Leaked Email: Pentagon Admits Plan To Direct Terror Attacks Inside Syria

March 8, 2012

Info Wars

By Paul Joseph Watson

“The people of the earth want peace – the governments want war.”  –KTRN

A shocking email leaked as part of the Wikileaks Stratfor data dump reveals that the Pentagon is planning to direct terror attacks and assassinations inside Syria in a bid to topple President President Bashar al-Assad.

The email, written by Reva Bhalla, Stratfor’s Director of Analysis, contains details of a December 6 Pentagon meeting attended by members of the USAF strategic studies group along with four military officers at the Lieutenant Colonel level, “including one French and one British representative.”

Bhalla was told by the military officials that, despite official claims to the contrary, foreign troops from NATO powers were already on the ground in Syria.

“After a couple hours of talking, they said without saying that SOF teams (presumably from US, UK, France, Jordan, Turkey) are already on the ground focused on recce [reconnaissance] missions and training opposition forces,” states the email.

Bhalla goes on to describe how the mission of the undercover commandoes is hypothetically to “commit guerrilla attacks, assassination campaigns, try to break the back of the Alawite forces [Assad's support base], elicit collapse from within.”

In other words, the Pentagon, along with other NATO powers, have already directed Special Forces troops stationed inside Syria to carry out terrorist attacks and assassinations in an effort to topple President President Bashar al-Assad.

Click here for the full report.

China Increases Military Spending 11.2% in 2012

March 6, 2012

Activist Post

By Madison Ruppert

China has announced that they will be increasing their funding for the military by 11.2 percent in 2012 on top of the 12.7 percent increase in 2011.

This move seems to be quite obviously intended to act as a counterweight to the American military’s shift to focus on the Asia-Pacific region announced by President of the United States Barack Obama last year.

As I have repeatedly pointed out, this policy shift does not involve just the United States, but indeed is actually a global expansion of the U.S.-NATO military machine involving complex multilateral ties.

This would bring the total official spending on the People’s Liberation Army to 670.3 billion yuan, or around $110 billion, for this year, according to Reuters.

This announcement is China’s first military budget since Obama announced the new policy and when tensions are quite high in the South China Sea dispute. I have noted the antagonistic approach taken by the United States in this dispute multiple times now, and it only makes sense that China would seek to arm themselves more heavily.

I have posited that America might actually be trying to goad China in the dispute as they have ignored all of China’s reasonable requests. China has asked countries without a direct interest in the dispute to stop meddling, which is exactly what the United States is doing, but of course that has been ignored.

Numerous countries have maritime disputes with China and the United States has clearly chosen sides in the dispute, even arming some of the nations involved along with carrying out joint military exercises.

Click here for the full report.

Obama To Host G8 Summit In Camp David, Not Chicago

March 6, 2012

Raw Story

By Agence France-Presse

US President Barack Obama will host leaders of the G8 club of rich nations on May 18-19 at his Camp David retreat instead of in his hometown of Chicago, the White House said Monday.

Obama still plans to host NATO leaders and partners in Chicago on May 20-21 for a summit that is shaping up as crucial to plans to transition international forces out of Afghanistan.

The White House said in a statement that it had been decided to move the G8 summit to Camp David, which features plush cabins nestling in the Catoctin Mountains “to facilitate a free-flowing discussion with our close G8 partners.”

Click here for the full report from Raw Story

 

Preventing Protest: G8 Summit Moved From Chicago To Camp David

March 6, 2012

Activist Post

By Madison Ruppert

“It’s obvious that the government is scared of the people. They don’t want you protesting and speaking your mind.” –KTRN

President Barack Obama has moved the upcoming Group of Eight (G8) summit from the city of Chicago to Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland, just 62 miles away from Washington, D.C.

An aide for the president said that he has decided that he would prefer a more “intimate setting” for the meeting, although I think it is obvious that what he really wants to avoid is a large-scale protest.

According to the Chicago Tribune, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) summit in May is still going to be held in Chicago and I think it will likely draw some quite sizable demonstrations.

Even the Tribune has to take note of the fact that “Summits in large cities typically see clamorous protests,” and given the current situation around the world, it’s quite obvious that it would draw a crowd who isn’t all too happy about what these elites are doing.

“It’s not about Chicago being able to handle logistics, as evidenced by the fact that the NATO and ISAF meetings will be held there, which are far larger than the G8 meeting,” Caitlin Hayden, a spokesperson for the Obama administration’s National Security Council, said. “There are a lot of political, economic and security issues that come together at the G8.”

“This was really about the president looking for a more informal setting with these close partners,” she claimed.

Click here for the full report.

The New Cold War In The Middle East

February 29, 2012

The Independent

By Robert Fisk

If Iran obtains nuclear weapons capability, “I think other nations across the Middle East will want to develop nuclear weapons”.

Thus thundered our beloved Foreign Secretary, William Hague, in one of the silliest pronouncements he has ever made. Hague seems to spend much of his time impersonating himself, so I’m not really certain which of Mr Hague-Hague’s personas made this statement.

Flaw number one, of course, is Hague-Hague’s failure to point out that there already is another Middle East “nation” that has, in fact, several hundred nuclear weapons along with the missiles to fire them. It’s called Israel. But blow me down, Hague-Hague didn’t mention the fact. Didn’t he know? Of course, he did. What he was trying to say, you see, was that if Iran persisted in producing a nuclear weapon, Arab states – Muslim states – would want to acquire one. And that would never do. The idea, of course, that Iran might be pursuing nuclear weapons because Israel already possesses them, did not occur to him.

Now as a nation that sells billions of pounds worth of military hardware to Gulf Arab nations – on the basis that they can then defend themselves from Iran’s non-existent plans to invade them – Britain is really not in a position to warn anyone of arms proliferation in the region. I’ve been to the Gulf arms fairs where the Brits show alarming films of an “enemy” nation threatening the Arabs – Iran, of course – and the need for these Arab chappies to buy even more kit from British Aerospace and the rest of our merchants of death.

Then comes the historical killer in Hague-Hague’s peroration. He warns of “the most serious round of nuclear proliferation since nuclear weapons were invented” which could produce “the threat of a new Cold War in the Middle East” that would be “a disaster in world affairs”. Now, I know that Hague-Hague sits in the throne room of Balfour and Eden – both pseudo-experts on the Middle East – but does he really have to mess up history so badly? Surely the most serious round of nuclear proliferation occurred when India and Pakistan acquired the bomb, the latter a nation which is awash with al-Qa’ida chaps, home-grown Talibans and dodgy intelligence men.

Still, it was good to be reassured that “we are not favouring the idea of anybody attacking Iran at the moment”. Maybe later, then. Or maybe after President Assad eventually falls, thus depriving Iran of its only – and valuable – ally in the Middle East. Which is, I suspect, what a lot of the roaring and raging against Assad is all about. Get rid of Assad and you cut out part of Iran’s heart – though whether that will induce the crackpot Ahmadinejad to turn his nuclear plants into baby-milk factories is another matter. For here’s the rub. The mighty voices calling for Assad’s departure grow louder every time they refuse to involve themselves militarily in the overthrow of the same man. The more they promise not to “do a Nato” on Syria – every time they claim there can be no “no-fly” zones over Syria – they get angrier and angrier at Assad. Why doesn’t he just go off to retirement in Turkey, end the theatre once and for all, and stop embarrassing us all by bludgeoning his country with shells and sniper fire, killings thousands – journalists among them – while we rage on innocently from the stalls?

Click here for the full report from the Independent.

CIA-NATO Front Group Drafts “Humanitarian Aid” for Syria

February 24, 2012

Info Wars

By Kurt Nimmo

An effort to impose the sort of “humanitarian aid” on Syria that ultimately killed around 30,000 people in Libya is underway in Tunisia.

CNN reports that “world powers” – corrupt states belonging to the Arab League and ultimately members of the European Union – are “mapping out a plan to deliver humanitarian aid” in Syria under the banner of “Friends of Syria.”

On Thursday, Secretary of State Clinton gave her blessing to a move to arm the Syrian opposition. CNN attempted to soften the deadly impact of Clinton’s move to initiate a fresh round of terror and murder by stating that “the opposition will find willing sources to supply them with munitions to counter the Syrian government onslaught blamed for thousands of deaths.”

“There will be increasingly capable opposition forces,” Clinton hinted. “They will from somewhere, somehow, find the means to defend themselves as well as begin offensive measures.”

The latest “Arab Spring” effort to impose a new political order in Syria arrives after months of corporate media coverage portraying the al-Assad regime as murderous while ignoring reports of CIA and NATO snipers killing civilians.

An Arab League report issued earlier this month revealed that the Free Syria Army and other “armed opposition groups” are currently engaged in killing civilians and police and conducting terrorist attacks targeting innocent civilians.

Click here for the full report.

Is Western Democracy Real Or A Facade?

February 14, 2012

Info Wars

By Paul Craig Roberts

The United States government and its NATO puppets have been killing Muslim men, women and children for a decade in the name of bringing them democracy. But is the West itself a democracy?

Skeptics point out that President George W. Bush was put in office by the Supreme Court and that a number of other elections have been decided by electronic voting machines that leave no paper trail. Others note that elected officials represent the special interests that fund their campaigns and not the voters. The bailout of the banks arranged by Bush’s Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs chairman, Henry Paulson, and Washington’s failure to indict any banksters for the fraud that contributed to the financial crisis, are evidence in support of the view that the US government represents money and not the voters.

Recent events in Greece and Italy have created more skepticism of the West’s claim to be democratic. Two elected European prime ministers, George Papandreou of Greece and Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, were forced to resign over the sovereign debt issue. Not even Berlusconi, a billionaire who continues to lead the largest Italian political party, could stand up to the pressure brought by private bankers and unelected European Union officials.

Papandreou lasted only 10 days after announcing on October 31, 2011, that he would let the Greek voters decide in a referendum whether or not to accept the austerity being imposed on the Greek people from the outside. Austerity is the price charged by the EU for lending the Greek government the money to pay to the banks. In other words, the question was austerity or default. However, the question was decided without the participation of the Greek people.

Consequently, Greeks have taken to the streets. The conditions accompanying the latest tranche of the bailout have again brought large numbers of Greeks into the streets of Athens and other cities. Citizens are protesting a 20% cut both in the minimum wage and in pensions larger than 12,000 euros ($15,800) annually and more cuts in public sector jobs. Greek taxes were raised 2.3 billion euros last year and are scheduled to rise another 3.4 billion euros in 2013. The austerity is being imposed despite Greece’s unemployment rate of 21% overall and 48% for those under the age of 25.

One interpretation is that the banks, which were careless in their loans to governments, are forcing the people to save the banks from the consequences of their bad decisions.

Another interpretation is that the European Union is using the sovereign debt crisis to extend its power and control over the individual member states of the EU.

Click here for the full report from Info Wars

Is Western Democracy Real or a Facade?

February 14, 2012

Activist Post

By Paul Craig Roberts

The United States government and its NATO puppets have been killing Muslim men, women and children for a decade in the name of bringing them democracy. But is the West itself a democracy?

Skeptics point out that President George W. Bush was put in office by the Supreme Court and that a number of other elections have been decided by electronic voting machines that leave no paper trail. Others note that elected officials represent the special interests that fund their campaigns and not the voters. The bailout of the banks arranged by Bush’s Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs chairman, Henry Paulson, and Washington’s failure to indict any banksters for the fraud that contributed to the financial crisis, are evidence in support of the view that the US government represents money and not the voters.

Recent events in Greece and Italy have created more skepticism of the West’s claim to be democratic.

Two elected European prime ministers, George Papandreou of Greece and Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, were forced to resign over the sovereign debt issue. Not even Berlusconi, a billionaire who continues to lead the largest Italian political party, could stand up to the pressure brought by private bankers and unelected European Union officials.

Papandreou lasted only 10 days after announcing on October 31, 2011, that he would let the Greek voters decide in a referendum whether or not to accept the austerity being imposed on the Greek people from the outside. Austerity is the price charged by the EU for lending the Greek government the money to pay to the banks. In other words, the question was austerity or default. However, the question was decided without the participation of the Greek people.

Consequently, Greeks have taken to the streets. The conditions accompanying the latest tranche of the bailout have again brought large numbers of Greeks into the streets of Athens and other cities. Citizens are protesting a 20% cut both in the minimum wage and in pensions larger than 12,000 euros ($15,800) annually and more cuts in public sector jobs. Greek taxes were raised 2.3 billion euros last year and are scheduled to rise another 3.4 billion euros in 2013. The austerity is being imposed despite Greece’s unemployment rate of 21% overall and 48% for those under the age of 25.

One interpretation is that the banks, which were careless in their loans to governments, are forcing the people to save the banks from the consequences of their bad decisions.

Another interpretation is that the European Union is using the sovereign debt crisis to extend its power and control over the individual member states of the EU.

Click here for the full report.

U.S. and NATO Are On The March Worldwide

January 23, 2012

Activist Post

By Madison Ruppert

The global growth of the West and NATO is so complex and so far reaching that it is almost overwhelming.

However, I have been writing this series in an attempt to show my readers how many seemingly disconnected events are, in fact, highly connected and interrelated developments.

Without further ado, let’s jump right in and start examining some of the more important events which have transpired since the last part of this series.

Please do not forget to get yourself familiar with what is going on by reading parts one, two, and three. If I have missed anything I would appreciate you letting me know by emailing me directly at admin@endthelie.com.

Estonia
At a meeting with NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves discussed continuing long-term NATO air operations in the Baltics, saying, “We have clearly stated repeatedly that the air security mission is not only unavoidable in a military sense, but it also represents a good example of smart defense and an expression of NATO’s internal [solidarity] with respect to its member states,” according to Estonian World Review.

Ilves said that Estonia is considering raising their monetary support of NATO and therefore would be “entitled to expect support from its allies.”

Yet the strongest statement coming from Ilves was when he said, “Baltic air space is also NATO’s air space; it is NATO’s task to defend this air space. This can only be done by the fighters of NATO members [sic] states located in the Baltic states.”

Given the region’s strategic location relative to Russia, this statement is quite interesting, to say the least.

It seems that the Estonian president is eager to give up his nation’s sovereignty in exchange for a spot in the vicious NATO alliance, something which I find quite worrisome for the people of Estonia and the greater Baltics as a whole.

Click here for the full report.

US Long-Term Plan In Afghanistan Laid Bare

December 21, 2011

Info Wars

By Dr. Raja Muhammad Khan

Afghan people must have a realization that NATO and U.S have no love with them. In fact, their own strategic objectives compel them to remain stuck to Afghanistan and Pakistan for promoting a regional instability by promoting terrorism and internally destabilizing both countries as an excuse to continue their mission.

The final Communiqué of the Bonn Conference on Afghanistan-2011 supported the covert US plan for staying in Afghanistan beyond 2014. Earlier, during the Lisbon Summit-November 2011, the forty-eight member coalition agreed for a troop’s drawdown by December 2014. Pentagon had a reservation to this deadline, as expressed by its representative immediately after the Lisbon Summit. President Obama however had a different framework for the withdrawal of US troops, starting from July 2011. Nevertheless, his powerful Pentagon lobby resented his plan. The Pentagon indeed is the B team of the neoconservatives, aiming for a global domination and capturing the important natural sources worldwide.

The Bonn Communiqué says, both sides “solemnly dedicated themselves to deepening and broadening their historic partnership from Transition to the Transformation Decade of 2015-2024.” The Lisbon Summit of November 20, November 2010 has approved withdrawal of ISAF forces from Afghanistan by 2014, in the wordings, “The Alliance approved to end its combat mission in Afghanistan and hand over full sovereignty and security responsibility to Afghan forces.” Indeed, it has been seen since 2001, that US always lobby for keeping leverages for the further extension of any mission where it has long-term objectives fixed, until their attainment.

In Iraq, US has gained maximum through bilateral arrangement for a control on its hydrocarbons, therefore, decided to pull out its combat troops by December 31, 2011, as a ‘mission accomplished’, announced by President Obama. Besides, there is a substantial presence of US combat forces in other Middle Eastern countries to take care of its future interests. Furthermore, it has overthrown some of the anti-US regimes like Libyan leader Qadafi and indeed, looking for toppling many others likes Syria. U.S is carefully crafting a methodology for dealing with Iran, another anti US country in the region, in the garb of its nuclearization plan.

Click here for the full report.

« Previous Page — Next Page »