If there was ever a doubt about whether Senate Democrats would be obstructionists, this article should shout ‘Democratic obstructionism’. President Trump announced today that he’ll announce his SCOTUS nominee next week sometime. Democrats are feeling bitter that Republicans give Merrick Garland, President Obama’s pick to replace Antonin Scalia, a committee hearing. It isn’t surprising to […]
Continue reading Sen. Schumer’s obstructionism
. . . → Read More: Sen. Schumer’s obstructionism
I received a lot of feedback on yesterday’s commentary about how Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz have traded their Conservative principles for compromising politics; needless to say, it was a mixed-bag of supporters and detractors. One of the glaring arguments…
Read more →
Continue reading GOP Establishment vs. a kingdom of conscience
. . . → Read More: GOP Establishment vs. a kingdom of conscience
When I wrote this post, I hadn’t read Stephen Hayes’ devastating article about Sen. Chuck Schumer’s dishonesty. In the post, I wrote that Democrats put a higher priority on their PR stunt, aka “the Resistance”, than they put on protecting national security. I wasn’t as cynical as I should’ve been. According to Hayes’ article, according […]
Continue reading The Schumer Option
. . . → Read More: The Schumer Option
President Trump’s very first stop on his first full day in office was at CIA headquarters, where a capacity crowd of 400 agents, analysts and other personnel were there to here him speak. Remember, According to the Washington Post, New York Times…
Continue reading CIA Agents Cheer Trump – ‘Feud’ Is Just Another Fake News Story
. . . → Read More: CIA Agents Cheer Trump – ‘Feud’ Is Just Another Fake News Story
Ah yes, fake news, the latest gambit by the Left to marginalize and ban everything as ‘fake’ except for the Leftist propaganda their trained seals in the media put out.The latest example is yet another attempt to rationalize their losing an elect…
Continue reading Fake News? How About ‘Wa-ah, Putin Got Trump Elected!’
. . . → Read More: Fake News? How About ‘Wa-ah, Putin Got Trump Elected!’
Mike Morrell, President Obama’s handpicked choice to head the CIA in 2011 and again from 2012-2013 is a lifelong Democrat in spite of his claim to be ‘non-partisan’. Today, he endorsed Hillary Clinton for president and called her “highly qualified.” He claims during the four years he worked with her, he found her -don’t laugh- to be “prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument.”
Donald Trump? “Dangerous to America’s national security, unprepared and an unwitting Russian Agent.”
Morrell put this out in an editorial in Pravda-on-the -Hudson, and then hit the Sunday shows, most notably with Martha Raddatz on the Clinton News Network (CNN).
This is actually a very telling endorsement. Here we have the man who was Obama’s pick as head of the CIA who backs Mrs. Clinton’s claim that Benghazi was ‘about the video’ and oversaw the intel in Obama and Hillary’s illegal Libya war which helped destabilize the entire Middle East and led to deaths in Libya, Syria, Algeria, Mali and Nigeria (yes, Boko Haram got a lot of Khaddaffi’s arms too). This is the man who was in command of the agency that trained the Syrian Free Army members who later became ISIS, like these guys and many more just like them. While the article talks about this being a State Department program, the agency that did the hands on work was the CIA, in connivance with Qatar, Turkey and the Saudis as PBS revealed. And it that isn’t enough to call Morrell’s judgment into question, he’s also willing to disregard Mrs. Clinton’s trafficking of confidential material for ca$h.
Just to show you how bogus this all is, on the one hand, Morrell claims that while he hasn’t seen any evidence, he’s ‘pretty sure’ Russia was behind the DNC hacking. Yet, he’s willing to ignore (and Martha Raddatz, of course would never mention) that if he’s right about Russia being responsible,, Putin has tons of blackmail material ready and waiting if the corrupt candidate he’s shilling for, Hillary Clinton, becomes president.
Speaking of Russia, Morrell also conveniently forgets that Mrs. Clinton, under Obama’s direction was responsible for giving Putin top secret intel on our Missile defense system as part of the ‘reset,’ In particular our state of the art Hit-to-Kill technology. And that wasn’t ‘unknowing’, but deliberate. Talk about a risk to national security!
On the other hand, Morrell’s ‘evidence’ that Trump is ‘an unwitting Russian agent’ is that the two men have spoken respectfully about each other, with Trump saying that Putin is a much stronger leader than Obama, something that’s undoubtedly true from the perspective of looking after his country’s interests.
None of this is accidental,by the way. In the NBC commander-in -chief forum, Trump came across strongly as a strategic thinker and presidential to the overwhelming majority of viewers while Mrs. Clinton was revealed as the corrupt, incompetent and dishonest creature she actually is in spite of Matt Lauer’s best efforts.
Again, since the Democrats can’t sell Hillary, their only recourse is to demonize Donald Trump and hope enough of it sticks thanks to constant repetition on the media they control.
The choice of Martha Raddatz for Morrell’s interview is no coincidence. She’ll be ‘moderating’ the 2nd presidential debate and rest assured, this will be her attack line, to ignore Clinton’s serious foreign policy errors and national security breaches and concentrate on ‘Trump, the Russian agent.’
Continue reading Obama’s CIA Head Lies, Endorses Clinton, Shows How Trump Will Be Attacked At Debates
. . . → Read More: Obama’s CIA Head Lies, Endorses Clinton, Shows How Trump Will Be Attacked At Debates
Bashar al-Assad interview with France2
by Bashar al-Assad
The Endrun Project: Syria: President Bashar al-Assad meets with Turkish Press
The Endrun Project: Crisis’ by design* Perception deception in treacherous times
The Endrun Project: Israel 2015: On the precipice – Prelude to WWIII
The Endrun Project: Israel 2015: Where things go wrong
The Endrun Project: 2015 The Perfect Storm – Wars and Rumors of Wars Economic Crisis by Design
The Endrun Project: High Stakes Global Chess – Putin vs Bilderberg and the New World Order
Given current events in Syria, understanding the thought processes of key players from their own words trumps the analysis of ‘pundits’ in my opinion. ‘Pundits’ aren’t there to begin with.
Currently, ‘According to the Jeddah-based ‘Okaz’ daily newspaper, Syria’s Intelligence services have alerted various Alawite families to arrive in Latakia within 48 hours.
A report in the Saudi newspaper Okaz on Sunday quoted Lebanese Social Affairs Minister Rashid Derbas denying an article in the same paper a day earlier quoting unnamed sources claiming that Syrian intelligence told the elite Alawite families to leave the capital within 48 hours for its coastal stronghold of Latakia.’ Jerusalem Post 05/03/2015
Much of what we hear and know comes from the Western media. Then again, much of what people hear and share is what they want to hear.
This interview was given before the most recent ‘rumors’ circulating from Saudi Arabia.
Another Provided by the Syrian Presidency was given by Charlie Rose on March 15.
Assad speaks excellent and eloquent English. Hearing from the ‘horse’s mouth soars above trying to understand reality through celebrity pundits every time.
Something big is coming up in Syria. Prophesy says Damascus will be vaporized and never rebuilt.
What is to come, will affect all of Humanity. It might be wise to leave Damascus as rumored.
Bashar al-Assad interview with France2
David Pujadas: Good evening, Mr. President, I’d like to start straight forward. For most French, you are in a very large part responsible for the chaos going on in Syria, because of the brutality of the repression during the last four years. According to you, what is your part of responsibility?
Bashar al-Assad:Actually, since the first few weeks of the conflict, the terrorists infiltrated the situation in Syria with the support of Western countries and regional countries, and they started attacking the civilians and destroying public places, public properties and private properties, and that’s documented on the internet, by them, not by us. So, our role as government is to defend our society and our citizens. If you want to say what you said is correct after four years, how could a government or president that’s been brutal with his population, killing them, and with the support from the other side of the greatest countries and political powers in the world, with the petrodollars in our region… how could he withstand for four years? Is it possible to have the support of your public while you are brutal with your public?
David Pujadas: In the beginning, there were tens of thousands of people in the street. Were they all jihadists?
Bashar al-Assad: No, definitely not. But the other question is, if in the sixth day of the conflict, the first Syrian policeman was killed… how? By the peaceful demonstration? By the audio waves of the demonstrators? How? He’s been killed by terrorists. Somebody who took a gun and shot that policeman, so he’s a terrorist. It doesn’t matter if he’s a jihadist or not, because he killed a policeman.
David Pujadas: There were perhaps jihadists or terrorists, but our reporters were there at the beginning and they met a lot of people saying “we want more freedom, more democracy.” They weren’t terrorists or jihadists.
Bashar al-Assad: Definitely, everybody has the right to ask for his freedom, and every government should support freedom, of course, under the constitution. But does freedom mean to kill the civilians, to kill policemen, to destroy the schools, the hospitals, the electricity, the infrastructure? That’s not owned by the government; it’s owned by the Syrian people. It’s not owned by us, it’s not owned by me. Is that the freedom that you’re talking about?
David Pujadas: A lot of analysts and a lot of journalists say that you have helped ISIS to emerge, because it’s an opportunity for you to appear like a shield.
Bashar al-Assad: But ISIS was created in Iraq in 2006 under the supervision of the Americans. I’m not in Iraq and I wasn’t in Iraq. I wasn’t controlling Iraq. The Americans controlled Iraq, and ISIS came from Iraq to Syria, because chaos is contagious. When you have chaos at your neighborhood, you have to expect it in your area.
David Pujadas: But the word ISIS at the beginning…
Bashar al-Assad: Let me continue. Whenever you have chaos in a certain country, this is a fertile soil for the terrorists to come. So, when there is chaos in Syria, ISIS came to Syria. Before ISIS came al-Nusra Front, which is al-Qaeda, and before that you had the Muslim Brotherhood. They all represent the same grassroots for ISIS to come later.
David Pujadas: So you have no responsibility at all for what happened since the last years in Syria?
Bashar al-Assad:Normally, things are not absolute. To have no responsibility is not precise, because everybody has a responsibility. We have our own problems in Syria. The government is responsible, every one of us is responsible, every Syrian citizen is responsible, but now I’m talking about what brought ISIS here: the chaos, and your government, the government – or if you want to call it regime – the French regime, as they call us, is responsible for supporting those jihadists that they called moderate opposition.
David Pujadas: France is supporting a coalition, national Syrian coalition. Are they terrorists?
Bashar al-Assad: The people who are supported now, who have Western armaments, they became ISIS, they were supported by your state, and by other Western states, by armaments, and that was announced by your Defense Minister. He announced it at the beginning of this year; he said we sent armaments. So, those people you called moderate, in 2012 before the rise of ISIS and before the West acknowledged the existence of al-Qaeda faction which is al-Nusra, they published videos where they eat the heart of a Syrian soldier, where they dismember other victims, and where they behead others. They published it, we didn’t. So, how can you ignore this reality that they want to publish it, and tell you this is the fact?
David Pujadas: Let’s talk about the present. It appears that the Syrian army continues to utilize indiscriminate weapons like barrel bombs, which have devastating effects on civilians. Why don’t you change this strategy?
Bashar al-Assad: We never heard in our army of indiscriminate killing weapons, because no army, including our army, will accept to use weaponry that doesn’t aim, because it will be of no use. You can’t use it, I mean from a military point of view. This is first. Second, when you want to talk about indiscriminate killing, it’s not about the weapon; it’s about the way you use it, and the proof of that is the drones, the American drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan, they killed more civilians than terrorists. They are the highest precision weapon in the world. So, it’s not about the kind of bomb. We have regular bombs, regular armaments.
David Pujadas: You don’t use barrel bombs?
Bashar al-Assad: What is a barrel bomb? Can you tell me what it is?
David Pujadas: There are several documents, videos, and photographs like this, where you see a barrel bomb dropped by helicopters. This is Aleppo, this is Hama a few months ago, one year ago. Only Syrian army has helicopters, so what can you answer?
Bashar al-Assad: This is not proof. These are two pictures of two things. No one can link them to each other.
David Pujadas: Aleppo, Hama.
Bashar al-Assad: No, no. This picture that you mentioned here, what is it? I have never seen such a thing in our army. I’m not talking about the helicopters, I’m talking about two pictures. How can you relate between the two?
David Pujadas: You say it’s a fake? It’s a false document?
Bashar al-Assad: No, no, it has to be verified, but in our army we only use regular bombs that could be aimed. So, we don’t have any armament that could be shelled indiscriminately. That’s it.
David Pujadas: But this helicopter, only the Syrian army has helicopters.
Bashar al-Assad: Yes, of course, I didn’t say we didn’t have helicopters, that we don’t use it. I’m talking about the armaments. They aim to target the terrorists. Why to kill indiscriminately? Why to kill the civilians? The war in Syria is about winning the hearts of the people, it’s not about killing people. If you kill people, you cannot be in your position, as a government, or as president. It’s impossible.
David Pujadas: What about chemical weapons? You committed two years ago not to use chemical weapons. Did you use chlorine gas in the battle of Idleb last month?
Bashar al-Assad: No, this is another fake narrative by the Western governments. Why? Because we have two factories of chlorine. One of them is closed for a few years now, it’s not used anyway, and the other one is in the northern part in Syria, which is the most important factory than the first one. It’s on the Turkish border, it’s under the control of the terrorists for two years, and we sent formal documents to the United Nations regarding that factory. They wanted to come and they sent us a formal response, they couldn’t reach it. So, the chlorine in Syria is under the control of the rebels. This is first. Second, this is not a WMD, it’s not a weapon of mass destruction. The regular armaments that we have are more influential than chlorine, so we don’t need it anyway.
David Pujadas: But there are investigations, you must have seen that, from HRW, about last month in Idleb. Three attacks with chlorine smell, with symptoms consistent with exposure to toxic gas, that is what was concluded this investigation. These three attacks took place in territory controlled by armed opposition groups. HRW, are they liars?
Bashar al-Assad: We didn’t use it. We don’t need to use it. We have our regular armaments, and we could achieve our goals without it. So, we don’t use it. No, there’s no proof.
David Pujadas: There are witnesses, there are testimonies of doctors.
Bashar al-Assad: No, no. We ask, in every allegation regarding the chemical weapons in the past, in the present, we were the party who asked the international institutions to send delegations for investigations. We are, not the opposite, actually. And our soldiers were exposed to sarin gas two years ago, and we invited the United Nations to make investigations. How could we invite them while we are using them? That’s neither true nor reasonable.
David Pujadas: Are you ready to invite them again, on Idleb?
Bashar al-Assad: We already did. We always invite. We don’t have a problem with that.
David Pujadas: Now, an international coalition led by the U.S. is bombing ISIS from the air. Is it a problem for you, or is it help for you?
Bashar al-Assad: It’s neither, none of them. Because it’s not a problem of course if you attack terrorists, but at the same time, if you’re not serious, you don’t help us.
David Pujadas: Why not serious?
Bashar al-Assad: If you want to make a comparison between the number of air raids of the coalition of 60 countries, while we are one country, a small country, what we do is tenfold, sometimes, than what they do in one day. IS that serious? It took them to liberate what they call in the media Kobani city, on the Turkish borders, it took them four months to liberate it, in spite of having Syrian fighters on the ground. So, they’re not serious so far. And the other proof is that ISIS has expanded in Syria, in Iraq, in Libya, in the region in general. So, how can you say that it was effective? They’re not serious, that’s why they don’t make any help to anyone in this region.
David Pujadas: There have been thousands of strikes of coalition in the beginning, but France only is striking in Iraq. Would you like France to join the coalition to strike in Syria?
Bashar al-Assad: As I said, they’re not serious anyway. The coalition against terrorism cannot be formed by countries who support the terrorists at the same time, so we don’t care whether they attack it in Syria, or Iraq, or both, as long as they support the same terrorists at the same time. They send weapons to the same terrorists under the title of moderate opposition when Obama said it’s elusive, so the armaments will actually go to whom? To the terrorists. So, this is contradiction. It doesn’t work.
David Pujadas: You have the same enemy with France: ISIS. There have been attacks in France in January. For that moment, did your intelligence service have contact with French intelligence services?
Bashar al-Assad: There are some contacts, but there’s no cooperation.
David Pujadas: What do you mean by contacts?
Bashar al-Assad: We met with them, we met with some of your security officials, but there’s no cooperation.
David Pujadas: No exchange of information?
Bashar al-Assad: No, nothing at all.
David Pujadas: So, why did you meet them?
Bashar al-Assad: They came to Syria, we didn’t go to France. They came, maybe for some exchange of information, but when you want to have this kind of cooperation, it’s a two-directions way, so it’s about we help them, they help us. Now, according to the reality that’s related to your politics or to the policy of the French government, we should help them, while they support the terrorists and kill our people, so it doesn’t work.
David Pujadas: Did France ask for contact with your intelligence services?
Bashar al-Assad: Yes, we met with them. There was a meeting with them.
David Pujadas: It was France asking?
Bashar al-Assad: Yes. We don’t have anything to ask from the French intelligence. We have all the information about the terrorists.
David Pujadas: There are hundreds of French fighting with ISIS in Syria. Did you arrest some of them? Are there some French people from ISIS now in Syrian jails?
Bashar al-Assad: No, in the prisons we don’t have any of them, we only have information, because the majority of those jihadists, they come here to fight and to die and to go to Heaven, that’s their ideology. So they’re not ready to go to any prison.
David Pujadas: So, there are none in jail?
Bashar al-Assad: No, in jail we don’t have any of them.
David Pujadas: There are some people nowadays in France, some politicians, some MPs, you have received some of them these last days, they say that it’s time to dialogue with you. What initiative would you be ready to take to convince the others that you can become a partner for dialogue?
Bashar al-Assad: With them?
David Pujadas: With France.
Bashar al-Assad: They have to convince me first, that they don’t support terrorists that they are not involved in the blood shedding of the Syrian people first. They made the mistake regarding Syria, we didn’t kill any French or European people. We didn’t help terrorists in your country. We didn’t help the Charlie Hebdo. You helped the terrorists, so your country, Western officials, should convince us that they don’t support terrorists. But we are ready for any dialogue, taking into consideration that it’s going to be for the interest of the Syrian citizens.
David Pujadas: So at this moment, you are not interested in dialogue with France.
Bashar al-Assad: No, we are always interested in dialogue with anyone, but that is based on the policy. How can we make dialogue with a regime that supports terrorists in our country, and what for? That’s the question. When they change their policy, we’ll be ready to make dialogue, but without that policy, there’s no aim for the dialogue. You don’t make dialogue for the sake of dialogue; you make it in order to reach certain results, and that result for me is for this government to stop supporting the terrorists in my country.
David Pujadas: So, you would have no message to send to Francois Hollande in the objective of dialogue?
Bashar al-Assad: I think the main message that should be sent to him is by the French people, and the poll in France will tell you what message Hollande should listen to, which is, as the most unpopular president in the history of France since the 50s, should take care of his population and prevent terrorists from coming to France. For me, as somebody who suffering with his citizens, with the other citizens in Syria, from terrorists, I think the most important message is what you’ve been seeing in France is only the tip of the iceberg. When you talk about terrorism, you have a full mountain under the sea. Be aware of this mountain that will inflict your society.
David Pujadas: When John Kerry, the United States, said perhaps we will have dialogue with Mr. Bashar Assad, with President Assad, after he came back to another position, but you said ok, these are words, I want acts, I’m ready for dialogue. So, you are ready for dialogue?
Bashar al-Assad: Of course, we are ready. I said we are ready, with every country in this world, including the great powers in the world, including France. But I said dialogue should be based on a certain policy. The spearhead against Syria, the spearhead that supports terrorism in Syria, was first France, second UK, not the US this time. Obama acknowledged that the moderate opposition is illusive.. he said that it is fantasy.
David Pujadas: He said it’s a phantasm to think that we could arm them and they could win the war, but he didn’t say there were no moderate opposition.
Bashar al-Assad: Exactly. What’s the meaning of “we could arm them and they couldn’t win the war?” What does it mean? What does fantasy mean? They said they’re going to arm the moderate opposition. Can you tell me what is it, where it is? We don’t see it. We live in Syria, you live in France. I live here, I don’t find it to fight it, if we have to fight it. We don’t find it.
David Pujadas: You say there are foreign countries, too much foreign countries, involved in the Syria conflict, but without Iranian support, without Hezbollah support, would you be able to fight against terrorism now? I mean, you denounced that foreign countries are involved in Syria, but on your part there is Iranian and Hezbollah support for you.
Bashar al-Assad: There’s a big difference between intervention and invitation. Every country, every government in the world, every state, has the right to invite any other country or party or organization to help in any domain, while no country has the right to intervene without invitation. So, we invited Hezbollah. We didn’t invite the Iranians, they’re not here, they didn’t send any troops.
David Pujadas: There are no Iranians here fighting with you?
Bashar al-Assad: No, no, they don’t fight. We have regular relations with Iran for more than three decades. We have commanders, officers coming and going between the two countries based on the cooperation that existed between us for a long time. This is different from fighting. So, we as a government have the right to have such kind of cooperation, but France and other countries don’t have the right to support anyone within our country. This is a breach of the international law, this is a breach of our sovereignty, this a breach of the values that they’ve been proudly talking about – or allegedly some of them talk about – for decades now, maybe for centuries. One of these values is democracy. Is it democracy to send armaments to terrorists? To support rebels? Do I have the right to support the terrorists of Charlie Hebdo or something similar?
David Pujadas: You know what the French Prime Minister said recently about you. He said “he’s a butcher.” What’s your response?
Bashar al-Assad: First of all, let me be frank with you. The statements of the officials in France, no-one is taking them seriously now, for one reason: because France is a satellite somehow to the American policy in the region. It’s not independent, it doesn’t have the weight, it doesn’t have the credibility. This is first. Second, as an official, you always care about the opinion of the population and Syrain citizens. I’m not made in France or any other country. I’m here because of the Syrian citizens, and that’s what you have to take care of.
David Pujadas: Do you think, one day, you will win this war, and that everybody, everything will go on like before, and Syria will go like before, with nothing changed?
Bashar al-Assad: No, nothing should be as before, because you make things as before means you didn’t develop, you didn’t learn from the conflict. This conflict has many lessons. We have to learn from the lessons, and we have to make things not like before, but better, and there’s a big difference.
David Pujadas: And with Bashar Assad ruling Syria?
Bashar al-Assad: I don’t care about this. I care about what the Syrian people want. If they want Bashar al-Assad, he will stay. If they don’t want him, he has to leave right now. I mean, how can he govern without the support of his public? Can he? He cannot.
David Pujadas: How can you know that you have the support of your population?
Bashar al-Assad: First of all, when you don’t have support, they won’t support the army, you will not withstand for four years. How can you withstand without their support?
David Pujadas: Perhaps they’re scared.
Bashar al-Assad: They are 23 millions. How can 23 millions be scared of one person, or one intelligence, or one government? That’s not realistic, not rational.
David Pujadas: You think it’s democracy now in Syria? You think people can really say what they think?
Bashar al-Assad: No, we were on the way to democracy, it’s a process, it’s a long way. There’s no place you reach it, you say this is democracy. If you want to compare me to the West, to France, and other countries, no, you are much ahead of us, definitely, because of your history and because of many other circumstances and factors. If you want to compare me to your closest friend, Saudi Arabia, of course we are democratic. So, it depends on how you compare me.
David Pujadas: If you were convinced that leaving the power would mean peace for Syria, would you do it?
Bashar al-Assad: Without hesitation. If that were the case, without hesitation, I would leave of course. If I’m the reason of conflict in my country, I shouldn’t be here. That’s self-evident.
David Pujadas: I wanted to show you another photograph. This is Gilles Jacquier. He was a journalist in our channel, France 2. He was killed here in Syria 3 years ago. You had promised an investigation about that to know who killed him. What can you tell us about this investigation today?
Bashar al-Assad: Regardless of the allegations at that time that we killed him, he was in a residential area under the control of the government, and he was killed by a mortar, not by a bullet, so the self-evident thing is that the government wouldn’t shell itself or the residential area of its supporters by mortars. So, it’s very clear, everybody knows, and many French media at the time acknowledged that he was killed by a mortar that was shelled by what you call the opposition, actually they are terrorists. So, he was definitely killed by them, but if you want to about – are you asking about the investigation?
David Pujadas: Yes. There has been an investigation? Would you give the result of this investigation you have to prove for French justice?
Bashar al-Assad: No, we don’t have to prove. We have legal procedures, and whenever we have any crime in Syria, we follow these procedures, like any other country. You have a judicial system in Syria, you have regular procedures; so if you want to know about the details, after this interview you can be referred to the involved or interested institution.
David Pujadas: And you would ok to give this information to French justice?
Bashar al-Assad: Of course, we don’t have any problem.
David Pujadas: If French justice would like to send investigators here, policemen, judge, would you be willing to?
Bashar al-Assad: That depends on the agreement between the two governments, if you have agreement or, let’s say, a treaty or such a thing, regarding the judicial systems in the two countries and the cooperation between these two systems, we don’t have a problem, but it’s not a political decision.
David Pujadas: Thank you, Mr. President.
Bashar al-Assad: Thank you for coming.
Continue reading Bashar al-Assad interview with France2
. . . → Read More: Bashar al-Assad interview with France2
The Democrat-dominated Senate Intelligence committee finally made public its report on the CIA’s interrogation policy during the Bush years. There was no credible reason to make the report public,since the Justice Department has already investigated this not once but twice and failed to file any charges.
These incidents of enhanced interrogation – which hardly constitute torture in any case,given the circumstances – occurred over a decade ago. members of America’s security establishment including Democrats Leon Panetta and former CIA Director George Tenet were emphatic in their opposition to this report being released publicly because of the danger to national security, providing what amounted to a primer for jihadis in what to expect from American interrogators and what to claim was done to them in the future, and the endangerment of personnel serving overseas as well as to American prisoners in and the hands of Islamic State and elsewhere. As Colonel Ralph Peters and others put it, it amounted to aid and comfort to America’s enemies..or would if we were actually in a declared war.
So why release this publicly now? Simple, really. It accomplishes two things. First it provides political cover for Democrats who were fully briefed about the enhanced interrogation techniques at the time and is and who now claim they knew nothing, particularly Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, wielding the gavel for the last time and Senator Jay D. Rockefeller IV from West Virginia who is now leaving the senate. The second reason is score settling with the CIA, and crippling it so that it no longer can function. The rest of the Democrats on the committee are either lame ducks on their way out who no longer care or hard edged members of the Left like Ron Wyden and Barbara Mikulski, who have always hated the CIA as a matter of principle.
Rockefeller has been known to try this sort of thing before, and as it happens, there’s a clear record he was fully briefed on all of this at the time. Senator Feinstein’s record of selective memory on these sorts of things is almost as laughable as her California colleague Nancy Pelosi’s.
None of the Republicans on the committee participated in this dangerous nonsense and exercise in political thuggery,not even Susan Collins. This committee report was exclusively a Democrat project.
NBC’s chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel was fairly blunt about this, to the point where I’m surprised it got on the air:
I think this is really about changing the narrative of American history. This process went on, it was a brutal process. It was legal at the time, whether it should have been legal or not, I think, is highly debatable. It was legal at the time. The CIA was asked to do it. The CIA was passing on its intelligence to the President. So everyone in the world knew what was going on, including by the way, the Senate, which is now pretending to be a bit of a babe in the woods. They knew what was going on at the time and in many cases were quite happy with the intelligence they were getting.
I think this is about rewriting the narrative of history. When we look back, how are we going to remember the period? Are we going to remember a period in which the rogue evil CIA was beating people, in some cases to death, and the politicians didn’t know about it? Or are we going to look back and say the politicians were plenty aware of this, the CIA beat people to death, and then Senate tried to come out and say, “Well, you know, we didn’t know anything about it,” and trying to wash their hands of the situation? And to be honest, I think it’s a little bit of the latter.
Not only that,but a bi-partisan group of former CIA heads and intelligence personnel, in anticipation of this nonsense have actually put together a response and a website to give a true picture of what actually went on, and to rebut the more egregious of the report’s accusations.
The allegations themselves? That in order to save American lives our CIA interrogators and others (of course, the report only mentions and attacks the CIA)waterboarded known terrorists, kept them in stress positions for long periods of time, subjected them to sleep deprivation, and at times allegedly threatened their loved ones to induce them to give intelligence on what were imminent threats to American lives.
Oh, the humanity!
I’ve actually explored the subject of torture before, back when Attorney General Eric Holder released the so-called ‘torture memos’ which came to nothing except to seriously lower the morale and efficiency of the men tasked with interrogating America’s enemies, and to inform al-Qaeda and other jihadis about our interrogation techniques and the limits placed on our interrogators:
The problem with most physical torture is that it can be incredibly inefficient much of the time. Given an individual with a sufficiently strong will, it can take hours, days, months or even years to accomplish the desired end.
Combining the administration of drugs like sodium penathol, baradanga, and sodium amytal with a skilled interrogator is normally quicker, more efficient and easier on the basement janitorial crew afterwards. It also eliminates the nasty problem of false confessions and information that sometimes tends to go with the territory when you get your answers by using an electric drill on somebody’s hands. However, there’s no doubt that waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques can work quite well, especially when a threat is imminent and time is of the essence. And they’re useful tools as psychological threats to promote cooperation, even if the techniques themselves aren’t used.
I’ll even go a step further and let you know that if I thought a jihadi had knowledge of an imminent attack (which turned out to be the case with Khalid Sheik Mohammed and probably with others)and were in a position to make the call, I’d have done exactly the same thing and perhaps even gone a bit further. American lives matter to paraphrase a popular slogan these days.
When I wrote this 5 years ago, I suggested that what was really needed was a covert, clear policy that could be invoked in situations when information is needed quickly and American lives are at stake as well as other non-violent but effective techniques that could be used in such cases.
Of course, this being the era of Obama, nothing like that has even been considered, let alone implemented.
For now, this sordid attempt at revisionism and political kabuki theater will of course be front page news,pushed by the usual suspects. Of course, none of those usual suspects is going to blame these senators and their accomplices – I can think of no more appropriate word – when and if we get hit with a major terrorist strike in the future.
Or make the connection that it happened because we missed out on operational intel because our CIA was handcuffed in how if gathered that information or because our interrogators were too intimidated to question jihadis in custody with sufficient vigor.
UPDATE: The committees Republicans were unanimous is disputing this report’s findings. In fact, they have filed a minority rebuttal disputing it in detail.
Continue reading The Real Torture Is The Lies,Selective Amnesia And Scramble For Political Cover
. . . → Read More: The Real Torture Is The Lies,Selective Amnesia And Scramble For Political Cover
Later today, the Senate Intelligence Committee will release a report on terrorist interrogations. It’s already being called the “Torture Report.” Retired CIA officer Jose Rodriguez wrote this op-ed to expose Dianne Feinstein’s and Nancy Pelosi’s dishonesty. Let’s start with this: According to news accounts of the report, Feinstein and her supporters will say that the […]
Continue reading Feinstein’s, Democrats’ dishonesty exposed
. . . → Read More: Feinstein’s, Democrats’ dishonesty exposed
Get Obama Toilet Paper For Your Christmas Giving List!During his interview with Bill O’Reilly, Leon Panetta opined that Obama has the intelligence and the courage to wage war against ISIS and that at some point he will!I disagree with the former Secret… . . . → Read More: Leon Panetta is wrong about Obama!
Who Then is Senator McCain?
Are Barack Obama and John McCain political opponents as they claim, or are they working together on the imperialist strategy of their country?
Everyone has noticed the contradiction of those who recently characterized the Islamic Emirate as “freedom fighters” in Syria and who are indignant today faced with its abuses in Iraq. But if that speech is incoherent in itself, it makes perfect sense in the strategic plan: the same individuals were to be presented as allies yesterday and must be as enemies today, even if they are still on orders from Washington. Thierry Meyssan reveals below US policy through the particular case of Senator John McCain, conductor of the “Arab Spring” and longtime partner of Caliph Ibrahim.
John McCain is known as the leader of the Republicans and unhappy 2008 US presidential candidate. This is, we will see, only the real part of his biography, which serves as a cover to conduct covert actions on behalf of his government.
When I was in Libya during the “Western”attack, I was able to view a report of the foreign intelligence services. It stated that, on February 4, 2011 in Cairo, NATO organized a meeting to launch the “Arab Spring” in Libya and Syria. According to this document, the meeting was chaired by John McCain. The report detailed the list of Libyan participants, whose delegation was led by the No. 2 man of the government of the day, Mahmoud Jibril, who abruptly switched sides at the entrance of the meeting to become the opposition leader in exile. I remember that, among the French delegates present, the report quoted Bernard-Henry Lévy, although officially he had never exercised functions within the French government. Many other personalities attended the symposium, including a large delegation of Syrians living abroad.
Emerging from the meeting, the mysterious Syrian Revolution 2011 Facebook account called for demonstrations outside the People’s Council (National Assembly) in Damascus on February 11. Although this Facebook account at the time claimed to have more than 40,000 followers, only a dozen people responded to its call before the flashes of photographers and hundreds of police. The demonstration dispersed peacefully and clashes only began more than a month later in Deraa. 
On February 16, 2011, a demonstration underway in Benghazi, in memory of members of the Islamic Fighting Group in Libya  massacred in 1996 in the Abu Selim prison, degenerated into shooting. The next day, a second event, this time in memory of those who died by attacking the Danish consulate during the Muhammad cartoons affair, also degenerated into shooting. At the same time, members of the Islamic Fighting Group in Libya ,coming from Egypt and coordinated by unidentified, hooded individuals, simultaneously attacked four military bases in four different cities. After three days of fighting and atrocities, the rebels launched the uprising of Cyrenaica against Tripolitania ; a terrorist attack that the western press falsely presented as a “democratic revolution” against “the regime” of Muammar el-Qaddafi.
On February 22nd, John McCain was in Lebanon. He met members of the Future Movement (the party of Saad Hariri) whom he charged to oversee the transfer of arms to Syria around the MP Okab Sakr . Then, leaving Beirut, he inspected the Syrian border and the selected villages including Ersal, which were used as a basis to back mercenaries in the war to come.
The meetings chaired by John McCain were clearly the trigger point for a long-prepared Washington plan; the plan that would have the UK and France attack Libya and Syria simultaneously, following the doctrine of “leadership from behind” and the annex of the Treaty of Lancaster House of November 2010. 
The Illegal Trip to Syria, April 2013
In May 2013, Senator John McCain made his way illegally to near Idleb in Syria via Turkey to meet with leaders of the “armed opposition”. His trip was not made public until his return to Washington. [6
This movement was organized by the Syrian Emergency Task Force, which, contrary to its title, is a Zionist Organization led by a Palestinian employee of AIPAC 
John McCain in Syria. In the foreground at right is the director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force. In the doorway, center, Mohammad Nour.
In photographs released at that time, one noticed the presence of Mohammad Nour, a spokesman for the Northern Storm Brigade (of the Al-Nosra Front, that is to say, al-Qaeda in Syria), who kidnapped and held 11 Lebanese Shiite pilgrims in Azaz.  Asked about his proximity to al-Qaeda kidnappers, the Senator claimed not to know Mohammad Nour who would have invited himself into this photo.
The affair made a great noise and the families of the abducted pilgrims lodged a complaint before the Lebanese judiciary against Senator McCain for complicity in kidnapping. Ultimately, an agreement was reached and the pilgrims were released.
Let’s suppose that Senator McCain had told the truth and that he was abused by Mohammad Nour. The object of his illegal trip to Syria was to meet the chiefs of staff of the Free Syrian Army. According to him, the organization was composed “exclusively of Syrians” fighting for “their freedom” against the “Alouite dictatorship” (sic). The tour organizers published this photograph to attest to the meeting.
John McCain and the heads of the Free Syrian Army. In the left foreground, Ibrahim al-Badri, with which the Senator is talking. Next, Brigadier General Salim Idris (with glasses).
If we can see Brigadier General Idriss Salem, head of the Free Syrian Army, one can also see Ibrahim al-Badri (foreground on the left) with whom the senator is talking. Back from the surprise trip, John McCain claimed that all those responsible for the Free Syrian Army were “moderates who can be trusted” (sic).
However, since October 4, 2011, Ibrahim al-Badri (also known as Abu Du’a) was on the list of the five terrorists most wanted by the United States (Rewards for Justice). A premium of up to $ 10 million was offered to anyone who would assist in his capture. [9
] The next day, October 5, 2011, Ibrahim al-Badri was included in the list of the Sanctions Committee of the UN as a member of Al Qaeda. [10
In addition, a month before receiving Senator McCain, Ibrahim al-Badri, known under his nom de guerre as Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, created the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ÉIIL) – all the while still belonging to the staff of the very “moderate” Free Syrian Army. He claimed as his own the attack on the Taj and Abu Ghraib prisons in Iraq, from which he helped between 500 and 1,000 jihadists escape who then joined his organization. This attack was coordinated with other almost simultaneous operations in eight other countries. Each time, the escapees joined the jihadist organizations fighting in Syria. This case is so strange that Interpol issued a note and requested the assistance of the 190 member countries. 
For my part, I have always said that there was no difference on the ground between the Free Syrian Army, Al-Nosra Front, the Islamic Emirate etc … All these organizations are composed of the same individuals who continuously change flag. When they pose as the Free Syrian Army, they fly the flag of French colonization and speak only of overthrowing the “dog Bashar.” When they say they belong to Al-Nosra Front, they carry the flag of al Qaeda and declare their intention to spread Islam in the world. Finally when they say they are the Islamic Emirate, they brandish the flag of the Caliphate and announce that they will clean the area of all infidels. But whatever the label, they proceed to the same abuses: rape, torture, beheadings, crucifixions.
Yet neither Senator McCain nor his companions of the Syrian Emergency Task Force provided the information in their possession on Ibrahim al-Badri to the State Department, nor have they asked for the reward. Nor have they informed the anti-terrorism Committee of the UN.
In no country in the world, regardless of their political system, would one accept that the opposition leader be in direct contact, and publicly friendly, with a very dangerous wanted terrorist.
Who Then is Senator McCain?
But John McCain is not just the leader of the political opposition to President Obama, he is also one of his senior officials!
He is in fact President of the International Republican Institute (IRI), the republican branch of NED / CIA , since January 1993. This so-called “NGO” was officially established by President Ronald Reagan to extend certain activities of the CIA, in connection with the British, Canadian and Australian secret services. Contrary to its claims, it is indeed an inter-governmental agency. Its budget is approved by Congress in a budget line dependent of the Secretary of State.
It is also because it is a joint agency of the Anglo-Saxon secret services that several states in the world prohibit it from any activity on their territory.
Accused of plotting the overthrow of President Hosni Mubarak for the Muslim Brotherhood, the two employees of the International Republican Institute (IRI) in Cairo, John Tomlaszewski (second right) and Sam LaHood (son of US-Lebanese, Ray LaHood, a democratic government Transportation Secretary) (second left) took refuge at the embassy of the United States.
Here they are along with Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham at the preparatory meeting of the “Arab Spring” in Libya and Syria. They would be released by Brother Mohamed Morsi when he became President.
The list of interventions by John McCain on behalf of the State Department is impressive. He participated in all the color revolutions of the last twenty years.
To take only a few examples, ever in the name of “democracy”, he prepared the failed coup against constitutional president Hugo Chávez in Venezuela,  the overthrow of constitutionally elected president Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti , the attempt to overthrow the constitutional President Mwai Kibaki in Kenya  and, more recently, the ousting of the constitutional president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych.
In any state in the world, when a citizen takes initiative to topple the regime of another State, he may be appreciated if successful and the new regime proves an ally, but he will be severely condemned when his initiatives have negative consequences for his own country. Now, Senator McCain never was harassed because of his anti-democratic actions in states where it has failed and who have turned against Washington. In Venezuela, for example. That is because, for the United States, John McCain is not a traitor, but an agent.
And an agent that has the best coverage imaginable: he is the official opponent of Barack Obama. As such, he can travel anywhere in the world (he is the most traveled US senator) and meet whoever he wants without fear. If his interlocutors approve Washington policy, he promised them to continue it, if they fight it, he hands over the responsibility to President Obama.
John McCain is known to have been a prisoner of war in Vietnam for five years, where he was tortured. He was involved in a program designed not to extract information but to instill speech. This was to transform his personality in order that he make statements against his own country. This program, studied based on the Korean experience for the Rand Corporation by Professor Albert D. Biderman, served as the basis for research at Guantánamo and elsewhere by Dr. Martin Seligman . Applied under George W. Bush to more than 80,000 prisoners, it has transformed many of them into real fighters serving Washington. John McCain, who had cracked in Vietnam, therefore understands. He knows how to unscrupulously manipulate jihadists.
What is the US strategy with the jihadists in the Levant?
In 1990, the United States decided to destroy its former Iraqi ally. Having suggested to President Saddam Hussein that they would consider the attack of Kuwait as an Iraqi internal affair, they used this attack as an excuse to mobilize a broad coalition against Iraq. However, because of the opposition of the USSR, they did not overthrow the regime, but were content to administer a no-fly zone.
In 2003, France’s opposition was not enough to offset the influence of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. The United States attacked the country again and this time overthrew President Hussein. Of course, John McCain was a major contributor to the Committee. After handing to a private company the care of plundering the country for a year , they tried to partition Iraq into three separate states, but had to give it up due to the resistance of the population. They tried again in 2007, around the Biden-Brownback resolution, but again failed.  Hence the current strategy that attempts to achieve this by means of a non-state actor: the Islamic Emirate.
The operation was planned well in advance, even before the meeting between John McCain and Ibrahim al-Badri. For example, internal correspondence from the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs, published by my friends James and Joanne Moriarty , shows that 5,000 jihadis were trained at the expense of Qatar in NATO’s Libya in 2012, and 2,5 million dollars was paid at the same time to the future Caliph.
In January of 2014, the Congress of the United States held a secret meeting at which it voted, in violation of international law, to approve funding for the Al-Nosra Front (Al-Qaeda) and the Islamic emirate in Iraq and the Levant until September 2014.  Although it is unclear precisely what was really agreed to during this meeting revealed by the British Reuters news agency , and no media US media dared bypass censorship, it is highly probable that the law includes a section on arming and training jihadists.
Proud of this US funding, Saudi Arabia has claimed on its public television channel, Al-Arabiya, that the Islamic Emirate was headed by Prince Abdul Rahman al-Faisal, brother of Prince Saud al Faisal (Foreign Minister) and Prince Turki al-Faisal (Saudi ambassador to the United States and the United Kingdom) .
The Islamic Emirate represents a new step in the world of mercenaries. Unlike jihadi groups who fought in Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Chechnya around Osama bin Laden, it does not constitute a residual force but actually an army in itself. Unlike previous groups in Iraq, Libya and Syria, around Prince Bandar bin Sultan, they have sophisticated communication services at their disposal for recruitment and civilian officials trained in large western schools capable of instantly taking over the administration of a territory.
Brand new Ukrainian weapons were purchased by Saudi Arabia and conveyed by the Turkish secret services who gave them to the Islamic Emirate. Final details were coordinated with the Barzani family at a meeting of jihadist groups in Amman on 1 June 2014.  The joint attack on Iraq by the Islamic Emirate and the Kurdistan Regional Government began four days later. The Islamic Emirate seized the Sunni part of the country, while the Kurdistan Regional Government increased its territory by over 40%. Fleeing the atrocities of jihadists, religious minorities left the Sunni area, paving the way for the three-way partition of the country.
Violating the Iraqi-US Defense agreement, the Pentagon did not intervene and allowed the Islamic Emirate to continue its conquest and massacres. A month later, while the Kurdish Peshmerga Regional Government had retreated without a fight, and when the emotions of world public opinion became too strong, President Obama gave the order to bomb some positions of the Islamic Emirate. However, according to General William Mayville, director of operations at the headquarters, “These bombings are unlikely to affect the overall capacity of the Islamic Emirate and its activities in other areas of Iraq or Syria “.  Obviously, they are not meant to destroy the jihadist army, but only to ensure that each player does not overlap the territory that has been assigned. Moreover, for the moment, they are symbolic and have destroyed only a handful of vehicles. It was ultimately the intervention of the Kurds of the Turkish and Syrian Kurdish PKK which halted the progress of the Islamic Emirate and opened a corridor to allow civilians to escape the massacre.
Much disinformation is circulating about the Islamic Emirate and its caliph. The Gulf Daily News newspaper claimed that Edward Snowden had made revelations about it.  However, after verification, the former US spy published nothing about it. Gulf Daily News is published in Bahrain, a state occupied by Saudi troops. The article aims to clear only Saudi Arabia and Prince Abdul Rahman al-Faisal of their responsibilities.
The Islamic Emirate is comparable to the mercenary armies of the European sixteenth century. They were conducting religious wars on behalf of the lords who paid them, sometimes in one camp, sometimes in another. Caliph Ibrahim is a modern condottiere. Although he is under the orders of Prince Abdul Rahman (Member of Sudeiris clan), it would not be surprising if he continued his epic in Saudi Arabia (after a brief detour in Lebanon or Kuwait) and determine the Royal succession favoring the Sudeiris clan over Prince Mithab (son, not brother of King Abdullah).
The Islamic State in Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) – or simply, the Islamic State, as it now prefers to be called – is well on the road to achieving its end goal: the restoration of the caliphate in the territory it controls, under the authority of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, an Islamist militant leader since the early days of the American occupation of Iraq.
Ibrahim al-Badri, also known as Abu Du’a, also known as Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, aka Caliph Ibrahim, mercenary of Prince Abdul Rahman al-Faisal, funded by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United States. He can commit all the horrors that are forbidden to states by the Geneva Conventions.
Ibrahim Awwad Ibrahim Ali al-Badri has reinvented himself as “Caliph” Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. But the caliphate he has “restored” is a dystopian fantasy and illusion.
John McCain and the Caliph
In the latest issue of its magazine, the Islamic Emirate devoted two
pages to denounce Senator John McCain as “the enemy” and “double-crosser”, recalling his support for the US invasion of Iraq.
Lest this accusation remain unknown in the United States, Senator immediately issued a statement calling the Emirate the “most dangerous Islamist terrorist group in the world” .
This controversy is there only to distract the gallery. One would like to believe it … if it
weren’t for this photograph from May 2013.
by Thierry Meyssan
] We relayed press reports assuring that the demonstration in Deraa was a protest after the arrest and torture of students who tagged hostile slogans about the Republic. However, many colleagues have attempted to establish the identity of these students and meet their families. None was able to do so, the only witnesses who spoke did so for the British press, but anonymously, thus unverifiably. We are now convinced that this event never existed. The study of Syrian contemporary documents shows that the event was really about an increase in civil servants’ salaries and pensions. It obtained satisfaction from the government. At that point, no newspaper had mentioned these students, this story having been invented by Al-Jazeera
two weeks later.
] Report of the Fact Finding Mission on the current crisis in Libya
, June 2011.
] The Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999) October 15, 1999 is also known as the “Committee for sanctions against Al-Qaida.” Record registration Ibrahim al-Badri
(this time with the nom de guerre of al-Samarrai).
] « La balkanisation de l’Irak
» (“The Balkanization of Iraq”), par Manlio Dinucci, Traduction Marie-Ange Patrizio, Il Manifesto (Italie), Réseau Voltaire
, 17 juin 2014.
Concerning current events.
‘At some point, … it will be too late for effective political action. … there reaches a point where it won’t matter who’s president and it won’t matter how devoted the global community is …the damage will be out of control.
Whether you are a believer of Prophesy, agnostic, atheistic or indigenous and living off the land in a remote village …despite it all, just as earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, and the passing of night and day affect everyone regardless of who or what one’s ‘god’ or belief system may be …the significance of these prophetic pieces coming together now in the way they are provides an opportunity to rethink priorities and focus.
Watch out that no one deceives you! Matthew 24
Continue reading Who Then is Senator McCain?
. . . → Read More: Who Then is Senator McCain?
President Obama’s Memorial Day trip to Afghanistan was a well-executed propaganda coup, especially with the VA scandal still in the news.
And then somebody screwed up. Someone at the White House accidentally leaked the name of the CIA station chief in Kabul, Afghanistan on a list of people the president was going to meet with to some 6,000 members of the press, and there’s no telling whom it could have gone to from there.
This is dangerous not only for the individual involved, but for anyone he talks to, as this person’s movements are are likely one of a number of others being monitored by al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
Only NBC out of the three major alphabet networks even mentioned this story, although they found considerable air time to devote to stories on Michelle Obama’s school lunch program.
And as you’ll notice, the NBC reporter, Peter Alexander mentioned the leaking of part-time agent Valerie’s Plame’s identity by “Bush administration officials” and took care to equal the two.
Actually, there’s not much of a comparison except in one major detail…in both cases, it’s a felony. The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 makes revealing the name of a covert CIA agent a crime.
In the Plame outing,the story became a major firestorm and made national headlines after the late columnist Robert Novak published a piece revealing that revealing that prominent Democrat Iraq War critic Joseph C. Wilson’s wife Valerie Plame was a CIA employee. The dinosaur media were all over the story. A Special Counsel was appointed to investigate the leak, and charges of political retribution by the Bush White House over Wilson’s opinions on the Iraq War (and as it turned out later, his wholesale lies) were the story for months. Figures within the Bush administration including Karl Rove were targeted and investigated.
Eventually, Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff Scooter Libbey was charged, mostly because in the months between his first statements to the FBI and subsequent ones and his later testimony under oath some of his details weren’t correlated and didn’t match up. He became the Official Designated Victim,and got 30 months in federal prison, a fine of $250,000, and two years of supervised release, including 400 hours of community service. He was spared prison but remains a convicted felon because President Bush commuted only his 30-month prison sentence and left his conviction and the rest of his punishment intact.
And in the end, the person who gave Novak the leak was not a ‘Bush Administration official’ but Colin Powell’s deputy Richard Armitage, who readily admitted that he was the source but claimed he didn’t know Plame was covert. He,of course, was never punished, most likely because it would have reflected on Colin Powell, who sat back, said nothing and let Libbey take the rap.
Now as bad as releasing Valerie Plame’s name was, let’s remember that she was essentially a clerical employee who worked in Washington DC, not in Kabul, one of the most dangerous posts in the world. Yet there’s no media frenzy, no call to investigate Obama appointees in the White House, no calling for a special counsel, nothing.
It remains to be seen if members of Congress and the dinosaur media are going to go after this story, report indignantly about this latest example of the Obama White House’s sheer incompetence and insist that whomever leaked this CIA station head’s name be punished.
Continue reading Deadly Incompetence: White House Leaks Identity of CIA head Of Station For Afghanistan
. . . → Read More: Deadly Incompetence: White House Leaks Identity of CIA head Of Station For Afghanistan
According to top US intelligence officials, al-Qa’ida is morphing so it can fight other fights: “Is al Qaeda on the run and on the path to defeat?” Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-OK, asked in a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper responded, “No, it is morphing and and franchising itself […]
Continue reading al-Qa’ida morphing
. . . → Read More: al-Qa’ida morphing
Well America, I think its time we have that talk. It’s the one I told you we’d be having about six years ago. I wrote to you, I posted on Facebook and Twitter, and now here we are. I said, when the levy breaks and all the damage done by Democrats had come to […] . . . → Read More: When The Levy Breaks . . . → Read More: When The Levy Breaks
Grim, over at Blackfive has some thought on why the USG is doing intelligence the way they are. I agree with him, and find that very unsettling. If you are doing intelligence properly, you don’t need every TX call and e-mail for the last 10 years-you do it properly, you look around and talk to […] . . . → Read More: The Real Intelligence Scandals: Incompetent Bureaucracy . . . → Read More: The Real Intelligence Scandals: Incompetent Bureaucracy
“The art of war”
The Nobel Peace Laureat’s killer drones by Manlio Dinucci
By permission: Voltaire Network| Rome (Italy)
3 June 2013
Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama is going all out, but neither he nor any other President of the United States can promise the total defeat of terror, because “We will never erase the evil that lies in the hearts of some human beings.” He announced this in his speech on the “comprehensive counterterrorism strategy.” 
Despite the setbacks suffered by Al Qaeda and its affiliates, “the threat today is more diffuse,” from Yemen to Iraq, from Somalia to North Africa, and in countries like Libya and Syria. The extremists have gained “a foothold” following the “unrest in the Arab world” (and not as a consequence of the wars unleashed by the U.S. and NATO). The struggle of good against evil thus continues under the enlightened leadership of the President and under a new strategy definition: from “unlimited war on terror,” it switches to a series (in fact unlimited) of “targeted lethal actions” with the aim of “dismantling specific networks of violent extremists who threaten America” (the United States, translator’s note).
These actions will be increasingly deploying unmanned drones, whose use is “legal” according to the US and international law, given that the United States is leading a “just war of self-defense.” The use of drones helps to “save human lives“, as planes and missiles are less accurate and can cause a greater number of victims. Now, however, “targeted lethal action” carried out by drones and special forces “outside of war zones” will be subject to a “strong oversight“. But, Obama says, “we must keep information secret.” Thus, nobody will know what will be the actual use of drones and special forces.
The “strong oversight” announced by Obama has, in reality, the goal of transferring the control of “lethal, targeted actions” from the CIA to the Pentagon. In over a decade of “war on terror” it is essentially the CIA that has carried out these drone and secret agent operations not only in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also in Yemen, Somalia and many other countries not officially at war. However, through this arrangement the CIA took up too much space, encroaching upon the Pentagon’s turf. The Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations Command, which performs parallel actions to those of the CIA Command, now wants to have control over all drone operations towards which the CIA will contribute by identifying targets, both human and material. Shifting control into the hands of the Pentagon also applies to the upgrading of the drone fleet, with the goal of replacing remotely controlled drones with completely robotic ones.
On May 22, the day before Obama’s speech, Northrop Grumman performed the first flight of the MQ-4C Triton, which it is building for the U.S. Navy: the drone with a wingspan of 40 meters (greater than that of the Boeing 737 airliner), can fly without refueling for 30 hours over 18 000 km, identifying automatically through its sensor various types of ships and targets to hit. The U.S. Navy has ordered 68, part of which will surely be deployed to Sigonella or another base in Italy.
This same Northrop Grumman, six days before Obama’s speech, on the aircraft carrier George HW Bush, began “touch and go” maneuvers (landing and immediate takeoff) of the X-47B: a “smart” drone robot (as large as a F/A-18 Super Hornet) that, once launched, will independently reach and hit the target and return to the carrier.
Thus, the Nobel Peace Laureat will be able to continue “saving human lives.”
Voltaire Network| Rome (Italy) | 3 June 2013
We are on a Prophetic fast track. The train has already left the station. Its clean up time.
To understand why the articles below are frequented by governments, world leaders and global journalists, new readers, journalists, political or ‘religious’ ‘pundits’ are encouraged to set aside failing ‘conventional wisdom‘, read them and do your homework.
Contents are documented in context with current events, vetted sources and minimal speculation.
The ‘Endrun’ image represents the disparity being felt by so many people … especially the children who are witnessing events in America and the international community in which they have no voice or control of decisions that are destroying prospects and hope for a secure and prosperous future.
. . . → Read More: The Nobel Peace Laureat’s killer drones . . . → Read More: The Nobel Peace Laureat’s killer drones
This past week, lots of pundits from across the political spectrum have warned Republicans not to overreach on the AP story. They’re warning that this is a national security issue. That isn’t exactly accurate. It’s time to unravel the DOJ’s disgusting behavior. At the heart of the scandal is this statement from Attorney General Holder: […] . . . → Read More: Let’s unravel the AP scandal . . . → Read More: Let’s unravel the AP scandal
As I sit here today, watching Jay Carney talk around in circles, I am most stunned by the room full of “journalists,” all with college degrees, many from highly touted schools, like Harvard, Yale, Columbia and Northwestern, all of whom couldn’t ask a real question to save their lives. Journalism isn’t a science. […] . . . → Read More: Journalism In America . . . → Read More: Journalism In America