PDA

View Full Version : Tunisia



Ed Jewett
08-12-2012, 04:35 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xncznvkB7S8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xncznvkB7S8)(9:36)(Dizzy and friends in Havana in 1985)

http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2012/08/al-qaeda-destroying-tunisia-tourists.html

Magda Hassan
08-12-2012, 05:59 AM
I'll never be going there for any holidays that is for sure. I only go to places with a fair to good record of human rights and no fundamentalist religion of any stripe and where women are free and equal. I don't have many places I can travel so me and my money do better things than support crap regimes.

Danny Jarman
08-12-2012, 04:38 PM
Under the new government, there has been an increase in food prices, poverty, unemployment, rioting and crime.

Sounds familiar.

Bill Kelly
08-16-2012, 03:05 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xncznvkB7S8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xncznvkB7S8)(9:36)(Dizzy and friends in Havana in 1985)

http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2012/08/al-qaeda-destroying-tunisia-tourists.html

I wish someone would explain how the CIA instigated the Arab Spring. This is the town - Sidi Bouzid where Mohamied Bouazizi lit himself afire and sparked the revolts that have so far taken down three dictators and has others on the ropes. I have studied this incident, which went unreported in the west and mainstream media for almost a week after it happened, something that would not have occurred if the CIA Mockingbird media were on the ball.

In addition, the first three dictators were already in bed with the West - especially France and England but also USA, so why would the CIA or NATO want to throw the region into turmoil if they already had the dictators in their pockets.

I am just tired of hearing about this false flag Arab Spring and how the CIA and NATO and big bankers are behind the revolt when in fact it is a popular democratic revolution that is not over.

Tunisia, Egypt and Libya have already had their first elections in decades and while Islamists have won a majority, the radicals have not yet imposed Islamic law and appear to be open to diversity, including Christians and supporting tourism.

Am I the only one here who perceives the situation this way?

If so, will someone please show me how the CIA instigated this revolt and why they would want to?

Thanks,

BK

Magda Hassan
08-16-2012, 03:08 AM
Bill, I suggest to look at the National Endowment for Democracy and their various fronts like Otpor to see how they work.

Have you seen General Wesley Clark's interview about military plans to invade all these countries?

Once the US has finished with their dictator or their dictator gets too uppity they get replaced.

Bill Kelly
08-16-2012, 03:18 AM
Bill, I suggest to look at the National Endowment for Democracy and their various fronts like Otpor to see how they work.

Have you seen General Wesley Clark's interview about military plans to invade all these countries?

Once the US has finished with their dictator or their dictator gets too uppity they get replaced.

Hi Mag, I am familiar with NED and saw how it operated in Egypt but didn't see it in Tunisia or Libya. I know how they work.

I haven't seen Clark's interview but would like to. I do know that since Iraq, the US military policy is they will not invade to occupy a country again, as they have learned their lesson.

As for the dictators, I don't think they get rid of anyone who is working for them, and I can't see how the replacements in these countries benefts them or the multi-nationals any better than what they had before - a gravy train.

I am open to persuasion, but not the propaganda I have been reading from either side.

BK

Magda Hassan
08-16-2012, 03:49 AM
I haven't seen Clark's interview but would like to. I do know that since Iraq, the US military policy is they will not invade to occupy a country again, as they have learned their lesson.

I am open to persuasion, but not the propaganda I have been reading from either side.

BK

Here is Salon's article on Wesley Clarke's interview with the video of it.


Wes Clark and the neocon dream (http://www.salon.com/2011/11/26/wes_clark_and_the_neocon_dream/)In 2007, the retired General described a necon "policy coup" aimed at toppling the governments of 7 countries VIDEOBY GLENN GREENWALD (http://www.salon.com/writer/glenn_greenwald/)


(http://www.salon.com/2011/11/26/wes_clark_and_the_neocon_dream/)
85 (http://www.salon.com/2011/11/26/wes_clark_and_the_neocon_dream/)
(http://www.salon.com/2011/11/26/wes_clark_and_the_neocon_dream/)
more

(updated below)
In October, 2007, Gen. Wesley Clark gave a speech to the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco (seven-minute excerpt in the video below) in which he denounced what he called “a policy coup” engineered by neocons in the wake of 9/11. After recounting how a Pentagon source had told him weeks after 9/11 of the Pentagon’s plan to attack Iraq notwithstanding its non-involvement in 9/11, this is how Clark described the aspirations of the “coup” being plotted by Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and what he called “a half dozen other collaborators from the Project for the New American Century”:

Six weeks later, I saw the same officer, and asked: “Why haven’t we attacked Iraq? Are we still going to attack Iraq?”
He said: “Sir, it’s worse than that. He said – he pulled up a piece of paper off his desk – he said: “I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense’s office. It says we’re going to attack anddestroy the governments in 7 countries in five years – we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.”
Clark said the aim of this plot was this: “They wanted us to destabilize the Middle East, turn it upside down, make it under our control.” He then recounted a conversation he had had ten years earlier with Paul Wolfowitz — back in 1991 — in which the then-number-3-Pentagon-official, after criticizing Bush 41 for not toppling Saddam, told Clark: “But one thing we did learn [from the Persian Gulf War] is that we can use our military in the region – in the Middle East – and the Soviets won’t stop us. And we’ve got about 5 or 10 years toclean up those old Soviet regimes – Syria, Iran [sic], Iraq –before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us.” Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz’s desires because, as Clark put it: “the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts?”
The current turmoil in the Middle East is driven largely by popular revolts, not by neocon shenanigans. Still, in the aftermath of military-caused regime change in Iraq and Libya (the latter leading to this (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/leaked-un-report-reveals-torture-lynchings-and-abuse-in-postgaddafi-libya-6266636.html) andthis (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/29/world/africa/western-companies-see-libya-as-ripe-at-last-for-business.html?pagewanted=all)), with concerted regime change efforts now underway aimed at Syria and Iran, with active and escalating proxy fighting (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-intensifies-its-proxy-fight-against-al-shabab-in-somalia/2011/11/21/gIQAVLyNtN_story.html) in Somalia, with a modest military deployment (http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE79K0F520111021) to South Sudan (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/15/sudan-unamid-obama), and the active use of drones in six — count ‘em: six (http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-06-30/politics/30095838_1_al-qaeda-qaeda-somalian-islamist) — different Muslim countries, it is worth asking whether the neocon dream as laid out by Clark is dead or is being actively pursued and fulfilled, albeit with means more subtle and multilateral than full-on military invasions (it’s worth remembering that neocons specialized in dressing up their wars in humanitarian packaging: Saddam’s rape rooms! Gassed his own people!). As Jonathan Schwarz (or, as he would be called by establishment newspapers: “a person familiar with Jon Schwarz’s thinking on the subject who asked not to be identified”) put it about the supposedly contentious national security factions:

As far as I can tell, there’s barely any difference in goals within the foreign policy establishment. They just disagree on the best methods to achieve the goals. My guess is that everyone agrees we have to continue defending the mideast from outside interference (I love that Hillary line), and the [Democrats] just think that best path is four overt wars and three covert actions, while the neocons want to jump straight to seven wars.
The difference between seven and four overt wars isn’t non-existent or unimportant, of course, but it’s a question of means. The neocon end as Clark reported them — regime change in those seven countries — seems as vibrant as ever. It’s just striking to listen to Clark describe those 7 countries in which the neocons plotted to have regime change back in 2001, and then compare that to what the U.S. Government did and continues to do since then with regard to those precise countries.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha1rEhovONU&feature=player_embedded




UPDATE: Those unreasonable, inscrutable Pakistanis are angry just because the U.S. entered their country by air and killed 30 of their soldiers (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/world/asia/pakistan-says-nato-helicopters-kill-dozens-of-soldiers.html?_r=1&hp) today. As a result, they have demanded that the U.S. vacate its drone base on their soil. What an outrageous over-reaction: I’m sure the U.S. would be extremely understanding if a foreign nation came and killed 30 U.S. soldiers on American soil from the air.
http://www.salon.com/2011/11/26/wes_clark_and_the_neocon_dream/

Keith Millea
08-16-2012, 02:23 PM
Tunisian police fired teargas and rubber bullets to disperse protesters demanding jobs in Sidi Bouzid, the site of the of the CIA false flag operation that triggered the CIA's Arab Spring uprisings.


Bill,

That quote is from the aangirfan web page that Ed provided.You have the right to express your opinion because Ed loves to post from unreliable sources.Yeah,it's bullshit!The CIA doesn't own the Arab Spring,but surely you can see the Neo-Con agenda is in full play.And,this has no other ending except death and destruction on a massive scale.

I WANT NO PART OF IT

Lauren Johnson
08-16-2012, 09:08 PM
Regarding the binary "CIA managed vs. indigenous uprising":

I recall a Rumsfeld speech (which I cannot locate) in which he said something to the effect: 'you cannot control the chaos but you can manage and give it shape.' This is the kind of thinking that would apply to the Arab Spring.

So how might that apply? Riots break out in Syria. You have a long standing goal of cleaning up the old Soviet supported regimes. You activate sleeper operatives or send in some to stir the pot. Make sure that people know that they will be supported. Make sure there are plenty of victims and make sure the narrative is about an evil dictator cruelly abusing a single group seeking justice. Make sure the MSM gets the same story out; eliminate nuances. Etc.

Bill Kelly
08-16-2012, 10:40 PM
Regarding the binary "CIA managed vs. indigenous uprising":

I recall a Rumsfeld speech (which I cannot locate) in which he said something to the effect: 'you cannot control the chaos but you can manage and give it shape.' This is the kind of thinking that would apply to the Arab Spring.

So how might that apply? Riots break out in Syria. You have a long standing goal of cleaning up the old Soviet supported regimes. You activate sleeper operatives or send in some to stir the pot. Make sure that people know that they will be supported. Make sure there are plenty of victims and make sure the narrative is about an evil dictator cruelly abusing a single group seeking justice. Make sure the MSM gets the same story out; eliminate nuances. Etc.

Maggie said that the revolution only leads to death and destruction but she fails to realize that ALL of the revolutions now going on in North Africa and Middle East began as peaceful protests seeking reform, and only turned violent and demanding of regime change AFTER they were violently repressed.

Rumsfeld has been put out to pasture but certainly the CIA, USA as well as Al Qada and Muslem Brotherhood want to control the chaos, but the bottom line is - it is a popular uprising, a democratic revolution that the CIA didn't expect or spark.

Syria especially was a repressive police state where journalists couldn't operate until over a year after the revolution began. You really believe that USA CIA had "Sleeper Cells" in Syria and they responsible? You really think that the "narrative" about the evil dictator is fiction? You don't believe that the Syrian police state cruelly abused children and teenagers who wrote graffiti, which sparked the revolt? The MSM was not even allowed in Syria until the revolt broke the borders.

It isn't the Mainstream message vs. the Police State Propaganda, it is the attempt to determine the truth that should be the goal, and the truth that can't be denied is that Assad is a tyrant, a dictator and a mass murder whose forces tortured children - and you want to check with the CIA and NATO to see whose side they are on so you can be on the other side?

BK
Revolutionary Program (http://revolutionaryprogram.blogspot.com/)

Magda Hassan
08-17-2012, 04:43 AM
Maggie said that the revolution only leads to death and destruction but she fails to realize that ALL of the revolutions now going on in North Africa and Middle East began as peaceful protests seeking reform, and only turned violent and demanding of regime change AFTER they were violently repressed.
And in the case of Syria, Libya and Tunisia after the use of foreign mercenaries to cause violence and chaos so that the government would be forced to step in and repress the violence and chaos to protect the people from the violence and chaos.....and so it goes.



Rumsfeld has been put out to pasture but certainly the CIA, USA as well as Al Qada and Muslem Brotherhood want to control the chaos, but the bottom line is - it is a popular uprising, a democratic revolution that the CIA didn't expect or spark.
Rumsfeld may be gone but the neo-con ideology lives on and on in the hearts of many in the State Department and the Pentagon. It may have started as a popular uprising but it has long been taken over by others who do not have the welfare of the people at heart and are just using the opportunity to impose their own dictatorship/theocracy on the people.


Syria especially was a repressive police state where journalists couldn't operate until over a year after the revolution began.
Quite ironic when the US is using all means to get Assange's head on a platter for reporting the news of what the US war machine is doing. To the extent that he has had to seek out and just received asylum in a safe country where his human rights and safety from political persecution will be protected because they cannot be guaranteed by the US, Australia , Sweden or the UK, supposedly all bastions of civilisation.


You really believe that USA CIA had "Sleeper Cells" in Syria and they responsible? Why not? They usually have half the key military officers and government minister on the pay roll of all sorts of countries and the stay behind network is well established. But even if they don't have it on the ground it can always be imported from outside as they have done any way.


You really think that the "narrative" about the evil dictator is fiction? And do you really believe that the "narrative" about the civilised west is true? For me the world is far less black and white but many shades of grey with occasional rainbows.


You don't believe that the Syrian police state cruelly abused children and teenagers who wrote graffiti, which sparked the revolt? Yes I do. And I also know that the US used the Assad government to outsource their torture programme on various renditioned kidnapped victims.


It isn't the Mainstream message vs. the Police State Propaganda, it is the attempt to determine the truth that should be the goal But that's not happening any where in the west. Truth is the first casualty as they say. And we could ask "Whose truth?"


....and the truth that can't be denied is that Assad is a tyrant, a dictator and a mass murder whose forces tortured children... And what does that make Obomber? Incinerator of children from on high? Destroyer of wedding parties? The man for where the buck stops for the disappeared and rendered of the not so secret American gulag archipeligo?


....and you want to check with the CIA and NATO to see whose side they are on so you can be on the other side? We know NATO and the CIA are always on the dark side. We don't want to be on that side.

Lauren Johnson
08-17-2012, 05:06 AM
What she said.

Bill, read it and re-read it until you can grok it. No, wait. Not that many times.

Keith Millea
08-17-2012, 04:00 PM
Weekend Edition August 17-19, 2012

Regime Change is About Establishing Sunni Dominance Not Democratic Freedoms

Syrian Australians Demand an End to Foreign Intervention

by CHRIS RAY
Sydney.

Around 1500 people, mostly Australians of Syrian descent marched in Sydney on August 5, calling for an end to foreign intervention aimed at destroying the government of President Bashar al-Assad. The Australian media gave the march almost no coverage, unlike well-publicised though much smaller protests against the Syrian government.

It should surprise no one that large numbers of Syrians support the al-Assad government, with its promise of peaceful reform in a direction indicated by the May 2012 parliamentary elections (when, incidentally, the communists won additional seats), rather than the civil war on religious lines now in progress. One does not have to be an al-Assad supporter to suspect that his government’s immediate departure, as demanded by the rebels and their foreign backers, would create a power vacuum, fragment the country and result in far greater bloodshed.

For its Syria project the US has put together a powerful alliance embracing NATO through its Turkish spearhead, and Israel and its Gulf Arab de facto allies, particularly Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Intervention has ranged from sanctions and economic sabotage to funding and equipping foreign mercenaries and “boots on the ground” in the form of Western military advisers and trainers. The current goal appears to be regime change by promoting civil war rather than foreign invasion. But calls for a “No Fly Zone” along Libyan lines can now be heard – no doubt a precursor to another “humanitarian” bombing campaign.

Foreign forces are playing a substantial role in the campaign to topple the government. According to some assessments, foreign jihadis including Al Qaeda units from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Libya and Jordan are more effective, and engaged in more significant combat (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/30/al-qaida-rebels-battle-syria/print) than the so-called Free Syrian Army. Al Qaeda is once again enjoying the backing of the ‘Great Satan’ patterned on their 1980s relationship in Afghanistan.

Foreign jihadis have admitted (http://world.time.com/2012/07/26/time-exclusive-meet-the-islamist-militants-fighting-alongside-syrias-rebels/#ixzz21lqe6f6J) that they formed brigades to infiltrate Syria well before the first protests in early 2011.

Also instructive is the testimony of two Western photographers captured and tormented by a rebel group comprising fighters from Bangladesh, Britain, Chechnya and Pakistan – but no Syrians. Viewers of the ABC’s 7.30 Report on 7.8.12 would have seen a Chechen combatant in Syria threaten an ABC reporter.

We are not only talking foreign jihadi cannon fodder: “It is highly likely that some western special forces and intelligence resources have been in Syria for a considerable time,” says Colonel Richard Kemp, of the Royal United Services Institute which has strong connections to British intelligence services.

Some on the Left argue that the Syrian regime is unworthy of support because it is a dictatorship. Should the political form of the Syrian state absolve the Left of any responsibility to defend it against imperialist aggression? The al-Assad government is under attack by NATO, Israel and the Arab Gulf monarchies not for its denial of democracy, or harsh treatment of dissent, but because of its positive features: support for Palestinian and Lebanese resistance to Zionist expansion; refusal to join the US in isolating and impoverishing Iran; upholding a unique (in the Middle East) degree of religious tolerance and pluralism. For a visitor to Syria this commitment to freedom of religion – and rights for women – comes as a revelation in comparison to the reactionary US/British protectorates of the Arab Gulf. Such freedoms enrage the poisonously sectarian Sunni fundamentalists now sponsored in Syria by the West. Bin Laden always hated Shia Islam more than Zionists or the CIA.

For much of the anti-government opposition, regime change is about establishing Sunni dominance not democratic freedoms. They hate the regime because it is a heretical government responsible for a secular state with constitutionally guaranteed freedom of worship. The popular rebel slogan “Christians to Beirut, Alawites to their graves” raises the spectre of widespread ethnic cleansing – already underway with the expulsion of tens of thousands of Christians by the NATO-backed ‘Free Syrian Army’.

The fall of the al-Assad government is probably inevitable given the forces ranged against it. Some have predicted an Egypt-like power-sharing arrangement between the Muslim Brotherhood and secular nationalist ‘democrats’ will follow. However Syria’s religious and ethnic make-up is far more complicated than almost anywhere else in the region: a Sunni majority with numerous Muslim minorities (Shia, Alawite, Sufi, Ismailis) as well as Druse and several strands of Christianity – altogether about one third of the population. There are significant ethnic minorities such as the Muslim Kurds and Christian Armenians – descendants of refugees from Turkish genocide – as well as hundreds of thousands of Palestinian and Iraqi refugees, many of them Christians. These minorities do not share the cheerful assessment that the outcome of this war is likely to approximate post-Mubarak Egypt – itself now a more dangerous home for minorities.

The Syrian government is widely blamed for starting the war with unprovoked attacks on peaceful demonstrators. Western media spent most of 2011 denying the very existence of armed opposition, until the media narrative was recast to that of peaceful protests gradually morphing into armed revolt as a consequence of regime brutality.

The authorities’ initial response to opposition protests in March 2011 was brutal and inflammatory. But it is not contradictory to also acknowledge that government forces were under armed attack from the outset. Syrian TV was broadcasting footage of the funerals of military and police personnel killed by protestors in March 2011. My son who was living in Damascus viewed these reports and discussed them with locals. I saw similar Syrian TV coverage while in Jordan in April-May 2011.

Reporter Robert Fisk identified the murder of a boy by police as the spark for the initial March 2011 protest in Deraa. Fisk, no supporter of the regime, also pointed to the existence of video footage of gunmen on the streets of Deraa that same month and al-Jazeera footage of armed men fighting Syrian troops near the Lebanon border in April 2011. Fisk noted that Al-Jazeera television, cheerleader for the rebels, chose not to broadcast it. The station is of course owned by the emir of Qatar, a principal financier of the war against the Syrian government.
On 21 March 2011 Israel National News (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/143026#.UCjZBo56O8A) reported that seven policemen were killed in Deraa in mid-March.

As early as August 2011 the anti-regime, UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights estimated that soldiers and police accounted for about one quarter of Syria’s death toll since the start of the uprising – a casualty proportion not likely to be suffered by an army ranged against unarmed protestors. SOHR, in a rare moment of candour conceded that some of the dead civilians were tortured and killed by regime opponents. This was before Al-Qaeda bombers began their work in co-ordination with the ‘Free Syrian Army’.

Most Syrians would possibly prefer a ceasefire and negotiations in order to avoid the catastrophic fate of Iraq and Libya. Yet the rebel leaderships and their foreign backers (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/(http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/international/syrian-rebels-reject-un-peace-initiative-for-armed-struggle-1-2164048) have sought only to prolong the fighting (). ) Four weeks into Kofi Annan’s attempted ceasefire, the Washington Post reported: “Syrian rebels battling the regime of President Bashar al-Assad have begun receiving significantly more and better weapons in recent weeks, an effort paid for by Persian Gulf nations and coordinated in part by the United States, according to opposition activists and U.S. and foreign officials.” CounterPunch’s Patrick Cockburn was one of the few western correspondents to report the UN monitoring team’s observation that during the ceasefire “the level of offensive military operations by the government significantly decreased” while there has been “an increase in militant attacks and targeted killings”.

In Libya, war sold to the gullible as a humanitarian necessity has reduced North Africa’s only welfare state to an ungovernable ruin: where rival tribal militias fight perpetual turf wars, blacks are ethnically cleansed, ancient archaeological treasures plundered and the social gains of the revolution systematically erased. All this mostly goes unreported – a non-story now that Libya’s oil contracts are in safer hands (China and Russia need not apply) and Western weapons sales rejected by the murdered Gaddafi are back on the table.

Only the terminally naïve would recommend the Syrian people risk a repeat of the Libyan triumph.

Chris Ray is a Sydney-based Asia business analyst and journalist.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/17/syrian-australians-demand-an-end-to-foreign-intervention/

Lauren Johnson
08-17-2012, 04:29 PM
Bill Kelly:


it is a popular uprising, a democratic revolution that the CIA didn't expect or spark.

Bill, my position is that it is irrelevant whether this statement is true or not. It might well be true but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. If one's goal is to capitalize on turmoil, then it is possible to spin gold from whatever happens whether one can take credit or not. Whoever the sponsors are, the facilitators and mechanics seem to be bending and shaping things quite well.

Magda's position continues to persuade.

Lauren Johnson
08-17-2012, 05:10 PM
Obama's Regime-Change Policy in Syria (http://www.thenation.com/blog/169367/obamas-regime-change-policy-syria)

Robert Dreyfuss (http://www.thenation.com/authors/robert-dreyfuss) on August 13, 2012 - 11:47 AM ET

The Pentagon, the State Department and the CIA are making war plans for Syria. And they’re pretty much announcing them.

Over the weekend, on a visit to Turkey, a NATO member, to meet with Syrian opposition leaders and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, the Turkish foreign minister, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton explicitly declared (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/clinton-meets-turkish-leaders-and-syrian-activists-in-campaign-to-undermine-syrias-assad/2012/08/11/7ee8aac2-e38c-11e1-89f7-76e23a982d06_story.html) that Washington’s policy toward Syria is now in what she called the “operational” phase. “We have been closely coordinating over the course of this conflict, but now we need to get into the real details of such operational planning,” she said, adding (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443404004577583044107167390.html): “Our intelligence services, our military have very important responsibilities and roles to play, so we are going to be setting up a working group to do exactly that.”

Make no mistake: this is regime change by force. It’s not exactly like Iraq, and it’s not exactly like Libya (yet)—but it’s regime change by force anyway.

In her statement with Davutoglu, Clinton said that the United States is doing the following:
First, supporting the opposition and their efforts to end the violence and begin the transition to a free and democratic Syria without Assad. The United States continues to provide the opposition with communications equipment and other forms of non-lethal assistance and direct financial assistance. We are coordinating our efforts with others who are also providing various forms of support.


Of course, the United States is not supporting the opposition to “end the violence” but to intensify it.

Second, it isn’t known exactly what aid is being provided to the opposition, but it’s certain that when Clinton talks about “communications equipment and other forms of non-lethal assistance,” she means sophisticated spy gear and probably intelligence about Syrian security forces.

And third, when she says that the United States is coordinating with those providing “providing various forms of support,” that means with countries such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar that are supplying increasingly sophisticated arms via Turkey.

In case you missed it, the New York Times reported on August 4 about feverish war plans in Washington (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/world/middleeast/state-dept-and-pentagon-planning-for-post-assad-syria.html?_r=1&ref=syria), in coordination with Israel:
The State Department and Pentagon planning efforts became more systematic last month after hopes for an internationally brokered resolution faltered in the face of Russian and Chinese opposition in the United Nations Security Council. The planning is being closely coordinated with regional allies like Turkey, Jordan and Israel, and it coincides with an expansion of overt and covert American and foreign assistance to Syria’s increasingly potent rebel fighters.


The article added:
Other countries, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, are providing weapons, assisted by a small number of officers from the Central Intelligence Agency (http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/world/middleeast/cia-said-to-aid-in-steering-arms-to-syrian-rebels.html) who are vetting the fighters receiving them and working with State Department officials trying to unify the fighters with political leaders inside and outside the country. Last month, the Treasury Department granted a waiver to let a new American organization, the Syrian Support Group (http://syriansupportgroup.org/), raise money for the rebels despite the sanctions that prohibit most financial transactions in Syria.


To cover its tracks the United States is wildly exaggerating the role of Iran and Hezbollah, an

ally of Iran and Syria, in supporting the government in Damascus.

Alon Ben-Meir, writing in the Jerusalem Post, warned—without evidence—that Iran might intervene (http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=280987) directly in Syria, using military force. In tandem, the US State and Treasury departments this week accused Hezbollah (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/11/world/middleeast/us-officials-say-hezbollah-helps-syrias-military.html?pagewanted=all), Iran’s ally, of “actively providing support to the Assad regime as it carries out its bloody campaign against the Syrian people,” though the Wall Street Journal reported (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443404004577581073528920242.html?K EYWORDS=syria) that Middle East analysts believe that the idea that Hezbollah is playing an important role in Syria is overstated.

And a no-fly zone? Safe zones for rebels protected by NATO? Bombing of Syria? Stay tuned.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/169367/obamas-regime-change-policy-syria



Regime Change in Syria: Part II (http://www.thenation.com/blog/169388/regime-change-syria-part-ii)

Robert Dreyfuss (http://www.thenation.com/authors/robert-dreyfuss) on August 14, 2012 - 11:53 AM ET

On Syria, Pat Lang is asking the right questions (http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2012/08/clinton.html). And unfortunately, writing for The Nation, Sharif Abdel Kouddous is missing the point (http://www.thenation.com/article/169360/ground-zabadani-syrian-town-revolt).

Yesterday, I blogged about the Obama administration’s regime-change-by-force campaign in Syria (http://www.thenation.com/blog/169367/obamas-regime-change-policy-syria). (Not for the first time, as I’ve been writing (http://www.thenation.com/blog/168972/syrias-descent-all-out-civil-war).) The CIA, the State Department and the Pentagon are all involved, working with NATO’s Turkey and the kleptocrats in Saudi Arabia to overthrow President Assad. Why? Not because they care about Assad (or the Syrian people, for that matter) but because they want to give Iran a black eye. It’s all about Iran.

On his blog, Sic Semper Tyrannis, Lang—a former chief of intelligence for the Pentagon on Middle East affairs—questions the policy and legality of Obama’s blatant interference in Syria.

Here’s what he says:
Why is the State Department leading in the conduct of this war? Does this strange situation reflect a dvision of opinion withing [sic] the Executive Branch? Do Panetta, the JCS [Joint Chiefs of Staff] and the CIA agree with what is being done or is HC [Hillary Clinton] leading the way because she and her allies among the neo-Wilsonians and neocons are the “pro” faction in such an argument?

What is [Obama’s] actual position in this matter? Is he so pre-occupied with the election in November that he is no longer really in charge?

What is the US intelligence community [IC] telling the WH about the composition and nature of the Syrian rebel groups? On FNS today McCain told the world that [Al Qaeda] is increasingly present in Syria. He must have gotten that from the IC. What else is the IC saying about the rebels? … The Democrats should ask Clapper, Petraeus and Flynn the hard questions in open hearings.

What is the IC (particularly DIA) telling the WH about the actual course of the civil war in Syria? Has the message soaked in that the rebels are on the verge of defeat? If they lose in Aleppo, then their “sanctuaries” along the Turkish border will become vulnerable. Is that why there is now talk of a “no fly zone” over those parts of Syria. Will that be followed by a “no drive” zone? Such zones would require direct combat operations on the part of US and Turkish forces. Which US law would authorize that?


All good questions.

Meanwhile, Kouddous is writing on the ground (http://www.thenation.com/article/169360/ground-zabadani-syrian-town-revolt) from a town in Syria. His ground-truth reporting is good, but he doesn’t exactly provide a birds’-eye view. Is the story in Syria really one of heroic rebel fighters against a regime of monsters, without international implications? How did the rebels transubstantiate from defenseless protesters (à la Iran’s Green Movement in 2009), who were mowed down by the government’s security forces, into an armed revolutionary force, if not for the outside assistance of Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, along with the United States and NATO?

Kouddous quotes a Syrian fighter:
“The revolution became militarized,” says Mohammed Abo Khattab, a 24-year-old media activist. “People that were unarmed at first decided to arm themselves. The regime made this happen.”


Well, maybe the regime provoked it, but it was forces outside Syria who “made this happen.” It’s certainly true that early on, Assad did what Iran’s leaders in 2009 were too smart to do, namely, gun down unarmed protesters. (Even Assad, in a recent interview, admitted that shooting down protesters in Deraa early in the conflict was a huge mistake, and it’s at least open to question whether Assad himself have those early orders to fire on civilians, or whether it was local security-force hotheads.) But even then, there was a chance for a peaceful solution, and a big part of the reason it didn’t happen is because Obama and Hillary Clinton started demanding Assad’s head on a platter.

Back in 2009, Obama was right not to intervene in Iran or to egg on the Iranian Greens. Why did that change in Syria in 2011–12? Politics, maybe? Does the United States have the right to decide to force out of office anyone it doesn’t like? Or only the ones that the Israel Lobby wants to get rid of, in an election year?

http://www.thenation.com/blog/169388/regime-change-syria-part-ii

Bill Kelly
08-17-2012, 11:38 PM
Bill Kelly:


it is a popular uprising, a democratic revolution that the CIA didn't expect or spark.

Bill, my position is that it is irrelevant whether this statement is true or not. It might well be true but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. If one's goal is to capitalize on turmoil, then it is possible to spin gold from whatever happens whether one can take credit or not. Whoever the sponsors are, the facilitators and mechanics seem to be bending and shaping things quite well.

Magda's position continues to persuade.

You mean Assad's Police State continues to persuade.

BK

Lauren Johnson
08-18-2012, 12:19 AM
Bill Kelly:


it is a popular uprising, a democratic revolution that the CIA didn't expect or spark.

Bill, my position is that it is irrelevant whether this statement is true or not. It might well be true but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. If one's goal is to capitalize on turmoil, then it is possible to spin gold from whatever happens whether one can take credit or not. Whoever the sponsors are, the facilitators and mechanics seem to be bending and shaping things quite well.

Magda's position continues to persuade.

You mean Assad's Police State continues to persuade.

BK

No that is not what I mean. But this IS what I mean. Fook off.

Magda Hassan
08-18-2012, 12:28 AM
You mean Assad's Police State continues to persuade.

BK
Don't put words in people's mouth Bill. Just because others don't support foreign mercenaries in the Middle east doesn't mean the dictators are supported either. Like I said. it is far from black and white. Take your rose coloured glasses off and look at the small print. Big print actually.

Bill Kelly
08-18-2012, 12:48 AM
Bill Kelly:


it is a popular uprising, a democratic revolution that the CIA didn't expect or spark.

Bill, my position is that it is irrelevant whether this statement is true or not. It might well be true but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. If one's goal is to capitalize on turmoil, then it is possible to spin gold from whatever happens whether one can take credit or not. Whoever the sponsors are, the facilitators and mechanics seem to be bending and shaping things quite well.

Magda's position continues to persuade.

You mean Assad's Police State continues to persuade.

BK

No that is not what I mean. But this IS what I mean. Fook off.

So much for intelligent discussion about what I think is an important subject, one that I recognized as a Deep Political Event when it began and started a blog on the topic:

Revolutionary Program
(http://revolutionaryprogram.blogspot.com/)
For those who don't know me, I have been fighting the US military police state since 1968 when I was 17 years old, tear gassed by the Illinois National Guard, beat with night sticks by Chicago Police and arrested for protesting the war in Vietnam. I have been an outspoken critic of the US coups in Guatemala and Iran, the US policies in Cuba and Nicaragua and actively opposed the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, although I think that the Taliban are an evil enemy that can be best opposed by creating schools for women.

When the revolution in Tunisia began, the USA, France, UK and other countries were in bed with the dictator there as well as cozy with Gadhafi and Mubarak. While I knew nothing about the situations in Tunisa and Egypt, I was very familiar with the history of US foreign policy in Libya, and started a blog about it in 2008 Remember the Intrepid (http://remembertheintrepid.blogspot.com/). My goal of repatriating the remains of a hometown Naval hero - Richard Somers, who is buried in an unmarked grave at Martyr's Square - the only real martyr actually buried there, and had obtained the permission of the Gadhafis to permit the repatriation, but my efforts have been opposed by the US Navy Brass as well as US Sen. John McCain. I worked with Prof. Benjamin Barber, the only American on the Gadhafi Charities Foundation, who was an academic mentor to Saif Gadhafi, and almost convinced him to begin the reformation of the Libyan government, but the revolution interceded, ending both our efforts to repatriate the remains of our native son from Tripoli and Barber and Saif's efforts to reform their system of government.

While I began my blog as a spectator, attempting to discern and describe the once unfamiliar dictators and their cronies as well as the revolutionaries, it quickly became apparent that the dictators were the bad guys, and it doesn't matter if the police state is the USA or Tunisia, or Egypt, Libya or Syria, - or Bahrain, Iran or Saudi Arabia for that matter - it is still a police state, and I support the revolutionaries in the USA as well as Libya and Syria.

I have studied the situation in Tunisia in depth, and have yet to see how the Arab Spring was instigated by the CIA, NATO or the West, though I continue to compile information on this issue, and it has led to many disagreements with others who have worked with me on the JFK assassination research and other issues - especially Peter Dale Scott -who coined the term Deep Politics, as well as John Judge, my college mate, Cynthia McKinney (who I worked closely with on the Congressional 9/11 Briefing and the relief of Gaza) and Maggie, all of whom I admire, but can't understand their turning their backs on these brave revolutionaries who have deposed dictators without a principal leader and instead support the police states. Though they claim to oppose the American police state, they now embrace these tyrants, who they claim to be benevolent dictators. Rubbish. They are mass murders who will not be missed, and will have the same fate as Hitler and Gadhafi.

As I will continue to study and review the outcomes of the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya and follow the events in Syria, I will Fook off, and not bother to engage in any more discussion with those who would rather post Russian and Iranian propaganda about non-existent western covert actions and disinformation.

I also support the publication of the Wiki Leaks and believe Assage is being railroaded for his releasing these valuable records - and everyone should read them as they show the USA had nothing to do with the origins of the Arab Spring revolutions, though they loathed the dictators, they worked with them and were supported by the bankers and oil companies to continue working with them as they already had deals with them. If you read the Wiki Leaks documents you see the changes in US policies from support for the dictators to the morally correct change in policy of supporting the democratic revolutionaries.

I don't check with the CIA to see what side they are on before determining who the bad guys are - and if the CIA is against the dictators that these revolutionaries are trying to depose, then they are on the right side for a change - which is a deep political change in policy that nobody wants to discuss.

All the best to you all,

Bill Kelly
"Death to Tyrants" - The motto of the US Navy volunteers who fought the Barbary Pirates who enslaved Americans in 1800.

Lauren Johnson
08-18-2012, 02:51 AM
So much for intelligent discussion about what I think is an important subject, one that I recognized as a Deep Political Event when it began and started a blog on the topic:

Now comes the part where you play the innocent victim. This is how it works. You state your case, but do not engage other explanations. You either ignore or misstate other arguments. And you resort to repeating your thesis over and over again. Finally, once your frustrated hopeful partners in debate become frustrated, you roll your eyes. What is the great Bill Kelly supposed to do when he is has to talk to idiots like these? Finally, you proclaim your expertise, which by the way is on full demo at your website.

Just seems like we just went through the same thing with someone else.

<a href="https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?10546-Martial-Law-Imminent-Arrival>Martial Law: Imminent Arrival"</a>

PS How does one make a hypertext link here. <a href=>

Magda Hassan
08-18-2012, 05:18 AM
Lauren to do a hyperlink you can either copy and paste the link or if you look at the box above where you write the reply you can see an icon of a globe and a tree and a film strip. The one you want for a hyperlink is the globe. When this is clicked it will bring up a box where you can place the hyperlink.

Bill Kelly
08-18-2012, 07:02 PM
So much for intelligent discussion about what I think is an important subject, one that I recognized as a Deep Political Event when it began and started a blog on the topic:

Now comes the part where you play the innocent victim. This is how it works. You state your case, but do not engage other explanations. You either ignore or misstate other arguments. And you resort to repeating your thesis over and over again. Finally, once your frustrated hopeful partners in debate become frustrated, you roll your eyes. What is the great Bill Kelly supposed to do when he is has to talk to idiots like these? Finally, you proclaim your expertise, which by the way is on full demo at your website.

Just seems like we just went through the same thing with someone else.

<a href="https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?10546-Martial-Law-Imminent-Arrival>Martial Law: Imminent Arrival"</a>

PS How does one make a hypertext link here. <a href=>

Without stating your case, you told me to Fook off.

I've stated my case, and I accept Maggie's statement that because she is against foreign intervention does not mean she supports dictators, but I also take that to mean she is against Russian, Chinese and Iranian intervention.

What other explanations do you want?
What arguments am I ignoring? If I have restated my thesis, then it has not been refuted. What's your thesis, all I know is that you responded to mine by saying Fook off.

My expertise is only that I have been following these events since they began, have read everything Maggie and others have sent me or referred to or posted, and will continue to do so, but am not convinced that the regional revolution that is now sweeping North Africa and the middle east is anything but what it appears to be - a popular democratic uprising the purpose of which is to overthrow unpopular dictators and install some semalance of democracy.

And I resent being called names by someone who doesn't know me.

BK

Lauren Johnson
08-19-2012, 12:37 AM
Lauren to do a hyperlink you can either copy and paste the link or if you look at the box above where you write the reply you can see an icon of a globe and a tree and a film strip. The one you want for a hyperlink is the globe. When this is clicked it will bring up a box where you can place the hyperlink.



Obama's Regime-Change Policy in Syria (http://www.thenation.com/blog/169367/obamas-regime-change-policy-syria)

Actually, I am asking about making a hypertext link the one above which I copied from earlier in this thread. I see that others do it, but I cannot even using <a href=URL>text</a>.

Lauren Johnson
08-19-2012, 01:02 AM
So much for intelligent discussion about what I think is an important subject, one that I recognized as a Deep Political Event when it began and started a blog on the topic:

Now comes the part where you play the innocent victim. This is how it works. You state your case, but do not engage other explanations. You either ignore or misstate other arguments. And you resort to repeating your thesis over and over again. Finally, once your frustrated hopeful partners in debate become frustrated, you roll your eyes. What is the great Bill Kelly supposed to do when he is has to talk to idiots like these? Finally, you proclaim your expertise, which by the way is on full demo at your website.

Just seems like we just went through the same thing with someone else.

<a href="https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?10546-Martial-Law-Imminent-Arrival>Martial Law: Imminent Arrival"</a>

PS How does one make a hypertext link here. <a href=>

Without stating your case, you told me to Fook off.

I've stated my case, and I accept Maggie's statement that because she is against foreign intervention does not mean she supports dictators, but I also take that to mean she is against Russian, Chinese and Iranian intervention.

What other explanations do you want?
What arguments am I ignoring? If I have restated my thesis, then it has not been refuted. What's your thesis, all I know is that you responded to mine by saying Fook off.

My expertise is only that I have been following these events since they began, have read everything Maggie and others have sent me or referred to or posted, and will continue to do so, but am not convinced that the regional revolution that is now sweeping North Africa and the middle east is anything but what it appears to be - a popular democratic uprising the purpose of which is to overthrow unpopular dictators and install some semalance of democracy.

And I resent being called names by someone who doesn't know me.

BK

Bill, First I can apologize for calling you names.

I must say I have achieved a greater degree of clarity why I was so frustrated with your posts in this thread. I certainly am aware of your thesis after having read it so many times. But what I missed was an adequate response to challenging data. As much as you were able to state your thesis, I was looking forward to you sustaining your argument in the face of things that others have put forward.

The best example of how to sustain an argument was by a member of the DPF. Charles Drago put forward the thesis that the Chicago plot to kill Kennedy was in fact never meant to actually kill JFK. It served other purposes. He was strongly challenged, but considered the challenges and responded with specific points. He sustained his argument with energy and clarity. BTW I was moved from disagreeing to maybe agreeing his thesis.

With your thesis, I remain willing to be persuaded but have not seen you sustain your argument against challenges.

Bill Kelly
08-19-2012, 01:56 AM
So much for intelligent discussion about what I think is an important subject, one that I recognized as a Deep Political Event when it began and started a blog on the topic:

Now comes the part where you play the innocent victim. This is how it works. You state your case, but do not engage other explanations. You either ignore or misstate other arguments. And you resort to repeating your thesis over and over again. Finally, once your frustrated hopeful partners in debate become frustrated, you roll your eyes. What is the great Bill Kelly supposed to do when he is has to talk to idiots like these? Finally, you proclaim your expertise, which by the way is on full demo at your website.

Just seems like we just went through the same thing with someone else.

<a href="https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?10546-Martial-Law-Imminent-Arrival>Martial Law: Imminent Arrival"</a>

PS How does one make a hypertext link here. <a href=>

Without stating your case, you told me to Fook off.

I've stated my case, and I accept Maggie's statement that because she is against foreign intervention does not mean she supports dictators, but I also take that to mean she is against Russian, Chinese and Iranian intervention.

What other explanations do you want?
What arguments am I ignoring? If I have restated my thesis, then it has not been refuted. What's your thesis, all I know is that you responded to mine by saying Fook off.

My expertise is only that I have been following these events since they began, have read everything Maggie and others have sent me or referred to or posted, and will continue to do so, but am not convinced that the regional revolution that is now sweeping North Africa and the middle east is anything but what it appears to be - a popular democratic uprising the purpose of which is to overthrow unpopular dictators and install some semalance of democracy.

And I resent being called names by someone who doesn't know me.

BK

Bill, First I can apologize for calling you names.

I must say I have achieved a greater degree of clarity why I was so frustrated with your posts in this thread. I certainly am aware of your thesis after having read it so many times. But what I missed was an adequate response to challenging data. As much as you were able to state your thesis, I was looking forward to you sustaining your argument in the face of things that others have put forward.

The best example of how to sustain an argument was by a member of the DPF. Charles Drago put forward the thesis that the Chicago plot to kill Kennedy was in fact never meant to actually kill JFK. It served other purposes. He was strongly challenged, but considered the challenges and responded with specific points. He sustained his argument with energy and clarity. BTW I was moved from disagreeing to maybe agreeing his thesis.

With your thesis, I remain willing to be persuaded but have not seen you sustain your argument against challenges.

Well Lauren, I accept your apology and won't Fook Off and remain if people want to continue discussing these important topics. I apologize as well, for repeating my thesis, but it remains the same, though I have only been studying this situation for a relatively short time, while I am very familiar with the JFK assassination, which I no longer debate or argue about but develop new research on.

I am not interested in sustaining an argument, as Charles Drago is an expert at doing, but would rather come to a more accurate perspective of the fast developing revolutionary situations in many countries at once - with the primary focus on the situation in Syria at the moment, but that will be over soon and the revolution will move on to somewhere else shortly thereafter. So far over 20,000 people have been killed, and it appears to me that the final solution must include a new government that permits Russia to maintain its navy base and China its commerce, and Iran its influence, all of which should be included if the new post-Assad government is democratic and secular. The only thing I have been hearing about however is the undue influence of the CIA, NATO and other BS, when in fact, it is the refusal of the Assad government to relinquish its power that has destroyed the country, so far. Once Assad is gone, the new era can begin, and whether it is a democracy or an Islamic fascist state has yet to be determined, but my interest is to study the dynamics of the revolution and accurately describe it. Unlike the Castro revolution in Cuba, and the Communist revolutions in Russia and China, there is no one person who is leading these revolutions, so it really is a popular uprising. You can claim that it is the result of US stimulated propaganda and disinformation but I have not seen that yet, and I am very familiar with it and would like to document it if it is there. Because it is a leaderless revolution and one based on democratic idealogy, everyone is trying to co-opt it. The only thing that is certain is that Syria will not be the military police state it was under Assad.

Lauren Johnson
08-19-2012, 02:53 AM
I am not interested in sustaining an argument

Well, there ya are. That is the issue. I wanted you to convince me; you wern't interested. Hah! Isn't there a lesson somewhere?

Magda Hassan
08-19-2012, 06:36 AM
The only thing that is certain is that Syria will not be the military police state it was under Assad.
No, it will more likely be a military police state under another US or Saudi puppet. I'm not going to be supporting that.

Magda Hassan
08-19-2012, 06:49 AM
I've stated my case, and I accept Maggie's statement that because she is against foreign intervention does not mean she supports dictators, but I also take that to mean she is against Russian, Chinese and Iranian intervention.
Well, almost right. I am against salafist mercenaries and Xi dogs of war etc. As a sovereign state Syria is free to negotiate treaties, alliances, partnerships etc with whom ever they choose. In any case I don't see any Chinese or Russian intervention. And I wouldn't call it intervention either if they are invited by Syria to come and assist. I am fine with the US coming to 'intervene' in Australia during WW2. Because it wasn't intervention it was requested and or offered help and assistance. So it will be with Syria's allies.

Magda Hassan
08-19-2012, 08:12 AM
Lauren to do a hyperlink you can either copy and paste the link or if you look at the box above where you write the reply you can see an icon of a globe and a tree and a film strip. The one you want for a hyperlink is the globe. When this is clicked it will bring up a box where you can place the hyperlink.



Obama's Regime-Change Policy in Syria (http://www.thenation.com/blog/169367/obamas-regime-change-policy-syria)

Actually, I am asking about making a hypertext link the one above which I copied from earlier in this thread. I see that others do it, but I cannot even using <a href=URL>text</a>.
The way I do it is to select the text I want to highlight with my cursor and then I click the globe in the box above where I post my reply and place inside there the link. Once this is done the highlighted text becomes the link. Is this what you meant?

Bill Kelly
08-19-2012, 09:17 PM
I've stated my case, and I accept Maggie's statement that because she is against foreign intervention does not mean she supports dictators, but I also take that to mean she is against Russian, Chinese and Iranian intervention.
Well, almost right. I am against salafist mercenaries and Xi dogs of war etc. As a sovereign state Syria is free to negotiate treaties, alliances, partnerships etc with whom ever they choose. In any case I don't see any Chinese or Russian intervention. And I wouldn't call it intervention either if they are invited by Syria to come and assist. I am fine with the US coming to 'intervene' in Australia during WW2. Because it wasn't intervention it was requested and or offered help and assistance. So it will be with Syria's allies.

Well, they were Russian jets that bombed a Syrian village yesterday, killing a half dozen and wounding twenty people. Who protects their sovereignty?

Yea, Syria is a sovereign state owned by the Assad family they are free to negotiate treaties, alliances, partnerships and kill whoever they chose, and they're not about to give it up that power without a fight, probably to the death.

BK

Bill Kelly
08-19-2012, 09:24 PM
The only thing that is certain is that Syria will not be the military police state it was under Assad.
No, it will more likely be a military police state under another US or Saudi puppet. I'm not going to be supporting that.

Egypt was a country controlled by a US puppet, since the revolution, it is not controlled by a US puppet. Tunisa was a sovereign state controlled by a French puppet; since the revolution it is not. Libya was a state controlled by Gadhafi, who had made his peace with UK and USA and made deals with US and European oil companies to suit his family needs, which included paying $1 million for rock stars to perform at his kid's birthday party. Now, since the revolution, Tunisa, Egypt and Libya have had free elections and the people of those countries are determing their own future. The Syria people deserve the same opportunity. After Assad is gone, a new leader, worse than him might emerge, but that is the way revolutions sometimes go.

It is quite clear that Assad is a puppet of Russia, and owes his life, his rule and power to the Russians.

At least our differences are now more clear and we know where we stand.

BK

Danny Jarman
08-19-2012, 10:09 PM
The only thing that is certain is that Syria will not be the military police state it was under Assad.
No, it will more likely be a military police state under another US or Saudi puppet. I'm not going to be supporting that.

Egypt was a country controlled by a US puppet, since the revolution, it is not controlled by a US puppet.


:lol:.

The Egyptian Military is not a US puppet?

Bill Kelly
08-19-2012, 11:51 PM
The only thing that is certain is that Syria will not be the military police state it was under Assad.
No, it will more likely be a military police state under another US or Saudi puppet. I'm not going to be supporting that.

Egypt was a country controlled by a US puppet, since the revolution, it is not controlled by a US puppet.


:lol:.

The Egyptian Military is not a US puppet?

The Egyptian military is absolutely a puppet of the US military, and some of the 9/11 terrorists were former Egyptian military, including the one who infiltrated the US special forces training facility. They were also responsible for the assassination of the guy who preceded Mubarak. The new, first publicly elected president of Egypt in decades, recently fired the top two military brass for failing to stop or respond to the recent attack on the Israel border by radical islamics. We shall see how it plays out - democracy in action.

Revolutionary Program: Assad on the Ropes - Attends Mosque Service (http://revolutionaryprogram.blogspot.com/2012/08/assad-on-ropes-attends-mosque-service.html)

Bill Kelly
09-25-2012, 01:11 AM
Tunisia Girl - A voice of reason from a revolutionary country.

Some Thoughts about the USEmbassy Incidents

http://atunisiangirl.blogspot.com/2012/09/some-thoughts-about-us-embassys.html

Tonight, I feel bad for my country. But also for theentire region, for the Arab world, the Muslim world ... For humanity. Ido not understand this resentment and hatred coming from all sides. I do notunderstand these wars, and all these interventions here and there.

I do not understand this killing silence as to the denial of the right tofree movement. A denial that forces young Africans to risk their lives inthose death rafts. I do not understand that torture is still practiced inmy country. I can not admit or accept the attacks on the first of thefreedoms we have secured thanks to the sacrifices of our martyrs and wounded:the freedom of opinion and expression.

Today we experienced a tragic day, two / three -two different numbers given bythe Minister of the Interior and his spokesman- Tunisians have lost theirlives while they were trying to break into the American Embassy in Tunisin what they thought to be an action to defend Islam and our Prophet. Thishappened as a reaction to the dissemination of an "anti-Islam"movie.

Personally, I can't talk about the movie itself. I did not watch it. I cannot make comments neither on its content nor on its artistic andtechnical quality.

I understand that young people feel annoyed, attacked and harmed in theirsacred, but I do not understand at all those who push them to react violentlyin a country where peaceful youth overthrew a dictator. I am doingmy best to understand those who get excited because of a movie or a book.Moreover I think that the response to a movie should be a movie, a deepcriticism or a peaceful, well-organized demonstration.

The USA Embassy's incidents are beyond my imagination and apprehension. What happened worries me. Many questions hit my mind after what happened:

-Who is the manipulator standing behind these events occurring onan international scale?-Who are his allies / collaborators acrossthe region in general and in our country in particular?I do notunderstand at all why are some parties and occult forces initiating, from timeto time, provocative actions despite knowing in advance that theyare going to put some countries on fire. I do not understand who is behindthe manipulation of the masses. Who pushes them to react violently? Nevertheless, I have a feeling that those behind the alibi and those behind the reaction arethe same.

Furthermore I am astonished at the passivity and incapacity of the securityforces to control the situation despite their awareness of the possibility ofsuch events in advance. Why didn't they cut off the access to the area ? Howdid they let excited and angrypeople reach the walls of the embassyand climb them so easily?We have already seen these same forces actwith promptness and rigidity against people who wanted to celebrate the memoryof the martyrs on April 9th, 2012. Theyhave been very efficient against strikers and protesters in SidiBouzid, the Hencha, Kebili, and many other areas of the country. why did they fail in stopping the angry masses?

There are probably thousands of questions to be raised. Personally, I amconvinced that these incidents are neither spontaneous nor an action that isthe natural reaction of disappointed people hurt in their self-esteem.However, I still have confidence in our youth. I strongly believethat we will succeed in defending and expressing ourselves peacefully. Ihope that the forces of peace and progress around the world will succeed instopping the evil campaigns causing hatred and wars.

Publié par lina ben Mhenni (http://www.blogger.com/profile/17220124423496957935)à l'adresse samedi, septembre 15, 2012 (http://atunisiangirl.blogspot.com/2012/09/some-thoughts-about-us-embassys.html) file:///C:\Users\Owner\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip _image001.gif (http://www.blogger.com/email-post.g?blogID=7625685145701466514&postID=6049668307566161631)
Envoyer par e-mail (http://www.blogger.com/share-post.g?blogID=7625685145701466514&postID=6049668307566161631&target=email)BlogThis! (http://www.blogger.com/share-post.g?blogID=7625685145701466514&postID=6049668307566161631&target=blog)Partager sur Twitter (http://www.blogger.com/share-post.g?blogID=7625685145701466514&postID=6049668307566161631&target=twitter)Partager sur Facebook (http://www.blogger.com/share-post.g?blogID=7625685145701466514&postID=6049668307566161631&target=facebook)
6 commentaires:
file:///C:\Users\Owner\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip _image003.gif
andersljungberg (http://www.blogger.com/profile/04792022629784057026)samedi,15 septembre, 2012 (http://atunisiangirl.blogspot.com/2012/09/some-thoughts-about-us-embassys.html?showComment=1347719656932#c500815223 6383371183)
Christians and Jews have been murdered since muhammed livedon earth
and this sannng can not say when it demeans muhammed and people get upset whenthe mad and violent
this can only mean one thing Muslims can tolerate no criticism even when thecriticism is based on facts
Répondre
Réponses
file:///C:\Users\Owner\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip _image003.gif
Cyrina (http://www.blogger.com/profile/16899363081395085398)samedi,15 septembre, 2012 (http://atunisiangirl.blogspot.com/2012/09/some-thoughts-about-us-embassys.html?showComment=1347738900576#c281809731 6500770798)
what u say anders ljungberg is simply ridiculous or may be unever heard about crusades or hitler, get ur facts, and please stop beinghateful, coz u're not less hateful than those who did these acts to USembassies!
file:///C:\Users\Owner\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip _image004.jpg
BrunoSantos Ribeiro (http://www.blogger.com/profile/10504587515659823266)dimanche,16 septembre, 2012 (http://atunisiangirl.blogspot.com/2012/09/some-thoughts-about-us-embassys.html?showComment=1347757073888#c143388444 1385485364)
All religions have blood in their hands but that isradicalism! So let's not fed it please.
Répondre
file:///C:\Users\Owner\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip _image005.jpg
RamziAtwi (http://www.blogger.com/profile/05261826130597091409)dimanche,16 septembre, 2012 (http://atunisiangirl.blogspot.com/2012/09/some-thoughts-about-us-embassys.html?showComment=1347751793389#c869731112 0213780240)
Entered Tunisiain Hurricane Islamists
Répondre
file:///C:\Users\Owner\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip _image003.gif
Eivind (http://www.blogger.com/profile/07327083310096712235)lundi,17 septembre, 2012 (http://atunisiangirl.blogspot.com/2012/09/some-thoughts-about-us-embassys.html?showComment=1347868309704#c623334117 6719947885)
It's a tragedy.

Some rightwing nutjob is of the opinion that islam is a violent and intolerantreligion, so he sets out to "prove" it by creating a movie.

The technical and artistic qualities of the film are bad, it's on the lever youwould expect from 14-year-olds making a school-project, and not on the levelyou'd expect in a professional movie.

The movie is unable to hurt Islam. It's ridicolous. If nobody had flipped outabout it, all it would amount to would be: "intolerant assholes publishesbad movie, the
world ignores him."

A tiny minority of extremists have a fit about it. Even a peaceful protest ismore attention than these film-makers deserve, but they get more than that.They get cars
on fire. They get rocks thrown at the police. They get stormed embassies. Theyget killings.

These reactions, hurt Islam.

From the perspective of the film-makers this is an astounding success ! Theyset out to "prove" that islam is violent and intolerant. And now theyfeel that their "proof" is valid. They can stand triumphant and say:"See ? Muslims flip out with violence and killings over the slightestprovocation, just like I said!"

That too, is a lie offcourse. Reality is that 99.9% of muslims react sensibly,that is they offer critique, they may even attend some demonstration, if theythink the issue is even worth it. In short, they do their best to prove thatthe picture of Islam that this movie attempts to draw, is a false one.

Of course, those of us lucky enough to have friends who are muslims, have knownthat for a long time. I'm an atheist myself, and my muslim friends surelydisagree with me, like I disagree with them, about many issues. But we agree100% that the way forward is respect, understanding and friendship, notneedless provocations, hatred and violence.

Magda Hassan
10-07-2013, 03:23 AM
Oh, there's that al-Qaeda-affiliated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) again that is ever so obliging and useful.


Tunisia: New Details in Opposition Assassination Point to Libyan Islamist Veritas (http://libya360.wordpress.com/author/newworldrisingchronicles/) / 2 days ago (http://libya360.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/tunisia-new-details-in-opposition-assassination-point-to-libyan-islamist/)
http://english.al-akhbar.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/5cols/leading_images/344412-01-08.jpg
Protesters shout slogans and hold up portraits of assassinated Tunisian opposition figure Chokri Belaid during a demonstration in Tunis on 2 October 2013 organised to pressure the ruling Islamist party to tell the truth on the attack blamed on radical Islamists. AFP – Fethi Belaid)
By Noureddine Baltayeb (http://english.al-akhbar.com/author/noureddine-baltayeb)
As many had expected, Tayeb Oqaili, member of the national initiative working to uncover the truth behind the assassinations of Chokri Belaid (http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/14936) and Mohammed Brahmi, has made public secret information ostensibly implicating the ruling al-Nahda Movement in the assassination of Belaid, who was the leader of the opposition Tunisian Popular Front – and Oqaili’s close friend. The information links a Libyan militia led by Islamist leader Abdul-Hakim Belhadj to the assassination.
Belhadj, who was active in the 1980s and 90s with the al-Qaeda-affiliated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), is credited with leading the attack on the stronghold of the late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in Bab al-Aziziya during the Libyan uprising.
The left-wing leader maintained that at a time when security leaders and intelligence operatives had Belhadj under close observation, leaders in al-Nahda were seen meeting and talking with him.The revelations were made on Wednesday, October 2, during a press conference held by Oqaili on Avenue Habib Bourguiba, a few meters away from the heavily-guarded Interior Ministry. Oqaili revealed he had documents from early January 2011, circulated by Interior Ministry official Wahid al-Toujani, instructing the security services to keep tabs on Belhadj, who apparently intended to carry out terrorist attacks in Tunisia. The left-wing leader maintained that at a time when security leaders and intelligence operatives had Belhadj under close observation, leaders in al-Nahda were seen meeting and talking with him.
According to Oqaili, those leaders include the movement’s chief Rachid Ghannouchi, former prime minister Hamadi Jebali, current Prime Minister Ali al-Arid, Minister Noureddine Buhairi, and Minister Samir Dilou, who lied in an interview with Radio Mosaïque when he denied having ever met Belhadj.
To be sure, pictures were circulated on social media sites showing Dilou meeting with Belhadj in the city of Zarzis, confirming the information brought forward by Oqaili, who said, “It was Belhadj who handled the training of Ansar al-Sharia in Tunisia, including the cell that would go on to assassinate Belaid and Brahmi. This confirms that the Libyan leader was involved in both murders.”
For its part, al-Nahda scrambled to call a meeting of its executive council to respond to what it called “serious allegations.” Al-Nahda said it would assign its legal division to sue Oqaili, who stressed he was ready to face any legal action.
Oqaila also said that the weapons caches found successively in Tunisia after the first one was discovered in Medenine, in the southeast near Libya, were directly linked to the LIFG’s activities in Tunisia, in coordination with al-Nahda. Oqaili purported that Belhadj and his group have been training Tunisians in collaboration with al-Nahda, something he said was in line with the thinking of Islamic groups that place partisan affiliation above national identity.
The public prosecutor has decided to begin an investigation into the documents disclosed by Oqaili.
In truth, these allegations did not come as a surprise to many Tunisians. To a large segment of the Tunisian public, al-Nahda’s direct or indirect involvement in political assassinations and the proliferation of weapons is almost taken for granted.
In the same vein, the official spokesperson for the Tunisian General Labour Union (UGTT), the body currently leading national reconciliation efforts, said that the leadership of the organization received warnings from the Interior Ministry, saying that there was a need for caution because of credible threats to the lives of a number of UGTT leaders. According to Sami Tahiri, UGTT member, there have been serious attempts to target trade unionists and the headquarters of the organization in the provinces.
At a later time, Belhadj, in a statement to the independent Tunisian News Agency, denied having anything to do with Ansar al-Sharia – the group accused by the Tunisian Interior Ministry of masterminding the wave of assassinations seen in the past months – or any knowledge of Belaid and Brahmi.
The Libyan leader, who has been involved in the political process in his home country through a new political party, stressed that he was opposed to any meddling in Tunisian affairs. Belhadj expressed his surprise at the allegations.
At any rate, the documents revealed by Oqaili are expected to cause further controversy ahead of the third anniversary of the fall of the regime. Meanwhile, reaching political consensus is almost impossible in the country of Mohammed Bouazizi, the man whose death sparked the Tunisian revolution. The majority of the Tunisian people today suffer from despair, frustration, and perhaps even regret because of the outcome of the Tunisian revolution and the Arab revolutions so far.
http://libya360.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/tunisia-new-details-in-opposition-assassination-point-to-libyan-islamist/

Magda Hassan
03-18-2015, 12:12 PM
Reports of exchange of gunfire at Tunisia's parliament: state news agency

TUNIS Wed Mar 18, 2015 7:36am EDT







(Reuters) - Exchanges of gunfire have been heard at Tunisia's parliament building, the TAP state news agency said on Wednesday, without giving further details.
A witness near the parliament told Reuters a large police presence was moving to evacuate the building.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/18/us-tunisia-security-idUSKBN0ME18E20150318


Gunmen 'take hostages' in attack on Tunisia parliament

Three gunmen attack Tunisia's parliament building in Tunis, with reports that a hostage or hostages taken from nearby museum


By Andrew Marszal (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/andrew-marszal/), and agencies

12:04PM GMT 18 Mar 2015



Exchanges of gunfire have been heard at Tunisia (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/tunisia/)'s parliament building, the country's state news agency said on Wednesday.

A witness near the parliament told Reuters a large police presence was moving to evacuate the building.

Local radio said the gunmen may also have taken a hostage from the nearby museum that shares grounds with the parliament.

There were unverified reports a tourist or tourists may have been taken hostage.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/tunisia/11479898/Gunmen-take-hostages-in-attack-on-Tunisia-parliament.html

Magda Hassan
03-18-2015, 12:20 PM
Operation over. Wow, that was quick.

According to reporters, 160 tourists were rescued from a back door, 20 to 30 are still inside. MI spokesman Aroui " there's an ongoing terrorist attack, 1 tourist is wounded and been taken to emergency" he refuses to give any details. There are some dead among security forces, no information about hostages.

Magda Hassan
03-19-2015, 12:48 PM
https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=6798&stc=1

This is supposed to be the 2 terrorists shot in the attack on the museum. However as you can see they are not the military clad gunmen that were stated in the reports.