How Wall Street & London Manufacture Tragedy to Sell War & Regime Change

Atrocities Made to Order

By Tony Cartalucci, Land Destroyer
May 29, 2012

In the wake of the Houla massacre in Syria, and evidence exposing the West’s initial narrative of Syrian troops “shelling to death” around 100 people to be categorically false, people are struggling to understand just what happened. The Guardian has chosen to post unverified witness accounts produced by the Free Syrian Army, seemingly custom tailored to refute evidence brought by Russia to the UN Security Council. The BBC has admitted that only “most” of the accounts they’ve received implicated what they “believe” were Syrian troops, or pro-government militias – and by doing so, imply that some did not and have told a different account.

As the window of opportunity closes for the West to exploit the bloodshed at Houla, the Western media is increasingly backpedaling, retracting, and being caught in a crossfire of their own lies and propagandizing. BBC was caught initially using years’ old photos from Iraq for their Houla coverage, while papers and networks across the board have had to adjust their narratives entirely as each new piece of verified evidence emerges.

What is known is that Syrian troops were engaged with armed militants of the “Free Syrian Army” (FSA) in and around Houla. Syrian troops, as they have been doing throughout the conflict, were using artillery and tanks to target heavily fortified rebel positions from a distance. During or shortly after this exchange, militants began entering homes and killing families with knives and small arms fire. The FSA and Syrian opposition claim the militants were pro-government militias while the government claims they were foreign-backed Al Qaeda terrorists, known to be operating throughout the country. What they weren’t, by all accounts, were Syrian troops.

A recent “editorial” out of the Globe and Mail claims that Russia’s position that opposition forces were involved in the massacre is “laughable.” However, this is divorced from not only reality, but also from a complete understanding of modern 4th generation warfare. From Venezuela to Thailand, Western backed opposition groups have triggered unrest and used it as cover to pick off members of their own movement, to then blame on the targeted government and compound any given conflict until a critical mass is reached, and a targeted government is toppled.

A Historical Example: Bangkok, Thailand 2010

Wall Street-backed former-Thai Prime Minsiter Thaksin Shinawatra, a close associate of the Bush family with connections ranging from before, during, and after his term in office, was ousted from power in 2006 by nationalist forces for abuses of power. Thaksin had worked as a Carlyle Group adviser, sent Thai troops to aid in Bush’s invasion of Iraq, attempted to implement a free trade agreement with Wall Street’s Fortune 500 without parliamentary approval, hosted CIA torture facilities, and prosecuted a “war on drugs” that saw some 2,500 Thais extra-legally executed in the streets, most of whom were later determined to have nothing to do with the drug trade.

Since his ousting in 2006, he has received support from a myriad of prominent US lobbying firms including fellow Carlyle member James Baker and Baker Botts, Bush administration warmonger Robert Blackwill of Barbour Griffith & Rogers, and Neo-Conservative PNAC signatory Kenneth Adelman of Edelman.

With this backing, Thaksin has led an increasingly violent bid to return to power through a “red” color revolution constituting of a large political machine operating in Thailand’s northeast provinces and a personality cult called the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD).

In April of 2010, Thaksin mobilized thousands of UDD members to paralyze Thailand’s capital of Bangkok in retaliation to a court seizure of billions of his ill-gotten assets. On the night of April 10, 2010, when riot troops moved in to disperse the protesters, militants clad in black opened fire on Thai troops.

Page 62 of Human Rights Watch’s “Descent into Chaos (.pdf)” report stated:

“As the army attempted to move on the camp, they were confronted by well-armed men who fired M16 and AK-47 assault rifles at them, particularly at the Khok Wua intersection on Rajdamnoen Road. They also fired grenades from M79s and threw M67 hand grenades at the soldiers. News footage and videos taken by protesters and tourists show several soldiers lying unconscious and bleeding on the ground, as well as armed men operating with a high degree of coordination and military skills.”

HRW, an otherwise dubious organization, only conceded to this a full year after the events unfolded and only in the face of irrefutable photographic and video evidence captured and broadcasted by both professional and amateurs local and foreign journalists. This included videos and photos of militants armed with both AK-47′s and M-16′s. Previously, Thaksin’s Western backers and his opposition leaders had tried to blame all deaths resulting from the M-16′s 5.56mm rounds squarely on the Thai military, including the high-profile death of Reuters cameraman Hiro Muramoto. With proof that opposition militants were also firing 5.56mm rounds, this political leverage was negated.

However, the most chilling aspect of the April 10, 2010 violence was an incident involving the premeditated murder of a pro-Thaksin protester by Thaksin’s own mercenaries – recorded on tape and extensively photographed, then shamelessly and relentlessly used as propaganda to this very day. The incident took place on April 10, 2010, the same night Reuters cameraman Hiro Muramoto was killed, and gives us immense insight into how Western-backed unrest will take advantage of chaos it itself creates to then purposefully kill both protesters and government troops to escalate tensions and violence while undermining the legitimacy of a targeted government.

In a YouTube video (WARNING: EXTREMELY GRAPHIC) recorded by Thaksin propagandists, protesters can be seen facing off against troops to the left of the screen with other protesters seeking cover as fire is exchanged between militants and troops. In the center of the frame, a very conspicuous man is seen carrying a tall red flag with his attention fixated on men directing him into position. He moves in steps, almost as if posing for a picture with his attention focused on the men directing him. Behind him, with his hat turned backwards, appears to be a spotter shadowing the flagman’s moves and flashing a series of hand signals to the men on the left directing the flagman.

Images: Frames taken from the video with annotations describe the events that unfolded shortly before and directly after Thaksin mercenaries intentionally killed one of their own protesters. The final image eventually made it onto the cover of Thaksin propaganda magazine, “Voice of Taksin.” (click images to enlarge)

….

Men in the upper left of the screen can be seen waving the flagman into position as they tell other protesters to “get down” before a shot is fired taking off the top of the man’s skull. As protesters panic and run off camera, the spotter moving with the flagman calmly stands above the dead man and waves in a photographer who takes the infamous pictures that would soon be featured on the cover of Thaksin’s propaganda publication, the “Voice of Taksin.” It must be remembered that the video camera was fixated on this otherwise insignificant flagman the entire time leading up to the gruesome event, to specifically capture the entire, premeditated murder.

Image: A censored version of the very explicit “special” cover of Thaksin propaganda magazine, “Voice of Taksin,” featuring a man killed not even a minute ago. The flag he was conspicuously waving just moments before lays across his chest and was most likely handed to him to aid mercenary snipers in targeting him. The original cover with translations can be found here. (WARNING: EXTREMELY GRAPHIC.) The editor of “Voice of Taksin” has since been arrested and imprisoned for his role in the 2010 violence – however Western “human rights” fronts including US-funded Prachatai maintain that he is a “political prisoner” and a “human rights activist.” Note: on the bottom of the magazine cover a “free” CD is offered featuring video of the gruesome staged murder of this unfortunate man.

….

This horrific, cold-blooded demonstration of the callous, murderous nature of these so-called “pro-democracy” movements sowing chaos from Tunisia to Thailand, and certainly including Syria, illustrates the full depths of depravity from which the global elite and their proxies operate. Behind the thin veneer of revolutionary “singing tomorrows” is a heartless, craven killing machine as eager to dispose of its most adamant supporters as it is inclined to eliminate its most reviled opponents. What was just described has played out not only repeatedly in Thailand, but all across North Africa and the Middle East as well as during previous attempts by the West to oust Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

Back to Syria

The Free Syrian Army has been regularly engaging in armed combat with government troops and now more than ever, are better equipped with communication equipment, weapons, cash and logistical support from the West and the Gulf States. Just as Thaksin’s gunmen were able to draw Thai troops into a conflict used as cover to commit manufactured atrocities to be used as propaganda against the Thai government, militants in Syria have already demonstratively employed similar tactics. In 2011, “mystery gunmen” would regularly start firefights during protest rallies identical to the one in Bangkok, firing on both Syrian troops and protesters, with both sides describing elusive “rooftop snipers.”

Houla appears to simply be on a much larger scale, involving militants most likely not affiliated with local FSA fighters or the Syrian government, but foreign elements just as the Syrian government has claimed. Just as in Bangkok where protesters were taken as much by surprise as Thai troops at the arrival of Thaksin’s militants, FSA fighters, Houla residents, and Syrian troops all seem baffled as to who exactly committed the atrocities.

And amongst all the finger pointing, it is the politically-motivated haste by the US, UK, France, Israel, and the Muslim Brotherhood to condemn the massacre, baselessly blame the Syrian government, and cry in unison for military intervention that is by far the most incriminating evidence yet as to who was really behind the bloodbath. Cui Bono? To whose benefit? NATO and its Middle Eastern proxies have made it abundantly clear it was to their benefit.

Clearly there is the distinct possibility that a third party took advantage of a prolonged engagement between the FSA and government troops in Houla, to manufacture a very real atrocity. With so few facts in hand, it would be the height of irresponsibility to lay blame on anyone so squarely that punitive actions are leveled. So while the Globe and Mail berates Russia for suggesting that “the blame must be determined objectively,” it is by far, without debate, the most sensible course of action to take. If the West laments the distrust it now suffers, it has only itself, and its long history of running death squads in exactly this manner, to blame.

Antichrist Must Come First and Sit in the Temple Claiming to be God, Causing a Great Falling Away from the Christian Faith

The Amazing Parallels of End Time Scriptures (Excerpt)
By John Aggson Sr., Liberty To The Captives

AntiChrist will come before Christ returns and he will sit in the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem claiming to be God. Why is it that people can never see the blindness and sin in their OWN GENERATION? Why can we look back to the past and see the sins of others in the Bible down through time, but do not even suspect that today, we are doing the same thing the Pharisees of old did? Why can we not see the “blindness” and “callousness” in our own hearts?

Many folks have gotten fed up over “arguing:” over this subject, and say that “they refuse to even discuss it anymore!” I have seen brethren almost come to blows and scream and yell at each other over this topic! The devil gets really angry when it is brought up, because it is exposing one of his GREATEST DECEITS THAT HE IS FOISTING UPON GOD’S UNSUSPECTING CHURCH IN THE END TIME! It is certainly wrong to get ANGRY over anything and get mad at each other, but it is not wrong to discuss such a serious and important matter as this!? Satan just loves that feint! That “cop out!” He knows that then every one will be afraid to bring the subject up after that for fear of starting a “hullabullo,” and will just not talk about it. Then folks go on teaching their perverted and distorted view to the flock of God’s Church! He is so clever! First of all, it is NOT a light thing, and will have very dramatic negative effects on God’s Church when things do not transpire as folks have been taught they will!

Most folks teaching this “pre-trib” view are doing it in ignorance; just “parroting” what they have been taught since they got saved, without having ever taken the time to study it all out carefully, and prayerfully. The Lord is very merciful, and understanding, and patient. He is trying to get folks to “see the light” on this, but it is very difficult. “As the branch bends, so grows the tree!?” And once a person is grounded deeply in this false belief system, it seems to be very hard to convince them otherwise, or to even get them to LOOK AT THE FACTS surrounding all this, and read Scriptures like the ones in this study.

Most will “stubbornly” cling to this false view, until it becomes apparent that it is wrong, and then they will say, “Oh WHY, didn’t we see this plain and simple truth laid out in the Scriptures?” “WHY couldn’t we see what Jesus warned SO CLEARLY of concerning all this?” Suddenly the “blinders” will be “ripped off” and they will clearly see; but too late to alter the effects of what it will cause on “the Body!” Those who are “strong” in the Lord will survive, but sadly, it will not go so good for those who “follow afar off; who will begin to question their FAITH, and the LORD, and to become very confused!” Many may just “give up!?”

This is something that should be brought out into the open and discussed above almost all else, after Salvation and other basics of the Faith! People say that it is just “causing division.” The TRUTH always causes division among those who resent hearing it! Jesus’s Words caused division. Paul’s words caused division, and Paul ARGUED with the Pharisees and “contended” and “disputed” with them for 3 years in the Book of Acts, before getting fed up with them and telling them he’d had it with them and was now going to the Gentiles! So it is not wrong to “contend” for the Truth!

Many Christians will support the antiChrist when he comes, thinking that he couldn’t possibly be the antiChrist or they would have been raptured out already!? He’s not coming with “horns and hoofs” and a “pitchfork!?” He will appear as “AN ANGEL OF LIGHT!” He will appear to be a very righteous and Godly man, a great man of peace, who will be championing the cause of Israel in the world courts, demanding that they be given the right to rebuild their temple, (which he plans to sit in and rule from) and that they should be given the right to re-start their animal sacrifices once again.

Folks will think he’s the greatest man of peace and friend of Israel to ever come along!? He’s going to fool nearly EVERYONE! DON’T YOU BE DECEIVED! Read these Scriptures again and pray over them, asking the Lord if these things are really the truth!? Satan is setting the entire church system up for the greatest “sucker punch” he’s ever given them; knocking their faith out by total surprise and shock, when things do not turn out the way folks have been taught! He’s lulled almost the entire church to sleep. Wake up and see what’s coming! He just LOVES this method of catching folks off guard by total surprise, and causing the greatest amount of fear possible in an instant! It causes such great confusion, and he is the “author of confusion.” He wants to totally KNOCK OUT THE CHURCH IN ONE PUNCH!!!

Like a great commanding general who studies out his war strategies long in advance, Satan sat back and looked over this “end time” scenario centuries ago. He knew he would have to put the Church to sleep to be able to catch them by surprise in this fashion. He began to enter the Church with false “sleepy” doctrines.

Pre-trib rapture teaching is part of Satan’s long term strategy to get the Church right where he wants us so he can wreak the most havoc and cause the greatest amount of confusion and damage possible when his man, the “beast” or “antiChrist” comes to power!? The Church will “rock and reel” under the fiery darts of the one who will “speak great words against the Most High,” and “wear out the Saints of the Most High;” who will “make war with the Saints and PREVAIL against them!?” And when the “guillotines begin to fall,” and people begin to lose their heads for refusing to deny their Faith in Jesus Christ, many may begin to “jump off the boat” like “scared men fleeing a sinking ship!?”

Instead of a “pre-tribulation rapture,” many are going to be “yanked” out of their beds in the middle of the night, by complete surprise; by “jackbooted” storm troopers, brandishing sub-machine guns, and dressed in black S.W.A.T. gear; and hauled off to PRISON CAMPS, that have already been set up all over America, under a program first designed by Lt. Colonel Oliver North, in the days of President Ronald Reagan, called “REX 84!” This was even exposed in Congress by Congressman Jack Brooks, who publicly challenged Oliver North about it and was told to “shut up” as it was a matter of national security! Although originally designed to “house” American gun-owners and patriots who refuse to go along with a “new world order” takeover — complete with a massive “gun confiscation program” — as well as other “dissidents;” this same program in the hands of a future administration may be used to lock up even other “Christian dissidents” who, although “peaceful” and non-violent, do not “believe” the way they are supposed to (ie: folks who dare to expose America and Israel’s sins!). Daniel the Prophet also spoke of this same event over and over; of a GREAT PERSECUTION of God’s Saints in the END TIME TRIBULATION PERIOD, under the TERRIFYING REIGN OF THE ANTICHRIST.

Many may support the antiChrist thinking he’s a good man, and not suspecting him at all because they have been taught they will be “raptured out” first before he comes!? Wake up America! YOU ARE the “MIGHTY AND THE HOLY PEOPLE!” spoken of by Daniel the prophet. The American churches are going to feel the main brunt of this persecution, along with the tiny nation of Israel!

The “indignation” spoken of by Daniel is “God’s indignation” against the nation of Israel for “trying to take their kingdom back in the flesh” without going through the proper “doorway” of JESUS CHRIST His Son, (as per John 10) and winning the world through His love, instead of considering themselves better than everyone else (God is no respecter of persons) and mowing them down with machine guns, bombs and bullets, to take back what they consider “rightfully theirs,” — but is NOT since the Lord drove them out 2,000 years ago. And also because they are willing to accept “one who comes in his own name” to get this great advantage and blessing, instead of having accepted Him who came “in the name of His Father,” Jesus Christ! This “indignation of God” is also against the duped American church system for “aiding and abbetting” them in this great end time “fiasco!”

Both the American church system and the modern nation of so-called “Israel” are going to be PURGED AND PURIFIED AND MADE WHITE HERE to get them straightened out on this issue! When they finally realize all this — under the antiChrist’s relentless attacks and his actual “winning” against them and subduing and destroying them — AND THEY REPENT (as per Zechariah 13), then the “Lord will come and fight against those nations that have come against them, and He will return in all His glory to fight for His people and deliver them from their STRONG OPPRESSOR!” (as per Zechariah 14).

This is another “great lie” that has entered the “corrupt and compromised American church system” that the Lord is going to expose before all, before the great day of His Coming! Jesus said in John chapters 8 & 10, to the Pharisees, that they were not going to be saved and blessed by God merely because they were “flesh sons of Abraham,” and that they had to go through “HIM, the ‘DOOR’, to get into the kingdom!?” Now, 2,000 years later the same bunch with the same mindset have returned to foist this same belief on the followers of Christ, and most have warmly received it with open arms, no questions asked, and would support them to the death, fighting to get their land back for them — thinking that they are “doing God service!?” But don’t worry! God is going to “straighten everyone out on this” before the Lord returns! It will be made very plain!

As both America and Israel “rock and reel” under the antiChrist’s future attacks, and coming terrorist attacks — and natural disasters like famines, earthquakes, weather related disasters, disease, and ill health — many will TURN HARD to the Lord and begin questioning, “why is all this coming upon us?”

Most Churches are turning their people into “MODERN PHARISEES” instead of loving followers of Christ, like the early disciples were. And then they are built on the false foundation of these other modern “comfortable” teachings that put them TOTALLY TO SLEEP, concerning the totally serious and sometimes “horrifying” end time events that are coming; and make them into “self-righteous judges” of today’s “wicked sinners” and “publicans and harlots,” who condemn folks to hell with their tongues, instead of loving them into the kingdom. The TRIBULATION is the time period in which the antiChrist tries to stamp out all other religions, and mainly Christianity; and to foist upon the world the worship of himself as God. During the tribulation, 1/3rd of everything is destroyed by the Lord’s “selective judgments,” while we are protected miraculously by the Lord right here on the earth.

Jerusalem is the Most Difficult Symbolic Issue for the Peace Process

Insight: Jerusalem Expansion Reaches Point of No Return

Reuters
May 22, 2012

Named for the crash site of an airforce plane shot down during the Six Day War in 1967, Givat HaMatos may yet prove the place where Palestinian hopes of a creating a capital in Jerusalem also plunge to earth.

'Airplane Hill' lies on the southern fringes of Jerusalem's city limits - rock-strewn land dotted with shabby, prefabricated bungalows and the occasional pine tree.

Once a tranquil backwater, the area has become the focus of hectic activity in the last six months, with Israeli authorities releasing plans for 2,610 housing units and 1,110 hotel rooms.

With the approval process going more quickly than expected, building could start later this year, creating the first new Israeli settlement in 15 years among the sprawl of a modern Jerusalem that is spread out over many hills.

If that happens, it would effectively cut off the city's mainly Arab neighbourhoods from Bethlehem in the occupied West Bank, imperiling the Palestinians' prospects for establishing a coherent capital and with it their goal of an independent state.

"There is only so much territorial abuse this tortured land can take before we kill the political options of saving the two- state solution," said Daniel Seidemann, an Israeli attorney who monitors urban developments he thinks affect chances for peace.

"What is happening at Givat HaMatos is a game changer," he said, his finger tapping a map of the area for added emphasis. "Events are careering out of control."

Of all the obstacles blocking the way to peace between the Palestinians and Israelis, the status of Jerusalem is arguably the most intractable.

"It's the most difficult symbolic issue for the peace process. It's an emotional issue," Israeli Prime Benjamin Netanyahu told Reuters earlier this month.

For Israelis, all of the city, including East Jerusalem and its West Bank suburbs captured in 1967, is their "eternal and indivisible" capital, the home the Jews dreamed of through 2,000 years of exile, and the site of their revered Western Wall.

For Palestinians, there can be no peace until Israel cedes them control over East Jerusalem, a symbol of their national struggle and home to Islam's third holiest site, al-Aqsa mosque and the glittering Dome of the Rock.

In the absence of a deal, or even meaningful negotiations, Israel has been busy developing the holy city, building impressive, stone-clad neighbourhoods across the annexed land in defiance of constant international criticism.

PRECIOUS LAND

A series of recent interviews with Israelis and Palestinians suggests that the development is at a tipping point.

Plans for Givat HaMatos are not taking place in a vacuum.

Israeli officials are also pushing to expand the nearby settlements of Gilo and Har Homa, thereby building a broad, concrete crescent just north of the hilltop town of Bethlehem.

Some 35 percent of Palestinian economic activity is centered on a line that stretches from Bethlehem through East Jerusalem and on to Ramallah, the West Bank's administrative centre, north of Jerusalem. Critics say the southern settlements will snap this link.

"It is like putting a ribbon around a finger and pulling tighter and tighter until all the blood is cut off," said Ashraf Khatib, a Palestinian activist from East Jerusalem.

"But it is not just in the south. The Israelis are creating facts on the ground across the eastern city," he added.

A proud exponent of that policy is Aryeh King, the founder of the Israeli Land Fund whose stated mission is to "reclaim the land of Israel for the people of Israel".

In April, he secured the eviction of an Arab family from a home in the Arab neighborhood of Beit Hanina after a court ruled that the place had been legally bought by a Jew. He immediately moved half a dozen young supporters into the house and promised further evictions in the months ahead.

"We are locating property in all of East Jerusalem. In Jerusalem, every piece of land is important. All the plots put together can change the reality," said King, standing in the backyard of the low-rise building he had just taken over.

"The reality we don't want to see happen is one that we think would lead to catastrophe - the division of the city."

Jews, from Biblical kings such as David and Solomon to present day Israelis, see Jerusalem as the home of their religion and as a national capital fit for their people.

Most Israelis dismiss accusations their presence in East Jerusalem is illegal and bridle at the term "settlement" to describe what they refer to as Jewish neighbourhoods.

POPULATION GROWTH

As British imperial forces left Palestine in 1948, 60 percent of Jerusalem's population was Jewish. The United Nations had planned to put the city under international control, but war intervened and when a truce ended it, Jordan held the eastern sector, including the walled Old City with its sacred sites.

Israel controlled the West Jerusalem.

Following the 1967 war, Israel swept away the armistice boundary, or Green Line, and more than doubled the city limits. In 1980, parliament passed a law declaring united Jerusalem as the national capital, a move never recognized internationally.

Palestinians say the new masters have strived to alter the demographics, limiting land available to develop in Arab neighbourhoods, imposing residency rules that push Arabs out and demolishing more than 2,000 of their homes in East Jerusalem.

This has had little impact on population ratios, even as the number of inhabitants has soared from 263,000 in 1967 to around 800,000 today. Indeed the Arab ratio is climbing, with secular Israelis reluctant to settle in a city known for tensions and as home to growing numbers of religiously observant Jews.

According to the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, 36 percent of inhabitants were Arab in 2009 against 28 percent in 1980. City officials say the figure will hit 40 percent by 2020. By contrast, 20 percent of Israel's total population are Arabs.

"Jerusalem is not a Jewish city, not an Israeli city, but a bi-national city. It is not a united city. It is divided in more ways than you could care to imagine," said Seidemann, who is the go-to person for diplomats seeking information on town planning.

The divisions are often invisible to the naked eye. Outsiders rarely notice when they cross from west to east, and are surprised if Jewish taxi drivers refuse to take them to hotels in Arab areas because they fear being pelted with stones.

Likewise, both visitors and residents often express surprise when told that leafy districts of solid, modern homes are the very settlements which are so regularly denounced abroad.

"This place isn't a settlement," said Ofer Dror, a 36-year-old technician and resident of Har Homa, a terraced suburb of neat, white-stone apartments housing 13,000 Israelis that overlooks the Biblical town of Bethlehem.

"If we were behind some fence or a separation line then I might think that," he added, clearly surprised by the concept.

WINNERS AND LOSERS

Ironically, just a hundred meters from Har Homa's outer ring of houses, lives a Palestinian shepherd stranded by a fence.

Saed al-Zawahri lost a third of his land as the settlement spread this past decade. He grazes his small flock of sheep over his remaining three acres, cut off from Bethlehem, which lies tantalizingly close behind coils of barbed wire.

Israel has sealed much of the West Bank behind walls and fences following a wave of Palestinian suicide attacks at the start of the last decade that killed many hundred Israelis.

This has ensnared Zawahri in a bureaucratic mess.

Denied Jerusalem residency, he says he is only allowed to travel to Bethlehem but is not entitled to register a car with Israeli license plates to drive on the Israelis-only roads he would need to get him there. Likewise, he says he does not have the right to shop in the adjacent Har Homa and must call in special deliveries from Palestinian stores.

"They plan a thousand years ahead," said the 74-year-old shepherd. "They plan to get rid of us."

Asked if anything could stop the Israeli expansion, he smiled wryly.

"Only God. All the Arab armies already tried and failed," he said, referring to the wars of 1948, 1967 and 1973, when combined Arab forces tried but failed to defeat Israel.

However, recent events in Jerusalem suggest that the United States could influence policy-making if it wanted to.

A review of city planning activity shows that between March 9 and November 1 in 2010 there was a de facto halt on settlement work in the city and again from January 3, 2012 to early April.

The first period coincided with intense U.S. lobbying for a freeze to entice the Palestinian leadership into peace talks - negotiations that swiftly broke down when Netanyahu rejected Palestinian demands for a further extension to the halt.

There is no clear explanation for the second period of inactivity, although some diplomats have suggested Netanyahu applied the brake to avoid rows with Washington as he sought to gain U.S. support for a tough stance on Iran's nuclear strategy.

"Israel failed to get the green light from America to attack Iran. Shortly afterwards the building plans for Jerusalem accelerated. Who knows if these two facts are connected?" said a senior Western diplomat in Israel who declined to be named.

Israeli officials said the apparent freeze was coincidental.

Municipal leaders complain openly about the outside pressure that is brought to bear as they seek to run one of the world's iconic cities, administering garbage collection, school buses and restaurant permits, while welcoming in the tourist hordes.

"Everything stood still for quite a few months but from the point of view of the city's various populations it was tragic," says Deputy Mayor Naomi Tsur, adding that the order in 2010 to stop work had come directly from Netanyahu.

"This is a living city. People have to live somewhere, send their children to schools," she said. "When we are left to ourselves we know how to do it, but we are not left to ourselves."

With peace talks blocked and world attention fixed on myriad other crises, the floodgates have lifted and the city authorities seem to have a free hand to do what they want.

Out in Givat HaMatos, the bulldozers could swing into action by the autumn, when the summer heat starts to fade.

"The geography and demographics will then be so Balkanised that the two-state solution will be gone," said Seidemann.

"All the analysts we have met in the intelligence community in Europe and the United States, including the White House, see it and know it is coming."

Impetus Towards War with Iran can Only be Explained in Terms of a Western Desire for Iraq-style Regime Change

Iran: Drumbeat of War has a Familiar Sound

By Simon Tisdall, guardian.co.uk
February 24, 2012

The drumbeat of war with Iran grows steadily more intense. Each day brings more defiant rhetoric from Tehran, another failed UN nuclear inspection, reports of western military preparations, an assassination, a missile test, or a dire warning that, once again, the world is sliding towards catastrophe. If this all feels familiar, that's because it is. For Iran, read Iraq in the countdown to the 2003 invasion.

A decisive moment may arrive when Barack Obama meets Israel's prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, in Washington on 5 March.

"The meeting … will be definitive," said Ari Shavit in Haaretz.

"If the US president wants to prevent a disaster, he must give Netanyahu iron-clad guarantees the US will stop Iran in any way necessary and at any price after the 2012 [US] elections. If Obama doesn't do this, he will obligate Netanyahu to act before the 2012 elections."

If accurate, this is not much of a choice. It suggests military action by the US or Israel or both is unavoidable, the only question being one of timing. Objectively speaking, this is not actually the position. All concerned still have choices. The case against Iran's nuclear programme is far from proven. It is widely agreed that limited military strikes will not work; a more extensive, longer-lasting campaign would be required. And Obama in particular, having striven to end the Iraq and Afghan wars, is loath to start another.

But as with Iraq in 2003, the sense that war is inevitable and unstoppable is being energetically encouraged by political hardliners and their media accomplices on all sides, producing a momentum that even the un-bellicose Obama may find hard to resist.

A recent analysis of US public opinion revealed deeply ambivalent attitudes on Iran, with the majority of Americans apparently favouring diplomatic solutions. Yet as Republican presidential candidates exploit the issue, as the Israelis lobby America, and as Iranian factions manoeuvre ahead of parliamentary polls, the likelihood grows that doves and doubters will again be either converted or ignored.

In some key respects, the Iran crisis is distinctly different from that over Iraq in 2002-03. As matters stand, similarly strident warmongering surrounding Iran is thus hard to understand or explain – unless the ultimate, unstated objective is not to curb Iran's nuclear programme but, as in Iraq, to overthrow its rulers.

Bogeymen

George Bush and Tony Blair claimed a moral imperative in toppling the "monstrous" dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. But the much vilified Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's president, is no Saddam, and neither is the country's bumbling Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The Iranian regime is repressive and sporadically brutal, but so too are many developing world governments. Unlike Saddam's Ba'athists, it has significant democratic and ideological underpinning. As a bogeyman whose depredations might justify international intervention, Ahmadinejad is a flop.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Saddam, notoriously, had no deployable or usable WMD, but his overthrow was primarily justified by the mistaken belief that he did. The present western consensus is that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons capability, but does not have an atomic bomb and is not currently trying to build one. Khamenei said this week that nuclear weapons were "useless and harmful" and that possessing them was sinful . Netanyahu's belief that Israel faces an imminent, existential threat is visceral rather than fact-based. Israel's refusal to acknowledge its own nuclear arsenal, let alone contemplate its reduction, further undermines the case for action.

Terrorism

Plenty of evidence exists that Iran supports, or has supported, armed militants, jihadis, and anti-Israeli and anti-western armed groups in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, providing financial and political backing, arms and training. In this respect, its behaviour is more threatening to western interests than was that of Saddam's secular regime, no friend to Islamists. But limited or even protracted attacks on Iran's nuclear and/or military facilities would not end these links, unless there was a shift of political direction in Tehran.

Strategic power-games

Iraq was considered important for its strategic position at the heart of the Arab Middle East and its economic potential, especially its oil reserves. Similarly, there can be no doubt the US and Britain would like to see energy-rich Iran return to the western camp, as in the pre-revolution days of the Shah. Conversely, Iran's military is more powerful and more committed to the defence of the status quo, from which it benefits greatly, than was Iraq's. The potential disruption to oil supplies and western economies, not to mention the impact of asymmetric Iranian counter-attacks, makes a resort to war contingent on producing lasting dividends.

Political imperatives

In contrast to the splits over Iraq, the main western powers are united in their determination to bring Iran to heel. As well as Netanyahu, David Cameron, Nicolas Sarkozy and Barack Obama have all declared an Iranian bomb unacceptable. Their inflexibility thus makes war more rather than less likely should Iran refuse to back down. "

Having made the case for urgency and concerted action, it would be difficult for Obama to tell the world 'never mind' and shift to a strategy that accepts Iranian membership in the nuclear club," said Michael Gerson in the Washington Post.

In short, the Iranian crisis differs from that over Iraq in 2003 in key respects. But the current impetus towards war can only be explained in terms of a western desire for Iraq-style regime change – because only regime change may achieve the de-nuclearisation the west insists upon.

'Friends of Syria' Group Created after Russia and China Veto U.N. Draft Resolution to Pressure Syria's Assad to Step Down

As Syria Burns, Neighboring Lebanon Feels the Heat

Associated Press
February 11, 2012

The tensions between the two neighborhoods were building for days in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli. On one side live Sunni Muslims who hate the Syrian regime. On the hill above are members of the Alawite sect, Bashar Assad's strongest backers.

Overnight, the tempers exploded. For hours, gunmen in the two districts traded automatic weapons fire and volleys of rocket-propelled grenades across the avenue that divides them, ironically named Syria Street.

By the time a shaky truce was reached Saturday, two people were dead — one from each side — and 12 people wounded, half of them soldiers trying to stop the clashes.

The fighting underscored how the bloodshed in Syria, where Assad's regime is cracking down on an 11-month-old uprising against his rule, is enflaming emotions in its tiny neighbor Lebanon. The already deep divisions between Lebanese are being strained, and many fear Syria's chaos will bleed over across the border.

Lebanon is sharply split along sectarian lines, with 18 religious sects. But it also has a fragile political faultline precisely over the issue of Syria.

There is an array of diehard pro-Syrian Lebanese parties and politicians, as well as support for the regime on the street level. There is an equally deep hatred of Assad among other Lebanese who fear Damascus is still calling the shots here. The two sides are the legacy of, and backlash against, Syria's virtual rule over Lebanon from 1976 to 2005 and its continued influence since.

Tempers between the two sides are high enough. But Syria opponents worry the regime may intentionally cause trouble.

"The Syrian regime holds a lot of cards in Lebanon, and the biggest fear is that as the Assad regime gets more desperate, it would decide to use them to create regional chaos," anti-Syrian politician Mustafa Alloush said.

Among those cards is Hezbollah, the Syrian and Iranian-backed Shiite militant group with an arsenal of weapons more powerful than that of the Lebanese army.

Already, any talk about Syria is potential cause for a fight.

On a political talk show on Al-Jazeera TV earlier this month, Lebanese writer and Syria supporter Joseph Abu Fadel flew into a rage over taunts from the other guest, a Syrian opposition member.

Abu Fadel leaped from his chair and charged around the table, fists clenched — and though the host got between them, he managed to land a slap on his rival's face.

An earlier show on Lebanese television turned into a brawl when Alloush called Syria's president a liar. His rival guest, Fayez Shukur, the head of the Lebanese branch of Syria's ruling party, hurled a glass of water in his face.

Northern Lebanon, in particular, is a potential powder keg.

It has a strong Sunni Muslim population, sympathetic to its sectarian brethren who have been the backbone of the Syrian uprising. But it also has pockets of Alawites, the Shiite offshoot that makes up the majority of the Syrian regime's leadership and to which Assad himself belongs.

The Friday-Saturday night clashes were between the mainly Sunni Bab Tabbaneh neighborhood and the adjacent, Alawite-majority Jabal Mohsen, on a hill overlooking its rival.

Short bouts of gunfire or grenade-throwing between them has been going on for years because of the sectarian tensions. But the violence has become more frequent as Syria worsens. Sunnis in Bab Tabbaneh resent their Alawite neighbors' backing of Assad, while Jabal Mohsen residents accuse their rivals of giving aid to the uprising.

In Beirut last week, hundreds of Lebanese demonstrators faced off outside the Russian Embassy after Russia and China vetoed a Western- and Arab-backed resolution at the U.N. Security Council aimed at pressing Assad to step down. An army cordon separated the anti-Assad crowd from the president's supporters to prevent clashes.

"Bashar, we are your men!" supporters shouted unanimously.

"Come on, Bashar, leave!" opponents chanted back.

Many of Lebanon's Christians, meanwhile, have been laying low on the subject of Syria.

Their community is divided between pro- and anti-Syrian camps. Even some Christian opponents of Damascus are hesitant about backing an uprising they fear will bring Sunni fundamentalists to power in Syria.

Patriarch Bechara al-Rai, head of the Maronite Church, which had long been critical of Damascus, raised an uproar in September when he warned that the Christian presence in the Mideast could be threatened if Assad falls. He said Assad should be given a chance to reform.

The tensions come at a time when anti-Syrian parties in Lebanon, which once ran the government, are weakened. They were replaced in 2010 by a government dominated by Hezbollah and pro-Syrian allies. Prime Minister Najib Mikati, a personal friend of Assad, says he isn't taking sides in the crisis, adopting a policy of "disassociation."

Still, opponents accuse the government of complicity with Damascus.

Lebanon voted against suspending Syria from the Arab League in November and was the only member state that did not endorse a League plan calling on Assad to transfer powers to his vice president.

"The Lebanese government is cooperating with the Syrian regime, they are only using this policy of disassociation as a cover," Alloush said.

A longtime Syrian military presence in Lebanon ended after massive 2005 protests sparked by the killing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in a car bombing. Many Lebanese accuse Syria of involvement in the assassination, a charge Damascus denies.

A Western-backed, anti-Syrian government was elected, but its stint in power was plagued by constant feuds with Hezbollah, until the Shiite movement succeeded in bringing it down and elevating pro-Syrians to power.

Writing in the leading An-Nahar daily, political analyst Abdelwahab Badrakhan warned that Syria could stir up trouble in Lebanon to intimidate the West and "settle scores" with Arabs it accuses of conspiring against it.

Anti-Syrian politicians say they fear possible assassinations, recalling a string of unsolved killings of Lebanese critics of Syria in 2006. Last week, media reported that legislator Sami Gemayel had been warned by a security chief to take precautions because of a threat.

Alloush, the anti-Syrian politician, said he takes the warnings seriously.

"The Syrian regime is in trouble and as it goes down, the concern is that it will try to bring everyone down with it."

Arab League Wants UN Peacekeepers in Syria

Associated Press
February 13, 2012

The Arab League called Sunday for the U.N. Security Council to create a joint peacekeeping force for Syria and urged Arab states to sever all diplomatic contact with President Bashar Assad's regime, the League's latest effort to bring an end to the violence that has killed more than 5,000 people.

Syria immediately rejected the moves, spelled out in a resolution adopted by League foreign ministers meeting in Cairo.

Saudi Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faisal conveyed the 22-nation League's deep frustration with Syria, telling delegates that it was no longer appropriate to stand by and watch the bloodshed.

"Until when will we remain spectators?" he said. The bloodshed in Syria "is a disgrace for us as Muslims and Arabs to accept."

Syria's state news agency said the regime rejected the Arab League decisions, which were taken without a Syrian representative present. Syria's ambassador to the Arab League, Ahmed Youssef, was quoted as saying that Saudi Arabia and Qatar were "living in a state of hysteria after their last failure at the U.N. Security Council to call for outside interference in Syria's affairs and to impose sanctions on the Syrian people."

The Arab League has been at the forefront of regional efforts to end 11 months of bloodshed in Syria. The group put forward a plan that Assad agreed to in December, then sent in monitors to check whether he was complying. When it became clear that Assad's regime was flouting the terms of the agreement and the killings were continuing, the League pulled out the observers last month.

"The time has come for a decisive action to stop the bloodshed suffered by the Syrian people since the start of last year," Arab League chief Nabil Elaraby told the Arab foreign ministers. "We must move quickly in all directions ... to end or break the ongoing cycle of violence in Syria."

The League called for the U.N. Security Council to adopt a resolution that provides for an immediate cease-fire in Syria, the protection of civilians and overseeing a humanitarian effort for victims of the violence. It demanded that regime forces lift the siege on neighborhoods and villages and pull troops and their heavy weapons back to their barracks.

It urged Syrian opposition groups to unite ahead of a Feb. 24 meeting in Tunisia of the "Friends of Syria" group, which includes the United States, its European allies and Arab nations working to end the uprising against Assad's authoritarian rule.

The group was created after last weekend's veto at the U.N. by Russia and China of a Western and Arab draft resolution that would have pressured Assad to step down. That resolution also would have demanded that Assad halt the crackdown on dissent and implement the Arab League peace plan that calls for him to hand over power to his vice president and allow creation of a unity government to clear the way for elections.

Elaraby told the Cairo meeting that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov wrote him a letter Saturday saying Russia would agree to a joint U.N.-Arab League peacekeeping force.

The League also said it wanted to provide Syrian opposition groups with political and material support. It called for a halt to all diplomatic contacts with Syria and for referring officials responsible for crimes against the Syrian people to international criminal tribunals. It urged a tightening of trade sanctions previously adopted by the League that have not been fully implemented.

The foreign ministers were also expected to consider a proposal by Gulf states to expel Syrian ambassadors from Arab capitals, but the resolution made no mention of that.

Meanwhile, Washington piled more pressure on Syria.

President Barack Obama's chief of staff, Jacob Lew, said it was only a matter of time before Assad's regime collapsed.

"The brutality of the Assad regime is unacceptable and has to end," Lew told "Fox News Sunday." The U.S. is pursuing "all avenues that we can" and "there is no question that this regime will come to an end. The only question is when," he said.

Late Saturday, al-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahri threw the terror network's support behind Syrian rebels trying to topple President Bashar Assad, raising fears that Islamic extremists are exploiting the uprising that began peacefully but is quickly transforming into an armed insurgency.

The regime has long blamed terrorists for the revolt, and al-Qaida's endorsement creates new difficulties for Western and Arab states trying to figure out a way to help force Assad out of power.

At the Cairo meeting, foreign ministers from the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council proposed that all Arab League nations withdraw their ambassadors from Damascus and expel Syria's ambassadors from their capitals, according to officials.

The proposal was not mentioned in the resolution, but the clause calling for a halt to all diplomatic contacts with Syria appeared to reflect a compromise.

The six gulf nations, particularly Saudi Arabia and Qatar, have been campaigning for a tougher stand against Assad's regime and may offer formal recognition of the National Syrian Council, the largest of Syria's opposition groups.

Assad's regime has pursued a harsh crackdown against the uprising since it began last March. More than 5,400 people have been killed, according to a U.N. estimate in January. That figure has not been updated because the chaos in Syria has made it all but impossible to do so, and hundreds have been reported killed since.

Iran Won't Give Up Its Right to Enrich Uranium and Produce Nuclear Fuel, But It Will Allow Inspectors to Visit Its Nuclear Sites to Ensure That Its Nuclear Program Won't Be Weaponized

Ahmadinejad Says Iran Ready for Nuclear Talks

The Associated Press
January 26, 2012

Iran is ready to revive talks with the world powers, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday, as toughening sanctions aim at forcing Tehran to sharply scale back its nuclear program.

Even so, he insisted that the pressures will not force Iran to give up its demands, including to continue enriching uranium, that led to the collapse of dialogue last year.

The United States and its allies want Iran to halt making nuclear fuel, which they worry could eventually lead to weapons-grade material and the production of nuclear weapons.

Iran says its program is for peaceful purposes — generating electricity and producing medical radioisotopes to treat cancer patients.

The 27-member European Union imposed an oil embargo against Iran on Monday, part of sanctions to pressure Tehran into resuming talks on the country's nuclear program. It follows U.S. action also aimed at limiting Iran's ability to sell oil, which accounts for 80 percent of its foreign revenue.

No date is set for the possible resumption of talks between Iran and the five permanent U.N. Security Council members plus Germany. Negotiations ended in stalemate in January 2011, and Iran later rejected a plan to send its stockpile of low-enriched uranium abroad in exchange for reactor-ready fuel rods.

Iran had previously indicated that it is ready for a new round of talks. Ahmadinejad is the highest-ranking official to make the offer.

He accused the West of trying to scuttle negotiations as a way to further squeeze Iran.

"It is you who come up with excuses each time and issue resolutions on the verge of talks so that negotiations collapse," Ahmadinejad said in a speech in Kerman in southeastern Iran. "Why should we shun talks? Why and how should a party that has logic and is right shun talks? It is evident that those who resort to coercion are opposed to talks and always bring pretexts and blame us instead."

A senior U.N. nuclear agency team is expected to visit Tehran on Saturday, the first such mission since a report in November that alleged Iran conducted secret weapons-related tests and that Tehran was on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon.

The delegation from the International Atomic Energy Agency will be led by Deputy Director General Herman Nackaerts, who is in charge of the Iran nuclear file, and might include Peri Lynne Johnson, the agency's senior legal official.

Iran begun uranium enrichment at a new underground site built to withstand possible airstrikes earlier this month, in another show of defiance against Western pressure to rein in Tehran's nuclear program.

Centrifuges at the bunker-like Fordo facility near Iran's holy city of Qom are churning out uranium enriched to 20 percent. That level is higher than the 3.5 percent being made at Iran's main enrichment plant at Natanz, central Iran, and can be turned into warhead material faster and with less work.

Iran says it won't give up its right to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel, but it has offered to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to visit its nuclear sites to ensure that its nuclear program won't be weaponized.

Ahmadinejad also said sanctions and oil embargo will backfire because it has minimum trade with EU.

"Americans have not purchased Iranian oil for 30 years. Our central bank has had no dealings with them ... our (total) foreign trade is about $200 billion. Between $23 billion to $24 billion of our trade is with Europeans, making up about 10 percent of our total trade ... Iran won't suffer," Ahmadinejad said.

His comments were posted on state TV's website.

Ahmadinejad said sanctions won't harm the government, but only the people.

He said officials will be paid.

"They won't be under pressure ... it's clear that you (U.S. and allies) want to pressure the people," Ahmadinejad said. "History has shown that the Iranian nation has overcome obstacles. The bigger the obstacles, the more determined the Iranian nation is."

The EU had been importing about 450,000 barrels of oil a day from Iran, making up 18 percent of Iran's oil exports.

In Beijing, the official Xinhua News Agency quoted the Foreign Ministry as opposing the latest EU measures on Iran.

"To blindly pressure and impose sanctions on Iran are not constructive approaches," the statement said.

China, which is a major buyer of Iranian oil, has urged that the nuclear standoff be resolved through dialogue and consultation.

Russia Says It Would Never Support a U.N. Resolution Imposing Economic Sanctions on Iran

Bible prophecy describes a coalition of nations that will almost certainly include China and Russia and several other Muslim nations of the Middle East. The Euphrates originates in Turkey, and flows through Syria and Iraq; then it converges with the Tigris River, which then borders Iran. Anyone who hears the daily news should know that these four nations are extremely volatile trouble spots for military conflicts nowadays. The prophecies even imply that the nation of Iraq, once controlled by the regime of Saddam Hussein, will be a notable part of this final showdown. The population of these countries today is: Turkey -- 77 million; Syria -- 19.4 million; Iraq -- 29 million; Iran -- 70 million. The total population of that region is 195.4 million. Obviously, a 200-million-man army cannot come from these nations alone. In the light of China's cooperation with Iran and Syria (both openly and covertly), it appears to be fairly certain that China will league with Iran and Syria, somehow engaging Iraq and Turkey as well, to attempt to defeat Israel and the West. Their rabid anti-Zionism, anti-American hatred will not die, but will escalate into the worst conflagration in the history of human conflicts. Every day, the evidence mounts that China will be tightly leagued with Russia and many of the Islamic nations in a powerful new anti-Israel political and military alliance from which this 200-million-man army will ultimately come. - The Church Will Be 'Raptured' at Armageddon

Russia Asserting Itself Against West, This Time Over Syria Regime Change

The Washington Post
January 28, 2012

With the United States and its allies pressing President Bashar al-Assad to step down, the Arab League last week issued a detailed plan for a political transition in Syria. The plan was welcomed by the Obama administration, and Arab leaders quickly said they would refer it to the United Nations.

And a day later, Russia had its say: Not a chance.

“This is an effort from the Arab League, if I understand correctly, to sort of already put a precooked solution on the table,” said Vitaly I. Churkin, Moscow’s envoy to the United Nations. “I understand that the attitude of Damascus to that has been negative.”

The response doomed any hope of a quick resolution at the United Nations to bring greater pressure to bear on the Syrian government, but it also fell into a familiar pattern by which Moscow has shown a growing willingness to challenge the United States and its European partners on a range of issues.

In recent weeks, Moscow has sought U.N. scrutiny of possible crimes by NATO during its air campaign in Libya, and even called for investigations into organ sales in Kosovo, a close ally of the West. Most notably, Moscow has obstructed any effort to increase pressure on Iran. Asked in an interview whether Russia would ever support a U.N. resolution imposing economic sanctions on the Islamic republic, Churkin said:

“No chance, no chance, no chance. . . . Ever.”

Critics say Moscow’s tough line at the United Nations reflects what one senior council diplomat described as “the Putinization of Russian foreign policy,” on the eve of what many expect will be the return of Vladimir Putin to the presidency. Other analysts say Russia is trying to reassert its authority in the council following a period in which the United States and Europe prevailed in the handling of several major crises, engineering the downfall of former Ivory Coast leader Laurent Gbagbo and, more recently, of Moammar Gaddafi in Libya.

“The Russians looked diminished in the first half of 2011, and the strategy is to show, one, they are prepared to act as a spoiler, but, two, they can also lay out a more proactive agenda,” said Richard Gowan, an expert on the United Nations at the New York University Center for International Cooperation.

The United States and its European partners have responded to Russian aims by mounting a campaign to isolate it at the United Nations, and portraying Moscow as an obstacle to the democratic changes sweeping through the Middle East.

This past week, for example, the United States, Britain, Germany and France publicly rebuked Syria’s arms suppliers, a veiled reference to Russia, for continuing to sell weapons to Damascus.

“It is glaringly obvious that transferring weapons into a volatile and violent situation is irresponsible and will only fuel the bloodshed,” Britain’s U.N. envoy, Mark Lyall Grant, told the Security Council.

Russia is coming under mounting pressure to break with Assad from the Arab League, which is sending a delegation to the Security Council on Tuesday to press its case for a political transition that would require that the Syrian leader step aside. Meanwhile, Morocco, acting on behalf of a group of Western and Arab governments, has introduced a draft resolution endorsing the Arab League initiative calling on states to follow the Arab organization’s example by imposing sanctions on Syria. The Russians have responded coolly.

The high-level diplomatic gamesmanship is playing out as violence continues to spiral in Syria, forcing the United States to prepare for the possible closure of its embassy and the evacuation of its diplomatic personnel. U.N. officials estimate that more than 5,400 civilians have been killed, mostly at the hands of government security forces, since protesters took to the streets earlier last year.

Russia’s stance underscores the strength and depth of its relationship with Assad’s regime, which is not only a recipient of Russian arms but also host of a Russian naval base. The crisis in Syria also has provided Moscow with an opportunity to show it is a more reliable ally than Western powers, particularly the United States, which is seen by many in the region as having abandoned one of its closest allies, former Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak.

“If you have good relations with a country, a government for years, for decades, then it’s not so easy to ditch those politicians and those governments because of political expediency,” Churkin said. “We are stronger on our allegiances than others.”

Tensions between the West and Russia have spilled over into a series of highly personal attacks at the United Nations. Last month, U.S. Ambassador Susan E. Rice derided Churkin’s appeal for a new probe into possible NATO killings as a “cheap stunt” aimed at distracting attention from the killing in Syria.

Churkin fired back at the Stanford-educated envoy, saying,

“Really this Stanford dictionary of expletives must be replaced by something more Victorian.”

Rice’s media spokesman posted a tweet with a photoshopped picture of Churkin on the head of “the Grinch Who Stole Christmas.”

Asked if he was trying to change the subject from Syria, Churkin acknowledged that the Security Council has been the scene of “games of distraction,” but he said Russia’s concerns about the Libya mission were legitimate, asserting that the killing of civilians during the NATO campaign was “a real issue.”

Russia, along with Brazil, China, India and South Africa, believe “it would be extremely dangerous if” the West continues to be “carried away by this regime-change idea,” he said.

In Syria, Russia has pursued a complicated diplomatic strategy to shore up the regime, joining China in vetoing the Western-backed resolution threatening sanctions against Damascus, and introducing its own resolution. That resolution, now stalled, sought to focus the Security Council’s energy on backing a political settlement between the Syrian government and the opposition, and cutting off military supplies to the opposition.

Under the resolution, Assad’s army could still be armed.

Asked if Russia’s ongoing arms sales to Assad’s government were perhaps undercutting his government’s effort to pursue a political settlement, Churkin said:

“We are not doing anything which is contrary to international law. Other than that, we don’t have to give any explanation to anybody.”

U.S. Military Refuses to Drive Bilderberg Israeli Bus Off Cliff into WWIII

U.S. Military Refuses to Drive Bilderberg Israeli Bus Off Cliff into WW III

www.911insidejob.com
January 25, 2012

I deliberately use words that will trigger computer key word searches by the military and US Intelligence Services. This is one of those posts.

I deal in reality. If you want to hear fantasies about Iran’s nuclear weapons program that does not exist, you will have to go to a news outlet that either takes money from the Federal Reserve or is owned by Zionists and arms manufacturers. There is no evidence that Iran has an active program to make nuclear weapons. The Iranians are at 20% enrichment which is enough to make medical isotopes. They need to get to over 90% to make a bomb.

Yet we have heard nothing but war talk against Iran ever since the invasion of Iraq. We spent a trillion dollars and lots of lives fighting in Iraq over WMDs we knew never existed even before we invaded. We spent over a trillion dollars fighting in Afghanistan because the Taliban refused to turn over Osama bin Laden without evidence that he was responsible for 911. The US refused to produce any evidence of Osama’s crimes because there was none. But there is overwhelming evidence that Israel did 911 which I will demonstrate in my next essay.

So if the Iraqi WMDs were a fantasy cooked up by the Israelis to trick Americans into killing millions of Muslims in Iraq and Israel did 911 so there was no reason to kill millions of Muslims in Afghanistan, why is the Jewish owned media talking about attacking Iran which means war with Syria and Hezbollah as well? And what was it with those drone attacks and car bombs the CIA unleashed against Pakistan? I thought Pakistan was one of America’s best friends in the world.

As I said before, I deal in reality. Israel has laid claim to all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates which has an area the size of Texas and a population of 300 million. In 2001 just after 911 Wesley Clark saw a list of 7 nations Bush had told the Pentagon to invade. The list included Libya, Lebanon, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Iran. It was based upon Oded Yinon’s 1982 A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties. The only reason for all of America’s wars is Israel and her insane idea that she has the right to dispossess 300 million people from their land. America spent trillions of dollars and ten years fighting people who were only guilty of resisting invasions and occupations that killed millions of innocent civilians. You might ask where the honor is in killing unarmed women and children.

All that fighting and dying and all those sacrifices by families back home were to no avail. When the US officially left Iraq on December 15, 2011, she left behind lots of cancer and birth defect inducing Depleted Uranium and lots of death squads to teach those Muslims to love Wall Street democracy. The US is now negotiating an exit from Afghanistan with the Taliban in Qatar. Things have not gone well on the Afghan front ever since the Pakistan Army cut off American supplies. This was after the deliberate and unprovoked murder of 24 Pakistani soldiers on November 26th.

So you ask just how do the Israelis plan to get from here to there? They want to dispossess 300 million Muslims and America failed at that task. But the US military will succeed in doing exactly what Israel wants if they attack Iran.

Israel wants US sailors, marines, soldiers and airmen to die.

The Israelis know that Iran has sufficient guided missiles with fuel air explosives to destroy every Air Force, Marine and Army base in US Central Command within minutes. They know that Iran also has sufficient anti-ship missiles and supercavitating high speed torpedoes to sink the entire Persian Gulf fleet in minutes. The Israelis know the flight time to Iran is so long that the first ten thousand of those 150,000 incoming missiles would already begin the obliteration of Israel long before their 100 jets drop some bombs and returned home. That is not a real plan. So what is their real plan?

The only plan that makes military sense is to get the Iranians to destroy US Central Command and sink the US Persian Gulf fleet while Israel launches a preemptive nuclear strike against Lebanon, Syria and Iran. That way the American military is permanently degraded along with its economy. Then the United States would become an impoverished vassal state for Israel supplying their Zionist masters with mad dog killers willing to torture and commit war crimes. But, if you think about it, that is the function America has already been fulfilling for some time in the eyes of Israel.

Let’s move onto the Bilderberg Society which owns the banks that have stolen tens of trillions of dollars from Americans. They also want America to lose World War III. If America loses the next big war, then its once free citizens will become permanent Debt Slaves incapable of seizing even part of the money stolen from them. That is why the Bilderbergers had their puppets pass the North American Free Trade Act in 1994. They wanted to send 50,000 American manufacturing plants and all those high paying jobs overseas so our supply lines would stretch 8,000 miles on a dodgy credit card to China.

The Zionists want America to lose World War III for Israel and for the Rothschild banking network. The Bilderbergers and the Israelis have all their power because they steal billions of dollars every week from US federal spending they do not let the lowly Americans audit. They have that right because they give less than 1% of the money they stole as bribes to politicians in the two political parties they permit Americans to have. This two party corruption gives the voters the illusion of democracy. It was those same bribes that allowed banks to foreclose on millions of Americans dispossessing them just as the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians.

Israel is eager to launch World War III by attacking Iran because the bankers and the Israelis do not want Americans to live long enough as a free people to catch on to just how much contempt they have for the Goyim of America and Palestine. Israel did 911 more than ten years ago and still there has been no price paid for betrayal. The Israelis and Bilderbergers need a war to shut down all those people talking about bankers stealing trillions and Israel doing 911.

So tell me again why the American enlisted men who have risked their lives on 6, 7 and 8 combat tours should eagerly commit suicide in the Persian Gulf for a nation that holds them in contempt and mocks God and His laws? So tell me why officers who have men and women in their command die in combat and 8 times that many die at their own hands because the politicians who took those Bilderberg and Israeli bribes actively despise the returning vets. Those men and women are dying from Depleted Uranium and experimental vaccines. It is illegal to administer to serial killers on death row what is routinely forced upon our troops. America’s military has been fighting No Win wars for a very long time because that is the way the Bilderbergers and the Israelis demand it be.

But this need not be. There is a future other than the one the Rothschilds planned for you. The US military can refuse to drive that Bilderberg Israeli bus off a cliff into World War III and the pits of hell.

The military can and will say No rather than die killing themselves and a few billion innocent human beings.