Search Blog Posts

Showing posts with label Terrorism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Terrorism. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

US War on Iran Takes Bizarre Turn

If you don't find it frightening that your 'conservative' Republican Party has done nothing for decades to stop this, or even expose these atrocities, you better sober up for your family's sake, if none other.

Image: Logo of the terrorist MEK, backed 
for years by the US as part of a covert war 
against Iran. Though greatly diminished by 
joint Iraqi-Iranian security operations, the
terrorist organization still enjoys support 

from the highest levels of Western 
October 19, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - It is not merely hyperbole when it is said the US created terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda or the so-called "Islamic State." It is documented fact. The current conflict in the Middle East may appear to be a chaotic conflagration beyond the control of the United States and its many eager allies, but in reality it is the intentional, engineered creation of regional fronts in a war against Iran and its powerful arc of influence.

It is not Western policy that indirectly spurs the creation and perpetuation of terrorist organizations, but in fact, direct, intentional, unmistakable support.

This support would manifest itself in perhaps the most overt and bizarre declaration of allegiance to terrorism to date, US Army General Hugh Shelton on stage before terrorists of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) and their Wahabist counterparts fighting in Syria, hysterically pledging American material, political, and strategic backing. MEK was listed for years by the US State Department as a foreign terrorist organization, but has received funding, arms, and safe haven by the United States for almost as long.

General Hugh's speech titled, "Making Iranian mullahs fear, the MEK, come true," was most likely never meant to be seen or fully understood by Americans. In titled alone, it is clear that US foreign policy intends to use the tool of terrorism to exact concessions from Tehran. If the true nature of America's support for terrorist organizations like MEK were more widely known, the current narrative driving US intervention in Iraq and Syria would crumble.
Image: MEK is just one of many terrorist organizations, that despite being listed by the US State Department as such, still receives weapons, training, cash, and political support from the US government. This is a pattern seen repeated in Libya and most recently in Syria - each case spun and excused with a myriad of lies wrapped in false, constantly shifting narratives.

MEK Has Killed US Servicemen, Contractors, and Iranian Civilians For Decades

MEK has carried out decades of brutal terrorist attacks, assassinations, and espionage against the Iranian government and its people, as well as targeting Americans including the attempted kidnapping of US Ambassador Douglas MacArthur II, the attempted assassination of USAF Brigadier General Harold Price, the successful assassination of Lieutenant Colonel Louis Lee Hawkins, the double assassinations of Colonel Paul Shaffer and Lieutenant Colonel Jack Turner, and the successful ambush and killing of American Rockwell International employees William Cottrell, Donald Smith, and Robert Krongard.

Admissions to the deaths of the Rockwell International employees can be found within a report written by former US State Department and Department of Defense official Lincoln Bloomfield Jr. on behalf of the lobbying firm Akin Gump in an attempt to dismiss concerns over MEK's violent past and how it connects to its current campaign of armed terror - a testament to the depths of depravity from which Washington and London lobbyists operate.

To this day MEK terrorists have been carrying out attacks inside of Iran killing political opponents, attacking civilian targets, as well as carrying out the US-Israeli program of targeting and assassinating Iranian scientists. MEK terrorists are also suspected of handling patsies in recent false flag operations carried out in India, Georgia, and Thailand, which have been ham-handedly blamed on the Iranian government by the United States and Israel.

MEK is described by Council on Foreign Relations Senior Fellow Ray Takeyh as a "cult-like organization" with "totalitarian tendencies." While Takeyh fails to expand on what he meant by "cult-like" and "totalitarian," an interview with US State Department-run Radio Free Europe-Radio Liberty reported that a MEK Camp Ashraf escapee claimed the terrorist organization bans marriage, using radios, the Internet, and holds many members against their will with the threat of death if ever they are caught attempting to escape.

US Has Been Eagerly Supporting MEK Terrorists For Years

Besides providing MEK terrorists with now two former US military bases in Iraq as safe havens, the US has conspired to arm, fund, and back MEK for years in a proxy war against Iran.

Covert support for the US-listed terrorist group Mujahedeen e-Khalq (MEK) has been ongoing since at least 2008 under the Bush administration, when Seymour Hersh's 2008 New Yorker article "Preparing the Battlefield," reported that not only had MEK been considered for their role as a possible proxy, but that the US had already begun arming and financing them to wage war inside Iran:

The M.E.K. has been on the State Department’s terrorist list for more than a decade, yet in recent years the group has received arms and intelligence, directly or indirectly, from the United States. Some of the newly authorized covert funds, the Pentagon consultant told me, may well end up in M.E.K. coffers. “The new task force will work with the M.E.K. The Administration is desperate for results.” He added, “The M.E.K. has no C.P.A. auditing the books, and its leaders are thought to have been lining their pockets for years. If people only knew what the M.E.K. is getting, and how much is going to its bank accounts—and yet it is almost useless for the purposes the Administration intends.
Image: MEK terrorists have been given safe haven by the US at Camp Ashraf
and then former US military base, Camp Liberty. 
Seymore Hersh in an NPR interview, also claims that select MEK members have already received trainingin the US.

More recently, the British Daily Mail published a stunning admission by "US officials" that Israel is currently funding, training, arming, and working directly with MEK. The Daily Mail article states:

U.S. officials confirmed today that Israel has been funding and training Iranian dissidents to assassinate nuclear scientists involved in Iran's nuclear program. Washington insiders confirmed there is a close relationship between Mossad and MEK.

Monday, October 20, 2014

What were the Motivations for the 9/11 Attack on the United States? - Answer is Seen Here *vid*

This is a threaded string of short video clips which we urge you to complete, segmented if you must, but it'll get the cobwebs out of your head about the disinfo and deception we've been getting from our power sources!

Uploaded on Sep 11, 2011

See What Dan Rather would NOT READ on 9/11: ISRAEL, the MOTIVE, the WHY of the attacks -- Motive suppressed by the media! Omitting motive of anger at US support of Israel is Media Betrayal. Michael Scheuer (former CIA intelligence officer and CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief 1996-99) points out that our politicians are lying to us about why our lives are being put at risk with regard to the motivation of the terrorists attack the U.S. Why they hate us ISN'T "hatred of our freedoms" but rather hatred of specific foreign policies of the U.S. government which are, in fact, unjust, immoral and illegal. 
The top grievance is anger at the U.S. government's policy of aiding and abetting Israeli crimes.

The 1993 attack was led by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's nephew, Ramzi Yousef. After his capture, the FBI questioned Ramzi Yousef on the flight back from Pakistan about his motivations for bombing the World Trade Center in 1993.
"Yousef said he took no thrill from killing American citizens and felt guilty about the civilian deaths he had caused. But his conscience was overridden by his desire to stop the killing of Arabs by Israeli troops." "Yousef said he "would like it to be different," but only terrible violence could force this kind of abrupt political change. He said that he truly believed his actions had been rational and logical in pursuit of a change in U.S. policy toward Israel. He mentioned NO OTHER motivation during the flight and NO OTHER issue in American foreign policy that concerned him." Steve Coll, Ghost Wars p273 http://representativepress.blogspot.c...

What motivated the 9/11 hijackers? See testimony most didn't
"Sit Down!" The Power to Silence the Truth about 9/11 Part 2

9/11 Mastermind's Motivation: "By his own account, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experiences there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel." 9/11 Report See

Bin Laden has said, "We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine . This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula , and until it stops its support of Israel."

IMPERIAL HUBRIS by Michael Scheuer

A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America's Intelligence Agencies by James Bamford

Ramzi Yousef sent a letter to the New York Times after the 1993 bombing attack on the WTC, "We declare our responsibility for the explosion on the mentioned building. This action was done in response for the American political, economical, and military support to Israel the state of terrorism and to the rest of the dictator countries in the region."

Please subscribe
Join Email list to give extra boost: (People report not seeing their subscriptions so this could help boost views)


The 9/11 Motive Map is an adaptation I made of a diagram showing the areas where debris from American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 fell upon Lower Manhattan during the course of the September 11 terror attacks. Map (NOT this video) licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. Original image is a work of a Federal Emergency Management Agency employee, taken or made during the course of an employee's official duties. As works of the U.S. federal government, all FEMA images are in the public domain.
NOTE: Don't copy this video, just share the link with others. You can post the link or embed the link in a video annotation.

"... In the past, that was taken to mean that they would never be a serious collapse threat. While this is usually the case in the completed structures, it is not a guarantee, particularly in the steel-framed high-rise that relies on some type of spray-on or membrane fireproofing to protect the steel. The 1 Meridian Plaza fire in Philadelphia proved that these can be severe dangers under the wrong set of circumstances." Sept. 1998 SEE VIDEO INFO FOR:

Saturday, October 18, 2014

What if EBOLA was a BIOLOGICAL WARFARE WEAPON Created by Our Government, and NOT A VIRUS

Implementation of a horror such as this is way above Obama's threshold of decision-making. Who will thoroughly investigate without delay for us? Hard to even conceive there would be such beings on this earth moving among us. 

Ebola a Biological Warfare Weapon?

By Various Sources / October 15th, 2014

Data Dumped by Alex Constantine

Right-wing GOP fear brokers have blamed undocumented children for the domestic outbreak of the lethal enterovirus, Fox News claims that Barack Obama wants the entire country to “suffer with less fortunate nations,” and Rush Limbaugh maintains that Obama’s refusal to divert flights from Liberia is the unleashing of a racially-motivated vendetta against white people.

Given these unfounded allegations from the right, it is only fair to ask if white supremacists on the federal payroll had anything to do with it.
The suggestion that Ebola is an American-made WMD has arisen far and wide:

U.S. Government Patented Ebola! Why?
(Snippet from Western Journalism, October 7, 2014)
… We have two huge entities supposedly here helping us from outside invaders, albeit the tiniest of enemies being single cell viruses, but just how outside are they? What if I were to tell you that one of those big ‘helper’ entities actually had a patent on Ebola? Sound far-fetched? 

One guess which of the two big happy helpers it is. Drug companies, right? …Wrong. It’s big government. Specifically, The United States of America. Before you dismiss this as far-fetched or even impossible, just run a simple free patent search under the keyword ‘Ebola’. Not only will you see that Uncle Sam owns the patent on Ebola, but they also own the rights to all variations on Ebola, with the rights to all Ebola research.

The official owner of this Ebola patent is: The Government of the US as Represented by the Secretary of the Dept. of Health. Essentially, it is a patent issued by The United States government to The United States government. Please, look up U.S. patent number 20120251502, and then read the rest of this article—if you dare. … Now you know what very few people know–that Ebola is not only able to be patented, but that patent is owned by the U.S. government! So ask yourself one question: 

What word is synonymous with patentable creations or inventions? …You guessed it: Inventors. Read more at

Farrakhan claims Ebola invented to kill off blacks
(, October 2, 2014)

Firebrand Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan’s latest racially-charged claim is that Ebola – the deadly disease ravaging parts of Africa and now diagnosed on American soil – was designed by white scientists specifically to kill off blacks. The 81-year-old leveled the charge in his organization’s newspaper, The Final Call, insisting the disease is man-made and cooked up in a laboratory as a means of population control. He underscored the claim on his Twitter page, which has 308,000 followers. …

The first diagnosis on U.S. soil associated with the current outbreak came on Wednesday and involved a Sierra Leone man who flew to Dallas. But Farrakhan is not alone in his suspicions about Ebola. Villagers in remote areas of Africa have alleged the disease is a Western plot and has even killed aid workers. And in the U.S., Delaware State University agriculture professor Cyril Broderick wrote a letter to a Liberian newspaper charging Ebola was created by the U.S. military and pharmaceutical companies who are intentionally spreading the deadly disease in Africa. …

Inventors of Ebola must be punished – Palmer Buckle
Vibe Ghana, “Inventors of Ebola must be punished – Palmer Buckle,” October 15, 2014)

… “We hope and pray that the world would talk about it, if it is true that they did some experimentation with human beings without authorization, so that whoever it was, whatever country was involved in something like that could be brought to book because it should not be allowed to happen” Palmer Buckle told Starr News in an exclusive interview. … Various people across the world have also shared similar thoughts that Ebola was specifically created by some scientists. 

However, Palmer Buckle said the world must look to God to help the sub-region overcome this pandemic. “If the Lord our God would have the Church become a channel for – call it this way – causing infection it would be quite a very sad story, so we are praying to God to help this country, to help the sub-region to lift this scourge of this Ebola from all of us”.

Pharmaceutical companies and their interests
(Excerpt, “‘There is no natural disease called 

Ebola,” FinalCall, September 30, 2014)

… ZMapp, an experimental treatment developed by Mapp 

Biopharmaceutical Inc., in limited use, appears to have been effective in treating Ebola. Kent Brantly and Nancy Writebol, two medical workers operating in Liberia, were treated with ZMapp in the U.S., and appeared to have improved dramatically within 30 days.

Although ZMapp had not passed the initial human trial stage, the Food and Drug Administration granted emergency access to ZMapp in order to treat Mr. Brantly and Ms. Writebol. Prior to their treatment ZMapp had not been used at all on human beings, officials said. Officials are cautious about the success of the treatment made from Ebola antibodies, however, plans are in motion to produce more and quickly.

“It is too early to know whether ZMapp is effective or not, since it is still in an experimental stage and it has not yet been tested in humans for safety and effectiveness. Some patients infected with Ebola virus do get better spontaneously or with supportive care.  However, the best way to know if treatment with the product is efficacious is to conduct a randomized controlled clinical trial in people to compare the outcomes of patients who receive the treatment to untreated patients. No such studies have been conducted. It’s important to note that the standard treatment  for Ebola remains supportive therapy,” according to a statement from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), a division within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. HHS announced September 2 that “development of a medication to treat illness from Ebola will be accelerated” upon ASPR’s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority entering into an 18-month contract with Mapp Biopharmaceutical Inc. with funding at $24.9 million. The contract can be extended up to $42.3 million.

Mapp Biopharmaceutical Inc., established in 2003, has received other government contracts and grants for the last decade, which raises the questions: Why hasn’t it been tested in humans sooner? Why was the supply so limited in the first place? Who determines who gets it and how much will it cost? It does not appear that any Blacks have received the treatment, however, The Final Call will continue to monitor ZMapp’s development and use within ethnically specific test populations. Author Harriet A. Washington condemns the motivations of some pharmaceutical firms in her latest book  “Deadly Monopolies: 

The Shocking Takeover of Life Itself.” Pharmaceutical companies in 
Africa see a sort of “scientific Manifest Destiny,” except it involves the appropriation and patenting of actual human beings for Western advancement not the advancement of Africans, she wrote.

Friday, October 17, 2014

Beware: Israel the Eager Provocateur

...while traitorous Republicans and Democrats partner-up in a criminal bipartisanship Conspiracy

August 8, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - With hostilities once again erupting between Israeli forces and Palestine, onlookers must keep in mind the greater agenda in which the current violence is playing out and the stated agenda of achieving hegemony over the Middle East in which Israel plays a pivotal role - as the "unilateral aggressor."

FOB Israel 

Of course, Israel does nothing unilaterally. It is a stunted, militaristic faux-state that depends entirely on the West for its continued existence. From the funds it builds its military with, to the very hardware it buys and maintains, starting from the day the modern state of Israel was founded up to and including today, Israel is in reality a state-sized forward operating base (FOB). Wikipedia defines a FOB as follows:

"The base may be used for an extended period of time. FOBs are traditionally supported by Main Operating Bases that are required to provide backup support to them.[citation needed] An FOB also improves reaction time to local areas as opposed to having all troops on the main operating base."  

As such, Israel's constant and otherwise irrational belligerence makes perfect sense. An FOB's priorities are not prosperity and peace as would a nation's, but rather to engage forward into enemy territory. The trick over the years has been to portray Israel as a nation, while propping up its constant belligerence and aggression as "self-defense." To keep this illusion in motion, Israel and its regional and Western collaborators have even created full-time enemies, including Hamas itself - a creation of Israeli intelligence and to this day primarily propped up by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, both of which are defacto regional partners with the West and of course Israel itself.

The Wall Street Journal reported in their article, "
How Israel Helped to Spawn Hamas," that (emphasis added): 

"Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel's creation," says Mr. Cohen, a Tunisian-born Jew who worked in Gaza for more than two decades. Responsible for religious affairs in the region until 1994, Mr. Cohen watched the Islamist movement take shape, muscle aside secular Palestinian rivals and then morph into what is today Hamas, a militant group that is sworn to Israel's destruction.

Instead of trying to curb Gaza's Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat's Fatah. Israel cooperated with a crippled, half-blind cleric named Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, even as he was laying the foundations for what would become Hamas. Sheikh Yassin continues to inspire militants today; during the recent war in Gaza, Hamas fighters confronted Israeli troops with "Yassins," primitive rocket-propelled grenades named in honor of the cleric.

This is in fact exactly what Hamas is still being used today for - to counter real opposition movements by dividing against each other different factions of Muslims and secular organizations alike, in confusion and armed combat, preventing a greater, unified front against Western expansion and exploitation throughout the region. Extremist groups closely aligned to Hamas, including Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, would flood into Iraq during the US occupation to "serendipitously" disrupt united Sunni-Shia'a resistance, and create bloody infighting that broke the back of meaningful opposition against foreign occupation. The same method is being used again in Syria, and with the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria's (ISIS) incursion into Iraq weeks ago, yet again against Baghdad

Divided and in perpetual conflict, the Arab World across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) has not been able to create strong, secular, nationalist nations to protect Arab socioeconomic and political interests. In the process, the West has been able to exploit, divide, and conquer regions of MENA over and over again. Israel's role as the ultimate casus belli, instigator, and aggressor, has been instrumental in keeping this hegemonic enterprise alive and well with the region kept in a perpetual and crippling defensive posture. 
Israel's Role as "Unilateral Aggressor" is Stated US Policy
Finish reading​

Christian Brothers and Sisters: Did You Know Our Government Is Supporting Islamic Terrorists?

Look for traitors within your own ranks my friends. Start by looking at the US Congress's own terrorist fund, the NED.
Read more of NED's membership and activies from source
Posted on August 11, 2014 by WashingtonsBlog

Christians Are Being Persecuted By Islamic Terrorists

Christians are being persecuted by Islamic terrorists in Iraq and Syria.

The "ISIS" Islamic terrorists have literally CRUCIFIED people in Iraq recently, and have marked the houses of Christians … presumably for execution.

They have told Christians in Mosel, "convert to Islam or die". They have pulled down crosses at churches in Iraq.   Thousands of residents of Iraq's biggest Christian town have been forced to flee their homes as the ISIS killers overran their town and said: "leave, convert or die".

The ISIS terrorists are not only beheading adult Christians, but they are systematically beheading CHILDREN.

In Syria, rebels fighting against the Syrian government told Christians, "Either you convert to Islam or you will be beheaded."   Syrian rebels slit the throat of Christian man who refused to convert to Islam, taunting his fiance by yelling: "Jesus didn't come to save him!"  And – like the Islamic terrorists in Iraq – they've  CRUCIFIED Christians.

A former Syrian Jihadi says the rebels have a "9/11 ideology".  Indeed, they're literally singing Bin Laden's praises and celebrating the 9/11 attack:

It's obvious that the Islamic terrorists are threatening Christians. And they're threatening Jews as well.

Our Government Is BACKING Islamic Terrorists

But did you know that irrefutable proof shows that our government is backing Islamic terrorists?

ABC News reports:

The Sunni rebels [inside Syria] are supported by the Islamist rulers of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, as well as the U.S., France, Britain and others.

So the U.S. is directly supporting the terrorists … and close U.S. allies Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey France and Britain are also supporting them.

World Net Daily reports that the U.S. trained Islamic jihadis – who would later join ISIS - in Jordan.

Der Spiegel and the Guardian confirmed that the U.S., France and England trained hundreds if not thousands of Islamic fighters in Jordan.

The Jerusalem Post and Breitbart report that an ISIS fighter says that Turkey funds the terrorist group. Turkey is a member of NATO and – until very recently – a close U.S. ally.

The Independent headlines "Iraq crisis: How Saudi Arabia helped Isis take over the north of the country":

Some time before 9/11, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, once the powerful Saudi ambassador in Washington and head of Saudi intelligence until a few months ago, had a revealing and ominous conversation with the head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove. Prince Bandar told him: "The time is not far off in the Middle East, Richard, when it will be literally 'God help the Shia'. More than a billion Sunnis have simply had enough of them."


There is no doubt about the accuracy of the quote by Prince Bandar, secretary-general of the Saudi National Security Council from 2005 and head of General Intelligence between 2012 and 2014, the crucial two years when al-Qa'ida-type jihadis took over the Sunni-armed opposition in Iraq and Syria. Speaking at the Royal United Services Institute last week, Dearlove, who headed MI6 from 1999 to 2004, emphasised the significance of Prince Bandar's words, saying that they constituted "a chilling comment that I remember very well indeed".

He does not doubt that substantial and sustained funding from private donors in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, to which the authorities may have turned a blind eye, has played a central role in the Isis surge into Sunni areas of Iraq. He said: "Such things simply do not happen spontaneously." This sounds realistic since the tribal and communal leadership in Sunni majority provinces is much beholden to Saudi and Gulf paymasters, and would be unlikely to cooperate with Isis without their consent.


Unfortunately, Christians in areas captured by Isis are finding this is not true, as their churches are desecrated and they are forced to flee. A difference between al-Qa'ida and Isis is that the latter is much better organised; if it does attack Western targets the results are likely to be devastating.


Dearlove … sees Saudi strategic thinking as being shaped by two deep-seated beliefs or attitudes. First, they are convinced that there "can be no legitimate or admissible challenge to the Islamic purity of their Wahhabi credentials as guardians of Islam's holiest shrines". But, perhaps more significantly given the deepening Sunni-Shia confrontation, the Saudi belief that they possess a monopoly of Islamic truth leads them to be "deeply attracted towards any militancy which can effectively challenge Shia-dom".

Western governments traditionally play down the connection between Saudi Arabia and its Wahhabist faith, on the one hand, and jihadism, whether of the variety espoused by Osama bin Laden and al-Qa'ida or by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi's Isis. There is nothing conspiratorial or secret about these links: 15 out of 19 of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, as was Bin Laden and most of the private donors who funded the operation.


But there has always been a second theme to Saudi policy towards al-Qa'ida type jihadis, contradicting Prince Bandar's approach and seeing jihadis as a mortal threat to the Kingdom. Dearlove illustrates this attitude by relating how, soon after 9/11, he visited the Saudi capital Riyadh with Tony Blair.

He remembers the then head of Saudi General Intelligence "literally shouting at me across his office: '9/11 is a mere pinprick on the West. In the medium term, it is nothing more than a series of personal tragedies. What these terrorists want is to destroy the House of Saud and remake the Middle East.'" In the event, Saudi Arabia adopted both policies, encouraging the jihadis as a useful tool of Saudi anti-Shia influence abroad but suppressing them at home as a threat to the status quo. It is this dual policy that has fallen apart over the last year.

Saudi sympathy for anti-Shia "militancy" is identified in leaked US official documents. The then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wrote in December 2009 in a cable released by Wikileaks that "Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qa'ida, the Taliban, LeT [Lashkar-e-Taiba in Pakistan] and other terrorist groups."
​Finish reading from source

The Neocon Zionist Coup ...and Why It Matters to Americans! *vid*

Granted, there is some heavy stuff here:

Do not be confused. Zionists are "fake" Jews. Legitimate Jews are our friends as are un-radicalized Arab people. Here's a clearer explanation: Judaism and Zionism - What's the Difference? 

Neoconservatives are home-grown, ▶ Who are the NeoConservatives?: Know Thy Enemies Within *vid*
Graphic Chart of the Socialist Neoconservatives

Published on Oct 8, 2013

not for shock purposes, just for documenting FSA mercenaries war crimes in Syria against the Syrian people. If you are a minor or mentally unstable, please do not watch. Thank you for your cooperation and understanding.

FSA Free Syrian Army is the latest version of death squads in Syria accused of war crimes & crimes against humanity by the UN,HRW. Free Syrian Army's crimes against humanity including execution of captured anti-revolution civilians.

Thursday, October 9, 2014

Notice that ISIS Isn’t Beheading Swiss Citizens

When President Obama and his army began their bombing campaign against Islamic State forces in Iraq and Syria, they cited as their justification the Islamic State’s (aka ISIS) beheading of a private American citizen. The beheading, U.S. officials, said demonstrated what a dangerous threat the Islamic State was to the United States.
But there was one big problem with that reasoning: Those who did the beheading cited Obama’s bombing campaign against ISIS as the justification for beheading the American citizen. Since the bombing campaign succeeded in killing Islamic State friends and comrades, the Islamic State claimed that it was justified in retaliating by beheading an American citizen.

So, is this a chicken and egg quandary? Which came first: the bombing or the beheading? Does it make any difference?
Ever since 9/11, this has been the major issue facing the American people with respect to U.S. foreign policy: Did terrorism come to the United States because of the ferocity of radical Muslims who hate America for its freedom and values? 
Or did terrorism come to the United States out of retaliation for what the U.S. government was doing to people in the Middle East, many of whom were Muslims, including such things as the U.S. government’s partnership with Middle East dictatorships, including Saddam Hussein, the Persian Gulf intervention, the sanctions against Iraq that were killing tens of thousands of Iraqi children on an annual basis, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright’s statement that the deaths of half-a-million Iraqi children from the sanctions were “worth it,” the stationing of U.S. troops near Islamic holy lands, the deadly no-fly zones over Iraq, and the unconditional military and financial support to the Israeli government.
One clue to which version is correct is Switzerland. That’s a country whose freedom and values are similar to those of the United States but with one major exception.
Like the United States, Switzerland has a welfare state and a regulated society.

Yet, notice something important: Switzerland isn’t the subject of terrorist attacks, and the Islamic State isn’t beheading Swiss citizens. Wouldn’t  you think that if radical Muslims hate the United States for its freedom and values, they would also hate Switzerland for its freedom and values, especially since the freedom and values of the United States are similar to those of Switzerland, with one major exception?

So, what’s that major exception? Is it possible that that major exception could provide a clue as to which comes first: terrorism or U.S. interventionism?

One of the big things that distinguishes Switzerland from the United States is its foreign policy. Unlike the U.S. government, the Swiss government does not maintain military bases in foreign countries. It doesn’t meddle in or intervene in the internal affairs of other countries. It doesn’t engage in bombing campaigns against foreigners. It doesn’t commit kidnappings, coups, torture, assassinations, and indefinite military detention of foreigners. It doesn’t partner with brutal foreign dictatorships. It doesn’t get involved in civil wars or conflicts between nations.

The Swiss government, unlike the U.S. government, minds its own business.

In fact, the Swiss government’s foreign policy pretty much mirrors the foreign policy on which the United States was founded. That foreign policy of non-interventionism was summarized in John Quincy Adams’ Fourth of July Speech to Congress in 1821 entitled “In Search of Monsters to Destroy.”
And it’s not as though the Switzerland is a nation of pacifists. On the contrary, the Swiss people are among the fiercest and most competent fighters in history. Swiss citizens maintain assault rifles in their homes and most every one of them are trained to use them. In fact, shooting is a national pastime in Switzerland.
The difference is that the Swiss military, which relies in large part on well-trained citizen soldiers, is entirely oriented toward genuine defense — that is, the defense of Switzerland from an attack or invasion.
Thus, I find it amusing whenever American conservatives say they favor “a strong national defense.” The Swiss model — which constitutes genuine defense — is not what conservatives mean by that term. What conservatives mean by the term “a strong national defense” is actually a powerful overseas military empire, one that maintains military bases all over the world, engages in coups and other regime-change operations, kidnaps, tortures, assassinates, and indefinitely detains people through the Pentagon and CIA, partners with brutal dictatorships, interferes with the internal affairs of other countries, and uses foreign aid to manipulate foreign regimes.
So, why do foreigners initiate terrorist attacks against the United States and not against Switzerland?
It shouldn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
This post was written by:
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at and from Full Context

Suspicions Run Deep in Iraq That CIA and the Islamic State Are United

Suspicions Run Deep in Iraq That CIA and the Islamic State Are United
Iraqi Shiite militants demonstrate against US intervention. (Photo: AFP)

Baghdad:  The United States has conducted an escalating campaign of deadly airstrikes against the extremists of the Islamic State for more than a month. But that appears to have done little to tamp down the conspiracy theories still circulating from the streets of Baghdad to the highest levels of Iraqi government that the CIA is secretly behind the same extremists that it is now attacking.

"We know about who made Daesh," said Bahaa al-Araji, a deputy prime minister, using an Arabic shorthand for the Islamic State, on Saturday at a demonstration called by the Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to warn against the possible deployment of U.S. ground troops.

Sadr publicly blamed the CIA for creating the Islamic State in a speech last week, and interviews suggested that most of the few thousand people at the demonstration, including dozens of members of parliament, subscribed to the same theory. (Sadr is considered close to Iran, and the theory is popular there as well.)

When an American journalist asked Araji to clarify if he blamed the CIA for the Islamic State, he retreated: "I don't know. I am one of the poor people," he said, speaking fluent English and quickly stepping back toward the open door of a chauffeur-driven SUV. "But we fear very much. Thank you!"

The prevalence of the theory in the streets underscored the deep suspicions of the U.S. military's return to Iraq more than a decade after its invasion, in 2003. The casual endorsement by a senior official, though, was also a pointed reminder that the new Iraqi government may be an awkward partner for the U.S.-led campaign to drive out the extremists.

The Islamic State has conquered many of the predominantly Sunni Muslim provinces in Iraq's northeast, aided by the alienation of many residents to the Shiite-dominated government of the former prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki. President Barack Obama has insisted repeatedly that U.S. military action against the Islamic State depended on the installation of a more inclusive government in Baghdad, but he moved ahead before it was complete.

The parliament has not yet confirmed nominees for the crucial posts of interior or defense ministers, in part because of discord between Sunni and Shiite factions, and the Iraqi news media has reported that it may be more than a month before the posts are filled.

The demonstration Saturday was the latest in a series of signals from Shiite leaders or militias, especially those considered close to Iran, warning the United States not to put its soldiers back on the ground. Obama has pledged not to send combat troops, but he seems to have convinced few Iraqis.

"We don't  trust him," said Raad Hatem, 40.

Haidar al-Assadi, 40, agreed.

"The Islamic State is a clear creation of the United States, and the United States is trying to intervene again using the excuse of the Islamic State," he said.

Shiite militias and volunteers, he said, were already answering the call from religious leaders to defend Iraq from the Islamic State without American help.

"This is how we do it," he said, adding that the same forces would keep U.S. troops out. "The main reason Obama is saying he will not invade again is because he knows the Islamic resistance" of the Shiite militias "and he does not want to lose a single soldier."

The leader of the Islamic State, for his part, declared Saturday that he defied the world to stop him.

"The conspiracies of Jews, Christians, Shiites and all the tyrannical regimes in the Muslim countries have been powerless to make the Islamic State deviate from its path," the leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, declared in an audio recording released over the Internet, using derogatory terms from early Islamic history to refer to Christians and Shiites.

"The entire world saw the powerlessness of America and its allies before a group of believers," he said. "People now realize that victory is from God, and it shall not be aborted by armies and their arsenals."

Many at the rally in Baghdad said they welcomed airstrikes against Baghdadi's Islamic State but not U.S. ground forces, the position that Sadr has taken.

Many of the 30 lawmakers backed by Sadr - out of a parliament of 328 seats - attended the rally.

Sadr's supporters opposed al-Maliki, the former prime minister, and many at the rally were quick to criticize the former government for mistakes like failing to build a more dependable army.
"We had a good army, so where is this army now?" asked Waleed al-Hasnawi, 35. "Maliki gave them everything but they just left the battlefield."

But few if any blamed al-Maliki for alienating Sunnis, as U.S. officials assert, by permitting sectarian abuses under the Shiite-dominated security forces.

Omar al-Jabouri, 31, a Sunni Muslim from a predominantly Shiite neighborhood of Baghdad who attended the rally and said he volunteers with a Shiite brigade, argued that al-Maliki had alienated most Iraqis, regardless of their sect.

"He did not just exclude and marginalize the Sunni people; he ignored the Shiite people, too," Jabouri said. "He gave special help to his family, his friends, people close to him. He did not really help the Shiite people, as many people think."

But the Islamic State was a different story, Jabouri said. "It is obvious to everyone that the Islamic State is a creation of the United States and Israel."
© 2014, The New York Times News Service
Story First Published: September 21, 2014 08:16 IST

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

George Soros Funded: The Center for American Progress’ Jihad Against the Free World

When, oh when, Dear Lord, are the American people going to put a halt to their own taxpayer funding of these tax-exempt subversive foundations?!

See the complete Guide to the Soros Network

Posted by Daniel Greenfield Bio ↓ on Dec 30th, 2011

The colors of the American flag are red, white and blue, but the colors of the Center for American Progress are red, white and green. Red for the left and green for Islam.

The Center for American Progress is not just any organization. Headed up by John Podesta, a co-chairman of Obama’s transition team and backed by a 38 million dollar annual budget, it is George Soros’ most ambitious attempt to turn his Shadow Party into a shadow government. CAP is the organization with the single greatest influence on the Obama White House and its foreign and domestic policy.

CAP is more than just another think tank; it’s a lever for shifting the Democratic Party further to the left, bought and paid for by George Soros and a roster of secret donors whose names are not made public by the secretive and powerful organization. Those who buy influence with it also get anonymity as part of the package.

But the Center is more than a rogue billionaire’s brand of progressivism turned into talking-point groupthink by Washington insiders. It is a link between the American left and the Muslim right, articulating the Islamist agenda as a vehicle for the foreign policy of the post-American left. It’s where Ali Gharib can run pieces whitewashing the Muslim Brotherhood while Zaid Jiliani attempts to justify the ambassador to Belgium’s comments denying the existence of Muslim anti-Semitism.

A CAP report co-authored by Wajahat Ali, a defender of Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists, and a board member of the Muslim Students Association, a Muslim Brotherhood front group, claimed that counterterrorism analysts were misrepresenting the threat of Sharia law and that Sharia was “overwhelmingly concerned with personal religious observance such as prayer and fasting, and not with national laws.” That particular revelation might come as a shock to raped women in Pakistan and gay men in Iran.

Ali’s Islamist leanings drove him to call on Obama to “interact with democratically elected Muslim governments and representatives, such as Hamas and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran.” But despite Ali’s extremism, the Center allowed him to co-author a report on Islamic law and another report titled “Fear Inc.” which attempted to demonize Muslim and non-Muslim critics of Islamist organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood.

ThinkProgress, the Center for American Progress’ blog, is run by Faiz Shakir, who also serves as the organization’s vice president. The ThinkProgress blog has become extreme even by CAP standards, forcing Ken Gude, CAP’s national security director, to attempt to distance his center’s policy arm from its blogs. In a post jointly co-authored by Faiz Shakir and Ken Gude, the two men denied that their work was anti-Semitic, but avoided similarly ruling out that their work was anti-Israel, probably because such an assertion would have simply been unsupportable.

CAP and its various affiliated blogs have taken an enthusiastically uncritical approach to the Islamist Arab Spring and a hostile, critical approach to the State of Israel. At the ThinkProgress blog, Matt Duss described Israel’s border controls with Hamas-run Gaza as a “moral abomination” and compared the deaths of Islamist radicals who attempted to murder Israeli soldiers to the murders of Goodman, Chaney, and Schwerner in the South during the Civil Rights movement.

Duss, writing at Middle East Progress, a spinoff CAP blog, ran a piece on Rashid al-Ghannushi. Al-Ghannushi is one of the leaders of Tunisia’s Islamist Ennahda organization with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. In the past he has called for a war against America, branding it an “enemy of Islam.”

Al-Ghannushi has also called for the genocide of Israeli Jews, writing: “There are no civilians in Israel. The population– males, females and children… are the army reserve soldiers, and thus can be killed.” True to form, Duss tossed softball questions to the gruesome Al-Ghannushi while praising him as a non-violent intellectual. This was business at usual at CAP where Netanyahu is a monster who must be kicked to the curb, but real monsters like Al-Ghannushi are moderates who deserve our support.

A more accurate name for CAP would be the Center for Islamist Progress. There is no Islamist thug or regime too awful for the Center, whose number one priority is backing Islamist takeovers in the Middle East. Its number two priority is fighting military action on Iran, and even decrying sanctions against Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollahs, and its number three priority is portraying Israel as the greatest threat to peace in the region.

But if the Center wanted to avoid allegations of anti-Semitism it would have been wise to also avoid picking a fight with the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a non-partisan organization started by Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal that tracks expressions of hate against the Jewish people.

Instead, in response to a simple policy statement from the Wiesenthal Center against returning to the indefensible 1948 borders, ThinkProgress’ Ben Armbruster called it a “far-right” organization and accused it of branding Obama a Nazi.

The Wiesenthal Center had done no such thing and blasted CAP and Media Matters, the former home of Ben Armbruster, for conspiring to intimidate any group taking a pro-Israel position. CAP’s goal is to shift the Democratic Party further into the anti-Israel camp and attacking and silencing pro-Israel voices is an effective means of doing so. This Kulturkampf being waged against pro-Israel groups by Soros’ prodigies extended even to an attack on the most prominent Jewish anti-Nazi group in the world. An attack doubtlessly approved of by Soros, who was after all an unashamed Nazi collaborator.

Jewish liberals who attempted to denounce the harmful influence of the Center have been silenced. Josh Block, a former fellow at the Truman National Security Project (TNSP), was purged after he denounced Duss and co. for their bigotry. The purge was unsurprising considering that John Podesta of CAP is on the advisory board at TNSP and Rachel Kleinfeld, TNSP’s executive director who fired Block, has consulted for Soros’ Open Society Institute.

The Truman National Security Project was created to bolster the Democratic Party’s image on national security. Instead it has chosen to follow the CAP line and that has ominous implications for the Democratic Party. The Center for American Progress has done its best to revive the Carter-era Green Belt program of passing off Islamist empowerment and Israel bashing as policies that are in our national interest.

The American left has rolled out the red carpet for the Islamists without paying any attention to the bloody footprints that the Muslim Brotherhood’s various affiliates leave behind. The red, white and green flag that they have raised over the White House, the State Department and over their party has already helped turn major portions of the Middle East and North Africa into another Iran. Unless moderate Democrats stand up to the extremists at the Center for American Progress, then their party will be permanently red, white and green all over.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.