independent Kurdistan on any inch of Turkish territory.  Turkey will likewise be violently opposed to any creation of an independent Kurdish state in Iraq or Syria, since it would empower the Turkish Kurds while preventing Turkey from grabbing the oil-rich regions for itself.

This dynamic acts as an impossible barrier for the Obama administration to “re-balance” its Middle East alliances by using the Kurds. No nation with a sizable Kurdish population — Iran, Turkey, Iraq, Syria — will buy in to a possible U.S. policy of Kurdish statehood, since they would lose the oil-rich territory that the Kurds live on.

Not only would the U.S. lose regional allies by advocating Kurdish independence, but if such a state were to emerge, it would be a weak nation, since the Kurds are already divided into various factions, and thus not strong enough for the U.S. to rely on to achieve regional objectives.

Consequently, Obama feels compelled to continue down the same war-torn path as his predecessors. But Obama’s perspective is colored by his assumption that the United States must remain the regional power in an area thousands of miles from its border, and that U.S. corporations should dominate the oil, banking, weapons selling, and other markets in the region.

The U.S. is long past the point where it can claim that its Middle East goals are “peace, stability, and democracy,” especially after invading and destroying Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and now the dirty war against Syria.  The oil, minerals, and other wealth that attracts the U.S. corporations that steer U.S. foreign policy prevent any real lasting peace to be achieved. The logic of corporate America is to crush the competitor by any means necessary.

Peace with Iran and Syria could be achieved if Obama told the world the truth about the above dynamics in the region, and treated Iran and Syria with the respect that an independent nation deserves, while working to curb the power of Israel and Saudi Arabia, who both depend on U.S. financial, military, and political support.

But instead Obama has dug in his heels and re-enforced alliances that demand the continuation of the Syrian war, and after that Iran. A war-shredded region remains on the bloody path to a potentially even wider war, while the billions of U.S. tax dollars funding this genocide will remain unusable for domestic projects like job creation and climate change reduction and preparedness. During this election season both Democrats and Republicans agree on continuing Middle East war.

Posted in USA, IranComments Off on Why Obama Rejected Peace With Iran

Washington Is Defaming Putin: America’s “Strategic Target” is the Russian President

NOVANEWS
Global Research
obama-putin-better

October 24 at the Valdai International Discussion Club meeting in Sochi, Russia’s President Putin correctly and justifiably denounced Washington for destabilizing the world in order to serve its own narrow and selfish interest and the interests of the private interest groups that control Washington at the expense of the rest of the world.  It is about time a world leader denounced the thuggish neocon regime in Washington. Putin described Washington’s double standards with the Roman phrase: “What is allowed for God [the US] is not allowed for cattle [the rest of the world].”

RT reports on Putin’s address here: http://rt.com/news/198924-putin-valdai-speech-president/

RIA Novotsi reports here:  http://en.ria.ru/politics/20141024/194537272/Putin-Global-Security-System-Seriously-Weakened-Deformed.html

Curiously, the Russian media has not, at this time of writing, produced an English translation of Putin’s full remarks.  Perhaps the Russian media do not realize the importance of Putin’s words. Too much of the Russian media is owned by foreign interests who use the access to Russian readers to attack and discredit the Russian government.  It is amazing that the Russian government allows Washington’s propaganda within its own ranks. Perhaps Moscow accepts Washington’s propaganda among Russians in order to protect the broadcasts in the US of RT, RIA, and Voice of Russia. But the balance is uneven. The Russian broadcasts in the West report otherwise unreported news; they do not defame America.

See also:

Putin: world leaders blackmailed:  http://en.ria.ru/world/20141024/194542305/Putin-Says-Reports-Show-World-Leaders-Could-Be-Blackmailed-With.html

Putin: US escalates worldwide conflict: http://en.ria.ru/world/20141024/194540658/Putin-US-Dictatorship-Global-Interference-Lead-to-Escalation-of.html

German MP” sanctions without proof: http://en.ria.ru/interview/20141014/194062719/German-MP-Germany-Has-No-Evidence-of-Who-Shot-Down-MH17.html

I did not see any reporting of Putin’s address in the US print and TV media. Clearly in the US there is an absence of public discussion of US foreign policy and foreign reaction to it. A country in which propaganda and silence rule out awareness and public discussion is not a democracy regardless of what it calls itself.

Washington long ago learned the dark art of silencing truth with defamation. Washington used defamation to overthrow Iran’s elected leader, Mossadegh in 1953, to overthrow Congo’s prime minister Patrice Lumumba in 1960, to overthrow Guatemala’s President Arbenz in 1954, to overthrow Venezuela’s President Hugo Chevez in 2002, a coup that was cancelled by the Venezuelan people and military who threw out Washington’s stooge replacement and reinstalled Chavez, to overthrow Ukraine’s elected President Yanukovych in 2013, to overthrow Honduras President Manuel Zelaya in 2009 , to overthrow  in 2013 Mohamed Morsi, president of the first democratically elected government in Egypt’s history, to overthrow Gaddafi in Libya, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, in ongoing efforts to overthrow Assad in Syria and the government of Iran, and in failed attempts to overthrow Indonesia’s Sukarno, Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, and Castro in Cuba.

Today Washington’s target is Vladimir Putin. This is the height of folly and hubris. Putin’s public support far exceeds that of any American president in history.  Currently, the level of public support for the Obama regime and the US Congress is far too low to be compatible with a functioning democracy.  If the US is actually a democracy, it is the most dysfunctional democracy in world history.  Practically no one, except the powerful private interest groups who own Washington, supports the US government. Everyone else despises Washington.

As the result of 13 years of murderous destruction of life and property in the Middle East and Africa, a dysfunctional and collapsing US economy, and a display of unrivaled arrogance, Washington has destroyed America’s soft power.  Abroad only the deluded few and those paid by US-financed NGOs still have a good opinion of the United States.

In all world polls, the US ranks as the greatest threat to world peace. Washington has made our country a despised nation, and we the people  have done nothing about it.

You would never know this from the US print or TV media or even from most of the UK and Western European media.  As I reported on October 16, Udo Ulfkotte, a former editor of one of Germany’s most important newspapers, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, has written a best-selling book in which he reports that the CIA owns everyone of significance in the major European media. In his own words Udo Ulfkotte says that he was “taught to lie, to betray and not to tell the truth to the public.”

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/10/16/cia-owns-everyone-significance-major-media/

As a former Wall Street Journal editor, Business Week columnist, columnist for the Scripps Howard News Service, columnist for a German magazine and French and Italian newspapers, I observed and experienced the gradual impoundment of any dissent from Washington’s line.  It became clear that the path to journalism success in the West was to lie for the Establishment in Washington, largely a private establishment along with the dark off-budget “security” agencies bolstered by the neoconservative ideology of US world hegemony.

Much of Russian media and Putin’s advisors are fully aware of Washington’s media campaign to defame President Vladimir Putin. http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/756160   The internet site Russia Insider today asked the pertinent question: “Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?”  As Russia Insider makes clear, the answer is most certainly.

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_media_watch/2014/10/24/04-54-03pm/cia_running_defamation_campaign_against_putin

Click the URL above and view the front pages of the UK Sun, Daily Mirror, and Daily Express.  I would bet that these are front pages designed in Washington or Langley and are in fact paid ads by the CIA or National Endowment for Democracy or by one of the Republican or Democrat organizations that sponsor Washington’s  overseas propaganda.

Of course, these UK rags can be dismissed as sensational junk comparable to the US versions that are for sale at grocery store checkout counters–”movie star abducted by aliens in UFO.”  So scroll down the page of the above URL and look at the covers of Newsweek and The Economist.  Once these were respected publications.  Today I would bet that no one reads them and that they are dependent on CIA subsidies for their existance.  Nevertheless, they impact the European, Canadian, Australian, and Japanese media and no doubt the media of other countries on the borders of the US empire. These gullible fools still think that America has a free press.

Be sure to notice this section of the report from Russia Insider:

“The issue of manipulation of news by intelligence services has been in the news recently with revelations that the CIA and German Secret Service (GSS) have long-running programs to influence how media executives and top journalists convey and interpret the news, including direct cash payments.

“Here are some examples they point to:

  • Portraying him [Putin] as a scheming dictator trying to rebuild a repressive empire.
  • Claiming he personally ordered the murder of a number of journalists, and personally ordered a KGB defector to be murdered with radiation poisoning.
  • Frequently citing unsubstantiated rumors he is having an affair with a famous gymnast.
  • Allegations that he has stashed away billions for his personal benefit, without providing evidence.
  • Recent article in newsweek claiming he leads a luxurious and lazy lifestyle, sleeping late.
  • Recent article in NYT focusing on a supposed personal arrogance.
  • Hillary Clinton mentioning in speech after speech that he is a bad guy, a bully, that one must confront him forcefully.
  • Mis-quoting him on his regret about the collapse of the Soviet Union.
  • Articles about a supposed super-luxury villa built for him in southern Russia.
  • The over-the top headlines in the western media (they were worst of all in Germany) portraying him personally responsible for murdering the victims of MH17.
  • And soft stuff – magazine covers making him look sinister, monstrous, etc.”

If you are not already aware, I am pleased to introduce you to The Saker, a pseudonym for a high level US military analyst who lives in Florida.  No, it is not me.  Be sure to read Saker’s interview with Russia Insider which is at the bottom of the article:

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_media_watch/2014/10/24/04-54-03pm/cia_running_defamation_campaign_against_putin

Every day readers ask me what they as individuals can do.  Some possibly are government trolls who hope I will answer “overthrow the government” so that I can be arrested as a terrorist.  My answer to the question is that people are powerless until enough of them are informed.  If people become informed and will take a stand, then the people can force the government back under their control.  If this does not or cannot happen, democracy in America is dead, and our life as a free people protected by the Constitution and law against the power of the state is finished.

Possibly America is already finished and will now finish the rest of the world in its insane neoconservative drive to establish Washington’s hegemony over the entire world.

Russia and China are not going to submit to being Washington’s vassals and India had enough of being a colony under Great Britain. If the crazed hegemons in Washington persist, nuclear war will be the outcome.

Posted in USA, RussiaComments Off on Washington Is Defaming Putin: America’s “Strategic Target” is the Russian President

US House Testimony: Sweat on Bus Surfaces Can Spread Ebola

NOVANEWS
Health and Human Services boss admits Ebola can survive in perspiration on inert surfaces
Global Research
Ebola-USA

The exchange occurred on Friday during a House hearing on the federal government’s response to the disease. Massie also asked Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary Dr. Nicole Lurie about the transmissibility of Ebola.

Torbay said he is not a medical professional and tried to skirt the issue. Dr. Lurie said Ebola is present in perspiration but did not concede it may be spread on a bus. She also conceded that Ebola can live outside the body on inert surfaces.

Rep. Massie’s questions and the answers by Torbay, Lurie and Maj. Gen. James Lariviere indicate Ebola can be passed on in a bus or other public transport – for instance, the subway car used by a Doctors Without Borders physician hours before checking into a hospital where he was diagnosed with Ebola.

The question is, then: Is the government simply inept and incapable of handling a national health care issue, or are they hiding the truth from the American people for other, more nefarious reasons?

If Torbay and Lurie know Ebola can be passed on to others through sweat – and who in a crowded bus has not touched a pole or straphanger where sweat from an ill person may be present? – and they are hiding or avoiding telling people about the dangers, they should not only be fired, but brought up on charges of endangering public health.

Posted in USAComments Off on US House Testimony: Sweat on Bus Surfaces Can Spread Ebola

Suspicious Canada Shooting Triggers ‘Minority Report’ Pre-Crime Plans for ‘Preventive Arrests’

NOVANEWS
Global Research
parliamenthill

On Wednesday, just two days after a “radicalized” man ran over two Canadian soldiers in a mall parking lot, a gunmen opened fire at Canada’s National War Memorial and at Parliament Hill, killing one soldier and wounding a security guard. He was later killed by an armed guard.

Within less than two days, rhetoric has risen unusually high for Canada in the wake of what have been called “terror attacks,” bringing terrorism home along with fresh demands for new police powers.

This time, the new powers would include ‘preventive arrests,’ potentially taking the country down the slippery slope of guilty-until-proven innocent authoritarian policies.

Via CBC News:

Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney is giving more indications of how the government intends to strengthen Canada’s security laws in the wake of Wednesday’s attack in Ottawa on Parliament Hill.

The minister told Radio-Canada on Friday that the government is eyeing the thresholds established in Canadian law for the preventive arrests of people thought to be contemplating attacks that may be linked to terrorism. Officials are considering how to make it easier to press charges against so-called lone-wolf attackers.

“The challenges are the thresholds — the thresholds that will allow either preventive arrest, or charges that lead to sentences, or more simple operations,” Blaney said in French. “So what the prime minister has asked is for us to review in accelerated manner the different mechanisms that are offered to police to ensure everyone’s security.”

There is even talk now of ramping up Canada’s hate speech laws.

A bill was already in the works prior to the shootings to strengthen the Canadian Security Intelligence Services’ (CSIS) powers; Prime Minister Stephen Harper had already announced changes including his belief police powers needed to be increased.

“In recent weeks, I’ve been saying that our laws and police powers need to be strengthened in the area of surveillance, detention and arrest,” he said as MPs returned one day after a gunman killed a soldier and made his way into Centre Block on the Parliament Hill. (CBC News)

That makes this shooting very convenient for Harper’s agenda; now in the wake of this week’s shooting, Harper has stated that work will be “expedited”.

Questions already abound as to where suspect Michael Zehaf-Bibeau even got his the Winchester 30-30 rifle he used in the shooting. Due to his criminal record, Zehaf-Bibeau was already prohibited from owning a gun; in fact, Canadian courts had already issued the man a standard lifetime gun ban due to a violent conviction. Even without that ban, however, this guy couldn’t have obtained the gun in any legal way.

If anything, first and foremost it just proves that gun control doesn’t work. Regardless, in Canada there is no right by law to bear arms. “Canadians, unlike Americans, do not have a constitutional right to bear arms,” the Canadian Supreme Court ruled in 1993.

As Tony Cartalucci of Land Destroyer Report notes, the same plot had been scripted by the FBI just a month prior:

In mid-September A Rochester man, Mufid A. Elfgeeh, was accused by the FBI of attempting to provide material support to ISIS (undercover FBI agents), attempting to kill US soldiers, and possession of firearms and silencers (provided to him by the FBI). The FBI’s own official press release stated (emphasis added):

According to court records, Elfgeeh attempted to provide material support to ISIS in the form of personnel, namely three individuals, two of whom were cooperating with the FBI. Elfgeeh attempted to assist all three individuals in traveling to Syria to join and fight on behalf of ISIS. Elfgeeh also plotted to shoot and kill members of the United States military who had returned from Iraq. As part of the plan to kill soldiers, Elfgeeh purchased two handguns equipped with firearm silencers and ammunition from a confidential source. The handguns were made inoperable by the FBI before the confidential source gave them to Elfgeeh.

It was warned that only an inoperable firearm stood between Elfgeeh’s arrest and his successful execution of deadly plans hatched by him and his undercover FBI handlers. This script, written by the FBI to entrap Elfgeeh, would be followed almost to the letter in live attacks subsequently carried out in Canada resulting in the death of two Canadian soldiers.

Cartalucci goes on to point out another troubling detail. Like so many other heavily publicized terror attacks, Zehaf-Bibeau was already under both Canadian and U.S. government surveillance prior to the event, with the suspected shooter listed as a “high-risk traveler” who had his passport revoked prior to the shooting:

It is very likely that the recent attacks in Canada involved at least one “informant” working for the FBI. Because the FBI uses confidential informants to handle suspects, if a plot is switched “live,” the informant will be implicated as an accomplice and the FBI’s covert role will remain uncompromised…

With both suspects having been on both US and Canadian watch lists – it is very likely undercover agents were involved in either one or both cases. While many possibilities exist, Western security agencies should be among the first suspects considered as potential collaborators…

And of course —

Conveniently, both suspects are now dead and little chance remains of ascertaining the truth of who they were in contact with and how they carried out their deadly attacks.

Canada’s domestic terror threat level was quietly elevated just days before by CSIS intelligence, issuing a medium-level ‘could occur’ threat advisory for the first time since 2010. Unlike the often hyped and exaggerated public threat assessments in the U.S., this was an internal determination among the intelligence agencies, and signals likely prior knowledge.

So what did they know and when did they really know it?

Also, as in many highly publicized shootings with government ties, initially police reported multiple shooters. In the end, the story changed, naming Zehaf-Bibeau as the only shooter.

Former public safety minister Stockwell Day told CBC News, “There are always limitations, and this is what we have to realize in a free and democratic society. Any time you increase your security, you decrease your freedom somewhere.” [emphasis added]

And there you have it.

Terrorism — monitored and enabled by undercover informants — used as a catalyst to break down civil liberties and accumulate more state power.

Posted in CanadaComments Off on Suspicious Canada Shooting Triggers ‘Minority Report’ Pre-Crime Plans for ‘Preventive Arrests’

Amnesty International: Ferguson Police Crackdown Violated US and International Law

NOVANEWS
Global Research
ferguson don't shoot

The crackdown on peaceful protesters by police in Ferguson, Missouri violated numerous US and international laws, according to a report published Monday by Amnesty International.

The report, The streets of America: Human rights abuses in Ferguson, extensively documents systematic acts of police violence against peaceful protestors and the arrest and assault of media and international observers. It details the suppression of rights protected under the US Constitution, international law and international human rights agreements.

The report comes as police are “stocking up on riot gear,” as a report in the Associated Press put it, in preparation for renewed protests next month in the event that a grand jury fails to indict Darren Wilson, the Ferguson police officer who shot unarmed teenager Michael Brown on August 9.

“What Amnesty International witnessed in Missouri on the ground this summer underscored that human rights abuses do not just happen across borders and oceans,” said Steven W. Hawkins, executive director of Amnesty International USA.

Hawkins added, “Standing on W. Florissant Avenue with my colleagues, I saw a police force, armed to the teeth, with military-grade weapons. I saw a crowd that included the elderly and young children fighting the effects of tear gas.”

Police confronted protesters while “armed with semi-automatic weapons and leashed police dogs,” the report noted. “Officers moved among the protesters using armored vehicles which are more commonly seen in a conflict zone rather than the streets of a suburban town in the United States.” It added, “Some of the officers had… no names, badges, other identifying information visible.”

The report concluded, “In all, more than 170 individuals were arrested during the first 12 days of protests since Michael Brown’s death,” more than three quarters of arrests were for the ad-hoc charge of “failure to disperse.”

The report also documents the attack on free speech and the media. “Legal and human rights observers as well as members of the media have repeatedly been obstructed” by police, it noted.

“From August 13 through October 2, at least 19 journalists and members of the media were arrested by law enforcement with others subjected to tear gas and the use of rubber bullets… Reporters for CNN, Al Jazeera America and other outlets report being harassed or physically threatened.”

When Ron Johnson of the Missouri Highway Patrol, who nominally headed the police response in the area, was asked in a press conference why members of the press were being targeted for arrest, he replied, “It is difficult to tell who is media, and who is disguising themselves as such.”

In one particularly shocking event, the report recounts how Ryan Devereaux of The Intercept and Lukas Hermsmeier of the German Bild-Zeitung were shot with rubber bullets and arrested while fleeing from a barrage of tear gas.

The report recounts,

“After coming out [from] behind a cover with their hands in the air, shouting, ‘Press!’ and ‘Journalists’ and ‘We’re media!’ [an] officer allowed them to pass. However, as Devereaux and Hermsmeier continued walking with their hands in the air, shouting ‘Press!’ the same officer shot rubber bullets at them, hitting both journalists in the back. Out of fear, they dove behind a car. The officers approached with guns pointed and arrested them.”

On another occasion Amnesty International observers were threatened by police while seeking to leave a protest scene after determining that they were in danger from tear gas and rubber bullets.

“One officer directly in front of the delegation pointed his weapon at the delegation and shouted ‘get on the ground!’ A staff member at the front of the delegation knelt on the ground and informed the officer, ‘We are human rights observers.’”

In another incident, “Amnesty International witnessed an officer with the St. Ann Police Department in Missouri point his AR-15 semi-automatic rifle at a group of journalists and threaten to kill them.”

The Amnesty International report noted that the practice of pointing firearms at peaceful protestors violates US law and international rules. “Under the U.N.’s Basic Principles for the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, law enforcement officials shall not use firearms against persons except in self-defense or defense of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury.” In addition, “An officer pointing a gun at close range at an unarmed individual who is not presenting a threat would also be excessive use of force under U.S. law.”

The report concluded that the police attempt to “collectively punish” local residents and peaceful protestors. It noted that the imposition of a curfew “limited not only the rights of those who were demonstrating peacefully, but also the freedom of movement of the general public in Ferguson who were required to be off of the streets after midnight each night.”

The illegal and unconstitutional character of the police response was summed up by an injunction issued by a federal judge earlier this month against the so-called “five second rule,” an arbitrary directive that police used to abrogate the constitutionally protected freedom of assembly. The judge said the order allowed “police officers, if they felt like it, to order peaceful, law-abiding protesters to keep moving rather than standing still.” She concluded, “As it was applied in this case, the practice…violates the constitution.”

The Amnesty International report, together with the nationwide militarization of the police and the ongoing wave of police killings, makes a mockery of the claims by the United States military and politicians that the aims of the US’s endless series of wars and international provocations is to defend “human rights.”

Posted in USA, HealthComments Off on Amnesty International: Ferguson Police Crackdown Violated US and International Law

The Entry of Ebola into the US Has Hallmarks of a Planned Happening

NOVANEWS
Global Research
ebola-cia

More information is available that suggests the the government had advance information that ebola was coming to the US and that the government expects a much larger outbreak of the disease in the US than it admits.

Keep in mind that Washington is evil and has been killing people in seven countries for thirteen years based entirely on lies. Keep in mind that Washington has a long list of countries that it has destabilized. Most recently Washington overthrew the elected government in Ukraine and is currently working on the remaining independent governments in the Middle East, Russia, and China as Tony Cartalucci’s article documents:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/turmoil-in-hong-kong-terrorism-in-xinjiang-americas-covert-war-on-china/5409079

For six case studies of how Washington overthrows governments read The Brothers.

Here is a report from Natural News:

http://www.naturalnews.com/047118_ebola_pandemic_us_government_american_cities.html

The U.S. government knew about the outbreak in advance, but didn’t warn the public

It’s now clear that the U.S. government has long known this outbreak was coming but did nothing to warn the public.

In early September, the government sought to purchase 160,000 Ebola hazmat suits from a U.S.  supplier.

http://www.naturalnews.com/046884_ebola_pandemic_hazmat_suits_biological_protection.html

Furthermore, according to this report on SHTFplan.com, “Disaster Assistance Response Teams were told to prepare to be activated in the month of October.”

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/report-disaster-teams-were-told-months-ago-they-would-be-activated-in-october_10012014

Don’t you find it strange that while the government itself was gearing up for an October disaster, the public wasn’t told a thing about any of this?

Posted in USA, HealthComments Off on The Entry of Ebola into the US Has Hallmarks of a Planned Happening

Washington Post Seizes on Chemical Weapons Claims to Press for Wider War in Syria

NOVANEWS

 

 

Global Research
warmedia

Two articles in Friday’s Washington Post reporting chemical weapons attacks in Iraq and Syria are part of a general propaganda campaign by the mainstream media to turn the operation against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) into a war to overthrow the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

A front-page article headlined “Jihadist launched chemical assault” reports that ISIS forces deployed chlorine gas in an attack last month against Sunni police officers in the Iraqi city of Duluiyah, approximately 60 miles north of Baghdad. The officers reported being overcome by a cloud of yellow gas which hung low to the ground, consistent with chlorine gas. The attack reportedly sickened at least 11 officers who were taken to a nearby hospital and treated with oxygen and anti-inflammatory medication for shortness of breath.

According to the Iraq Defense Ministry, ISIS has obtained significant quantities chlorine from water treatment facilities where the chemical is used to chlorinate water to prevent the spread of water-borne disease. Improvised chlorine bombs were used previously by Al-Qaeda in Iraq, the predecessor of ISIS, at the height of the Sunni insurgency against the US occupation in 2006 and 2007.

There have been other reports in recent weeks of the use of chlorine gas by ISIS in Iraq. According to soldiers who managed to escape an ISIS attack last month on the Saqlawiyah military base in Anbar Province, chlorine gas was deployed as part of the brutal assault which killed approximately 370 soldiers. ISIS fighters reportedly fired chlorine gas canisters into the base.

The Al Nusra Front is suspected of being responsible for a chlorine gas attack in March of last year that killed 26 Syrians, including 16 Syrian soldiers. The Al Nusra Front seized control of the Sheikh Suleiman military base in western Aleppo as well as a chlorine factory at the end of 2012, giving them access to chemical weaponry. Sheikh Suleimna, also known as Base 111, is believed to have been an important site in Syria’s chemical weapons program.

The Post’s editorial titled “Obama gives Syria’s Assad another pass on chemical weapons,” seizes on the recent reports of use of chlorine weapons by ISIS in Iraq to press for the overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria. “The Islamic State, too, may be using chlorine,” the editorial states, but “the difference is that, while the United States has mobilized a coalition against the Islamic State, Mr. Assad is taking advantage of the fact that the U.S. strategy in Syria is to ignore him.”

The paper states quite bluntly that “the Assad regime is once again blatantly violating the ‘red line’ drawn by Mr. Obama against the use of chemical weapons—and getting away with it.” The editorial quotes Simon Limage, a State Department nonproliferation official, who said that the “evidence strongly suggests the Assad regime is the culprit.”

The editorial cites a report published this week by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a Washington, D.C. think-tank which laid blame for 18 recent alleged chlorine gas attacks in rebel held areas on the Assad regime. The ISW was founded and is overseen by Kimberly Kagan, the sister-in-law of Robert Kagan, one of the founders of the neoconservative Project for a New American Century. Robert Kagan served as an advisor to Generals Stanley McChrystal and David Petraeus during President Barack Obama’s 2009 surge in Afghanistan.

The editorial concludes that Obama’s refusal to establish a no-fly zone or target the Syrian military has given the Assad regime “a pass.” The conclusion which the Washington Post intends for its readers draw is that a massive military campaign must be undertaken immediately to oust Assad.

Ironically this propaganda for war is published on the same day that the Post’s news reporting vindicates earlier exposures of the Western-backed “rebels’” responsibility for chemical weapons attacks in Syria that were largely ignored by the mainstream media at the time.

UN special investigator Carla Del Ponte stated in May of last year that investigators had “strong, concrete suspicions” of the use of sarin gas “on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities.”

Plots by Al Qaeda in Iraq, the precursor to ISIS, and Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria, the Al Nusra Front, were broken up in May and June of last year. The groups were accused of planning to manufacture and deploy chemical weapons, including sarin and mustard gas.

The Iraqi Defense Ministry arrested five members of ISIS in Baghdad who were allegedly seeking to deploy chemical agents against crowds of Shia pilgrims via remote controlled planes. Turkish authorities claimed to have broken up a plot by the Al-Nusrah Front to launch a sarin gas attack either inside Syria or on the Incirlik Air Base in Turkey.

Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh exposed claims by the imperialist powers that Assad was responsible for a sarin gas attack on the rebel-held Damascus suburb of Ghouta in August last year as a calculated fraud. Hersh reported that Al Nusra also had the capability to deploy sarin gas in Syria but never came under suspicion from the US. This remarkable exposure of claims that had served as the principal pretext for the Obama administration’s aborted plan to launch air strikes against Syria at the time was subsequently buried by US media.

The Washington Post is seizing upon the most recent claims of chemical weapons attacks in Iraq and Syria as part of a cynical maneuver in the Obama administration’s drive to oust the Assad regime. The yellow press is churning out this propaganda in an attempt to prepare the general population for an escalation of the current military operations against ISIS into an all-out war for regime change in Syria.

Posted in USA, SyriaComments Off on Washington Post Seizes on Chemical Weapons Claims to Press for Wider War in Syria

Putin at Valdai – World Order: New Rules or a Game without Rules ”VIDEO”

NOVANEWS

Vladimir Putin

There is no doubt that humanitarian factors such as education, science, healthcare and culture are playing a greater role in global competition.

This also has a big impact on international relations, including because this ‘soft power’ resource will depend to a great extent on real achievements in developing human capital rather than on sophisticated propaganda tricks.

 

Posted in RussiaComments Off on Putin at Valdai – World Order: New Rules or a Game without Rules ”VIDEO”

Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING