Friday, January 3, 2014

Axis of Evil

Axis of Evil

Remember "w" bush's "Axis of Evil"?  Iran, Iraq, North Korea (or somesuch).  Those were countries that were dangerous to world peace, threatening the world's stability and not above using terrorism as a policy tool.

My, how times have changed.

Lets see if in Anno Domini 2014 the Axis of Evil list should not be updated.

The case for including Israel

As I have written in Why does Israel want Syria destroyed?,  a very influential (yet unknown for most people) neocon, professor Bernard Lewis, advocated "lebanonization" for those countries that opposed Israeli policies and/or that could be a danger to it.

History Commons, timeline: Autumn 1992:

Princeton University professor Bernard Lewis publishes an article in the influential journal Foreign Affairs called “Rethinking the Middle East.” In it, he advocates a policy he calls “lebanonization.” He says, “[A] possibility, which could even be precipitated by [Islamic] fundamentalism, is what has late been fashionable to call ‘lebanonization.’ Most of the states of the Middle East—Egypt is an obvious exception—are of recent and artificial construction and are vulnerable to such a process. If the central power is sufficiently weakened, there is no real civil society to hold the polity together, no real sense of common identity.… Then state then disintegrates—as happened in Lebanon—into a chaos of squabbling, feuding, fighting sects, tribes, regions, and parties.” Lewis, a British Jew, is well known as a longtime supporter of the Israeli right wing. 

Lewis is considered a highly influential figure to the neoconservative movement, and some neoconservatives such as Richard Perle and Harold Rhode consider him a mentor. In 1996, Perle and others influenced by Lewis will write a paper for right wing Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu entitled “A Clean Break” that advocates the “lebanonization” of countries like Iraq and Syria (see July 8, 1996). Lewis will remain influential after 9/11. For instance, he will have dinner with Vice President Cheney shortly before the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. Some will later suspect that Cheney and others were actually implementing Lewis’s idea by invading Iraq. Chas Freeman, former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia, will say in May 2003, just after the invasion, “The neoconservatives’ intention in Iraq was never to truly build democracy there. Their intention was to flatten it, to remove Iraq as a regional threat to Israel.”
The goal of Israel is to destabilize countries inimical to it.  To do that, money and turning blind eye to Saudis setting up terror Sunni-Wahhabism (extremist branch of Islam) groups in countries such as Syria.  In effect, supporting terrorism.

Many people will undoubtedly point out to Israeli treatment of Palestinians and its influx of African migrants (i.e. sterilization and deportation of) as terrorism.  I disagree - I believe that Israel has a right to protect itself (within its own borders, no less) and has the goal of doing what is best for Israeli citizens - the Jewish ones.  Obviously, that precludes a massive African immigration into the country, and the setting up of an independent Palestinian country.

Or perhaps - countries?  After an Israeli Mossad operation, Hamas was created to split up and divide the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the "Divide and Conquer" maxim, or the modern updated "lebanonization" one.  In case any moron disbelieves me...

Wikipedia: Hamas

Israeli military and intelligence was still focused on Fatah, and continued to maintain contacts with Gaza Islamic activists. Numerous Islamist leaders, including senior Hamas founder Mahmoud Zahar, met with Yitzhak Rabin as part of "regular consultations" between Israeli officials and Palestinians not linked to the PLO.
 Wall Street Journal
"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.
 Mr. Cohen, who worked at the time for the Israeli government's religious affairs department in Gaza, says he began to hear disturbing reports in the mid-1970s about Sheikh Yassin from traditional Islamic clerics. He says they warned that the sheikh had no formal Islamic training and was ultimately more interested in politics than faith. "They said, 'Keep away from Yassin. He is a big danger,'" recalls Mr. Cohen.
Instead, Israel's military-led administration in Gaza looked favorably on the paraplegic cleric, who set up a wide network of schools, clinics, a library and kindergartens. Sheikh Yassin formed the Islamist group Mujama al-Islamiya, which was officially recognized by Israel as a charity and then, in 1979, as an association. Israel also endorsed the establishment of the Islamic University of Gaza, which it now regards as a hotbed of militancy. The university was one of the first targets hit by Israeli warplanes in the recent war.

Brig. General Yosef Kastel, Gaza's Israeli governor at the time, is too ill to comment, says his wife. But Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Segev, who took over as governor in Gaza in late 1979, says he had no illusions about Sheikh Yassin's long-term intentions or the perils of political Islam. As Israel's former military attache in Iran, he'd watched Islamic fervor topple the Shah. However, in Gaza, says Mr. Segev, "our main enemy was Fatah," and the cleric "was still 100% peaceful" towards Israel. Former officials say Israel was also at the time wary of being viewed as an enemy of Islam.
Mr. Segev says he had regular contact with Sheikh Yassin, in part to keep an eye on him. He visited his mosque and met the cleric around a dozen times. It was illegal at the time for Israelis to meet anyone from the PLO. Mr. Segev later arranged for the cleric to be taken to Israel for hospital treatment. "We had no problems with him," he says.

Again, this is the old Ancient Roman policy of divide-and-conquer of the tribal barbarian territories which the ancient military power conquered (or wanted to conquer) - organize opposition to the anti-Roman faction, even if such was inimical to Roman interests.  After all, they will spend more time fighting each other than the occupier.  This was practiced by most Empires in history, most successfully (albeit for a very short time) by the British Empire, which conquered half the world with a laughably small, miniscule number of active soldiers.

In modern parlance, divide-and-conquer was renamed "lebanonization" but it is still the same thing - sic your enemies against each other, using money, arms, lies and false flag operations to accomplish this. Because of Israel's "lebanonization" efforts and the success of the pro-Israeli lobby in the USA in pushing this policy for it, I herefore assign Israel to the new, updated Axis of Evil.

The case for including Saudi Arabia

Err... Do I need to write ANYTHING in this section?

I mean, the case for this one is fucking overwhelming...

Eh, might as well.

Frontline (PBS):

A madrassa is an Islamic religious school. Many of the Taliban were educated in Saudi-financed madrassas in Pakistan that teach Wahhabism, a particularly austere and rigid form of Islam which is rooted in Saudi Arabia. Around the world, Saudi wealth and charities contributed to an explosive growth of madrassas during the Afghan jihad against the Soviets. During that war (1979-1989), a new kind of madrassa emerged in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region -- not so much concerned about scholarship as making war on infidels. The enemy then was the Soviet Union, today it's America. Here are analyses of the madrassas from interviews with Vali Nasr, an authority on Islamic fundamentalism, and Richard Holbrooke, former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. (For more on the role of madrassas in producing militant Islamists, see the story of Haroun Fazul.)
Vali Nasr:
an authority on Islamic fundamentalism
All of these groups are rooted in a network of seminaries, or as the term is called in the local vernacular, "madrassa." My argument was that the main source of funding for these groups is Saudi Arabia. In fact, this whole phenomenon that we are confronting, which Al Qaeda is a part of, is very closely associated with Saudi Arabia's financial and religious projects for the Muslim world as a whole. ...
You said that the main source of funding for these Islamic extremists--
Or at least the institutions that train them.
-- is whom?
It's Saudi Arabia and its network of charities and the like. The argument I make is that there is an undercurrent of terror and fanaticism that go hand in hand in the Afghanistan-Pakistan arc, and extend all the way to Uzbekistan. And you can see reflections of it in Bosnia, in Kosovo, in Indonesia, in the Philippines.

For instance, in one madrassa in Pakistan, I interviewed 70 Malaysian and Thai students who are being educated side by side with students who went on to the Afghan war and the like. These people return to their countries, and then we see the results in a short while. ... At best, they become hot-headed preachers in mosques that encourage fighting Christians in Nigeria or in Indonesia. And in a worst case, they actually recruit or participate in terror acts.
What you're saying is that, if we wanted to look for the causes of what's happened -- Al Qaeda and the movement worldwide -- we would have to look to the schools, to the educational system which Saudi Arabia has fostered in the Islamic world?

... In order to have terrorists, in order to have supporters for terrorists, in order to have people who are willing to interpret religion in violent ways, in order to have people who are willing to legitimate crashing yourself into a building and killing 5,000 innocent people, you need particular interpretations of Islam.
Those interpretations of Islam are being propagated out of schools that receive organizational and financial funding from Saudi Arabia. In fact, I would push it further: that these schools would not have existed without Saudi funding. They would not have proliferated across Pakistan and India and Afghanistan without Saudi funding. They would not have had the kind of prowess that they have without Saudi funding, and they would not have trained as many people without Saudi funding.
Richard Holbrooke (U.S. ambassador to the U.N. in the Clinton administration):
I think that one of the tragedies of this story is that the Saudi Arabians exported their problem by financing the schools, the madrassas, all through the Islamic world. I saw this in Uzbekistan a few years after Uzbekistan got out of the Soviet Union, became an independent state in cities like Tashkent and Samarkand, where the Saudis were funding these schools teaching Koranic studies and creating a class of people for whom education was simply the Holy Book, the Koran.

... What happened here was that the Saudi Arabian government had two wings. The mainland Saudi leadership went into financial issues, defense issues, and they controlled the elite establishment in order to purchase support. From the more fundamentalist religious groups, they gave certain other ministries, the religious ministries, education ministries, to more fundamentalist Islam leaders. And that's how the split occurred.
So the Saudi government was, to a certain extent, pursuing internally inconsistent policies throughout this period -- reaching out to the West with sophisticated, well educated, internationally minded leaders like its foreign minister, like its ambassador in Washington and others. At the same time, it was funding with this vast oil revenue a different set of efforts: education, which was narrowly based in the Koran. ...
 Of course, we can see the difference between a real expert, Mr. Vali, and an American Amateur "expert", the idiot holbrooke.  There are no two wings in Saudi politics, nor is there an inconsistency in Saudi politics.  The goal for the Sauds is both political and religious (after all, both go hand in hand, ask the Chinese, Japanese about Christian missionaries and their influence during the Middle Ages).

Madrassas are terrorism incubators - so called schools which do not teach math, nor farming techniques, nor business, nor how to help your own society.  These are not Western European style NGO's - this is purely and simply brainwashing.

And they are in EVERY country that has a moslem population.  Pick one, randomly.  Indonesia - check. Phillipines - check. America - check. UK - or shall I say, the near future Caliphate of the Islands - check, check, check.

EVERY news story involving islamic militants blowing up mosques (non-wahhabi, Shia mosques that is), blowing up crowded bazaars, killing teachers, killing women for attending school - this is all House of Saud paid for, trained and schooled and brainwashed in Saudi paid/staffed/organized Madrassas terrorism.  EVERY single one.  The Taj Mahal massacre in India? The shopping mall massacre in Nairobi, Kenya?  All Saudi sponsored, paid for, trained and organized.

The Guardian, quoting Wikileaks:

Saudi Arabia is the world's largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups such as the Afghan Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba – but the Saudi government is reluctant to stem the flow of money, according to Hillary Clinton.

"More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaida, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups," says a secret December 2009 paper signed by the US secretary of state. Her memo urged US diplomats to redouble their efforts to stop Gulf money reaching extremists in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

"Donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide," she said.
Three other Arab countries are listed as sources of militant money: Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates.

The cables highlight an often ignored factor in the Pakistani and Afghan conflicts: that the violence is partly bankrolled by rich, conservative donors across the Arabian Sea whose governments do little to stop them.
Again, amateur American so called "analysis".  "More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaida, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups," says a secret December 2009 paper signed by the US secretary of state".  What idiocy.  This is the policy of the government and country of Saudi Arabia - like any virus, it wishes to spread itself, to multiply and to make it hard to fight - and so it infects as much of the world as it can.

But is there a smoking gun, something that decisively proves Saudi involvement in worldwide terrorism?


Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria, The Telegraph:

Saudi Arabia has secretly offered Russia a sweeping deal to control the global oil market and safeguard Russia’s gas contracts, if the Kremlin backs away from the Assad regime in Syria.
Leaked transcripts of a closed-door meeting between Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan shed an extraordinary light on the hard-nosed Realpolitik of the two sides.

Prince Bandar, head of Saudi intelligence, allegedly confronted the Kremlin with a mix of inducements and threats in a bid to break the deadlock over Syria. “Let us examine how to put together a unified Russian-Saudi strategy on the subject of oil. The aim is to agree on the price of oil and production quantities that keep the price stable in global oil markets,” he said at the four-hour meeting with Mr Putin. They met at Mr Putin’s dacha outside Moscow three weeks ago.

“We understand Russia’s great interest in the oil and gas in the Mediterranean from Israel to Cyprus. And we understand the importance of the Russian gas pipeline to Europe. We are not interested in competing with that. We can cooperate in this area,” he said, purporting to speak with the full backing of the US.
As-Safir said Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord. “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” he allegedly said.
Prince Bandar went on to say that Chechens operating in Syria were a pressure tool that could be switched on an off. “These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role in Syria’s political future.”
The Putin-Bandar meeting was stormy, replete with warnings of a “dramatic turn” in Syria. Mr Putin was unmoved by the Saudi offer, though western pressure has escalated since then. “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters,” he said, referring to footage showing a Jihadist rebel eating the heart and liver of a Syrian soldier.
Prince Bandar in turn warned that there can be “no escape from the military option” if Russia declines the olive branch. Events are unfolding exactly as he foretold.

Reread this blurb about the meeting between Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar and Mr. Putin.

Especially pay attention to "Prince Bandar went on to say that Chechens operating in Syria were a pressure tool that could be switched on an off. “These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role in Syria’s political future.”"

Also pay special attention to "As-Safir said Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord. “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” he allegedly said". 

Got that?

Saudis CONTROL worldwide Sunni wahhabi terrorism.

They use it as a tool.

Putin said "Nyet" to Saudi-American blackmail.

And lately... we have suicide bombings in Russia.

Now pay attention to the last line of the article quoted: "Prince Bandar in turn warned that there can be “no escape from the military option” if Russia declines the olive branch. Events are unfolding exactly as he foretold".

The Role of Iran

In fact, the one counterpoint, the one ally against this worldwide tsunami of evil, is that one natural American/Western European country in the Middle East - I am talking, of course, of Iran.

But because Iran is an enemy of our enemy, Israel (suck on that, Israeli firsters in America), and because of American policy of "lebanonization" (which is really Israeli policy, but since America is Israel's bitch, both apply), this cannot be.

CBS news: Iran Gave U.S. Help On Al Qaeda After 9/11
Iran rounded up hundreds of Arabs to help the United States counter al Qaeda after the Sept. 11 attack after they crossed the border from Afghanistan, a former Bush administration official said Tuesday. Many were expelled, Hillary Mann Leverett said, and the Iranians made copies of almost 300 of their passports.

The copies were sent to Kofi Annan, then the secretary-general of the United Nations, who passed them to the United States, and U.S. interrogators were given a chance by Iran to question some of the detainees, Leverett said in an Associated Press interview.
Leverett, a Middle East expert who was a career U.S. Foreign Service officer, said she negotiated with Iran for the Bush administration in the 2001-3 period, and Iran sought a broader relationship with the United States. "They thought they had been helpful on al Qaeda, and they were," she said.

For one thing, she said, Iran denied sanctuary to suspected al Qaeda operatives.

Some administration officials took the view, however, that Iran had not acknowledged all likely al Qaeda members nor provided access to them, Leverett said.
I can guarantee that these "some administration" officials are neocons dead set on American war on Iran, again to further "lebanonize"/destabilize Israeli foes and make them fight each other and ignore Israel.

James F. Dobbins, the Bush administration's chief negotiator on Afghanistan in late 2001, said Iran was "comprehensively helpful" in the aftermath of the 9-11 attack in 2001 in working to overthrow the Taliban militias' rule and collaborating with the United States to install the Karzai government in Kabul.

Iranian diplomats made clear at the time they were looking for broader cooperation with the United States, but the Bush administration was not interested, the author of "After the Taliban: Nation-Building in Afghanistan," said in a separate interview.

The Bush administration has acknowledged contacts with Iran over the years even while denouncing Iran as part of an "axis of evil" and declining to consider resumption of diplomatic relations.
Here was "w" bush's "Nixon in China" moment, which would have as big strategic ramifications as that momentous anti-Soviet alliance.

In one stroke, the Middle East would be stabilized, with clear areas of influence defined between the Sunni (Saudi influence) and Shia (Iranian influence).  Secret and then open discussions between the two nations could have hammered out security deals for the stability and influence of Israel, Saudi, Iranian interests/groups in Iraq (which, lets face it, the Shia-Iranian faction has won).  Call it realpolitik for peace this time, not war.

Cooperation against the Saudi Sunni wahhabi loonies, with Iran, USA and the UK (UK is America's poodle and does as it is told - more on that in a moment) would result in much better results against islamic extremism worldwide.

And did I not mention stabilization of the Middle East?  The hundreds of thousands of dead, millions of refugees of "lebanonization" in Syria, of "Arab Spring" which opened the door to "Moslem Brotherhood" extremism "democracy" (after we win, no more democracy, only Sharia "democracy") all gone.  Peace, stability, prosperity, lots of loud talking of happy people at the bazaars and cafes, and no bomb going off.

But that would be against Israeli vision of setting the Middle East on fire, and so is a no go.

And Iran is our main enemy, with American TV news stating "facts" that is sponsors Sunni al Kaida (Only in America could the populace be so stupid as to "swallow this", right?  I mean the chief enemy of Sunni extremism, Shia Iran, sponsoring and supporting al Kaida, insane).

The case for including USA

In pursuit of the Israeli goal of "lebanonization" of the Middle East. The USofA has invaded Iraq, precipitating a bloody civil strife, totally destabilizing that country. 

It is not the drone strikes, which, despite some claims (many of them propaganda, many of them truth) that they have an alarming frequency of striking wild Arab weddings (with fleets of SUV's packed full of Arab men shooting guns into the air) instead of hard core terrorist leaders, can be argued (and I also support this viewpoint) are a defensive/counter-strike action against anti-American wahhabi terrorism.

But on the other hand, USA, in pursuit of Israel's "lebanonization" goals, has clearly supported, in Syria, the same wahhabi terrorists, a hodgpe podge of Saudi, Yemeni, Egyptian, Tunisian, Libyan and other dregs of Arab society, paid by Saudi money, which is freely allowed to flow into Syria by American and Israeli intelligence services.

The American government even went so far as to latch onto a clear-to-all "False Flag" operation of using chemical weapons on innocent civilian targets in that country - and by "targets", I mean unarmed men, women and children; civilians not taking part in the war at all.

The obama administration jumped into the tried already "9-11" mode of using a manufactured crisis to drastically change American policy and America's realities/paradigms.  The call was for war, to bomb Assad and his Syria, under assault (then as of now) by the so called al Kaida Sunni wahhabi fanatical, anti-civilization, sponsored by Saudi and American and Israeli money and turning a blind eye support.

Remember the whole WMD brouhaha?  American TV and newspapers and radio talk-shows were full of sob stories of children gassed "by the Syrian regime".  Articles like this New York Times Report Detail Could Further Implicate Syria in Chemical Attack, Analysts Say, beating the drums for war and bombing Syria (to "help the children", "for humanitarian reasons", of course, because apparently that's what American bombing of a country does).  But while the article clearly states "could further implicate Syria" followed by a weasely "analysts' say", it neither in the writeup states exactly HOW it implicated Syria and exactly WHOM the experts who said so WERE.

Another one from that time of lies; U.N. report on sarin attack in Syria points to Assad, envoys say.  

A United Nations report concluding that chemical weapons were used in Syria on Aug. 21 contains evidence pointing to Syrian President Bashar Assad's forces as the perpetrators, the U.S. and British ambassadors to the world body said Monday.

Nothing could be further from the truth - the UN report DID NOT contain evidence that it was Syria which used chemical weapons on its own people.  In effect, the UK and American envoys were lying to the world and to their people, preparing the masses for yet another war for Israeli interests.

In fact, the United Nations experts on the ground in Syria have stated that, yes, chemical weapons were used, but that they were used by the anti-Assad al Kaida REBELS. 

Yes, you read that right.

Syrian Rebels May Have Used Sarin

The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces using chemical weapons, which are banned under international law, said Carla Del Ponte, a commission member.

“Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals,” Ms. Del Ponte said in an interview with Swiss-Italian television. “According to their report of last week, which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated.”

“This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities,” she added, speaking in Italian.
Just like 9-11, a manufactured crisis was used to drastically change American (and in effect, UK's and indeed, the whole world) policy... but this time, the ploy failed.

But there is another episode of recent, modern history, that really showcases what America stands for these days, which escaped much attention.

Peruse my "Ossetia Collection" links on the right of this blog.

The short of it is, that a small American allied country, Georgia, had 1500 American (and Israeli) "advisors", and that it invaded another nation to ethnically cleanse it and to add it to its own borders.

In effect, to pull what hitler, Stalin and Saddam have done.

The Russian state interfered to, in my opinion, acted to prevent ethnic cleansing and genocide and moved its armed forces to protect Russians (and other non-Georgians) in Ossetia.

Imagine my surprise when I was watching American TV and every news show, every one, has stated that Russians have, yes, they said it, "invaded" Georgia.

Mr. mccain (the son of the traitor admiral at the heart of the "USS Liberty" incident in which Israeli planes and torpedo boats sunk an American Navy intelligence ship, and also committed a war crime by strafing and rocketing the survivors in their rescue dinghies) beat the drums for war:
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Republican White House hopeful John McCain said Monday Russia appears bent on extinguishing Georgia's independence as he demanded a united Western front to protect the former Soviet republic.

The United States should dispatch "immediate economic and humanitarian assistance to help mitigate the impact the invasion has had on the people of Georgia," McCain said in a statement he read to reporters in Pennsylvania
Note that this article has been scrubbed from the American news sources, but at least the French version is up (McCain accuses Russia of bidding to wipe out Georgia).

As I have said before, there were American and Israeli "military advisors" in Georgia, training their army in modern combat techniques.

Another article, incidentally also scrubbed from the web, on my blog, by Jason Cooper:

TSKHINVALI (Tiraspol Times) - Despite not being at war with anyone, for the year 2007 the military budget of Georgia is showing the highest growth rate of any country in the world, with much of it being financed openly and directly by its key military partner, the United States.
As a result, fears run high in Tskhinvali these days.
The capital of the small Republic of South Ossetia is increasingly seen as the next target of Georgian military aggression, and many here worry that it is only a matter of time before enemy troops unleash an assault on the city.
This was written before the Georgian invasion, of course.  So, what we have here is the Georgian armed forces, a small state in the Caucasus (think oil and Russian strategic interest, think of Caucasus as Russia's "Monroe Doctrine") arming itself to the teeth, having over a thousand American and Israeli "military advisors" launching a war of aggression on a country bordering it.

Linking originally BBC, now on Liveleak, 

The BBC has discovered evidence that Georgia may have committed war crimes in its attack on its breakaway region of South Ossetia in August.

Eyewitnesses have described how its tanks fired directly into an apartment block, and how civilians were shot at as they tried to escape the fighting.

Research by the international investigative organisation Human Rights Watch also points to indiscriminate use of force by the Georgian military, and the possible deliberate targeting of civilians.

Indiscriminate use of force is a violation of the Geneva Conventions, and serious violations are considered to be war crimes.

The allegations are now raising concerns among Georgia's supporters in the West.

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband has told the BBC the attack on South Ossetia was "reckless".

He said he had raised the issue of possible Georgian war crimes with the government in Tbilisi.

The evidence was gathered by the BBC on the first unrestricted visit to South Ossetia by a foreign news organisation since the conflict.

Georgia's attempt to re-conquer the territory triggered a Russian invasion and the most serious crisis in relations between the Kremlin and the West since the Cold War.

Eye-witness account
Georgy Tadtayev, a 21-year-old dental student, was one of the Ossetian civilians killed during the fighting.

His mother, Taya Sitnik, 45, a college lecturer, told the BBC he bled to death in her arms on the morning of 9 August after a fragment from a Georgian tank shell hit him in the throat as they were both sheltering from artillery fire in the basement of her block of flats.

Mrs Sitnik said she subsequently saw the tank positioned a few metres from the building, firing shells into every floor.

Extensive damage to the five-storey block appeared consistent with her version of events.

She said she and her son were watching television when the Georgian attack began.

"They started firing not from rifles, but from heavy weapons. Shells were exploding."

"We jumped up straight away, switched off the lights and ran down to the cellar."

"And we sat here on boxes. We thought it would end, but the firing got heavier and heavier," she added.

"They went on firing all the next day without stopping. At some point there was a pause, and we saw Georgian soldiers going along the street in their Nato uniforms," according to Mrs Sitnik.

"Then they started firing again, even more heavily. The Grad rockets were coming over all the time."

"And we gained evidence and witness testimony of Grad rocket attacks and tank attacks on apartment buildings, including tank attacks that shot at the basement level.

"And basements are typically areas where civilians will hide for their own protection.

"So all of this points to the misuse, the inappropriate use of force by Georgia against civilian targets," according to Alison Gill.
Marina Kochieva, a doctor at Tskhinvali's main hospital, says she herself was targeted by a Georgian tank as she and three relatives were trying to escape by car from the town on the night of 9 August.

She says the tank fired on her car and two other vehicles, forcing them to crash into a ditch.

The firing continued as she and her companions lay on the ground.

She showed the BBC the burnt-out wreckage of the car on the town's ring-road, riddled with bullet holes and with a much larger hole, apparently from a tank round, in the front passenger door.

Ms Kochieva says a nurse from her hospital was killed while fleeing Tskhinvali in similar circumstances.

She says she counted 18 burnt-out cars on the ring-road on 13 August, at the end of the war, suggesting there may have been more casualties.

Asked if, at night, Georgian soldiers might not have suspected her car of carrying Ossetian fighters, Ms Kochieva said: "Fighters wouldn't have gone away from town, they would have gone towards town. We were escaping like other refugees.

"The Georgians knew this was the 'Road of Life' for Ossetians. They were sitting here waiting to kill us," she said.
There is more - after all, the whole idea of the invasion was to ethnically cleanse Ossetians and Russians and others to clear the land for Georgia and its people.  A modern day "lebensraum" if you will.

Meanwhile, on EVERY American TV "news-show", on the radio and on the newspapers, every paid propagandist (excuse me - "news personality") was screaming about the Russian aggression against Georgia.

But is there a smoking gun, something that decisively proves American involvement in worldwide terrorism?

Sure there is.

First, read up on the quite recent attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, in The Guardian.

There are two versions of events - the truth and the official American version of what happened.

After skimming that article, hit The Telegraph: CIA 'running arms smuggling team in Benghazi when consulate was attacked':
The CIA has been subjecting operatives to monthly polygraph tests in an attempt to suppress details of a reported US arms smuggling operation in Benghazi that was ongoing when its ambassador was killed by a mob in the city last year, according to reports.
Up to 35 CIA operatives were working in the city during the attack last September on the US consulate that resulted in the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, according to CNN.
The circumstances of the attack are a subject of deep division in the US with some Congressional leaders pressing for a wide-ranging investigation into suspicions that the government has withheld details of its activities in the Libyan city.
The television network said that a CIA team was working in an annex near the consulate on a project to supply missiles from Libyan armouries to Syrian rebels.
Sources said that more Americans were hurt in the assault spearheaded by suspected Islamic radicals than had been previously reported. CIA chiefs were actively working to ensure the real nature of its operations in the city did not get out.
For this support of ethnic cleansing and a clear war of aggression and conquest, and for supporting wahhabi Sunni extremist terrorists in the Syrian civil war, and "lebanonizing" Libya, I hereby put the United States in the Axis of Evil.

America and Saudi Terrorism

But in my writeup I am making a big assumption.  It is that the so called al Kaida (the word means "the toilet" in Arabic) Sunni terrorism is fought by the American Empire.

This is not... exactly true...

Think of Pakistan - while officially fighting the Taliban/extremists, and sometimes the Army taking casualties from Taliban crazies toting RPG's, and sometimes raiding the tribal areas in revenge, the Talibs are not eradicated.  In fact, Pakistan allows Saudi money and teachers into the country to organize a huge number of madrassas.  Why?  Because it uses the brainwashed loonies as shock troops/terrorists in its undeclared war against India.

Pakistan's intelligence was implicated, time and again, with names named and the country itself implicated.  Peruse Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) report, or read up Times of India:

WASHINGTON: A far-reaching legislation has been introduced in the US Congress that would deduct USD 50 million from the aid to Islamabad for every American killed by terrorists operating from the safe havens in Pakistan with the "support" of ISI.
"Pakistan has for decades leveraged radical terrorist groups to carry out attacks in India and Afghanistan," Congressman Dana Rohrabacher said introducing the 'Pakistan Terrorism Accountability Act of 2012'.

The legislation would require the Department of Defence to list all Americans killed by terrorist groups operating with impunity inside Pakistan and Afghanistan and supported by elements of Pakistani government.
For each person killed, USD 50 million would be subtracted from US foreign assistance to Pakistan -- a requested USD 2.2 billion -- and given to the victim's family.

"For too long America has funded the Pakistani government, giving it free money, while elements of the ISI and Pakistan's military operate radical Islamic groups that are actively murdering Americans. Americans will not accept this," Rohrabacher, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, said.


That name sounds familiar.  Of course!

It was her that spoke the truth about Ossetia, despite the traitors/neocons and their paid propaganda specialists stating the opposite; Americangoy, quoting Reuter:
 "The Russians are right! We're wrong! Georgia started it, the Russians ended it," Rep. Dana Rohrbacher, a California Republican, told Assistant Secretary of State Dan Fried, who testified on administration policy to both the Senate panel and the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
I LIKE Dana Rohrbacher.

Anyways, I have proved on this blog (twas not hard...) that Saudi Arabia sponsors, promotes, supports and then uses extremist Sunni terrorist groups as one very effective tool of its international policy.

The thing is, Saudi Arabia is, alongside Israel, America's main ally.  While American politicians make some limited noises about its ties to terrorism, never is the House of Saud accused directly.  American politicians, whether by idiocy or told from above, always differentiate between the "good Saudis" who just abhor terrorism, oh my, and the "baaaaaad Saudis", who are private citizens, who have nothing to do with Saudi government nor ruling elite, who pay hundreds of millions annually worldwide to spread madrassas, wahhabism and terrorism.

The "9-11" event allowed for a huge paradigm shift in America (and the world), finding a new enemy for the hopelessly lost military industrial complex (after all, Russia is NOT the Soviet Union, despite the best efforts of neocons to paint it as such - again, it is, or rather should be, alongside Iran, America's BEST ALLY against worldwide terrorism).

The civil war in Syria is carried out by wahhabi extremist thugs, who literally kicked out the Free Syrian Army made up of native Syrians whose revolt it originally was (if it ever really was...).

The whole "WMD take 2" fiasco (after Iraq's non-existent WMD) where the so called "rebels" used chemical weapons on civilians paints the USA in a somewhat nefarious light.

America is allowing Israel and Saudi intelligence agencies free rein the Middle East.  It actively supports the "rebels" in Syria to carry out its (I apologize - Israel's) policy goals.

It supports Chechen (now really Saudi wahhabi and some Chechen) partisan/terrorist groups in their fight against Russia.  The Guardian: The Chechens' American friends:
An enormous head of steam has built up behind the view that President Putin is somehow the main culprit in the grisly events in North Ossetia. Soundbites and headlines such as "Grief turns to anger", "Harsh words for government", and "Criticism mounting against Putin" have abounded, while TV and radio correspondents in Beslan have been pressed on air to say that the people there blame Moscow as much as the terrorists. There have been numerous editorials encouraging us to understand - to quote the Sunday Times - the "underlying causes" of Chechen terrorism (usually Russian authoritarianism), while the widespread use of the word "rebels" to describe people who shoot children shows a surprising indulgence in the face of extreme brutality.

On closer inspection, it turns out that this so-called "mounting criticism" is in fact being driven by a specific group in the Russian political spectrum - and by its American supporters. The leading Russian critics of Putin's handling of the Beslan crisis are the pro-US politicians Boris Nemtsov and Vladimir Ryzhkov - men associated with the extreme neoliberal market reforms which so devastated the Russian economy under the west's beloved Boris Yeltsin - and the Carnegie Endowment's Moscow Centre. Funded by its New York head office, this influential thinktank - which operates in tandem with the military-political Rand Corporation, for instance in producing policy papers on

Russia's role in helping the US restructure the "Greater Middle East" - has been quoted repeatedly in recent days blaming Putin for the Chechen atrocities. The centre has also been assiduous over recent months in arguing against Moscow's claims that there is a link between the Chechens and al-Qaida.
 Snip.  Here comes the good part:
This harshness towards Putin is perhaps explained by the fact that, in the US, the leading group which pleads the Chechen cause is the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC). The list of the self-styled "distinguished Americans" who are its members is a rollcall of the most prominent neoconservatives who so enthusastically support the "war on terror".

They include Richard Perle, the notorious Pentagon adviser; Elliott Abrams of Iran-Contra fame; Kenneth Adelman, the former US ambassador to the UN who egged on the invasion of Iraq by predicting it would be "a cakewalk"; Midge Decter, biographer of Donald Rumsfeld and a director of the rightwing Heritage Foundation; Frank Gaffney of the militarist Centre for Security Policy; Bruce Jackson, former US military intelligence officer and one-time vice-president of Lockheed Martin, now president of the US Committee on Nato; Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, a former admirer of Italian fascism and now a leading proponent of regime change in Iran; and R James Woolsey, the former CIA director who is one of the leading cheerleaders behind George Bush's plans to re-model the Muslim world along pro-US lines.
Our old friends, the Jewish neocons! And their American lackeys!

All the gang is here!

Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, Michael Ledeen, James Woolsey...

In effect, America has become Pakistan writ large - claiming to fight terrorism, while using it to further its (apologies, again - Israel's) political goals.

I have come to this conclusion about America, Israel and Saudi Arabia as the updated "Axis of Evil" and having read this, perhaps you too, especially if you are an American, will start to think about American foreign policy, about why our sons (and now daughters, thanks feminists!) have to die or get maimed horribly in such fun places like Iraq, Iran, Ossetia, Afghanistan, Pakistan...

Instead of waving your American Flag (Made in China - err, their workers are getting uppity, double check that - Bangladesh or Indonesia now?) at a Veterans Day parade, start to think.

Especially if you have a son or a daughter in the American military.

Before, I could (and did) make a clear case that the American military was serving the interests of Israel, not America or its citizens.

Now, I can state unequivocally that your son and daughter is also suffering for the interests of Saudi sponsored terrorists.

That "hero" who came home sans an arm or a leg, or was buried in a solemn ceremony - think on why exactly he/she died or came home a cripple.

Prince Bandar and then president "w" bush holding hands, American style.  Best friends forever.

Leads one to question that "9-11" narrative a bit... but that is a story for another post.  This one. in fact (Fun and Games).


AmericanGoy said...

If you think about it, the world has turned 180 degrees. In the 1970's and 1980's, it was the Soviet Union (and its slaves, the Eastern European Warsaw Pact members) who supported worldwide terrorism.

The PLO was lavishly supported by Moscow, so was the IRA and Red Brigades in Italy and Carlos the most famous terrorist in the world.

Now, it is America which is the worldwide supporter/enabler of terrorism, enabling the House of Saud to spread its poison worldwide.

Topsy turvy world, it is.

Peter said...

Interesting article. Senator Bob Graham, who was on the 9-11 commission has repeatedly brought up the subject of extensive involvement of the Saudis with those who carried it out. Al Qaeda is pretty much our tool to destabilize a large part of the world even as more money gets budgeted to supposedly fight it.
An alignment with Iran would seem logical except that it would violate our policy of preventing the rise of regional powers who might become dominant and strong enough to defend themselves. That's one reason we ally with Israel and Saudi Arabia, two countries who are dependent on us for protection, against the larger and potentially stronger Iran. Iran has almost 80 million people who are reputed to have better capabilities than their neighbors. It's a part of the divide and conquer strategy, to reduce everything to warring statelets that can be picked off whenever convenient. The ultimate goal is to be able to plunder the world. That's why they are so angry with Russia and China and seek to undermine them. They are strong enough to defend themselves and can act as impediments to US plans.
BTW, it's said the Red Brigades were a western intelligence creation. It's the old trick of discrediting the left by attacking it from the supposed ultra-left and having them engage in terrorism which ultimately goes nowhere but turns off the electorate. Aldo Moro was leftist friendly; he even planned to bring the communist party into the government. Then he's suddenly dead, allegedly by ultra-left extremists.

AmericanGoy said...

Actually, VERY good point on Aldo Moro. VERY good point.

I got this theory full blast when I lived in Eastern Europe, because I lived in the territory of the "other team" :)