A Mediterranean Battlefield - Syria

[Bill Kelly]

Wed, September 19, 2012 11:07:45 AM
Carving up the Middle East
From: Brasscheck TV <news@brasschecktv.com>

The US isn't the only
country involved in
destabilizing the
Middle East.

Here's a player you
rarely hear talked
about.

Video: 2:17 minutes long

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/20309.html

- Brasscheck

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and
videos with friends and colleagues.

That's how we grow. Thanks.

================================
Brasscheck TV
2380 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94115

Adele

The USA is not trying to destablixe the Middle East, that was done by dictators who refuse to give up their power. Those behind the USA policy in the Middle East- bankers and oil companies, do not and did not want unrest in the area, which is why the CIA and USA did not instigate the Arab revolutions in the region.

As for Syria, Assad would rather destroy his country than give up his power, and so the Kurds will probably try to for a Kurdish state in the areas they control along the Turkish border.

And if you believe the propaganda, USA and Germany will divide up the rest.

BK

[Magda Hassan]

What you are saying makes no sense Bill. On the one hand you are saying the US government and corporations (is there a difference these days?) need stability. I suppose that is why the US is supplying arms and equipment to maintain the stability in Bahrain, home of the 5 fleet, for the billionaire family of sheiks there? Libya and Syria were all stable before. But why did the US and others fund and supply arms to the small number of rebels there? Then when that didn't work because no one really wanted to join the 'uprising' they sent in NATO to force the matter? So much for stability. Now it is unstable. Have you read 'Shock Doctrine' by Naomi Klein Bill? Do you know about the Strategy of Tension? What you say also flies in the face of historical fact. The US has destabilised almost every country that would not do their bidding or tow the Washington consensus and replaced them with some one who would. Iran, Australia, Italy, All of South and Central America, Congo. The list goes on and on and on.

[Bill Kelly]

What you are saying makes no sense Bill. On the one hand you are saying the US government and corporations (is there a difference these days?) need stability. I suppose that is why the US is supplying arms and equipment to maintain the stability in Bahrain, home of the 5 fleet, for the billionaire family of sheiks there? Libya and Syria were all stable before. But why did the US and others fund and supply arms to the small number of rebels there? Then when that didn't work because no one really wanted to join the 'uprising' they sent in NATO to force the matter? So much for stability. Now it is unstable. Have you read 'Shock Doctrine' by Naomi Klein Bill? Do you know about the Strategy of Tension? What you say also flies in the face of historical fact. The US has destabilised almost every country that would not do their bidding or tow the Washington consensus and replaced them with some one who would. Iran, Australia, Italy, All of South and Central America, Congo. The list goes on and on and on.

Why would the banks and big oil companies, who already OWN the DICTATORS want to depose them and create chaos?

How does that not make sense?

Certainly the USA did not encourage the revolutions that have deposed their pals Ali, Mubarak and Gadhafi and they continue to support the dictator of Bahrain because the 5th Fleet is stationed there on a base that he provides for them.

The policy of the US government, as it was changed significantly by Chris Stevens when he suggested the USA support the Libyan rebels, must also support the people of Bahrain and their attempts to peacefully protest the government and bring about real political and economic changes in that small, but strategically placed country. The USA should get out of Bahrain if the reforms are not instituted, and the USA should support the revolutions there and restore the Freedom Roundabout Statute that came to represent the freedom that people sought there. The USA should also support the efforts of Saudi Arabian and Kuatai citiesens to obtain their rights, especially the women and young people of those countries.

What flies in the face of historical fact is that the USA is forced to bring the Marines to North Africa not for oil or NATO or dictators, but to fight to protect their ambassador and for liberty, freedom and justice, the same things they fought for 200 years ago.

My thinking makes sense, it is you who supports the dictators and tyrants of those countries and blames the USA for overthrowing and supporting dictators. You seem to be reserve your judgement - to see what side the USA is on before you chose the other side, even if it they are dictators and tyrants.

You seemed to take some joy in the assassination of Chris Stevens as a payback for Stevens' murder of Gadhafi, however wharped that opinion is - that attack has now brought the radical islamics into the open and now they will be revealed for what they really are.

What I'd like to know is why the Muslems got upset over Rushdie's book, the Dutch cartoon and the silly movie, but voiced no outrage when Gadhafi totally destroyed the Mosque in Xintan, and more recently bulldosed the Sufi mosque in Tripoli? Aren't mosques more sacred then word and images?

And where was the outrage when the producer of the "Innocence of Muslums" movie was revealed to have been born in Egypt?
I'm not the one with faulty logic, my standards are straight - a dictator is a tyrant and they are all bad, but others ask whether they are Sunni or Sufi or whatever, or whether the USA supports them before they decide what's good or bad.

I know BAD when I see it, and I know GOOD when I see it, and the overthrow of the dictators in North Africa and the Middle East by Arab democratic revolutionaries is a GOOD thing, and Chris Stevens was a GOOD guy, and recognised as such by the overwhelming majority of Libyans.

As the chief clerk of the militia that killed Chris Stevens said, "Islam is not compatible with democracy," and that's because the religious fueled dictator lose their power and wealth and the people assume the responsibility for their own lives.

The uncertainty of life after the revolution is better than the certainty and security of life under tyranny.

Bill Kelly
Revolutionary Program
Remember the Intrepid

[Albert Doyle]

Why would the banks and big oil companies, who already OWN the DICTATORS want to depose them and create chaos?

More pro-CIA propaganda from Bill.


Because CIA then could use their applied corruption to install favorable leaders in those countries to assure control they otherwise wouldn't get from those other powerful, entrenched leaders. The old divide and conquer formula. Honestly Bill, you aren't blind to how this is being done in the US are you?

[Keith Millea]

The USA should get out of Bahrain if the reforms are not instituted, and the USA should support the revolutions there and restore the Freedom Roundabout Statute that came to represent the freedom that people sought there. The USA should also support the efforts of Saudi Arabian and Kuatai citiesens to obtain their rights, especially the women and young people of those countries.

And this is where your theory sinks into delusions.Sorry Bill,this is not in the game plan,and you must know that.

My thinking makes sense, it is you who supports the dictators and tyrants of those countries and blames the USA for overthrowing and supporting dictators. You seem to be reserve your judgement - to see what side the USA is on before you chose the other side, even if it they are dictators and tyrants.

What utter bullshit.Nobody here supports dictators and tyrants.We have repeated that assertion for you,so please don't try to dirty us here who disagree with your theory.OK!

[Lauren Johnson]

September 24

http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2012/09/...nce-psyop/

by Scott Creighton
It's being reported in the New York Times that the CIA was all over the "consulate" compound in Benghazi where Amb. Chris Stevens was reportedly killed. They ran the place. It was their base of operations in Libya. In fact, it wasn't a consulate at all but rather the base of operations for the CIA. Stevens' presence there is not remarkable since it was the CIA and Stevens working together in Libya since early 2011 who created and ran the fake revolution in the first place.

Of the 20 or so Americans who were evacuated from the location prior to Stevens' death, "over a dozen" of them were CIA. When it was reported that the ambassador became "separated" from the rest as the evacuation took place, that report came from the CIA. When CNN reports that "someone" found the ambassador's journal "on the floor" and gave it to them, that unnamed source was probably CIA.

The CIA is still in Libya reportedly keeping tabs on the growing Green Resistance in the country, people who are opposed to the puppet neoliberal regime we installed by running a CIA/Stevens terror campaign and then using that bloodshed and various US media lies to justify a NATO bombing campaign which took the lives of thousands of innocent Libyan people and the rightful leader of the country.

As a result of the reported death of Amb. Stevens, the CIA now gets to use more drones in Libya in full public view to bomb and murder various opposition leader, the rank and file of the Green Resistance and their family members as well. They are also sending in various hit squads, "spies" to run the midnight black bag ops taking opposition leaders out of their homes and renditioning them to various black site Gitmos across the world. So when one asks "who benefits" from the "Innocence of the Muslims" psyop, the answer finally comes back, the CIA.

"The U.S. is sending more spies, Marines and drones to Libya, trying to speed the search for those who killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans…" AP Sept. 15th 2012

The CIA has been in Libya since the fake revolution started, the destabilization campaign which used CIA and Saudi linked "Salafist' Muslims called "sheikists" by other Muslims for their affiliation with the Saudi oil regimes and their American dollars. The CIA and Chris Stevens ran these "sheikists" since day one according to the New York Times article.

"Within months of the start of Libyan revolution in February 2011, the C.I.A. began building a meaningful but covert presence in Benghazi, a locus of the rebel efforts to oust the government of Colonel Qaddafi.
… From these buildings, the C.I.A. personnel carried out their secret missions." New York Times
"In the early days of the Libyan revolution, I asked Chris to be our envoy to the rebel opposition. He arrived on a cargo ship in the port of Benghazi and began building our relationship with Libya's revolutionaries." Hillary Clinton

In a rather disingenuous article published at Global Research, two writers put forward the notion that the Green Resistance is responsible for the attack which led to Stevens' death.

[URL="http://www.globalresearch.ca/libyas-green-resistance-did-it-and-nato-powers-are-covering-up/"]Benghazi Attack. Libya's Green Resistance Did It… And NATO Powers Are Covering Up
[/URL]
(Typically I'm a fan of Global Research but the publishing of this article makes me have to reassess my support of the site. Even the recent by Felicity Arbuthnot published at Global Research had to include a rather ham-handed tribute to the "the Green Resistance Movement Did It" article which tells me someone working in the editorial side over there probably inserted it.)

The authors of the disinfo piece at Global Research base their entire conclusion that the Green Resistance killed Stevens on the fact that the CIA and State Department have been running the Salafist (sheikist) terrorists since the beginning and thus they wouldn't bite the hand that feeds so to speak

"Some claim that Salafists carried out the fatal attack on the US premises. This is more nonsense, since Salafists are NATO allies…
Its members are pro-NATO and anti-Green Resistance. They had no reason to attack the US government site in Benghazi which had been instrumental in galvanizing the Islamist insurgency to topple the Gaddafi government, beginning at least from March 2011 and under the supervision of the late Christopher Stevens. Stevens was Washington's point man in Benghazi and is known to have cultivated strong ties with the Islamists.

In short, it does not make sense that such Benghazi contacts would have wanted or have been motivated to kill their American paymaster." Mark Robertson and Finian Cunningham

What Mark Robertson and Finian Cunningham fail to acknowledge and admit is the fact that these self same "sheikists" have been running various false flag attacks for their bosses (Saudi royal family, U.S. state department, CIA, NATO) for decades, always terrorizing some innocent civilians or US official targets in order to justify the inevitable US retaliation against some other group or people. In this case, it's obvious, it will be the Green Resistance, and Robertson and Cunningham are simply helping to sell that narrative to the "alternative" faction here in the States.

Yes, the "far right" Salafists, the fascist "professional jihadists" who don't give a rat's ass about Allah or the Islamic faith (yes people, there are those in Muslim countries who don't care about such things believe it or not), are in service to NATO and the CIA and strongly opposed to the growing Green Resistance in Libya. So did they have motivation to help the CIA create a justification to step up military involvement in Libya? You betcha.
Now, the FBI investigation into what happened that night is going to be dead on arrival. These CIA assets and employees have fled the scene of the crime and the staged "looters" who ransacked the place afterward destroyed the crime scene to the point that it's being reported there is no evidence to speak of.

"Complicating the investigation, the officials said, is that many of the Americans who were evacuated from Benghazi after the attack are now scattered across Europe and the United States. It is also unclear, one of the officials said, whether there was much forensic evidence that could be extracted from the scene of the attacks." New York Time

Hillary Clinton has appointed CFR member and former El Salvadorian ambassador Thomas R. Pickering to head up her "investigation" of the events.
The Green Resistance in Libya is growing in numbers. The people of Libya are opposed to NATO's rule and the chaos that has erupted in their once peaceful and prosperous nation since the CIA and Stevens planned their destabilization campaign.

The Green Resistance could not have produced the stupid "Innocence of the Muslims" clip and they certainly couldn't have gotten it from the FBI who created it in the first place as an effort to entrap "extremist" Muslims in California.

The Green Resistance could not have sent Ambassador Stevens back to Benghazi on short notice and under such odd circumstances especially considering how dangerous the area has become as of late.

The Green Resistance could not have made the State Department fail to warn US staff in the country after receiving warnings of pending trouble 3 days prior to the attacks.

and the Green Resistance certainly could not have convinced the 30 or so local militia members who made up the security detail at the CIA compound leave their posts as the attacks began.

The Green Resistance could not have done any of these things (for references to each and every one of the items listed above, please check out my archives on this event, here). So who could have done them all?

The CIA.

Who benefits? Who fled the scene of the crime? Who fed the press the misleading info? Who's compound was it? Who's contractors attacked the compound? Who could have arraigned for the Egyptian's to run the video in the first place? And who had done this exact same kind of operation in the past? The Green Resistance? Get real.

As a side note, odd as it is, has anyone here seen anything about a state funeral for "hero" Chris Stevens? A recent Google search turned up nothing that I could find. Felicity also noticed that odd fact. The two former Navy Seals had funerals and announcements of such, but what about the ambassador and the guy who was supposedly killed along with him?

"In a nation which lets its grief hang out as no other, oddly, daily searches find no funeral announcements for Ambassador Stevens or U.S. Air Force veteran Sean Smith, with ten years as an information management officer in what has been since 2009, Hillary Clinton's State Department."

"If there are, as one bereaved American father stated of his son: "throw away soldiers", perhaps there are also "throw away" Ambassadors and their staff when things go wrong." Global Research

[Bill Kelly]

The USA should get out of Bahrain if the reforms are not instituted, and the USA should support the revolutions there and restore the Freedom Roundabout Statute that came to represent the freedom that people sought there. The USA should also support the efforts of Saudi Arabian and Kuatai citiesens to obtain their rights, especially the women and young people of those countries.

And this is where your theory sinks into delusions.Sorry Bill,this is not in the game plan,and you must know that.

My thinking makes sense, it is you who supports the dictators and tyrants of those countries and blames the USA for overthrowing and supporting dictators. You seem to be reserve your judgement - to see what side the USA is on before you chose the other side, even if it they are dictators and tyrants.

What utter bullshit.Nobody here supports dictators and tyrants.We have repeated that assertion for you,so please don't try to dirty us here who disagree with your theory.OK!

If you and Maggie don't support dictators then why not support the revolutions that overthrew the dictators of Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Syria? Why promote the fact that the trains ran on time under tyranny, so the dictator was okay?

You can't have it both ways, either you are for the dictators or you are against them.

The utter Bullshit is the idea that Gadhafi was okay because his society functioned at a high level of prosperity, but Bahrain's dictator has to go because he is supported by the USA and the Fifth Fleet.

I'm not trying to dirty anybody, I just don't think that you can chose which dictators you like and which ones you don't like. I don't like any of them, but others seem to think that Gadhafi was okay, when in fact he killed thousands of people who disagreed with him - in one day - and he ran a brutal, fascist dictatorship.

If you don't support dictators then why keep proposing the false allegation that the USA and CIA instigated the Arab revolts, something that they would have been proud of if they did, but didn't.

BK

[Bill Kelly]

Why would the banks and big oil companies, who already OWN the DICTATORS want to depose them and create chaos?

More pro-CIA propaganda from Bill.


Because CIA then could use their applied corruption to install favorable leaders in those countries to assure control they otherwise wouldn't get from those other powerful, entrenched leaders. The old divide and conquer formula. Honestly Bill, you aren't blind to how this is being done in the US are you?

Yea, the CIA should pay me to do this.

BK

[Bill Kelly]

Since this thread is supposed to be about the current battle for Syria can we keep it on topic and post the Libyan events in their proper thread? Thanks BK



Syrian rebel force announces shift of its headquarters from Turkeyto Syria

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/syrian-rebel-force-announces-shift-of-its-headquarters-from-turkey-to-syria/2012/09/22/fab6112e-04ef-11e2-9132-f2750cd65f97_story.html

By WilliamBooth, Saturday, September 22, 5:17 PM

CAIRO Commanders of the rebel Free Syrian Army saidSaturday that they have moved their headquarters from Turkey to an unidentifiedlocation in Syria in an effort to unite and coordinate the armed insurrectionagainst President Bashar al-Assad's government.

Col. Riad al-Assad, a leader of the force, announced themove in a video posted on YouTubetitled "Free Syrian Army Communique No. 1 From Inside." The colonel was flankedas he spoke by other rebel leaders in camouflage uniforms.

A look at the Syrian uprising one year later. Thousands ofSyrians have died and President Bashar al-Assad remains in power, despitenumerous calls by the international community for him to step down.

Syrian rebel forces now have at least nominal control of alarge crescent of territory along Syria'snorthern border with Turkeywhere they could operate a base and no longer have to officers shuttle back andforth across the border.

Some rebel fighters battling government forces inside Syriahave complained that the leadership of the Free Syria Army should be besidethem, rather than based in Turkey.
"This could be a key development, giving the FSA the chanceto become the Syrian opposition to Assad instead of running the risk of turninginto Turkey'sopposition to Assad,' " said Soner Cagaptay of the Washington Institute forNear East Policy.

Turkey'sprime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has thrown his supportbehind the Syrian rebels, but Turkish opposition parties and some ordinaryTurks have expressed fear that their country could be dragged into a sectarianwar.

Members of a minority group in Turkey,the Shiite Alawite sect, have demonstrated in support of President Assad, alsoan Alawite. They have branded the Syrian rebels "terrorists" and called for theouster not only of Syrian rebel fighters, but of the 120,000Syrian refugees who Turkish officials estimate are living in Turkey incamps and rented apartments.

The government in Ankarahas tightenedthe border crossing and earlier this month announced a new policy ofmoving Syrian refugees away from the border area.

"To our free Syrian people, the heroic and proud, and to thesons of the revolution in all the cities of Syriaand its villages and homes, and to all factions of the armed revolution, to allof you, we announce the news that the FSA command is moved to the liberatedareas," Col. Assad said in the video.

The commander complained of a lack of support and materieland "international marginalization" but vowed: "We do not accept compromisewith anyone, until we liberate Damascusfrom the this criminal gang."

The relocation of the military headquarters was carried outa week ago, Brig. Gen. Mustafa al-Sheikh, head of the FSA military council,told the Associated Press.
"There are liberated areas now, and it's better for thecommand to be with the rebels instead of being abroad," Sheikh said.

[Keith Millea]

either you are for the dictators or you are against them.

Jesus Christ,a fucking "Bushism"......Bill,the State Department is looking for a few good men.It could be your lucky day.

I'm not trying to dirty anybody, I just don't think that you can chose which dictators you like and which ones you don't like.

Okay,here it is again Bill,please take notes this time.Nobody likes dictators or tyrants on this forum!Get it?Stop insulting us!