WikiLeaks: Oil Motivates U.S. Policy More than Fighting Terrorists - Nafeez Ahmed

ꕤ Article SOURCE alternet | here Wikileaks' Cables Suggests that Oil Motivates U.S. Policy More than Fighting Terrorists Cables released by Wikileaks demonstrate that control of the world's strategic energy reserves has always been a key factor in the direction of the "War on Terror". By Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed / Foreign Policy in Focus December 16, 2010 Among the batch of classified diplomatic cables recently released by the controversial whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks, several have highlighted the vast extent of the financial infrastructure of Islamist terrorism sponsored by key U.S. allies in the ongoing "War on Terror." One cable by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in December 2009 notes that “donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.” Despite this, “Riyadh has taken only limited action to disrupt fundraising for the UN 1267-listed Taliban and LeT [Lashkar e-Tayyiba] groups that are also aligned with al-Qaeda.” Clinton raises similar concerns about other states in the Gulf and Central Asia. Kuwait remains reluctant “to take action against Kuwait-based financiers and facilitators plotting attacks outside of Kuwait.” The United Arab Emirates is “vulnerable to abuse by terrorist financiers and facilitation networks” due to lack of regulatory oversight. Qatar’s cooperation with U.S. counter-terrorism is the “worst in the region,” and authorities are “hesitant to act against known terrorists.” Pakistani military intelligence officials “continue to maintain ties with a wide array of extremist organizations, in particular the Taliban [and the] LeT.” Despite such extensive knowledge of these terrorism financing activities, successive U.S. administrations have not only failed to exert military or economic pressure on these countries, but in fact have actively protected them, funneling billions of dollars of military and economic assistance. The reason is oil. It's the Hydrocarbons, Stupid Oil has always been an overwhelming Western interest in the region, beginning with Britain’s discovery of it in Persia in 1908. Britain controlled most Middle East oil until the end of World War II, after which the United States secured its sphere of influence in Saudi Arabia. After some pushback, Britain eventually accepted the United States as the lead player in the region. “US-UK agreement upon the broad, forward-looking pattern for the development and utilization of petroleum resources under the control of nationals of the two countries is of the highest strategic and commercial importance”, reads a 1945 memo from the chief of the State Department’s Petroleum Division. Anglo-U.S. geo-strategy exerted this control through alliances with the region’s most authoritarian regimes to ensure a cheap and stable supply of petroleum to Western markets. Recently declassified secret British Foreign Office files from the 1940s and 1950s confirm that the Gulf sheikhdoms were largely created to retain British influence in the Middle East. Britain pledged to protect them from external attack and to “counter hostile influence and propaganda within the countries themselves.” Police and military training would help in “maintaining internal security.” Similarly, in 1958 a U.S. State Department official noted that the Gulf sheikhdoms should be modernized without undermining “the fundamental authority of the ruling groups.” The protection of some of the world’s most virulent authoritarian regimes thus became integral to maintaining Anglo-U.S. geopolitical control of the world’s strategic hydrocarbon energy reserves. Our governments have willingly paid a high price for this access – the price of national security. Still Funding Radicalism One of al-Qaeda’s chief grievances against the West is what Osama bin Laden dubs the “Crusader-Jewish” presence in the lands of Islam, including support for repressive Arab regimes. Under U.S. direction and sponsorship, many of these allies played a central role in financing and supporting bin Laden’s mujahideen networks in Afghanistan to counter Soviet influence. It is perhaps less well understood that elements of the same regimes continued to support bin Laden’s networks long after the Cold War – and that they have frequently done so in collusion with U.S. intelligence services for short-sighted geopolitical interests. In fact, Afghanistan provides a rather revealing example. From 1994 to 2001, assisted by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, the Clinton and Bush II administrations covertly sponsored, flirted and negotiated with the Taliban as a vehicle of regional influence. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, former White House Special Assistant to Ronald Reagan, also testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on South Asia about the “covert policy that has empowered the Taliban,” in the hopes of bringing sufficient stability to “permit the building of oil pipelines from Central Asia through Afghanistan to Pakistan.” The Great Game is still in full swing. “Since the U.S.-led offensive that ousted the Taliban from power, the project has been revived and drawn strong U.S. support” reported the Associated Press in 2005. “The pipeline would allow formerly Soviet Central Asian nations to export rich energy resources without relying on Russian routes. The project’s main sponsor is the Asian Development Bank” – in which the United States is the largest shareholder alongside Japan. It so happens that the southern section of the proposed pipeline runs through territory still under de facto Taliban control, where NATO war efforts are focused. Other evidence demonstrates that control of the world’s strategic energy reserves has always been a key factor in the direction of the "War on Terror". For instance, the April 2001 study commissioned by then-Vice President Dick Cheney confirmed official fears of an impending global oil supply crunch, energy shortages, and “the need for military intervention” in the Middle East to maintain stability. Energy and Iran Other diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks show clearly that oil now remains central to U.S. policy toward Iran, depicting an administration desperate to “wean the world” off Iran’s oil supply, according to the London Telegraph. With world conventional oil production most likely having peaked around 2006, Iran is one of few major suppliers that can potentially boost oil output by another 3 million barrels, and natural gas output by even more.  The nuclear question is not the real issue, but provides ample pretext for isolating Iran. But the U.S. anti-Iran stance has been highly counterproductive. In a series of dispatches for the New Yorker, Seymour Hersh cited U.S. government and intelligence officials confirming that the CIA and the Pentagon have funneled millions of dollars via Saudi Arabia to al-Qaeda-affiliated Sunni extremist groups across the Middle East and Central Asia. The policy – officially confirmed by a U.S. Presidential Finding in early 2008 – began in 2003 and has spilled over into regions like Iraq and Lebanon, fuelling Sunni-Shi’ite sectarian conflict. Not only did no Democratic members of the House ever contest the policy but President Obama reappointed the architect of the policy – Robert Gates – as his defence secretary. As former National Security Council staffers Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett observe, Obama’s decision earlier this year to step up covert military operations in North Africa and the Middle East marked an “intensification of America’s covert war against Iran.” This anti-Iran directive, which extends covert U.S. support for anti-Shi’ite Islamist militant networks linked to al-Qaeda, hardly fits neatly into the stated objectives of the "War on Terror." Unless we recognize that controlling access to energy, not fighting terror, is the primary motive. Beyond Dependency While classified covert operations continue to bolster terrorist activity, the Obama administration struggles vainly to deal with the geopolitical fall-out. Getting out of this impasse requires, first, recognition of our over-dependence on hydrocarbon energy sources to the detriment of real national security. Beholden to the industry lobbyists and the geopolitical dominance that control of oil provides, Western governments have supported dictatorial regimes that fuel widespread resentment in the Muslim world. Worse, the West has tolerated and until recently colluded in the sponsorship of al-Qaeda terrorist activity by these regimes precisely to maintain the existing global energy system. Given the convergence of peak oil and climate change, it is imperative to transition to a new, renewable energy system.  Such a transition will mitigate the impact of hydrocarbon energy depletion, help prevent the worst effects of anthropogenic global warming, and contribute to economic stability through infrastructure development and job creation. By weaning us off our reliance on dubious foreign regimes, a shift to renewables and away from supporting oil dictatorships will also make us safer. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development in London and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus. His latest book is A User’s Guide to the Crisis of Civilization: And How to Save It (2010). He blogs at The Cutting Edge. SOURCE alternet | here ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- COMMENT Another great article. I'm hopeless at taking everything in at once.  Will have to do some really brief notes for myself. So when the West isn't actively sponsoring Middle Eastern terrorism, the West overlooks sponsorship of terrorism by British-installed sheikdoms, favourably disposed to US and allied interests that keep them propped up in power? The US has muscled in on Britain's Middle Eastern turf post-WWII, and Britain plays second banana to the US in the region, while the US is BFF with Saudi Arabia, until the oil runs out. The key regional Western-propped dictator (Western-puppet ... or is that partner?) regimes, sponsoring terrorism and sectarian kill-fests (to maintain their self-serving and exploitative power grip on the region), are: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Pakistan. Surprised that Pakistan is there, although I know Pakistan's terrorist central.  Why?  Pakistan seems like odd man out. The Brits made a deal that should be void:  ie protecting the puppet monarchs from *internal* challenges ... which effectively means taking part in enslaving these populations under the control of these Western propped monarchies or other dictatorships, because it precludes the rise of anything remotely close to 'proper democracy' (if that's actually possible ... anywhere), I would think. British pledges to protect don't mean much, unless there's something in it for the British (I think it was Persia that they slimed out of protecting some time around the turn of last century or perhaps just before that): "... when Britain failed to defend Persia in the Russo-Persian War of 1826-28-a course of inaction which Britain was fully justified in taking because Persia had started the war and the 1814 mutual defense agreement obligated Britain to defend Persia only against aggression-the Shah concluded that Britain was an unreliable ally, and in effect he went over to the Russian side." [here] Wow, that was way earlier than I thought.  It was the early 1800s.  The Shah concluded correctly, in my opinion. lol  Stick with the Russians, Persia. Bin Laden wasn't happy about the Western support for repressive regimes in the region; but it also sounds like there's maybe a religious and cultural element to OBL's objection, judging by the terminology used:  'Crusader-Jewish'?  Or maybe I'm reading too much into that? Looks like OBL had forgotten that Islam itself was spread in the region through conquest of people and territories.  Not that the West is planning on spreading any ideology ... it's only profits for the wealthy that matter. Asian Development Bank, Japan and USA have a stake in a pipeline project that is intended to run through Taliban controlled territory and this is where NATO concentrated its aggression.  So, wherever NATO is, profit is?  With Obama's blessing, Robert Gates was the mastermind of a policy backing Sunni extremist vs the Shia side in the region (against Iran's interests),  while US GOVERNMENT, US INTELLIGENCE, the PENTAGON and CIA funnelled dollars for this project, via Saudi Arabia, who, in turn, flicked the dollars to al-Qaeda.  It's thanks to Gates' policy that there's a spread of sectarian violence in the Middle East, including Iraq and Lebanon.  The funnelling of money that reached al-Qaeda is confirmed (presidential finding, 2008).  So this isn't speculation. So, I take it there's no organised Islamic 'war on terror' 'death cult' about to attack anyone in here in the West, and there's only the random crazy head-chopping incident associated with the consequences of mass displacement and mass immigration, to sidestep when out and about, say, doing a spot of furniture shopping? That Robert Gates struck me as shifty and creepy looking when I saw him in this video, filmed on the day of Julian Assange's arrest in Britain, almost 5 years ago: ROBERT GATES US Defence Secretary in Afghanistan 7 Dec 2010 Associated Press https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g9g9F6_TC4 If I hadn't got interested in Ukraine and then curious about Assange and WikiLeaks, I'd probably never have paid this creepy old man any attention.  And look what fun I'd have missed out on.  lol Imagine this guy knows where all the bodies are buried. So, Gates, the architect of Hell (ie the policy of funnelling American money to Sunni al-Qaeda affiliated terrorists, in the Middle East) has been free the last 5 years, while Australian journalist, Julian Assange, has been a political prisoner in Britain (Britain, which is America's Middle Eastern second banana partner in oil and crime) -- held without charge, for exposing US and allied war crimes, those same 5 years that Architect of Hell, Robert Gates, has been free. Ehem.  Western values?  Where's those Western values plate-face, Dave Cameron's been preaching, then?  Eh? How can this be permitted to happen in democracies, among free men? Can somebody please help Assange: Julian Assange Australian Journalist FAQ & Support https://justice4assange.com/ Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ----------- PS I'm hoping I'll remember some of this.  Terrible recall of facts.  lol But I've discovered that information has a mysterious way of seeping in without being aware that it has.  A couple of times I've written things I thought were original ideas ... until I remembered where I'd read whatever it was that I'd laboured over ... for ages. It was rather upsetting to find out I'm not at all an original thinker.  lol ꕤ

MUST READ: Neoliberal Capitalism - Planned Machinations of Empire & Militarism - Syria, Ukraine, Libya & Beyond

MUST READ SOURCE http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-collateral-damage-of-us-nato-wars-europes-refugee-crisis-depraved-morality-of-uk-prime-minister-david-cameron/5473997?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter The “Collateral Damage” of US-NATO Wars: Europe’s Refugee Crisis, Depraved Morality of UK Prime Minister David Cameron By Colin Todhunter Global Research, September 06, 2015 Region: Europe, Middle East & North Africa Theme: Police State & Civil Rights, United Nations UK Prime Minister David Cameron this week said “as a father I felt deeply moved” by the image of a Syrian boy dead on a Turkish beach. As pressure mounts on the UK to take in more of those fleeing to Europe from Syria and elsewhere. Cameron added that the UK would fulfil its “moral responsibilities.” On hearing Cameron’s words on the role of ‘morality’, something he talks a lot about, anyone who has been following the crisis in Syria would not have failed to detect the hypocrisy. According to former French foreign minister Roland Dumas, Britain had planned covert action in Syria as early as 2009. He told French TV: I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business… I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was preparing gunmen to invade Syria. Writing in The Guardian in 2013, Nafeez Ahmed discusses leaked emails from the private intelligence firm Stratfor, including notes from a meeting with Pentagon officials, that confirmed US-UK training of Syrian opposition forces since 2011 aimed at eliciting “collapse” of Assad’s regime “from within.” He goes on to write that, according to retired NATO Secretary General Wesley Clark, a memo from the Office of the US Secretary of Defense just a few weeks after 9/11 revealed plans to “attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years,” starting with Iraq and moving on to “Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” Clark argues that this strategy is fundamentally about control of the region’s vast oil and gas resources. In 2009, Syrian President Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter’s North field through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets in direct competition with Russia. Being a Russian ally, Assad refused to sign and instead pursued negotiations for an alternative $10 billion pipeline plan with Iran crossing Iraq and into Syria that would also potentially allow Iran to supply gas to Europe. Thus Assad had to go. And this is where Cameron’s concerns really lie: not with ordinary people compelled to flee war zones that his government had a hand in making but with removing Assad in order for instance to run a pipeline through Syrian territory and to prevent Iran and Russia gaining strategic momentum in the region. Ordinary folk are merely ‘collateral damage’ in the geopolitical machinations of bankers, oilmen and arms manufacturers, only to be shown any sympathy when the media flashes images of a dead Syrian boy washed up on a Turkish beach or people drowned at sea trying to escape turmoil at home. It is then that people like Cameron are obliged to demonstrate mock sincerity in the face of public concern. ***** It is not only Syrians who are heading for Europe and the UK but also people from Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere. Countries that Britain has helped to devastate as part of the US-led long war based on the Project for a New American Century and the US right to intervene unilaterally as and when it deems fit under the notion of the US ‘exceptionalism’ (better known as the project for a new imperialism – the ‘Wolfowitz Doctrine’). Cameron said that Britain is a moral nation and would fulfil its moral responsibilities. Large sections of the population – ordinary men and women – are certainly ‘moral’ but that is unfortunately where any notion of morality seems to stop. Former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray has called the UK a rogue state and a danger to the world. Last year, he told a meeting at St Andrews University in Scotland that the British Government is deeply immoral and doesn’t care how many people its kills abroad if it advances it aims. Moreover, he said the UK was a state that is prepared to go to war to make a few people wealthy. He added that Libya is now a disaster and 15,000 people were killed when NATO (British and French jets) bombed Sirte, something the BBC never told the public. Murray told his audience what many already know or suspect but what many more remain ignorant of: I’ve seen things from the inside and the UK’s foreign interventions are almost always about resources. It is every bit as corrupt as others have indicated. It is not an academic construct, the system stinks. Murray was a British diplomat for 20 years. But after only six months, he said that in the country where he was Ambassador, the British and the US were shipping people in order for them to be tortured and some of them were tortured to death. As far as Iraq is concerned, Murray said that he knew for certain that key British officials were fully aware that there weren’t any weapons of mass destruction. He said that invading Iraq wasn’t a mistake, it was a lie. Back in 2011, 200 prominent African figures accused Western nations and the International Criminal Court of “subverting international law” in Libya. The UN has been misused to militarise policy, legalise military action and effect regime change, according to University of Johannesburg professor Chris Landsberg. He said it is unprecedented for the UN to have outsourced military action to NATO in this way and challenges the International Criminal Court to investigate NATO for “violating international law.” In 2015, the outcome has been to turn Africa’s most developed nation to ruins and run by armed militias fighting one another. Is this the stability and morality Cameron preaches? Yet for public consumption, Cameron flags up his ‘morality’ by stating that the UK would continue to take in “thousands” of refugees. But he cautions that this is not the only answer to the crisis, saying a “comprehensive solution” is required. Awash with self-righteous platitudes he hoped would drown out any hint of hypocrisy or irony, Cameron added: “We have to try and stabilise the countries from which these people are coming.” One year ago, Cameron told the United Nations that Britain was ready to play its part in confronting “an evil against which the whole world must unite.” He also said that that “we” must not be so “frozen with fear” of repeating the mistakes of the 2003 Iraq invasion. He was attempting to drum up support for wider Anglo-US direct military action against Syria under the pretext of attacking ISIS. At the same time, Cameron spoke of the virtues of the West’s economic freedom and democratic values as well as the horrors of extremism and terror. Cameron’s was a monologue of hypocrisy. Over a million people have been killed via the US-led or US-backed attacks on Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, so we were told. It did not. That was a lie and hundreds of thousands have paid with their lives. We were told that Gaddafi was a tyrant. He used the nation’s oil wealth well by presiding over a country that possessed some of the best indices of social and economic well-being in Africa. Now, thanks to Western backed terror and military conflict, Libya lies in ruins and torn apart. Russia is a threat to world peace because of its actions in Ukraine, we are told. It is not. The US helped instigate the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Ukraine and has instigated provocations, sanctions and a proxy war against an emerging, confident Russia. But how far in history should we go back to stress that the West and Cameron and his ilk have no right to take the moral high ground when it comes to peace, respect for international law, self-determination, truth or democracy? The much quoted work by historian William Blum documents the crimes, bombings, assassinations, destabilisations and wars committed by the US in country after country since 1945. And since 1945 the UK has consistently stood shoulder to shoulder with Washington. Cameron stood at the UN and talked of the West’s values of freedom and democracy and the wonders of economic neoliberalism in an attempt to promote Western values and disguise imperialist intent. But it’s a thin disguise. The Anglo-US establishment has imposed its economic structural violence on much of the world by bankrupting economies, throwing millions into poverty and imposing ‘austerity’ and by rigging and manipulating global commodity markets and prices. Add to that the mass illegal surveillance at home and abroad, torture, drone murders, destabilisations, bombings and invasions and it becomes clear that Cameron’s ongoing eulogies to morality, freedom, humanitarianism, democracy and the ‘free’ market is hollow rhetoric. Apart from attempting to legitimise neoliberal capitalism, this rhetoric has one purpose: it is part of the ongoing ‘psych-ops’ being waged on the public to encourage people to regard what is happening in the world – from Syria, Iraq and Ukraine to Afghanistan and Libya, etc – as a confusing, disconnected array of events (perpetuated by unhinged madmen or terror groups) that are in need of Western intervention. These events are not for one minute to be regarded by the public as the planned machinations of empire and militarism, which entail a global energy and trade war against Russia and China, the associated preservation of the petro-dollar system and the encircling and intimidation of these two states with military hardware. Any mainstream narrative about the current migrant-refugee ‘crisis’ must steer well clear of such an analysis. Instead, we must listen to Cameron talking about the West ‘helping’ to stabilise the countries it helped to destabilise or destroy in the first place. It’s the same old story based on the same misrepresentation of imperialism: the US-led West acting as a force for good in the world and reluctantly taking up the role of ‘world policeman’. Whether it’s the now amply financially rewarded Blair or whether it is Cameron at the political helm, the perpetual wars and perpetual deceptions continue. Cameron plays his role well. Like Tony Blair, Cameron’s media-friendly bonhomie is slicker (and cheaper) than the most experienced used car salesman. And like Blair before him, Cameron is the media-friendly PR man who beats the drums of war (or mock sincerity, as the situation dictates), courtesy of a global power elite, who through their think tanks, institutions and financial clout ultimately determine economic policies and decide which wars are to be fought and for what purpose: “… the Davos-attending, Gulfstream/private jet-flying, money-incrusted, megacorporation-interlocked, policy-building elites of the world, people at the absolute peak of the global power pyramid. They are 94 percent male, predominantly white, and mostly from North America and Europe. These are the people setting the agendas at the Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group, G-8, G-20, NATO, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization. They are from the highest levels of finance capital, transnational corporations, the government, the military, the academy, nongovernmental organizations, spiritual leaders and other shadow elites. Shadow elites include, for instance, the deep politics of national security organizations in connection with international drug cartels, who extract 8,000 tons of opium from US war zones annually, then launder $500 billion through transnational banks, half of which are US-based.” – David Rothkopf (Project Censored ‘Exposing the transnational ruling class’) SOURCE http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-collateral-damage-of-us-nato-wars-europes-refugee-crisis-depraved-morality-of-uk-prime-minister-david-cameron/5473997?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT An excellent article, packed with everything that these slimy used-car salesmen politicians (and their corporate media enabler handmaidens), responsible for devastating their own countries and destroying those abroad, don't want you to know. These same hypocrite politicians that are responsible for the wilful destruction abroad and ensuing mayhem at home, wring their hands about 'radicalisation' ... like they haven't a clue how such a thing could possibly happen ... while entire populations in their countries are placed under totalitarian control, and their vulnerable and working classes are reduced to homelessness and relying on food banks.  lol It's a lot to take in.  Might have to do some notes. Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ꕤ

SYRIA - On Gen. Wesley Clarke - Pentagon List of Countries to Overthrow - Circa 2001

US plans to topple Syria’s Assad go back to 9/11: Analyst Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:23PM Washington’s plans to overthrow the Syrian government go back to the 9/11 attacks and recent revelations by Wikileaks founder Julian Assange should come as no surprise to anybody, says an American journalist. Wayne Madsen, an author and investigative journalist, made the comments when asked about Assange’s remarks who said on Wednesday that the US had planned to topple the Syrian government long before 2011, the year that the brutal conflict broke out in the country. What Assange has said is nothing new because “we know according to retired Gen. Wesley Clarke that, shortly after 9/11, he was shown in the Pentagon a list of countries that the US wanted to overthrow” their governments, Madsen told Press TV on Thursday. The analyst noted that on the list, Syria came after Iraq and was followed by countries like Libya and Sudan. In his new book, Assange points to a cable pertaining to US Ambassador William Roebuck, who served as the Political Counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Damascus between 2004-2007, about plans for overthrowing the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad at the time. This is “also no surprise because the successive US ambassadors to Syria have sought to undermine the Syrian government,” Madsen maintained. He added that “It clearly is a demonstration that just because the United States maintains diplomatic relations with a country,” there is no guarantee that the US is not going to shy away from taking harsh measures against “the government it recognizes.” This is an extreme version of democracy, Madsen argued, which was sought after not only by President Obama’s administrations, but also Republican government such as that of George Bush also attempted to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government. The Syrian government has been in an all out war against various Takfiri groups, mainly the ISIL, since March 2011. According to reports, the United States and its regional allies - especially Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey – have been supporting the militants operating inside the country. The conflict, according to the UN, has so far taken the lives of about 230,000 people. Millions of Syrians have also been displaced as a result of the conflict. SOURCE http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/09/10/428634/Syria-Assange-US-Assad-Wayne-Madsen-911 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT So the US getting 'cosy' with Iran by way of the nukes deal and the Brits reopening an embassy in Iran can only mean one thing:  stand by for an action replay of the 1953 CIA-MI6 coup in Iran? That's almost a quarter of a million dead in Syria, according to the UN. Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are bankrolling. While the American government keeps a list of countries to destroy, Hollywood celebrity hypocrites front aid agencies and act as American war propaganda agents. So, there you go Europe.  The Americans planned this Middle Eastern and African mayhem well in advance; but, guess what?   It's European taxpayers and European societies that will be paying the price:  the enormous material and social costs of refugee and other immigration - which is incalculable in future social terms. While public welfare funding is being cut, welcome to increased military spending for the 'privilege' of NATO gangster Club Membership. Being under US corporate empire's rule is like voluntarily becoming a taxpayer-funded mercenary (proxy) force for the US corporate empire (thus private interests of the enormously wealthy). Subordinate state proxy forces are then usually also supplied to some extent by US manufacturers, enriching American military manufacturers and providing the means of destroying target nations, to pillage resources and entrap the target nations' populations in future debt servitude of the 'nation rebuilding' kind. The 'nation rebuilding' profits to be received post destructive phase must make destroying nations so rewarding.  Win-win. All these subordinate states' resources are directed in aid of US and Western private corporate and banking masters' profits, while impoverishing generations of 'free' men among NATO member domestic populations. Intergenerational debt slavery for the sheeple, but a what a deal for corporate American and allied corporate interests, so what's not to like ... a European colony that buys US arms & military equipment, enriching US military manufacturers; a colony that self-funds military actions on behalf of the US plutocratic empire (and its own player corporations); and a colony that takes on-board all consequences of the massive human costs of the American empire's aggression and insatiable capitalist expansion. Ummmm, how stupid is Europe? Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ꕤ

TRANSCRIPT - VIDEO - Refugee Crisis: What The Media Is Hiding | Syrian Girl

TRANSCRIPT [for quotation purposes, confirm audio] SOURCE VIDEO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHFnvFbThDE&feature=youtu.be VIDEO TITLE Refugee Crisis: What The Media Is Hiding SYRIAN GIRL This is Syrian Girl. The media is painting the refugee crisis as an acute issue, but the Syrian war and the refugees have been there for four years, and Aylan wasn't the first child refugee to drown. Last month, an 11 year old Syrian girl drowned off the coast of Egypt. So, why is there such a media push now? Well, it's just in time for when France, Britain and Australia were asked to join the US's war on Syria. In fact, the US asked Australia to join its coalition a week before Aylan died. So they're using sympathy for this child's death to drop bombs on more children, while crying crocodile tears over them as they run from those bombs. Just look at this headline from: The Sun Bomb Syria | For Aylan ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. [aside] ⟴ Why Murdoch Pushes for War⟴ by Craig Murray  on September 7, 2015 1:33 pm EXTRACT Given the disgraceful Sun front page and middle spread urging war on Syria, and the all-out propaganda on Sky News, it is important to understand why Murdoch is pushing so hard for war. I therefore reproduce my article from February 2013. It is important to note that the links are to industry publications: this is very genuine, hard information.  Israel Grants Oil Rights in Syria to Murdoch and Rothschild Israel has granted oil exploration rights inside Syria, in the occupied Golan Heights, to Genie Energy. Major shareholders of Genie Energy – which also has interests in shale gas in the United States and shale oil in Israel – include Rupert Murdoch and Lord Jacob Rothschild.  FULL AT SOURCE https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/09/why-murdoch-pushes-for-war/ note:  article is not referred to in video | it is addition to this post [transcript] You'd think they'd make themselves less obvious. This is the city that Aylan comes from. The area was bombed to smithereens by the US. Rupert Murdoch couldn't even wait for Aylan's body to go cold before he started exploiting it for more war in Syria. Turkey's also causing the refugee crisis to push for the creation of a buffer zone in Syria, as part of their continued attempt at regime change. So, before you wave "Refugees Welcome" while letting your government get away with murder there are a few things you need to know. 1:20 The whole Syrian war and refugees were caused in the first place because the US and NATO backed Islamist rebels in Syria in 2011. In spite of this, politicians and the mass media are blaming the Syrian president, Assad, for Europe's entire refugee crisis and using that to convince people that there needs to be a war in Syria. But how can Assad be blamed for the entire refugee crisis, when the majority of the refugees aren't even Syrian, but either: poor immigrant workers, or refugees from other wars, such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Libya. All the other places that have suffered US interventions in the recent years, yet the media labels them all Syrian, anyway, to convince Europeans that that this problem can be solved by intervention in Syria. They even go as far as to label Sub-Saharan Africans as Syrian because they believe their viewers are too ignorant to notice the difference. How racist do you have to be to confuse Asia with Africa. [cut to video footage] MALE NARRATOR Romania's coast guard rescued 70 migrants, mostly Syrians and Iraqis, packed onto a small fishing boat that was in danger of sinking, as they attempted to make the crossing to Europe in stormy seas on Saturday. SYRIAN GIRL The number of Syrian refugees is also being falsely conflated, because other immigrants and refugees are simply claiming to be Syrian and throwing their original passports away. Pakistani and Bangladeshi passports are being found discarded near border crossings. [CUT TO VIDEO FOOTAGE] MALE [... On our boat ... ] 29 persons FEMALE We're just four Syrian people -- MALE [interjects] We're just four Syrian people -- [cross-talk] MALE [interjects] -- 25 in Iraq.  [ie 25 from Iraq] ENGLISH SPEAKING WOMAN All the rest of them are Iraqi? FEMALES They said: I don't have a passport [cross-talk] I don't have anything to say who I am. So I am Syrian. Where's your passport? I don't have because the government in Germany allows everything for the Syrian people. You get a house, you get money, you get food. ENGLISH SPEAKING WOMAN So it pays to be a 'Syrian'? FEMALE "Yes." SYRIAN GIRL And some European politicians are exploiting the war in Syria, to push for an open border immigration policy. So, was it the Syrian government that caused these refugees, or was it these same politicians and their liberal interventions that are now crying over the refugees deaths? People like Angelina Jolie, ironically, the Ambassador of the UN Refugee program, caused these African refugees to drown off the coast of Libya, because she supported the Libyan rebels who ethnically cleansed them. It was also Amnesty International who claimed Gaddafi was using black immigrants as mercenaries, which resulted in their ethnic cleansing. Now, Amnesty International are raking in the donations over their deaths. It was these same liberal interventionists who, in 2011, supported al-Qaeda affiliated rebels in Syria, and they dare yell: "Shame, shame, shame!", for not letting in the Syrian refugees. How about shame on you, for ruining our beautiful country? The refugee crisis didn't start when Syrians tried to cross into Europe, but when Europeans tried to cross into Syria to join ISIS. Syrians are being pushed out their country while a multinational Islamic State moves in from all over the world. But the so-called 'coalition' on ISIS is a lie. The US and its allies actually have no intention of defeating ISIS. Instead of working with the Syrian army, the only force capable of fighting ISIS on the ground, they are preventing the Syrian army from doing their job. Only four years ago, Syria was a well off and prosperous country, that even accepted 2 million Iraqi refugees. Now, we've become the refugees. Syrian refugees want your help, yes. But to get back home to their own country. Almost half of Syria's population are refugees: 3 million outside of Syria; and 7 million of them are internally displaced, inside Syria. Shouting 'Refugees Welcome!," while well-meaning, is not enough. You're not going to be able to airlift 10 million Syrians into Europe. Displacing them further from their country is not ideal for anyone. The refugees want to come home. Hear them out for yourself. MALE [speaking Arabic] "My dream is for Syria to return to what it used to be. I will be one of the first people to return, because there is no place like Syria. FEMALE [Speaking English, with accent] Er, my name is Rena. I wish to come back to the lovely country when the war will end. MALE - MINOR [Speaking English, with accent] I like to - the war to be end. Just I can go to see my friends and my family in Syria. MALE [Speaking Arabic] This terrorism is done via eternal conspiracy with external financing. But we are alive, and we are returning, we are returning, we are returning! FEMALE #1 [Speaking English, with accent] What happening now, happening by, by -- by foreign hands. FEMALE #2 [Speaking English, with accent] [cross-talk] This is not freedom. This is not-- FEMALE #2 [Speaking English, with accent] The Syrian we are a good people, and we want to complete our life in Syria. [CUT TO] FEMALE #3 [Speaking Arabic] I miss everything. Everything. Our neighbourhood, our house, our family, our gatherings. [CUT TO] MALE - MINOR [Speaking English, with accent] You just stop the war. We don't want to go to Europe. SYRIAN GIRL To help them come home, you need to: pressure your government to stop the war in Syria, by: stopping the US's Saudi Arabian, Qatari and Turkish allies from funding and facilitating ISIS: by ending the political support for al-Quaeda linked rebels and by preventing your government from entering a war against Syria. end the sanctions on Syria. Aylan Kurdi's dad's infected teeth pushed him to try and get to Europe and fix them. Sanctions on Syria, prevented his family from sending the $14,000 required to fix them. If there were no sanctions on Syria, he would have got medical care at home, and Aylan would still be alive. Before the war, medical care in Syria was free. Sanctions prevent from rebuilding and fighting ISIS off itself. Rebuild Syria for refugees to return. Concentrate on donating to organisations that help refugees inside of Syria. This will decrease the pressure on refugee institutions inside of Syria, and help external refugees return, instead of getting on a creaky[?] boat and drowning on the way to Europe. Here are two such organisations: WafaRelief Fund; and http://wafarelief.org.uk/donate/ the Syrian Red Crescent; http://sarc.sy/ The Syrian government wants refugees to return and have put forward a plan to do so. They have asked for help in implementing that plan. Blaming the refugees themselves for the wars NATO creates is not the solution. Suddenly, so many people are disrespecting Syrians, but those people never noticed Syrians in their country when we were inventing the iphone, not to mention all of Western civilisation. There are forces that want to estrange people from their homeland dissolve national identities altogether. Obama and other criminals are trying to make Syrians a people without a nation. A people without a nation suffer the worst humiliation. Look at what happened to the Palestinian people. One day, it could happen to you. So, defending your nationality doesn't mean disrespecting the nationality of others. By demonising Syrian refugees, right-wing nationalist are handing liberal interventionists moral victory on a silver platter. People are sympathetic to that boy and his family and any group that demonises them, comes off as being sociopaths and alienate everyone. For example, this UKIP politician had to apologise for his statement, "The little Syrian boy was well-clothed and well-fed. He died because his parents were greedy for the good life in Europe." Syrians had the good life before the UK government interfered. GROUP OF YOUNG FEMALES & MATURE MALE FEMALE [Speaking English - with accent] Nothing. I don't have a home. FEMALE [English accent] And what happened to your business in Aleppo, does it exist anymore? FEMALE [Speaking English - with accent] No it's not exist anymore FEMALE [English accent] Everything gone? FEMALE [Speaking English - with accent] Mmmm ... MALE [Speaking Arabic] I used to produce these. Now you just give me this. [Holding, wash cloth or napkin?] [Group Laughter] FEMALE INTERVIEWER [Speaking Arabic] Um Gasem, what was your life like four years ago? FEMALE RESPONDS I can't ... once I start thinking about my life four years ago ... [Distressed] We had a safe life. [CUT TO RT NEWS FOOTAGE] NANCY KASEM SYRIAN REFUGEE Yes, in Syria I had my own car. It's like a car you can drive. Not -- it's really hard to drive in this car. We still don't have a good job to buying [sic] a good car, like in Syria. CUT TO FEMALE FEMALE [Speaking Arabic] We were comfortably off. I was a housewife and my husband had work, thanks to God. We moved to the village, because the villages were safe. And then the war came to the villages. Islamists came and kidnapped him for a month. They broke his jaw. CUT TO REFUGEE TENT SITE SCENE FEMALE [Speaking Arabic] Sometimes we reminisce together about our home. Yes, we talk about things like that. So that our children continue to love their homeland, so they don't forget. Particularly here, I have children with me. SYRIAN GIRL People ask me, why don't the Syrians stay in Turkey. Well, Syrians who are used to a high standard of living get tired of three years in a tent in Turkey, with no prospects of a future. Numbers are very high -- in the million -- and conditions are bad. Turkey won't improve these conditions, but want to continue sending terrorists to Syria. People are also asking, why aren't Syrians being helped by other Muslim countries? Well, Turkey and Jordan have taken 1 million each. What these people are really asking is, why aren't the rich, Gulf Arab astates accepting Syrian refugees. Because, in the worlds of this Kuwaiti politician -- [CUT TO MALE IN TRADITIONAL ARAB GARB, ON TV, GESTURING] -- we Syrians have a different culture and ethnicity to Arabs. They don't see Syrians as Arab, and they don't accept them as their kin. Since when have the Gulf lifted a finger to help the Palestinians, anyway? While it is true the people of the Levant have as little in common culturally with Arabs as they do with West Europe, this doesn't change the fact that it is the Gulf Arab states that caused the Syrian problem, by backing terrorists. They won't invest in helping Syrian refugees, because they are busy spending the money on ISIS and buying golden toilets. But, why doesn't Israel take any refugees. After all, it's in Syria's border and it's in the Levant, Syrian people's historical land. Israel has greyed out this image, as if it doesn't even warrant consideration. I guess, Israel is the only country in the world that's allowed to be racist. It's funny to hear Zionists talk about how Europe needs to accept Syrian refugees, when they won't even let Palestinian refugees return to their own homes and villages. I've also heard: Why Germany, not Greece? Well, I'll let this Syrian refugee tell you. CUT TO MALE - STREET SCENE [Speaking Arabic] I didn't stay in Greece because it doesn't offer any benefits or work. It can't help its own people let alone help us. SYRIAN GIRL The most honourable are the Syrians still in Syria fighting for their country. But how can one blame those that run, if they themselves aren't fighting with a gun in their hand. It's time to point that finger inward. Save your nation, and stop these governments from starting these wars. --- 13:24 end --- ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ꕤ