A Mediterranean Battlefield - Syria

[Magda Hassan]

Probably one of the reasons they UK authorities stopped PressTV from broadcasting in the UK...

[Christer Forslund]

And the Americans are not far behind:

Lebanese security officials seize suspicious cargo from US, Brazil

Voltaire Network 8 February 2012 http://www.voltairenet.org/Lebanese-secu...ials-seize



Lebanon's security officials say a suspicious cargo containing huge amounts of US dollars, guns, special passports and credit cards have been seized upon arrival in the Lebanese capital, Beirut, from the US and Brazil.

The items, packed in a number of chests and delivered via airmail, were discovered at Beirut's airport, the Lebanese security officials said.

The chests also contained a list of both well-known and ordinary Lebanese citizens including a figure related to Salafi extremist groups. The security officials have summoned a number of the individuals, whose names were on the list, arresting some of them.

Beirut has redoubled security surveillance across the country following remarks by some Lebanese factions as well as widespread rumors about the presence of al-Qaeda in Lebanon.

Meanwhile, the Lebanese defense minister earlier confirmed that members of the al-Qaeda terrorist group, fighting against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, have entered Syria through Lebanon.

Over the past few months, reports have circulated that caches of weapons have been smuggled to armed gangs in Syria through the Lebanese border.

[Ed Jewett]

SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2012

Israel to the United States: 'We'll Give You the War, You Give Us the Cannon Fodder'

The dogs of war are off the leash.

In meeting rooms in London, Tel Aviv and Washington the dice have been thrown: snake eyes.

Flashback, 1963: When John F. Kennedy decided not to escalate the soon-to-be disastrous Vietnam war and issued National Security Action Memorandum 263 (NSAM 263), he signed his death warrant.

Scarcely six weeks after vowing to pull all American forces out of South Vietnam by 1965, Kennedy was dead, the target of an"executive action" orchestrated by the CIA, a coup d'état on behalf of America's corporatist masters--the military-industrial cabal of hardline cold warriors who stood to lose billions if Kennedy lived.

That sweet little deal to "win" the war in Southeast Asia cost some two million Vietnamese lives, 58,000 dead Americans and precipitated an economic crisis which dealt a death blow to post-World War II prosperity and launched the United States on its inexorable glide path towards becoming a failed state.

Flash forward to 2012: We have Barack Obama in the White House; a fraudster who promised "hope and change" and instead led his wilfully blind constituents into embracing the third term of a George W. Bush administration.

Comparing Obama with Kennedy one can only conclude: They don't make bourgeois politicians like they use to!

Following on from a decades-long drive to transform the Gulf into an "American lake" (under provisions of the so-called "Carter Doctrine," another "peace loving" Democrat), the coming war with Iran is a transparent scheme to ensure U.S. hegemony over the vast petroleum resources of Central Asia and the Middle East--to the detriment of their geopolitical rivals.

U.S. and NATO naval forces on high alert threaten the free flow of oil in the Persian Gulf, the life's blood of the global capitalist economy.

A war will lead to an oil price spike as Iranian, but perhaps also Saudi and GCC oil is removed in one fell swoop from the market, thereby setting-off a chain reaction that will exacerbate the West's economic decline--to the benefit of financial jackals waiting in the wings who will gobble up what remains of America and Europe's publicly-owned assets at fire sale prices in a desperate move to stave off the crisis.

Currently, Iran is ringed with military bases. American, British and Israeli submarines equipped with nuclear cruise missiles keep silent watch. Aircraft carrier battle groups carry out provocative maneuvers. U.S. and Israeli drones routinely overfly Iranian territory. Scientists are murdered in orchestrated terror attacks. Defense installations are bombed.

Economic sanctions, universally recognized as a prelude to war, strangle the Iranian people and their economy, all in the quixotic hope of inducing (coercing) "regime change" in Tehran.

The U.S. media, reprising their role during the run-up to 2003's invasion and occupation of Iraq, are chock-a-block with scare stories that Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) are preparing to carry out terrorist attacks in Europe and the United States.

Indeed, the Shiite regime "may have" given "new freedoms" to Sunni Salafist extremists, including members of the "management council" of the Afghan-Arab database of disposable Western intelligence assets also known as "Al Qaeda" detained in Iran and "may have provided some material aid to the terrorist group," if an account published last week by The Wall Street Journal can be believed, which of course it can't.

Meanwhile, the CIA and Mossad recruit, train and then unleash Salafist terrorists such as Jundallah or Saddam Hussein's former henchmen, the cultic Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) for terror ops, just as they did in Libya when former Al Qaeda "emir," the MI6 asset Abdelhakim Belhaj was appointed chief of Tripoli's Revolutionary Military Council.

And what "evidence" did U.S. officials offer for these dastardly Iranian plots to murder us all in our beds? Why the now-discredited FBI fable which had a failed Texas used-car dealer, Manssor Arbabsiar, and a still-unnamed DEA snitch posing as or actually a member of the notorious Zetas narcotrafficking cartel, plotting to murder the Saudi ambassador by blowing up a tony Georgetown restaurant, that's what!

Former CIA chief Leon Panetta, who replaced Robert Gates, also a former CIA chief, now helms the Defense Department.

Corporate media in Europe and America report that Panetta and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, have tried to "cool" the Israeli's ardor for a preemptive strike and deny that the U.S. is preparing for war.

This too, is a carefully contrived disinformation campaign.

In a syndicated column for The Washington Post, war hawk David Ignatius wrote Thursday that "Panetta believes there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June--before Iran enters what Israelis described as a 'zone of immunity' to commence building a nuclear bomb."

According to Ignatius, "the administration appears to favor staying out of the conflict unless Iran hits U.S. assets, which would trigger a strong U.S. response," and that Washington's alleged disapproval of an Israeli first strike "might open a breach like the one in 1956, when President Dwight Eisenhower condemned an Israeli-European attack on the Suez Canal."

Ignatius' unnamed "senior administration official," since identified as Panetta, "caution that Tehran shouldn't misunderstand: The United States has a 60-year commitment to Israeli security, and if Israel's population centers were hit, the United States could feel obligated to come to Israel's defense."

In other words, should America's "stationary aircraft carrier in the Middle East" launch a sneak-attack on Iran, hitting their civilian nuclear and defense installations, thereby inflicting "collateral damage," i.e., the wanton slaughter of innocent Iranian citizens, if Tehran has the temerity to defend itself and strike back, the full military might of the imperialist godfather will be brought to bear.

Inter Press Service reported Wednesday that JCS Chairman Dempsey, "told Israeli leaders Jan. 20 that the United States would not participate in a war against Iran begun by Israel without prior agreement from Washington, according to accounts from well-placed senior military officers."

According to journalist Gareth Porter, "Dempsey's warning, conveyed to both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak, represents the strongest move yet by President Barack Obama to deter an Israeli attack and ensure that the United States is not caught up in a regional conflagration with Iran."

Claiming that "Obama still appears reluctant to break publicly and explicitly with Israel over its threat of military aggression against Iran, even in the absence of evidence Iran has decided to build a nuclear weapon," Porter alleges that "the message carried by Dempsey was the first explicit statement to the Netanyahu government that the United States would not defend Israel if it attacked Iran unilaterally."

Holding onto the thinnest of reeds, Porter writes that Panetta "had given a clear hint" of the U.S. position "in an interview on 'Face the Nation' Jan. 8 that the Obama administration would not help defend Israel in a war against Iran that Israel had initiated."

When asked by CBS host Bob Schieffer, who pressed the issue of a unilateral Israeli attack, Panetta said, "If the Israelis made that decision, we would have to be prepared to protect our forces in that situation. And that's what we'd be concerned about."

What are we to make of these claims?

If their purpose was to force Israel to rethink their attack plans, it clearly isn't working. If however, Panetta's remarks were meant to disarm domestic opponents of U.S. war plans, then mission accomplished!

"Speaking at the Herzliya Interdisciplinary Center's annual conference," The Christian Science Monitor reported that "Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak compared the current standoff with Iran to the 'fateful' period before the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, when Israel launched a preemptive strike against Egypt."

"The temperature is rising in Israel," Iran analyst Meir Javedanfar told the Monitor. "He says that if the defense minister sees the current period as similar to the run-up to the [1967] Six-Day War, 'that gives credibility to those who think Israel is going to launch an attack'."

In a follow-up piece published Saturday by IPS, Porter now suggests that Panetta's leak to Ignatius "had a different objective," namely that the "White House was taking advantage of the current crisis atmosphere over that Israeli threat and even seeking to make it more urgent in order to put pressure on Iran to make diplomatic concessions to the United States and its allies on its nuclear programme in the coming months."

Indeed, the "Panetta leak makes it less likely that either Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Iranian strategists will take seriously Obama's effort to keep the United States out of a war initiated by an Israeli attack."

Moreover, Panetta's leak to The Washington Post "seriously undercut the message carried to the Israelis by Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, last month that the United States would not come to Israel's defence if it launched a unilateral attack on Iran."

Although there is trepidation amongst military planners in Tel Aviv and Washington should Israeli officials opt for a preemptive attack on Iran--and a retaliatory counterstrike by the Islamic Republic would have devastating effects on both Israel's civilian population and U.S./NATO military forces in the Persian Gulf and beyond--should such disastrous orders be given, it is a certainty that Washington would follow suit.

This in fact, is what the Israeli leadership is banking on and, contrary to sanctioned leaks to media conduits like Ignatius, is fully in keeping with Washington's strategy of employing Israel as a cats' paw to "drag" the United States into a war with Iran.

As the World Socialist Web Site points out, "any differences between the US and Israel are purely tactical."

"Washington could of course use its considerable influence to veto an attack by Israel, which is heavily dependent on the US, diplomatically, economically and militarily," leftist critic Peter Symonds writes.

Ignatius' column however, "makes no mention of this possibility. In effect, the Obama administration appears to be giving Israel a tacit green light for an illegal, unprovoked attack on Iran, and threatening its own military action if Iran retaliates."

Indeed, the right-wing Israeli publication Debkafile reported Saturday that while Panetta "has been outspoken about a possible Israeli offensive against Iran taking place as of April ... no US source is leveling on the far more extensive American, Saudi, British, French and Gulf states' preparations going forward for an offensive against the Islamic Republic."

Accordingly, Debkafile's "military sources" (read high-placed intelligence and military officials favoring an attack) "report a steady flow of many thousands of US troops for some weeks to two strategic islands within reach of Iran, Oman's Masirah just south of the Strait of Hormuz and Socotra, between Yemen and the Horn of Africa."

Debkafile also noted that "the Saudis this week wound up their own intensive preparations for war. Large forces are now deployed around Saudi oil fields, pipelines and export facilities in the eastern provinces opposite the Persian Gulf, backed by anti-missile Patriot PAC-3 batteries. American, British and French fighter-bombers have been landing at Saudi air bases to safeguard the capital, Riyadh."

And with the Pentagon speeding-up arms sales to repressive Gulf monarchies and Saudi royals (with tens of billions in profits flowing into the coffers of American and European death merchants), the stage is now set for a bloody military confrontation.

On the so-called diplomatic front, as "useful idiots" and "accessories before the fact" in the drive towards war, the shameful part played by the International Atomic Energy Agency must be underscored.

Despite, or more likely because Iran's top leadership have expressed their willingness to reopen stalled talks over their civilian nuclear program and have taken steps to do so, the United States and NATO are stepping-up their propaganda offensive, with the IAEA playing a leading role.

Indeed, The New York Times reported Sunday that "American and European officials said Friday that a mission by international nuclear inspectors to Tehran this week had failed to address their key concerns, indicating that Iran's leaders believe they can resist pressure to open up the nation's nuclear program."

Times' stenographers Robert F. Worth and David E. Sanger averred that an unnamed "senior American official described the session between the agency and Iranian nuclear officials as 'foot-dragging at best and a disaster at worst'."

Why is the onus solely placed on Iranian negotiators?

Because "members of the I.A.E.A. delegation were told that they could not have access to Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, an academic who is widely believed to be in charge of important elements of the suspected weaponization program, and that they could not visit a military site where the agency's report suggested key experiments on weapons technology might have been carried out."

What Worth and Sanger fail to mention in their report is that Iranian officials asserted that before Roshan's murder he "had talked to IAEA inspectors, a fact which 'indicates that these UN agencies may have played a role in leaking information on Iran's nuclear facilities and scientists'," Russia Today reported at the time.

Protesting the killing before the UN Security Council last month, Iranian deputy UN ambassador Eshagh Al Habib said there was "'high suspicion' that, in order to prepare the murder, terrorist circles used intelligence obtained from UN bodies."

According to the deputy ambassador's charge, "this included interviews with Iranian nuclear scientists carried out by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the sanction list of the Security Council," RT disclosed.

Sound far-fetched, the product of Iranian "conspiracy theories"? Better think again!

As former UNSCOM Iraq weapons' inspector Scott Ritter revealed in his 2005 book, Iraq Confidential, "The issue of uncovering incriminating documentation suddenly took on a higher priority, and the CIA, supported by activist elements within the Department of State, pushed for more direct involvement in the operations of UNSCOM and the IAEA. For the first time, the darkest warriors in the CIA's covert army, the Operations Planning Cell (OPC), were getting actively involved in preparing intelligence for UNSCOM's use."

According to Ritter, "The secret warriors of the CIA were accustomed to plying their trade in the shadows, far away from prying eyes. UNSCOM inspections, however, were carried out in full view of the Iraqi government, representing the antithesis of covert action. The existence of the OPC, as with any CIA affiliation with UNSCOM, was a carefully guarded secret. Officially, therefore, all OPC personnel were presented to UNSCOM as State Department 'experts'."

In light of past practices by the CIA, or for that matter the IAEA itself, Iranian fears that their scientists are being set-up for liquidation are fully justified.

Indeed, the "cautious" U.S. Secretary of Defense, former CIA chief Leon Panetta, speaking at the Ramstein Air Base in Germany on Friday, echoed Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak's claim that Israel would need to "consider taking action" should nuclear inspections and sanctions fail.

"My view is that right now the most important thing is to keep the international community unified in keeping that pressure on, to try to convince Iran that they shouldn't develop a nuclear weapon, that they should join the international family of nations and that they should operate by the rules that we all operate by," Panetta asserted. "But I have to tell you, if they don't, we have all options on the table, and we'll be prepared to respond if we have to."

One of those "options," passed by the U.S. Senate Banking Committee on Friday were demands made to the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications, or SWIFT.

"The new Senate package," Reuters reported, "seeks to target foreign banks that handle transactions for Iran's national oil and tanker companies, and for the first time, extends the reach of Iran-related sanctions to foreign subsidiaries of U.S. companies."

The new legislation would target SWIFT with wide-ranging penalties if they failed to exclude sanctioned Iranian banks from the international system.

The bill now goes to the full Senate "where the likelihood of passage is considered strong," The New York Times reported.

With the Orwellian title, the "Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Human Rights Act" Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson (D-SD) said that "Iran can end its suppression of its own people, come clean on its nuclear program, suspend enrichment and stop supporting terrorist activities around the globe. Or it can continue to face sustained, intensifying multilateral economic and diplomatic pressure deepening its international isolation."

Now if only Senator Johnson offered similar demands on America's Israeli allies who possess upwards of 200 nuclear weapons, refuse to join the international nonproliferation regime and carry out worldwide terrorist attacks with impunity, perhaps then diplomacy would operate on a level playing field!

SWIFT officials were quick to cave to U.S. pressure. "SWIFT fully understands and appreciates the gravity of the situation,"Reuters disclosed.

In its statement, "SWIFT said it is working with officials and central banks to find 'the right multilateral legal framework' to 'expedite' a response to the issues."

"This is a complex situation, and SWIFT needs to ensure that it takes into consideration the implications to the functioning of the broader global financial payments system, as well as the continued flow of humanitarian payments to the Iranian people," the organization said.

Needless to say, a boycott of Iranian financial institutions by SWIFT would be catastrophic to Iran's economy, a provocation fully intended as a step towards war.

As the World Socialist Web Site noted, "if Israel does attack Iran, it will not simply be 'a surgical strike' that destroys Iran's key nuclear facilities. Any Iranian retaliation will be used by the US as a pretext for a massive air war aimed at destroying the country's military and infrastructure. As a result, any conflict carries a real danger of becoming a regional war that could embroil the major powers."

Despite the evident madness of countenancing an Iran attack, political calculations by capitalist elites during a critical election year in the United States, with "conservative" and "liberal" factions angling for advantage by currying favor with the powerful Zionist and U.S. defense lobbies, Israel's unambiguous message to the White House is: "We'll give you the war, you give us the cannon fodder."

Posted by Antifascistat 11:24 AM

2 comments

[Magda Hassan]

During the assault on the rebel stronghold in the Homs district of Bab Amr, the Syrian army took more than 1,500 prisoners, mostly foreigners. Of these, a dozen French nationals requested the status of prisoner of war, refusing to give their identity, rank and unit of assignment. One of them is a Colonel working for the DGSE transmission service.In arming the Wahhabi Legion and feeding it with satellite intelligence, France conducted a secret war against the Syrian army, which caused more than 3,000 deaths among the military, and more than 1,500 among civilians in ten months of fighting.This information was partially revealed by Thierry Meyssan during an appearance on the top Russian TV channel, on Monday, 13 February 2012, followed by anarticle published on Tuesday, the 14th, by Komsomolskaya Pravda and finally through a Voltaire Network TV video.France has sought Russia's assistance to negotiate with Syria the release of its prisoners of war.Voltaire Network has found no evidence enabling it to confirm the allegations according to which 120 French nationals were taken prisoner in Zabadani. This rumor appears to be unfounded and, in any case, exaggerated.However, Voltaire Network questions the articles by French special correspondents in Homs which have been published in recent days: one week after the takeover of the rebel district, and with nothing but low intensity urban clashes still taking place, these reporters persist in depicting a fictional revolution scenario, obscuring the truth from their readers, thus making it possible for Alain Juppé to negotiate in secret the return of the POW's.On 17 February, Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron signed a joint declaration, stating that "France and the United Kingdom wish to make it clear that those responsible for the violence in all parts of Syria should realize that the day will come when they will answer for their actions. France and the United Kingdom reiterate their determination to ensure that all the evidence of the crimes is duly collected so that those who ordered or committed atrocities can be held accountable. "In the absence of an obligation stipulated in the relevant treaties, the secret war led by President Sarkozy and his government constitutes an unprecedented act under the Fifth Republic. It violates Article 35 of the Constitution and amounts to a crime punishable by the High Court (Article 68).
http://www.voltairenet.org/France-opens-...tions-with
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


On 13 February 2012, Thierry Meyssan revealed on the first Russian television channel that Syria had captured a dozen French soldiers. Voltaire Network is now in a position to confirm that as of 26 February the number of French prisoners is 18 (eighteen).
If Paris admits that they were on a mission, they will be entitled to prisoner-of-war status and protected by the relative Geneva Convention; but if Paris denies having sent them, they will be considered as foreign civilians and judged in Syria for their crimes, which are punishable by the death penalty.France has opened three negotiation channels via the Russian Federation, the United Arab Emirates and the Sultanate of Oman.
The ambassador of France, Eric Chevallier, returned urgently to Damascus on 23 February.
Kofi Annan has been appointed as the joint United Nations-Arab League envoy on the Syrian crisis.Aware of the potential use it can make of the captives in the midst of the French electoral campaign, Damascus called on Syrian state media not to raise the matter at this time. It thus reserves the possibility of dealing with it under the radar if this option proves to be more advantageous. While acknowledging the uniqueness of this situation, the Syrian journalists, who were quick to adapted to the freedom of expression guaranteed by the new media law, growled that limits are again being imposed for reasons of national security.If negotiations are kept secret, France will have to quietly pay very heavy war indemnities, either in cash or by way of economic privileges. If they are made public, France can hope to reduce the bill, but Nicolas Sarkozy and Alain Juppe will have some explaining to do to their fellow citizens. Their political camp would compromise its chances of winning the presidential election, with the president even risking to be brought before the High Court (Articles 35 and 68 of the Constitution).In the Rainbow Warrior affair (1985), where there was a sunken ship and one person killed, France had formally apologized and had paid a compensation of $ 7 million to New Zealand and $ 8.16 million to Greenpeace. Above all, Paris had to consent to the importation of sheep of New Zealand partially destroying its own sheep industry. In exchange, the two detained French agents were released. Ironically, Laurent Fabius, the Prime Minister whose government had ordered the attack on the Rainbow Warrior, is tipped to become foreign minister if the Socialist candidate, François Hollande, becomes the next president of France. The latter happens to be former brother-in-law of Lt. Col. Gerard Royal, who commanded the operation.In the secret war against Syria, France and its allies are responsible for a conflict that caused the death of at least 3,000 Syrian soldiers and 1,500 civilians, plus economic losses and the sabotage of infrastructure estimated at least $ 3 billion.
http://www.voltairenet.org/a172869

[Jan Klimkowski]

During the assault on the rebel stronghold in the Homs district of Bab Amr, the Syrian army took more than 1,500 prisoners, mostly foreigners. Of these, a dozen French nationals requested the status of prisoner of war, refusing to give their identity, rank and unit of assignment. One of them is a Colonel working for the DGSE transmission service.In arming the Wahhabi Legion and feeding it with satellite intelligence, France conducted a secret war against the Syrian army, which caused more than 3,000 deaths among the military, and more than 1,500 among civilians in ten months of fighting.

The Guantanamo legal rationale of "unlawful combatants", used by Bush and his scumbag lawyers to justify denying individuals Geneva Convention protection, could presumably also be used on these French terrorists operating in Syria.

I'm not holding my breath...

[Magda Hassan]

[TABLE="width: 0"]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"]

Turkish Secret Agents Trained by the Mossad Captured in Syria


by Global Research News

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2, align: left"]Global Research, February 22, 2012

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2, align: left"]- 2012-02-21
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2, align: left"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2, align: left"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2, align: left"]
According to the Israeli daily Haaretz, "40 Turkish intelligence officers were captured by the Syrian army. "
Turkey has been conducting intensive negotiations with Syria in order to secure their freedom [...] (Zvi Bar'el and DPA, Report: U.S. drones flying over Syria to monitor crackdown, Haaretz, 18 February, 2012)
Haaretz notes that their release would depend on the extradition of Syrian defectors now living in Turkey. Syria is also willing to continue negotiating only if Turkey prevents "weapon transfers and passage of soldiers from the rebels' Free Syria Army through its territory".
Turkish sources told the Israeli newspaper that Turkey would reject the Syrian demands and was about to strengthen its position on Syria.
The Turkish officers allegedly confessed to the Syrian authorities that they were trained by the Israeli Mossad and were instructed "to carry out bombings to undermine the country's security." (Ibid.) One officer purportedly admitted that the "Mossad also trains soldiers from the Free Syria Army" as well as al-Qaeda officials on Jordanian soil with a view to send them to Syria to conduct attacks.

These testimonies corroborate information, including from Israeli intelligence sources, indicating the implication of the Mossad in the Syrian insurrection. Several reports also mention the involvement of the CIA and the British MI6, as well as European and American special forces.
The Turkish authorities denied the Israeli report.

For more on this topic visit the Global Research dossier on Syria.
Julie Lévesque contributed to this report.

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[Jan Klimkowski]

I woke up this morning to BBC Radio 4's flagship current affairs Today banging on about Syrian state media being a lying propaganda operation.

They then spoke to Daily Telegraph "foreign correspondent" Con Coughlin and asked him to explain what was happening in Syria, without even the hint of an interrogatory question.

Which prompts two thoughts:

i) the hypocrisy of the BBC in criticizing Syrian state media operation for peddling propaganda and then putting up Con Coughlin;

ii) the historical record of when Coughlin surfaces.

See for instance his role in MSM coverage of the Habbush letter:

In late 2003, in a front-page exclusive story, Coughlin revealed a leaked intelligence memorandum, purportedly uncovered by Iraq's interim government, which detailed a meeting between Mohamed Atta, one of the September 11 hijackers, and Iraqi intelligence at the time of Saddam Hussein.[10][11] The memo was supposedly written by Iraqi security chief General Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti to the president of Iraq. The report was subsequently challenged with American officials also reiterating that there was no such link.[12]

The Daily Telegraph's exclusive report was picked up and repeated by several conservative columnists in the United States, including syndicated columnist Deroy Murdock[13] and William Safire.[14]

More here:

Ron Suskind allegation

According to Ron Suskind in his 2008 book The Way of the World:

The White House had concoted a fake letter from Habbush to Saddam backdated to July 1, 2001. It said that 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq . . . The letter also mentioned suspicious shipments to Iraq from Niger set up with al Qaeda's assistance. The idea was to take the letter to Habbush and have him transcribe it in his own neat handwriting on a piece of Iraq government stationery, to make it look legitimate. CIA would then take the finished product to Baghdad and have someone release it to the media. [11]

Suskind goes on to describe what happened next. Richer talks to Maguire, a CIA Iraq expert, who says that this plan will not work - Habbush will not sign anything himself because the insurgency would harm his family. This, by Suskind's account, leads to the White House telling the CIA directly to hand write the letter itself. Suskind's book says that this new order then passed down eventually to the Iraq Operations Group for it to be carried out. Maguire left for Baghdad to help run the CIA station there and was not involved directly in the mission, other than discussing the mission with Richer.

Suskind's evidence includes, according to an interview he gave on August 7, 2008, on-the-record statements from two CIA agents, Robert Richer and John Maguire, and others. He also claims to have tape recorded statements to back up his claims.[12]

According to the tape recorded interview with Richer, former CIA deputy chief of clandestine operations, Richer saw a letter on White House stationery, passed down the ranks of the CIA through George Tenet, then-CIA director, "probably" to James Pavitt, the Deputy Director of Operations, who passed it to his chief of staff, who passed it to Richer. Richer said that the letter might or might not have come from the vice president's office, but he wasn't sure. The letter described what the White House wanted Habbush to say in a forged letter. Suskind published a partial transcript on his web site on August 8.[13]

In a taped interview on the Fox News program Hannity & Colmes,[14] which aired on August 15, 2008, Suskind said, "We are putting up all the transcripts. They're on my Web site, and I think they're all over the Internet at this point."

On August 5, 2008, the White House issued the statement on behalf of George Tenet, Robert Richer and John Maguire, addressing Suskind's allegation. Tenet said:

It is well established that, at my direction, CIA resisted efforts on the part of some in the Administration to paint a picture of Iraqi-Al Qa'ida connections that went beyond the evidence. The notion that I would suddenly reverse our stance and have created and planted false evidence that was contrary to our own beliefs is ridiculous.[15]

The CIA issued its own statement on August 22, 2008 saying that Suskind's allegations regarding Habbush "did not happen",[16] and Tenet followed the same day with a second statement saying that Suskind's charges were "demonstrably false in every regard."[17]

Suskind also contends that Habbush, who still carries a $1 million reward for his capture and appears as the Jack of Diamonds on the US military's deck of most-wanted Iraqi playing cards, was secretly resettled in Jordan by the CIA with $5 million in US taxpayers money.

[edit] Philip Giraldi allegationFormer CIA officer Philip Giraldi, writing in The American Conservative, has claimed to have a reliable source who tells him that Suskind's basic story about the White House ordering the forgery is correct, but some of the detail is wrong.[18] His source claims that Dick Cheney ordered the forgery, but not from the CIA, instead using the Office of Special Plans, an office created by Donald Rumsfeld and run by Douglas Feith.[19]

Giraldi writes that "Tenet is for once telling the truth when he states that he would not have undermined himself by preparing such a document while at the same time insisting publicly that there was no connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda."[18]

[edit] Subsequent reactionsProfessor Juan Cole posits that Habbush crafted the letter himself, and that the CIA "authenticated" it in bad faith through onetime asset Ayad Allawi whom journalist Con Coughlin contacted to vouchsafe the document's authenticity after it was leaked to him.[20]

Author Joe Conason noted that Ayad Allawi had visited CIA headquarters in Langley just days before speaking with Con Coughlin of the Telegraph.[21]

Con Coughlin, in a blog post highly critical of Suskind, confirmed that he had indeed received the letter from Ayad Allawi. He also calls the letter a 'leak' and says he got it in November 2003, in Baghdad.[22]

[edit] Congressional investigationThe House Judiciary Committee is now[when?] investigating the allegations. Chairman John Conyers stated, "I am particularly troubled that the decision to disseminate this fabricated intelligence is alleged to have come from the highest reaches of the administration. The administration's attempt to challenge Mr. Suskind's reporting appears to have been effectively dismissed by the publication of the author's interview recordings and transcripts. I have instructed my staff to conduct a careful review of Mr. Suskind's allegations and the role played by senior administration officials in this matter."[23]

Something is clearly in the air....

[Magda Hassan]

Stratfor Emails: Covert Special Ops Inside Syria Since December

A private conversation with Pentagon officials suggested US and allied troops were on the ground in Syria

by John Glaser, March 07, 2012

| Print This | Share This | Antiwar Forum

Special operations forces from the U.S. and its allies have been on the ground in Syria since at least December, according to confidential emails from the private intelligence firm Stratfor that were released by WikiLeaks.An analyst from Stratfor claimed in December 2011 that officials at the Pentagon clued him in on covert military operations taking place in Syria. "After a couple hours of talking, they said without saying that SOF [Special Operations Forces] teams (presumably from US, UK, France, Jordan, Turkey) are already on the ground focused on recce [reconnaissance] missions and training opposition forces," the email said."One Air Force intel guy (US) said very carefully that there isn't much of a Free Syrian Army to train right now anyway, but all the operations being done now are being done out of prudence,'" it continued. "They have been told to prepare contingencies and be ready to act within 2-3 months, but they still stress that this is all being done as contingency planning, not as a move toward escalation."Publicly, the Obama administration has retreated from its initial refusal to stay out of the conflict in Syria by agreeing this week to provide direct humanitarian and communications assistance to the Syrian opposition. While the official line remains to keep military options off the table for now, the change in policy could open the flood gates for expanded military intervention.Complicating the official story, a report coming out of Lebanon this week claimed 13 French soldiers were captured in the Syrian city of Homs. The French Foreign Ministry denied the claims, saying there are no ground troops in Syria.According to the Stratfor analyst, after rejecting the prospect of "an eventual air campaign," the officials at the Pentagon told him "the idea hypothetically' is to commit guerrilla attacks, assassination campaigns, try to break the back of the Alawite forces, elicit collapse from within."The extent to which the information exchanged in the conversation was "hypothetical" is not clear and no U.S. official has made any comment on the information in the leaked email. The discussion appeared focused on contingency planning and the phrase "they said without saying" is never elaborated on. The date of the email coincides roughly with the first public reports of secret contingency planing in December.Information in a report on Stratfor's website published March 7, 2012, appears to have been taken at least partially from this very email. It reads: "The U.S. military indeed has updated its order of battle for Syria in preparation for any contingency operations, and this work allegedly produced the best order of battle the United States has had on Syria since 2001. However, contingency plans exist for numerous countries with which war is unlikely."In congressional sessions with top military officials on Wednesday, some in Congressexpressed frustration with current policy, as articulated by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and others. "I get irritated, I get angry," McCain insisted, accusing the U.S. military of "standing on the sidelines" instead of waging an all out war on Syria, as he proposed on Monday.
http://news.antiwar.com/2012/03/07/strat...-december/

[Magda Hassan]

Confessions of 40 Turkish intelligence officers captured in Syria

By SAEBPRESS - Sat Feb 18, 7:44 pm
ANKARA, (SaebPress) Editorial by Saeb Shaath Turkey as a member of NATO has with Israel' a longstanding joint military-intelligence agreement, which is explicitly directed against Syria. A 1993 Memorandum of Understanding led to the creation of (Israeli-Turkish joint committees) to handle "regional threats". Turkey and Israel' agreed to cooperate in gathering intelligence on Syria, Iran, and Iraq and to meet regularly to assess terrorism and Syria, Iran, and Iraq military capabilities.

The position of the Turkish government on Syria is not popular in Turkey, thousands of Turkish citizens protested on Friday 18th Feb at the gates of the Presidential Palace in Ankara during the meeting between Turkish President Abdullah Gul and Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen, denouncing the Turkish government's conspiring with the NATO and the US against Syria.

Confessions of 40 Turkish intelligence officers captured in Syria

A diplomatic crisis erupted between Turkey and Syria when more than 40 Turkish intelligence officers were captured by the Syrian army. Over the past week, Turkey has been conducting intensive negotiations with Syria in order to get them back. Syria insists that their release will be conditioned on the extradition of Syrian officers and soldiers that defected and are currently in Turkey.Syria also stressed that its continuation of the negotiations with Turkey is subject to Turkey's blockade of weapon transfers and passage of soldiers from the rebels' "Free Syria Army" through its territory. Syria demanded that Iran sponsor the negotiations of releasing the Turkish officers, Turkey rejected Syria's demands.Syria, on the other hand, has recently published confessions it gathered from the captured Turkish officers; their confessions concluded that they were trained by Israel's' Mossad, and were instructed to carry out bombing campaigns to destabilize the country from within. Captured Turkish officers said that the "Mossad also actively engaged in training soldiers from the Free Syria Army, and that Mossad agents came to Jordan in order to train al-Qaida officials to send to Syria to carry out attacks".Meanwhile Jordan's Al-Helal News website reported that units from the Royal Desert Forces operating in the north western desert area managed to arrest a number of non-Jordanians who were trying to enter Syria illegally, finding automatic firearms in their possession.Assistant Director of Jordanian General Security and Commander of the Royal Desert Forces, Lt. Gen. Mohammad Khalaf al-Sayyed, said that seven men carrying AK-47 rifles were arrested, all of them not from Jordan, and that these people were arrested by the authorities while they were trying to enter a neighbouring country illegally and that they're being interrogated to discover their motives.

Attacking Syria

Armed insurgents belonging to radical Islamist groups are crossing the border from Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, some Libyans fighters have been captured, and last week's double attack on Aleppo was blamed on al Qaida whose objective is to destabilize the Syrian State. Anti-government violence followed, local residents trapped between warring sides, civilian casualties mount.Radical Islamist groups, who are working on inflicting heavy casualties and many deaths among security forces and civilians, are intensifying their efforts to provide Turkey, NATO, Israel' and partners with a justification forhumanitarian intervention; under the principle "Responsibility to Protect", they believe that would provide the western alliance with an opportunity to use the UN-GA latest statement on Syria and interpret it in a way to serves their objective of attacking Syria. (UN-GA latest statement on Syria ignores the fact that International law prohibits interfering in the internal affairs of other nations, including determining the legitimacy of their leaders).Obama confirmed the US of A's commitment by stating that NATO and allies will "redouble their efforts to unseat Bashar Assad."The war planners have to go back to their own drawing board, and to add to their military assessment that they are not dealing with a weak or an isolated country, Syria have demonstrated its strength in countering, containing and defeating large parts of the Radical Islamist groups. Syria showed the western alliance that it is in a strategic alliance with powerful global partners who are prepared to get involved in defending it, Syria's partners perceives destabilizing Syria as a direct threat to their own national security.
http://saebpress.com/2012/02/confessions...-in-syria/

[Magda Hassan]

Report: German ship carrying Iranian weapons to Syria stopped at sea

According to Der Spiegel, cruiser was carrying ammunition to Syrian port city of Tartus; German government says looking into report.

By Ofer Aderet and The Associated PressTags: Syria Iran Bashar Assad
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"][/TD]
[TD="align: center"][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


A German ship carrying Iranian weapons was stopped the Mediterranean on Saturday, according to a report by Der Spiegel.

The ship, weighing 6,200 tons, was carrying weapons and ammunition to Tartus, Syria with the aim of arming President Bashar Assad's forces, the report said.[TABLE="class: features, width: 464"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="class: text"]The ship, owned by Bulk Chartering.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]Photo by: Bulk Chartering website[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]



The German government says it's looking into the report.Der Spiegel quoted shipping agent Torsten Lueddeke of Hamburg-based C.E.G.
Bulk Chartering as saying: "We stopped the ship after we received information
on the weapons cargo."He said the ship was chartered to Ukraine-based White Whale Shipping, and they said the ship was carrying pumps and similar equipment.Neither C.E.G. nor the ship's owner were immediately reachable. The German
Economy Ministry said it looks into all suspected embargo breaches but didn't yet have details of the case.Earlier on Saturday, human rights group said Syrian forces shelled two central districts in the battered city of Homs, the first bombings since a ceasefire took hold on Thursday."There was shelling last night in the old part of the city, in Jouret al-Shiyah and al-Qaradis. And I have heard eight shells fall in the past hour," Karm Abu Rabea, a resident activist who lives in an adjacent neighborhood, said on Saturday morning.The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that shelling had wounded several people overnight.On Friday, Syrian forces used live fire, tear gas and clubs to beat back tens of thousands of protesters who took to the streets across the country in powerful and often jubilant displays of defiance. But at that time the UN-brokered truce largely held up without the widespread, bloody offensives that have pushed the nation toward civil war.Activists said security forces killed at least six people, a lower-than-usual toll. The rallies, described as some of the largest in months, stretched from the suburbs of Damascus to the central province of Hama, Idlib in the north and the southern province of Daraa, where the uprising began in March 2011.http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/...a-1.424190