The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Philip Giraldi ArchiveBlogview
How the U.S. Government Spins the Story
Did Syria actually use chemical weapons?
Idlib
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Strings  Include Comments

Sounds like we’ve heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th. Shortly after the more recent incident, President Donald Trump, possibly deriving his information from television news reports, abruptly stated that the government of President Bashar al-Assad had ordered the attack. He also noted that the use of chemicals had “crossed many red lines” and hinted that Damascus would be held accountable. Twenty-four hours later retribution came in the form of the launch of 59 cruise missiles directed against the Syrian airbase at Sharyat. The number of casualties, if any, remains unclear and the base itself sustained only minor damage amidst allegations that many of the missiles had missed their target. The physical assault was followed by a verbal onslaught, with the Trump Administration blaming Russia for shielding al-Assad and demanding that Moscow end its alliance with Damascus if it wishes to reestablish good relations with Washington.

The media, led by the usual neoconservative cheerleaders, have applauded Trump’s brand of tough love with Syria, even though Damascus had no motive to stage such an attack while the so-called rebels had plenty to gain. The escalation to a war footing also serves no U.S. interest and actually damages prospects for eliminating ISIS any time soon. Democratic Party liberal interventionists have also joined with Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Marco Rubio to celebrate the cruise missile strike and hardening rhetoric. Principled and eminently sensible Democratic Congressman Tulsi Gabbard, has demanded evidence of Syrian culpability, saying “It angers and saddens me that President Trump has taken the advice of war hawks and escalated our illegal regime change war to overthrow the Syrian government. This escalation is short-sighted and will lead to more dead civilians, more refugees, the strengthening of al-Qaeda and other terrorists, and a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia—which could lead to nuclear war. This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria without waiting for the collection of evidence from the scene of the chemical poisoning.” For her pains, she has been vilified by members of her own party, who have called for her resignation.

Other congressmen, including Senators Rand Paul and Tim Kaine, who have asked for a vote in congress to authorize going to war, have likewise been ignored or deliberately marginalized. All of which means that the United States has committed a war crime against a country with which it is not at war and has done so by ignoring Article 2 of the Constitution, which grants to Congress the sole power to declare war. It has also failed to establish a casus belli that Syria represents some kind of threat to the United States.

What has become completely clear, as a result of the U.S. strike and its aftermath, is that any general reset with Russia has now become unimaginable, meaning among other things that a peace settlement for Syria is for now unattainable. It also has meant that the rebels against al-Assad’s regime will be empowered, possibly deliberately staging more chemical “incidents” and blaming the Damascus government to shift international opinion farther in their direction. ISIS, which was reeling prior to the attack and reprisal, has been given a reprieve by the same United States government that pledged to eradicate it. And Donald Trump has reneged on his two campaign pledges to avoid deeper involvement in Middle Eastern wars and mend fences with Moscow.

There have been two central documents relating to the alleged Syrian chemical weapon incidents in 2013 and 2017, both of which read like press releases. Both refer to a consensus within the U.S. intelligence community (IC)and express “confidence” and even “high confidence” regarding their conclusions but neither is actually a product of the office of the Director of National Intelligence, which would be appropriate if the IC had actually come to a consensus. Neither the Director of National Intelligence nor the Director of CIA were present in a photo showing the White House team deliberating over what to do about Syria. Both documents supporting the U.S. cruise missile attack were, in fact, uncharacteristically put out by the White House, suggesting that the arguments were stitched together in haste to support a political decision to use force that had already been made.

ORDER IT NOW

The two documents provide plenty of circumstantial information but little in the way of actual evidence. The 2013 Obama version “Government Assessment of the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013,” was criticized almost immediately when it was determined that there were alternative explanations for the source of the chemical agents that might have killed more than a thousand people in and around the town of Ghouta. The 2017 Trump versionThe Assad Regime’s Use of Chemical Weapons on April 4, 2017,” is likewise under fire from numerous quarters. Generally reliable journalist Robert Parry is reporting that the intelligence behind the White House claims comes largely from satellite surveillance, though nothing has been released to back-up the conclusion that the Syrian government was behind the attack, an odd omission as everyone knows about satellite capabilities and they are not generally considered to be a classified source or method. Parry also cites the fact that there are alternative theories on what took place and why, some of which appear to originate with the intelligence and national security community, which was in part concerned over the rush to judgment by the White House. MIT Professor Theodore Postol, considered to be an expert on munitions, has also questioned the government’s account of what took place in Khan Sheikhoun through a detailed analysis of the available evidence. He believes that the chemical agent was fired from the ground, not from an airplane, suggesting that it was an attack initiated by the rebels made to appear as if it was caused by the Syrian bomb.

In spite of the challenges, “Trust me,” says Donald Trump. The Russians and Syrians are demanding an international investigation of the alleged chemical weapons incident, but as time goes by the ability to discern what took place diminishes. All that is indisputably known at this point is that the Syrian Air Force attacked a target in Idlib and a cloud of toxic chemicals was somehow released. The al-Ansar terrorist group (affiliated with al-Qaeda) is in control of the area and benefits greatly from the prevailing narrative. If it was in fact the actual implementer of the attack, it is no doubt cleaning and reconfiguring the site to support the account that it is promoting and which is being uncritically accepted both by the mainstream media and by a number of governments. The United States will also do its best to disrupt any inquiry that challenges the assumptions that it has already come to. The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Of Related Interest
Iran-rg
A world in turmoil, thank you Mr. Trump!
Analysis of the Times and Locations of Critical Events in the Alleged Nerve Agent Attack at 7 AM on April 4, 2017 in Khan Sheikhoun, Syria
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[]
  1. This whole chemical weapon attack by Assad sounds fishy from the beginning. From what I read Assad is winning the civil war and things are turning for the better for him. What would he gain at this point to launch a chemical attack on the civilian populations? Things just doesn’t add up. Check out this video:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brewer
    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/how-the-u-s-government-spins-the-story/#comment-1840645
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Am I the only person who remembers news from a month ago? Trump ordered hundreds of regular American combat troops into Syria BEFORE this event, with no explanation. This was covered on all major networks, including CNN.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    And why? They’ve been trying to overthrow Assad since 2005:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Russia was having too much success, they needed to understand that the US is not going to stand by any longer and wait to see.
  3. I am forced to conclude that the neoconservatives and indeed all of Washington DC are eager to go to war. They are just itching for any excuse to start yet another war in a nation of their choosing.

    If there is no good reason, they will make one up. There is an eerie resemblance to what is happening now with Syria and what happened leading up to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.

    I think the paleoconservative community also needs to come to terms with the fact that Trump has sold them out and is increasingly acting like a Washington insider neocon. Trump did to the paleoconservatives what Obama did to the left.

    It seems Trump will not put “America First” nor make any attempts to restore the American Middle Class nor American manufacturing to truly “Make American Great Again”.

    Tulsi Gabbard seems to be one of the few principled politicians in this case and for that she is marginalized for saying what few others have the moral courage to say. Many on the left are hoping she will run in 2020 for President.

    Coming from the left, I’d say that the Sanders and Trump base have a lot more in common than we admit. We are both deeply unhappy with the way that Washington has handled things. They basically betrayed the American people and enriched themselves at public expense.

    The real question is, can the US be saved for the people or will it continue on its path to terminal decline?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Duglarri
    The Neocons have always been raring to go and have the US army save nearly defenseless Israel from the looming threat of the Syrian army, circa 1973. They have long memories. They will not forget that the Syrians very nearly broke through during that war, and could easily, given some luck, have swept down onto the plains of Israel itself.

    Israelis have not forgotten. And neither have their neocons.

    To us Westerners, those days are ancient history. To Israelis, these days are payback time.

    And neither have they forgotten whose tanks those Syrians were riding when they nearly pushed the Israelis into the sea. Those were Russian tanks, and Russian planes, and Russian artillery.

    When they are done with the Syrians (and Iran) they will get around to Russia.

    Is that not the explanation for what has happened in the Ukraine?

    They have long memories.

    , @Blondenfun1
    I agree. The culprit in all of this is war hawk Jared Kushner who is making sure Israhell takes over the Whitehouse. See also Operation Talpiot, the NSA's direct data pipeline to Tel Aviv.
  4. Why’d there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don’t they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jeff Davis
    "...picture he found somewhere on social media."

    If you check closely, I think you will find that Postol took that photo from the White House issued document presenting the "evidence"(not!) of Syrian responsibility(not!) for the sarin(?) gas attack. Thus that photo represents the on-the-record official story w/official "evidence".

    Far from being some randomly acquired photo taken from social media and originating who knows where. And to take it one discrediting step further, it turns out the photo was provided by the al Qaeda terrorists -- the CIA's client anti-Assad terrorists -- who control that area.

    Bottom line: From the first, this was an ***OBVIOUS*** false flag. The only question remaining is whether the CIA coordinated with al Qaeda in planning this event.

    , @Wally
    You won't find it by looking at CNN / ZNN.

    Try:
    http://russia-insider.com/en
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    How do we know it wasn't YOU? Prove it. I want pictures, names.
    , @Ace
    You're right. The Syrians​ and Russians are strangely passive on this.

    The putative "munition" in the crater just sits there like it got there by magic but something had to deliver it.

    A sarin payload requires only a small charge to eject the liquid. Thus, there should be tail fins and other rocket parts nearby allowing identification of what the munition was and whether it came from a Syrian plane. Such debris is present even with an H/E payload.

    It would be easy to call attention to the oddity of the canister only.
  5. What is your view of David Kilcullen, what he knows about, and what his views are worth? No doubt “modified” or ” qualified” respect but it is the qualifications and the reasons for them that I am interested in. When I’ve got round tobfinishing his article saying Assad is desperate and losing I’ll probably be back.

    Read More
  6. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Get a load of this a**hole who was responsible for disaster in Russia.

    He thinks he has the right to judge the mental health of others.

    But as long as super-rich globalists fund think-tanks and invite lunatics like him, he can posture as a ‘voice of reason’.

    And there is the other esteemed ‘voice of reason’, Thomas Friedman, who wants war in Syria to go on, even if ISIS kills more innocents.

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/15/thomas-friedmans-perverse-love-affair-isis

    These academics are like mafia lawyers.

    The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia.
    It’s like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob.

    And there were other famous Mob Lawyers, the real ones.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ragano

    So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates.
    They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob.

    Sachs is a total shark. He’s been a Glob Advocate forever. A real weasel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Quartermaster
    Putin is the real weasel, and problem in Russia. He's corrupt to his core and has his own vision for Russia which is quite destructive. His Soviet revanchism is a serious problem for Russia and has set the country up for a serious fall.
    , @Z-man
    What's the common denominator to these two??????
  7. Proof of the false-flag nature of the ‘chemical attack’ in Syria absurdly ascribed to Assad’s forces -

    Above all because of a very-censored explosive story – a distinguished group of Swedish doctors showed that the George Clooney & Western-backed ‘White Helmets’ in fact made a snuff film actually murdering children of this ‘chemical attack’ … anyone can invite medical physicians they know to view this, to see the Swedish Doctors for Human Rights are absolutely correct in their accusations:

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/06/swedish-medical-associations-says-white-helmets-murdered-kids-for-fake-gas-attack-videos/

    For an overview of the many wider points making clear the false flag, Aangirfan does an excellent job here as she very often does:

    http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/trump-at-war-with-assad-and-putin.html

    (1) Anti-Assad “reporter” Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened – Tweet says: “Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians”

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, “who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in” is Dr Shajul Islam, “used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register”

    (5) The USA & CIA were previously documented as having approved a “plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria & blame it on Assad’s regime’ … A 2013 article on this is deleted from the UK Daily Mail website, but is saved at Web Archive, a screenshot at Aangirfan’s page above

    (6) Videos previously exposed as fraudulent are being recycled “A chemical weapons shipment run by Saudi mercenaries [is blown up] before it can be offloaded & used to attack the Syrian army in Hama … [this story] has turned into Syrian aircraft dropping sarin gas on orphanages … videos shot in Egypt with the smoke machines are dragged out again.”

    (7) Gas attack story is supported by known Soros-funded frauds ‘White Helmets’ who had previously celebrated alongside Israeli-Saudi backed ‘Al Qaeda’ extremists after seizing Idlib from Syrian Army forces. White Helmets “have been caught filming their fake videos in places like Egypt & Morocco, using actors, smoke machines & fake blood”.

    (8) The 2013 gas attack in Syria killing over 1000 people, was also proven to be an operation by USA & allies, with admissions to this effect by Turkish Members of Parliament … The operation even involved the CIA’s Google Inc monopoly search control internet domination tool, via their subsidiary Google Idea Groups & Jared Cohen:

    In 2014, the later-murdered journalist Serena Shim “stumbled upon a safehouse run by Jared Cohen & Google Idea Groups, a short distance from a border crossing into Syria between Hatay, Turkey & Aleppo province in Syria. In the safehouse were three Ukrainian secret service who had just buried a load of sarin gas shells from the Republic of Georgia. Chemical weapons used in the Ghouta war crime were trucked through Turkey to Gaziantep then taken from there to Aleppo by NGOs, hidden in ambulances or in trucks supposedly carrying relief aid. After Shim broke this story on PressTV … the clumsily-staged ‘accident’ leading to her death only a few days later.”

    By way of motive – Destruction of Syria & Assad serves the long-being-implemented 1980s Israeli Oded Yinon Plan to destroy & dismember all major countries surrounding mafia state Israel, in general service to the world oligarchs. Plus, there are major US-backed economics behind the campaign to destroy Syria – Assad’s fall is sought for changing from the Russia-supported pipeline from Iran thru Iraq & Syria, to the USA-supported pipeline from Qatar thru Saudi Arabia, Jordan & Syria.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Quartermaster
    Sarin is a nerve agent and if that is what was used, gas masks are far less than what is needed to protect anyone.

    I don't see any motivation on Assad's part to stage such an attack. It simply was not in his interest to do so. Trump's action was a knee jerk reaction and stupid.
  8. What has happened is one of two things as far is Trump is concerned. Either he walked into a trap prepared for him by the Deep state, willingly or unwillingly. If willingly he knew he was set up and accepted it because he has no choice. He could not disobey the military. They have their own agenda in Syria which they had been pursuing for a while, that is carving out American zone of occupation in eastern Syria with the help of Sunny states. Or Trump simply capitulated to the deep state as Obama did before him. If that is the case we know now how American is governed, by the military industrial complex that dictates its policy. The sad part is that the Constitution is disregarded once again, that the Liberals who used to be peaceniks, are now cheering for war, that the UN is marginalized, that Trump uses it just as Bush did to justify an illegal war.

    Read More
  9. Sounds like we’ve heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.

    Quite. They maybe faked before and know how to in there was a overwhelming need. However, one wonders why they did not use the gas gambit when they were set to lose Aleppo. Using it now only when they have lost their big gains, seems like bolting the stable door after the horse is gone . So the motives for the rebels faking a gas attack at this juncture are even more puzzling as for the Assad regime having ordered it .

    Why Volatility Signals Stability, and Vice Versa
    By Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Gregory F. Treverton
    Purchase Article
    Even as protests spread across the Middle East in early 2011, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appeared immune from the upheaval. Assad had ruled comfortably for over a decade, having replaced his father, Hafez, who himself had held power for the previous three decades. Many pundits argued that Syria’s sturdy police state, which exercised tight control over the country’s people and economy, would survive the Arab Spring undisturbed. ]…

    But appearances were deceiving: today, Syria is in a shambles, with the regime fighting for its very survival, whereas Lebanon has withstood the influx of Syrian refugees and the other considerable pressures of the civil war next door. Surprising as it may seem, the per capita death rate from violence in Lebanon in 2013 was lower than that in Washington, D.C. That same year, the body count of the Syrian conflict surpassed 100,000.

    Why has seemingly stable Syria turned out to be the fragile regime, whereas always-in-turmoil Lebanon has so far proved robust? The answer is that prior to its civil war, Syria was exhibiting only pseudo-stability, its calm façade concealing deep structural vulnerabilities. Lebanon’s chaos, paradoxically, signaled strength. Fifteen years of civil war had served to decentralize the state and bring about a more balanced sectarian power-sharing structure. Along with Lebanon’s small size as an administrative unit, these factors added to its durability. So did the country’s free-market economy. In Syria, the ruling Baath Party sought to control economic variability, replacing the lively chaos of the ancestral souk with the top-down, Soviet-style structure of the office building. This rigidity made Syria (and the other Baathist state, Iraq) much more vulnerable to disruption than Lebanon.[...]

    The divergent tales of Syria and Lebanon demonstrate that the best early warning signs of instability are found not in historical data but in underlying structural properties. Past experience can be extremely effective when it comes to detecting risks of cancer, crime, and earthquakes. But it is a bad bellwether of complex political and economic events, particularly so-called tail risks—events, such as coups and financial crises, that are highly unlikely but enormously consequential. For those, the evidence of risk comes too late to do anything about it, and a more sophisticated approach is required.

    [...]

    Simply put, fragility is aversion to disorder. Things that are fragile do not like variability, volatility, stress, chaos, and random events, which cause them to either gain little or suffer. A teacup, for example, will not benefit from any form of shock. It wants peace and predictability, something that is not possible in the long run, which is why time is an enemy to the fragile. What’s more, things that are fragile respond to shock in a nonlinear fashion. With humans, for example, the harm from a ten-foot fall in no way equals ten times as much harm as from a one-foot fall. In political and economic terms, a $30 drop in the price of a barrel of oil is much more than twice as harmful to Saudi Arabia as a $15 drop.

    THE CENTER CANNOT HOLD

    The first marker of a fragile state is a concentrated decision-making system.funds, at the price of increasing systemic risks, such as disastrous national-level reforms.

    This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria

    A Russian build military base being used to attack urban areas is not “Syria”

    Assad and those around him hold concentrated centralised power and are already proven to be incredibly stupid, that is why he is in this position– he thought the people loved him, put up the price of basic commodities and the rebellion started. Assad perhaps believes the US is scared to get involved in Syria or to to cross the Russians . It seems silly but he and his advisors have a proven record of catastrophic misjudgements . Bringing in the Russians meant the US would be involved.

    I dare say the US has more advanced facilities for gathering intelligence it lets on about and than Syria, Russia or US media know about. Providing “evidence” gives away the hole card one might come in handy if the nuclear balloon starts going goes well and truly up. Any price would be worth paying for knowing Russia’s intent. If people doubt Trump over this (and he warned the Russian it was going to be done so he didn’t seek confrontation) it is the unfortunate price of maintaining secret intelligence facilities.

    The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.

    For a great power seeing its rival use military force to crush a rebellion it has expressed sympathy is quite definitely a real defeat . It’s a zero sum game for America and Russia (yes Russia is Jingoistic, and I think it is more centralised in decision making ) . The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn’t be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Alarmist

    "The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn’t be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe."
     
    Wow, we must have been observing two different worlds, because Russian actions in several theatres (Syria, Ukraine, Korea, ROW) have been relatively restrained to non-existent despite clear threats to their national interests, while the US has ratcheted up it military intervention pretty much globally over the same period. Then again, I live outside the US and am not blanketed with the propaganda that spills out of its MSM house organs, so we have indeed observed two different worlds.
    , @Jeff Davis
    You have no idea what you're talking about. You don't source your quotes, and you're ideologically driven by a form of crypto anti-socialism revealed in you're basic premise that centralized planning created the vulnerability that brought down Saddam and now threatens Assad.

    Nonsense. What threatens all of the Mideast -- what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad -- is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.

    The US has been turned into Israel's bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project. And you,... are either a fool or an Israeli propagandist.

  10. @Carlton Meyer
    Am I the only person who remembers news from a month ago? Trump ordered hundreds of regular American combat troops into Syria BEFORE this event, with no explanation. This was covered on all major networks, including CNN.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    And why? They've been trying to overthrow Assad since 2005:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pm8-vSo4Y4

    Russia was having too much success, they needed to understand that the US is not going to stand by any longer and wait to see.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait.
  11. Jewish AIPAC Israel firster Jared Kushner and his fellow Jewish AIPAC Israel first friends (like Reed Cordish who worked for Israel Lobby lackey Dick Cheney as well) whom he brought into the White House more than likely influenced Trump to push the Israel Lobby agenda vs Syria for regime change to weaken Iran:

    http://america-hijacked.com/2012/02/12/israel-lobby-pushes-for-us-action-against-the-syrian-government/

    More on Kushner and his fellow AIPAC Israel firster at the White House obviously influencing Trump to push the Israel Lobby agenda like he did with Syria as I heard Netanyahu praised the Syriaattack and Pence personally telephoned to thank him:

    http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/359120/jared-kushners-friend-picked-by-donald-trump-as-assistant/

    Read More
  12. @Sean
    Russia was having too much success, they needed to understand that the US is not going to stand by any longer and wait to see.

    INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Well they do not get to set the rules until they are the most powerful state in the world--like the US.
    , @iffen
    Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port.
    , @Wally
    IOW, the Russians have their own military in their own county guarding their own borders.
  13. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    It certainly appears to have been a manufactured event. The media was ready and swung into action immediately with pictures and a noisy campaign that the usual war-hawk politicians joined in with. The timing was just too good and seems to have been coordinated. Syria was bombed without bothering to investigate based on Trump’s claim that the evidence was ironclad. Did people like McMaster think it was real and report it to Trump as such? Did Trump believe it? Or did they know it was fake but pretended otherwise? Were they in on it from the beginning or were they forced to play along? Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. Next up, N Korea and then Iran?
    No matter how one votes they end up getting the same thing. It’s very disheartening.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Orville H. Larson
    " . . . Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. . . ."

    Yeah, it looks like it.

    I voted for Trump mainly for foreign policy reasons. I assumed--I hoped!--that Trump would be better than Our Lady of the Pantsuits, that Israel-controlled, neocon hack. Maybe the difference is this: With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it'll take a bit longer. . . .
  14. @Anon
    Get a load of this a**hole who was responsible for disaster in Russia.

    He thinks he has the right to judge the mental health of others.

    But as long as super-rich globalists fund think-tanks and invite lunatics like him, he can posture as a 'voice of reason'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhyD-fPS0vs

    And there is the other esteemed 'voice of reason', Thomas Friedman, who wants war in Syria to go on, even if ISIS kills more innocents.

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/15/thomas-friedmans-perverse-love-affair-isis

    These academics are like mafia lawyers.

    The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia.
    It's like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob.

    And there were other famous Mob Lawyers, the real ones.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ragano

    So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates.
    They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob.

    Sachs is a total shark. He's been a Glob Advocate forever. A real weasel.

    Putin is the real weasel, and problem in Russia. He’s corrupt to his core and has his own vision for Russia which is quite destructive. His Soviet revanchism is a serious problem for Russia and has set the country up for a serious fall.

    Read More
    • LOL: geokat62
    • Troll: L.K, Rurik
    • Replies: @Wally
    Putin is so bad for Russia that the Russians overwhelmingly support him.

    I suggest you quit digging.

  15. @Brabantian
    Proof of the false-flag nature of the 'chemical attack' in Syria absurdly ascribed to Assad's forces -

    Above all because of a very-censored explosive story - a distinguished group of Swedish doctors showed that the George Clooney & Western-backed 'White Helmets' in fact made a snuff film actually murdering children of this 'chemical attack' ... anyone can invite medical physicians they know to view this, to see the Swedish Doctors for Human Rights are absolutely correct in their accusations:
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/06/swedish-medical-associations-says-white-helmets-murdered-kids-for-fake-gas-attack-videos/

    For an overview of the many wider points making clear the false flag, Aangirfan does an excellent job here as she very often does:
    http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/trump-at-war-with-assad-and-putin.html

    (1) Anti-Assad "reporter" Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened - Tweet says: "Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians"

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, "who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in" is Dr Shajul Islam, "used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register"

    (5) The USA & CIA were previously documented as having approved a "plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria & blame it on Assad's regime' ... A 2013 article on this is deleted from the UK Daily Mail website, but is saved at Web Archive, a screenshot at Aangirfan's page above

    (6) Videos previously exposed as fraudulent are being recycled "A chemical weapons shipment run by Saudi mercenaries [is blown up] before it can be offloaded & used to attack the Syrian army in Hama ... [this story] has turned into Syrian aircraft dropping sarin gas on orphanages ... videos shot in Egypt with the smoke machines are dragged out again."

    (7) Gas attack story is supported by known Soros-funded frauds 'White Helmets' who had previously celebrated alongside Israeli-Saudi backed 'Al Qaeda' extremists after seizing Idlib from Syrian Army forces. White Helmets "have been caught filming their fake videos in places like Egypt & Morocco, using actors, smoke machines & fake blood".

    (8) The 2013 gas attack in Syria killing over 1000 people, was also proven to be an operation by USA & allies, with admissions to this effect by Turkish Members of Parliament ... The operation even involved the CIA's Google Inc monopoly search control internet domination tool, via their subsidiary Google Idea Groups & Jared Cohen:

    In 2014, the later-murdered journalist Serena Shim "stumbled upon a safehouse run by Jared Cohen & Google Idea Groups, a short distance from a border crossing into Syria between Hatay, Turkey & Aleppo province in Syria. In the safehouse were three Ukrainian secret service who had just buried a load of sarin gas shells from the Republic of Georgia. Chemical weapons used in the Ghouta war crime were trucked through Turkey to Gaziantep then taken from there to Aleppo by NGOs, hidden in ambulances or in trucks supposedly carrying relief aid. After Shim broke this story on PressTV ... the clumsily-staged ‘accident’ leading to her death only a few days later."

    By way of motive - Destruction of Syria & Assad serves the long-being-implemented 1980s Israeli Oded Yinon Plan to destroy & dismember all major countries surrounding mafia state Israel, in general service to the world oligarchs. Plus, there are major US-backed economics behind the campaign to destroy Syria - Assad's fall is sought for changing from the Russia-supported pipeline from Iran thru Iraq & Syria, to the USA-supported pipeline from Qatar thru Saudi Arabia, Jordan & Syria.

    Sarin is a nerve agent and if that is what was used, gas masks are far less than what is needed to protect anyone.

    I don’t see any motivation on Assad’s part to stage such an attack. It simply was not in his interest to do so. Trump’s action was a knee jerk reaction and stupid.

    Read More
  16. April 07, 2017 Pentagon Trained Syria’s Al Qaeda “Rebels” in the Use of Chemical Weapons

    The Western media refutes their own lies.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784

    Apr 9, 2017 No More

    Read More
  17. Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    Thete is mo reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda afiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscrtobe to the populsr contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn’t hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack?

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    Hi Wiz,

    I think it is quite clear, that with the assistance of the Russian military, the Syrian army has mounted multiple strategic victories against ISIS over the past year and a half.

    The entry of Russia into the fray, at the request of Syria, provided a very deep reservoir of enhanced military power which has shown to be highly effective in degraded both Al Qaeda and ISIS on multiple fronts.

    It seems as absurd now , as it did in 2013, that Assad would do the ONE THING that would force the hand of the US military to enter the fray against him.

    I also doubt the notion of the Syrian regimes "desperation" given the complete cooperation of Russia in providing any assistance the Syrian army might need , to achieve victory against ISIS.

    One could argue, however ,that Assad is truly "bonehead" stupid.

    You are certainly free to make that argument, Wiz , because, in this case, it seems to be the one that would make the most sense.
    , @Philip Giraldi
    Kilcullen is well compensated by those who support the Establishment narrative on Syria and everywhere else in the Middle East so he does indeed have an agenda. Most intel and military types that I have spoken to agree that after the retaking of Aleppo al-Assad is winning and will eventually win. Did he nevertheless stage the chemical attack on Idbil? I don't know. Let's see the evidence. Somebody obviously knows that happened.
    , @Ivan
    Oz,
    Assad may well have the means to deliver chemical weapons but then so does the opposition.

    Had the Americans presented the evidence they had to a court of experts and the experts had concurred, I would be forced to agree that it was Assad who had used the chemical weapon. As it stands the purported physical evidence has been picked cleanly apart by experts such as Dr Theodore Postol, to the point where those who continue to maintain that it was Assad's forces that used the chemical weapon, are reduced to conjectures about Assad's mental state and abilities of the Syrian Air Force. They are not able to argue on the basis of physical evidence at all.

    The Americans are past masters in this, breathlessly claim that that they have incontrovertible evidence of some crime: that the Russians were complicit in shooting down MH17, that Iraq had WMD, but when pressed have to hint darkly about evil Russians and Arabs, with some stories of historical bloodthirstiness thrown in. Rather typical of the propaganda that the neocons have regaled us with for well on three decades.

    Very clearly sections in America were looking for an opportunity to bloody Assad. Trump saw opportunities in this to impress Xi, while eating rich chocolate cake and send a message to the Norks.

    , @KA
    Why should someone will believe ( even if it is correct ) anything that comes out of US-UK? Haven t they lost that natural right ? There something devil or radioactive about them .Once the lines ( it has been crossed many times) are crossed , we don't want to associate truth or pious or good intention with them It is too risky to believe them . It is like walking into swamps infested with vipers and crocodile assuming that there might be a deer stuck in the mud.


    Second ,lets assume Assad did. It is being spread around Assad did to shorten the war and mop up te last hurdles and declare victory. He has used sarin / chemical. Has he won the war? has he achieved what he wanted to achieve ? Why hasn't he ?

    The evidences offered by US-UK are nothing but readjustments of alphabets and nothing but pure wordsmithing

  18. Is it possible that Trump and Putin cooked up this little show simply to give Trump more credibility in his approaching confrontation with North Korea?

    Read More
  19. @Anon
    Get a load of this a**hole who was responsible for disaster in Russia.

    He thinks he has the right to judge the mental health of others.

    But as long as super-rich globalists fund think-tanks and invite lunatics like him, he can posture as a 'voice of reason'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhyD-fPS0vs

    And there is the other esteemed 'voice of reason', Thomas Friedman, who wants war in Syria to go on, even if ISIS kills more innocents.

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/15/thomas-friedmans-perverse-love-affair-isis

    These academics are like mafia lawyers.

    The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia.
    It's like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob.

    And there were other famous Mob Lawyers, the real ones.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ragano

    So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates.
    They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob.

    Sachs is a total shark. He's been a Glob Advocate forever. A real weasel.

    What’s the common denominator to these two??????

    Read More
  20. “Democratic Party liberal interventionists have also joined with Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Marco Rubio to celebrate the cruise missile strike and hardening rhetoric.”

    All owned by the likes of… http://www.haaretz.com/polopoly_fs/1.631441.1418390491!/image/412181903.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_640/412181903.jpg Repulsive no?

    Read More
  21. @utu
    Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media?

    “…picture he found somewhere on social media.”

    If you check closely, I think you will find that Postol took that photo from the White House issued document presenting the “evidence”(not!) of Syrian responsibility(not!) for the sarin(?) gas attack. Thus that photo represents the on-the-record official story w/official “evidence”.

    Far from being some randomly acquired photo taken from social media and originating who knows where. And to take it one discrediting step further, it turns out the photo was provided by the al Qaeda terrorists — the CIA’s client anti-Assad terrorists — who control that area.

    Bottom line: From the first, this was an ***OBVIOUS*** false flag. The only question remaining is whether the CIA coordinated with al Qaeda in planning this event.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    On Apr 13, 2017, Center for Strategic and International Studies hosted Mike Pompeo for his first public speaking appearance as CIA director.

    After Pompeo's prepared remarks, Juan Zarate queried the director on the Syria attack/s, starting his questions with comment on the rapidity with which "assessments were made."
    (Zarate is now at CSIS after proving his neoconservative bona fides as a charter member of Stuart Levey's Treasury Department "guerrillas in grey suits" -- the gang that deploys financial blackmail to coerce international banks and corporations to join the US in constraining their commerce with states the USA does not like.)

    Pompeo responded to Zarate's request for "behind the scenes" description of how the assessments were made:


    "We were in short order able to deliver a high confidence assessment that it was the Syrian regime that had launched chemical attacks against its own people. Not me, Our Team, not just the CIA, the entire intelligence community was good and fast and we challenged ourselves. I can assure you we were challenged by the President and his team. We wanted to make sure we had it right. There’s not much like when the president looks at you and says, Are you sure? When you know he’s contemplating an action based on the analysis your organization has provided, and we got it right and I’m proud of the work that get to have the president have the opportunity to make a good decision about what he ought to do in the face of the atrocity that took place. "
     
    Zarate did not register dissatisfaction with this non-response; instead, he accepted the assessment as conclusive. Then he escalated the discussion:

    "What do you make of the Russian disputation of those conclusions? Bashar Al-Assad calling this a fabrication, the entire event. It’s a battle of legitimacy and proof. How do you deal with that?"
     
    To which Pompeo delivered the money-quote:

    They’re challenges. There are things we were able to use to form the basis of our conclusion that we cannot reveal. That is always tricky, but we’ve done our best and I think over time we can reveal a bit more. Everyone saw the open source photos, so we had reality on our side."
     
    So apparently Pompeo and the "entire intelligence community" used the same photos that Dr. Postol examined exhaustively, but reached a different conclusion; they believe that the photos reflect "reality" and support their interpretation of events as fingering the Syrian government as perpetrators of the "red-line" "atrocity."

    Pompeo spent the next few minutes derogating Russia and Putin, stating that "Russia is on its sixth or seventh version of the story," and that "Putin is not a credible man . . . a man for whom veracity does not translate into English." (I think he meant "into Russian . . ..")

    ---

    Recall that in 2013 Diane Feinstein also engaged the "rapid turnaround" efforts of the CIA to produce a video presentation of gassed children, which she claimed implicated the Syrian government, in her bid to drive the Obama administration across the "red line." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/07/cia-authenticates-13-videos-showing-syrian-gas-attack-aftermath-official-says.html
    and
    Lawmakers shown ‘horrendous’ video of alleged chemical attack in Syria Sept 05, 2013

    After extensive investigation by experts under the auspices of the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon declared that it was "indisputable" that a chemical attack had occurred, but those responsible for the attack were not conclusively identified. Samantha Power, however, insisted that "it must have been Assad." http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/un-report-confirms-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-syria-a-922746.html

    Same lies, different liars.

  22. @Hunsdon
    INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait.

    Well they do not get to set the rules until they are the most powerful state in the world–like the US.

    Read More
  23. Remember WMD and Saddam? What did the top papers say after Colin Powell’s speech to the UN “proving” that Iraq had WMD?

    New York Times: “[Powell's speech] may not have produced a ‘smoking gun,” but it left little question that Mr. Hussein had tried hard to conceal one.”

    Wall Street Journal: “The Powell evidence will be persuasive to anyone who is still persuadable. …The only question remaining is whether the U.N. is going to have the courage of Mr. Powell’s convictions.”

    Washington Post: “To continue to say that the Bush administration has not made its case, you must now believe that Colin Powell lied in the most serious statement he will ever make…”

    “Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.”
    Joseph Goebbels

    Read More
  24. @Hunsdon
    INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait.

    Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    "Illegal" not.

    Russia was right to accept the legitimate Crimean vote.

    The Crimean voters overwhelmingly approved returning to Russia.

    Democracy personified, the will of the people.

    Leftists hate that.

    , @RobinG
    Thanks, Wally.

    "iffen," the eff'n Israeli disinfo troll, is always trying to slip one in.
    , @Anon
    Keith says:


    "Not only that they recently annexed a prized warm water port".

    Iffen, have you forgot you and your Zionists comrades, Sam the Sham and Incitatus, are ardent supporters of Israel's annexing of the entire homeland of the Palestinians?

    There in a big difference between Russia's annexing a warm water port and Israel's annexing of Palestine.


    The people of Crimea ( majority are Russian) wanted to be annexed, just like the Danzig Germans who wanted to reunite with Germany. The annexing ( reuniting ) with Russia was peaceful. The Israeli annexing is ethnic cleansing and genocide.

    Iffen ... like I said once before, you are over your head. No matter how much you support Israel's war crimes, your arguments will never get support in a free media like the UNZ Review.

    Stick with sending your bullshit to the editorial pages of the Zio NY Time and Washington Post. They, I promise will accept your hasbara news.,

    , @Avery
    {Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port}

    Not only that, but legally reversing an illegal act is not only not illegal, but quite legal and just: a patently illegal act was righted.

    Khrushchev, a Soviet dictator, decided on his won to 'give' Crimea to Ukraine SSR, without the consent of the people in Crimea.

    In 1991 as USSR was dissolving, residents of Crimea held a referendum on restoration of Autonomy. It passed by 90%+. Kiev ignored it.
    In 1994 residents of Crimea held a referendum on self-rule. It passed by ~80%. Kiev ignored it.

    After the Neo-Nazi coup in Kiev - financed in part by György Schwartz aka George Soros and Kolomoisky (Israeli+Cypriot+Ukrainian citizen (!)) - the Azov neo-Nazi gangs and their kin started ethnically cleansing and murdering ethnic Russians. Exhibit A: the massacre in Odessa. Residents of Crimea, very rationally not wanting to be massacred by neo-Nazis voted in a referendum in 2014 to re-join Russia.
    Done. Thank you very much.

    Now let's talk about Israel' illegal occupation and annexation of Golan Heights, land that belongs to Syrian Arab Republic.
    Let's also talk about Israel's ongoing, illegal theft of lands that legally belong to Palestinians. To be clear, I am talking about the illegal Jews-only settlements being currently built on Palestinian territories, not what transpired before.
  25. @Wizard of Oz
    Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    Thete is mo reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda afiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscrtobe to the populsr contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn't hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack?

    Hi Wiz,

    I think it is quite clear, that with the assistance of the Russian military, the Syrian army has mounted multiple strategic victories against ISIS over the past year and a half.

    The entry of Russia into the fray, at the request of Syria, provided a very deep reservoir of enhanced military power which has shown to be highly effective in degraded both Al Qaeda and ISIS on multiple fronts.

    It seems as absurd now , as it did in 2013, that Assad would do the ONE THING that would force the hand of the US military to enter the fray against him.

    I also doubt the notion of the Syrian regimes “desperation” given the complete cooperation of Russia in providing any assistance the Syrian army might need , to achieve victory against ISIS.

    One could argue, however ,that Assad is truly “bonehead” stupid.

    You are certainly free to make that argument, Wiz , because, in this case, it seems to be the one that would make the most sense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I've written more than enough on this without having a dog in the fight but let me just point out that it is not ISIS that is said to be Assad's particular concern now but Al Nusra or other more or less Al Qaeda affiliated jihadi rebels.
  26. @Sean

    Sounds like we’ve heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.
     
    Quite. They maybe faked before and know how to in there was a overwhelming need. However, one wonders why they did not use the gas gambit when they were set to lose Aleppo. Using it now only when they have lost their big gains, seems like bolting the stable door after the horse is gone . So the motives for the rebels faking a gas attack at this juncture are even more puzzling as for the Assad regime having ordered it .

    Why Volatility Signals Stability, and Vice Versa
    By Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Gregory F. Treverton
    Purchase Article
    Even as protests spread across the Middle East in early 2011, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appeared immune from the upheaval. Assad had ruled comfortably for over a decade, having replaced his father, Hafez, who himself had held power for the previous three decades. Many pundits argued that Syria’s sturdy police state, which exercised tight control over the country’s people and economy, would survive the Arab Spring undisturbed. ]...

    But appearances were deceiving: today, Syria is in a shambles, with the regime fighting for its very survival, whereas Lebanon has withstood the influx of Syrian refugees and the other considerable pressures of the civil war next door. Surprising as it may seem, the per capita death rate from violence in Lebanon in 2013 was lower than that in Washington, D.C. That same year, the body count of the Syrian conflict surpassed 100,000.

    Why has seemingly stable Syria turned out to be the fragile regime, whereas always-in-turmoil Lebanon has so far proved robust? The answer is that prior to its civil war, Syria was exhibiting only pseudo-stability, its calm façade concealing deep structural vulnerabilities. Lebanon’s chaos, paradoxically, signaled strength. Fifteen years of civil war had served to decentralize the state and bring about a more balanced sectarian power-sharing structure. Along with Lebanon’s small size as an administrative unit, these factors added to its durability. So did the country’s free-market economy. In Syria, the ruling Baath Party sought to control economic variability, replacing the lively chaos of the ancestral souk with the top-down, Soviet-style structure of the office building. This rigidity made Syria (and the other Baathist state, Iraq) much more vulnerable to disruption than Lebanon.[...]


    The divergent tales of Syria and Lebanon demonstrate that the best early warning signs of instability are found not in historical data but in underlying structural properties. Past experience can be extremely effective when it comes to detecting risks of cancer, crime, and earthquakes. But it is a bad bellwether of complex political and economic events, particularly so-called tail risks—events, such as coups and financial crises, that are highly unlikely but enormously consequential. For those, the evidence of risk comes too late to do anything about it, and a more sophisticated approach is required.

    [...]

    Simply put, fragility is aversion to disorder. Things that are fragile do not like variability, volatility, stress, chaos, and random events, which cause them to either gain little or suffer. A teacup, for example, will not benefit from any form of shock. It wants peace and predictability, something that is not possible in the long run, which is why time is an enemy to the fragile. What’s more, things that are fragile respond to shock in a nonlinear fashion. With humans, for example, the harm from a ten-foot fall in no way equals ten times as much harm as from a one-foot fall. In political and economic terms, a $30 drop in the price of a barrel of oil is much more than twice as harmful to Saudi Arabia as a $15 drop.

    THE CENTER CANNOT HOLD

    The first marker of a fragile state is a concentrated decision-making system.funds, at the price of increasing systemic risks, such as disastrous national-level reforms.
     


    This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria
     
    A Russian build military base being used to attack urban areas is not "Syria"

    Assad and those around him hold concentrated centralised power and are already proven to be incredibly stupid, that is why he is in this position-- he thought the people loved him, put up the price of basic commodities and the rebellion started. Assad perhaps believes the US is scared to get involved in Syria or to to cross the Russians . It seems silly but he and his advisors have a proven record of catastrophic misjudgements . Bringing in the Russians meant the US would be involved.

    I dare say the US has more advanced facilities for gathering intelligence it lets on about and than Syria, Russia or US media know about. Providing "evidence" gives away the hole card one might come in handy if the nuclear balloon starts going goes well and truly up. Any price would be worth paying for knowing Russia's intent. If people doubt Trump over this (and he warned the Russian it was going to be done so he didn't seek confrontation) it is the unfortunate price of maintaining secret intelligence facilities.


    The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.
     
    For a great power seeing its rival use military force to crush a rebellion it has expressed sympathy is quite definitely a real defeat . It's a zero sum game for America and Russia (yes Russia is Jingoistic, and I think it is more centralised in decision making ) . The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe.

    “The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn’t be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe.”

    Wow, we must have been observing two different worlds, because Russian actions in several theatres (Syria, Ukraine, Korea, ROW) have been relatively restrained to non-existent despite clear threats to their national interests, while the US has ratcheted up it military intervention pretty much globally over the same period. Then again, I live outside the US and am not blanketed with the propaganda that spills out of its MSM house organs, so we have indeed observed two different worlds.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    Trump didn't wait for the gas attack, he was already laying the ground for getting involved in Syria, which is not a vital interest of Russia. Russians want to do stuff like support Assad and crush rebels the US has expressed sympathy for. they surely didn't expect to be left alone.

  27. @Hunsdon
    INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait.

    IOW, the Russians have their own military in their own county guarding their own borders.

    Read More
  28. @iffen
    Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port.

    “Illegal” not.

    Russia was right to accept the legitimate Crimean vote.

    The Crimean voters overwhelmingly approved returning to Russia.

    Democracy personified, the will of the people.

    Leftists hate that.

    Read More
  29. @utu
    Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media?

    You won’t find it by looking at CNN / ZNN.

    Try:

    http://russia-insider.com/en

    Read More
  30. @Wizard of Oz
    Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    Thete is mo reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda afiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscrtobe to the populsr contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn't hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack?

    Kilcullen is well compensated by those who support the Establishment narrative on Syria and everywhere else in the Middle East so he does indeed have an agenda. Most intel and military types that I have spoken to agree that after the retaking of Aleppo al-Assad is winning and will eventually win. Did he nevertheless stage the chemical attack on Idbil? I don’t know. Let’s see the evidence. Somebody obviously knows that happened.

    Read More
    • Replies: @unseated
    I assume that someone called "Wizard of Oz" might, like myself, be a resident of Australia.
    What is surprising, then, is that he/she gives any credibility to a Murdoch rag and the Australian at that. Its political positions with respect to the Middle East in particular are well known.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Now that we are zeroing in on a consensus that it is the symbolism that is the key to understanding rather than any particualrs about the use of gas I wonder what you make of this Victor Davis Hanson article which was drawn to my attention by a retired Australian senior public servant who writes extensively on strategic anf security matters:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446812/trump-restoring-deterrence-necessary-dangerous-corrective-obama-appeasement
    , @RobinG
    This is so good, I was blown away. Max has really come a long way on Syria. He and Ben hit the White Helmets, US involvement since 2006, Saudi et al support of militants....everything. (Yes, Israel too.) As they say, [no other "progressives" are covering this].

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6C249jh7wQ
    On Contact: The Uncivil War with Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton

    Following the US missile attacks, Max Blumenthal, Senior Editor of AlterNet's Grayzone Project, and Ben Norton, reporter for Alternet discuss, the U.S. role in the Syrian conflict.
  31. @Quartermaster
    Putin is the real weasel, and problem in Russia. He's corrupt to his core and has his own vision for Russia which is quite destructive. His Soviet revanchism is a serious problem for Russia and has set the country up for a serious fall.

    Putin is so bad for Russia that the Russians overwhelmingly support him.

    I suggest you quit digging.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BASUDEB
    Sorry to say, you don't have any. For that you will have to make a revolution. Present form of democracy, or whatever you may call it, suits the corporates best.
  32. @Jeff Davis
    "...picture he found somewhere on social media."

    If you check closely, I think you will find that Postol took that photo from the White House issued document presenting the "evidence"(not!) of Syrian responsibility(not!) for the sarin(?) gas attack. Thus that photo represents the on-the-record official story w/official "evidence".

    Far from being some randomly acquired photo taken from social media and originating who knows where. And to take it one discrediting step further, it turns out the photo was provided by the al Qaeda terrorists -- the CIA's client anti-Assad terrorists -- who control that area.

    Bottom line: From the first, this was an ***OBVIOUS*** false flag. The only question remaining is whether the CIA coordinated with al Qaeda in planning this event.

    On Apr 13, 2017, Center for Strategic and International Studies hosted Mike Pompeo for his first public speaking appearance as CIA director.

    After Pompeo’s prepared remarks, Juan Zarate queried the director on the Syria attack/s, starting his questions with comment on the rapidity with which “assessments were made.”
    (Zarate is now at CSIS after proving his neoconservative bona fides as a charter member of Stuart Levey’s Treasury Department “guerrillas in grey suits” — the gang that deploys financial blackmail to coerce international banks and corporations to join the US in constraining their commerce with states the USA does not like.)

    Pompeo responded to Zarate’s request for “behind the scenes” description of how the assessments were made:

    “We were in short order able to deliver a high confidence assessment that it was the Syrian regime that had launched chemical attacks against its own people. Not me, Our Team, not just the CIA, the entire intelligence community was good and fast and we challenged ourselves. I can assure you we were challenged by the President and his team. We wanted to make sure we had it right. There’s not much like when the president looks at you and says, Are you sure? When you know he’s contemplating an action based on the analysis your organization has provided, and we got it right and I’m proud of the work that get to have the president have the opportunity to make a good decision about what he ought to do in the face of the atrocity that took place. “

    Zarate did not register dissatisfaction with this non-response; instead, he accepted the assessment as conclusive. Then he escalated the discussion:

    “What do you make of the Russian disputation of those conclusions? Bashar Al-Assad calling this a fabrication, the entire event. It’s a battle of legitimacy and proof. How do you deal with that?”

    To which Pompeo delivered the money-quote:

    They’re challenges. There are things we were able to use to form the basis of our conclusion that we cannot reveal. That is always tricky, but we’ve done our best and I think over time we can reveal a bit more. Everyone saw the open source photos, so we had reality on our side.

    So apparently Pompeo and the “entire intelligence community” used the same photos that Dr. Postol examined exhaustively, but reached a different conclusion; they believe that the photos reflect “reality” and support their interpretation of events as fingering the Syrian government as perpetrators of the “red-line” “atrocity.”

    Pompeo spent the next few minutes derogating Russia and Putin, stating that “Russia is on its sixth or seventh version of the story,” and that “Putin is not a credible man . . . a man for whom veracity does not translate into English.” (I think he meant “into Russian . . ..”)

    Recall that in 2013 Diane Feinstein also engaged the “rapid turnaround” efforts of the CIA to produce a video presentation of gassed children, which she claimed implicated the Syrian government, in her bid to drive the Obama administration across the “red line.” http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/07/cia-authenticates-13-videos-showing-syrian-gas-attack-aftermath-official-says.html
    and
    Lawmakers shown ‘horrendous’ video of alleged chemical attack in Syria Sept 05, 2013

    After extensive investigation by experts under the auspices of the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon declared that it was “indisputable” that a chemical attack had occurred, but those responsible for the attack were not conclusively identified. Samantha Power, however, insisted that “it must have been Assad.” http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/un-report-confirms-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-syria-a-922746.html

    Same lies, different liars.

    Read More
    • Replies: @chris
    The real video which convinced Trump of Assad's guilt so quickly must have been the one from his hotel room in Moscow.
    , @Z-man
    Juan Zarate, a tool of the Cabal.
  33. The Theodor Postel report made it onto Yahoo News…surprisinly, last night. JW

    Read More
  34. @Sean

    Sounds like we’ve heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.
     
    Quite. They maybe faked before and know how to in there was a overwhelming need. However, one wonders why they did not use the gas gambit when they were set to lose Aleppo. Using it now only when they have lost their big gains, seems like bolting the stable door after the horse is gone . So the motives for the rebels faking a gas attack at this juncture are even more puzzling as for the Assad regime having ordered it .

    Why Volatility Signals Stability, and Vice Versa
    By Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Gregory F. Treverton
    Purchase Article
    Even as protests spread across the Middle East in early 2011, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appeared immune from the upheaval. Assad had ruled comfortably for over a decade, having replaced his father, Hafez, who himself had held power for the previous three decades. Many pundits argued that Syria’s sturdy police state, which exercised tight control over the country’s people and economy, would survive the Arab Spring undisturbed. ]...

    But appearances were deceiving: today, Syria is in a shambles, with the regime fighting for its very survival, whereas Lebanon has withstood the influx of Syrian refugees and the other considerable pressures of the civil war next door. Surprising as it may seem, the per capita death rate from violence in Lebanon in 2013 was lower than that in Washington, D.C. That same year, the body count of the Syrian conflict surpassed 100,000.

    Why has seemingly stable Syria turned out to be the fragile regime, whereas always-in-turmoil Lebanon has so far proved robust? The answer is that prior to its civil war, Syria was exhibiting only pseudo-stability, its calm façade concealing deep structural vulnerabilities. Lebanon’s chaos, paradoxically, signaled strength. Fifteen years of civil war had served to decentralize the state and bring about a more balanced sectarian power-sharing structure. Along with Lebanon’s small size as an administrative unit, these factors added to its durability. So did the country’s free-market economy. In Syria, the ruling Baath Party sought to control economic variability, replacing the lively chaos of the ancestral souk with the top-down, Soviet-style structure of the office building. This rigidity made Syria (and the other Baathist state, Iraq) much more vulnerable to disruption than Lebanon.[...]


    The divergent tales of Syria and Lebanon demonstrate that the best early warning signs of instability are found not in historical data but in underlying structural properties. Past experience can be extremely effective when it comes to detecting risks of cancer, crime, and earthquakes. But it is a bad bellwether of complex political and economic events, particularly so-called tail risks—events, such as coups and financial crises, that are highly unlikely but enormously consequential. For those, the evidence of risk comes too late to do anything about it, and a more sophisticated approach is required.

    [...]

    Simply put, fragility is aversion to disorder. Things that are fragile do not like variability, volatility, stress, chaos, and random events, which cause them to either gain little or suffer. A teacup, for example, will not benefit from any form of shock. It wants peace and predictability, something that is not possible in the long run, which is why time is an enemy to the fragile. What’s more, things that are fragile respond to shock in a nonlinear fashion. With humans, for example, the harm from a ten-foot fall in no way equals ten times as much harm as from a one-foot fall. In political and economic terms, a $30 drop in the price of a barrel of oil is much more than twice as harmful to Saudi Arabia as a $15 drop.

    THE CENTER CANNOT HOLD

    The first marker of a fragile state is a concentrated decision-making system.funds, at the price of increasing systemic risks, such as disastrous national-level reforms.
     


    This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria
     
    A Russian build military base being used to attack urban areas is not "Syria"

    Assad and those around him hold concentrated centralised power and are already proven to be incredibly stupid, that is why he is in this position-- he thought the people loved him, put up the price of basic commodities and the rebellion started. Assad perhaps believes the US is scared to get involved in Syria or to to cross the Russians . It seems silly but he and his advisors have a proven record of catastrophic misjudgements . Bringing in the Russians meant the US would be involved.

    I dare say the US has more advanced facilities for gathering intelligence it lets on about and than Syria, Russia or US media know about. Providing "evidence" gives away the hole card one might come in handy if the nuclear balloon starts going goes well and truly up. Any price would be worth paying for knowing Russia's intent. If people doubt Trump over this (and he warned the Russian it was going to be done so he didn't seek confrontation) it is the unfortunate price of maintaining secret intelligence facilities.


    The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.
     
    For a great power seeing its rival use military force to crush a rebellion it has expressed sympathy is quite definitely a real defeat . It's a zero sum game for America and Russia (yes Russia is Jingoistic, and I think it is more centralised in decision making ) . The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe.

    You have no idea what you’re talking about. You don’t source your quotes, and you’re ideologically driven by a form of crypto anti-socialism revealed in you’re basic premise that centralized planning created the vulnerability that brought down Saddam and now threatens Assad.

    Nonsense. What threatens all of the Mideast — what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad — is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.

    The US has been turned into Israel’s bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project. And you,… are either a fool or an Israeli propagandist.

    Read More
    • Agree: Z-man
    • Replies: @Z-man

    What threatens all of the Mideast — what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad — is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.
    The US has been turned into Israel’s bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project.
     
    Bares repeating.
  35. @utu
    Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media?

    How do we know it wasn’t YOU? Prove it. I want pictures, names.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    It's not about proving things. It is about narrative control. However you look at it Russia (and Assad) lost the narrative. One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff. One would think they have means, right? After all there are FSB, GRU, Assad's intelligence, assets on the ground in Syria, intercepted communications between Al Qaeda and their handlers. And Russian media can't come up with a good story and relies on 71 years old former MIT professor report. So what's going on there? Don't they want to win? Are they being sabotaged by inept and indolent staff? Or is Russia's fight in the Middle East just a make belief? Hey, Our American Partners, how much will you pay us for playing bad guys? And for being stupid guys you pay extra, right?
  36. @The Anti-Gnostic
    How do we know it wasn't YOU? Prove it. I want pictures, names.

    It’s not about proving things. It is about narrative control. However you look at it Russia (and Assad) lost the narrative. One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won’t change it. Still it is this report that Russia’s media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff. One would think they have means, right? After all there are FSB, GRU, Assad’s intelligence, assets on the ground in Syria, intercepted communications between Al Qaeda and their handlers. And Russian media can’t come up with a good story and relies on 71 years old former MIT professor report. So what’s going on there? Don’t they want to win? Are they being sabotaged by inept and indolent staff? Or is Russia’s fight in the Middle East just a make belief? Hey, Our American Partners, how much will you pay us for playing bad guys? And for being stupid guys you pay extra, right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @bike-anarchist
    Your comment reminds me of a conversation I had with a fence post. At least I found the the fence post truthful, unlike you. I can't imagine you to be able to make humanitarian decisions based on your impatience and impudence.
    , @SolontoCroesus

    One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won’t change it. Still it is this report that Russia’s media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff.
     
    According to newly minted director of CIA, that organization and the entire "intelligence community" relied on the "reality" of those photos, in addition to other things that "can't be revealed right now, maybe later."

    Maybe it will be revealed after Assad is safely dead or in exile in Moscow what the CIA's can't be revealed methods were.
  37. @The Alarmist

    "The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn’t be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe."
     
    Wow, we must have been observing two different worlds, because Russian actions in several theatres (Syria, Ukraine, Korea, ROW) have been relatively restrained to non-existent despite clear threats to their national interests, while the US has ratcheted up it military intervention pretty much globally over the same period. Then again, I live outside the US and am not blanketed with the propaganda that spills out of its MSM house organs, so we have indeed observed two different worlds.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    Trump didn’t wait for the gas attack, he was already laying the ground for getting involved in Syria, which is not a vital interest of Russia. Russians want to do stuff like support Assad and crush rebels the US has expressed sympathy for. they surely didn’t expect to be left alone.

    Read More
  38. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.

    So far it’s been a Big Media claim, too. To the point of at least one piece (in The Atlantic, IIRC) poo-pooing the idea that the Big Media Narrative could be wrong.

    even though Damascus had no motive to stage such an attack

    I’m tired of reading this and seeing no explanation. I’d like to see that assertion supported. I’d like it to come from you, Phil, because so far, in my experience, you seem to be the most reasonable US-skeptic writer at TUR.

    It isn’t self-explanatory. Chemical weapons have their uses, like clearing out heavily fortified urban areas that would be costly to clear the old fashioned way. Weighed against Trump’s ostensible goal to stay out of Syria and drop the insane “Assad must go” rhetoric of the previous administration, it might’ve been tempting. Which is why I would like to know more about the target area and circumstances. But nobody seems to give a shit. I suppose it might have a lot to do with the fact that there are (or were, last I heard) no journalists in Syria. But if we simply don’t know much about the target area, maybe we should stop assuming hitting it with chemical weapons had no utility.

    Principled and eminently sensible Democratic Congressman Tulsi Gabbard

    Those principles being “don’t invade the world, invite the world,” I presume?

    There have been two central documents relating to the alleged Syrian chemical weapon incidents in 2013 and 2017, both of which read like press releases. Both refer to a consensus within the U.S. intelligence community (IC)and express “confidence” and even “high confidence” regarding their conclusions but neither is actually a product of the office of the Director of National Intelligence, which would be appropriate if the IC had actually come to a consensus. Neither the Director of National Intelligence nor the Director of CIA were present in a photo showing the White House team deliberating over what to do about Syria. Both documents supporting the U.S. cruise missile attack were, in fact, uncharacteristically put out by the White House, suggesting that the arguments were stitched together in haste to support a political decision to use force that had already been made.

    The American Security Apparatus can shove their consensus up their asses anyway. Why should the American public take their word for anything?

    Generally reliable journalist Robert Parry is reporting that the intelligence behind the White House claims comes largely from satellite surveillance, though nothing has been released to back-up the conclusion that the Syrian government was behind the attack, an odd omission as everyone knows about satellite capabilities and they are not generally considered to be a classified source or method.

    And there are huge, consistent gaps in satellite coverage (and always have been, last I heard) that everyone and their mother knows about, meaning, it would be trivial for anyone to plan an attack when the satellites can’t see. If Parry is right, then it sounds like the administration has jack shit. “Satellite surveillance” is the last source I’d find persuasive or conclusive in this context.

    Parry also cites the fact that there are alternative theories on what took place and why, some of which appear to originate with the intelligence and national security community, which was in part concerned over the rush to judgment by the White House.

    So this really is shaping up to all be a bunch of “Wag The Dog/I bombed Serbia to distract from my kosher blowjob scandal” bullshit. Great.

    The al-Ansar terrorist group (affiliated with al-Qaeda) is in control of the area

    Meaning, this “innocent civilians” mantra we’ve been hearing from Big Media is bullshit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    "...like clearing out heavily fortified urban areas.."

    Svigor, all parties seem to agree this was a small village and there were only civilian casualties. (Did I misread?) So, hardly a "tempting" target.
    , @Intelligent Dasein

    I’m tired of reading this and seeing no explanation. I’d like to see that assertion supported.
     
    Well, it's also germane to this narrative that Assad, de jure, has no chemical weapons. He supposedly rid himself of them in a manner that was internationally verified. So if he had actually been the one using chemical weapons, not only would this attack have stupidly invited the condemnation of the world for humanitarian reasons, it would have been tantamount to him saying, "Yeah, I got 'em and I use 'em. Whatcha gonna do about it, punk?"

    Assad does not strike me as either stupid or crazy or abnormally cruel. It simply beggars belief that he would do this when he couldn't possibly benefit from it.

    So now the US government has been caught in a resounding lie, an utterly exposed and busted false flag, with Trump's pathetic elegiacs about "beautiful little babies" providing an extra dollop of schmaltz; and, like a true sociopath, rather than showing any remorse or even embarrassment at the exposure, it simply moves on to the next lie, the next mark.

    We who are still clinging to sanity have got to remember that there is an objective and recognizably human external reality outside of the government's propaganda mills and the MSMattix. If Assad did the attack, he had motives for doing so. If he has no credible motives, he probably didn't do it. The government's case seems to be that Assad is literally a homicidal lunatic who does these sorts of things just because. If you cannot believe that, then you cannot believe the rest of the story.
  39. @utu
    It's not about proving things. It is about narrative control. However you look at it Russia (and Assad) lost the narrative. One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff. One would think they have means, right? After all there are FSB, GRU, Assad's intelligence, assets on the ground in Syria, intercepted communications between Al Qaeda and their handlers. And Russian media can't come up with a good story and relies on 71 years old former MIT professor report. So what's going on there? Don't they want to win? Are they being sabotaged by inept and indolent staff? Or is Russia's fight in the Middle East just a make belief? Hey, Our American Partners, how much will you pay us for playing bad guys? And for being stupid guys you pay extra, right?

    Your comment reminds me of a conversation I had with a fence post. At least I found the the fence post truthful, unlike you. I can’t imagine you to be able to make humanitarian decisions based on your impatience and impudence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    You found it impudent for me calling Russian media and Russia's propaganda machine inept and indolent? You must be one of those who drank Putin's Kool-Aid and is now patiently awaiting his 2nd coming and saving us all from the grips of the NWO, right?
  40. @Jeff Davis
    You have no idea what you're talking about. You don't source your quotes, and you're ideologically driven by a form of crypto anti-socialism revealed in you're basic premise that centralized planning created the vulnerability that brought down Saddam and now threatens Assad.

    Nonsense. What threatens all of the Mideast -- what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad -- is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.

    The US has been turned into Israel's bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project. And you,... are either a fool or an Israeli propagandist.

    What threatens all of the Mideast — what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad — is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.
    The US has been turned into Israel’s bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project.

    Bares repeating.

    Read More
  41. @bike-anarchist
    Your comment reminds me of a conversation I had with a fence post. At least I found the the fence post truthful, unlike you. I can't imagine you to be able to make humanitarian decisions based on your impatience and impudence.

    You found it impudent for me calling Russian media and Russia’s propaganda machine inept and indolent? You must be one of those who drank Putin’s Kool-Aid and is now patiently awaiting his 2nd coming and saving us all from the grips of the NWO, right?

    Read More
  42. I think the take-home point for anyone who does his own thinking is that Trump acted so quickly (36 hours) that the evidence should be overwhelming and incontrovertible. The evidence forthcoming has been shit. Ergo, it seems very clear that Trump had no valid reason to act as he did.

    What would he gain at this point to launch a chemical attack on the civilian populations?

    Either the area is full of innocent civilians, or it’s an al-Qaeda stronghold.

    Why’d there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don’t they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media?

    The Russians are going to need a lot more than counter-propaganda. I trust them even less than I trust western Big Media. Hard evidence or go home.

    Agent76, nobody who will trust globalresearch.ca needs to have their link cited, they’ll know about it already, being Konspiracy Kooks. Nobody else is gonna buy that junk.

    Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port.

    Illegal, schmellegal. It’s perfectly legit realpolitik. If Ukraine didn’t want Russia taking back what was hers, she shouldn’t have jumped into bed with hostile powers. Seriously, if you’d asked a Ukrainian on independence day what would happen in the current circumstances, they could have painted you an accurate picture.

    “We were in short order able to deliver a high confidence assessment that it was the Syrian regime that had launched chemical attacks against its own people. Not me, Our Team, not just the CIA, the entire intelligence community was good and fast and we challenged ourselves. I can assure you we were challenged by the President and his team. We wanted to make sure we had it right. There’s not much like when the president looks at you and says, Are you sure? When you know he’s contemplating an action based on the analysis your organization has provided, and we got it right and I’m proud of the work that get to have the president have the opportunity to make a good decision about what he ought to do in the face of the atrocity that took place. “

    “Trust me, I’m a professional liar.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    Trump's actions remind me of a kid doing a cannonball into a pool, splashing those around him. While they gasp, point and sputter, he (or his designate) gets out, dries off and goes onto his next activity leaving behind plenty of material for copy. The media has a news cycle to beat to death, so why not give them what they want, and then continue to go about other activities while they are distracted.

    At some point, I expect to learn that various commentators are on extended leave (to which select spas and clinics?) from unending panel discussions and early wake-up calls generated by . Won't someone think of the children?
  43. Dear Mr. Giraldi,

    Not withstanding our Presidents “rush to judgement” tomahawk strike against the Assad regime last week, there should be very strong indications to our main stream media, that they are being abandoned by tens of millions of Americans across our country who no longer accept the medias willingness to defraud us ,at nearly every turn.

    I was an avid reader of the the NY Times, for over 25 years, and I watched the nightly news all the time.

    When we were all told by these media outlets in the run up to the Iraq war, that Saddam had launched an anthrax attack against our news rooms and our capitol…I believed it completely…100%..without any reason in my own mind why I shouldn’t .

    Once the war began, and the attribution to Saddam of the anthrax attack quickly collapsed , I felt defrauded by those who I had always trusted to be honest, most especially on issues of war and peace.

    In 2013,when the Ghouta Sarin attack was attributed to Assad by these very same pundits, the memory of the phony Saddam anthrax attribution reared its ugly head, and with good reason.

    If they were lying then…why aren’t they lying now ?

    I think our media has proven itself, scores of times, over the last fifteen years, to be, at best, disingenuous and at worst complicit in acts of war fraud and terror fraud which have taken the lives of millions of innocent people and cost our country tens of trillions of dollars.

    There is no reason why I , nor any American, should be happy about this.

    Whats worse is they have displayed such enormous contempt for all the tens of millions of innocent families who have suffered on account of their deceits…that they have lost an overwhelming amount of respect from me,as well as, I imagine, countless others.

    Our Big Media can only cry “wolf” so many times…before they are greeted by everyone with the middle finger.

    This reality will not go away, but only get worse, until they start to shoot straight, and have proven to their viewers, that they are not seeking to manipulate, or defraud us…. into War.

    Read More
  44. @iffen
    Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port.

    Thanks, Wally.

    “iffen,” the eff’n Israeli disinfo troll, is always trying to slip one in.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    always trying to slip one in

    Thanks to you RobinG I get a White House propaganda blurb "slipped" into my email every day or so. The decent thing for you to have done would have been to warn me not to use my actual email address.

    BTW. the commies have been trying to get a warm water port since the beginning of the Cold War.

  45. With Trump’s complete flip on foreign policy I’m starting to think(again) that U.S. Presidents are mere puppets for the real rulers of this world – who no doubt considered Obama to be just a corporate “house negro”.

    Read More
  46. President KUSHNER and his faithful toady Trump sure are busy these days. In between bites of chocolate cake, they are arming the terrorists and bombing Syrian civilians.

    Over 50 Civilians Killed, Injured in US-Led Coalition Airstrikes in Eastern Syria

    http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960129000960

    US Continues to Airdrop More Aid Packages to ISIL Terrorists in Northwestern Iraq

    http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960129000900

    There’s one reason the USA is stuck in endless ME wars, with no end in sight. American troops are fighting and dying for Apartheid Israel, and our wealth is being spent on the same.

    When Syria is toast, the MSM will start attacking Iran, and they’ll have plenty of friends who think the same way in the WH and Congress.

    Read More
  47. @RobinG
    Thanks, Wally.

    "iffen," the eff'n Israeli disinfo troll, is always trying to slip one in.

    always trying to slip one in

    Thanks to you RobinG I get a White House propaganda blurb “slipped” into my email every day or so. The decent thing for you to have done would have been to warn me not to use my actual email address.

    BTW. the commies have been trying to get a warm water port since the beginning of the Cold War.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    Pretty sure the Commies had Sevastopol at the start of the Cold War and all the way through it. Sevastopol doesn't really count as a warm water port in the way you mean since you have to go through two straits controlled by NATO before you are in the real ocean.
  48. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_weapons

    There are three basic configurations in which these agents are stored. The first are self-contained munitions like projectiles, cartridges, mines, and rockets; these can contain propellant and/or explosive components. The next form are aircraft-delivered munitions. This form never has an explosive component.[41] Together they comprise the two forms that have been weaponized and are ready for their intended use. The U.S. stockpile consisted of 39% of these weapon ready munitions. The final of the three forms are raw agent housed in one-ton containers. The remaining 61%[41] of the stockpile was in this form.[56] Whereas these chemicals exist in liquid form at normal room temperature,[41][57] the sulfur mustards H, and HD freeze in temperatures below 55 °F (12.8 °C). Mixing lewisite with distilled mustard lowers the freezing point to −13 °F (−25.0 °C).[48]

    Higher temperatures are a bigger concern because the possibility of an explosion increases as the temperatures rise. A fire at one of these facilities would endanger the surrounding community as well as the personnel at the installations.[58] Perhaps more so for the community having much less access to protective equipment and specialized training.[59] The Oak Ridge National Laboratory conducted a study to assess capabilities and costs for protecting civilian populations during related emergencies,[60] and the effectiveness of expedient, in-place shelters.[61]

    Read More
  49. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    None of this would be an issue if the media did its job.

    But it doesn’t.

    There is free media in the US, but Big Media is not free media. It is Bought Media and should be called as such.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    Right you are! The Big, Bought and Biased Media must be RELENTLESSLY exposed and discredited.

    Trump's airstrike was triggered by the latest Assad-Did-It-Again, “gassing his own people" story, that we first heard in 2013. Once again evidence is lacking, and worse, there is a total lack of interest in finding evidence, or in asking the obvious questions of motive, cui bono? In a replay of “Gulf of Tonkin,” “WMDs in Iraq,” and numerous other false provocations, the mainstream media has once again rushed to judgment with no penetrating questions asked.


    Since 2011, U.S. corporate media has acted as advocate for militant factions. Rather than reporting events as they occurred, our "journalists" have repeated stories selected by anti-Assad "sources" such as the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, i.e. Rami Abdul Rahman. Yes, the SOHR is one guy, an ex-pat member of the so-called “Syrian opposition” who operates out of his house in Coventry, England.
  50. @Svigor

    Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.
     
    So far it's been a Big Media claim, too. To the point of at least one piece (in The Atlantic, IIRC) poo-pooing the idea that the Big Media Narrative could be wrong.

    even though Damascus had no motive to stage such an attack
     
    I'm tired of reading this and seeing no explanation. I'd like to see that assertion supported. I'd like it to come from you, Phil, because so far, in my experience, you seem to be the most reasonable US-skeptic writer at TUR.

    It isn't self-explanatory. Chemical weapons have their uses, like clearing out heavily fortified urban areas that would be costly to clear the old fashioned way. Weighed against Trump's ostensible goal to stay out of Syria and drop the insane "Assad must go" rhetoric of the previous administration, it might've been tempting. Which is why I would like to know more about the target area and circumstances. But nobody seems to give a shit. I suppose it might have a lot to do with the fact that there are (or were, last I heard) no journalists in Syria. But if we simply don't know much about the target area, maybe we should stop assuming hitting it with chemical weapons had no utility.

    Principled and eminently sensible Democratic Congressman Tulsi Gabbard
     
    Those principles being "don't invade the world, invite the world," I presume?

    There have been two central documents relating to the alleged Syrian chemical weapon incidents in 2013 and 2017, both of which read like press releases. Both refer to a consensus within the U.S. intelligence community (IC)and express “confidence” and even “high confidence” regarding their conclusions but neither is actually a product of the office of the Director of National Intelligence, which would be appropriate if the IC had actually come to a consensus. Neither the Director of National Intelligence nor the Director of CIA were present in a photo showing the White House team deliberating over what to do about Syria. Both documents supporting the U.S. cruise missile attack were, in fact, uncharacteristically put out by the White House, suggesting that the arguments were stitched together in haste to support a political decision to use force that had already been made.
     
    The American Security Apparatus can shove their consensus up their asses anyway. Why should the American public take their word for anything?

    Generally reliable journalist Robert Parry is reporting that the intelligence behind the White House claims comes largely from satellite surveillance, though nothing has been released to back-up the conclusion that the Syrian government was behind the attack, an odd omission as everyone knows about satellite capabilities and they are not generally considered to be a classified source or method.
     
    And there are huge, consistent gaps in satellite coverage (and always have been, last I heard) that everyone and their mother knows about, meaning, it would be trivial for anyone to plan an attack when the satellites can't see. If Parry is right, then it sounds like the administration has jack shit. "Satellite surveillance" is the last source I'd find persuasive or conclusive in this context.

    Parry also cites the fact that there are alternative theories on what took place and why, some of which appear to originate with the intelligence and national security community, which was in part concerned over the rush to judgment by the White House.
     
    So this really is shaping up to all be a bunch of "Wag The Dog/I bombed Serbia to distract from my kosher blowjob scandal" bullshit. Great.

    The al-Ansar terrorist group (affiliated with al-Qaeda) is in control of the area
     
    Meaning, this "innocent civilians" mantra we've been hearing from Big Media is bullshit.

    “…like clearing out heavily fortified urban areas..”

    Svigor, all parties seem to agree this was a small village and there were only civilian casualties. (Did I misread?) So, hardly a “tempting” target.

    Read More
  51. @DB Cooper
    This whole chemical weapon attack by Assad sounds fishy from the beginning. From what I read Assad is winning the civil war and things are turning for the better for him. What would he gain at this point to launch a chemical attack on the civilian populations? Things just doesn't add up. Check out this video:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1VNQGsiP8M&t=22s

    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked.

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    Hi Brewer,

    Is there a link to the video ?

    Moreover, if what you are saying is true, then it would seem to indicate the White Helmets, as well as ISIS were leaked information as to the time of the Syrian strike so as to stage the chemical event well beforehand.

    This means there is a big leak in the shared information between the White House and Moscow.

    My understanding is Moscow shared advanced warning of the Syrian strike with D.C., as part of their non confrontation agreement.

    Somebody leaked that information to ISIS and Al Qaeda....I wonder who ?

    How else could ISIS obtain advanced knowledge about exactly when to plant their gas canister
    and stage the gas attack ?
    , @utu

    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am.
     
    Why Russian media does not make the same point? Wouldn't it be nice if there was an article in Sputnik or even better, a video on rt.com that would argue that the video was made one day before?
  52. @Anon
    None of this would be an issue if the media did its job.

    But it doesn't.

    There is free media in the US, but Big Media is not free media. It is Bought Media and should be called as such.

    Right you are! The Big, Bought and Biased Media must be RELENTLESSLY exposed and discredited.

    Trump’s airstrike was triggered by the latest Assad-Did-It-Again, “gassing his own people” story, that we first heard in 2013. Once again evidence is lacking, and worse, there is a total lack of interest in finding evidence, or in asking the obvious questions of motive, cui bono? In a replay of “Gulf of Tonkin,” “WMDs in Iraq,” and numerous other false provocations, the mainstream media has once again rushed to judgment with no penetrating questions asked.

    Since 2011, U.S. corporate media has acted as advocate for militant factions. Rather than reporting events as they occurred, our “journalists” have repeated stories selected by anti-Assad “sources” such as the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, i.e. Rami Abdul Rahman. Yes, the SOHR is one guy, an ex-pat member of the so-called “Syrian opposition” who operates out of his house in Coventry, England.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Agent76
    Know and share this with folks on the topic of the media. Jun. 14, 2012 These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America

    That's consolidated from 50 companies back in 1983. But the fact that a few companies own everything demonstrates "the illusion of choice," Frugal Dad says. While some big sites, like Digg and Reddit aren't owned by any of the corporations, Time Warner owns news sites read by millions of Americans every year.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6
  53. @anonymous
    It certainly appears to have been a manufactured event. The media was ready and swung into action immediately with pictures and a noisy campaign that the usual war-hawk politicians joined in with. The timing was just too good and seems to have been coordinated. Syria was bombed without bothering to investigate based on Trump's claim that the evidence was ironclad. Did people like McMaster think it was real and report it to Trump as such? Did Trump believe it? Or did they know it was fake but pretended otherwise? Were they in on it from the beginning or were they forced to play along? Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. Next up, N Korea and then Iran?
    No matter how one votes they end up getting the same thing. It's very disheartening.

    ” . . . Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. . . .”

    Yeah, it looks like it.

    I voted for Trump mainly for foreign policy reasons. I assumed–I hoped!–that Trump would be better than Our Lady of the Pantsuits, that Israel-controlled, neocon hack. Maybe the difference is this: With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it’ll take a bit longer. . . .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it’ll take a bit longer. .
     
    Israel has a well known deterrent referred to as the 'Samson option'.

    I think it would be prudent, and I hope that the sane world has already made those in a position to force a major war between the zio-West vs. Russia (for instance)..

    .. that the first place to get glassed will be that shitty little country- as a kind of reverse Samson option

    I would like to hope that even now, all sane nations.. (Russia, China, India, Pakistan, et al) who have nukes, have them all trained at ground zero (T.A.) for the strife in the world.

    and I suppose to be effective, they'd have to be aimed at some of the snake pits in the Western world as well- I really don't think Rothschild, (Soros, Kristol, etc..) would care too much if most of Israel proper were glowing, so long as they and the diaspora would be able to take control of what ever was left after the fallout dispersed.

    the Fiend needs to know that he'd get it first, and there would be the peace

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn6Cf30HgNI
  54. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    How does the lie work? It survives . It always survives . King is dead! Long live the king! It come back. People ignore when they find it out . Same propel tweak the margins and support the new version to build another lie.

    That’s why we hear that “Saddam did not have nukes but they found weapons they found this they found that they found gas chemical”

    I tell them ” that is none of your and this Gov’s Freaking business”

    Now these guys are busy saying “Assad sent refugees he doesn’t want this or that or he poured chem s or make attack it possible”

    Mu answer is usually this ” The Gov can go to war tomorrow because r the sky was not blue above the desert of Iran proving they are not compliant and is busy destroying the climate . You will accept that logic as well or shrug it off but will vote him or his surrogate next time “

    Read More
  55. @Philip Giraldi
    Kilcullen is well compensated by those who support the Establishment narrative on Syria and everywhere else in the Middle East so he does indeed have an agenda. Most intel and military types that I have spoken to agree that after the retaking of Aleppo al-Assad is winning and will eventually win. Did he nevertheless stage the chemical attack on Idbil? I don't know. Let's see the evidence. Somebody obviously knows that happened.

    I assume that someone called “Wizard of Oz” might, like myself, be a resident of Australia.
    What is surprising, then, is that he/she gives any credibility to a Murdoch rag and the Australian at that. Its political positions with respect to the Middle East in particular are well known.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Giraldi
    Yes, Australian.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    You make clear that the broad brush is your preferred tool, and even slapdash perhaps as I have to infer that you accuse me of giving credence rather than "credibility" to The Oz.

    Don't you find even in the Education Faculty of the University of Very Provincial NSW that piecing together, scruinising critically and cross checking bits of information from multiple at least partly independent sources is the way to try and find some truth on difficult issues?

    Your implied prescription for using the media for information and understanding require a much greater understanding of editorial practices and the people involved (at Fairfax and News in their msny manifestations, and at the ABC, just for starters) than you evidently command.

    And to illustrate the problem less personslly, can you not see the similarity with analogous anathemas such as "I can't see how X can give any credence to anything said by faculty members of any Australian sociology department which are hives of conformist Cultural Marxism" or "How can anyone seriously quote anything from priests of the great Church of Pedophilia snd Coverups whose formal position on everything to do with sex, birth and marriage has been reiterated ad nauseam for centuries"?
    , @NoseytheDuke
    Bloody favouritism, that's what you got. I got links to the Telegraph from the Wiz instead. It would seem that Rupert Murdoch having 70% of the print media in Australia isn't quite enough for the Wiz kid, he'd like to assist in the spreading of Rupey's propaganda a little bit further if he can. How very sad for the Wiz.
  56. @utu
    It's not about proving things. It is about narrative control. However you look at it Russia (and Assad) lost the narrative. One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff. One would think they have means, right? After all there are FSB, GRU, Assad's intelligence, assets on the ground in Syria, intercepted communications between Al Qaeda and their handlers. And Russian media can't come up with a good story and relies on 71 years old former MIT professor report. So what's going on there? Don't they want to win? Are they being sabotaged by inept and indolent staff? Or is Russia's fight in the Middle East just a make belief? Hey, Our American Partners, how much will you pay us for playing bad guys? And for being stupid guys you pay extra, right?

    One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won’t change it. Still it is this report that Russia’s media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff.

    According to newly minted director of CIA, that organization and the entire “intelligence community” relied on the “reality” of those photos, in addition to other things that “can’t be revealed right now, maybe later.”

    Maybe it will be revealed after Assad is safely dead or in exile in Moscow what the CIA’s can’t be revealed methods were.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nsa
    The details of the concocted official narrative make no difference at all. A ZIG spokesman could admit on camera they killed little kids to stage a false flag....and nothing would happen....hardly anyone would be shocked. The KM (kosher media) would simply rationalize it away and most the public cares not a jot...."needed to prevent another holocaust"....."only way to get rid of Adolph Assad". And the usual cliches the KM and public are so fond of......"have to break a few eggs to make an omelet"......"had to sacrifice the kiddies to save them".....and the always reliable "suppose someone had killed Hitler in 1937". Think Branch Davidian kiddies fried alive, OKC Bombing blown up kiddies but FBI lads evacuated, My Lai napalmed kiddies, 500k Iraq kiddies sacrificed by jooie Albright.......list is endless.
  57. @unseated
    I assume that someone called "Wizard of Oz" might, like myself, be a resident of Australia.
    What is surprising, then, is that he/she gives any credibility to a Murdoch rag and the Australian at that. Its political positions with respect to the Middle East in particular are well known.

    Yes, Australian.

    Read More
  58. @Brewer
    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked.

    Hi Brewer,

    Is there a link to the video ?

    Moreover, if what you are saying is true, then it would seem to indicate the White Helmets, as well as ISIS were leaked information as to the time of the Syrian strike so as to stage the chemical event well beforehand.

    This means there is a big leak in the shared information between the White House and Moscow.

    My understanding is Moscow shared advanced warning of the Syrian strike with D.C., as part of their non confrontation agreement.

    Somebody leaked that information to ISIS and Al Qaeda….I wonder who ?

    How else could ISIS obtain advanced knowledge about exactly when to plant their gas canister
    and stage the gas attack ?

    Read More
  59. It should surprise none that Syria is simply a redux of Iraq 2002-03, minus Ahmed Chalabi or a reasonable facsimile. A “slam dunk.” It worked then. The media loved it. All the players got to write memoirs and collect royalties on the same bogus narrative. OK, it was widened a bit to include how everyone, absolutely everyone had no doubt about the ‘intelligence’ and WMDs. Honest.

    GW Bush even did a clever PowerPoint mime for the Radio & Television Correspondent’s Association Dinner 24 March 2004 in which he said “Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere!…Nope, no weapons over there!…Maybe under here?” while pretending to look for WMD under his desk. Few (if any) objected. That’s when it was pretty clear the soul of the press, if not the Republic, was dead.

    The media loves it now. Easy stories – sensational, complete with dead infant/kiddy pics. Second only to porn. Better in a way, because you can inject moral indignation into the byline. Remember the Sabah’s hawking 312 dead babies removed from incubators by Saddam in Kuwait in ‘90? Worked then too. No need to look further.

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad ‘must go’ without considering what will follow. It champions ‘moderate rebels’, despite their kinship to the most extreme barbarism. If Iraq 2003 was bad, this is even worse. We don’t even bother to suggest reasonable succession or a viable alternative future. Too much effort?

    True corruption. There are no excuses.

    Did it all start with Truman’s National Security Act of ‘47, which codified the CIA and changed the “Department of War’ to the ’Department of Defense’?. We’ve waged war (clandestine and overt) ever since. If only for honesty, it should be changed back to’ Department of War.’

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad ‘must go’ without considering what will follow.
     
    that's not specifically true. They've come right out and said they prefer Al Nursa and the cannibals and crucifying head slicers to a stable government with a viable middle class.

    "We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren't backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran,"
     
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-crisis-israel-idUSBRE98G0DR20130917

    Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.

    They literally thrive on that shit


    Did it all start with Truman’s National Security Act of ‘47
     
    nope

    it started in earnest with the Balfour Declaration and Wilson's war. A hundred years ago exactly to the day from Trump's attack on Syria.

    The attack on Syria on that notorious anniversary was sort of like a modern day Passover, when the kings of Europe slaughtered the new born of Europa, and the chosen were blessed with a country of their own out of the smoking ashes of Christendom

  60. @Brewer
    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked.

    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am.

    Why Russian media does not make the same point? Wouldn’t it be nice if there was an article in Sputnik or even better, a video on rt.com that would argue that the video was made one day before?

    Read More
    • Agree: Sam Shama
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Credit where due. As far as I can see you are the first to raise effectively the (Russian) dog that didn't bark aspect. It still leaves all sorts of possibilities open but has to be important at least for analysing what happened and why and with whose complicity. The question of Assad's weakness or, with Russian support, strength against the non ISIS jihadist rebels, and whether that might lead him to fire an intimidatory sarin filled shell or bomb, is part of it. And if the answer is yes, still, what was the preliminary political choreography?
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Credit where due. As far as I can see you are the first to raise effectively the (Russian) dog that didn't bark aspect. It still leaves all sorts of possibilities open but has to be important at least for analysing what happened and why and with whose complicity. The question of Assad's weakness or, with Russian support, strength against the non ISIS jihadist rebels, and whether that might lead him to fire an intimidatory sarin filled shell or bomb, is part of it. And if the answer is yes, still, what was the preliminary political choreography?
  61. @Orville H. Larson
    " . . . Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. . . ."

    Yeah, it looks like it.

    I voted for Trump mainly for foreign policy reasons. I assumed--I hoped!--that Trump would be better than Our Lady of the Pantsuits, that Israel-controlled, neocon hack. Maybe the difference is this: With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it'll take a bit longer. . . .

    With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it’ll take a bit longer. .

    Israel has a well known deterrent referred to as the ‘Samson option’.

    I think it would be prudent, and I hope that the sane world has already made those in a position to force a major war between the zio-West vs. Russia (for instance)..

    .. that the first place to get glassed will be that shitty little country- as a kind of reverse Samson option

    I would like to hope that even now, all sane nations.. (Russia, China, India, Pakistan, et al) who have nukes, have them all trained at ground zero (T.A.) for the strife in the world.

    and I suppose to be effective, they’d have to be aimed at some of the snake pits in the Western world as well- I really don’t think Rothschild, (Soros, Kristol, etc..) would care too much if most of Israel proper were glowing, so long as they and the diaspora would be able to take control of what ever was left after the fallout dispersed.

    the Fiend needs to know that he’d get it first, and there would be the peace

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn6Cf30HgNI

    Read More
  62. @Incitatus
    It should surprise none that Syria is simply a redux of Iraq 2002-03, minus Ahmed Chalabi or a reasonable facsimile. A “slam dunk.” It worked then. The media loved it. All the players got to write memoirs and collect royalties on the same bogus narrative. OK, it was widened a bit to include how everyone, absolutely everyone had no doubt about the ‘intelligence’ and WMDs. Honest.

    GW Bush even did a clever PowerPoint mime for the Radio & Television Correspondent’s Association Dinner 24 March 2004 in which he said “Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere!...Nope, no weapons over there!...Maybe under here?” while pretending to look for WMD under his desk. Few (if any) objected. That’s when it was pretty clear the soul of the press, if not the Republic, was dead.

    The media loves it now. Easy stories - sensational, complete with dead infant/kiddy pics. Second only to porn. Better in a way, because you can inject moral indignation into the byline. Remember the Sabah’s hawking 312 dead babies removed from incubators by Saddam in Kuwait in ‘90? Worked then too. No need to look further.

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad ‘must go’ without considering what will follow. It champions ‘moderate rebels’, despite their kinship to the most extreme barbarism. If Iraq 2003 was bad, this is even worse. We don’t even bother to suggest reasonable succession or a viable alternative future. Too much effort?

    True corruption. There are no excuses.

    Did it all start with Truman’s National Security Act of ‘47, which codified the CIA and changed the “Department of War’ to the ’Department of Defense’?. We’ve waged war (clandestine and overt) ever since. If only for honesty, it should be changed back to’ Department of War.’

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad ‘must go’ without considering what will follow.

    that’s not specifically true. They’ve come right out and said they prefer Al Nursa and the cannibals and crucifying head slicers to a stable government with a viable middle class.

    “We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran,”

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-crisis-israel-idUSBRE98G0DR20130917

    Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.

    They literally thrive on that shit

    Did it all start with Truman’s National Security Act of ‘47

    nope

    it started in earnest with the Balfour Declaration and Wilson’s war. A hundred years ago exactly to the day from Trump’s attack on Syria.

    The attack on Syria on that notorious anniversary was sort of like a modern day Passover, when the kings of Europe slaughtered the new born of Europa, and the chosen were blessed with a country of their own out of the smoking ashes of Christendom

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    Rurik,

    Happy Patriots’ Day! 242 years ago our forebears gave the Brits the first kiss goodbye at Lexington and Concord. Then, through the most unlikely chain of events (anyone writing it as a movie script would surely have been fired or committed to an institution - e.g. invading Québec?) we emerged an infant state in 1783. Thanks largely (arms, uniforms, money, troops, engineers, artillery, navy) to former (1754-63) enemy France (just finished ‘Brothers in Arms’). Go figure!

    Even better, men like Washington and Adams had the wisdom not be in thrall to France. “Make no passionate attachments.” A position I wholly agree with, be it France, England, or today - Israel. It distorts both countries.

    “Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.”

    I’ve read Oded Yinon’s ‘Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties' (Feb ‘82); Wolfowitz and Libby’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’ (‘92); Perle, Feith and Wurmser’s ‘Clean Break’ (‘96); Kristol and Kagan’s PNAC (1997), AEI ‘scholars’ (Ledeen et.al.) and the rest. Most are at best cynical nightmares, indictments of anything human. My opinion.

    Rurik, here’s where you and I part ways. I don’t think all of the ills of the world can be traced back to a single group of conspirators [Jews, Israel, Irish, Germans or fill in the group] in [fill in the year]. The Balfour Declaration? Old Testament? Wilson? Well, sure, I’ve no affection for Wilson. I think his second wife was probably a better president. Only because he was rather messianic long before he started drooling. But that’s another subject.

    You seem to always conclude with Jews or Israel as sole culprits to whatever you wax about (WW1, WW2, Iraq, Libya, Syria, neocons, etc). Of course, that’s your mime. Knock yourself out. But it’s always up to a suggestive point, as if you dare your reader to draw the next conclusion. What action are you suggesting, Rurik? Registration? Yellow Stars on clothing? Prohibition from commerce? Barred from schools, making a living, owning property? Transfer? Resettlement? A “Final Solution” (no need to be specific with that deadly euphemism)? Let us know.

    “Utinam populus Romanus unam cervicem haberet!” (“Would that the Roman people had but one neck!”) uttered by Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus comes to mind. But Caligula is hardly a good role model.

    I’ll be honest. I don’t really care about Jews any more than I care about anybody else (excepting myself of course). But what happens to Jews can just as easily happen to me. Full stop. That's why I care. Note, for example, more American Jews supported the Iran Treaty (JCPOA) than were against it. What gives, Rurik?

    I confess (maybe it’s age) I can’t marshall confidence any single scapegoat will lessen our/my sins. Wish I could. Especially when we/I do everything in our power to blame them on everybody/anybody else.

    Syria. Wrote my congressman and both senators when Obama seemed about to intervene (‘Red Line’). A lot of others did too. Guess what? It worked. I’ll be honest. With Trump? Who knows what will work. I only think it’s important to keep trying.
  63. @iffen
    always trying to slip one in

    Thanks to you RobinG I get a White House propaganda blurb "slipped" into my email every day or so. The decent thing for you to have done would have been to warn me not to use my actual email address.

    BTW. the commies have been trying to get a warm water port since the beginning of the Cold War.

    Pretty sure the Commies had Sevastopol at the start of the Cold War and all the way through it. Sevastopol doesn’t really count as a warm water port in the way you mean since you have to go through two straits controlled by NATO before you are in the real ocean.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Sevastopol doesn’t really count as a warm water port

    Thanks Bill. I thought that we could save time and effort by recycling the clichés since we are recycling enemies. Are you keeping an eye on those Red Chinese?

  64. @SolontoCroesus
    On Apr 13, 2017, Center for Strategic and International Studies hosted Mike Pompeo for his first public speaking appearance as CIA director.

    After Pompeo's prepared remarks, Juan Zarate queried the director on the Syria attack/s, starting his questions with comment on the rapidity with which "assessments were made."
    (Zarate is now at CSIS after proving his neoconservative bona fides as a charter member of Stuart Levey's Treasury Department "guerrillas in grey suits" -- the gang that deploys financial blackmail to coerce international banks and corporations to join the US in constraining their commerce with states the USA does not like.)

    Pompeo responded to Zarate's request for "behind the scenes" description of how the assessments were made:


    "We were in short order able to deliver a high confidence assessment that it was the Syrian regime that had launched chemical attacks against its own people. Not me, Our Team, not just the CIA, the entire intelligence community was good and fast and we challenged ourselves. I can assure you we were challenged by the President and his team. We wanted to make sure we had it right. There’s not much like when the president looks at you and says, Are you sure? When you know he’s contemplating an action based on the analysis your organization has provided, and we got it right and I’m proud of the work that get to have the president have the opportunity to make a good decision about what he ought to do in the face of the atrocity that took place. "
     
    Zarate did not register dissatisfaction with this non-response; instead, he accepted the assessment as conclusive. Then he escalated the discussion:

    "What do you make of the Russian disputation of those conclusions? Bashar Al-Assad calling this a fabrication, the entire event. It’s a battle of legitimacy and proof. How do you deal with that?"
     
    To which Pompeo delivered the money-quote:

    They’re challenges. There are things we were able to use to form the basis of our conclusion that we cannot reveal. That is always tricky, but we’ve done our best and I think over time we can reveal a bit more. Everyone saw the open source photos, so we had reality on our side."
     
    So apparently Pompeo and the "entire intelligence community" used the same photos that Dr. Postol examined exhaustively, but reached a different conclusion; they believe that the photos reflect "reality" and support their interpretation of events as fingering the Syrian government as perpetrators of the "red-line" "atrocity."

    Pompeo spent the next few minutes derogating Russia and Putin, stating that "Russia is on its sixth or seventh version of the story," and that "Putin is not a credible man . . . a man for whom veracity does not translate into English." (I think he meant "into Russian . . ..")

    ---

    Recall that in 2013 Diane Feinstein also engaged the "rapid turnaround" efforts of the CIA to produce a video presentation of gassed children, which she claimed implicated the Syrian government, in her bid to drive the Obama administration across the "red line." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/07/cia-authenticates-13-videos-showing-syrian-gas-attack-aftermath-official-says.html
    and
    Lawmakers shown ‘horrendous’ video of alleged chemical attack in Syria Sept 05, 2013

    After extensive investigation by experts under the auspices of the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon declared that it was "indisputable" that a chemical attack had occurred, but those responsible for the attack were not conclusively identified. Samantha Power, however, insisted that "it must have been Assad." http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/un-report-confirms-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-syria-a-922746.html

    Same lies, different liars.

    The real video which convinced Trump of Assad’s guilt so quickly must have been the one from his hotel room in Moscow.

    Read More
  65. Svigor, all parties seem to agree this was a small village and there were only civilian casualties. (Did I misread?) So, hardly a “tempting” target.

    Why would rebels choose such a silly target for a false flag attack? To help the Konspiracy Kooks let Assad off the hook? Doesn’t that suggest that it was a double-false-flag by Assad, according to Konspiracy Kook logic?

    And was it a nest of Al-Qaeda, as Giraldi states, or not?

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    It's obvious that you have no idea as to what you are talking about, you have not been following the war in Syria at all, bc, in fact, you don't care, as the american supremacist scumbag you are.... even though without your fucking country this war would not be happening... you are the one who, in the past, was cheering and trying to justify the criminal nuclear strikes that wiped out 2 Japanese cities in WW2. Funny also that your idiotic and ignorant comeback to evidence that ZUSA pressed Japan into a corner, forcing it into fight or surrender mode, was 'it is all leftist' talk, given that most of those historians who have documented these facts, are conservatives.

    The real reason you are causing trouble in regards to the criminal act of war by ZUSA against Syria based on more bloody lies, is that it 1. it was carried out by the orange bozo, Trump, probably a hero of yours.
    2. well, bc you are an american supremacist, and as such you always try to find justification for your countries' many horrible crimes against humanity.

    Anyway, back to Khan Sheikhoun( you probably cannot even locate Syria on a map), there is ZERO contradiction between it being run by Al-CIAda and the fact that there are civilians in the town, what sort of idiot are you? Mosul is still partly held by Daesh, but there are large numbers of civilians in the city. Who controls Khan Sheikhoun, in Idlib province?

    Deutsche Welle reported: "Idlib province, where Khan Sheikhun is located, is mostly controlled by the Tahrir al-Sham alliance, which is dominated by the Fateh al-Sham Front, formerly known as the al-Qaeda affiliated al-Nusra Front."
     
    This 'incident' is just another one in a long line of manufactured atrocities used to create the justification for a direct ZAMERICAN intervention as AL-CIADA's air force. I still remember one of the first ones, the Houla massacre in the summer of 2012, immediately pinned on the Syrian government.

    But listen, your country has probably an unmatched record of criminality, lawlessness and aggression in History. 93% of its history at war, always wars of choice, only country to have ever used nuclear weapons, ZUSA has also used chemical weapons and helped others use them.
    ZUSA and co have been killing children for decades, from Europe, to the MiddleEast, to Asia, and one is supposed to think that Zusa cares about a few children killed in a supposed Chem attack? What a sick joke. Only days after the manufactured crisis, ZUSA's backed "rebels", aka, al-ciada, bombed buses evacuating civilians from 2 small towns in Idlib, which have long been under siege. A deal was reached for the safe passage of the civilians to government held areas, and zusa's rebels just bombed them, killing over a 100, over 80 of them children. Robert Fisk, possibly the only msm brit reporting on Syria who is not a 100% propagandist, put it this way:

    Yet after this weekend’s suicide bombing of a convoy of civilian refugees outside Aleppo killed 126 Syrians, more than 80 of them children, the White House said nothing. Even though the death toll was far greater, Trump didn’t even Tweet his grief. The US navy launched not even a symbolic bullet towards Syria. The EU went all coy and refused to say a single word. All talk of “barbarism” from Downing Street was smothered.

    Do they feel no sense of shame? What callousness. What disgrace. How outrageous that our compassion should dry up the moment we realised that this latest massacre of the innocents wasn’t quite worth the same amount of tears and fury that the early massacre had produced.
     
  66. @RobinG
    Right you are! The Big, Bought and Biased Media must be RELENTLESSLY exposed and discredited.

    Trump's airstrike was triggered by the latest Assad-Did-It-Again, “gassing his own people" story, that we first heard in 2013. Once again evidence is lacking, and worse, there is a total lack of interest in finding evidence, or in asking the obvious questions of motive, cui bono? In a replay of “Gulf of Tonkin,” “WMDs in Iraq,” and numerous other false provocations, the mainstream media has once again rushed to judgment with no penetrating questions asked.


    Since 2011, U.S. corporate media has acted as advocate for militant factions. Rather than reporting events as they occurred, our "journalists" have repeated stories selected by anti-Assad "sources" such as the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, i.e. Rami Abdul Rahman. Yes, the SOHR is one guy, an ex-pat member of the so-called “Syrian opposition” who operates out of his house in Coventry, England.

    Know and share this with folks on the topic of the media. Jun. 14, 2012 These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America

    That’s consolidated from 50 companies back in 1983. But the fact that a few companies own everything demonstrates “the illusion of choice,” Frugal Dad says. While some big sites, like Digg and Reddit aren’t owned by any of the corporations, Time Warner owns news sites read by millions of Americans every year.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6

    Read More
  67. Moreover, if what you are saying is true, then it would seem to indicate the White Helmets, as well as ISIS were leaked information as to the time of the Syrian strike so as to stage the chemical event well beforehand.

    Location would be necessary, but time would not. It’s not hard to wait for a jet to make a strike, and then flip a switch. In fact, the only necessary information would be the likelihood that the place would be targeted. So, another thing we just don’t know.

    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked.

    I suppose the key is the “it is established part.” I don’t just buy stuff like that because someone says so.

    Read More
  68. This is the problem, too much partisan certainty. The State is far too certain of its “evidence” to be trusted, and the Konspiracy Kooks are far too certain of theirs to be trusted; birds of a feather.

    Read More
  69. @chris
    The real video which convinced Trump of Assad's guilt so quickly must have been the one from his hotel room in Moscow.

    LOL!

    Read More
  70. @Wizard of Oz
    Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    Thete is mo reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda afiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscrtobe to the populsr contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn't hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack?

    Oz,
    Assad may well have the means to deliver chemical weapons but then so does the opposition.

    Had the Americans presented the evidence they had to a court of experts and the experts had concurred, I would be forced to agree that it was Assad who had used the chemical weapon. As it stands the purported physical evidence has been picked cleanly apart by experts such as Dr Theodore Postol, to the point where those who continue to maintain that it was Assad’s forces that used the chemical weapon, are reduced to conjectures about Assad’s mental state and abilities of the Syrian Air Force. They are not able to argue on the basis of physical evidence at all.

    The Americans are past masters in this, breathlessly claim that that they have incontrovertible evidence of some crime: that the Russians were complicit in shooting down MH17, that Iraq had WMD, but when pressed have to hint darkly about evil Russians and Arabs, with some stories of historical bloodthirstiness thrown in. Rather typical of the propaganda that the neocons have regaled us with for well on three decades.

    Very clearly sections in America were looking for an opportunity to bloody Assad. Trump saw opportunities in this to impress Xi, while eating rich chocolate cake and send a message to the Norks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    All plausible enough, as is the supposition that Kilcullen wouldn't lose his well paid pundit status for turning out be wrong in assessing how easy it will be for Assad, backed by Russia, to consolidate his hold on core Syria.

    If Assad's forces are (by relative lack of numbers and exhaustion) hardpressed it is certainly not beyond possibility that he would use Vlad the Impaler's famous strategem in modern guise.
  71. @Bill
    Pretty sure the Commies had Sevastopol at the start of the Cold War and all the way through it. Sevastopol doesn't really count as a warm water port in the way you mean since you have to go through two straits controlled by NATO before you are in the real ocean.

    Sevastopol doesn’t really count as a warm water port

    Thanks Bill. I thought that we could save time and effort by recycling the clichés since we are recycling enemies. Are you keeping an eye on those Red Chinese?

    Read More
  72. @utu

    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am.
     
    Why Russian media does not make the same point? Wouldn't it be nice if there was an article in Sputnik or even better, a video on rt.com that would argue that the video was made one day before?

    Credit where due. As far as I can see you are the first to raise effectively the (Russian) dog that didn’t bark aspect. It still leaves all sorts of possibilities open but has to be important at least for analysing what happened and why and with whose complicity. The question of Assad’s weakness or, with Russian support, strength against the non ISIS jihadist rebels, and whether that might lead him to fire an intimidatory sarin filled shell or bomb, is part of it. And if the answer is yes, still, what was the preliminary political choreography?

    Read More
  73. @Ivan
    Oz,
    Assad may well have the means to deliver chemical weapons but then so does the opposition.

    Had the Americans presented the evidence they had to a court of experts and the experts had concurred, I would be forced to agree that it was Assad who had used the chemical weapon. As it stands the purported physical evidence has been picked cleanly apart by experts such as Dr Theodore Postol, to the point where those who continue to maintain that it was Assad's forces that used the chemical weapon, are reduced to conjectures about Assad's mental state and abilities of the Syrian Air Force. They are not able to argue on the basis of physical evidence at all.

    The Americans are past masters in this, breathlessly claim that that they have incontrovertible evidence of some crime: that the Russians were complicit in shooting down MH17, that Iraq had WMD, but when pressed have to hint darkly about evil Russians and Arabs, with some stories of historical bloodthirstiness thrown in. Rather typical of the propaganda that the neocons have regaled us with for well on three decades.

    Very clearly sections in America were looking for an opportunity to bloody Assad. Trump saw opportunities in this to impress Xi, while eating rich chocolate cake and send a message to the Norks.

    All plausible enough, as is the supposition that Kilcullen wouldn’t lose his well paid pundit status for turning out be wrong in assessing how easy it will be for Assad, backed by Russia, to consolidate his hold on core Syria.

    If Assad’s forces are (by relative lack of numbers and exhaustion) hardpressed it is certainly not beyond possibility that he would use Vlad the Impaler’s famous strategem in modern guise.

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    I told you so, didn't I, troll?
    Now you bring up another propagandist, Victor D. Hanson...
    Keep it coming , shill, you are good for a laugh.
  74. A bit OT, but I thought I’d share this excerpt from the latest piece by Philip Weiss, who has the honesty to identify the driving force behind the deep state:

    Bill Kristol celebrates ‘normal’ foreign policy — with Russia replacing Iraq in the new ‘axis of evil’

    Two months ago, Bill Kristol was pushing for the Deep State over the Trump coup.

    Obviously strongly prefer normal democratic and constitutional politics. But if it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state.

    Now it seems he’s got his wish. This is why I say that the deep state in Washington is the Israel lobby with all its militancy. One of Bill Kristol’s earlier brags was purging the “old fashioned Arabists” from the Republican Party in the ’90s; more recently his Emergency Committee for Israel helped make Tom Cotton the senator from Arkansas, but failed to stop the Iran deal. Today Israel lobbyists are in thinktanks, and policy positions, they survive elections in the anti-terror job at Treasury. They had Hillary Clinton’s unquestioning support, and were threatened by Trump for a while, but now it’s business as usual. “Trump with his attack on Syria has revealed his true colors so consequently, he’s been welcomed back into ‘respectable company’: by Deep Statists, McCain, Graham, etc.,” says Todd Pierce. That’s Lindsey Graham, who joked that his Cabinet would be all Jewish because of all the pro-Israel funding. Both the Washington Post and New York Times editorial columnists include fervent Zionists. No anti-Zionists.

    http://mondoweiss.net/2017/04/kristol-celebrates-replacing/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    An Israel First position is comprehensible and not too difficult to associate with Israel's obsession with Iran (itself I suppose understandable if you see that Israel'existence for even 100 years is not a given and that it both has and needs enemies AND that Israeli contempt for the Arabs and hardheaded assessment of the dysfunctionality of Egypt and Saudi Arabia leaves Iran to be the Ogre). But where does Russia fit in? That is, why would Israel or its American supporters have any particular animus against Russia which is not even a great power or ever likely to be one again?
  75. @Svigor

    Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.
     
    So far it's been a Big Media claim, too. To the point of at least one piece (in The Atlantic, IIRC) poo-pooing the idea that the Big Media Narrative could be wrong.

    even though Damascus had no motive to stage such an attack
     
    I'm tired of reading this and seeing no explanation. I'd like to see that assertion supported. I'd like it to come from you, Phil, because so far, in my experience, you seem to be the most reasonable US-skeptic writer at TUR.

    It isn't self-explanatory. Chemical weapons have their uses, like clearing out heavily fortified urban areas that would be costly to clear the old fashioned way. Weighed against Trump's ostensible goal to stay out of Syria and drop the insane "Assad must go" rhetoric of the previous administration, it might've been tempting. Which is why I would like to know more about the target area and circumstances. But nobody seems to give a shit. I suppose it might have a lot to do with the fact that there are (or were, last I heard) no journalists in Syria. But if we simply don't know much about the target area, maybe we should stop assuming hitting it with chemical weapons had no utility.

    Principled and eminently sensible Democratic Congressman Tulsi Gabbard
     
    Those principles being "don't invade the world, invite the world," I presume?

    There have been two central documents relating to the alleged Syrian chemical weapon incidents in 2013 and 2017, both of which read like press releases. Both refer to a consensus within the U.S. intelligence community (IC)and express “confidence” and even “high confidence” regarding their conclusions but neither is actually a product of the office of the Director of National Intelligence, which would be appropriate if the IC had actually come to a consensus. Neither the Director of National Intelligence nor the Director of CIA were present in a photo showing the White House team deliberating over what to do about Syria. Both documents supporting the U.S. cruise missile attack were, in fact, uncharacteristically put out by the White House, suggesting that the arguments were stitched together in haste to support a political decision to use force that had already been made.
     
    The American Security Apparatus can shove their consensus up their asses anyway. Why should the American public take their word for anything?

    Generally reliable journalist Robert Parry is reporting that the intelligence behind the White House claims comes largely from satellite surveillance, though nothing has been released to back-up the conclusion that the Syrian government was behind the attack, an odd omission as everyone knows about satellite capabilities and they are not generally considered to be a classified source or method.
     
    And there are huge, consistent gaps in satellite coverage (and always have been, last I heard) that everyone and their mother knows about, meaning, it would be trivial for anyone to plan an attack when the satellites can't see. If Parry is right, then it sounds like the administration has jack shit. "Satellite surveillance" is the last source I'd find persuasive or conclusive in this context.

    Parry also cites the fact that there are alternative theories on what took place and why, some of which appear to originate with the intelligence and national security community, which was in part concerned over the rush to judgment by the White House.
     
    So this really is shaping up to all be a bunch of "Wag The Dog/I bombed Serbia to distract from my kosher blowjob scandal" bullshit. Great.

    The al-Ansar terrorist group (affiliated with al-Qaeda) is in control of the area
     
    Meaning, this "innocent civilians" mantra we've been hearing from Big Media is bullshit.

    I’m tired of reading this and seeing no explanation. I’d like to see that assertion supported.

    Well, it’s also germane to this narrative that Assad, de jure, has no chemical weapons. He supposedly rid himself of them in a manner that was internationally verified. So if he had actually been the one using chemical weapons, not only would this attack have stupidly invited the condemnation of the world for humanitarian reasons, it would have been tantamount to him saying, “Yeah, I got ‘em and I use ‘em. Whatcha gonna do about it, punk?”

    Assad does not strike me as either stupid or crazy or abnormally cruel. It simply beggars belief that he would do this when he couldn’t possibly benefit from it.

    So now the US government has been caught in a resounding lie, an utterly exposed and busted false flag, with Trump’s pathetic elegiacs about “beautiful little babies” providing an extra dollop of schmaltz; and, like a true sociopath, rather than showing any remorse or even embarrassment at the exposure, it simply moves on to the next lie, the next mark.

    We who are still clinging to sanity have got to remember that there is an objective and recognizably human external reality outside of the government’s propaganda mills and the MSMattix. If Assad did the attack, he had motives for doing so. If he has no credible motives, he probably didn’t do it. The government’s case seems to be that Assad is literally a homicidal lunatic who does these sorts of things just because. If you cannot believe that, then you cannot believe the rest of the story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinPNW
    "The government’s case seems to be that Assad is literally a homicidal lunatic who does these sorts of things just because."

    Hmm...maybe if you are a psychopath that goes about doing "... these sorts of things just because" you might really think someone else might also "...do these sorts of things just because".

    , @schmenz
    Well said.
  76. @SolontoCroesus

    One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won’t change it. Still it is this report that Russia’s media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff.
     
    According to newly minted director of CIA, that organization and the entire "intelligence community" relied on the "reality" of those photos, in addition to other things that "can't be revealed right now, maybe later."

    Maybe it will be revealed after Assad is safely dead or in exile in Moscow what the CIA's can't be revealed methods were.

    The details of the concocted official narrative make no difference at all. A ZIG spokesman could admit on camera they killed little kids to stage a false flag….and nothing would happen….hardly anyone would be shocked. The KM (kosher media) would simply rationalize it away and most the public cares not a jot….”needed to prevent another holocaust”…..”only way to get rid of Adolph Assad”. And the usual cliches the KM and public are so fond of……”have to break a few eggs to make an omelet”……”had to sacrifice the kiddies to save them”…..and the always reliable “suppose someone had killed Hitler in 1937″. Think Branch Davidian kiddies fried alive, OKC Bombing blown up kiddies but FBI lads evacuated, My Lai napalmed kiddies, 500k Iraq kiddies sacrificed by jooie Albright…….list is endless.

    Read More
  77. You have to weigh that against what – for the sake of argument – a totally cynical Assad hopes to gain by using chemical weapons, when clearly that was the red line that the Americans drew. For that matter neither would the Russians or Iranians stand with him, notwithstanding the usual hoots whenever the Iranians are mentioned in this context. Once again I would like to point out, that this smells of nothing more than a ‘false flag’. The one art in which I credit the CIA and their British allies, to be unequalled masters in.

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    You left out the Israelis, the real masters in the 'art' of false flags.
  78. @utu

    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am.
     
    Why Russian media does not make the same point? Wouldn't it be nice if there was an article in Sputnik or even better, a video on rt.com that would argue that the video was made one day before?

    Credit where due. As far as I can see you are the first to raise effectively the (Russian) dog that didn’t bark aspect. It still leaves all sorts of possibilities open but has to be important at least for analysing what happened and why and with whose complicity. The question of Assad’s weakness or, with Russian support, strength against the non ISIS jihadist rebels, and whether that might lead him to fire an intimidatory sarin filled shell or bomb, is part of it. And if the answer is yes, still, what was the preliminary political choreography?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivan
    My follow on above has been left hanging . Apologies.
    , @SolontoCroesus

    you are the first to raise effectively the (Russian) dog that didn’t bark aspect.
     
    Lavrov addressed Russia's concerns directly to the people who matter -- not media.

    When Hillary Mann Leverett was part of the Bush admin. national security team delegated to the United Nations, she observed Lavrov in action. She has stated that Lavrov appears and speaks only when the discourse is meaningful and addressed to the appropriate parties.

    https://sputniknews.com/politics/201704131052596968-lavrov-syria-chemical-attack-probe/


    Lavrov told reporters he "sufficiently convincingly" explained to US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Wednesday the reasons why a special independent UN and OPCW-based study should investigate the purported attack.

    "But, considering the enormous very confrontational resonance surrounding what happened in Syria, we offered to complement these structures with professional inspectors in this field who would be invited from both Western countries, Russia, and regional countries," Lavrov said.
     

    In my opinion, Lavrov established his reputation as an eminently rational and forthright statesman and diplomat in a 2012 interview with Australia Broadcasting's Emma Alberici --

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-31/russia-opposes-intervention-in-syria/3803670

    Lavrov stated Russia's position(s), which are consistent with United Nations Charter; specifically, that:


    Russia would not support anything which would be actually imposed on Syrians.

    . . .

    We would also be guided by the need to avoid taking sides in a situation of internal conflict.

    The international community unfortunately did take sides in Libya and we would never allow the Security Council to authorise anything similar to what happened in Libya. Yes, we condemn strongly the use of force by government forces against civilians, but we can condemn in the same strong way the activities of the armed extremist groups who attack government positions, who attack administration in various provinces of Syria, who attack a police station and who terrorise people telling them not to come to jobs, not to come to hospitals, not to come to shops.

    It's impossible to ... when you say that government forces must leave towns, but at the same time you watch BBC, you watch CNN and you see that parts of those towns are taken by the armed opposition, are you realistically expecting that any government in this situation would leave the city and leave it to the armed groups? I don't think so.
     

    Whereupon Alberici noted that:

    The opposition says it wants to sit down and have dialogue, but it just does not want to have that dialogue with president Assad.
     

    To which Lavrov responded that that amounts to pre-judging the negotiation before it commences.

    Lavrov stated that Russia has met with Syrian opposition leaders and was open to do so again. He said:


    The main thing we want to achieve - and we discussed it with minister of foreign affairs for Turkey, with other friends in the region - . . . is to bring them to a negotiating table, and to say that they're not going to do this until president Assad leaves, I think, is a mistake, because he's not leaving.

    EMMA ALBERICI: But is it worth the bloodshed just to keep one person in a position?

    SERGEI LAVROV: You answer me now, . . . They say they're not going to negotiate until he leaves, and he is not leaving. What are you going to do? Shell him, bomb him?

    EMMA ALBERICI: I guess the UN wants to apply more pressure. Perhaps an arms embargo.

    SERGEI LAVROV: The arms embargo? You know that the arms embargo was introduced on Libya, you know? And after that, people were bragging that arms were supplied openly. The French Minister of Defence said that yes we were sending arms to the rebels.

    You know the hypocrisy is not something which the Security Council should be engaged in.
     

    Nor should the US Congress engage in such hypocrisy: Tulsi Gabbard has introduced legislation that would stop arms shipments to Syrian rebels. For her efforts, Congresswoman Gabbard has been called a "traitor" and has been effectively silenced by the Borg media.

    Lavrov continued:


    My point is, if they say we want a negotiated solution they must negotiate with the representative of the current government. I don't think that president Assad personally is going to negotiate. But there would be somebody from this regime, if they say that we can accept vice-president as the head of interim government or whatever, why don't they sit down with him and negotiate? And then it would be a Syrian solution, not a solution imposed by outsiders.


     

    , @utu
    "the (Russian) dog that didn’t bark aspect"

    You haven't read my other comments. I am concerned with Russian media and propaganda aspect that their dogs bark much less effectively than Anglo-Zio media dogs. I followed Russian media in English for years and soon began to wonder why they were not as good as they could be. Nowhere do I insinuate (as apparently you do) that this is so (in this case) because somehow Russia and Syria were involved in the gas attack. I have no doubts (until presented with evidence to the contrary) that the attack was a false flag engineered by anti-Assad forces to compromise Assad and allow and justify American and Western intervention to overthrow his regime. Furthermore I am persuaded by the arguments that the gas attack was timed with president Xi visit to the US to have a maximum impact (on both Putin and Xi) and also was a part of the Deep State very crafty game (a kind of qui pro quo with Trump) to make him look presidential in exchange for (1) aggravating relations with Russia, (2) getting rid of Bannon, (3) pushing out of the news cycle Susan Rice and revelations of Devin Nunes of spying by Obama administration on Trump team. The whole operation was a complete success.

    Here is my recent comment about ineptness and indolence of Russian media:
    http://www.unz.com/ishamir/donald-goes-to-canossa/#comment-1840622
  79. @Wizard of Oz
    Credit where due. As far as I can see you are the first to raise effectively the (Russian) dog that didn't bark aspect. It still leaves all sorts of possibilities open but has to be important at least for analysing what happened and why and with whose complicity. The question of Assad's weakness or, with Russian support, strength against the non ISIS jihadist rebels, and whether that might lead him to fire an intimidatory sarin filled shell or bomb, is part of it. And if the answer is yes, still, what was the preliminary political choreography?

    My follow on above has been left hanging . Apologies.

    Read More
  80. @Intelligent Dasein

    I’m tired of reading this and seeing no explanation. I’d like to see that assertion supported.
     
    Well, it's also germane to this narrative that Assad, de jure, has no chemical weapons. He supposedly rid himself of them in a manner that was internationally verified. So if he had actually been the one using chemical weapons, not only would this attack have stupidly invited the condemnation of the world for humanitarian reasons, it would have been tantamount to him saying, "Yeah, I got 'em and I use 'em. Whatcha gonna do about it, punk?"

    Assad does not strike me as either stupid or crazy or abnormally cruel. It simply beggars belief that he would do this when he couldn't possibly benefit from it.

    So now the US government has been caught in a resounding lie, an utterly exposed and busted false flag, with Trump's pathetic elegiacs about "beautiful little babies" providing an extra dollop of schmaltz; and, like a true sociopath, rather than showing any remorse or even embarrassment at the exposure, it simply moves on to the next lie, the next mark.

    We who are still clinging to sanity have got to remember that there is an objective and recognizably human external reality outside of the government's propaganda mills and the MSMattix. If Assad did the attack, he had motives for doing so. If he has no credible motives, he probably didn't do it. The government's case seems to be that Assad is literally a homicidal lunatic who does these sorts of things just because. If you cannot believe that, then you cannot believe the rest of the story.

    “The government’s case seems to be that Assad is literally a homicidal lunatic who does these sorts of things just because.”

    Hmm…maybe if you are a psychopath that goes about doing “… these sorts of things just because” you might really think someone else might also “…do these sorts of things just because”.

    Read More
  81. @Wizard of Oz
    Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    Thete is mo reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda afiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscrtobe to the populsr contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn't hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack?

    Why should someone will believe ( even if it is correct ) anything that comes out of US-UK? Haven t they lost that natural right ? There something devil or radioactive about them .Once the lines ( it has been crossed many times) are crossed , we don’t want to associate truth or pious or good intention with them It is too risky to believe them . It is like walking into swamps infested with vipers and crocodile assuming that there might be a deer stuck in the mud.

    Second ,lets assume Assad did. It is being spread around Assad did to shorten the war and mop up te last hurdles and declare victory. He has used sarin / chemical. Has he won the war? has he achieved what he wanted to achieve ? Why hasn’t he ?

    The evidences offered by US-UK are nothing but readjustments of alphabets and nothing but pure wordsmithing

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Getting to believe anything important which someone who writes or speaks about it with apparent authority has a strong motive to lie about is indeed difficult.

    If one's doubtful sources can be assumed to have tried to take care not to be definitively caught out so often that they lose all credibilty one can possibly weight head of CIA or MI6 reported in MSM as say 6 ou of 10 as compared with say Random Passionate Blogger who turns up occasionally on sites like UR say 1.5 out of 10. And so on... with great effort and difficulty and constant reexaminations and rethinks if wants to get to the truth.

    So I wonder about your way of arriving at opinions on matters you think important. I can't deny that it would be systematic to start with the rule that no credence will be given to anything emerging from the US or UK but, to say the least, it would be a pretty good step on the way to having no beliefs about anything in this world of liars and dissemblers - until perhaps the brain snapped at the horrible nihilism opening up and one grasped at whatever the nearest confident madman said with passionate assurance....like "come with me to heaven via Waco and Jonestown".

    , @L.K
    You have to take into account the fact that wizard of ooze is a well known shill for the anglo-Zamerican establishment here at Unz.
  82. “… every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business.”

    Many, or every?

    Kind of makes of it mere propaganda what I actually once believed.

    “He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.”

    You kind of have to not blame him, since the power that really controls the government – not the average Americans but our own home grown aristocracy by another name – was clearly mounting a coup otherwise.

    Read More
  83. “With Trump’s complete flip on foreign policy I’m starting to think(again) that U.S. Presidents are mere puppets for the real rulers of this world – who no doubt considered Obama to be just a corporate ‘house negro’”.

    Along with Cornel West, I came to see one of those offensive little statues that used to adorn southern plantations, but on the White House lawn.

    Tamed. I would say, after reading his sermon screeds, Reverend Jeremiah Wright had a point or two, just like any Old Testament prophet – who were also hated by that time’s ruling class. Mark Twain once said as much in his War Prayer and the applause was deafening, as you couldn’t hear a thing.

    You got to go along, to get ahead.

    Read More
  84. @KA
    Why should someone will believe ( even if it is correct ) anything that comes out of US-UK? Haven t they lost that natural right ? There something devil or radioactive about them .Once the lines ( it has been crossed many times) are crossed , we don't want to associate truth or pious or good intention with them It is too risky to believe them . It is like walking into swamps infested with vipers and crocodile assuming that there might be a deer stuck in the mud.


    Second ,lets assume Assad did. It is being spread around Assad did to shorten the war and mop up te last hurdles and declare victory. He has used sarin / chemical. Has he won the war? has he achieved what he wanted to achieve ? Why hasn't he ?

    The evidences offered by US-UK are nothing but readjustments of alphabets and nothing but pure wordsmithing

    Getting to believe anything important which someone who writes or speaks about it with apparent authority has a strong motive to lie about is indeed difficult.

    If one’s doubtful sources can be assumed to have tried to take care not to be definitively caught out so often that they lose all credibilty one can possibly weight head of CIA or MI6 reported in MSM as say 6 ou of 10 as compared with say Random Passionate Blogger who turns up occasionally on sites like UR say 1.5 out of 10. And so on… with great effort and difficulty and constant reexaminations and rethinks if wants to get to the truth.

    So I wonder about your way of arriving at opinions on matters you think important. I can’t deny that it would be systematic to start with the rule that no credence will be given to anything emerging from the US or UK but, to say the least, it would be a pretty good step on the way to having no beliefs about anything in this world of liars and dissemblers – until perhaps the brain snapped at the horrible nihilism opening up and one grasped at whatever the nearest confident madman said with passionate assurance….like “come with me to heaven via Waco and Jonestown”.

    Read More
  85. @geokat62
    A bit OT, but I thought I'd share this excerpt from the latest piece by Philip Weiss, who has the honesty to identify the driving force behind the deep state:

    Bill Kristol celebrates ‘normal’ foreign policy — with Russia replacing Iraq in the new ‘axis of evil’

    Two months ago, Bill Kristol was pushing for the Deep State over the Trump coup.


    Obviously strongly prefer normal democratic and constitutional politics. But if it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state.
     
    Now it seems he’s got his wish. This is why I say that the deep state in Washington is the Israel lobby with all its militancy. One of Bill Kristol’s earlier brags was purging the “old fashioned Arabists” from the Republican Party in the ’90s; more recently his Emergency Committee for Israel helped make Tom Cotton the senator from Arkansas, but failed to stop the Iran deal. Today Israel lobbyists are in thinktanks, and policy positions, they survive elections in the anti-terror job at Treasury. They had Hillary Clinton’s unquestioning support, and were threatened by Trump for a while, but now it’s business as usual. “Trump with his attack on Syria has revealed his true colors so consequently, he’s been welcomed back into ‘respectable company’: by Deep Statists, McCain, Graham, etc.,” says Todd Pierce. That’s Lindsey Graham, who joked that his Cabinet would be all Jewish because of all the pro-Israel funding. Both the Washington Post and New York Times editorial columnists include fervent Zionists. No anti-Zionists.

    http://mondoweiss.net/2017/04/kristol-celebrates-replacing/
     

    An Israel First position is comprehensible and not too difficult to associate with Israel’s obsession with Iran (itself I suppose understandable if you see that Israel’existence for even 100 years is not a given and that it both has and needs enemies AND that Israeli contempt for the Arabs and hardheaded assessment of the dysfunctionality of Egypt and Saudi Arabia leaves Iran to be the Ogre). But where does Russia fit in? That is, why would Israel or its American supporters have any particular animus against Russia which is not even a great power or ever likely to be one again?

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    But where does Russia fit in?
     
    Hey, Wiz. Here is another pertinent excerpt from the Weiss piece regarding Russia:

    The former leader of the Never Trump movement among Republicans was thrilled by Trump’s black-and-white characterization of Russia and Syria on Fox. “Putin is backing a person that is truly an evil person. I think it’s very bad for Russia, I think it’s very bad for mankind.” Kristol tried out a new/old phrase:

    You could almost say that Russia, Iran & Syria constitute an axis of evil persecuting their own citizens & threatening the civilized world.
     
    Two days later he dispensed with that almost:
     
    But to directly answer your question, here's what I wrote just prior to last November's election:

    You think that sounds insane. What did you make of this one:

    “We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran” – general at Joint Staff, as disclosed by former general, Wesley Clark

    While these statements sound insane to most people, they are de rigueur for the neocons. This latter statement was formulated by PNAC, [a think tank] cofounded by Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan. I think the neocon’s motto is: think big, or go home. They have openly declared that remaking the Middle East is one of their prime objectives. Their goal is to enhance the security of the villa in the jungle and the biggest threat to that security is something called the Shia Arc – Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah. The problem they’re having in executing their goal is Putin’s Russia. You see, Russia, as a permanent member of UNSC, has a veto. And while they failed to exercise it to safeguard Gaddafi’s Libya, they are not prepared to make the same mistake, again. Therein lies the problem… and why Putin is regularly demonized in MSM. But if there is one thing the neocons are renowned for, it is persistence. Do you recall the redline Obama imposed on Assad? Well Putin stepped in an pulled his chestnuts out of that fire… something about which the neocons were not overly pleased.

    So, let’s just sit and watch how they manage to get the US and their NATO puppets to impose a No Fly Zone in Syria, without UNSC approval. I’m confident they’ll get Hillary to impose it within the first 90 days after taking office.

    The “insanity” has just begun.
     
    And I'll throw this other previous comment of mine for good measure:

    I couldn’t disagree more. As you well know, the neocons have been vilifying Putin, constantly provoking the Russian bear, and even pushing for regime change.

    Why are they pushing for regime change in Moscow? Because Russia is an ally of Syria and Iran, both staunch supporters of Hezbollah, Israel’s arch enemy.

    Here’s how NED President Carl Gershman put it in an opinion piece for the Washington Post:
    “Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.” http://www.ned.org/about/board/meet-our-president…

    Other neocons threaten to carry Putin out of the Kremlin “feet first.” http://www.interpretermag.com/west-has-means-shor…
     
  86. @SolontoCroesus
    On Apr 13, 2017, Center for Strategic and International Studies hosted Mike Pompeo for his first public speaking appearance as CIA director.

    After Pompeo's prepared remarks, Juan Zarate queried the director on the Syria attack/s, starting his questions with comment on the rapidity with which "assessments were made."
    (Zarate is now at CSIS after proving his neoconservative bona fides as a charter member of Stuart Levey's Treasury Department "guerrillas in grey suits" -- the gang that deploys financial blackmail to coerce international banks and corporations to join the US in constraining their commerce with states the USA does not like.)

    Pompeo responded to Zarate's request for "behind the scenes" description of how the assessments were made:


    "We were in short order able to deliver a high confidence assessment that it was the Syrian regime that had launched chemical attacks against its own people. Not me, Our Team, not just the CIA, the entire intelligence community was good and fast and we challenged ourselves. I can assure you we were challenged by the President and his team. We wanted to make sure we had it right. There’s not much like when the president looks at you and says, Are you sure? When you know he’s contemplating an action based on the analysis your organization has provided, and we got it right and I’m proud of the work that get to have the president have the opportunity to make a good decision about what he ought to do in the face of the atrocity that took place. "
     
    Zarate did not register dissatisfaction with this non-response; instead, he accepted the assessment as conclusive. Then he escalated the discussion:

    "What do you make of the Russian disputation of those conclusions? Bashar Al-Assad calling this a fabrication, the entire event. It’s a battle of legitimacy and proof. How do you deal with that?"
     
    To which Pompeo delivered the money-quote:

    They’re challenges. There are things we were able to use to form the basis of our conclusion that we cannot reveal. That is always tricky, but we’ve done our best and I think over time we can reveal a bit more. Everyone saw the open source photos, so we had reality on our side."
     
    So apparently Pompeo and the "entire intelligence community" used the same photos that Dr. Postol examined exhaustively, but reached a different conclusion; they believe that the photos reflect "reality" and support their interpretation of events as fingering the Syrian government as perpetrators of the "red-line" "atrocity."

    Pompeo spent the next few minutes derogating Russia and Putin, stating that "Russia is on its sixth or seventh version of the story," and that "Putin is not a credible man . . . a man for whom veracity does not translate into English." (I think he meant "into Russian . . ..")

    ---

    Recall that in 2013 Diane Feinstein also engaged the "rapid turnaround" efforts of the CIA to produce a video presentation of gassed children, which she claimed implicated the Syrian government, in her bid to drive the Obama administration across the "red line." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/07/cia-authenticates-13-videos-showing-syrian-gas-attack-aftermath-official-says.html
    and
    Lawmakers shown ‘horrendous’ video of alleged chemical attack in Syria Sept 05, 2013

    After extensive investigation by experts under the auspices of the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon declared that it was "indisputable" that a chemical attack had occurred, but those responsible for the attack were not conclusively identified. Samantha Power, however, insisted that "it must have been Assad." http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/un-report-confirms-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-syria-a-922746.html

    Same lies, different liars.

    Juan Zarate, a tool of the Cabal.

    Read More
  87. @Wizard of Oz
    An Israel First position is comprehensible and not too difficult to associate with Israel's obsession with Iran (itself I suppose understandable if you see that Israel'existence for even 100 years is not a given and that it both has and needs enemies AND that Israeli contempt for the Arabs and hardheaded assessment of the dysfunctionality of Egypt and Saudi Arabia leaves Iran to be the Ogre). But where does Russia fit in? That is, why would Israel or its American supporters have any particular animus against Russia which is not even a great power or ever likely to be one again?

    But where does Russia fit in?

    Hey, Wiz. Here is another pertinent excerpt from the Weiss piece regarding Russia:

    The former leader of the Never Trump movement among Republicans was thrilled by Trump’s black-and-white characterization of Russia and Syria on Fox. “Putin is backing a person that is truly an evil person. I think it’s very bad for Russia, I think it’s very bad for mankind.” Kristol tried out a new/old phrase:

    You could almost say that Russia, Iran & Syria constitute an axis of evil persecuting their own citizens & threatening the civilized world.

    Two days later he dispensed with that almost:

    But to directly answer your question, here’s what I wrote just prior to last November’s election:

    You think that sounds insane. What did you make of this one:

    “We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran” – general at Joint Staff, as disclosed by former general, Wesley Clark

    While these statements sound insane to most people, they are de rigueur for the neocons. This latter statement was formulated by PNAC, [a think tank] cofounded by Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan. I think the neocon’s motto is: think big, or go home. They have openly declared that remaking the Middle East is one of their prime objectives. Their goal is to enhance the security of the villa in the jungle and the biggest threat to that security is something called the Shia Arc – Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah. The problem they’re having in executing their goal is Putin’s Russia. You see, Russia, as a permanent member of UNSC, has a veto. And while they failed to exercise it to safeguard Gaddafi’s Libya, they are not prepared to make the same mistake, again. Therein lies the problem… and why Putin is regularly demonized in MSM. But if there is one thing the neocons are renowned for, it is persistence. Do you recall the redline Obama imposed on Assad? Well Putin stepped in an pulled his chestnuts out of that fire… something about which the neocons were not overly pleased.

    So, let’s just sit and watch how they manage to get the US and their NATO puppets to impose a No Fly Zone in Syria, without UNSC approval. I’m confident they’ll get Hillary to impose it within the first 90 days after taking office.

    The “insanity” has just begun.

    And I’ll throw this other previous comment of mine for good measure:

    I couldn’t disagree more. As you well know, the neocons have been vilifying Putin, constantly provoking the Russian bear, and even pushing for regime change.

    Why are they pushing for regime change in Moscow? Because Russia is an ally of Syria and Iran, both staunch supporters of Hezbollah, Israel’s arch enemy.

    Here’s how NED President Carl Gershman put it in an opinion piece for the Washington Post:
    “Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.” http://www.ned.org/about/board/meet-our-president…

    Other neocons threaten to carry Putin out of the Kremlin “feet first.” http://www.interpretermag.com/west-has-means-shor…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Thanks! It makes them sound mad. Somehow one doesn't expect to find people like that behaving like the embarrassing fanatical 20ish kids that most politicians come across in their own political parties and were universal by 1945 in Germany. Despite the fact that one of Australia's most impressive Jewish leaders once described Netanyahu to me as a man of no judgment I can't help having a faint expectation that even he might be embarrassed by that lot of anti-Russian neocons and prefer that they back off. What do you think?
    , @alexander
    I think its important to recognize, Geo,

    that all these grand "Neocon Designs", having been put into action, have foisted the most humongous amount of war debt on the back of American taxpayers ever contemplated in the entire history of western civilization.

    The "overspending" from this "grand" remaking of the Middle East, is a phenomena unlike anything we have ever seen.

    It is almost beyond "existential" in its largess.

    The fact we have QUADRUPLED our ENTIRE national debt in just fifteen years with all these endless wars...is something out of the "twilight zone" in its phenomenology.

    It may turn out to be a "Clean Break Strategy" alright, however what our Neocon overlords won't TELL US , is that what is really being "broken" ......is the BACK of our Nation's taxpayers, under the titanic weight of their heinous Neocon war debt.

    if President Trump loves our country (and I believe that he does) then his highest priority should be, first and foremost,...... a NEOCON WAR TAX....

    Every Neocon, and their Neocon uncle.... should be taxed...for EVERY PENNY their war fraud has cost us.....and this is the way it should go....... from here on in.

    There is no other solution.....They WANTED these wars....Now let THEM pay for these wars.

    Once TRUMP has squarely, and "permanently" shifted the burden of the WAR COSTS from US to THEM.....

    Then I say......BOMBS AWAY.........Knock yourself out !

  88. @geokat62

    But where does Russia fit in?
     
    Hey, Wiz. Here is another pertinent excerpt from the Weiss piece regarding Russia:

    The former leader of the Never Trump movement among Republicans was thrilled by Trump’s black-and-white characterization of Russia and Syria on Fox. “Putin is backing a person that is truly an evil person. I think it’s very bad for Russia, I think it’s very bad for mankind.” Kristol tried out a new/old phrase:

    You could almost say that Russia, Iran & Syria constitute an axis of evil persecuting their own citizens & threatening the civilized world.
     
    Two days later he dispensed with that almost:
     
    But to directly answer your question, here's what I wrote just prior to last November's election:

    You think that sounds insane. What did you make of this one:

    “We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran” – general at Joint Staff, as disclosed by former general, Wesley Clark

    While these statements sound insane to most people, they are de rigueur for the neocons. This latter statement was formulated by PNAC, [a think tank] cofounded by Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan. I think the neocon’s motto is: think big, or go home. They have openly declared that remaking the Middle East is one of their prime objectives. Their goal is to enhance the security of the villa in the jungle and the biggest threat to that security is something called the Shia Arc – Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah. The problem they’re having in executing their goal is Putin’s Russia. You see, Russia, as a permanent member of UNSC, has a veto. And while they failed to exercise it to safeguard Gaddafi’s Libya, they are not prepared to make the same mistake, again. Therein lies the problem… and why Putin is regularly demonized in MSM. But if there is one thing the neocons are renowned for, it is persistence. Do you recall the redline Obama imposed on Assad? Well Putin stepped in an pulled his chestnuts out of that fire… something about which the neocons were not overly pleased.

    So, let’s just sit and watch how they manage to get the US and their NATO puppets to impose a No Fly Zone in Syria, without UNSC approval. I’m confident they’ll get Hillary to impose it within the first 90 days after taking office.

    The “insanity” has just begun.
     
    And I'll throw this other previous comment of mine for good measure:

    I couldn’t disagree more. As you well know, the neocons have been vilifying Putin, constantly provoking the Russian bear, and even pushing for regime change.

    Why are they pushing for regime change in Moscow? Because Russia is an ally of Syria and Iran, both staunch supporters of Hezbollah, Israel’s arch enemy.

    Here’s how NED President Carl Gershman put it in an opinion piece for the Washington Post:
    “Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.” http://www.ned.org/about/board/meet-our-president…

    Other neocons threaten to carry Putin out of the Kremlin “feet first.” http://www.interpretermag.com/west-has-means-shor…
     

    Thanks! It makes them sound mad. Somehow one doesn’t expect to find people like that behaving like the embarrassing fanatical 20ish kids that most politicians come across in their own political parties and were universal by 1945 in Germany. Despite the fact that one of Australia’s most impressive Jewish leaders once described Netanyahu to me as a man of no judgment I can’t help having a faint expectation that even he might be embarrassed by that lot of anti-Russian neocons and prefer that they back off. What do you think?

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    What do you think?
     
    I think Nutnyahoo is delighted to play good cop to the neocons' bad cop routine. In other words, the Lobby does its part to keep the pressure on Russia by getting the West to push for sanctions, conflict in Ukraine, and regime change against Russia itself, while Nutnyahoo plays nice with Putin during official state visits. But make no mistake, the Russian bear is the grand prize in ensuring the dismantling of the Shia Arc.

    To that end, I highly recommend reading this article that analyses neocon efforts to bring about regime change in Russia.

    https://www.rt.com/op-edge/310744-neocons-regime-change-russia/
  89. @alexander
    Hi Wiz,

    I think it is quite clear, that with the assistance of the Russian military, the Syrian army has mounted multiple strategic victories against ISIS over the past year and a half.

    The entry of Russia into the fray, at the request of Syria, provided a very deep reservoir of enhanced military power which has shown to be highly effective in degraded both Al Qaeda and ISIS on multiple fronts.

    It seems as absurd now , as it did in 2013, that Assad would do the ONE THING that would force the hand of the US military to enter the fray against him.

    I also doubt the notion of the Syrian regimes "desperation" given the complete cooperation of Russia in providing any assistance the Syrian army might need , to achieve victory against ISIS.

    One could argue, however ,that Assad is truly "bonehead" stupid.

    You are certainly free to make that argument, Wiz , because, in this case, it seems to be the one that would make the most sense.

    I’ve written more than enough on this without having a dog in the fight but let me just point out that it is not ISIS that is said to be Assad’s particular concern now but Al Nusra or other more or less Al Qaeda affiliated jihadi rebels.

    Read More
  90. @Philip Giraldi
    Kilcullen is well compensated by those who support the Establishment narrative on Syria and everywhere else in the Middle East so he does indeed have an agenda. Most intel and military types that I have spoken to agree that after the retaking of Aleppo al-Assad is winning and will eventually win. Did he nevertheless stage the chemical attack on Idbil? I don't know. Let's see the evidence. Somebody obviously knows that happened.

    Now that we are zeroing in on a consensus that it is the symbolism that is the key to understanding rather than any particualrs about the use of gas I wonder what you make of this Victor Davis Hanson article which was drawn to my attention by a retired Australian senior public servant who writes extensively on strategic anf security matters:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446812/trump-restoring-deterrence-necessary-dangerous-corrective-obama-appeasement

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Interesting article by Victor. Have we heard him before? Has he been seen shadowing PNAC crowd and FDD and AEI and present Danger Committee and Campus Watch?

    We have .He has been resuscitated by another foolish President . President before 2008 was also moulded , sculpted and repackaged 911 gave him ( Bush ) new hope of being presidential .
    Fool Trump after being sandbagged and after wandering into more stupider zone is now back to the mercy of the charlatan like Victor.
    Victor uses same tropes and offers same hope.

    God help American and the stupid American
    , @anon
    The old canard is largely true: Russia has no natural interests in seeing a radical Islamic and nuclear Iran on its border, other than the fact that this change would irritate and aggravate the U.S., which might satisfy Putin.

    at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446812/trump-restoring-deterrence-necessary-dangerous-corrective-obama-appeasement

    Russia falls for false redirection It is done. Iran should get out of nuke deals and start building what NK has over the years .NK has quietly even without telling has been redirecting the warship to some lal la land that freaking Americans even were not told by US.


    And this gem from his keister worshipped and smelled by

    “ By now, Iran knows that it cannot send another missile toward an American carrier, hijack an American boat, or cheat flagrantly on the Iran Deal without “

    at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446812/trump-restoring-deterrence-necessary-dangerous-corrective-obama-appeasement.

    And this “rump ran as a Jacksonian”. Always throw some names, drop some hero and get the entire PNAC crowd hopeful of huge monetary/career compensation in next few days or help Victor achieve a contract for another write-up .
    , @Fran Macadam
    Hanson oughta stay down on his farm, where he does some good. Unfortunately, he saw Parree, and you can't keep that boy down from wanting to plough under the whole world instead.
  91. @unseated
    I assume that someone called "Wizard of Oz" might, like myself, be a resident of Australia.
    What is surprising, then, is that he/she gives any credibility to a Murdoch rag and the Australian at that. Its political positions with respect to the Middle East in particular are well known.

    You make clear that the broad brush is your preferred tool, and even slapdash perhaps as I have to infer that you accuse me of giving credence rather than “credibility” to The Oz.

    Don’t you find even in the Education Faculty of the University of Very Provincial NSW that piecing together, scruinising critically and cross checking bits of information from multiple at least partly independent sources is the way to try and find some truth on difficult issues?

    Your implied prescription for using the media for information and understanding require a much greater understanding of editorial practices and the people involved (at Fairfax and News in their msny manifestations, and at the ABC, just for starters) than you evidently command.

    And to illustrate the problem less personslly, can you not see the similarity with analogous anathemas such as “I can’t see how X can give any credence to anything said by faculty members of any Australian sociology department which are hives of conformist Cultural Marxism” or “How can anyone seriously quote anything from priests of the great Church of Pedophilia snd Coverups whose formal position on everything to do with sex, birth and marriage has been reiterated ad nauseam for centuries”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @unseated
    1. I will not pay for an article in any Murdoch media, so I cannot read the article to which you refer. If you wish me, and others here, to take cognisance of the "bits of information" there, please quote what you believe to be important.

    2. As I cannot read the article I have no idea how the "Education Faculty of the University of Very Provincial NSW" comes into this. Are your referring to the author of that article? In which case, from his Wikipedia page he has a PhD from ADFA, a "provincial" college of UNSW - if you can call the "Defence University" of Australia sited in our capital city "provincial". Also his PhD is, according to Wikipedia, in politics. He is now, apparently, "the non-executive Chairman of Caerus Associates, a strategy and design consulting firm that he founded". He has worked for Condoleezza Rice (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2011/11/02/141933739/pre-iraq-war-intelligence-on-wmds-was-clear-condoleezza-rice-says), was an advisor to Petraeus (http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/03/03/petraeus-lied-to-fbi/), has worked for the Center for a New American Security, and is an Adjunct Professor at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University (the home of such eminent academics as Francis Fukuyama and Zbigniew Brzezinski). Not a list to inspire confidence in his lack of bias on this matter.

    3. As a member of what claims to be a more august Australian university than the aforesaid college of UNSW (and indeed its overarching organisation) I set little store by the status of organisations and people and more by their track record. The Australian, for instance, has a pretty bad record in its reporting on the Middle East. Take the WMD issue in Iraq for instance. I believe that one member of the Murdoch stable argued against their existence and that was in PNG - which allows Rupert to claim that he does not exercise editorial control. Incidentally Kilcullen claims to be highly critical of the invasion of Iraq on that Wikipedia page, but he did so in an article in the Independent in 2016. Laudable but a tad late! I could go on about the Murdoch media and Libya for instance, and about the Al Ghouta CW attack in Syria. Pretty well consistently the Australian has been on the wrong side of truth in these things.

    You make several implicit claims about how I judge statements presented to me. My philosophy is that if someone has consistently and provably lied to me in the past, I set little store by what they say until proved wrong. Prove me wrong!

  92. @geokat62

    But where does Russia fit in?
     
    Hey, Wiz. Here is another pertinent excerpt from the Weiss piece regarding Russia:

    The former leader of the Never Trump movement among Republicans was thrilled by Trump’s black-and-white characterization of Russia and Syria on Fox. “Putin is backing a person that is truly an evil person. I think it’s very bad for Russia, I think it’s very bad for mankind.” Kristol tried out a new/old phrase:

    You could almost say that Russia, Iran & Syria constitute an axis of evil persecuting their own citizens & threatening the civilized world.
     
    Two days later he dispensed with that almost:
     
    But to directly answer your question, here's what I wrote just prior to last November's election:

    You think that sounds insane. What did you make of this one:

    “We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran” – general at Joint Staff, as disclosed by former general, Wesley Clark

    While these statements sound insane to most people, they are de rigueur for the neocons. This latter statement was formulated by PNAC, [a think tank] cofounded by Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan. I think the neocon’s motto is: think big, or go home. They have openly declared that remaking the Middle East is one of their prime objectives. Their goal is to enhance the security of the villa in the jungle and the biggest threat to that security is something called the Shia Arc – Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah. The problem they’re having in executing their goal is Putin’s Russia. You see, Russia, as a permanent member of UNSC, has a veto. And while they failed to exercise it to safeguard Gaddafi’s Libya, they are not prepared to make the same mistake, again. Therein lies the problem… and why Putin is regularly demonized in MSM. But if there is one thing the neocons are renowned for, it is persistence. Do you recall the redline Obama imposed on Assad? Well Putin stepped in an pulled his chestnuts out of that fire… something about which the neocons were not overly pleased.

    So, let’s just sit and watch how they manage to get the US and their NATO puppets to impose a No Fly Zone in Syria, without UNSC approval. I’m confident they’ll get Hillary to impose it within the first 90 days after taking office.

    The “insanity” has just begun.
     
    And I'll throw this other previous comment of mine for good measure:

    I couldn’t disagree more. As you well know, the neocons have been vilifying Putin, constantly provoking the Russian bear, and even pushing for regime change.

    Why are they pushing for regime change in Moscow? Because Russia is an ally of Syria and Iran, both staunch supporters of Hezbollah, Israel’s arch enemy.

    Here’s how NED President Carl Gershman put it in an opinion piece for the Washington Post:
    “Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.” http://www.ned.org/about/board/meet-our-president…

    Other neocons threaten to carry Putin out of the Kremlin “feet first.” http://www.interpretermag.com/west-has-means-shor…
     

    I think its important to recognize, Geo,

    that all these grand “Neocon Designs”, having been put into action, have foisted the most humongous amount of war debt on the back of American taxpayers ever contemplated in the entire history of western civilization.

    The “overspending” from this “grand” remaking of the Middle East, is a phenomena unlike anything we have ever seen.

    It is almost beyond “existential” in its largess.

    The fact we have QUADRUPLED our ENTIRE national debt in just fifteen years with all these endless wars…is something out of the “twilight zone” in its phenomenology.

    It may turn out to be a “Clean Break Strategy” alright, however what our Neocon overlords won’t TELL US , is that what is really being “broken” ……is the BACK of our Nation’s taxpayers, under the titanic weight of their heinous Neocon war debt.

    if President Trump loves our country (and I believe that he does) then his highest priority should be, first and foremost,…… a NEOCON WAR TAX….

    Every Neocon, and their Neocon uncle…. should be taxed…for EVERY PENNY their war fraud has cost us…..and this is the way it should go……. from here on in.

    There is no other solution…..They WANTED these wars….Now let THEM pay for these wars.

    Once TRUMP has squarely, and “permanently” shifted the burden of the WAR COSTS from US to THEM…..

    Then I say……BOMBS AWAY………Knock yourself out !

    Read More
  93. Try it again You are not making sense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I think that is directed to my trying #65 to do you the courtesy of not treating you as smple mindedly saying you will believe just what feels right to you at the time guided by your aversion to accepting anything that comes from a US or UK source. But maybe you don't recognise that what you wrote is only at the level of no-consequences banter over a beer.
  94. @KA
    Try it again You are not making sense.

    I think that is directed to my trying #65 to do you the courtesy of not treating you as smple mindedly saying you will believe just what feels right to you at the time guided by your aversion to accepting anything that comes from a US or UK source. But maybe you don’t recognise that what you wrote is only at the level of no-consequences banter over a beer.

    Read More
  95. @Intelligent Dasein

    I’m tired of reading this and seeing no explanation. I’d like to see that assertion supported.
     
    Well, it's also germane to this narrative that Assad, de jure, has no chemical weapons. He supposedly rid himself of them in a manner that was internationally verified. So if he had actually been the one using chemical weapons, not only would this attack have stupidly invited the condemnation of the world for humanitarian reasons, it would have been tantamount to him saying, "Yeah, I got 'em and I use 'em. Whatcha gonna do about it, punk?"

    Assad does not strike me as either stupid or crazy or abnormally cruel. It simply beggars belief that he would do this when he couldn't possibly benefit from it.

    So now the US government has been caught in a resounding lie, an utterly exposed and busted false flag, with Trump's pathetic elegiacs about "beautiful little babies" providing an extra dollop of schmaltz; and, like a true sociopath, rather than showing any remorse or even embarrassment at the exposure, it simply moves on to the next lie, the next mark.

    We who are still clinging to sanity have got to remember that there is an objective and recognizably human external reality outside of the government's propaganda mills and the MSMattix. If Assad did the attack, he had motives for doing so. If he has no credible motives, he probably didn't do it. The government's case seems to be that Assad is literally a homicidal lunatic who does these sorts of things just because. If you cannot believe that, then you cannot believe the rest of the story.

    Well said.

    Read More
  96. Dear Mr Giraldi,

    There was a time, in our nations history, when everybody, including our leaders (and our oligarchs) understood implicitly, that a war of CHOICE is a war of aggression and as such is a criminal act, right out of the gate.

    The fact that our leaders( and our oligarchs) do not believe this anymore, is quite bizarre.

    It is very strange.

    After 9-11, there was a clear mandate from the American people to bring the perpetrators responsible to justice.

    There was NO mandate from the people to bomb and destroy seven countries that never attacked us and never intended to.

    There was certainly no mandate to spend fifteen trillion dollars,beyond what we have, to get it
    done.

    If “wars of choice” enter the discussion, beyond their very criminal nature, then their COST to the taxpayer has to be spelled out in EXACTING DETAIL to each of us…so we have a clear understanding of what the F#ck we are getting ourselves into.

    Our leaders should be in the business of protecting us, and promoting our general good and our freedoms….so each of us can best contribute our own unique gifts to a vibrant and wealthy Republic.

    They have absolutely no business lying us into war.

    None whatsoever.

    Read More
  97. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Wizard of Oz
    Now that we are zeroing in on a consensus that it is the symbolism that is the key to understanding rather than any particualrs about the use of gas I wonder what you make of this Victor Davis Hanson article which was drawn to my attention by a retired Australian senior public servant who writes extensively on strategic anf security matters:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446812/trump-restoring-deterrence-necessary-dangerous-corrective-obama-appeasement

    Interesting article by Victor. Have we heard him before? Has he been seen shadowing PNAC crowd and FDD and AEI and present Danger Committee and Campus Watch?

    We have .He has been resuscitated by another foolish President . President before 2008 was also moulded , sculpted and repackaged 911 gave him ( Bush ) new hope of being presidential .
    Fool Trump after being sandbagged and after wandering into more stupider zone is now back to the mercy of the charlatan like Victor.
    Victor uses same tropes and offers same hope.

    God help American and the stupid American

    Read More
  98. @Svigor
    I think the take-home point for anyone who does his own thinking is that Trump acted so quickly (36 hours) that the evidence should be overwhelming and incontrovertible. The evidence forthcoming has been shit. Ergo, it seems very clear that Trump had no valid reason to act as he did.

    What would he gain at this point to launch a chemical attack on the civilian populations?
     
    Either the area is full of innocent civilians, or it's an al-Qaeda stronghold.

    Why’d there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don’t they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media?
     
    The Russians are going to need a lot more than counter-propaganda. I trust them even less than I trust western Big Media. Hard evidence or go home.

    Agent76, nobody who will trust globalresearch.ca needs to have their link cited, they'll know about it already, being Konspiracy Kooks. Nobody else is gonna buy that junk.

    Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port.
     
    Illegal, schmellegal. It's perfectly legit realpolitik. If Ukraine didn't want Russia taking back what was hers, she shouldn't have jumped into bed with hostile powers. Seriously, if you'd asked a Ukrainian on independence day what would happen in the current circumstances, they could have painted you an accurate picture.

    “We were in short order able to deliver a high confidence assessment that it was the Syrian regime that had launched chemical attacks against its own people. Not me, Our Team, not just the CIA, the entire intelligence community was good and fast and we challenged ourselves. I can assure you we were challenged by the President and his team. We wanted to make sure we had it right. There’s not much like when the president looks at you and says, Are you sure? When you know he’s contemplating an action based on the analysis your organization has provided, and we got it right and I’m proud of the work that get to have the president have the opportunity to make a good decision about what he ought to do in the face of the atrocity that took place. “
     
    "Trust me, I'm a professional liar."

    Trump’s actions remind me of a kid doing a cannonball into a pool, splashing those around him. While they gasp, point and sputter, he (or his designate) gets out, dries off and goes onto his next activity leaving behind plenty of material for copy. The media has a news cycle to beat to death, so why not give them what they want, and then continue to go about other activities while they are distracted.

    At some point, I expect to learn that various commentators are on extended leave (to which select spas and clinics?) from unending panel discussions and early wake-up calls generated by . Won’t someone think of the children?

    Read More
  99. @utu
    You found it impudent for me calling Russian media and Russia's propaganda machine inept and indolent? You must be one of those who drank Putin's Kool-Aid and is now patiently awaiting his 2nd coming and saving us all from the grips of the NWO, right?

    You poor desperate man…

    Read More
  100. @Ivan
    You have to weigh that against what - for the sake of argument - a totally cynical Assad hopes to gain by using chemical weapons, when clearly that was the red line that the Americans drew. For that matter neither would the Russians or Iranians stand with him, notwithstanding the usual hoots whenever the Iranians are mentioned in this context. Once again I would like to point out, that this smells of nothing more than a 'false flag'. The one art in which I credit the CIA and their British allies, to be unequalled masters in.

    You left out the Israelis, the real masters in the ‘art’ of false flags.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivan
    Sorry for the oversight. That goes without saying, Lavon Affair, Liberty, using innocent people's passports for terrorist acts, etc., etc.
  101. @KA
    Why should someone will believe ( even if it is correct ) anything that comes out of US-UK? Haven t they lost that natural right ? There something devil or radioactive about them .Once the lines ( it has been crossed many times) are crossed , we don't want to associate truth or pious or good intention with them It is too risky to believe them . It is like walking into swamps infested with vipers and crocodile assuming that there might be a deer stuck in the mud.


    Second ,lets assume Assad did. It is being spread around Assad did to shorten the war and mop up te last hurdles and declare victory. He has used sarin / chemical. Has he won the war? has he achieved what he wanted to achieve ? Why hasn't he ?

    The evidences offered by US-UK are nothing but readjustments of alphabets and nothing but pure wordsmithing

    You have to take into account the fact that wizard of ooze is a well known shill for the anglo-Zamerican establishment here at Unz.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    I just wish the Wiz would publish a course for English speakers to enable us to understand the letters he types and sometimes words that he weaves and strings together in a winding DNA-like fashion "sentence" structure.
  102. @Wizard of Oz
    All plausible enough, as is the supposition that Kilcullen wouldn't lose his well paid pundit status for turning out be wrong in assessing how easy it will be for Assad, backed by Russia, to consolidate his hold on core Syria.

    If Assad's forces are (by relative lack of numbers and exhaustion) hardpressed it is certainly not beyond possibility that he would use Vlad the Impaler's famous strategem in modern guise.

    I told you so, didn’t I, troll?
    Now you bring up another propagandist, Victor D. Hanson…
    Keep it coming , shill, you are good for a laugh.

    Read More
  103. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Wizard of Oz
    Now that we are zeroing in on a consensus that it is the symbolism that is the key to understanding rather than any particualrs about the use of gas I wonder what you make of this Victor Davis Hanson article which was drawn to my attention by a retired Australian senior public servant who writes extensively on strategic anf security matters:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446812/trump-restoring-deterrence-necessary-dangerous-corrective-obama-appeasement

    The old canard is largely true: Russia has no natural interests in seeing a radical Islamic and nuclear Iran on its border, other than the fact that this change would irritate and aggravate the U.S., which might satisfy Putin.

    at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446812/trump-restoring-deterrence-necessary-dangerous-corrective-obama-appeasement

    Russia falls for false redirection It is done. Iran should get out of nuke deals and start building what NK has over the years .NK has quietly even without telling has been redirecting the warship to some lal la land that freaking Americans even were not told by US.

    And this gem from his keister worshipped and smelled by

    “ By now, Iran knows that it cannot send another missile toward an American carrier, hijack an American boat, or cheat flagrantly on the Iran Deal without “

    at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446812/trump-restoring-deterrence-necessary-dangerous-corrective-obama-appeasement.

    And this “rump ran as a Jacksonian”. Always throw some names, drop some hero and get the entire PNAC crowd hopeful of huge monetary/career compensation in next few days or help Victor achieve a contract for another write-up .

    Read More
  104. @Svigor

    Svigor, all parties seem to agree this was a small village and there were only civilian casualties. (Did I misread?) So, hardly a “tempting” target.
     
    Why would rebels choose such a silly target for a false flag attack? To help the Konspiracy Kooks let Assad off the hook? Doesn't that suggest that it was a double-false-flag by Assad, according to Konspiracy Kook logic?

    And was it a nest of Al-Qaeda, as Giraldi states, or not?

    It’s obvious that you have no idea as to what you are talking about, you have not been following the war in Syria at all, bc, in fact, you don’t care, as the american supremacist scumbag you are…. even though without your fucking country this war would not be happening… you are the one who, in the past, was cheering and trying to justify the criminal nuclear strikes that wiped out 2 Japanese cities in WW2. Funny also that your idiotic and ignorant comeback to evidence that ZUSA pressed Japan into a corner, forcing it into fight or surrender mode, was ‘it is all leftist’ talk, given that most of those historians who have documented these facts, are conservatives.

    The real reason you are causing trouble in regards to the criminal act of war by ZUSA against Syria based on more bloody lies, is that it 1. it was carried out by the orange bozo, Trump, probably a hero of yours.
    2. well, bc you are an american supremacist, and as such you always try to find justification for your countries’ many horrible crimes against humanity.

    Anyway, back to Khan Sheikhoun( you probably cannot even locate Syria on a map), there is ZERO contradiction between it being run by Al-CIAda and the fact that there are civilians in the town, what sort of idiot are you? Mosul is still partly held by Daesh, but there are large numbers of civilians in the city. Who controls Khan Sheikhoun, in Idlib province?

    Deutsche Welle reported: “Idlib province, where Khan Sheikhun is located, is mostly controlled by the Tahrir al-Sham alliance, which is dominated by the Fateh al-Sham Front, formerly known as the al-Qaeda affiliated al-Nusra Front.”

    This ‘incident’ is just another one in a long line of manufactured atrocities used to create the justification for a direct ZAMERICAN intervention as AL-CIADA’s air force. I still remember one of the first ones, the Houla massacre in the summer of 2012, immediately pinned on the Syrian government.

    But listen, your country has probably an unmatched record of criminality, lawlessness and aggression in History. 93% of its history at war, always wars of choice, only country to have ever used nuclear weapons, ZUSA has also used chemical weapons and helped others use them.
    ZUSA and co have been killing children for decades, from Europe, to the MiddleEast, to Asia, and one is supposed to think that Zusa cares about a few children killed in a supposed Chem attack? What a sick joke. Only days after the manufactured crisis, ZUSA’s backed “rebels”, aka, al-ciada, bombed buses evacuating civilians from 2 small towns in Idlib, which have long been under siege. A deal was reached for the safe passage of the civilians to government held areas, and zusa’s rebels just bombed them, killing over a 100, over 80 of them children. Robert Fisk, possibly the only msm brit reporting on Syria who is not a 100% propagandist, put it this way:

    Yet after this weekend’s suicide bombing of a convoy of civilian refugees outside Aleppo killed 126 Syrians, more than 80 of them children, the White House said nothing. Even though the death toll was far greater, Trump didn’t even Tweet his grief. The US navy launched not even a symbolic bullet towards Syria. The EU went all coy and refused to say a single word. All talk of “barbarism” from Downing Street was smothered.

    Do they feel no sense of shame? What callousness. What disgrace. How outrageous that our compassion should dry up the moment we realised that this latest massacre of the innocents wasn’t quite worth the same amount of tears and fury that the early massacre had produced.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivan
    Do they feel no sense of shame? What callousness. What disgrace. How outrageous that our compassion should dry up the moment we realised that this latest massacre of the innocents wasn’t quite worth the same amount of tears and fury that the early massacre had produced.

    Absolutely. Quite apart from anything else the hypocrisy is staggering.
  105. Has is been factually confirmed that Sarin gas was released? Has the alleged body count been confirmed and autopsied? The few videos which I had seen appear to have been staged. Americas response was too quick to be credible, in my opinion, therefore, I believe that there has to be another explanation. The gas attack was a cover story for the tomahawk attack, in my opinion, I have not been following the story closely until now. Were we testing Syrias defense capabilities? Probably. What happened to 30 tomahawk missiles which are unaccountable after launching? Satellite imagery would tell us if they exploded on the ground. I imagine that they leave a heat trail also? Trump stated that there would be no further attacks on Syria and for good reasons if 30 missiles missed their targets. Did Trump know about the attack in advance? I doubt it. This could have been a rogue operation of magnitude stupidity and accomplished the opposite of what was intended. We lost the war.

    Read More
  106. @Wizard of Oz
    Credit where due. As far as I can see you are the first to raise effectively the (Russian) dog that didn't bark aspect. It still leaves all sorts of possibilities open but has to be important at least for analysing what happened and why and with whose complicity. The question of Assad's weakness or, with Russian support, strength against the non ISIS jihadist rebels, and whether that might lead him to fire an intimidatory sarin filled shell or bomb, is part of it. And if the answer is yes, still, what was the preliminary political choreography?

    you are the first to raise effectively the (Russian) dog that didn’t bark aspect.

    Lavrov addressed Russia’s concerns directly to the people who matter — not media.

    When Hillary Mann Leverett was part of the Bush admin. national security team delegated to the United Nations, she observed Lavrov in action. She has stated that Lavrov appears and speaks only when the discourse is meaningful and addressed to the appropriate parties.

    https://sputniknews.com/politics/201704131052596968-lavrov-syria-chemical-attack-probe/

    Lavrov told reporters he “sufficiently convincingly” explained to US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Wednesday the reasons why a special independent UN and OPCW-based study should investigate the purported attack.

    “But, considering the enormous very confrontational resonance surrounding what happened in Syria, we offered to complement these structures with professional inspectors in this field who would be invited from both Western countries, Russia, and regional countries,” Lavrov said.

    In my opinion, Lavrov established his reputation as an eminently rational and forthright statesman and diplomat in a 2012 interview with Australia Broadcasting’s Emma Alberici –

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-31/russia-opposes-intervention-in-syria/3803670

    Lavrov stated Russia’s position(s), which are consistent with United Nations Charter; specifically, that:

    Russia would not support anything which would be actually imposed on Syrians.

    . . .

    We would also be guided by the need to avoid taking sides in a situation of internal conflict.

    The international community unfortunately did take sides in Libya and we would never allow the Security Council to authorise anything similar to what happened in Libya. Yes, we condemn strongly the use of force by government forces against civilians, but we can condemn in the same strong way the activities of the armed extremist groups who attack government positions, who attack administration in various provinces of Syria, who attack a police station and who terrorise people telling them not to come to jobs, not to come to hospitals, not to come to shops.

    It’s impossible to … when you say that government forces must leave towns, but at the same time you watch BBC, you watch CNN and you see that parts of those towns are taken by the armed opposition, are you realistically expecting that any government in this situation would leave the city and leave it to the armed groups? I don’t think so.

    Whereupon Alberici noted that:

    The opposition says it wants to sit down and have dialogue, but it just does not want to have that dialogue with president Assad.

    To which Lavrov responded that that amounts to pre-judging the negotiation before it commences.

    Lavrov stated that Russia has met with Syrian opposition leaders and was open to do so again. He said:

    The main thing we want to achieve – and we discussed it with minister of foreign affairs for Turkey, with other friends in the region – . . . is to bring them to a negotiating table, and to say that they’re not going to do this until president Assad leaves, I think, is a mistake, because he’s not leaving.

    EMMA ALBERICI: But is it worth the bloodshed just to keep one person in a position?

    SERGEI LAVROV: You answer me now, . . . They say they’re not going to negotiate until he leaves, and he is not leaving. What are you going to do? Shell him, bomb him?

    EMMA ALBERICI: I guess the UN wants to apply more pressure. Perhaps an arms embargo.

    SERGEI LAVROV: The arms embargo? You know that the arms embargo was introduced on Libya, you know? And after that, people were bragging that arms were supplied openly. The French Minister of Defence said that yes we were sending arms to the rebels.

    You know the hypocrisy is not something which the Security Council should be engaged in.

    Nor should the US Congress engage in such hypocrisy: Tulsi Gabbard has introduced legislation that would stop arms shipments to Syrian rebels. For her efforts, Congresswoman Gabbard has been called a “traitor” and has been effectively silenced by the Borg media.

    Lavrov continued:

    My point is, if they say we want a negotiated solution they must negotiate with the representative of the current government. I don’t think that president Assad personally is going to negotiate. But there would be somebody from this regime, if they say that we can accept vice-president as the head of interim government or whatever, why don’t they sit down with him and negotiate? And then it would be a Syrian solution, not a solution imposed by outsiders.

    Read More
  107. Idlib ‘chemical attack’ was false flag to set Assad up, more may come – Putin
    https://www.rt.com/news/384333-putin-idlib-attack-provocation/
    Putin put it clearly:

    We have reports from multiple sources that false flags* like this one – and I cannot call it otherwise – are being prepared in other parts of Syria, including the southern suburbs of Damascus. They plan to plant some chemical there and accuse the Syrian government of an attack,” he said at a joint press conference with Italian President Sergio Mattarella in Moscow.

    Read More
  108. Hi Phil

    I’m surprised so many people would miss the 2013 gas attack at Ghouta, Syria, had been reported in Turkish press to be a home grown (by Turkish intelligence) operation/false-flag. As Erdogan began shutting down independent press in Turkey, I thought to preserve some evidence with screen shots, here is preserved reporting on two Turkish members of parliament revealing prosecutors in Adana had pursed the case prior to over-ruled by Erdogan:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2016/03/16/natos-most-censored-story/

    The same member of parliament reported speaking to foreign (Russian) press:

    http://www.mintpressnews.com/turkish-mp-faces-treason-charges-after-admitting-isis-used-turkey-for-transiting-sarin/212107/

    And how the story had been skewed beyond recognition by alternative press on the left and picked up elsewhere (my more recent piece correcting the record)

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2017/04/16/calling-out-corbett-report/

    I personally made certain this information had been placed in the hands of EU and German parliamentarians, as well the International Criminal Court… and while not expecting any dramatic consequence I did notice the head of the BND had been replaced since I’d pointed out to the parliamentarians the ‘Assad did it’ evidence presented to German parliament by the BND was at odds with the evidence presented by the Turkish CHP parliamentarians. Coincidence? Doesn’t matter. The facts are out there and have been placed in the hands of NATO and EU institutions but the same sh*t appears to just go on.

    As well, I’d provided the evidence to my worthless USA senator Jon Tester…

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    "...I thought to preserve some evidence with screen shots..." Bravo!

    "I personally made certain this information had been placed in the hands of EU and German parliamentarians, as well the International Criminal Court..." Triple bravo!

    Great to know somebody does more than just sound off in chat rooms.
  109. @Wizard of Oz
    Credit where due. As far as I can see you are the first to raise effectively the (Russian) dog that didn't bark aspect. It still leaves all sorts of possibilities open but has to be important at least for analysing what happened and why and with whose complicity. The question of Assad's weakness or, with Russian support, strength against the non ISIS jihadist rebels, and whether that might lead him to fire an intimidatory sarin filled shell or bomb, is part of it. And if the answer is yes, still, what was the preliminary political choreography?

    “the (Russian) dog that didn’t bark aspect”

    You haven’t read my other comments. I am concerned with Russian media and propaganda aspect that their dogs bark much less effectively than Anglo-Zio media dogs. I followed Russian media in English for years and soon began to wonder why they were not as good as they could be. Nowhere do I insinuate (as apparently you do) that this is so (in this case) because somehow Russia and Syria were involved in the gas attack. I have no doubts (until presented with evidence to the contrary) that the attack was a false flag engineered by anti-Assad forces to compromise Assad and allow and justify American and Western intervention to overthrow his regime. Furthermore I am persuaded by the arguments that the gas attack was timed with president Xi visit to the US to have a maximum impact (on both Putin and Xi) and also was a part of the Deep State very crafty game (a kind of qui pro quo with Trump) to make him look presidential in exchange for (1) aggravating relations with Russia, (2) getting rid of Bannon, (3) pushing out of the news cycle Susan Rice and revelations of Devin Nunes of spying by Obama administration on Trump team. The whole operation was a complete success.

    Here is my recent comment about ineptness and indolence of Russian media:
    http://www.unz.com/ishamir/donald-goes-to-canossa/#comment-1840622

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Thanks. Nothing that I want my dog to start fighting about. I wonder what you think of the Victor Davis Hanson Nstional Review piece that I have linked to PG. The linking to a deall with China over North Korea and trade portrays Trump rather fsvourably. A priori I would be inclined to assume that Trump is by no means passive helpless victim whrn it comes to game playing. Cp. FDR playing all sides at home, Churchill (effectively enough) and Stalin (ineffectively) all at the same time.
  110. @Ronald Thomas West
    Hi Phil

    I'm surprised so many people would miss the 2013 gas attack at Ghouta, Syria, had been reported in Turkish press to be a home grown (by Turkish intelligence) operation/false-flag. As Erdogan began shutting down independent press in Turkey, I thought to preserve some evidence with screen shots, here is preserved reporting on two Turkish members of parliament revealing prosecutors in Adana had pursed the case prior to over-ruled by Erdogan:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2016/03/16/natos-most-censored-story/

    The same member of parliament reported speaking to foreign (Russian) press:

    http://www.mintpressnews.com/turkish-mp-faces-treason-charges-after-admitting-isis-used-turkey-for-transiting-sarin/212107/

    And how the story had been skewed beyond recognition by alternative press on the left and picked up elsewhere (my more recent piece correcting the record)

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2017/04/16/calling-out-corbett-report/

    I personally made certain this information had been placed in the hands of EU and German parliamentarians, as well the International Criminal Court... and while not expecting any dramatic consequence I did notice the head of the BND had been replaced since I'd pointed out to the parliamentarians the 'Assad did it' evidence presented to German parliament by the BND was at odds with the evidence presented by the Turkish CHP parliamentarians. Coincidence? Doesn't matter. The facts are out there and have been placed in the hands of NATO and EU institutions but the same sh*t appears to just go on.

    As well, I'd provided the evidence to my worthless USA senator Jon Tester...

    “…I thought to preserve some evidence with screen shots…” Bravo!

    “I personally made certain this information had been placed in the hands of EU and German parliamentarians, as well the International Criminal Court…” Triple bravo!

    Great to know somebody does more than just sound off in chat rooms.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Triple bravo!

    Great to know somebody does more than just sound off in chat rooms.
     

    I agree Robin

    at least it's something

    but then as I'm sure you and RTW are well aware, the EU, German government, and ICC are all just as corrupt and criminal as the US government and media all are.

    I'll never forget when they murdered Milosevic because he was humiliating the ICC during the farce trial

    anyways, perhaps there's an honorable person somewhere in that den of snakes

    as SC mentioned, there is at least Tulsi Gabbard, so perhaps there's more like her somewhere

    kudos to any efforts to stop the war fiend

  111. @Wizard of Oz
    You make clear that the broad brush is your preferred tool, and even slapdash perhaps as I have to infer that you accuse me of giving credence rather than "credibility" to The Oz.

    Don't you find even in the Education Faculty of the University of Very Provincial NSW that piecing together, scruinising critically and cross checking bits of information from multiple at least partly independent sources is the way to try and find some truth on difficult issues?

    Your implied prescription for using the media for information and understanding require a much greater understanding of editorial practices and the people involved (at Fairfax and News in their msny manifestations, and at the ABC, just for starters) than you evidently command.

    And to illustrate the problem less personslly, can you not see the similarity with analogous anathemas such as "I can't see how X can give any credence to anything said by faculty members of any Australian sociology department which are hives of conformist Cultural Marxism" or "How can anyone seriously quote anything from priests of the great Church of Pedophilia snd Coverups whose formal position on everything to do with sex, birth and marriage has been reiterated ad nauseam for centuries"?

    1. I will not pay for an article in any Murdoch media, so I cannot read the article to which you refer. If you wish me, and others here, to take cognisance of the “bits of information” there, please quote what you believe to be important.

    2. As I cannot read the article I have no idea how the “Education Faculty of the University of Very Provincial NSW” comes into this. Are your referring to the author of that article? In which case, from his Wikipedia page he has a PhD from ADFA, a “provincial” college of UNSW – if you can call the “Defence University” of Australia sited in our capital city “provincial”. Also his PhD is, according to Wikipedia, in politics. He is now, apparently, “the non-executive Chairman of Caerus Associates, a strategy and design consulting firm that he founded”. He has worked for Condoleezza Rice (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2011/11/02/141933739/pre-iraq-war-intelligence-on-wmds-was-clear-condoleezza-rice-says), was an advisor to Petraeus (http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/03/03/petraeus-lied-to-fbi/), has worked for the Center for a New American Security, and is an Adjunct Professor at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University (the home of such eminent academics as Francis Fukuyama and Zbigniew Brzezinski). Not a list to inspire confidence in his lack of bias on this matter.

    3. As a member of what claims to be a more august Australian university than the aforesaid college of UNSW (and indeed its overarching organisation) I set little store by the status of organisations and people and more by their track record. The Australian, for instance, has a pretty bad record in its reporting on the Middle East. Take the WMD issue in Iraq for instance. I believe that one member of the Murdoch stable argued against their existence and that was in PNG – which allows Rupert to claim that he does not exercise editorial control. Incidentally Kilcullen claims to be highly critical of the invasion of Iraq on that Wikipedia page, but he did so in an article in the Independent in 2016. Laudable but a tad late! I could go on about the Murdoch media and Libya for instance, and about the Al Ghouta CW attack in Syria. Pretty well consistently the Australian has been on the wrong side of truth in these things.

    You make several implicit claims about how I judge statements presented to me. My philosophy is that if someone has consistently and provably lied to me in the past, I set little store by what they say until proved wrong. Prove me wrong!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Thanks! I"ve only had time to glance at your reply but I'm sure you and I might be able to enjoy a semiserious joust over a beer or port as you clearly are not an alcoholic old trustafarian like one of our very shortwinded compatriots whose only mode of expression is the abruptly assertive explosion that your original comment employed.
    I copied the whole Oz link to PG in another reply/comment in case you want to read the Kilcullen piece with its reference to Assad losing to non ISIS jihadists. But as you can see in another reply to PG about the Victor Davis Hanson article I have moved on to assuming we are now down to treating it as important only in the symbolism to be interpreted.

    Apologies by the way for my disrespectful jibe. I now suspect you are an involuntarily retired MP now closely associated with one of our real universities real university parts. As I have a vast including close acwuaintance with media people of all kinds I obviously know others who abhor Rupert and what he has allegedly done to UK newspapers, American TV - take your pick. But isn't The Age sad, sad, sad? A Labor Premier once came across me in a library reading with derision from The Age letters column. "Yeah, they're a lot of whingers these days!" After decades subscribing I gave up about three years ago - even the Green Guide on Thursdays - and I only get the Weekend Australian in print.

  112. @RobinG
    "...I thought to preserve some evidence with screen shots..." Bravo!

    "I personally made certain this information had been placed in the hands of EU and German parliamentarians, as well the International Criminal Court..." Triple bravo!

    Great to know somebody does more than just sound off in chat rooms.

    Triple bravo!

    Great to know somebody does more than just sound off in chat rooms.

    I agree Robin

    at least it’s something

    but then as I’m sure you and RTW are well aware, the EU, German government, and ICC are all just as corrupt and criminal as the US government and media all are.

    I’ll never forget when they murdered Milosevic because he was humiliating the ICC during the farce trial

    anyways, perhaps there’s an honorable person somewhere in that den of snakes

    as SC mentioned, there is at least Tulsi Gabbard, so perhaps there’s more like her somewhere

    kudos to any efforts to stop the war fiend

    Read More
  113. @Rurik

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad ‘must go’ without considering what will follow.
     
    that's not specifically true. They've come right out and said they prefer Al Nursa and the cannibals and crucifying head slicers to a stable government with a viable middle class.

    "We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren't backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran,"
     
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-crisis-israel-idUSBRE98G0DR20130917

    Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.

    They literally thrive on that shit


    Did it all start with Truman’s National Security Act of ‘47
     
    nope

    it started in earnest with the Balfour Declaration and Wilson's war. A hundred years ago exactly to the day from Trump's attack on Syria.

    The attack on Syria on that notorious anniversary was sort of like a modern day Passover, when the kings of Europe slaughtered the new born of Europa, and the chosen were blessed with a country of their own out of the smoking ashes of Christendom

    Rurik,

    Happy Patriots’ Day! 242 years ago our forebears gave the Brits the first kiss goodbye at Lexington and Concord. Then, through the most unlikely chain of events (anyone writing it as a movie script would surely have been fired or committed to an institution – e.g. invading Québec?) we emerged an infant state in 1783. Thanks largely (arms, uniforms, money, troops, engineers, artillery, navy) to former (1754-63) enemy France (just finished ‘Brothers in Arms’). Go figure!

    Even better, men like Washington and Adams had the wisdom not be in thrall to France. “Make no passionate attachments.” A position I wholly agree with, be it France, England, or today – Israel. It distorts both countries.

    “Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.”

    I’ve read Oded Yinon’s ‘Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties’ (Feb ‘82); Wolfowitz and Libby’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’ (‘92); Perle, Feith and Wurmser’s ‘Clean Break’ (‘96); Kristol and Kagan’s PNAC (1997), AEI ‘scholars’ (Ledeen et.al.) and the rest. Most are at best cynical nightmares, indictments of anything human. My opinion.

    Rurik, here’s where you and I part ways. I don’t think all of the ills of the world can be traced back to a single group of conspirators [Jews, Israel, Irish, Germans or fill in the group] in [fill in the year]. The Balfour Declaration? Old Testament? Wilson? Well, sure, I’ve no affection for Wilson. I think his second wife was probably a better president. Only because he was rather messianic long before he started drooling. But that’s another subject.

    You seem to always conclude with Jews or Israel as sole culprits to whatever you wax about (WW1, WW2, Iraq, Libya, Syria, neocons, etc). Of course, that’s your mime. Knock yourself out. But it’s always up to a suggestive point, as if you dare your reader to draw the next conclusion. What action are you suggesting, Rurik? Registration? Yellow Stars on clothing? Prohibition from commerce? Barred from schools, making a living, owning property? Transfer? Resettlement? A “Final Solution” (no need to be specific with that deadly euphemism)? Let us know.

    “Utinam populus Romanus unam cervicem haberet!” (“Would that the Roman people had but one neck!”) uttered by Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus comes to mind. But Caligula is hardly a good role model.

    I’ll be honest. I don’t really care about Jews any more than I care about anybody else (excepting myself of course). But what happens to Jews can just as easily happen to me. Full stop. That’s why I care. Note, for example, more American Jews supported the Iran Treaty (JCPOA) than were against it. What gives, Rurik?

    I confess (maybe it’s age) I can’t marshall confidence any single scapegoat will lessen our/my sins. Wish I could. Especially when we/I do everything in our power to blame them on everybody/anybody else.

    Syria. Wrote my congressman and both senators when Obama seemed about to intervene (‘Red Line’). A lot of others did too. Guess what? It worked. I’ll be honest. With Trump? Who knows what will work. I only think it’s important to keep trying.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Z-man
    Let me barge into this conversation if just for a bit since I know where you're coming from and won't be convinced to change you position.

    You seem to always conclude with Jews or Israel as sole culprits to whatever you wax about (WW1, WW2, Iraq, Libya, Syria, neocons, etc). Of course, that’s your mime. Knock yourself out. But it’s always up to a suggestive point, as if you dare your reader to draw the next conclusion
     
    They may not be the 'sole' culprits but by far the most destructive to, at the least (and I would argue a lot more), American foreign policy/interests and the welfare of ordinary Americans. The paralysis of the American political class when it comes to being fair to Palestinians and telling the Jews to reign in their destructive global policies is, well, telling.
    , @NoseytheDuke
    Surely we could all agree that the perpetrators of crimes should be held accountable for their actions be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or whatever, this is especially true for those who foment wars. If they turned out to be 80% Jewish or any other group it would be a mistake to make that into a war on a religion when simply punishing the guilty would suffice.

    Your suggestion of the wearing of yellow stars is a bit of a low blow and merely introduces an unhelpful emotional component to the discussion. I wouldn't want all Jews rounded up and punished because of simply being Jews either but real American patriots do want those who violate the constitution held to account under the law. The list of names in what you posted… do happen to be all Jewish.

    "I’ve read Oded Yinon’s ‘Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties’ (Feb ‘82); Wolfowitz and Libby’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’ (‘92); Perle, Feith and Wurmser’s ‘Clean Break’ (‘96); Kristol and Kagan’s PNAC (1997), AEI ‘scholars’ (Ledeen et.al.) and the rest. Most are at best cynical nightmares, indictments of anything human."

    They do just happen to be all Jews, sure they have their non-Jewish accomplices either for religion, ideology or filthy lucre but it's not those who appear to be driving the bus.

    It's not just war crimes either, Americans voted for Trump because he convinced them he'd address the economic struggles, declining infrastructure and bleak future many face. Would the list of names of the perps in the Great Fed Swindle be mostly Irish? Polish? Greek?

    I do wonder why there isn't more opposition to the Rothschild's vile monster from Jewish people themselves since history tells us that they are those who ultimately suffer from the backlash.
    , @Anon
    Nothing surprising about invading Quebec. Revolutionary regimes often spill over their borders; cf. the French Revolutionary wars, the Polish-Soviet War, the Northern Expedition (sort of), etc.
    , @Rurik
    Hey Incitatus,

    I have about six minutes so I'll try to get a response to your post..


    here’s where you and I part ways. I don’t think all of the ills of the world can be traced back to a single group of conspirators [Jews, Israel, Irish, Germans or fill in the group] in [fill in the year].
     
    neither do I !

    But imagine if you're a Palestinian who's watching his home be bulldozed and looking at the bullet riddled body of his father and older brother who were protesting the demolition of their home while your mother and sister are weeping inconsolably. Now if you're thoughtful and intelligent, you're going to understand that much of what you're suffering is a consequence of very many different people and groups and forces. It isn't just the Zionist Jews who are causing you so much grief. It's also the craven and venal Arab governments that surround you. It's the king of Jordan and the House of Saud. It's the corrupt and rotten governments of the West who facilitate the Jews murdering your people, torturing your buddies and humiliating your family and friends. It's the banksters and international powerbrokers who have forsaken you, and who grimly watch, generation after generation as your people languish and suffer.

    But on this day, as the IDF goons who obviously took pleasure in murdering your family members, and are exchanging giggles between them as your mother crumples to the ground in despair, I think under these circumstances such a person could be forgiven if he muttered to himself.. 'fucking Jews'. And even tho you'd be right, that there are lots of very good and decent Jews, and there are also a lot of nasty and rotten Gentiles, if you were to chasten this person for blaming "the Jews", I suspect that he'd be rather exasperated, because most of what he's suffering, is a direct consequence of what Jews are doing.

    You see? So it gets complicated.

    Now I'm a million miles away from being a Palestinian, even tho I do sympathize and feel a distant solidarity for them, and hope the world one day finds it's humanity, I can't possibly claim to even begin to understand their suffering. But never the less, my main issue are the Eternal Wars that are foisted upon my nation by Zionist Jews and their myriad stooges. Sure, the MIC is perfectly eager to participate, and there are many other forces at work, but the main reason my government has waged so many wars, from WWI and WWII all the way up to and including today's wars in the Middle East, are all being done to (create/)benefit Israel, and so I think I can be forgiven if I resent the misuse of my government and military to slaughter innocent people for the benefit of some very nasty racial supremacists. No?

    And that's just in the context of the wars. There are other acts of treachery that are notable. The serial swindles of Goldman Sachs as the fox guarding the US Treasury. The moral sewage pumped into the soul of the West. Other shit. But mainly for me it's the wars. I hate them. Viscerally down the core of my being. And I hate the people who foist them on us. But for the record, I'm far, far more annoyed with shit bags like John McCain than I am with any Jews I can think of, simply because Jews are acting in what they consider the best interest of the Jews, whereas McCain is directly acting in his own people's worst interest on behalf of their deadliest enemy. So he's far, far worse.


    more American Jews supported the Iran Treaty (JCPOA) than were against it. What gives, Rurik?
     
    actually a majority of American Jews also support the Saudi plan of Israel returning to its 1967 borders. It isn't Jews who are the problem Incitatus. It's the Zio-scum and their willing accomplices. I know personally some very decent and honorable Jews. I'd have to be the world's biggest asshole to condemn all the Jewish people I know because of the actions of some of the most exorable POS (Sheldon Adelson, et al) that there are.

    That's all the time I have. I hope that sheds some light my friend.

    Cheers

  114. @unseated
    1. I will not pay for an article in any Murdoch media, so I cannot read the article to which you refer. If you wish me, and others here, to take cognisance of the "bits of information" there, please quote what you believe to be important.

    2. As I cannot read the article I have no idea how the "Education Faculty of the University of Very Provincial NSW" comes into this. Are your referring to the author of that article? In which case, from his Wikipedia page he has a PhD from ADFA, a "provincial" college of UNSW - if you can call the "Defence University" of Australia sited in our capital city "provincial". Also his PhD is, according to Wikipedia, in politics. He is now, apparently, "the non-executive Chairman of Caerus Associates, a strategy and design consulting firm that he founded". He has worked for Condoleezza Rice (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2011/11/02/141933739/pre-iraq-war-intelligence-on-wmds-was-clear-condoleezza-rice-says), was an advisor to Petraeus (http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/03/03/petraeus-lied-to-fbi/), has worked for the Center for a New American Security, and is an Adjunct Professor at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University (the home of such eminent academics as Francis Fukuyama and Zbigniew Brzezinski). Not a list to inspire confidence in his lack of bias on this matter.

    3. As a member of what claims to be a more august Australian university than the aforesaid college of UNSW (and indeed its overarching organisation) I set little store by the status of organisations and people and more by their track record. The Australian, for instance, has a pretty bad record in its reporting on the Middle East. Take the WMD issue in Iraq for instance. I believe that one member of the Murdoch stable argued against their existence and that was in PNG - which allows Rupert to claim that he does not exercise editorial control. Incidentally Kilcullen claims to be highly critical of the invasion of Iraq on that Wikipedia page, but he did so in an article in the Independent in 2016. Laudable but a tad late! I could go on about the Murdoch media and Libya for instance, and about the Al Ghouta CW attack in Syria. Pretty well consistently the Australian has been on the wrong side of truth in these things.

    You make several implicit claims about how I judge statements presented to me. My philosophy is that if someone has consistently and provably lied to me in the past, I set little store by what they say until proved wrong. Prove me wrong!

    Thanks! I”ve only had time to glance at your reply but I’m sure you and I might be able to enjoy a semiserious joust over a beer or port as you clearly are not an alcoholic old trustafarian like one of our very shortwinded compatriots whose only mode of expression is the abruptly assertive explosion that your original comment employed.
    I copied the whole Oz link to PG in another reply/comment in case you want to read the Kilcullen piece with its reference to Assad losing to non ISIS jihadists. But as you can see in another reply to PG about the Victor Davis Hanson article I have moved on to assuming we are now down to treating it as important only in the symbolism to be interpreted.

    Apologies by the way for my disrespectful jibe. I now suspect you are an involuntarily retired MP now closely associated with one of our real universities real university parts. As I have a vast including close acwuaintance with media people of all kinds I obviously know others who abhor Rupert and what he has allegedly done to UK newspapers, American TV – take your pick. But isn’t The Age sad, sad, sad? A Labor Premier once came across me in a library reading with derision from The Age letters column. “Yeah, they’re a lot of whingers these days!” After decades subscribing I gave up about three years ago – even the Green Guide on Thursdays – and I only get the Weekend Australian in print.

    Read More
    • Replies: @unseated
    Sorry but in a hurry now - will read the Kilcullen piece later if I can see it on this website.

    As to other Australian media, I have no respect for any of them in their reporting of the ME. That includes the Age and the ABC.
  115. @utu
    "the (Russian) dog that didn’t bark aspect"

    You haven't read my other comments. I am concerned with Russian media and propaganda aspect that their dogs bark much less effectively than Anglo-Zio media dogs. I followed Russian media in English for years and soon began to wonder why they were not as good as they could be. Nowhere do I insinuate (as apparently you do) that this is so (in this case) because somehow Russia and Syria were involved in the gas attack. I have no doubts (until presented with evidence to the contrary) that the attack was a false flag engineered by anti-Assad forces to compromise Assad and allow and justify American and Western intervention to overthrow his regime. Furthermore I am persuaded by the arguments that the gas attack was timed with president Xi visit to the US to have a maximum impact (on both Putin and Xi) and also was a part of the Deep State very crafty game (a kind of qui pro quo with Trump) to make him look presidential in exchange for (1) aggravating relations with Russia, (2) getting rid of Bannon, (3) pushing out of the news cycle Susan Rice and revelations of Devin Nunes of spying by Obama administration on Trump team. The whole operation was a complete success.

    Here is my recent comment about ineptness and indolence of Russian media:
    http://www.unz.com/ishamir/donald-goes-to-canossa/#comment-1840622

    Thanks. Nothing that I want my dog to start fighting about. I wonder what you think of the Victor Davis Hanson Nstional Review piece that I have linked to PG. The linking to a deall with China over North Korea and trade portrays Trump rather fsvourably. A priori I would be inclined to assume that Trump is by no means passive helpless victim whrn it comes to game playing. Cp. FDR playing all sides at home, Churchill (effectively enough) and Stalin (ineffectively) all at the same time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivan
    Oz,

    Assuming that the missile strike was aimed at impressing Xi over Korea, which I tend to concur with, does that not by itself present strong evidence that the outrage over Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons was a manufactured one?
  116. @Incitatus
    Rurik,

    Happy Patriots’ Day! 242 years ago our forebears gave the Brits the first kiss goodbye at Lexington and Concord. Then, through the most unlikely chain of events (anyone writing it as a movie script would surely have been fired or committed to an institution - e.g. invading Québec?) we emerged an infant state in 1783. Thanks largely (arms, uniforms, money, troops, engineers, artillery, navy) to former (1754-63) enemy France (just finished ‘Brothers in Arms’). Go figure!

    Even better, men like Washington and Adams had the wisdom not be in thrall to France. “Make no passionate attachments.” A position I wholly agree with, be it France, England, or today - Israel. It distorts both countries.

    “Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.”

    I’ve read Oded Yinon’s ‘Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties' (Feb ‘82); Wolfowitz and Libby’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’ (‘92); Perle, Feith and Wurmser’s ‘Clean Break’ (‘96); Kristol and Kagan’s PNAC (1997), AEI ‘scholars’ (Ledeen et.al.) and the rest. Most are at best cynical nightmares, indictments of anything human. My opinion.

    Rurik, here’s where you and I part ways. I don’t think all of the ills of the world can be traced back to a single group of conspirators [Jews, Israel, Irish, Germans or fill in the group] in [fill in the year]. The Balfour Declaration? Old Testament? Wilson? Well, sure, I’ve no affection for Wilson. I think his second wife was probably a better president. Only because he was rather messianic long before he started drooling. But that’s another subject.

    You seem to always conclude with Jews or Israel as sole culprits to whatever you wax about (WW1, WW2, Iraq, Libya, Syria, neocons, etc). Of course, that’s your mime. Knock yourself out. But it’s always up to a suggestive point, as if you dare your reader to draw the next conclusion. What action are you suggesting, Rurik? Registration? Yellow Stars on clothing? Prohibition from commerce? Barred from schools, making a living, owning property? Transfer? Resettlement? A “Final Solution” (no need to be specific with that deadly euphemism)? Let us know.

    “Utinam populus Romanus unam cervicem haberet!” (“Would that the Roman people had but one neck!”) uttered by Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus comes to mind. But Caligula is hardly a good role model.

    I’ll be honest. I don’t really care about Jews any more than I care about anybody else (excepting myself of course). But what happens to Jews can just as easily happen to me. Full stop. That's why I care. Note, for example, more American Jews supported the Iran Treaty (JCPOA) than were against it. What gives, Rurik?

    I confess (maybe it’s age) I can’t marshall confidence any single scapegoat will lessen our/my sins. Wish I could. Especially when we/I do everything in our power to blame them on everybody/anybody else.

    Syria. Wrote my congressman and both senators when Obama seemed about to intervene (‘Red Line’). A lot of others did too. Guess what? It worked. I’ll be honest. With Trump? Who knows what will work. I only think it’s important to keep trying.

    Let me barge into this conversation if just for a bit since I know where you’re coming from and won’t be convinced to change you position.

    You seem to always conclude with Jews or Israel as sole culprits to whatever you wax about (WW1, WW2, Iraq, Libya, Syria, neocons, etc). Of course, that’s your mime. Knock yourself out. But it’s always up to a suggestive point, as if you dare your reader to draw the next conclusion

    They may not be the ‘sole’ culprits but by far the most destructive to, at the least (and I would argue a lot more), American foreign policy/interests and the welfare of ordinary Americans. The paralysis of the American political class when it comes to being fair to Palestinians and telling the Jews to reign in their destructive global policies is, well, telling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    “They [Jews/Israel] may not be the ‘sole’ culprits but by far the most destructive to, at the least (and I would argue a lot more), American foreign policy/interests and the welfare of ordinary Americans.”

    GW Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rummy, and our Congress took the nation to war in 2003. They made the decision. Israel lobbied for it (according to M&W they preferred Iran).

    What about Tony Blair? He joined the sales campaign and offered troops. The Downing Street Memo is pretty damning. Was the UK as responsible as Israel? More responsible? Was BAE Systems any less a beneficiary than US firms like KBR and Blackwater? The Pentagon Contractor list for Iraq was a menu for a pretty sordid meal.

    Israeli individuals involved in Iraq 2002-03 PR (Netanyahu, Peres, etc.) share guilt for bogus testimony and should be indicted for Crimes Against Peace at the Hague. But prime charges - Crimes Against Peace and Waging Aggressive War - should be lodged against GW Bush and Company (including Admin neocons), Tony Blair and Company, and all others involved who actually pulled the trigger.

    Palestinians. Few more tragic victims exist. Ottomans, British (who should have done much more to protect them), the UN (crippled after Bernadotte and Serot were assassinated). But the Pals are not totally blameless. I saw the camps in Jordan from ‘76. Unforgettable squalor. I regularly worked with Pals in the Gulf - they were the educated, cosmopolitan professional class that kept things going. Wonderful people. What changed?

    Saddam’s ‘90 Kuwait invasion (engineered by the US? - another subject). When the PLO celebrated, the Gulf (Kuwait, Bahrain, KSA, etc.) expelled the Pals and they’ve been in the wilderness ever since. Did Israel force the PLO to celebrate Saddam’s invasion? I doubt it. It was a self-inflicted wound.

    The Iroquois were stalwart Anglo-colonial allies through many wars (King Phillips War 1675-78, French and Indian War 1754-63, etc.). They miscalculated after 1775 (especially the Senacas) and allied with the Brits. They’re now contained in a few NY State reservations.

    “The paralysis of the American political class when it comes to being fair to Palestinians and telling the Jews to reign in their destructive global policies is, well, telling.”

    I agree, without question. But ‘the American political class’ is pretty shameless these days. Listening to the markup of the recent GOP health care replacement attempt was depressing. First agenda item - allowing insurance companies to deduct limitless CEO/Officer compensation on their taxes. That sort of thing comes well before Israel. Don’t get me wrong - both stink, regardless of the order.
  117. @Philip Giraldi
    Kilcullen is well compensated by those who support the Establishment narrative on Syria and everywhere else in the Middle East so he does indeed have an agenda. Most intel and military types that I have spoken to agree that after the retaking of Aleppo al-Assad is winning and will eventually win. Did he nevertheless stage the chemical attack on Idbil? I don't know. Let's see the evidence. Somebody obviously knows that happened.

    This is so good, I was blown away. Max has really come a long way on Syria. He and Ben hit the White Helmets, US involvement since 2006, Saudi et al support of militants….everything. (Yes, Israel too.) As they say, [no other "progressives" are covering this].

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6C249jh7wQ
    On Contact: The Uncivil War with Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton

    Following the US missile attacks, Max Blumenthal, Senior Editor of AlterNet’s Grayzone Project, and Ben Norton, reporter for Alternet discuss, the U.S. role in the Syrian conflict.

    Read More
  118. @Wizard of Oz
    Thanks! It makes them sound mad. Somehow one doesn't expect to find people like that behaving like the embarrassing fanatical 20ish kids that most politicians come across in their own political parties and were universal by 1945 in Germany. Despite the fact that one of Australia's most impressive Jewish leaders once described Netanyahu to me as a man of no judgment I can't help having a faint expectation that even he might be embarrassed by that lot of anti-Russian neocons and prefer that they back off. What do you think?

    What do you think?

    I think Nutnyahoo is delighted to play good cop to the neocons’ bad cop routine. In other words, the Lobby does its part to keep the pressure on Russia by getting the West to push for sanctions, conflict in Ukraine, and regime change against Russia itself, while Nutnyahoo plays nice with Putin during official state visits. But make no mistake, the Russian bear is the grand prize in ensuring the dismantling of the Shia Arc.

    To that end, I highly recommend reading this article that analyses neocon efforts to bring about regime change in Russia.

    https://www.rt.com/op-edge/310744-neocons-regime-change-russia/

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @L.K
    Yep, you have absolutely nailed it, I could not have put it better.
  119. @L.K
    You left out the Israelis, the real masters in the 'art' of false flags.

    Sorry for the oversight. That goes without saying, Lavon Affair, Liberty, using innocent people’s passports for terrorist acts, etc., etc.

    Read More
  120. @Wizard of Oz
    Thanks! I"ve only had time to glance at your reply but I'm sure you and I might be able to enjoy a semiserious joust over a beer or port as you clearly are not an alcoholic old trustafarian like one of our very shortwinded compatriots whose only mode of expression is the abruptly assertive explosion that your original comment employed.
    I copied the whole Oz link to PG in another reply/comment in case you want to read the Kilcullen piece with its reference to Assad losing to non ISIS jihadists. But as you can see in another reply to PG about the Victor Davis Hanson article I have moved on to assuming we are now down to treating it as important only in the symbolism to be interpreted.

    Apologies by the way for my disrespectful jibe. I now suspect you are an involuntarily retired MP now closely associated with one of our real universities real university parts. As I have a vast including close acwuaintance with media people of all kinds I obviously know others who abhor Rupert and what he has allegedly done to UK newspapers, American TV - take your pick. But isn't The Age sad, sad, sad? A Labor Premier once came across me in a library reading with derision from The Age letters column. "Yeah, they're a lot of whingers these days!" After decades subscribing I gave up about three years ago - even the Green Guide on Thursdays - and I only get the Weekend Australian in print.

    Sorry but in a hurry now – will read the Kilcullen piece later if I can see it on this website.

    As to other Australian media, I have no respect for any of them in their reporting of the ME. That includes the Age and the ABC.

    Read More
  121. @unseated
    I assume that someone called "Wizard of Oz" might, like myself, be a resident of Australia.
    What is surprising, then, is that he/she gives any credibility to a Murdoch rag and the Australian at that. Its political positions with respect to the Middle East in particular are well known.

    Bloody favouritism, that’s what you got. I got links to the Telegraph from the Wiz instead. It would seem that Rupert Murdoch having 70% of the print media in Australia isn’t quite enough for the Wiz kid, he’d like to assist in the spreading of Rupey’s propaganda a little bit further if he can. How very sad for the Wiz.

    Read More
  122. @L.K
    You have to take into account the fact that wizard of ooze is a well known shill for the anglo-Zamerican establishment here at Unz.

    I just wish the Wiz would publish a course for English speakers to enable us to understand the letters he types and sometimes words that he weaves and strings together in a winding DNA-like fashion “sentence” structure.

    Read More
  123. @geokat62

    What do you think?
     
    I think Nutnyahoo is delighted to play good cop to the neocons' bad cop routine. In other words, the Lobby does its part to keep the pressure on Russia by getting the West to push for sanctions, conflict in Ukraine, and regime change against Russia itself, while Nutnyahoo plays nice with Putin during official state visits. But make no mistake, the Russian bear is the grand prize in ensuring the dismantling of the Shia Arc.

    To that end, I highly recommend reading this article that analyses neocon efforts to bring about regime change in Russia.

    https://www.rt.com/op-edge/310744-neocons-regime-change-russia/

    Yep, you have absolutely nailed it, I could not have put it better.

    Read More
  124. @L.K
    It's obvious that you have no idea as to what you are talking about, you have not been following the war in Syria at all, bc, in fact, you don't care, as the american supremacist scumbag you are.... even though without your fucking country this war would not be happening... you are the one who, in the past, was cheering and trying to justify the criminal nuclear strikes that wiped out 2 Japanese cities in WW2. Funny also that your idiotic and ignorant comeback to evidence that ZUSA pressed Japan into a corner, forcing it into fight or surrender mode, was 'it is all leftist' talk, given that most of those historians who have documented these facts, are conservatives.

    The real reason you are causing trouble in regards to the criminal act of war by ZUSA against Syria based on more bloody lies, is that it 1. it was carried out by the orange bozo, Trump, probably a hero of yours.
    2. well, bc you are an american supremacist, and as such you always try to find justification for your countries' many horrible crimes against humanity.

    Anyway, back to Khan Sheikhoun( you probably cannot even locate Syria on a map), there is ZERO contradiction between it being run by Al-CIAda and the fact that there are civilians in the town, what sort of idiot are you? Mosul is still partly held by Daesh, but there are large numbers of civilians in the city. Who controls Khan Sheikhoun, in Idlib province?

    Deutsche Welle reported: "Idlib province, where Khan Sheikhun is located, is mostly controlled by the Tahrir al-Sham alliance, which is dominated by the Fateh al-Sham Front, formerly known as the al-Qaeda affiliated al-Nusra Front."
     
    This 'incident' is just another one in a long line of manufactured atrocities used to create the justification for a direct ZAMERICAN intervention as AL-CIADA's air force. I still remember one of the first ones, the Houla massacre in the summer of 2012, immediately pinned on the Syrian government.

    But listen, your country has probably an unmatched record of criminality, lawlessness and aggression in History. 93% of its history at war, always wars of choice, only country to have ever used nuclear weapons, ZUSA has also used chemical weapons and helped others use them.
    ZUSA and co have been killing children for decades, from Europe, to the MiddleEast, to Asia, and one is supposed to think that Zusa cares about a few children killed in a supposed Chem attack? What a sick joke. Only days after the manufactured crisis, ZUSA's backed "rebels", aka, al-ciada, bombed buses evacuating civilians from 2 small towns in Idlib, which have long been under siege. A deal was reached for the safe passage of the civilians to government held areas, and zusa's rebels just bombed them, killing over a 100, over 80 of them children. Robert Fisk, possibly the only msm brit reporting on Syria who is not a 100% propagandist, put it this way:

    Yet after this weekend’s suicide bombing of a convoy of civilian refugees outside Aleppo killed 126 Syrians, more than 80 of them children, the White House said nothing. Even though the death toll was far greater, Trump didn’t even Tweet his grief. The US navy launched not even a symbolic bullet towards Syria. The EU went all coy and refused to say a single word. All talk of “barbarism” from Downing Street was smothered.

    Do they feel no sense of shame? What callousness. What disgrace. How outrageous that our compassion should dry up the moment we realised that this latest massacre of the innocents wasn’t quite worth the same amount of tears and fury that the early massacre had produced.
     

    Do they feel no sense of shame? What callousness. What disgrace. How outrageous that our compassion should dry up the moment we realised that this latest massacre of the innocents wasn’t quite worth the same amount of tears and fury that the early massacre had produced.

    Absolutely. Quite apart from anything else the hypocrisy is staggering.

    Read More
  125. @Wizard of Oz
    Thanks. Nothing that I want my dog to start fighting about. I wonder what you think of the Victor Davis Hanson Nstional Review piece that I have linked to PG. The linking to a deall with China over North Korea and trade portrays Trump rather fsvourably. A priori I would be inclined to assume that Trump is by no means passive helpless victim whrn it comes to game playing. Cp. FDR playing all sides at home, Churchill (effectively enough) and Stalin (ineffectively) all at the same time.

    Oz,

    Assuming that the missile strike was aimed at impressing Xi over Korea, which I tend to concur with, does that not by itself present strong evidence that the outrage over Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons was a manufactured one?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Yes but when you get into the detail you have ask whether it is more likely that an opportunistic US president would take prompt advantage of a mishap with gas or would risk history knowing that he had sanctioned the gasing of children....
  126. Rabbis Urge President Trump To “Act Decisively” In Syria
    http://forward.com/scribe/368405/rabbis-urge-president-trump-to-act-decisively-in-syria/

    As most people must know, Rabbis are religious teachers in Judaism. The ones above really, really care so much about human life, particularly Syrian life… I wonder where they were the last time around Israel was bombing the hell out of Gaza… oh, well, no matter, they at least ‘care’ for Syrian babies…
    Folks, take a look at a snippet from their letter, ain’t it good for a big laugh? The ‘measures’ these ‘religious teachers’ want the Bozo to implement for them;

    • Verify, with the various departments in your administration, that today’s attacks in Syria were indeed carried out with a nerve agent.
    This would mean that the Assad regime still possesses nerve gas and therefore did not comply with the September 2013 chemical agreement.

    • Order targeted airstrikes on Assad regime air facilities, jetways, and fix-wing and rotary aircraft so as to prevent the regime from carrying out further chemical attacks with nerve agents.
    If today’s horrific atrocity is not met with a firm response, Assad likely has more attacks planned on an even larger scale. The world today is looking to your administration for leadership.

    Now, for the truth, listen to veteran CIA Ray Mcgovern, during a cross talk interview on Syria, at 1:14; The Elephant in the room re the reason for ZUSA’s policies toward Syria: Israel
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd5fuAUM2BM

    Former US marine Ken O’Keefe on RT about al-ciada und isis in Syria, etc
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-sOnmsWivs

    Read More
  127. @Incitatus
    Rurik,

    Happy Patriots’ Day! 242 years ago our forebears gave the Brits the first kiss goodbye at Lexington and Concord. Then, through the most unlikely chain of events (anyone writing it as a movie script would surely have been fired or committed to an institution - e.g. invading Québec?) we emerged an infant state in 1783. Thanks largely (arms, uniforms, money, troops, engineers, artillery, navy) to former (1754-63) enemy France (just finished ‘Brothers in Arms’). Go figure!

    Even better, men like Washington and Adams had the wisdom not be in thrall to France. “Make no passionate attachments.” A position I wholly agree with, be it France, England, or today - Israel. It distorts both countries.

    “Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.”

    I’ve read Oded Yinon’s ‘Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties' (Feb ‘82); Wolfowitz and Libby’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’ (‘92); Perle, Feith and Wurmser’s ‘Clean Break’ (‘96); Kristol and Kagan’s PNAC (1997), AEI ‘scholars’ (Ledeen et.al.) and the rest. Most are at best cynical nightmares, indictments of anything human. My opinion.

    Rurik, here’s where you and I part ways. I don’t think all of the ills of the world can be traced back to a single group of conspirators [Jews, Israel, Irish, Germans or fill in the group] in [fill in the year]. The Balfour Declaration? Old Testament? Wilson? Well, sure, I’ve no affection for Wilson. I think his second wife was probably a better president. Only because he was rather messianic long before he started drooling. But that’s another subject.

    You seem to always conclude with Jews or Israel as sole culprits to whatever you wax about (WW1, WW2, Iraq, Libya, Syria, neocons, etc). Of course, that’s your mime. Knock yourself out. But it’s always up to a suggestive point, as if you dare your reader to draw the next conclusion. What action are you suggesting, Rurik? Registration? Yellow Stars on clothing? Prohibition from commerce? Barred from schools, making a living, owning property? Transfer? Resettlement? A “Final Solution” (no need to be specific with that deadly euphemism)? Let us know.

    “Utinam populus Romanus unam cervicem haberet!” (“Would that the Roman people had but one neck!”) uttered by Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus comes to mind. But Caligula is hardly a good role model.

    I’ll be honest. I don’t really care about Jews any more than I care about anybody else (excepting myself of course). But what happens to Jews can just as easily happen to me. Full stop. That's why I care. Note, for example, more American Jews supported the Iran Treaty (JCPOA) than were against it. What gives, Rurik?

    I confess (maybe it’s age) I can’t marshall confidence any single scapegoat will lessen our/my sins. Wish I could. Especially when we/I do everything in our power to blame them on everybody/anybody else.

    Syria. Wrote my congressman and both senators when Obama seemed about to intervene (‘Red Line’). A lot of others did too. Guess what? It worked. I’ll be honest. With Trump? Who knows what will work. I only think it’s important to keep trying.

    Surely we could all agree that the perpetrators of crimes should be held accountable for their actions be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or whatever, this is especially true for those who foment wars. If they turned out to be 80% Jewish or any other group it would be a mistake to make that into a war on a religion when simply punishing the guilty would suffice.

    Your suggestion of the wearing of yellow stars is a bit of a low blow and merely introduces an unhelpful emotional component to the discussion. I wouldn’t want all Jews rounded up and punished because of simply being Jews either but real American patriots do want those who violate the constitution held to account under the law. The list of names in what you posted… do happen to be all Jewish.

    “I’ve read Oded Yinon’s ‘Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties’ (Feb ‘82); Wolfowitz and Libby’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’ (‘92); Perle, Feith and Wurmser’s ‘Clean Break’ (‘96); Kristol and Kagan’s PNAC (1997), AEI ‘scholars’ (Ledeen et.al.) and the rest. Most are at best cynical nightmares, indictments of anything human.”

    They do just happen to be all Jews, sure they have their non-Jewish accomplices either for religion, ideology or filthy lucre but it’s not those who appear to be driving the bus.

    It’s not just war crimes either, Americans voted for Trump because he convinced them he’d address the economic struggles, declining infrastructure and bleak future many face. Would the list of names of the perps in the Great Fed Swindle be mostly Irish? Polish? Greek?

    I do wonder why there isn’t more opposition to the Rothschild’s vile monster from Jewish people themselves since history tells us that they are those who ultimately suffer from the backlash.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    “Surely we could all agree that the perpetrators of crimes should be held accountable for their actions be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or whatever, this is especially true for those who foment wars. If they turned out to be 80% Jewish or any other group it would be a mistake to make that into a war on a religion when simply punishing the guilty would suffice.”

    Absolutely agree, and nicely said. As for Yinon, Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Feith, Wurmser, Kristol, Kagan, Ledeen? Indict and try them by all means. Just make sure they’re not alone in the dock. GW Bush, Cheney, Condi, Rummy, Ashcroft, DeLay, Gingrich, Bolton, John Yoo, Safire, much of Congress, etc. There are a lot of fingerprints on the Iraq murder weapon. And a lot of other murders to consider (Libya, Syria...).

    “Your suggestion of the wearing of yellow stars is a bit of a low blow and merely introduces an unhelpful emotional component to the discussion.”

    Here’s where I was coming from. It’s easy to raise an emotionally charged question in a suggestive manner and (wink, wink) lead an audience to subliminally draw an unspoken conclusion. Take torture. Appeal to patriotism, mix it with fearful immanent threats, demonize enemies, discard the judicial process, and generalize or omit specific plan details. Presto, waterboarding! A capital crime after WW2.

    What’s unspoken is key. Never having to confront the nasty bits makes them more easily rationalized. It was easy for Hitler to scapegoat Jews in the ‘20s-30s. It found great resonance in his audiences. One wonders if they would have bought the program if they knew the full scope of the squalid process - the plan from beginning to disastrous end.

    Would Americans have bought waterboarding, Iraq, and the rest? I like to think they wouldn’t, but could be wrong. They never really got the chance, given our media and politicians.

    Accountability depends on acknowledging the full monty, all the facts and acts, from the beginning to anticipated conclusion. Just my view.

    “Great Fed Swindle...Rothschild’s vile monster”

    You’re way above my field of knowledge. My instinct in such situations (they happen frequently) is pragmatic. If there’s wrongdoing, indict and try the culprits, whoever they may be. It requires patience, but I prefer that to buyer’s regret for a blank check like Iraq ‘03.
  128. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Incitatus
    Rurik,

    Happy Patriots’ Day! 242 years ago our forebears gave the Brits the first kiss goodbye at Lexington and Concord. Then, through the most unlikely chain of events (anyone writing it as a movie script would surely have been fired or committed to an institution - e.g. invading Québec?) we emerged an infant state in 1783. Thanks largely (arms, uniforms, money, troops, engineers, artillery, navy) to former (1754-63) enemy France (just finished ‘Brothers in Arms’). Go figure!

    Even better, men like Washington and Adams had the wisdom not be in thrall to France. “Make no passionate attachments.” A position I wholly agree with, be it France, England, or today - Israel. It distorts both countries.

    “Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.”

    I’ve read Oded Yinon’s ‘Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties' (Feb ‘82); Wolfowitz and Libby’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’ (‘92); Perle, Feith and Wurmser’s ‘Clean Break’ (‘96); Kristol and Kagan’s PNAC (1997), AEI ‘scholars’ (Ledeen et.al.) and the rest. Most are at best cynical nightmares, indictments of anything human. My opinion.

    Rurik, here’s where you and I part ways. I don’t think all of the ills of the world can be traced back to a single group of conspirators [Jews, Israel, Irish, Germans or fill in the group] in [fill in the year]. The Balfour Declaration? Old Testament? Wilson? Well, sure, I’ve no affection for Wilson. I think his second wife was probably a better president. Only because he was rather messianic long before he started drooling. But that’s another subject.

    You seem to always conclude with Jews or Israel as sole culprits to whatever you wax about (WW1, WW2, Iraq, Libya, Syria, neocons, etc). Of course, that’s your mime. Knock yourself out. But it’s always up to a suggestive point, as if you dare your reader to draw the next conclusion. What action are you suggesting, Rurik? Registration? Yellow Stars on clothing? Prohibition from commerce? Barred from schools, making a living, owning property? Transfer? Resettlement? A “Final Solution” (no need to be specific with that deadly euphemism)? Let us know.

    “Utinam populus Romanus unam cervicem haberet!” (“Would that the Roman people had but one neck!”) uttered by Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus comes to mind. But Caligula is hardly a good role model.

    I’ll be honest. I don’t really care about Jews any more than I care about anybody else (excepting myself of course). But what happens to Jews can just as easily happen to me. Full stop. That's why I care. Note, for example, more American Jews supported the Iran Treaty (JCPOA) than were against it. What gives, Rurik?

    I confess (maybe it’s age) I can’t marshall confidence any single scapegoat will lessen our/my sins. Wish I could. Especially when we/I do everything in our power to blame them on everybody/anybody else.

    Syria. Wrote my congressman and both senators when Obama seemed about to intervene (‘Red Line’). A lot of others did too. Guess what? It worked. I’ll be honest. With Trump? Who knows what will work. I only think it’s important to keep trying.

    Nothing surprising about invading Quebec. Revolutionary regimes often spill over their borders; cf. the French Revolutionary wars, the Polish-Soviet War, the Northern Expedition (sort of), etc.

    Read More
  129. @Wizard of Oz
    Now that we are zeroing in on a consensus that it is the symbolism that is the key to understanding rather than any particualrs about the use of gas I wonder what you make of this Victor Davis Hanson article which was drawn to my attention by a retired Australian senior public servant who writes extensively on strategic anf security matters:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446812/trump-restoring-deterrence-necessary-dangerous-corrective-obama-appeasement

    Hanson oughta stay down on his farm, where he does some good. Unfortunately, he saw Parree, and you can’t keep that boy down from wanting to plough under the whole world instead.

    Read More
  130. @NoldorElf
    I am forced to conclude that the neoconservatives and indeed all of Washington DC are eager to go to war. They are just itching for any excuse to start yet another war in a nation of their choosing.

    If there is no good reason, they will make one up. There is an eerie resemblance to what is happening now with Syria and what happened leading up to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.

    I think the paleoconservative community also needs to come to terms with the fact that Trump has sold them out and is increasingly acting like a Washington insider neocon. Trump did to the paleoconservatives what Obama did to the left.

    It seems Trump will not put "America First" nor make any attempts to restore the American Middle Class nor American manufacturing to truly "Make American Great Again".

    Tulsi Gabbard seems to be one of the few principled politicians in this case and for that she is marginalized for saying what few others have the moral courage to say. Many on the left are hoping she will run in 2020 for President.

    Coming from the left, I'd say that the Sanders and Trump base have a lot more in common than we admit. We are both deeply unhappy with the way that Washington has handled things. They basically betrayed the American people and enriched themselves at public expense.

    The real question is, can the US be saved for the people or will it continue on its path to terminal decline?

    The Neocons have always been raring to go and have the US army save nearly defenseless Israel from the looming threat of the Syrian army, circa 1973. They have long memories. They will not forget that the Syrians very nearly broke through during that war, and could easily, given some luck, have swept down onto the plains of Israel itself.

    Israelis have not forgotten. And neither have their neocons.

    To us Westerners, those days are ancient history. To Israelis, these days are payback time.

    And neither have they forgotten whose tanks those Syrians were riding when they nearly pushed the Israelis into the sea. Those were Russian tanks, and Russian planes, and Russian artillery.

    When they are done with the Syrians (and Iran) they will get around to Russia.

    Is that not the explanation for what has happened in the Ukraine?

    They have long memories.

    Read More
  131. @Ivan
    Oz,

    Assuming that the missile strike was aimed at impressing Xi over Korea, which I tend to concur with, does that not by itself present strong evidence that the outrage over Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons was a manufactured one?

    Yes but when you get into the detail you have ask whether it is more likely that an opportunistic US president would take prompt advantage of a mishap with gas or would risk history knowing that he had sanctioned the gasing of children….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivan
    Trump is not some kind of Greek tragic figure agonising over cosmic morality. You can gauge his flippancy by his tweet that he informed Xi about it over rich chocolate cake. In the recent past GWB would count as a pious Christian, but instead of unloading on the Saudis who were mainly responsible for 9/11, he took it out on Saddam who had nothing to do with the WTC.
  132. @Wizard of Oz
    Yes but when you get into the detail you have ask whether it is more likely that an opportunistic US president would take prompt advantage of a mishap with gas or would risk history knowing that he had sanctioned the gasing of children....

    Trump is not some kind of Greek tragic figure agonising over cosmic morality. You can gauge his flippancy by his tweet that he informed Xi about it over rich chocolate cake. In the recent past GWB would count as a pious Christian, but instead of unloading on the Saudis who were mainly responsible for 9/11, he took it out on Saddam who had nothing to do with the WTC.

    Read More
  133. Sorry Ivan but the Saudis were minor players on 9/11. You have some important catch-up reading to do and not a moment too soon. The truth is out there.

    Read More
  134. @Incitatus
    Rurik,

    Happy Patriots’ Day! 242 years ago our forebears gave the Brits the first kiss goodbye at Lexington and Concord. Then, through the most unlikely chain of events (anyone writing it as a movie script would surely have been fired or committed to an institution - e.g. invading Québec?) we emerged an infant state in 1783. Thanks largely (arms, uniforms, money, troops, engineers, artillery, navy) to former (1754-63) enemy France (just finished ‘Brothers in Arms’). Go figure!

    Even better, men like Washington and Adams had the wisdom not be in thrall to France. “Make no passionate attachments.” A position I wholly agree with, be it France, England, or today - Israel. It distorts both countries.

    “Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.”

    I’ve read Oded Yinon’s ‘Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties' (Feb ‘82); Wolfowitz and Libby’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’ (‘92); Perle, Feith and Wurmser’s ‘Clean Break’ (‘96); Kristol and Kagan’s PNAC (1997), AEI ‘scholars’ (Ledeen et.al.) and the rest. Most are at best cynical nightmares, indictments of anything human. My opinion.

    Rurik, here’s where you and I part ways. I don’t think all of the ills of the world can be traced back to a single group of conspirators [Jews, Israel, Irish, Germans or fill in the group] in [fill in the year]. The Balfour Declaration? Old Testament? Wilson? Well, sure, I’ve no affection for Wilson. I think his second wife was probably a better president. Only because he was rather messianic long before he started drooling. But that’s another subject.

    You seem to always conclude with Jews or Israel as sole culprits to whatever you wax about (WW1, WW2, Iraq, Libya, Syria, neocons, etc). Of course, that’s your mime. Knock yourself out. But it’s always up to a suggestive point, as if you dare your reader to draw the next conclusion. What action are you suggesting, Rurik? Registration? Yellow Stars on clothing? Prohibition from commerce? Barred from schools, making a living, owning property? Transfer? Resettlement? A “Final Solution” (no need to be specific with that deadly euphemism)? Let us know.

    “Utinam populus Romanus unam cervicem haberet!” (“Would that the Roman people had but one neck!”) uttered by Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus comes to mind. But Caligula is hardly a good role model.

    I’ll be honest. I don’t really care about Jews any more than I care about anybody else (excepting myself of course). But what happens to Jews can just as easily happen to me. Full stop. That's why I care. Note, for example, more American Jews supported the Iran Treaty (JCPOA) than were against it. What gives, Rurik?

    I confess (maybe it’s age) I can’t marshall confidence any single scapegoat will lessen our/my sins. Wish I could. Especially when we/I do everything in our power to blame them on everybody/anybody else.

    Syria. Wrote my congressman and both senators when Obama seemed about to intervene (‘Red Line’). A lot of others did too. Guess what? It worked. I’ll be honest. With Trump? Who knows what will work. I only think it’s important to keep trying.

    Hey Incitatus,

    I have about six minutes so I’ll try to get a response to your post..

    here’s where you and I part ways. I don’t think all of the ills of the world can be traced back to a single group of conspirators [Jews, Israel, Irish, Germans or fill in the group] in [fill in the year].

    neither do I !

    But imagine if you’re a Palestinian who’s watching his home be bulldozed and looking at the bullet riddled body of his father and older brother who were protesting the demolition of their home while your mother and sister are weeping inconsolably. Now if you’re thoughtful and intelligent, you’re going to understand that much of what you’re suffering is a consequence of very many different people and groups and forces. It isn’t just the Zionist Jews who are causing you so much grief. It’s also the craven and venal Arab governments that surround you. It’s the king of Jordan and the House of Saud. It’s the corrupt and rotten governments of the West who facilitate the Jews murdering your people, torturing your buddies and humiliating your family and friends. It’s the banksters and international powerbrokers who have forsaken you, and who grimly watch, generation after generation as your people languish and suffer.

    But on this day, as the IDF goons who obviously took pleasure in murdering your family members, and are exchanging giggles between them as your mother crumples to the ground in despair, I think under these circumstances such a person could be forgiven if he muttered to himself.. ‘fucking Jews’. And even tho you’d be right, that there are lots of very good and decent Jews, and there are also a lot of nasty and rotten Gentiles, if you were to chasten this person for blaming “the Jews”, I suspect that he’d be rather exasperated, because most of what he’s suffering, is a direct consequence of what Jews are doing.

    You see? So it gets complicated.

    Now I’m a million miles away from being a Palestinian, even tho I do sympathize and feel a distant solidarity for them, and hope the world one day finds it’s humanity, I can’t possibly claim to even begin to understand their suffering. But never the less, my main issue are the Eternal Wars that are foisted upon my nation by Zionist Jews and their myriad stooges. Sure, the MIC is perfectly eager to participate, and there are many other forces at work, but the main reason my government has waged so many wars, from WWI and WWII all the way up to and including today’s wars in the Middle East, are all being done to (create/)benefit Israel, and so I think I can be forgiven if I resent the misuse of my government and military to slaughter innocent people for the benefit of some very nasty racial supremacists. No?

    And that’s just in the context of the wars. There are other acts of treachery that are notable. The serial swindles of Goldman Sachs as the fox guarding the US Treasury. The moral sewage pumped into the soul of the West. Other shit. But mainly for me it’s the wars. I hate them. Viscerally down the core of my being. And I hate the people who foist them on us. But for the record, I’m far, far more annoyed with shit bags like John McCain than I am with any Jews I can think of, simply because Jews are acting in what they consider the best interest of the Jews, whereas McCain is directly acting in his own people’s worst interest on behalf of their deadliest enemy. So he’s far, far worse.

    more American Jews supported the Iran Treaty (JCPOA) than were against it. What gives, Rurik?

    actually a majority of American Jews also support the Saudi plan of Israel returning to its 1967 borders. It isn’t Jews who are the problem Incitatus. It’s the Zio-scum and their willing accomplices. I know personally some very decent and honorable Jews. I’d have to be the world’s biggest asshole to condemn all the Jewish people I know because of the actions of some of the most exorable POS (Sheldon Adelson, et al) that there are.

    That’s all the time I have. I hope that sheds some light my friend.

    Cheers

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    Hi Rurik,

    “imagine if you’re a Palestinian...”

    Indeed I have. Spent years on KSA, Gulf and Levant projects. The Pals are wonderful people. Some, like anybody else, not so wonderful. Their politicians seem often to vary between feckless collusion with Likud or violent extremism. Almost as if they prefer job security in a hostile pantomime while their constituents continue to rot without hope. Pals need a Mandela. The greatest fear of Likud and far-right Israelis?

    “it gets complicated.”

    Too true. Is there a single cause, single scapegoat, or a single solution? Make no mistake, I wish there was a magic answer.

    “It isn’t just the Zionist Jews who are causing you so much grief. It’s also the craven and venal Arab governments that surround you. It’s the king of Jordan and the House of Saud.”

    Nobody’s causing me grief. Well, maybe our Administration and Congress, but that’s another subject. The Hashemites? Jordan absorbed more Pals than most. A decent people and reasonable government by all appearances. KSA, well that’s something different (the Sauds). As is Bahrain (Khalifas) or Kuwait (Sabahs). As you say “it gets complicated.” The people are mostly affable; leaders not always. Has our meddling encouraged inflexible dynasties? Corruption? Probably. But the alternatives may, like Libya, be worse.

    “There are other acts of treachery that are notable. The serial swindles of Goldman Sachs as the fox guarding the US Treasury.”

    No doubt. But, bear in mind the rescue of Goldman Sachs ‘07-08 came from a Christian Scientist (Hank Paulson), backed up by a Methodist (GW Bush) and an overwhelmingly Christian Congress. A lot of their clients like Mitt Romney (Mormon) had personal funds at risk. I don’t like it either, but it’s history. I care more about preventing repetition.

    Currently on the radar? Phil Graham, former senator, bankster and lobbyist. Husband of Wendy Graham, Enron enabler. Phil is best known for killing Glass-Steagall in ‘99. He now seems to have written a WSJ editorial. Whenever he surfaces, hold your wallet safe.

    Sheldon Adelson? No disagreement. Balzac had it right. Gambling is the opiate of poverty. Sheldon’s simply a pusher. His trade should be illegal.

    “McCain is directly acting in his own people’s worst interest”

    I confess a fondness for old ‘Hothead’, though I rarely (ever?) agree with him. It’s easier these days, given the failed presidential bid. And the three horseman of the apocalypse (John, Lindsey, and Joe) aren’t doing their tag-team routine on the nightly news. That drove me crazy.
  135. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The world would not have minded the wonderful jobs the Jews/Israeli do ,only if they allowed same chemistry and equation applied to them. They want to play but dont want to get hurt .But they avoid hurting not by honesty skill or application of laws but by distortions of each of these and by imposing their views on other. When the views get ridiculed or challenged ,they marshal- Holocaust,Hitler, Devil or Axis of Evil or Beyond Pale- arguments .

    Read More
  136. @Wally
    Putin is so bad for Russia that the Russians overwhelmingly support him.

    I suggest you quit digging.

    Sorry to say, you don’t have any. For that you will have to make a revolution. Present form of democracy, or whatever you may call it, suits the corporates best.

    Read More
  137. @Z-man
    Let me barge into this conversation if just for a bit since I know where you're coming from and won't be convinced to change you position.

    You seem to always conclude with Jews or Israel as sole culprits to whatever you wax about (WW1, WW2, Iraq, Libya, Syria, neocons, etc). Of course, that’s your mime. Knock yourself out. But it’s always up to a suggestive point, as if you dare your reader to draw the next conclusion
     
    They may not be the 'sole' culprits but by far the most destructive to, at the least (and I would argue a lot more), American foreign policy/interests and the welfare of ordinary Americans. The paralysis of the American political class when it comes to being fair to Palestinians and telling the Jews to reign in their destructive global policies is, well, telling.

    “They [Jews/Israel] may not be the ‘sole’ culprits but by far the most destructive to, at the least (and I would argue a lot more), American foreign policy/interests and the welfare of ordinary Americans.”

    GW Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rummy, and our Congress took the nation to war in 2003. They made the decision. Israel lobbied for it (according to M&W they preferred Iran).

    What about Tony Blair? He joined the sales campaign and offered troops. The Downing Street Memo is pretty damning. Was the UK as responsible as Israel? More responsible? Was BAE Systems any less a beneficiary than US firms like KBR and Blackwater? The Pentagon Contractor list for Iraq was a menu for a pretty sordid meal.

    Israeli individuals involved in Iraq 2002-03 PR (Netanyahu, Peres, etc.) share guilt for bogus testimony and should be indicted for Crimes Against Peace at the Hague. But prime charges – Crimes Against Peace and Waging Aggressive War – should be lodged against GW Bush and Company (including Admin neocons), Tony Blair and Company, and all others involved who actually pulled the trigger.

    Palestinians. Few more tragic victims exist. Ottomans, British (who should have done much more to protect them), the UN (crippled after Bernadotte and Serot were assassinated). But the Pals are not totally blameless. I saw the camps in Jordan from ‘76. Unforgettable squalor. I regularly worked with Pals in the Gulf – they were the educated, cosmopolitan professional class that kept things going. Wonderful people. What changed?

    Saddam’s ‘90 Kuwait invasion (engineered by the US? – another subject). When the PLO celebrated, the Gulf (Kuwait, Bahrain, KSA, etc.) expelled the Pals and they’ve been in the wilderness ever since. Did Israel force the PLO to celebrate Saddam’s invasion? I doubt it. It was a self-inflicted wound.

    The Iroquois were stalwart Anglo-colonial allies through many wars (King Phillips War 1675-78, French and Indian War 1754-63, etc.). They miscalculated after 1775 (especially the Senacas) and allied with the Brits. They’re now contained in a few NY State reservations.

    “The paralysis of the American political class when it comes to being fair to Palestinians and telling the Jews to reign in their destructive global policies is, well, telling.”

    I agree, without question. But ‘the American political class’ is pretty shameless these days. Listening to the markup of the recent GOP health care replacement attempt was depressing. First agenda item – allowing insurance companies to deduct limitless CEO/Officer compensation on their taxes. That sort of thing comes well before Israel. Don’t get me wrong – both stink, regardless of the order.

    Read More
    • Agree: Z-man, Sam Shama
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Was the UK as responsible as Israel?

    I'm disappointed in you. It's rather disingenuous of you to ask that, given the recent revelations where government officials from Israel were proven to be manipulating election outcomes to ensure Israel friendly parliamentarians to do the bidding of Israel in the UK. It is also safe to assume that just like in America, the influence is nefarious and destructive, to put it mildly.
    , @geokat62

    They made the decision. Israel lobbied for it (according to M&W they preferred Iran).
     
    Since you've chosen to reference M&W, I thought it might be helpful to clarify what they actually said about The Lobby's preference for Iran:

    Given that many Americans now share Ackerman's sentiments about the war [i.e., "it was a thorough and total disaster for the U.S."], we should not be surprised that some Israelis and their American allies have tried to rewrite the historical record to absolve Israel of any responsibility for the Iraq disaster. In March 2007, the editor of the Jerusalem Post, David Horovitz, wrote about "the false notion that Israel encouraged the US to fight the Iraq War." Similarly, Shai Feldman, former head of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies and now head of the Crown Center for Middle East Studies at Brandeis, told Glenn Frankel of the Washington Post in the summer of 2006, "Look, Israel didn't mobilize anybody over Iraq, and asso­ciating Israel with the neocons on this issue is preposterous. Israel didn't see Iraq as a danger, and what's more, it had no interest in pushing the Bush ad­ministration's democracy agenda." This view undoubtedly reflects Feldman's beliefs about Israel's interests and the hierarchy of threats it faced, but as we have shown, it is contrary to what Israel's leaders were actually saying and doing in the run-up to the war.

    Not to be outdone, Martin Kramer, a research fellow at WINEP, claims that any attempt to link Israel and the lobby with the war in Iraq is "simply a falsehood," arguing that "in the year preceding the Iraq War, Israel time and again disagreed with the United States, arguing that Iran posed the greater threat." But as shown above, Israel's concerns about Iran never led it to undertake a significant effort to halt the march to war. To the contrary, top Israeli officials were doing everything in their power to make sure that the United States went after Saddam and did not get cold feet at the last moment. They considered Iraq a serious threat and were convinced that Bush would deal with Iran after he finished with Iraq. They might have pre­ferred that America focus on Iran before Iraq, but as Kramer admits, Israelis "shed no tears over Saddam's demise." Instead, their leaders took to the American airwaves, wrote op-eds, testified before Congress, and worked closely with the neoconservatives in the Pentagon and the vice president's office to shape the intelligence about Iraq and coordinate the drive to war. - p. 261-2 The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy
     

  138. @Rurik
    Hey Incitatus,

    I have about six minutes so I'll try to get a response to your post..


    here’s where you and I part ways. I don’t think all of the ills of the world can be traced back to a single group of conspirators [Jews, Israel, Irish, Germans or fill in the group] in [fill in the year].
     
    neither do I !

    But imagine if you're a Palestinian who's watching his home be bulldozed and looking at the bullet riddled body of his father and older brother who were protesting the demolition of their home while your mother and sister are weeping inconsolably. Now if you're thoughtful and intelligent, you're going to understand that much of what you're suffering is a consequence of very many different people and groups and forces. It isn't just the Zionist Jews who are causing you so much grief. It's also the craven and venal Arab governments that surround you. It's the king of Jordan and the House of Saud. It's the corrupt and rotten governments of the West who facilitate the Jews murdering your people, torturing your buddies and humiliating your family and friends. It's the banksters and international powerbrokers who have forsaken you, and who grimly watch, generation after generation as your people languish and suffer.

    But on this day, as the IDF goons who obviously took pleasure in murdering your family members, and are exchanging giggles between them as your mother crumples to the ground in despair, I think under these circumstances such a person could be forgiven if he muttered to himself.. 'fucking Jews'. And even tho you'd be right, that there are lots of very good and decent Jews, and there are also a lot of nasty and rotten Gentiles, if you were to chasten this person for blaming "the Jews", I suspect that he'd be rather exasperated, because most of what he's suffering, is a direct consequence of what Jews are doing.

    You see? So it gets complicated.

    Now I'm a million miles away from being a Palestinian, even tho I do sympathize and feel a distant solidarity for them, and hope the world one day finds it's humanity, I can't possibly claim to even begin to understand their suffering. But never the less, my main issue are the Eternal Wars that are foisted upon my nation by Zionist Jews and their myriad stooges. Sure, the MIC is perfectly eager to participate, and there are many other forces at work, but the main reason my government has waged so many wars, from WWI and WWII all the way up to and including today's wars in the Middle East, are all being done to (create/)benefit Israel, and so I think I can be forgiven if I resent the misuse of my government and military to slaughter innocent people for the benefit of some very nasty racial supremacists. No?

    And that's just in the context of the wars. There are other acts of treachery that are notable. The serial swindles of Goldman Sachs as the fox guarding the US Treasury. The moral sewage pumped into the soul of the West. Other shit. But mainly for me it's the wars. I hate them. Viscerally down the core of my being. And I hate the people who foist them on us. But for the record, I'm far, far more annoyed with shit bags like John McCain than I am with any Jews I can think of, simply because Jews are acting in what they consider the best interest of the Jews, whereas McCain is directly acting in his own people's worst interest on behalf of their deadliest enemy. So he's far, far worse.


    more American Jews supported the Iran Treaty (JCPOA) than were against it. What gives, Rurik?
     
    actually a majority of American Jews also support the Saudi plan of Israel returning to its 1967 borders. It isn't Jews who are the problem Incitatus. It's the Zio-scum and their willing accomplices. I know personally some very decent and honorable Jews. I'd have to be the world's biggest asshole to condemn all the Jewish people I know because of the actions of some of the most exorable POS (Sheldon Adelson, et al) that there are.

    That's all the time I have. I hope that sheds some light my friend.

    Cheers

    Hi Rurik,

    “imagine if you’re a Palestinian…”

    Indeed I have. Spent years on KSA, Gulf and Levant projects. The Pals are wonderful people. Some, like anybody else, not so wonderful. Their politicians seem often to vary between feckless collusion with Likud or violent extremism. Almost as if they prefer job security in a hostile pantomime while their constituents continue to rot without hope. Pals need a Mandela. The greatest fear of Likud and far-right Israelis?

    “it gets complicated.”

    Too true. Is there a single cause, single scapegoat, or a single solution? Make no mistake, I wish there was a magic answer.

    “It isn’t just the Zionist Jews who are causing you so much grief. It’s also the craven and venal Arab governments that surround you. It’s the king of Jordan and the House of Saud.”

    Nobody’s causing me grief. Well, maybe our Administration and Congress, but that’s another subject. The Hashemites? Jordan absorbed more Pals than most. A decent people and reasonable government by all appearances. KSA, well that’s something different (the Sauds). As is Bahrain (Khalifas) or Kuwait (Sabahs). As you say “it gets complicated.” The people are mostly affable; leaders not always. Has our meddling encouraged inflexible dynasties? Corruption? Probably. But the alternatives may, like Libya, be worse.

    “There are other acts of treachery that are notable. The serial swindles of Goldman Sachs as the fox guarding the US Treasury.”

    No doubt. But, bear in mind the rescue of Goldman Sachs ‘07-08 came from a Christian Scientist (Hank Paulson), backed up by a Methodist (GW Bush) and an overwhelmingly Christian Congress. A lot of their clients like Mitt Romney (Mormon) had personal funds at risk. I don’t like it either, but it’s history. I care more about preventing repetition.

    Currently on the radar? Phil Graham, former senator, bankster and lobbyist. Husband of Wendy Graham, Enron enabler. Phil is best known for killing Glass-Steagall in ‘99. He now seems to have written a WSJ editorial. Whenever he surfaces, hold your wallet safe.

    Sheldon Adelson? No disagreement. Balzac had it right. Gambling is the opiate of poverty. Sheldon’s simply a pusher. His trade should be illegal.

    “McCain is directly acting in his own people’s worst interest”

    I confess a fondness for old ‘Hothead’, though I rarely (ever?) agree with him. It’s easier these days, given the failed presidential bid. And the three horseman of the apocalypse (John, Lindsey, and Joe) aren’t doing their tag-team routine on the nightly news. That drove me crazy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Pals need a Mandela.
     
    they'd never allow him out of their torture chambers

    they'd murder any such man or woman without compunction, and the ((Western press)) would call him a terrorist with an unanimous voice

    Is there a single cause, single scapegoat, or a single solution? Make no mistake, I wish there was a magic answer.
     
    education

    the only way these atrocities are tolerated is due to widespread, imposed ignorance. If they made one hundredth of the movies about Palestine that they make about the Holocaust, there'd be reform in a New York minute. The people are not evil, they're just duped or drunk on power, as the case may be, and if the governments and media of the West were not so totally controlled and corrupt, then there'd be the peace.

    I just made a remark on another thread about the need to End the Fed. The Fed is the perfidious little snake pit where all this bullshit emanates from.

    Phil is best known for killing Glass-Steagall in ‘99.
     
    Phil is a bitch. Killing Glass was Robert Rubin all the way, with his Igor hunchback Lawrence Summers. Rubin is the brains behind the mass lootings of the treasury going way back. He makes Madoff look like Mother Theresa.

    Sheldon Adelson? No disagreement. Balzac had it right. Gambling is the opiate of poverty. Sheldon’s simply a pusher. His trade should be illegal.
     
    it isn't gambling that bothers me about Sheldon. It's his repulsive hypocrisy in demanding open borders for America but calls immigrants in Israel "invaders" and demands their repatriation. He's the worst kind of Zionist oozing pus, almost as ugly on the outside as he is on the inside. May he- and all his duplicitous, double-dealing, Jewish supremacist, Zio-scum die hard and rot in hell.


    “McCain is directly acting in his own people’s worst interest”
     
    I confess a fondness for old ‘Hothead’,
     
    whoa

    I guess that certainly points to a gaping rift between us. I happen to consider John McBloodstain to be the most execrable, loathsome POS on the planet. If you water boarded me, I wouldn't be able to think of a more accursed and squalid little turd of a traitor than John McBloodstain McCain.
  139. @NoseytheDuke
    Surely we could all agree that the perpetrators of crimes should be held accountable for their actions be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or whatever, this is especially true for those who foment wars. If they turned out to be 80% Jewish or any other group it would be a mistake to make that into a war on a religion when simply punishing the guilty would suffice.

    Your suggestion of the wearing of yellow stars is a bit of a low blow and merely introduces an unhelpful emotional component to the discussion. I wouldn't want all Jews rounded up and punished because of simply being Jews either but real American patriots do want those who violate the constitution held to account under the law. The list of names in what you posted… do happen to be all Jewish.

    "I’ve read Oded Yinon’s ‘Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties’ (Feb ‘82); Wolfowitz and Libby’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’ (‘92); Perle, Feith and Wurmser’s ‘Clean Break’ (‘96); Kristol and Kagan’s PNAC (1997), AEI ‘scholars’ (Ledeen et.al.) and the rest. Most are at best cynical nightmares, indictments of anything human."

    They do just happen to be all Jews, sure they have their non-Jewish accomplices either for religion, ideology or filthy lucre but it's not those who appear to be driving the bus.

    It's not just war crimes either, Americans voted for Trump because he convinced them he'd address the economic struggles, declining infrastructure and bleak future many face. Would the list of names of the perps in the Great Fed Swindle be mostly Irish? Polish? Greek?

    I do wonder why there isn't more opposition to the Rothschild's vile monster from Jewish people themselves since history tells us that they are those who ultimately suffer from the backlash.

    “Surely we could all agree that the perpetrators of crimes should be held accountable for their actions be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or whatever, this is especially true for those who foment wars. If they turned out to be 80% Jewish or any other group it would be a mistake to make that into a war on a religion when simply punishing the guilty would suffice.”

    Absolutely agree, and nicely said. As for Yinon, Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Feith, Wurmser, Kristol, Kagan, Ledeen? Indict and try them by all means. Just make sure they’re not alone in the dock. GW Bush, Cheney, Condi, Rummy, Ashcroft, DeLay, Gingrich, Bolton, John Yoo, Safire, much of Congress, etc. There are a lot of fingerprints on the Iraq murder weapon. And a lot of other murders to consider (Libya, Syria…).

    “Your suggestion of the wearing of yellow stars is a bit of a low blow and merely introduces an unhelpful emotional component to the discussion.”

    Here’s where I was coming from. It’s easy to raise an emotionally charged question in a suggestive manner and (wink, wink) lead an audience to subliminally draw an unspoken conclusion. Take torture. Appeal to patriotism, mix it with fearful immanent threats, demonize enemies, discard the judicial process, and generalize or omit specific plan details. Presto, waterboarding! A capital crime after WW2.

    What’s unspoken is key. Never having to confront the nasty bits makes them more easily rationalized. It was easy for Hitler to scapegoat Jews in the ‘20s-30s. It found great resonance in his audiences. One wonders if they would have bought the program if they knew the full scope of the squalid process – the plan from beginning to disastrous end.

    Would Americans have bought waterboarding, Iraq, and the rest? I like to think they wouldn’t, but could be wrong. They never really got the chance, given our media and politicians.

    Accountability depends on acknowledging the full monty, all the facts and acts, from the beginning to anticipated conclusion. Just my view.

    “Great Fed Swindle…Rothschild’s vile monster”

    You’re way above my field of knowledge. My instinct in such situations (they happen frequently) is pragmatic. If there’s wrongdoing, indict and try the culprits, whoever they may be. It requires patience, but I prefer that to buyer’s regret for a blank check like Iraq ‘03.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    “Great Fed Swindle…Rothschild’s vile monster”

    You’re way above my field of knowledge.

    Now you really are being disingenuous, and to such a blatant degree that it surely undermines your veracity where truth is concerned.

    , @Rurik

    It was easy for Hitler to scapegoat Jews in the ‘20s-30s. It found great resonance in his audiences
     
    why do you suppose that was Incitatus?

    I was raised to believe that all the Jews (the only victims of the Nazis that really count) were all innocent and that Hitler (and all Germans) simply hated them out of an irrational bigotry born of their notions of racial supremacy, because Hitler and all the Germans were evil racists.

    Period.

    But then since I've grown up and read a little, I learned that is really wasn't quite that simple after all. And that some Jews were doing some very nasty things indeed!

    like waging a genocidal campaign of slaughter and terror in Russia and Ukraine and elsewhere against the Christians who lived there and threatening the same in Germany

    Like the Morgenthau plan, and other genocidal schemes to wipe Germany (and all Germans) off the map of humanity

    and the treachery and betrayal of WWI regarding the Balfour Declaration and the subsequent Treaty of Versailles signed on the slab of mass starvation of a Germany that had laid down its arms in honorable good will

    and the humiliations and suffering heaped upon the starving German people by the Weimar regime

    the brothels in Berlin that treated German children like sex toys for homosexuals and other foreign thrill seekers

    in fact there were a lot of things for which the German people had reason to resent some Jews, no?

    were the people of Hungary racists and anti-Semites for their hatred of Bela Kun?

    were the people of Ukraine anti-Semites for hating Lazar kaganovich?

    perhaps there were some things that some Jews did; like declaring an international war on Germany, for which the Germany people had a legitimate grievance.. no?
  140. @Incitatus
    “They [Jews/Israel] may not be the ‘sole’ culprits but by far the most destructive to, at the least (and I would argue a lot more), American foreign policy/interests and the welfare of ordinary Americans.”

    GW Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rummy, and our Congress took the nation to war in 2003. They made the decision. Israel lobbied for it (according to M&W they preferred Iran).

    What about Tony Blair? He joined the sales campaign and offered troops. The Downing Street Memo is pretty damning. Was the UK as responsible as Israel? More responsible? Was BAE Systems any less a beneficiary than US firms like KBR and Blackwater? The Pentagon Contractor list for Iraq was a menu for a pretty sordid meal.

    Israeli individuals involved in Iraq 2002-03 PR (Netanyahu, Peres, etc.) share guilt for bogus testimony and should be indicted for Crimes Against Peace at the Hague. But prime charges - Crimes Against Peace and Waging Aggressive War - should be lodged against GW Bush and Company (including Admin neocons), Tony Blair and Company, and all others involved who actually pulled the trigger.

    Palestinians. Few more tragic victims exist. Ottomans, British (who should have done much more to protect them), the UN (crippled after Bernadotte and Serot were assassinated). But the Pals are not totally blameless. I saw the camps in Jordan from ‘76. Unforgettable squalor. I regularly worked with Pals in the Gulf - they were the educated, cosmopolitan professional class that kept things going. Wonderful people. What changed?

    Saddam’s ‘90 Kuwait invasion (engineered by the US? - another subject). When the PLO celebrated, the Gulf (Kuwait, Bahrain, KSA, etc.) expelled the Pals and they’ve been in the wilderness ever since. Did Israel force the PLO to celebrate Saddam’s invasion? I doubt it. It was a self-inflicted wound.

    The Iroquois were stalwart Anglo-colonial allies through many wars (King Phillips War 1675-78, French and Indian War 1754-63, etc.). They miscalculated after 1775 (especially the Senacas) and allied with the Brits. They’re now contained in a few NY State reservations.

    “The paralysis of the American political class when it comes to being fair to Palestinians and telling the Jews to reign in their destructive global policies is, well, telling.”

    I agree, without question. But ‘the American political class’ is pretty shameless these days. Listening to the markup of the recent GOP health care replacement attempt was depressing. First agenda item - allowing insurance companies to deduct limitless CEO/Officer compensation on their taxes. That sort of thing comes well before Israel. Don’t get me wrong - both stink, regardless of the order.

    Was the UK as responsible as Israel?

    I’m disappointed in you. It’s rather disingenuous of you to ask that, given the recent revelations where government officials from Israel were proven to be manipulating election outcomes to ensure Israel friendly parliamentarians to do the bidding of Israel in the UK. It is also safe to assume that just like in America, the influence is nefarious and destructive, to put it mildly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I have spent many decades on and off attending to the importance of technicalities in electoral systems, parliamentary party procedires in parliaments of different sizes, preselection/party endorsement systems, probably to the point of being able to qualify as an expert witness in the Supteme Court of Bonho Bongo Land but actually requiring a lot more work before I dare put myself forward to conduct graduate seminars. That said, I do have the confidence to ask sceptical questions and I simply don't see the influence of Israel as being nearly as potent in the UK or Australia as in the US. Indeed I recall having to find some strings to pull to get a visa for a visiting pro Israeli historian sho was hsving trouble because some Lebanese in the Immigration Minister's electorate had objected. The relatively strong party systems make a difference too, as does compulsory voting. And there is simply nothing like the abject fear you could instil in the perpetually fundraising Congressman with a mere two year term by suggesting that thers was a promising young chap who had just joined the party but could probably count on a donation of $500,000 to help him win the primary in a safe Republican or Democrat electorate. And I just can't see much Israeli influence in Conservative or Labour constituency organisations let alone Labour's union sponsora.
    , @Incitatus
    Are you saying Tony Blair didn’t make the decision to go to war, that his mind was hijacked by Israel? Each of us is responsible for our own actions. There are no excuses. Not even this one:

    "Of course, you struggle with your own conscience about it [going to war]... and it's one of these situations that, I suppose, very few people ever find themselves in...In the end, there is a judgement that, I think if you have faith about these things, you realise that judgement is made by other people... and if you believe in God, it's made by God as well."

    -Tony Blair, ‘Blair ‘prayed to God’ over Iraq’ BBC, 3 Mar 2006
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4772142.stm

    “It is also safe to assume that just like in America, the influence is nefarious and destructive, to put it mildly.”

    I agree. Such influence should be exposed and, if criminal, prosecuted. But GW Bush and company still gave the order for war. And so did Tony Blair.
  141. @Incitatus
    “Surely we could all agree that the perpetrators of crimes should be held accountable for their actions be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or whatever, this is especially true for those who foment wars. If they turned out to be 80% Jewish or any other group it would be a mistake to make that into a war on a religion when simply punishing the guilty would suffice.”

    Absolutely agree, and nicely said. As for Yinon, Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Feith, Wurmser, Kristol, Kagan, Ledeen? Indict and try them by all means. Just make sure they’re not alone in the dock. GW Bush, Cheney, Condi, Rummy, Ashcroft, DeLay, Gingrich, Bolton, John Yoo, Safire, much of Congress, etc. There are a lot of fingerprints on the Iraq murder weapon. And a lot of other murders to consider (Libya, Syria...).

    “Your suggestion of the wearing of yellow stars is a bit of a low blow and merely introduces an unhelpful emotional component to the discussion.”

    Here’s where I was coming from. It’s easy to raise an emotionally charged question in a suggestive manner and (wink, wink) lead an audience to subliminally draw an unspoken conclusion. Take torture. Appeal to patriotism, mix it with fearful immanent threats, demonize enemies, discard the judicial process, and generalize or omit specific plan details. Presto, waterboarding! A capital crime after WW2.

    What’s unspoken is key. Never having to confront the nasty bits makes them more easily rationalized. It was easy for Hitler to scapegoat Jews in the ‘20s-30s. It found great resonance in his audiences. One wonders if they would have bought the program if they knew the full scope of the squalid process - the plan from beginning to disastrous end.

    Would Americans have bought waterboarding, Iraq, and the rest? I like to think they wouldn’t, but could be wrong. They never really got the chance, given our media and politicians.

    Accountability depends on acknowledging the full monty, all the facts and acts, from the beginning to anticipated conclusion. Just my view.

    “Great Fed Swindle...Rothschild’s vile monster”

    You’re way above my field of knowledge. My instinct in such situations (they happen frequently) is pragmatic. If there’s wrongdoing, indict and try the culprits, whoever they may be. It requires patience, but I prefer that to buyer’s regret for a blank check like Iraq ‘03.

    “Great Fed Swindle…Rothschild’s vile monster”

    You’re way above my field of knowledge.

    Now you really are being disingenuous, and to such a blatant degree that it surely undermines your veracity where truth is concerned.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    “Now you really are being disingenuous, and to such a blatant degree that it surely undermines your veracity where truth is concerned.”

    NtD,

    I really haven’t studied the topic. Honest. I note numerous returns when I google the phrase. What would you suggest?
  142. @utu
    Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media?

    You’re right. The Syrians​ and Russians are strangely passive on this.

    The putative “munition” in the crater just sits there like it got there by magic but something had to deliver it.

    A sarin payload requires only a small charge to eject the liquid. Thus, there should be tail fins and other rocket parts nearby allowing identification of what the munition was and whether it came from a Syrian plane. Such debris is present even with an H/E payload.

    It would be easy to call attention to the oddity of the canister only.

    Read More
  143. @Incitatus
    “They [Jews/Israel] may not be the ‘sole’ culprits but by far the most destructive to, at the least (and I would argue a lot more), American foreign policy/interests and the welfare of ordinary Americans.”

    GW Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rummy, and our Congress took the nation to war in 2003. They made the decision. Israel lobbied for it (according to M&W they preferred Iran).

    What about Tony Blair? He joined the sales campaign and offered troops. The Downing Street Memo is pretty damning. Was the UK as responsible as Israel? More responsible? Was BAE Systems any less a beneficiary than US firms like KBR and Blackwater? The Pentagon Contractor list for Iraq was a menu for a pretty sordid meal.

    Israeli individuals involved in Iraq 2002-03 PR (Netanyahu, Peres, etc.) share guilt for bogus testimony and should be indicted for Crimes Against Peace at the Hague. But prime charges - Crimes Against Peace and Waging Aggressive War - should be lodged against GW Bush and Company (including Admin neocons), Tony Blair and Company, and all others involved who actually pulled the trigger.

    Palestinians. Few more tragic victims exist. Ottomans, British (who should have done much more to protect them), the UN (crippled after Bernadotte and Serot were assassinated). But the Pals are not totally blameless. I saw the camps in Jordan from ‘76. Unforgettable squalor. I regularly worked with Pals in the Gulf - they were the educated, cosmopolitan professional class that kept things going. Wonderful people. What changed?

    Saddam’s ‘90 Kuwait invasion (engineered by the US? - another subject). When the PLO celebrated, the Gulf (Kuwait, Bahrain, KSA, etc.) expelled the Pals and they’ve been in the wilderness ever since. Did Israel force the PLO to celebrate Saddam’s invasion? I doubt it. It was a self-inflicted wound.

    The Iroquois were stalwart Anglo-colonial allies through many wars (King Phillips War 1675-78, French and Indian War 1754-63, etc.). They miscalculated after 1775 (especially the Senacas) and allied with the Brits. They’re now contained in a few NY State reservations.

    “The paralysis of the American political class when it comes to being fair to Palestinians and telling the Jews to reign in their destructive global policies is, well, telling.”

    I agree, without question. But ‘the American political class’ is pretty shameless these days. Listening to the markup of the recent GOP health care replacement attempt was depressing. First agenda item - allowing insurance companies to deduct limitless CEO/Officer compensation on their taxes. That sort of thing comes well before Israel. Don’t get me wrong - both stink, regardless of the order.

    They made the decision. Israel lobbied for it (according to M&W they preferred Iran).

    Since you’ve chosen to reference M&W, I thought it might be helpful to clarify what they actually said about The Lobby’s preference for Iran:

    Given that many Americans now share Ackerman’s sentiments about the war [i.e., "it was a thorough and total disaster for the U.S."], we should not be surprised that some Israelis and their American allies have tried to rewrite the historical record to absolve Israel of any responsibility for the Iraq disaster. In March 2007, the editor of the Jerusalem Post, David Horovitz, wrote about “the false notion that Israel encouraged the US to fight the Iraq War.” Similarly, Shai Feldman, former head of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies and now head of the Crown Center for Middle East Studies at Brandeis, told Glenn Frankel of the Washington Post in the summer of 2006, “Look, Israel didn’t mobilize anybody over Iraq, and asso­ciating Israel with the neocons on this issue is preposterous. Israel didn’t see Iraq as a danger, and what’s more, it had no interest in pushing the Bush ad­ministration’s democracy agenda.” This view undoubtedly reflects Feldman’s beliefs about Israel’s interests and the hierarchy of threats it faced, but as we have shown, it is contrary to what Israel’s leaders were actually saying and doing in the run-up to the war.

    Not to be outdone, Martin Kramer, a research fellow at WINEP, claims that any attempt to link Israel and the lobby with the war in Iraq is “simply a falsehood,” arguing that “in the year preceding the Iraq War, Israel time and again disagreed with the United States, arguing that Iran posed the greater threat.” But as shown above, Israel’s concerns about Iran never led it to undertake a significant effort to halt the march to war. To the contrary, top Israeli officials were doing everything in their power to make sure that the United States went after Saddam and did not get cold feet at the last moment. They considered Iraq a serious threat and were convinced that Bush would deal with Iran after he finished with Iraq. They might have pre­ferred that America focus on Iran before Iraq, but as Kramer admits, Israelis “shed no tears over Saddam’s demise.” Instead, their leaders took to the American airwaves, wrote op-eds, testified before Congress, and worked closely with the neoconservatives in the Pentagon and the vice president’s office to shape the intelligence about Iraq and coordinate the drive to war. – p. 261-2 The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    Hi Geo,

    No question Israelis tried to spin the story of their part in the sales campaign post invasion, including the 2006 and 2007 examples you cite. I was referring to earlier history:

    “...Israeli leaders were worried only that the United States might lose sight of the Iranian threat in its pursuit of Saddam. Once they realized that the Bush administration was countenancing a bolder scheme, one that called for winning quickly in Iraq and then dealing with Iran and Syria, they began to push vigorously for an American invasion”

    In short, Israel did not initiate the campaign for war against Iraq...it was the neoconservatives in the United States who conceived that idea and were principally responsible for pushing it forward in the wake of September 11. But Israel did join forces with the neoconservatives to help sell the war to the Bush administration and the American people...”


    -‘The Israel Lobby', M&W, p. 234

    An under-explored aspect of the sales campaign was the Israeli/American slander of ‘Old Europe’ - especially France. Pere’s challenge of French UNSC membership February 2003 is mentioned (M&W p. 236) , but much more followed (boycotts, accusations of oil-for-food corruption and illicit arms sales, books like ‘Our Oldest Enemy’ and ‘The French Betrayal of America’, op-eds, ‘freedom fries, etc.). Wish M&W dug a bit deeper. It was a pretty ugly operation, and frequently seemed coordinated.
  144. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @iffen
    Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port.

    Keith says:

    “Not only that they recently annexed a prized warm water port”.

    Iffen, have you forgot you and your Zionists comrades, Sam the Sham and Incitatus, are ardent supporters of Israel’s annexing of the entire homeland of the Palestinians?

    There in a big difference between Russia’s annexing a warm water port and Israel’s annexing of Palestine.

    The people of Crimea ( majority are Russian) wanted to be annexed, just like the Danzig Germans who wanted to reunite with Germany. The annexing ( reuniting ) with Russia was peaceful. The Israeli annexing is ethnic cleansing and genocide.

    Iffen … like I said once before, you are over your head. No matter how much you support Israel’s war crimes, your arguments will never get support in a free media like the UNZ Review.

    Stick with sending your bullshit to the editorial pages of the Zio NY Time and Washington Post. They, I promise will accept your hasbara news.,

    Read More
  145. @NoseytheDuke
    Was the UK as responsible as Israel?

    I'm disappointed in you. It's rather disingenuous of you to ask that, given the recent revelations where government officials from Israel were proven to be manipulating election outcomes to ensure Israel friendly parliamentarians to do the bidding of Israel in the UK. It is also safe to assume that just like in America, the influence is nefarious and destructive, to put it mildly.

    I have spent many decades on and off attending to the importance of technicalities in electoral systems, parliamentary party procedires in parliaments of different sizes, preselection/party endorsement systems, probably to the point of being able to qualify as an expert witness in the Supteme Court of Bonho Bongo Land but actually requiring a lot more work before I dare put myself forward to conduct graduate seminars. That said, I do have the confidence to ask sceptical questions and I simply don’t see the influence of Israel as being nearly as potent in the UK or Australia as in the US. Indeed I recall having to find some strings to pull to get a visa for a visiting pro Israeli historian sho was hsving trouble because some Lebanese in the Immigration Minister’s electorate had objected. The relatively strong party systems make a difference too, as does compulsory voting. And there is simply nothing like the abject fear you could instil in the perpetually fundraising Congressman with a mere two year term by suggesting that thers was a promising young chap who had just joined the party but could probably count on a donation of $500,000 to help him win the primary in a safe Republican or Democrat electorate. And I just can’t see much Israeli influence in Conservative or Labour constituency organisations let alone Labour’s union sponsora.

    Read More
  146. @NoseytheDuke
    Was the UK as responsible as Israel?

    I'm disappointed in you. It's rather disingenuous of you to ask that, given the recent revelations where government officials from Israel were proven to be manipulating election outcomes to ensure Israel friendly parliamentarians to do the bidding of Israel in the UK. It is also safe to assume that just like in America, the influence is nefarious and destructive, to put it mildly.

    Are you saying Tony Blair didn’t make the decision to go to war, that his mind was hijacked by Israel? Each of us is responsible for our own actions. There are no excuses. Not even this one:

    “Of course, you struggle with your own conscience about it [going to war]… and it’s one of these situations that, I suppose, very few people ever find themselves in…In the end, there is a judgement that, I think if you have faith about these things, you realise that judgement is made by other people… and if you believe in God, it’s made by God as well.”

    -Tony Blair, ‘Blair ‘prayed to God’ over Iraq’ BBC, 3 Mar 2006
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4772142.stm

    “It is also safe to assume that just like in America, the influence is nefarious and destructive, to put it mildly.”

    I agree. Such influence should be exposed and, if criminal, prosecuted. But GW Bush and company still gave the order for war. And so did Tony Blair.

    Read More
  147. @NoseytheDuke
    “Great Fed Swindle…Rothschild’s vile monster”

    You’re way above my field of knowledge.

    Now you really are being disingenuous, and to such a blatant degree that it surely undermines your veracity where truth is concerned.

    “Now you really are being disingenuous, and to such a blatant degree that it surely undermines your veracity where truth is concerned.”

    NtD,

    I really haven’t studied the topic. Honest. I note numerous returns when I google the phrase. What would you suggest?

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    You can Google whatever you like. It is quite telling that you would read a copious quantity of books about WWII German leaders but choose to remain ignorant of the banking clique (Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc) that financed the industrial might of the combatants on either side of that dreadful conflict.

    You say that you hope that all Jews will not be blamed for the actions of a few, while simultaneously doing your best to contribute to a cover up and thus bringing about just such an outcome. It seems LK was right about you after all.
  148. @geokat62

    They made the decision. Israel lobbied for it (according to M&W they preferred Iran).
     
    Since you've chosen to reference M&W, I thought it might be helpful to clarify what they actually said about The Lobby's preference for Iran:

    Given that many Americans now share Ackerman's sentiments about the war [i.e., "it was a thorough and total disaster for the U.S."], we should not be surprised that some Israelis and their American allies have tried to rewrite the historical record to absolve Israel of any responsibility for the Iraq disaster. In March 2007, the editor of the Jerusalem Post, David Horovitz, wrote about "the false notion that Israel encouraged the US to fight the Iraq War." Similarly, Shai Feldman, former head of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies and now head of the Crown Center for Middle East Studies at Brandeis, told Glenn Frankel of the Washington Post in the summer of 2006, "Look, Israel didn't mobilize anybody over Iraq, and asso­ciating Israel with the neocons on this issue is preposterous. Israel didn't see Iraq as a danger, and what's more, it had no interest in pushing the Bush ad­ministration's democracy agenda." This view undoubtedly reflects Feldman's beliefs about Israel's interests and the hierarchy of threats it faced, but as we have shown, it is contrary to what Israel's leaders were actually saying and doing in the run-up to the war.

    Not to be outdone, Martin Kramer, a research fellow at WINEP, claims that any attempt to link Israel and the lobby with the war in Iraq is "simply a falsehood," arguing that "in the year preceding the Iraq War, Israel time and again disagreed with the United States, arguing that Iran posed the greater threat." But as shown above, Israel's concerns about Iran never led it to undertake a significant effort to halt the march to war. To the contrary, top Israeli officials were doing everything in their power to make sure that the United States went after Saddam and did not get cold feet at the last moment. They considered Iraq a serious threat and were convinced that Bush would deal with Iran after he finished with Iraq. They might have pre­ferred that America focus on Iran before Iraq, but as Kramer admits, Israelis "shed no tears over Saddam's demise." Instead, their leaders took to the American airwaves, wrote op-eds, testified before Congress, and worked closely with the neoconservatives in the Pentagon and the vice president's office to shape the intelligence about Iraq and coordinate the drive to war. - p. 261-2 The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy
     

    Hi Geo,

    No question Israelis tried to spin the story of their part in the sales campaign post invasion, including the 2006 and 2007 examples you cite. I was referring to earlier history:

    “…Israeli leaders were worried only that the United States might lose sight of the Iranian threat in its pursuit of Saddam. Once they realized that the Bush administration was countenancing a bolder scheme, one that called for winning quickly in Iraq and then dealing with Iran and Syria, they began to push vigorously for an American invasion”

    In short, Israel did not initiate the campaign for war against Iraq…it was the neoconservatives in the United States who conceived that idea and were principally responsible for pushing it forward in the wake of September 11. But Israel did join forces with the neoconservatives to help sell the war to the Bush administration and the American people…”

    -‘The Israel Lobby’, M&W, p. 234

    An under-explored aspect of the sales campaign was the Israeli/American slander of ‘Old Europe’ – especially France. Pere’s challenge of French UNSC membership February 2003 is mentioned (M&W p. 236) , but much more followed (boycotts, accusations of oil-for-food corruption and illicit arms sales, books like ‘Our Oldest Enemy’ and ‘The French Betrayal of America’, op-eds, ‘freedom fries, etc.). Wish M&W dug a bit deeper. It was a pretty ugly operation, and frequently seemed coordinated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62
    It was 4 pages later, on p. 238, that M&W dropped this bombshell (one that I often quote):

    Israel's enthusiasm for war eventually led some of its allies in America to tell Israeli officials to damp down their hawkish rhetoric, lest the war look like it was being fought for Israel. In the fall of 2002, for example, a group of American political consultants known as the Israel Project circulated a six-page memorandum to key Israelis and pro-Israel leaders in the United States. The memo was titled "Talking about Iraq" and was intended as a guide for public statements about the war. "If your goal is regime change, you must be much more careful with your language because of the potential backlash. You do not want Americans to believe that the war on Iraq is being waged to protect Israel rather than to protect America."
     
  149. @NoldorElf
    I am forced to conclude that the neoconservatives and indeed all of Washington DC are eager to go to war. They are just itching for any excuse to start yet another war in a nation of their choosing.

    If there is no good reason, they will make one up. There is an eerie resemblance to what is happening now with Syria and what happened leading up to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.

    I think the paleoconservative community also needs to come to terms with the fact that Trump has sold them out and is increasingly acting like a Washington insider neocon. Trump did to the paleoconservatives what Obama did to the left.

    It seems Trump will not put "America First" nor make any attempts to restore the American Middle Class nor American manufacturing to truly "Make American Great Again".

    Tulsi Gabbard seems to be one of the few principled politicians in this case and for that she is marginalized for saying what few others have the moral courage to say. Many on the left are hoping she will run in 2020 for President.

    Coming from the left, I'd say that the Sanders and Trump base have a lot more in common than we admit. We are both deeply unhappy with the way that Washington has handled things. They basically betrayed the American people and enriched themselves at public expense.

    The real question is, can the US be saved for the people or will it continue on its path to terminal decline?

    I agree. The culprit in all of this is war hawk Jared Kushner who is making sure Israhell takes over the Whitehouse. See also Operation Talpiot, the NSA’s direct data pipeline to Tel Aviv.

    Read More
  150. @iffen
    Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port.

    {Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port}

    Not only that, but legally reversing an illegal act is not only not illegal, but quite legal and just: a patently illegal act was righted.

    Khrushchev, a Soviet dictator, decided on his won to ‘give’ Crimea to Ukraine SSR, without the consent of the people in Crimea.

    In 1991 as USSR was dissolving, residents of Crimea held a referendum on restoration of Autonomy. It passed by 90%+. Kiev ignored it.
    In 1994 residents of Crimea held a referendum on self-rule. It passed by ~80%. Kiev ignored it.

    After the Neo-Nazi coup in Kiev – financed in part by György Schwartz aka George Soros and Kolomoisky (Israeli+Cypriot+Ukrainian citizen (!)) – the Azov neo-Nazi gangs and their kin started ethnically cleansing and murdering ethnic Russians. Exhibit A: the massacre in Odessa. Residents of Crimea, very rationally not wanting to be massacred by neo-Nazis voted in a referendum in 2014 to re-join Russia.
    Done. Thank you very much.

    Now let’s talk about Israel’ illegal occupation and annexation of Golan Heights, land that belongs to Syrian Arab Republic.
    Let’s also talk about Israel’s ongoing, illegal theft of lands that legally belong to Palestinians. To be clear, I am talking about the illegal Jews-only settlements being currently built on Palestinian territories, not what transpired before.

    Read More
  151. @Incitatus
    Hi Geo,

    No question Israelis tried to spin the story of their part in the sales campaign post invasion, including the 2006 and 2007 examples you cite. I was referring to earlier history:

    “...Israeli leaders were worried only that the United States might lose sight of the Iranian threat in its pursuit of Saddam. Once they realized that the Bush administration was countenancing a bolder scheme, one that called for winning quickly in Iraq and then dealing with Iran and Syria, they began to push vigorously for an American invasion”

    In short, Israel did not initiate the campaign for war against Iraq...it was the neoconservatives in the United States who conceived that idea and were principally responsible for pushing it forward in the wake of September 11. But Israel did join forces with the neoconservatives to help sell the war to the Bush administration and the American people...”


    -‘The Israel Lobby', M&W, p. 234

    An under-explored aspect of the sales campaign was the Israeli/American slander of ‘Old Europe’ - especially France. Pere’s challenge of French UNSC membership February 2003 is mentioned (M&W p. 236) , but much more followed (boycotts, accusations of oil-for-food corruption and illicit arms sales, books like ‘Our Oldest Enemy’ and ‘The French Betrayal of America’, op-eds, ‘freedom fries, etc.). Wish M&W dug a bit deeper. It was a pretty ugly operation, and frequently seemed coordinated.

    It was 4 pages later, on p. 238, that M&W dropped this bombshell (one that I often quote):

    Israel’s enthusiasm for war eventually led some of its allies in America to tell Israeli officials to damp down their hawkish rhetoric, lest the war look like it was being fought for Israel. In the fall of 2002, for example, a group of American political consultants known as the Israel Project circulated a six-page memorandum to key Israelis and pro-Israel leaders in the United States. The memo was titled “Talking about Iraq” and was intended as a guide for public statements about the war. “If your goal is regime change, you must be much more careful with your language because of the potential backlash. You do not want Americans to believe that the war on Iraq is being waged to protect Israel rather than to protect America.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    Geo,

    It’s after all parties agreed on Iraq. Then, yes, Israeli politicians checked with their constituents to make sure their heads weren’t stuck too far out (note same page - an early 2002 poll found 58% of Israeli Jews favored war - a war to be fought by the USA). Their American neocon allies warned them to be discrete - they (Perle, Frum, Adelman, Feith, Safire, Wolfowitz, Wurmser, Ledeen, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, etc) - wanted to control events. And so they did.

    Any tips on who the “Israel Project” was?
  152. @geokat62
    It was 4 pages later, on p. 238, that M&W dropped this bombshell (one that I often quote):

    Israel's enthusiasm for war eventually led some of its allies in America to tell Israeli officials to damp down their hawkish rhetoric, lest the war look like it was being fought for Israel. In the fall of 2002, for example, a group of American political consultants known as the Israel Project circulated a six-page memorandum to key Israelis and pro-Israel leaders in the United States. The memo was titled "Talking about Iraq" and was intended as a guide for public statements about the war. "If your goal is regime change, you must be much more careful with your language because of the potential backlash. You do not want Americans to believe that the war on Iraq is being waged to protect Israel rather than to protect America."
     

    Geo,

    It’s after all parties agreed on Iraq. Then, yes, Israeli politicians checked with their constituents to make sure their heads weren’t stuck too far out (note same page – an early 2002 poll found 58% of Israeli Jews favored war – a war to be fought by the USA). Their American neocon allies warned them to be discrete – they (Perle, Frum, Adelman, Feith, Safire, Wolfowitz, Wurmser, Ledeen, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, etc) – wanted to control events. And so they did.

    Any tips on who the “Israel Project” was?

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    (note same page – an early 2002 poll found 58% of Israeli Jews favored war – a war to be fought by the USA)
     
    That number was much higher a year later:

    Another poll taken a year later in February 2003 found that 77.5 percent of Israeli Jews wanted the United States to invade Iraq.
     
    This unusual circumstance prompted Gideon Levy of Haaretz to ask:

    "Why is it that in England 50,000 people have demonstrated against the war in Iraq, whereas in Israel no one has? Why is it that in Israel there is no pub­lic debate about whether the war is necessary?" He went on to say, "Israel is the only country in the West whose leaders support the war unreservedly and where no alternative opinion is voiced."
     

    Any tips on who the “Israel Project” was?
     
    It's more like "Any tips on who the “Israel Project” is?"

    It looks like it's one of AIPAC's "educational" arms, headed by Joshua Block, former senior staff member at AIPAC.

    Here's their self-declared mission:

    Founded in 2002, The Israel Project (TIP) is a non-partisan American educational organization dedicated to informing the media and public conversation about Israel and the Middle East.

    TIP is the only organization dedicated to changing people’s minds about Israel through cutting-edge strategic communications. We don’t attack the media, we become a trusted partner and resource – bringing integrity and facts to the coverage using proven strategies like building relationships, testing messages and giving journalists everything they need to get the story right.
     
    Here's a link to their website

    http://www.theisraelproject.org

    To get a sense of how objective they are about "bringing integrity and facts", here is what they have to say about anti-semitism, one of their 6 Focus Issues:

    Today, anti-Israel hatred is rising. Throughout America, Europe, and the Middle East, extremists demonize the Jewish state and whip up anti-Israel bigotry, boycotts and hatred. Boycotting Israel is bigotry, plain and simple. It’s an attempt to economically strangle the only Jewish state in the world.

    This economic war on Israel is just the latest attempt to destroy the Jewish state. Israel’s enemies have tried massacres, war, and terrorism. Now, they are trying economic and cultural strangulation and sanctions.
     
  153. @Incitatus
    “Now you really are being disingenuous, and to such a blatant degree that it surely undermines your veracity where truth is concerned.”

    NtD,

    I really haven’t studied the topic. Honest. I note numerous returns when I google the phrase. What would you suggest?

    You can Google whatever you like. It is quite telling that you would read a copious quantity of books about WWII German leaders but choose to remain ignorant of the banking clique (Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc) that financed the industrial might of the combatants on either side of that dreadful conflict.

    You say that you hope that all Jews will not be blamed for the actions of a few, while simultaneously doing your best to contribute to a cover up and thus bringing about just such an outcome. It seems LK was right about you after all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    Your post is obviously coercive. You want me to parrot some story line. But, in true passive-aggressive fashion, you conceal any facts or theories with which I should agree or disagree. What gives?

    “It is quite telling that you would read a copious quantity of books about WWII German leaders but choose to remain ignorant of the banking clique (Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc) that financed the industrial might of the combatants on either side of that dreadful conflict.”

    “quite telling?” In what way? Please be specific. Am I a conspirator?

    “choose to remain ignorant”

    Please provide evidence of your allegation. I asked you to recommend sources. Your response:

    “You can Google whatever you like.”

    If you’re too lazy to suggest sources, why should I find energy to look for them?

    “You say that you hope that all Jews will not be blamed for the actions of a few..."

    Where did I say that? Be specific

    “...while simultaneously doing your best to contribute to a cover up..."

    Please provide evidence of your allegation. Describe the “cover up.”

    NtD you don’t mention withdrawal of US short-term financing to Weimar in 1930 post crash - it (the lack of US financing) led to 6 million unemployed Germans by 1932 (peak year). You’re silent on Fritz Thysen, the main contributor to Nazis before 1933. Gustav and Alfred Krupp? Hugo Stinnes, Albert Voegler, Adolf Kirdorf, Kurt von Schroder? Is it because they aren’t Jewish? Doesn’t fit whatever theory you subscribe to? Your websites don't mention them? Give me a hint.

    BTW, contributions to the Nazis didn’t really fund them pre-1933; it was NSDAP membership dues (Hitler personally was getting considerable royalties from ‘Mein Kampf’).

    Yes, I’ve read considerably over the years. Mostly full histories, not just profiles of “WWII German leaders.” None feature the “Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc” as prime causes of war. Thus my question to you. If you have definite account and the source I promise objective consideration.

    Judge me for what I write. Not for what I don’t write (much as you may want it).

    “It seems LK was right about you after all.”

    Really? In what respect? Always glad for helpful criticism.

    Tell me, NtD, do you agree with L.K’s following post:

    “...As for those who caused the war, the US had a great deal of responsability for the outbreak of war in Europe and for its subsequent escalation into a world war. The other main culprits were Perfidious Albion, aka, the english pests, and the peace loving uncle Stalin.
    -L.K #228 1 April 2016
    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/saker-rant-about-a-stolen-europe/

    What strange bed-fellows you keep, NtD.
  154. @Incitatus
    Geo,

    It’s after all parties agreed on Iraq. Then, yes, Israeli politicians checked with their constituents to make sure their heads weren’t stuck too far out (note same page - an early 2002 poll found 58% of Israeli Jews favored war - a war to be fought by the USA). Their American neocon allies warned them to be discrete - they (Perle, Frum, Adelman, Feith, Safire, Wolfowitz, Wurmser, Ledeen, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, etc) - wanted to control events. And so they did.

    Any tips on who the “Israel Project” was?

    (note same page – an early 2002 poll found 58% of Israeli Jews favored war – a war to be fought by the USA)

    That number was much higher a year later:

    Another poll taken a year later in February 2003 found that 77.5 percent of Israeli Jews wanted the United States to invade Iraq.

    This unusual circumstance prompted Gideon Levy of Haaretz to ask:

    “Why is it that in England 50,000 people have demonstrated against the war in Iraq, whereas in Israel no one has? Why is it that in Israel there is no pub­lic debate about whether the war is necessary?” He went on to say, “Israel is the only country in the West whose leaders support the war unreservedly and where no alternative opinion is voiced.”

    Any tips on who the “Israel Project” was?

    It’s more like “Any tips on who the “Israel Project” is?”

    It looks like it’s one of AIPAC’s “educational” arms, headed by Joshua Block, former senior staff member at AIPAC.

    Here’s their self-declared mission:

    Founded in 2002, The Israel Project (TIP) is a non-partisan American educational organization dedicated to informing the media and public conversation about Israel and the Middle East.

    TIP is the only organization dedicated to changing people’s minds about Israel through cutting-edge strategic communications. We don’t attack the media, we become a trusted partner and resource – bringing integrity and facts to the coverage using proven strategies like building relationships, testing messages and giving journalists everything they need to get the story right.

    Here’s a link to their website

    http://www.theisraelproject.org

    To get a sense of how objective they are about “bringing integrity and facts”, here is what they have to say about anti-semitism, one of their 6 Focus Issues:

    Today, anti-Israel hatred is rising. Throughout America, Europe, and the Middle East, extremists demonize the Jewish state and whip up anti-Israel bigotry, boycotts and hatred. Boycotting Israel is bigotry, plain and simple. It’s an attempt to economically strangle the only Jewish state in the world.

    This economic war on Israel is just the latest attempt to destroy the Jewish state. Israel’s enemies have tried massacres, war, and terrorism. Now, they are trying economic and cultural strangulation and sanctions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    Geo,

    Thanks for the informative post. For a moment I thought TIP might be the group led by Joe Lieberman, but that turns out to be a sibling - United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI). They did their best to stop the JCPOA with Iran with a similar ‘sky-is-falling’ message. Rep. Ed Royce, recipient of their largess, remains firmly in their grasp.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Against_Nuclear_Iran
    http://www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com/

    That such “educational organizations” (TIP, UANI, AIPAC, AEI, Heritage, etc) are sheltered from taxes is extremely irritating. At best they’re blatant lobbyists, should so register, and be taxed. And where their main purpose is “securing Israel’s future” they should be registered as foreign lobbyists. Period.

    I don’t know how much to credence to give Wikapedia:

    “Criticism of TIP includes describing it as "a right-wing media advocacy group" using "pro-settlement fear-mongering talking points" which are "incendiary, dangerous, and counterproductive", by the two-state advocacy group J street[19] and argue that its rhetoric and alliance with figures "far outside the mainstream of American politics" only serves to simultaneously undermine the image of the State of Israel and TIP's stated purpose: "promoting and improving the image of the State of Israel".

    Critics such as J Street describe the advice as "If you get a question about settlements, change the subject. If pressed, say stopping settlements is "a kind of ethnic cleansing". J Street sent a mailing to their organization asking their members to send letters to TIP asking them to "remove pro-settlement fear-mongering talking points from The Israel Project's materials".

    An op-ed by Matthew Duss, a National Security reporter of the ThinkProgress blog, in The Jewish Daily Forward said several groups, including the Israel Project, "seem to exist for no other reason than to spotlight the very worst aspects of Muslim societies."”

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Project

    Hopefully genuine criticism exists, though not nearly enough in my view.
  155. @geokat62

    (note same page – an early 2002 poll found 58% of Israeli Jews favored war – a war to be fought by the USA)
     
    That number was much higher a year later:

    Another poll taken a year later in February 2003 found that 77.5 percent of Israeli Jews wanted the United States to invade Iraq.
     
    This unusual circumstance prompted Gideon Levy of Haaretz to ask:

    "Why is it that in England 50,000 people have demonstrated against the war in Iraq, whereas in Israel no one has? Why is it that in Israel there is no pub­lic debate about whether the war is necessary?" He went on to say, "Israel is the only country in the West whose leaders support the war unreservedly and where no alternative opinion is voiced."
     

    Any tips on who the “Israel Project” was?
     
    It's more like "Any tips on who the “Israel Project” is?"

    It looks like it's one of AIPAC's "educational" arms, headed by Joshua Block, former senior staff member at AIPAC.

    Here's their self-declared mission:

    Founded in 2002, The Israel Project (TIP) is a non-partisan American educational organization dedicated to informing the media and public conversation about Israel and the Middle East.

    TIP is the only organization dedicated to changing people’s minds about Israel through cutting-edge strategic communications. We don’t attack the media, we become a trusted partner and resource – bringing integrity and facts to the coverage using proven strategies like building relationships, testing messages and giving journalists everything they need to get the story right.
     
    Here's a link to their website

    http://www.theisraelproject.org

    To get a sense of how objective they are about "bringing integrity and facts", here is what they have to say about anti-semitism, one of their 6 Focus Issues:

    Today, anti-Israel hatred is rising. Throughout America, Europe, and the Middle East, extremists demonize the Jewish state and whip up anti-Israel bigotry, boycotts and hatred. Boycotting Israel is bigotry, plain and simple. It’s an attempt to economically strangle the only Jewish state in the world.

    This economic war on Israel is just the latest attempt to destroy the Jewish state. Israel’s enemies have tried massacres, war, and terrorism. Now, they are trying economic and cultural strangulation and sanctions.
     

    Geo,

    Thanks for the informative post. For a moment I thought TIP might be the group led by Joe Lieberman, but that turns out to be a sibling – United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI). They did their best to stop the JCPOA with Iran with a similar ‘sky-is-falling’ message. Rep. Ed Royce, recipient of their largess, remains firmly in their grasp.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Against_Nuclear_Iran
    http://www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com/

    That such “educational organizations” (TIP, UANI, AIPAC, AEI, Heritage, etc) are sheltered from taxes is extremely irritating. At best they’re blatant lobbyists, should so register, and be taxed. And where their main purpose is “securing Israel’s future” they should be registered as foreign lobbyists. Period.

    I don’t know how much to credence to give Wikapedia:

    “Criticism of TIP includes describing it as “a right-wing media advocacy group” using “pro-settlement fear-mongering talking points” which are “incendiary, dangerous, and counterproductive”, by the two-state advocacy group J street[19] and argue that its rhetoric and alliance with figures “far outside the mainstream of American politics” only serves to simultaneously undermine the image of the State of Israel and TIP’s stated purpose: “promoting and improving the image of the State of Israel”.

    Critics such as J Street describe the advice as “If you get a question about settlements, change the subject. If pressed, say stopping settlements is “a kind of ethnic cleansing”. J Street sent a mailing to their organization asking their members to send letters to TIP asking them to “remove pro-settlement fear-mongering talking points from The Israel Project’s materials”.

    An op-ed by Matthew Duss, a National Security reporter of the ThinkProgress blog, in The Jewish Daily Forward said several groups, including the Israel Project, “seem to exist for no other reason than to spotlight the very worst aspects of Muslim societies.””

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Project

    Hopefully genuine criticism exists, though not nearly enough in my view.

    Read More
  156. @NoseytheDuke
    You can Google whatever you like. It is quite telling that you would read a copious quantity of books about WWII German leaders but choose to remain ignorant of the banking clique (Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc) that financed the industrial might of the combatants on either side of that dreadful conflict.

    You say that you hope that all Jews will not be blamed for the actions of a few, while simultaneously doing your best to contribute to a cover up and thus bringing about just such an outcome. It seems LK was right about you after all.

    Your post is obviously coercive. You want me to parrot some story line. But, in true passive-aggressive fashion, you conceal any facts or theories with which I should agree or disagree. What gives?

    “It is quite telling that you would read a copious quantity of books about WWII German leaders but choose to remain ignorant of the banking clique (Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc) that financed the industrial might of the combatants on either side of that dreadful conflict.”

    “quite telling?” In what way? Please be specific. Am I a conspirator?

    “choose to remain ignorant”

    Please provide evidence of your allegation. I asked you to recommend sources. Your response:

    “You can Google whatever you like.”

    If you’re too lazy to suggest sources, why should I find energy to look for them?

    “You say that you hope that all Jews will not be blamed for the actions of a few…”

    Where did I say that? Be specific

    “…while simultaneously doing your best to contribute to a cover up…”

    Please provide evidence of your allegation. Describe the “cover up.”

    NtD you don’t mention withdrawal of US short-term financing to Weimar in 1930 post crash – it (the lack of US financing) led to 6 million unemployed Germans by 1932 (peak year). You’re silent on Fritz Thysen, the main contributor to Nazis before 1933. Gustav and Alfred Krupp? Hugo Stinnes, Albert Voegler, Adolf Kirdorf, Kurt von Schroder? Is it because they aren’t Jewish? Doesn’t fit whatever theory you subscribe to? Your websites don’t mention them? Give me a hint.

    BTW, contributions to the Nazis didn’t really fund them pre-1933; it was NSDAP membership dues (Hitler personally was getting considerable royalties from ‘Mein Kampf’).

    Yes, I’ve read considerably over the years. Mostly full histories, not just profiles of “WWII German leaders.” None feature the “Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc” as prime causes of war. Thus my question to you. If you have definite account and the source I promise objective consideration.

    Judge me for what I write. Not for what I don’t write (much as you may want it).

    “It seems LK was right about you after all.”

    Really? In what respect? Always glad for helpful criticism.

    Tell me, NtD, do you agree with L.K’s following post:

    “…As for those who caused the war, the US had a great deal of responsability for the outbreak of war in Europe and for its subsequent escalation into a world war. The other main culprits were Perfidious Albion, aka, the english pests, and the peace loving uncle Stalin.
    -L.K #228 1 April 2016
    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/saker-rant-about-a-stolen-europe/

    What strange bed-fellows you keep, NtD.

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    inZitatus: 'I’ve read considerably over the years. Mostly full histories...'

    Ha, you are good for a laugh, old boy! What you have done is you read a lot of propaganda, particularly of the anti-German type, masquerading as 'history', and then you regurgitate this excrement here.
    As it is painfully obvious, you also only ever read those 'full histories' which of course confirm your prejudices and biases, while studiously ignoring those that contradict your deep seated beliefs.
    Also, clearly you'd have to be too much of a simpleton not to grasp the basic concept that the victors write the 'history' and invariably do so to make themselves look good... or do you think that had Germany won the world wars your 'histories' would be the ones we'd be reading?
    I believe you are just a miserable propagandist & shill, but there is always the chance that I overestimate you and, in the end, you are just another shit eater... after all, there's a sucker born every minute.
    As for keeping 'strange bed-fellows', you should take a hard look in the mirror first, old boy.
    After all, you seem to get along just fine with some of the worst zionist liars and scumbags here at Unz, such as sam the sham and iffen, the village Idiot.
    , @NoseytheDuke
    Thanks for all that, a lengthy read indeed, and should one infer by your omission that Rothschild's money was nowhere at all involved?
  157. @Incitatus
    Your post is obviously coercive. You want me to parrot some story line. But, in true passive-aggressive fashion, you conceal any facts or theories with which I should agree or disagree. What gives?

    “It is quite telling that you would read a copious quantity of books about WWII German leaders but choose to remain ignorant of the banking clique (Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc) that financed the industrial might of the combatants on either side of that dreadful conflict.”

    “quite telling?” In what way? Please be specific. Am I a conspirator?

    “choose to remain ignorant”

    Please provide evidence of your allegation. I asked you to recommend sources. Your response:

    “You can Google whatever you like.”

    If you’re too lazy to suggest sources, why should I find energy to look for them?

    “You say that you hope that all Jews will not be blamed for the actions of a few..."

    Where did I say that? Be specific

    “...while simultaneously doing your best to contribute to a cover up..."

    Please provide evidence of your allegation. Describe the “cover up.”

    NtD you don’t mention withdrawal of US short-term financing to Weimar in 1930 post crash - it (the lack of US financing) led to 6 million unemployed Germans by 1932 (peak year). You’re silent on Fritz Thysen, the main contributor to Nazis before 1933. Gustav and Alfred Krupp? Hugo Stinnes, Albert Voegler, Adolf Kirdorf, Kurt von Schroder? Is it because they aren’t Jewish? Doesn’t fit whatever theory you subscribe to? Your websites don't mention them? Give me a hint.

    BTW, contributions to the Nazis didn’t really fund them pre-1933; it was NSDAP membership dues (Hitler personally was getting considerable royalties from ‘Mein Kampf’).

    Yes, I’ve read considerably over the years. Mostly full histories, not just profiles of “WWII German leaders.” None feature the “Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc” as prime causes of war. Thus my question to you. If you have definite account and the source I promise objective consideration.

    Judge me for what I write. Not for what I don’t write (much as you may want it).

    “It seems LK was right about you after all.”

    Really? In what respect? Always glad for helpful criticism.

    Tell me, NtD, do you agree with L.K’s following post:

    “...As for those who caused the war, the US had a great deal of responsability for the outbreak of war in Europe and for its subsequent escalation into a world war. The other main culprits were Perfidious Albion, aka, the english pests, and the peace loving uncle Stalin.
    -L.K #228 1 April 2016
    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/saker-rant-about-a-stolen-europe/

    What strange bed-fellows you keep, NtD.

    inZitatus: ‘I’ve read considerably over the years. Mostly full histories…’

    Ha, you are good for a laugh, old boy! What you have done is you read a lot of propaganda, particularly of the anti-German type, masquerading as ‘history’, and then you regurgitate this excrement here.
    As it is painfully obvious, you also only ever read those ‘full histories’ which of course confirm your prejudices and biases, while studiously ignoring those that contradict your deep seated beliefs.
    Also, clearly you’d have to be too much of a simpleton not to grasp the basic concept that the victors write the ‘history’ and invariably do so to make themselves look good… or do you think that had Germany won the world wars your ‘histories’ would be the ones we’d be reading?
    I believe you are just a miserable propagandist & shill, but there is always the chance that I overestimate you and, in the end, you are just another shit eater… after all, there’s a sucker born every minute.
    As for keeping ‘strange bed-fellows’, you should take a hard look in the mirror first, old boy.
    After all, you seem to get along just fine with some of the worst zionist liars and scumbags here at Unz, such as sam the sham and iffen, the village Idiot.

    Read More
  158. @Incitatus
    Hi Rurik,

    “imagine if you’re a Palestinian...”

    Indeed I have. Spent years on KSA, Gulf and Levant projects. The Pals are wonderful people. Some, like anybody else, not so wonderful. Their politicians seem often to vary between feckless collusion with Likud or violent extremism. Almost as if they prefer job security in a hostile pantomime while their constituents continue to rot without hope. Pals need a Mandela. The greatest fear of Likud and far-right Israelis?

    “it gets complicated.”

    Too true. Is there a single cause, single scapegoat, or a single solution? Make no mistake, I wish there was a magic answer.

    “It isn’t just the Zionist Jews who are causing you so much grief. It’s also the craven and venal Arab governments that surround you. It’s the king of Jordan and the House of Saud.”

    Nobody’s causing me grief. Well, maybe our Administration and Congress, but that’s another subject. The Hashemites? Jordan absorbed more Pals than most. A decent people and reasonable government by all appearances. KSA, well that’s something different (the Sauds). As is Bahrain (Khalifas) or Kuwait (Sabahs). As you say “it gets complicated.” The people are mostly affable; leaders not always. Has our meddling encouraged inflexible dynasties? Corruption? Probably. But the alternatives may, like Libya, be worse.

    “There are other acts of treachery that are notable. The serial swindles of Goldman Sachs as the fox guarding the US Treasury.”

    No doubt. But, bear in mind the rescue of Goldman Sachs ‘07-08 came from a Christian Scientist (Hank Paulson), backed up by a Methodist (GW Bush) and an overwhelmingly Christian Congress. A lot of their clients like Mitt Romney (Mormon) had personal funds at risk. I don’t like it either, but it’s history. I care more about preventing repetition.

    Currently on the radar? Phil Graham, former senator, bankster and lobbyist. Husband of Wendy Graham, Enron enabler. Phil is best known for killing Glass-Steagall in ‘99. He now seems to have written a WSJ editorial. Whenever he surfaces, hold your wallet safe.

    Sheldon Adelson? No disagreement. Balzac had it right. Gambling is the opiate of poverty. Sheldon’s simply a pusher. His trade should be illegal.

    “McCain is directly acting in his own people’s worst interest”

    I confess a fondness for old ‘Hothead’, though I rarely (ever?) agree with him. It’s easier these days, given the failed presidential bid. And the three horseman of the apocalypse (John, Lindsey, and Joe) aren’t doing their tag-team routine on the nightly news. That drove me crazy.

    Pals need a Mandela.

    they’d never allow him out of their torture chambers

    they’d murder any such man or woman without compunction, and the ((Western press)) would call him a terrorist with an unanimous voice

    Is there a single cause, single scapegoat, or a single solution? Make no mistake, I wish there was a magic answer.

    education

    the only way these atrocities are tolerated is due to widespread, imposed ignorance. If they made one hundredth of the movies about Palestine that they make about the Holocaust, there’d be reform in a New York minute. The people are not evil, they’re just duped or drunk on power, as the case may be, and if the governments and media of the West were not so totally controlled and corrupt, then there’d be the peace.

    I just made a remark on another thread about the need to End the Fed. The Fed is the perfidious little snake pit where all this bullshit emanates from.

    Phil is best known for killing Glass-Steagall in ‘99.

    Phil is a bitch. Killing Glass was Robert Rubin all the way, with his Igor hunchback Lawrence Summers. Rubin is the brains behind the mass lootings of the treasury going way back. He makes Madoff look like Mother Theresa.

    Sheldon Adelson? No disagreement. Balzac had it right. Gambling is the opiate of poverty. Sheldon’s simply a pusher. His trade should be illegal.

    it isn’t gambling that bothers me about Sheldon. It’s his repulsive hypocrisy in demanding open borders for America but calls immigrants in Israel “invaders” and demands their repatriation. He’s the worst kind of Zionist oozing pus, almost as ugly on the outside as he is on the inside. May he- and all his duplicitous, double-dealing, Jewish supremacist, Zio-scum die hard and rot in hell.

    “McCain is directly acting in his own people’s worst interest”

    I confess a fondness for old ‘Hothead’,

    whoa

    I guess that certainly points to a gaping rift between us. I happen to consider John McBloodstain to be the most execrable, loathsome POS on the planet. If you water boarded me, I wouldn’t be able to think of a more accursed and squalid little turd of a traitor than John McBloodstain McCain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    “they’d murder any such man or woman without compunction”

    I fear you’re right. Even if that Pal Mandela had 24-hr press coverage, they’d probably figure an invisible demise (poison, etc). They can’t even free Vanunu.

    “education”

    You’re optimistic. Entertainment has eclipsed education, and news for that matter. Everything has a yawn expiration date. Agree about atrocities tolerated out of ignorance. But ignorance is bliss? Or, as Orwell would have it ‘ignorance is strength.’

    Phil Graham (don’t forget Wendy), Rubin, Larry Summers? Don’t fancy any of them (especially Larry).

    “John McBloodstain.” You certainly have a gift for apt expression. I condemn all he says, but I don’t hate the man. He’s not worth it. My affection is for the predictable regularity of his positions (better than the most reliable laxative).
  159. @Incitatus
    “Surely we could all agree that the perpetrators of crimes should be held accountable for their actions be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or whatever, this is especially true for those who foment wars. If they turned out to be 80% Jewish or any other group it would be a mistake to make that into a war on a religion when simply punishing the guilty would suffice.”

    Absolutely agree, and nicely said. As for Yinon, Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Feith, Wurmser, Kristol, Kagan, Ledeen? Indict and try them by all means. Just make sure they’re not alone in the dock. GW Bush, Cheney, Condi, Rummy, Ashcroft, DeLay, Gingrich, Bolton, John Yoo, Safire, much of Congress, etc. There are a lot of fingerprints on the Iraq murder weapon. And a lot of other murders to consider (Libya, Syria...).

    “Your suggestion of the wearing of yellow stars is a bit of a low blow and merely introduces an unhelpful emotional component to the discussion.”

    Here’s where I was coming from. It’s easy to raise an emotionally charged question in a suggestive manner and (wink, wink) lead an audience to subliminally draw an unspoken conclusion. Take torture. Appeal to patriotism, mix it with fearful immanent threats, demonize enemies, discard the judicial process, and generalize or omit specific plan details. Presto, waterboarding! A capital crime after WW2.

    What’s unspoken is key. Never having to confront the nasty bits makes them more easily rationalized. It was easy for Hitler to scapegoat Jews in the ‘20s-30s. It found great resonance in his audiences. One wonders if they would have bought the program if they knew the full scope of the squalid process - the plan from beginning to disastrous end.

    Would Americans have bought waterboarding, Iraq, and the rest? I like to think they wouldn’t, but could be wrong. They never really got the chance, given our media and politicians.

    Accountability depends on acknowledging the full monty, all the facts and acts, from the beginning to anticipated conclusion. Just my view.

    “Great Fed Swindle...Rothschild’s vile monster”

    You’re way above my field of knowledge. My instinct in such situations (they happen frequently) is pragmatic. If there’s wrongdoing, indict and try the culprits, whoever they may be. It requires patience, but I prefer that to buyer’s regret for a blank check like Iraq ‘03.

    It was easy for Hitler to scapegoat Jews in the ‘20s-30s. It found great resonance in his audiences

    why do you suppose that was Incitatus?

    I was raised to believe that all the Jews (the only victims of the Nazis that really count) were all innocent and that Hitler (and all Germans) simply hated them out of an irrational bigotry born of their notions of racial supremacy, because Hitler and all the Germans were evil racists.

    Period.

    But then since I’ve grown up and read a little, I learned that is really wasn’t quite that simple after all. And that some Jews were doing some very nasty things indeed!

    like waging a genocidal campaign of slaughter and terror in Russia and Ukraine and elsewhere against the Christians who lived there and threatening the same in Germany

    Like the Morgenthau plan, and other genocidal schemes to wipe Germany (and all Germans) off the map of humanity

    and the treachery and betrayal of WWI regarding the Balfour Declaration and the subsequent Treaty of Versailles signed on the slab of mass starvation of a Germany that had laid down its arms in honorable good will

    and the humiliations and suffering heaped upon the starving German people by the Weimar regime

    the brothels in Berlin that treated German children like sex toys for homosexuals and other foreign thrill seekers

    in fact there were a lot of things for which the German people had reason to resent some Jews, no?

    were the people of Hungary racists and anti-Semites for their hatred of Bela Kun?

    were the people of Ukraine anti-Semites for hating Lazar kaganovich?

    perhaps there were some things that some Jews did; like declaring an international war on Germany, for which the Germany people had a legitimate grievance.. no?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    An interesting post.

    Scapegoating (whoever the goat) has universal appeal to those who seek a lever to power. The disaffected buy it in a heartbeat. Bear in mind Jews came second or third, behind Hitler’s “archenemy” France (1st priority), Versailles/November traitors (2nd), international finance (all religions, but Jews were favorites). Etc. Enemies, enemies all around! What better reason for NSDAP support? Fear has great utility. You can see it in North Korea, Syria and Iran today.

    “some Jews were doing some very nasty things indeed!”
    Of course. Marc Rich, Adelson, et. al. in our time, for example. Yes, I believe they should be indicted and tried to the fullest extent of the law, just like anyone else.

    “Like the Morgenthau plan, and other genocidal schemes to wipe Germany”

    Morgenthau’s Carthaginian plan was vindictive arrogance at best. An unlikable man. I have no brief for Morgenthau and am thankful his plan was wisely put aside. But what about Hitler’s own Götterdämmerung plan? It went Morgenthau one better. What better than all Germans commit suicide just like their fearless Führer?

    Was Hitler right to order the destruction of Germany, Rurik? Fair is fair, after all. He destroyed Warsaw in August ‘44. He also ordered Paris destroyed at the same time. Why?

    “Treaty of Versailles signed on the slab of mass starvation of a Germany that had laid down its arms in honorable good will”

    We may differ here. You infer a Germany betrayed by Versailles (foreigners). I’ve no affection for the treaty (or Wilson), but suggest men like Hindenburg and Ludendorff, who shepherded the nation through four years of slaughter with sublime incompetence after knowing in September 1914 it was lost, intentionally handed negotiations to civilians as their troops were about to mutiny. They then engineered the stab-in-the back nonsense to save their own honor. They betrayed Germany.

    Here’s what Helmuth von Moltke wrote his wife 9 Sep 1914 after being stopped at the Battle of the Marne: “Things have not gone well. The fighting east of Paris has not gone in our favor, and we shall have to pay for the damage we have done.” What do you think Rurik? He’s alleged to have told Wilhelm II “Majesty, we have lost the war” at the same time - 38 days after invading Luxembourg. He resigned 25 October 1914 due to 'health concerns', and was replaced by General Erich von Falkenhayn (another outstanding nitwit). Germany knows it’s lost, but the war goes on for another four years, killing millions, many of them German. Why Rurik?

    Last, bear in mind Germany occupied Northern France 1870-73 until it was paid the largest war indemnity in history - 5 billion gold francs (as well as Alscace-Lorraine). It was paid two years early. The interesting thing? Germany, constantly bitching about Versailles unfairness, never even paid what France paid them by 1873 for victimizing them in a war on French territory! No wonder France was a prime targets in 1914! Shake that money tree!
  160. @Incitatus
    Your post is obviously coercive. You want me to parrot some story line. But, in true passive-aggressive fashion, you conceal any facts or theories with which I should agree or disagree. What gives?

    “It is quite telling that you would read a copious quantity of books about WWII German leaders but choose to remain ignorant of the banking clique (Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc) that financed the industrial might of the combatants on either side of that dreadful conflict.”

    “quite telling?” In what way? Please be specific. Am I a conspirator?

    “choose to remain ignorant”

    Please provide evidence of your allegation. I asked you to recommend sources. Your response:

    “You can Google whatever you like.”

    If you’re too lazy to suggest sources, why should I find energy to look for them?

    “You say that you hope that all Jews will not be blamed for the actions of a few..."

    Where did I say that? Be specific

    “...while simultaneously doing your best to contribute to a cover up..."

    Please provide evidence of your allegation. Describe the “cover up.”

    NtD you don’t mention withdrawal of US short-term financing to Weimar in 1930 post crash - it (the lack of US financing) led to 6 million unemployed Germans by 1932 (peak year). You’re silent on Fritz Thysen, the main contributor to Nazis before 1933. Gustav and Alfred Krupp? Hugo Stinnes, Albert Voegler, Adolf Kirdorf, Kurt von Schroder? Is it because they aren’t Jewish? Doesn’t fit whatever theory you subscribe to? Your websites don't mention them? Give me a hint.

    BTW, contributions to the Nazis didn’t really fund them pre-1933; it was NSDAP membership dues (Hitler personally was getting considerable royalties from ‘Mein Kampf’).

    Yes, I’ve read considerably over the years. Mostly full histories, not just profiles of “WWII German leaders.” None feature the “Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs etc” as prime causes of war. Thus my question to you. If you have definite account and the source I promise objective consideration.

    Judge me for what I write. Not for what I don’t write (much as you may want it).

    “It seems LK was right about you after all.”

    Really? In what respect? Always glad for helpful criticism.

    Tell me, NtD, do you agree with L.K’s following post:

    “...As for those who caused the war, the US had a great deal of responsability for the outbreak of war in Europe and for its subsequent escalation into a world war. The other main culprits were Perfidious Albion, aka, the english pests, and the peace loving uncle Stalin.
    -L.K #228 1 April 2016
    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/saker-rant-about-a-stolen-europe/

    What strange bed-fellows you keep, NtD.

    Thanks for all that, a lengthy read indeed, and should one infer by your omission that Rothschild’s money was nowhere at all involved?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    No, only that I’ve not come across them in accounts (any more than general mentions of the house of Morgan, etc). Don’t doubt if there was a profit to be made, like most financial entities, they made an appearance. Thus my request for sources.

    BTW I don’t pretend to be a definitive source, or any source at all for that matter.
  161. @NoseytheDuke
    Thanks for all that, a lengthy read indeed, and should one infer by your omission that Rothschild's money was nowhere at all involved?

    No, only that I’ve not come across them in accounts (any more than general mentions of the house of Morgan, etc). Don’t doubt if there was a profit to be made, like most financial entities, they made an appearance. Thus my request for sources.

    BTW I don’t pretend to be a definitive source, or any source at all for that matter.

    Read More
  162. @Rurik

    It was easy for Hitler to scapegoat Jews in the ‘20s-30s. It found great resonance in his audiences
     
    why do you suppose that was Incitatus?

    I was raised to believe that all the Jews (the only victims of the Nazis that really count) were all innocent and that Hitler (and all Germans) simply hated them out of an irrational bigotry born of their notions of racial supremacy, because Hitler and all the Germans were evil racists.

    Period.

    But then since I've grown up and read a little, I learned that is really wasn't quite that simple after all. And that some Jews were doing some very nasty things indeed!

    like waging a genocidal campaign of slaughter and terror in Russia and Ukraine and elsewhere against the Christians who lived there and threatening the same in Germany

    Like the Morgenthau plan, and other genocidal schemes to wipe Germany (and all Germans) off the map of humanity

    and the treachery and betrayal of WWI regarding the Balfour Declaration and the subsequent Treaty of Versailles signed on the slab of mass starvation of a Germany that had laid down its arms in honorable good will

    and the humiliations and suffering heaped upon the starving German people by the Weimar regime

    the brothels in Berlin that treated German children like sex toys for homosexuals and other foreign thrill seekers

    in fact there were a lot of things for which the German people had reason to resent some Jews, no?

    were the people of Hungary racists and anti-Semites for their hatred of Bela Kun?

    were the people of Ukraine anti-Semites for hating Lazar kaganovich?

    perhaps there were some things that some Jews did; like declaring an international war on Germany, for which the Germany people had a legitimate grievance.. no?

    An interesting post.

    Scapegoating (whoever the goat) has universal appeal to those who seek a lever to power. The disaffected buy it in a heartbeat. Bear in mind Jews came second or third, behind Hitler’s “archenemy” France (1st priority), Versailles/November traitors (2nd), international finance (all religions, but Jews were favorites). Etc. Enemies, enemies all around! What better reason for NSDAP support? Fear has great utility. You can see it in North Korea, Syria and Iran today.

    “some Jews were doing some very nasty things indeed!”
    Of course. Marc Rich, Adelson, et. al. in our time, for example. Yes, I believe they should be indicted and tried to the fullest extent of the law, just like anyone else.

    “Like the Morgenthau plan, and other genocidal schemes to wipe Germany”

    Morgenthau’s Carthaginian plan was vindictive arrogance at best. An unlikable man. I have no brief for Morgenthau and am thankful his plan was wisely put aside. But what about Hitler’s own Götterdämmerung plan? It went Morgenthau one better. What better than all Germans commit suicide just like their fearless Führer?

    Was Hitler right to order the destruction of Germany, Rurik? Fair is fair, after all. He destroyed Warsaw in August ‘44. He also ordered Paris destroyed at the same time. Why?

    “Treaty of Versailles signed on the slab of mass starvation of a Germany that had laid down its arms in honorable good will”

    We may differ here. You infer a Germany betrayed by Versailles (foreigners). I’ve no affection for the treaty (or Wilson), but suggest men like Hindenburg and Ludendorff, who shepherded the nation through four years of slaughter with sublime incompetence after knowing in September 1914 it was lost, intentionally handed negotiations to civilians as their troops were about to mutiny. They then engineered the stab-in-the back nonsense to save their own honor. They betrayed Germany.

    Here’s what Helmuth von Moltke wrote his wife 9 Sep 1914 after being stopped at the Battle of the Marne: “Things have not gone well. The fighting east of Paris has not gone in our favor, and we shall have to pay for the damage we have done.” What do you think Rurik? He’s alleged to have told Wilhelm II “Majesty, we have lost the war” at the same time – 38 days after invading Luxembourg. He resigned 25 October 1914 due to ‘health concerns’, and was replaced by General Erich von Falkenhayn (another outstanding nitwit). Germany knows it’s lost, but the war goes on for another four years, killing millions, many of them German. Why Rurik?

    Last, bear in mind Germany occupied Northern France 1870-73 until it was paid the largest war indemnity in history – 5 billion gold francs (as well as Alscace-Lorraine). It was paid two years early. The interesting thing? Germany, constantly bitching about Versailles unfairness, never even paid what France paid them by 1873 for victimizing them in a war on French territory! No wonder France was a prime targets in 1914! Shake that money tree!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Bear in mind Jews came second or third, behind Hitler’s “archenemy” France (1st priority),
     
    that's an absurdity

    Versailles/November traitors (2nd), international finance (all religions,
     
    all religions? Another absurdity. Are you simply trying to be insulting?

    but Jews were favorites). Etc. Enemies, enemies all around! What better reason for NSDAP support? Fear has great utility. You can see it in North Korea, Syria and Iran today
     
    the Syrians have nothing to fear?

    Assad is simply making hay by tweaking the fears of the Syrian people with hobgoblins and bogey men who chop off heads?

    Or perhaps Syria is under attack by the exact same forces Germany was being attacked by. Zionist bankers who demand absolute global dominance though financial control of a nation's money supply. Eh? Could that be? Because once they have that control they're able to order around the presidents and prime ministers of these countries like so many quisling dogs. Perhaps that's why Syria is under siege today, because they don't yet have their Rothschild central bank, that guarantees submission to the banker class? Hmm.

    Was Hitler right to order the destruction of Germany, Rurik?

     

    I'm no fan of Hitler's. Never have been.

    They then engineered the stab-in-the back nonsense to save their own honor. They betrayed Germany.
     
    no, it was Wilson and his Fourteen Points and Perfidious Albion and the Jewish International banking cabal that stabbed Germany in the back. But I suspect you already know that. ;)

    Germany, constantly bitching about Versailles unfairness,
     
    you're really quite something, aren't you?
  163. @Rurik

    Pals need a Mandela.
     
    they'd never allow him out of their torture chambers

    they'd murder any such man or woman without compunction, and the ((Western press)) would call him a terrorist with an unanimous voice

    Is there a single cause, single scapegoat, or a single solution? Make no mistake, I wish there was a magic answer.
     
    education

    the only way these atrocities are tolerated is due to widespread, imposed ignorance. If they made one hundredth of the movies about Palestine that they make about the Holocaust, there'd be reform in a New York minute. The people are not evil, they're just duped or drunk on power, as the case may be, and if the governments and media of the West were not so totally controlled and corrupt, then there'd be the peace.

    I just made a remark on another thread about the need to End the Fed. The Fed is the perfidious little snake pit where all this bullshit emanates from.

    Phil is best known for killing Glass-Steagall in ‘99.
     
    Phil is a bitch. Killing Glass was Robert Rubin all the way, with his Igor hunchback Lawrence Summers. Rubin is the brains behind the mass lootings of the treasury going way back. He makes Madoff look like Mother Theresa.

    Sheldon Adelson? No disagreement. Balzac had it right. Gambling is the opiate of poverty. Sheldon’s simply a pusher. His trade should be illegal.
     
    it isn't gambling that bothers me about Sheldon. It's his repulsive hypocrisy in demanding open borders for America but calls immigrants in Israel "invaders" and demands their repatriation. He's the worst kind of Zionist oozing pus, almost as ugly on the outside as he is on the inside. May he- and all his duplicitous, double-dealing, Jewish supremacist, Zio-scum die hard and rot in hell.


    “McCain is directly acting in his own people’s worst interest”
     
    I confess a fondness for old ‘Hothead’,
     
    whoa

    I guess that certainly points to a gaping rift between us. I happen to consider John McBloodstain to be the most execrable, loathsome POS on the planet. If you water boarded me, I wouldn't be able to think of a more accursed and squalid little turd of a traitor than John McBloodstain McCain.

    “they’d murder any such man or woman without compunction”

    I fear you’re right. Even if that Pal Mandela had 24-hr press coverage, they’d probably figure an invisible demise (poison, etc). They can’t even free Vanunu.

    “education”

    You’re optimistic. Entertainment has eclipsed education, and news for that matter. Everything has a yawn expiration date. Agree about atrocities tolerated out of ignorance. But ignorance is bliss? Or, as Orwell would have it ‘ignorance is strength.’

    Phil Graham (don’t forget Wendy), Rubin, Larry Summers? Don’t fancy any of them (especially Larry).

    “John McBloodstain.” You certainly have a gift for apt expression. I condemn all he says, but I don’t hate the man. He’s not worth it. My affection is for the predictable regularity of his positions (better than the most reliable laxative).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik


    “education”

     

    You’re optimistic. Entertainment has eclipsed education, and news for that matter. Everything has a yawn expiration date. Agree about atrocities tolerated out of ignorance. But ignorance is bliss? Or, as Orwell would have it ‘ignorance is strength.’
     
    well, I found my way out of the morass of imposed ignorance, (at least to a degree) and I'm just a schmo

    if I can do it, so can others

    the truth is a powerful thing Incitatus. It suffers relentless onslaughts from ubiquitous enemies and yet, even with governments and elites and entire global power structures aligned against it, somehow though sheer force of its merit, it perseveres.

    were it not for the truth, surely we'd have had our 1984 world by now, yes? We'd all be effectively living like Palestinians today, with that Zio-boot firmly stamping on our collective face. But they haven't gotten that yet, no matter how relentlessly they lie and connive and murder and intrigue. Still the truth bubbles up to the collective consciousness.

    They're making a movie about the USS Liberty for Christ's sake!

    Brexit was a huge set back for them - (the Fiend ; )

    Trump may turn out to be their tool, but he was elected in spite of their best efforts to get the war sow into the White House.

    Le Pen has them losing their bladders

    the truth is a powerful and persistent thing, and with just a little effort on all our parts to be its champion, we'll get though this difficulty Incitatus. Just watch and see ;)

  164. @Incitatus
    An interesting post.

    Scapegoating (whoever the goat) has universal appeal to those who seek a lever to power. The disaffected buy it in a heartbeat. Bear in mind Jews came second or third, behind Hitler’s “archenemy” France (1st priority), Versailles/November traitors (2nd), international finance (all religions, but Jews were favorites). Etc. Enemies, enemies all around! What better reason for NSDAP support? Fear has great utility. You can see it in North Korea, Syria and Iran today.

    “some Jews were doing some very nasty things indeed!”
    Of course. Marc Rich, Adelson, et. al. in our time, for example. Yes, I believe they should be indicted and tried to the fullest extent of the law, just like anyone else.

    “Like the Morgenthau plan, and other genocidal schemes to wipe Germany”

    Morgenthau’s Carthaginian plan was vindictive arrogance at best. An unlikable man. I have no brief for Morgenthau and am thankful his plan was wisely put aside. But what about Hitler’s own Götterdämmerung plan? It went Morgenthau one better. What better than all Germans commit suicide just like their fearless Führer?

    Was Hitler right to order the destruction of Germany, Rurik? Fair is fair, after all. He destroyed Warsaw in August ‘44. He also ordered Paris destroyed at the same time. Why?

    “Treaty of Versailles signed on the slab of mass starvation of a Germany that had laid down its arms in honorable good will”

    We may differ here. You infer a Germany betrayed by Versailles (foreigners). I’ve no affection for the treaty (or Wilson), but suggest men like Hindenburg and Ludendorff, who shepherded the nation through four years of slaughter with sublime incompetence after knowing in September 1914 it was lost, intentionally handed negotiations to civilians as their troops were about to mutiny. They then engineered the stab-in-the back nonsense to save their own honor. They betrayed Germany.

    Here’s what Helmuth von Moltke wrote his wife 9 Sep 1914 after being stopped at the Battle of the Marne: “Things have not gone well. The fighting east of Paris has not gone in our favor, and we shall have to pay for the damage we have done.” What do you think Rurik? He’s alleged to have told Wilhelm II “Majesty, we have lost the war” at the same time - 38 days after invading Luxembourg. He resigned 25 October 1914 due to 'health concerns', and was replaced by General Erich von Falkenhayn (another outstanding nitwit). Germany knows it’s lost, but the war goes on for another four years, killing millions, many of them German. Why Rurik?

    Last, bear in mind Germany occupied Northern France 1870-73 until it was paid the largest war indemnity in history - 5 billion gold francs (as well as Alscace-Lorraine). It was paid two years early. The interesting thing? Germany, constantly bitching about Versailles unfairness, never even paid what France paid them by 1873 for victimizing them in a war on French territory! No wonder France was a prime targets in 1914! Shake that money tree!

    Bear in mind Jews came second or third, behind Hitler’s “archenemy” France (1st priority),

    that’s an absurdity

    Versailles/November traitors (2nd), international finance (all religions,

    all religions? Another absurdity. Are you simply trying to be insulting?

    but Jews were favorites). Etc. Enemies, enemies all around! What better reason for NSDAP support? Fear has great utility. You can see it in North Korea, Syria and Iran today

    the Syrians have nothing to fear?

    Assad is simply making hay by tweaking the fears of the Syrian people with hobgoblins and bogey men who chop off heads?

    Or perhaps Syria is under attack by the exact same forces Germany was being attacked by. Zionist bankers who demand absolute global dominance though financial control of a nation’s money supply. Eh? Could that be? Because once they have that control they’re able to order around the presidents and prime ministers of these countries like so many quisling dogs. Perhaps that’s why Syria is under siege today, because they don’t yet have their Rothschild central bank, that guarantees submission to the banker class? Hmm.

    Was Hitler right to order the destruction of Germany, Rurik?

    I’m no fan of Hitler’s. Never have been.

    They then engineered the stab-in-the back nonsense to save their own honor. They betrayed Germany.

    no, it was Wilson and his Fourteen Points and Perfidious Albion and the Jewish International banking cabal that stabbed Germany in the back. But I suspect you already know that. ;)

    Germany, constantly bitching about Versailles unfairness,

    you’re really quite something, aren’t you?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus

    “Bear in mind Jews came second or third, behind Hitler’s “archenemy” France (1st priority),”
     
    “that’s an absurdity”

    “...Hitler had entered politics demanding an abrogation of the Treaty of Versailles, a settling of accounts with Germany’s “archenemy” France, the restitution of German colonies, and the restoration of Germany’s 1914 borders...”
    -Volker Ullrich ‘Hitler: Ascent 1889-1939’, Knopf 2016, p.178

    Read it and decide for yourself. Hitler’s words - “archenemy.”

    The attack on France (1940) came before the Holocaust. Scores to settle, don’t you know. Jews (popular scapegoats) weren’t a real threat, the French were. Germans signed the 1940 armistice in the very same railroad car that November Criminals betrayed Germany on 11 Nov 1918 at Compiègne. Why Rurik? Was it because Jews were target number one? Hitler ordered the car taken to Berlin and put on exhibit, much like the Romans would have dragged the vanquished in chains before the people.

    To be fair to Jews, Dolf had already done his best to starve them after the Nüremberg Laws in ‘35 (hard to make a living when one can’t be employed and can’t emigrate without liquidating one’s wealth - usually sold pennies on the dollar to loyal party members whose only qualification is thuggish loyalty and greed). What came next was what one could expect of a pathological monster. Little different from the sadist who delights in killing captives for some elusive satisfaction. In Adolf’s case without getting his own hands dirty, of course. By ‘41 he was a God, after all.

    “Fear has great utility. You can see it in North Korea, Syria and Iran today”
     
    “the Syrians have nothing to fear?”
    They have everything to fear. That was my point. Trump has fallen in bed with those who think Syria threatens the US. Just as GW Bush warned us Saddam was an imminent threat. I fear we will wage war on Iran and North Korea as well - we’re already waging it on Syria.

    “no, it was Wilson and his Fourteen Points and Perfidious Albion and the Jewish International banking cabal that stabbed Germany in the back.”
    You have a narrow view. Wilson was a shallow bigot (as I’ve said elsewhere, his second wife was a better president). BUT it wasn’t all Wilson and the “Jewish International banking cabal.” Not by a long shot.

    Austria-Hungary Ambassador Count László Szögyén-Marich met Wilhelm II at Potsdam and promised “to eliminate Serbia as a power-political factor in the Balkans” 5 July 1914. Wilhelm II’ gave his support for military action against Serbia (the ‘blank check’) and told Szögyén-Marich he “would be saddened if advantage was not taken of such a favorable juncture as the present one” for war. Willie then departed for his annual North Sea cruise. German officials repeated their support for military action against Serbia the following day, urging it it to act ‘quickly and with determination’ even if “action against Serbia will lead to a world war.” A day later (23 Jul 1914) Austria issued an ultimatum to Serbia at 6 pm, simultaneously published it in Austrian newspapers, and demanded a response within 48 hours.

    The Serbs agreed to all demands but suggested the final point - Serbia will permit Austria-Hungary to conduct an inquiry into the “subversive movement” and “plot of June 28th” on Serbian soil - be held by international jurists at the Hague. Austria-Hungary broke contact without discussion and declared war 28 Jul 1914.

    Know what Willie (in exile) told Harry Elmer Barnes in ‘26? It was all the fault of “international Jews and Free Masons” who ‘desired to destroy national states and the Christian religion.’ Find any orders for invasion by “international Jews and Free Masons” Rurik? Germans are meticulous record keepers, if nothing else. Funny no such records have surfaced. Willie’s words, on the other hand, survive.

    How many men did Willie kill, Rurik? How many did Hitler kill?

    God forgive us.
  165. @Incitatus
    “they’d murder any such man or woman without compunction”

    I fear you’re right. Even if that Pal Mandela had 24-hr press coverage, they’d probably figure an invisible demise (poison, etc). They can’t even free Vanunu.

    “education”

    You’re optimistic. Entertainment has eclipsed education, and news for that matter. Everything has a yawn expiration date. Agree about atrocities tolerated out of ignorance. But ignorance is bliss? Or, as Orwell would have it ‘ignorance is strength.’

    Phil Graham (don’t forget Wendy), Rubin, Larry Summers? Don’t fancy any of them (especially Larry).

    “John McBloodstain.” You certainly have a gift for apt expression. I condemn all he says, but I don’t hate the man. He’s not worth it. My affection is for the predictable regularity of his positions (better than the most reliable laxative).

    “education”

    You’re optimistic. Entertainment has eclipsed education, and news for that matter. Everything has a yawn expiration date. Agree about atrocities tolerated out of ignorance. But ignorance is bliss? Or, as Orwell would have it ‘ignorance is strength.’

    well, I found my way out of the morass of imposed ignorance, (at least to a degree) and I’m just a schmo

    if I can do it, so can others

    the truth is a powerful thing Incitatus. It suffers relentless onslaughts from ubiquitous enemies and yet, even with governments and elites and entire global power structures aligned against it, somehow though sheer force of its merit, it perseveres.

    were it not for the truth, surely we’d have had our 1984 world by now, yes? We’d all be effectively living like Palestinians today, with that Zio-boot firmly stamping on our collective face. But they haven’t gotten that yet, no matter how relentlessly they lie and connive and murder and intrigue. Still the truth bubbles up to the collective consciousness.

    They’re making a movie about the USS Liberty for Christ’s sake!

    Brexit was a huge set back for them – (the Fiend ; )

    Trump may turn out to be their tool, but he was elected in spite of their best efforts to get the war sow into the White House.

    Le Pen has them losing their bladders

    the truth is a powerful and persistent thing, and with just a little effort on all our parts to be its champion, we’ll get though this difficulty Incitatus. Just watch and see ;)

    Read More
  166. @Rurik

    Bear in mind Jews came second or third, behind Hitler’s “archenemy” France (1st priority),
     
    that's an absurdity

    Versailles/November traitors (2nd), international finance (all religions,
     
    all religions? Another absurdity. Are you simply trying to be insulting?

    but Jews were favorites). Etc. Enemies, enemies all around! What better reason for NSDAP support? Fear has great utility. You can see it in North Korea, Syria and Iran today
     
    the Syrians have nothing to fear?

    Assad is simply making hay by tweaking the fears of the Syrian people with hobgoblins and bogey men who chop off heads?

    Or perhaps Syria is under attack by the exact same forces Germany was being attacked by. Zionist bankers who demand absolute global dominance though financial control of a nation's money supply. Eh? Could that be? Because once they have that control they're able to order around the presidents and prime ministers of these countries like so many quisling dogs. Perhaps that's why Syria is under siege today, because they don't yet have their Rothschild central bank, that guarantees submission to the banker class? Hmm.

    Was Hitler right to order the destruction of Germany, Rurik?

     

    I'm no fan of Hitler's. Never have been.

    They then engineered the stab-in-the back nonsense to save their own honor. They betrayed Germany.
     
    no, it was Wilson and his Fourteen Points and Perfidious Albion and the Jewish International banking cabal that stabbed Germany in the back. But I suspect you already know that. ;)

    Germany, constantly bitching about Versailles unfairness,
     
    you're really quite something, aren't you?

    “Bear in mind Jews came second or third, behind Hitler’s “archenemy” France (1st priority),”

    “that’s an absurdity”

    “…Hitler had entered politics demanding an abrogation of the Treaty of Versailles, a settling of accounts with Germany’s “archenemy” France, the restitution of German colonies, and the restoration of Germany’s 1914 borders…”
    -Volker Ullrich ‘Hitler: Ascent 1889-1939’, Knopf 2016, p.178

    Read it and decide for yourself. Hitler’s words – “archenemy.”

    The attack on France (1940) came before the Holocaust. Scores to settle, don’t you know. Jews (popular scapegoats) weren’t a real threat, the French were. Germans signed the 1940 armistice in the very same railroad car that November Criminals betrayed Germany on 11 Nov 1918 at Compiègne. Why Rurik? Was it because Jews were target number one? Hitler ordered the car taken to Berlin and put on exhibit, much like the Romans would have dragged the vanquished in chains before the people.

    To be fair to Jews, Dolf had already done his best to starve them after the Nüremberg Laws in ‘35 (hard to make a living when one can’t be employed and can’t emigrate without liquidating one’s wealth – usually sold pennies on the dollar to loyal party members whose only qualification is thuggish loyalty and greed). What came next was what one could expect of a pathological monster. Little different from the sadist who delights in killing captives for some elusive satisfaction. In Adolf’s case without getting his own hands dirty, of course. By ‘41 he was a God, after all.

    “Fear has great utility. You can see it in North Korea, Syria and Iran today”

    “the Syrians have nothing to fear?”
    They have everything to fear. That was my point. Trump has fallen in bed with those who think Syria threatens the US. Just as GW Bush warned us Saddam was an imminent threat. I fear we will wage war on Iran and North Korea as well – we’re already waging it on Syria.

    “no, it was Wilson and his Fourteen Points and Perfidious Albion and the Jewish International banking cabal that stabbed Germany in the back.”
    You have a narrow view. Wilson was a shallow bigot (as I’ve said elsewhere, his second wife was a better president). BUT it wasn’t all Wilson and the “Jewish International banking cabal.” Not by a long shot.

    Austria-Hungary Ambassador Count László Szögyén-Marich met Wilhelm II at Potsdam and promised “to eliminate Serbia as a power-political factor in the Balkans” 5 July 1914. Wilhelm II’ gave his support for military action against Serbia (the ‘blank check’) and told Szögyén-Marich he “would be saddened if advantage was not taken of such a favorable juncture as the present one” for war. Willie then departed for his annual North Sea cruise. German officials repeated their support for military action against Serbia the following day, urging it it to act ‘quickly and with determination’ even if “action against Serbia will lead to a world war.” A day later (23 Jul 1914) Austria issued an ultimatum to Serbia at 6 pm, simultaneously published it in Austrian newspapers, and demanded a response within 48 hours.

    The Serbs agreed to all demands but suggested the final point – Serbia will permit Austria-Hungary to conduct an inquiry into the “subversive movement” and “plot of June 28th” on Serbian soil – be held by international jurists at the Hague. Austria-Hungary broke contact without discussion and declared war 28 Jul 1914.

    Know what Willie (in exile) told Harry Elmer Barnes in ‘26? It was all the fault of “international Jews and Free Masons” who ‘desired to destroy national states and the Christian religion.’ Find any orders for invasion by “international Jews and Free Masons” Rurik? Germans are meticulous record keepers, if nothing else. Funny no such records have surfaced. Willie’s words, on the other hand, survive.

    How many men did Willie kill, Rurik? How many did Hitler kill?

    God forgive us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    Trump has fallen in bed with those who think Syria threatens the US. Just as GW Bush warned us Saddam was an imminent threat..
     
    FIFY

    Trump has fallen in bed with those who lie to us that Syria threatens the US. Just as GW Bush and the Israel-firsters lied to us that Saddam was an imminent threat.

  167. @Incitatus

    “Bear in mind Jews came second or third, behind Hitler’s “archenemy” France (1st priority),”
     
    “that’s an absurdity”

    “...Hitler had entered politics demanding an abrogation of the Treaty of Versailles, a settling of accounts with Germany’s “archenemy” France, the restitution of German colonies, and the restoration of Germany’s 1914 borders...”
    -Volker Ullrich ‘Hitler: Ascent 1889-1939’, Knopf 2016, p.178

    Read it and decide for yourself. Hitler’s words - “archenemy.”

    The attack on France (1940) came before the Holocaust. Scores to settle, don’t you know. Jews (popular scapegoats) weren’t a real threat, the French were. Germans signed the 1940 armistice in the very same railroad car that November Criminals betrayed Germany on 11 Nov 1918 at Compiègne. Why Rurik? Was it because Jews were target number one? Hitler ordered the car taken to Berlin and put on exhibit, much like the Romans would have dragged the vanquished in chains before the people.

    To be fair to Jews, Dolf had already done his best to starve them after the Nüremberg Laws in ‘35 (hard to make a living when one can’t be employed and can’t emigrate without liquidating one’s wealth - usually sold pennies on the dollar to loyal party members whose only qualification is thuggish loyalty and greed). What came next was what one could expect of a pathological monster. Little different from the sadist who delights in killing captives for some elusive satisfaction. In Adolf’s case without getting his own hands dirty, of course. By ‘41 he was a God, after all.

    “Fear has great utility. You can see it in North Korea, Syria and Iran today”
     
    “the Syrians have nothing to fear?”
    They have everything to fear. That was my point. Trump has fallen in bed with those who think Syria threatens the US. Just as GW Bush warned us Saddam was an imminent threat. I fear we will wage war on Iran and North Korea as well - we’re already waging it on Syria.

    “no, it was Wilson and his Fourteen Points and Perfidious Albion and the Jewish International banking cabal that stabbed Germany in the back.”
    You have a narrow view. Wilson was a shallow bigot (as I’ve said elsewhere, his second wife was a better president). BUT it wasn’t all Wilson and the “Jewish International banking cabal.” Not by a long shot.

    Austria-Hungary Ambassador Count László Szögyén-Marich met Wilhelm II at Potsdam and promised “to eliminate Serbia as a power-political factor in the Balkans” 5 July 1914. Wilhelm II’ gave his support for military action against Serbia (the ‘blank check’) and told Szögyén-Marich he “would be saddened if advantage was not taken of such a favorable juncture as the present one” for war. Willie then departed for his annual North Sea cruise. German officials repeated their support for military action against Serbia the following day, urging it it to act ‘quickly and with determination’ even if “action against Serbia will lead to a world war.” A day later (23 Jul 1914) Austria issued an ultimatum to Serbia at 6 pm, simultaneously published it in Austrian newspapers, and demanded a response within 48 hours.

    The Serbs agreed to all demands but suggested the final point - Serbia will permit Austria-Hungary to conduct an inquiry into the “subversive movement” and “plot of June 28th” on Serbian soil - be held by international jurists at the Hague. Austria-Hungary broke contact without discussion and declared war 28 Jul 1914.

    Know what Willie (in exile) told Harry Elmer Barnes in ‘26? It was all the fault of “international Jews and Free Masons” who ‘desired to destroy national states and the Christian religion.’ Find any orders for invasion by “international Jews and Free Masons” Rurik? Germans are meticulous record keepers, if nothing else. Funny no such records have surfaced. Willie’s words, on the other hand, survive.

    How many men did Willie kill, Rurik? How many did Hitler kill?

    God forgive us.

    Trump has fallen in bed with those who think Syria threatens the US. Just as GW Bush warned us Saddam was an imminent threat..

    FIFY

    Trump has fallen in bed with those who lie to us that Syria threatens the US. Just as GW Bush and the Israel-firsters lied to us that Saddam was an imminent threat.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Philip Giraldi Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
A Modern Guernica Enabled by Washington
Pressuring Candidates Even Before They Are Nominated
But is it even a friend?
The gagged whistleblower goes on the record.
Today’s CIA serves contractors and bureaucrats—not the nation.
Pay no mind to the Mossad agent on the line.