Posted on 27th August 2013 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , , ,

With our democratization of Syria by cruise missiles about to begin, I thought it would be good for an update on the last country we democratized with our weapons of mass democratization. When the evil dictator was in charge of Libya they were producing 1.8 million barrels of oil per day. With the country now descending into chaos, their output is back down to 300,000 barrels per day. Thank God for our vast supplies of shale oil are keeping oil prices at only $109 per barrel. The two stories below detail the chaos engulfing the last country we “liberated” with tomahawk missiles. Did you know that Al Qaeda has found a new home in southern Libya? That’s great news, since they are our allies in Syria. Of course, they are our enemies in Afghanistan and Pakistan and Yemen. I’m not sure if they are friends or foes in Egypt.

Our intervention in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Egypt has been so successful, I can’t understand why only 9% of Americans support our next success story in Syria.


Oil sector chaos in Libya threatens national lifeline

As Libya looks to rebuild the fragile economy after the devastating eight-month civil war in 2011, the nation’s growth engine has almost ground to a halt. Striking workers angry about corruption and low wages have attacked export terminals and oilfields that hold Africa’s largest-known crude reserves. Roaming militias have shut down the terminals, bringing about a steep decline in Libya’s precious oil exports, which account for practically all of the country’s GDP. The unrest also reflects on the rickety authority of Prime Minister Ali Zeidan’s shaky central government and a divided legislature.

Libya could quickly turn around its oil industry from the turmoil of 2011. After bottoming out at only 45,000 bpd in August that year, having fallen 97% since the previous January, production was back near full capacity of 1.6mn bpd by last summer. Now, with shots fired at an oil tanker amid accusations of attempted thefts by army units that were supposed to protect the ports, the oil sector is sliding back to chaos. Oil output fell in the first half of August to 500,000 bpd – about one-third the highs reached last summer and the lowest level since the end of the revolution in October 2011.

The ports blockage that started at the end of July, which led to a 70% plunge in Libya’s oil exports, stems mainly from regional interests vying for control over oil revenues. Libya produces high-quality, very light and very sweet crude, which is easy to refine, and most gets shipped to Europe. Together with declining exports from Iraq and rising theft and pipeline sabotages in Nigeria, Libya’s turmoil has helped boost the benchmark Brent crude by about 7% since July 1 to trade around $110 a barrel.

Libya’s insecurity is already damaging investment in the country. Royal Dutch Shell said last year it was exiting its Libyan exploration blocks. US-based Marathon Oil  has signalled it would like to sell its interest there. Even for those who decide to stay, investment prospects may be severely curtailed.

The strikes have already cost the government at least $1.6bn in lost revenue in the past month – money it badly needs for post-war reconstruction. A monthly loss of about $4bn looms and if the closures continue for another month, Libya won’t be able to pay civil-servant salaries and pensions to veterans and will stop paying contractors working on projects.

Nearly two years after the bloody civil war, Libya is still struggling to get on track with rebuilding. But every successful transition requires from the start a cohesive leadership, an active civil society and national unity: factors that are painfully missing in Libya.

Libya is now in dire need of an efficient leadership with a compelling national vision to unify competing authorities, rein in trigger-happy militias and bridge regional divisions for a stable nation that thrives on its oil riches. The longer it takes to contain the oil sector chaos, the bigger the economic hit becomes.


‘Violent chaos’: Libya in deep crisis 2 years since rebels took over

  Published time: August 26, 2013

On this day two years ago, Libyan rebels were transferring their government to Tripoli. However, the anniversary is marred by an acute parliamentary crisis, a severe economic slump and the country becoming the main base for Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb.

August could have been a month of festivities in Libya, marking  the watershed in the rebels’ fight against Muammar Gaddafi, who  had to flee Tripoli. Even though it would still be two months  before the fugitive dictator was captured and brutally killed,  the insurgents celebrated their victory and had their government  transferred from the cradle of the revolution, Benghazi, to the  capital.

The euphoria of the revolution has all but gone now, as Libya  finds itself mired in deep political crisis as well as economic  turmoil.

We do not feel the taste of happiness, security and  stability,” a resident of Tripoli is cited as saying by Libya  Herald, “nor did we have any benefit from the government.  People are now feeling insecure and live in fear because of  killings that are being witnessed all over Libya.”

The government’s ruling Justice and Construction party,  controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood movement, has been facing  tough confrontation with the opposition.  Fearing the  Egypt-style scenario, the president of congress, Nuri Abu  Sahmain, had militias allied to the Brotherhood summoned to the  capital.

Joint Libyan forces from the ministries of defence and interior, raid bases of illegal militias made up of former rebels who did not join the army or internal security forces, in the capital Tripoli on March 18, 2013. (AFP Photo / Mahmud Turkia)

Joint Libyan forces from the ministries of defence and interior, raid bases of illegal militias made up of former rebels who did not join the army or internal security forces, in the capital Tripoli on March 18, 2013. (AFP Photo / Mahmud Turkia)


The main opposition party, the National Forces Alliance, which  mostly consisted in anti-Gaddafi rebels, has announced the  suspension of its political activity in protest against the move.

I am not sure that it will be right to assume that there is a  government in Libya. There is no army, no police, armed militias  are in control. There is violent chaos,” Yehudit Ronen,  professor of political science at Bar Ilan University, told RT.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) says a wave of assassinations has killed  dozens of politicians, activists, judges and members of security  agencies.

At least 51 people have died in a broadening wave of apparent  political assassinations in the cities of Benghazi and Derna in  volatile eastern Libya. Authorities have not prosecuted anyone  for these crimes,” an HRW report of August 8 states.

Militias, representing diverse interests have impacted  decision-making in Libya. Earlier this year armed groups held the  Libyan Foreign Ministry and the Justice Ministry besieged, pushing through the Political Isolation  law, according to which Gaddafi-era officials were denied the  right to be part of the new government.

All we hear is very troublesome, because we hear about  clandestine detention centers, detention centers that are run by  militias that are not accountable to anybody,” Juan Mendez,  UN rapporteur on torture told RT.

Unable to cope with militias the government has reportedly turned  to Gaddafi-era surveillance techniques, according to anonymous  officials the Wall Street Journal.

With all of these troubling reports coming out of Libya, there’s  quite an optimistic vision of the situation though within the  General National Congress (GNC).

Now we have improved dramatically. We have security committee  for Benghazi. We have a special committee in the GNC that’s  dealing with the Human Rights Watch,” said Suleiman Awad  Faraj Zubi, a member of parliament, in an interview with RT.

However he admitted that the government did “have a lack of  power on the ground in certain areas.”

Those must be the areas voicing their desire to break away from  Libya as Cyrenaica and Fezzan, which are seeking autonomy. Both  of the regions possess oil reserves, which could be blocked if  the breakaway spirit prevails.

Two years after Gaddafi regime fall the country’s constitution is  yet to be adopted. There are fears that once finally in place,  the constitution will fail to address the needs of all of the  diverse communities within the country.

Libyan society consists of Arabs, Berbers and Tebu, so the  constitution should represent all segments of Libyan society and  if any group of Libyan society is ignored, then this means  exclusion,”  Najmi Maylowd, Berber protestor told RT.

Earlier in August the Berbers stormed the Libyan parliament to  protest against what they believe is their marginalization. The  Berbers – who make up 10 percent of the population – fear their  language and culture are not going to be protected by the future  constitution. On July 25, Berbers shut down a gas pipeline, going  through their territory in the western district of Nalout.

Libyan Amazigh Berbers protest outside the prime minister's office in Tripoli (AFP photo / Mahmud Turkia)

Libyan Amazigh Berbers protest outside the prime minister’s office in Tripoli (AFP photo / Mahmud Turkia)


Meanwhile, work at Libya’s oilfields and ports have been  regularly paralyzed because of sporadic strikes by security  guards.

Libya has lost $1.6 billion in oil sales since July 25 until  today,” Oil Minister Abdelbari al-Arusi was cited by Reuters  on August 16.

Libya’s Prime Minister Ali Zeidan even promised to use military  force to prevent striking at the country’s main ports. Libya’s  two main crude oil terminals have however remained shut, which  means the country’s economic recovery after the 2011 unrest has  been derailed.

A general view shows the Zawiya oil installation on August 22, 2013 in Zawiya, Libya. (AFP photo / Mahmud Turkia)

A general view shows the Zawiya oil installation on August 22, 2013 in Zawiya, Libya. (AFP photo / Mahmud Turkia)


And as if economic turmoil and infighting weren’t enough, reports  emerged of Al-Qaeda making Southern Libya its new base of  operations, following its members being ousted from the nearby  Mali, following the French intervention to fight the Islamist  insurgency there.

At least that was what an anonymous top Libyan intelligence  official said in an interview to The Daily Beast.

Libya has become AQIM’s [Al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic  Maghreb] headquarters,” the intelligence source was cited as  saying.

Abayomi Azikiwe, editor of the Pan-Africa Newswire, predicts that  the instability in the post-Gaddafi Libya will only get worse.

This kind of revolution has been detrimental to the wellbeing  of the Libyan people. What we’ve seen over the last few years is  a total disruption of Libyan society. There’s no plan for the  national restoration of Libya. Many of the key political players  involved in an attempt to run Libya right now are divided over  tribal, regional as well as political levels,” Azikiwe told  RT.

And until the general national council government there  reigns in the malicious and tries to bring about some type of  national reconciliation process, the economic decline and  consequently the social instability will intensify.

  1. Administrator says:

    How The Times Have Changed: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam Use Chemical Weapons

    Submitted by Mike Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

    But the CIA documents, which sat almost entirely unnoticed in a trove of declassified material at the National Archives in College Park, Md., combined with exclusive interviews with former intelligence officials, reveal new details about the depth of the United States’ knowledge of how and when Iraq employed the deadly agents. They show that senior U.S. officials were being regularly informed about the scale of the nerve gas attacks. They are tantamount to an official American admission of complicity in some of the most gruesome chemical weapons attacks ever launched.

    - From Foreign Policy’s excellent article: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran

    Remember all of the propaganda ahead of the USA’s “democracy unleashing” invasion of Iraq in 2003. It went something like this: “We have evidence that Saddam Hussein has stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, and even worse he has a histroy of using them, even against his own people!”

    Well unsurprisingly, Mr. Hussein had a little help from his friends. The United States of America. Let’s bear this in mind as our Noble Peace Prize winning President attempts to involve us in another unconstitutional war based on the fact that chemical weapons have been used.

    Let’s be adults here and recognize that every single thing we have been told about Syria has been a lie. Let’s also admit that the “rebels” that we are allies with have al-Qaeda elements to them, and that Saddam Hussein was a close ally in the 1980?s before we decided he was the most evil dictator on the planet 20 years later for engaging in chemical attacks we were actually a party to.

    Please spread this far and wide, since I believe we can avoid this useless war if enough people get the joke. From Foreign Policy:

    The U.S. government may be considering military action in response to chemical strikes near Damascus. But a generation ago, America’s military and intelligence communities knew about and did nothing to stop a series of nerve gas attacks far more devastating than anything Syria has seen, Foreign Policy has learned.

    Next you’re going to tell me Santa Claus isn’t real.

    The Iraqis used mustard gas and sarin prior to four major offensives in early 1988 that relied on U.S. satellite imagery, maps, and other intelligence. These attacks helped to tilt the war in Iraq’s favor and bring Iran to the negotiating table, and they ensured that the Reagan administration’s long-standing policy of securing an Iraqi victory would succeed. But they were also the last in a series of chemical strikes stretching back several years that the Reagan administration knew about and didn’t disclose.

    U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.

    “The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew,” he told Foreign Policy.

    According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story.

    War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength and Not Commenting is Transparency.

    In contrast to today’s wrenching debate over whether the United States should intervene to stop alleged chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian government, the United States applied a cold calculus three decades ago to Hussein’s widespread use of chemical weapons against his enemies and his own people. The Reagan administration decided that it was better to let the attacks continue if they might turn the tide of the war. And even if they were discovered, the CIA wagered that international outrage and condemnation would be muted.

    But the CIA documents, which sat almost entirely unnoticed in a trove of declassified material at the National Archives in College Park, Md., combined with exclusive interviews with former intelligence officials, reveal new details about the depth of the United States’ knowledge of how and when Iraq employed the deadly agents. They show that senior U.S. officials were being regularly informed about the scale of the nerve gas attacks. They are tantamount to an official American admission of complicity in some of the most gruesome chemical weapons attacks ever launched.

    Top CIA officials, including the Director of Central Intelligence William J. Casey, a close friend of President Ronald Reagan, were told about the location of Iraqi chemical weapons assembly plants; that Iraq was desperately trying to make enough mustard agent to keep up with frontline demand from its forces; that Iraq was about to buy equipment from Italy to help speed up production of chemical-packed artillery rounds and bombs; and that Iraq could also use nerve agents on Iranian troops and possibly civilians.

    The declassified CIA documents show that Casey and other top officials were repeatedly informed about Iraq’s chemical attacks and its plans for launching more. “If the Iraqis produce or acquire large new supplies of mustard agent, they almost certainly would use it against Iranian troops and towns near the border,” the CIA said in a top secret document.

    But it was the express policy of Reagan to ensure an Iraqi victory in the war, whatever the cost.

    By 1988, U.S. intelligence was flowing freely to Hussein’s military. That March, Iraq launched a nerve gas attack on the Kurdish village of Halabja in northern Iraq.

    27th August 2013 at 1:54 pm

  2. Hope@ZeroKelvin says:

    Here is an excerpt of an interview with Bashir Assad yesterday. Man, I really hate to agree with this guy, but here’s what he said:

    Q5 Interviewer: Mr. President, this interview will be translated into several international languages, and shall be read by world leaders, some who may currently be working against you. What would you like to say to them?

    President al-Assad: Today there are many Western politicians, but very few statesmen. Some of these politicians do not read history or even learn from it, whilst others do not even remember recent events. Have these politicians learned any lessons from the past 50 years at least? Have they not realised that since the Vietnam War, all the wars their predecessors have waged have failed? Have they not learned that they have gained nothing from these wars but the destruction of the countries they fought, which has had a destabilising effect on the Middle East and other parts of the world? Have they not comprehended that all of these wars have not made people in the region appreciate them or believe in their policies?

    From another perspective, these politicians should know that terrorism is not a winning card you play when it suits you and keep it in your pocket when it doesn’t. Terrorism is like a scorpion; it can unexpectedly sting you at any time. Therefore, you cannot support terrorism in Syria whilst fighting it in Mali; you cannot support terrorism in Chechnya and fight it in Afghanistan.


    Read the whole thing.

    The US is totally WRONG here and we are heading towards a fucking disaster.

    27th August 2013 at 2:19 pm

  3. TPC says:

    In my “worst case scenario” I live here from time to time….the real one anyways, I cite a scrap over Syria as the kick off point. Lets face it, the writing has been on the wall for some time.

    US/UK and others on one side, Russia/Iran/China on the other, with Syria in the center.

    Things flare up, and then finally China pulls the rug out from under our currency.

    But still, carry on America, carry on.


    27th August 2013 at 2:44 pm

  4. MethodMan says:

    @TPC you will see that Russia has decided to “join ‘em.” That is, they’d rather be in or around the new western order than out. Russia could have easily derailed the Syria war train by squaring up against the US, but they did not.

    27th August 2013 at 2:56 pm

  5. Stucky says:

    Those Berber women should just shut the fuck up and go back to making their carpets … which are wonderful.

    The Libyan people have Freedom, after years of a brutal dictatorship.

    Don’t worry about the “Democracy” part, they’ll figure it out.

    Alfred “Al” Kayda is a nice guy and he’s getting sick and fucking tired of being blamed for everything.

    Things are going according to Plan. Now go back to work.

    27th August 2013 at 3:04 pm

  6. Persnickety says:

    The Assad interview is some of the most intelligent geopolitical discussion from a politician that I’ve read in a while, other than some essays written by crazies with the last names Paul and Roberts.

    27th August 2013 at 3:08 pm

  7. Administrator says:

    A senior Syrian official has warned that Israel will “come under fire” should the United states pursue any military aggression against the Assad regime.

    As reported by the Israeli news site Ynet, Halef al-Muftah, a leading member of the Syrian Ba’ath national council, and a former aide to the Syrian media minister said today that the Syrian government has “strategic weapons aimed at Israel.”

    Making the comments on an American Arabic radio station, Muftah added that Damascus views Israel as being “behind the aggression” and therefore will be retaliated against should the US strike Syria.

    The official also stated that the Syrian government would not be beholden to threats from the US, and added “If the US or Israel err through aggression and exploit the chemical issue, the region will go up in endless flames, affecting not only the area’s security, but the world’s.”

    27th August 2013 at 3:09 pm

  8. TPC says:

    @HZK – I kind of wish you were right, but I think Putin has lost any respect he may have once had for American military might. For the last 10 years the world has got to watch us play every trick we have chasing turbans through 3rd world countries.

    With Putin at the helm, Russia will never side with America in an international dispute.

    27th August 2013 at 3:15 pm

  9. Persnickety says:

    We are better off if Putin never sides with us. The worst thing for an alcoholic is the enablers who are mistakenly thought of as friends. What they need is someone telling them NO. The US needs the same.

    27th August 2013 at 3:23 pm

  10. Administrator says:

    Russia and Iran Warn Against Intervention in Syria

    By Aryn Baker @arynebakerAug. 27, 2013

    As a Western-led military strike on Syria appears increasingly likely in the wake of an alleged chemical weapons attack last week the Syrian government’s friends are warning the West that any attack could prove disastrous for the region.

    According to the office of British Prime Minister David Cameron, Russian President Vladimir Putin called Cameron Tuesday to tell him that there was no evidence that the Syrian regime had used chemical weapons. And Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Alexander Lukashevich warned in a statement the same day that military intervention in Syria without a UN Security Council resolution would have “catastrophic consequences.” In Tehran, U.N. Political Affairs Head Jeffrey D. Feltman, there for a regional security meeting, got an earful from Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who warned Feltman, “The use of military means [against Syria] will have serious consequences not only for Syria but for the entire region,” according to an account by Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Araqchi given to reporters covering the event. (Araqchi went on to state that Russia had already submitted to the U.N. Security Council “proof” that Syrian rebels, not regime soldiers, had used chemical weapons.)

    These kinds of apocalyptic warnings are to be expected in times of heightened tensions, and when it comes to Syria, not entirely misplaced. The Syrian conflict is multi-layered, pitting not just the regime against the opposition, but Islamists against secularists, Sunnis against the country’s religious minorities, Iranian-backed Hezbollah against Saudi Arabia-funded militias and an Iranian, Chinese and Russian axis against a Western coalition bent on regime change. The potential for a full-blown conflagration that could engulf the region in a drawn-out proxy war cannot be overlooked.

    But for the moment at least, the threats from Iran and Russia appear intended to avert an attack rather than to suggest either country plans to engage in the war themselves. Likewise, the U.S. and its allies – probably Britain, France, Turkey and others – appear to be discussing launching strikes that are likely to be limited to known military installations rather than an all-out attack on the regime of President Bashar Assad. And if that’s the case, neither Russia nor Iran is likely to respond in any significant matter. President Obama has made it clear that he has no desire to get involved in a war that has the potential to suck in vast amounts of troops, equipment and cash for years, if not longer. That’s a desire both Russia and Iran share.

    27th August 2013 at 3:33 pm

  11. Administrator says:

    Architect of Syria War Plan Doubts Surgical Strikes Will Work

    Posted By John HudsonMonday, August 26, 2013 – 6:29 PM Share

    The United States appears to be closer than ever to deploying a series of surgical strikes on Syrian targets. But a key architect of that strategy is seriously and publicly questioning the wisdom of carrying it out.

    In the last 48 hours, U.S. officials leaked plans to several media outlets to fire cruise missiles at Syrian military installations as a warning to the Syrian government not to use its chemical weapons stockpiles again. On Sunday, Sen. Bob Corker, who was briefed by administration officials twice over the weekend, said a U.S. “response is imminent” in Syria. “I think we will respond in a surgical way,” he said. On Monday, Secretary of State John Kerry appeared to set the groundwork for a U.S. military incursion.

    Now, a former U.S. Navy planner responsible for outlining an influential and highly-detailed proposal for surgical strikes tells The Cable he has serious misgivings about the plan. He says too much faith is being put into the effectiveness of surgical strikes on Assad’s forces with little discussion of what wider goals such attacks are supposed to achieve.

    “Tactical actions in the absence of strategic objectives is usually pointless and often counterproductive,” Chris Harmer, a senior naval analyst at the Institute for the Study of War, said. “I never intended my analysis of a cruise missile strike option to be advocacy even though some people took it as that.”

    “I made it clear that this is a low cost option, but the broader issue is that low cost options don’t do any good unless they are tied to strategic priorities and objectives,” he added. “Any ship officer can launch 30 or 40 Tomahawks. It’s not difficult. The difficulty is explaining to strategic planners how this advances U.S. interests.”

    In July, Harmer authored a widely-circulated study showing how the U.S. could degrade key Syrian military installations on the cheap with virtually no risk to U.S. personnel. “It could be done quickly, easily, with no risk whatsoever to American personnel, and a relatively minor cost,” said Harmer. One of the study’s proposals was cruise missile strikes from what are known as TLAMs (Tomahawk land attack missiles) fired from naval vessels in the Mediterranean.

    The study immediately struck a chord with hawkish lawmakers on the Hill who were frustrated with the options outlined by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey that required a major commitment by U.S. military forces with a pricetag in the billions.

    “For a serious accounting of a realistic limited military option in Syria, I would strongly recommend a new study that is being released today by the Institute for the Study of War,” Sen. John McCain said in July, referring to Harmer’s study. “This new study confirms what I and many others have long argued: That it is militarily feasible for the United States and our friends and allies to significantly degrade Assad’s air power at relatively low cost, low risk to our personnel, and in very short order.”

    Not all surgical strikes are created equal, of course. And there’s no guarantee that the Obama administration’s strike plan would look like Harmer’s. Regardless, Harmer doubted that any surgical strikes would produce the desired results — especially if the goal is to punish the Assad regime for its alleged use of chemical weapons.

    “Punitive action is the dumbest of all actions,” he said. “The Assad regime has shown an incredible capacity to endure pain and I don’t think we have the stomach to deploy enough punitive action that would serve as a deterrent.”

    He also doubted the effectiveness of taking out Assad’s chemical weapons capabilities. “If we start picking off chemical weapons targets in Syria, the logical response is if any weapons are left in the warehouses, he’s going to start dispersing them among his forces if he hasn’t already,” he continued. “So you’re too late to the fight.”

    27th August 2013 at 4:06 pm

  12. TheCynic says:

    Don’t corner a rat that has chemical warheads on missiles and artillery shells. We don’t get that. The Alawite people know they have a death sentence on their collective heads if the American trained, equipped and funded Al-Qeada forces win.

    And our so-called precision attacks are nothing short of war crimes themselves. The thing is we view all sorts of civilian facilities as military targets this includes; power plants; air raid shelters; water plants; telecom sites; railroad stations; roads; and bridges. That’s what we did in Serbia, bombed the shit out of civilian infrastructure, we did the same in Iraq.

    27th August 2013 at 4:19 pm

  13. MethodMan says:

    Assad was about to win. It is now clear the US & Israel have upped the stakes. Russia has not raised or called, they’ve folded because there was a deal. Russia could airlift a division and enough AA / AS to say Syria is our ally and we will defend them. That’s all they needed to do, there is NO WAY we will start WWIII over this.

    Did they? No. So that’s that for Assad; airpower will roll them up just like in Libya. Even though they are correct in their analysis, Syria is just playing into US hands by threatening Israel and looking just like Hussein (the dead Iraqi one.)

    Sorry if you some of you thought Putin was going to take a stand….

    27th August 2013 at 4:47 pm

  14. Administrator says:

    Interview With Gestapo Founder on Drumming Up Support For War

    From an interview with Hermann Göring Nazi founder of the Gestapo, Head of the Luftwaffe, in a jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946) ….

    Göring: Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

    Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

    Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

    27th August 2013 at 4:59 pm

  15. MuckAbout says:

    The entire Middle East and N. African rim has been totally fucked up since WWII when it was carved up by politicians with no understanding of tribal construction and organization and loyalties.

    All we’ve had ever since is dictators who rule by force, just shoot-em-all and let Allah sort them out kind of guys. Anyone disagrees with the strongman, just take him out of sight and shoot him/her and the kids too.

    So since we can’t go back and repair the politicians mistakes, we watch the fuse slowly burn, setting off brushfires now and then as it goes. Pretty soon that fuse will disappear into a black hole and a very large explosion will follow.

    Amerika, having gas filled balls, will, of course, send drones, cruise missiles and spies to straighten it all out – like we just did in Iraq (descending into civil war when WE stopped being the dictator who kept order – kinda like ol’ dead Saddam), Afghanistan (a unique country that is and always has been in a civil war) where warlords only join together to fight outsiders and when we leave there, it will go the exact same route (faster) as is happening in Iraq when they fight each other..

    There is an old saying – worth saying again – “Never disturb your enemies when they are in the process of destroying themselves!”

    For some reason, known well by TPTB, Amerika – by itself – must protect what’s left of the ME’s oil supply. These reasons, known only the people running the runners, are multi-level in construct but poison gas has nothing to do with it. It’s time for another distraction of the masses and “prove” the infinite worth of nanny government here and abroad.

    And the whole thing is self-defeating and only brings us closer and closer to the climax of the 4th Turning.


    27th August 2013 at 5:50 pm

  16. Spinalator says:

    You all need to support the govt’s effort to free the Syrian people from that evil dictator. He’s even used chemical agents on his own people. Don’t you know our next warning could come in the shape of a mushroom cloud! Our esteemed president Bush warned us. What does it take for you people to be more patriotic….OMFG!

    27th August 2013 at 6:50 pm

  17. Peaceout says:

    Good one Admin, the Gestapo piece above sums the process of war better than anything I’ve read before. It’s just that easy and works every time.

    27th August 2013 at 6:52 pm

  18. SSS says:

    “The declassified CIA documents show that (CIA Director William) Casey and other top officials were repeatedly informed about Iraq’s chemical attacks and its plans for launching more.”
    —-from the article posted in the very first comment (Admin’s)

    Slight disconnect. Saddam’s chemical attacks occurred in 1988. Bill Casey died in 1987. I’m sure the CIA wired his casket for post-mortem briefings.

    27th August 2013 at 7:32 pm

  19. SSS says:

    “Did you know that Al Qaeda has found a new home in southern Libya? That’s great news, since they are our allies in Syria. Of course, they are our enemies in Afghanistan and Pakistan and Yemen. I’m not sure if they are friends or foes in Egypt.”
    —-Admin’s preface comments to the article

    Now, you’re talking turkey. +10.

    27th August 2013 at 7:35 pm

Leave a comment

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.