Sunday, January 06, 2013

Obama & NATO Support Syrian Extremists & Terrorists And Setting The Stage For War On Iran

...The "Iranian threat" is overwhelmingly a Western obsession, shared by Arab dictators, though not Arab populations.

As numerous polls have shown, although citizens of Arab countries generally dislike Iran, they do not regard it as a very serious threat. Rather, they perceive the threat to be Israel and the United States; and many, sometimes considerable majorities, regard Iranian nuclear weapons as a counter to these threats.

Above Quote from: " The Gravest Threat to World Peace" By Noam Chomsky "Information Clearing House" January 4, 2013

Deja Vu America and NATO supporting terrorists in Syria as they did in Afghanistan in the war to oust the Russians who were occupying Afghanistan. This inevitably led to the Taliban taking power and the creation of Bin Laden's AlQaeda so that didn't work out quite the way the USA had planned.

The Obama Regime unsurprisingly is supporting various Islamic extremists and terrorists who constitute the anti-Assad rebels in Syria .

It is becoming more and more difficult to understand why in the world Obama should have been given a Nobel Peace Prize since he has continued implementation of a number of Bush era policies ie perpetual war, drone strikes, renditions, warrant-less wiretaps, targeted assassinations by executive order (the kill list)and torture lite and his failure to bring those Americans from George W. Bush on down who are guilty of various war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Syrian Rebels Praise Bin Laden, Celebrate 9/11 Attacks

Published on 1 Jan 2013

01/01/12) Footage of a Syrian Opposition Demonstration in which participants sing an Al Qaeda song reminiscing upon the 'sweet memory' of the 9/11 attacks and praising Bin Laden as their leader. This isn't the first time the song has been featured at opposition demonstrations at which Al Qaeda flags are commonplace.

Basic Verse translation of the song in question which is a well known Al Qaeda hymn.

"If they call me a 'terrorist', I would say: 'It is an honor for me'
Our terror is praised, with a divine calling

Our leader, the Mullah (Omar), did not forsake his religion
All the soldiers have sold their souls to Allah

Our leader bin Laden, America's worst nightmare
With the power of faith and our weapons

We destroyed America with a civilian plane
The World Trade Centre was turned into a pile of rubble

Strongest Damascus Insurgents join Jihadist coalition

Published on 28 Dec 2012

(28/12/12) The Jihadist group the Islam Brigade (Liwa Al Islam) announces that it is joining the Syrian Islamic Front, a coalition created by Al Qaeda in Syria and it's close partner Ahrar Al Sham. The Brigade's leader, a radical Islamist, pledges fealty to the front and states his desire for Syria to be ruled under Sharia Islamic Law thereby rejecting a civil state. The Islam Brigade's rejection of the Western backed but largely ineffectual National Coalition and effectively non-existent Free Syrian Army underlines how despite Western attempts to influence the rebels the genuinely powerful groups are now openly openly embracing Al Qaeda it's and hard line anti-Western Islamist agenda's despite desperate Western attempts to prevent them from doing so.

President Obama and other Western Leaders and their allies in the Middle East support the armed rebels in Syria claiming they are "freedom fighters" who want to replace the 'Evil' anti-American anti-Western Bashar Al-Assad regime with a more democratic regime but this is not the case given the facts on the ground in Syria.

In fact it appears that the most successful groups fighting against Assad are connected with Al Qaeda and the Taliban and their goal is to set up a radical extremist Islamic religious state .

The American attitude is once again an either /or Manichean view in which anyone criticizing the rebels in Syria must be on the side of Assad's regime. And that anyone who is against Assad is therefore one of the "good guys".

So it would appear ostensibly that if the more radical Islamic groups oust Assad and form a new government the USA will have cornered itself in this conflict and left supporting Al Qaeda and other extremists in Syria.

But the Obama/NATO plan is in fact to destabilize and destroy the Syrian state so either the USA can have more control over Syria or at the least to make Syria no longer a factor or concern in the coming war on Iran as Syria becomes locked in even more sectarian violence . The Obama doctrine is to further isolate Iran by taking down its possible allies one by one to facilitate Israel's or NATO's or America's war on Iran.

And yet given the evidence the so called "freedom Fighters" or members of the Free Syrian Army have committed numerous atrocities and are involved in sectarian attacks on Shia and Alawite Muslims and on Christian Syrians .

As this article points out destroying the al-Assad Regime could be the worst possible scenario for Syria if not the entire region but other than the Israelis the USA and NATO couldn't care less about the peoples in the region of the Middle East, Palestine, North Africa and Central Asia except in terms of America ,NATO, Western Corporations and Israel's agenda .

Syria Civil War: Why the Fall of Assad Could Be the Worst Possible Outcome

As Bashar al-Assad is increasingly cornered and his regime gradually fails, the question of what Syria is going to look like after he leaves is fast becoming clear: Without Assad, Syria will be a pit of sectarian violence.

According to the UN, entire groups of people are at threat. Syria’s population is a religious and ethnic patchwork, one that is barely being held together by Assad. While tens of thousands of people will have died to oust Assad, sectarian violence after Assad could dramatically increase that number. The deteriorating security situation in Lebanon, the influx of foreign fighters, refugees, and Syria's own internal centrifugal forces demonstrate that the opposition is weak, and upon Assad's exit, it will disintegrate into bloody sectarian conflict.

Here is the basic problem: The Free Syrian Army (FSA) defines itself as being the antithesis to Assad’s regime. However, when he’s gone, the reference point for what the FSA represents becomes much weaker and it must find another focus to stay relevant. The prolonged negotiations in Qatar managed to produce a loosely united opposition under Moaz al-Khatib, but the indications are that the rebel alliance is splintering before the civil war even ends.

Foreign fighters from Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, with Saudi and Qatari funding, are fighting alongside the indigenously Syrian groups; conspicuously, al-Nusra, an import rebel brigade, as one of the most experienced combat outfits operating in Syria, has a significant share of the military competence the rebels demonstrate, but are at the same time designated as terrorists, fighting for an Islamic state in Syria. The writing is on the wall: any future regime in Syria will include an Islamist party with a narrow vision, and that alone will fuel warfare in the country.

The refugee problem is intense as well, at nearly a million people relocating to the surrounding countries, and with further millions being displaced internally in Syria. Christians and Druze are among the most adversely affected, with those who escaped the fighting going mainly to Lebanon. Millennia-old communities will be uprooted and will potentially never recovered, not to mention of the reprisals and group-based violence that will take place. It is not a stretch of the imagination to foresee inter-ethnic violence taking aim at soft targets, like marketplaces, schools and sites of worship.

The Alawites represent a branch of Islam, not quite aligned with the dominant Sunni variety, nor the more conservative streams of the religion. They take their name from Ali ibn Abi Talib, considered to be the cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad, as well as the first Shi’a imam. The Alawis also self-identify as Shi’a Muslims. However, their interpretation of Islam is also thought to include aspects of Christianity, and the secrecy of the group in regard to their beliefs and customs makes it hard to discern other influences on their teachings. A likely factor is their geographical remoteness and living on the periphery of the Muslim world helped this change in perspective. It is also indicative that the government of Assad did not tolerate political opposition, but its secular nature did permit greater religious freedom. It is ironic that Syria’s Arab Spring could harm the Alawites in paticular.

Syria’s VP, Farouq al-Sharaa maintains that the war cannot be won by either side, and it is the most sober evaluation of the conflict to date. It is impossible to kill every loyalist without committing anything short of a genocide and the alternative to Assad is a sectarian bloodbath. In the end, as in Libya, any reference to Assad could mean personal, professional, or family suicide, and a restoration of a regime very similar to Assad’s.

And now let's take a look at America's accusations that Iran has been secretly implementing a nuclear weapons program that has been ongoing since a few years ago or going back to shortly after the American puppet and dictator the Shah of Iran was ousted in 1979.

The religious leaders in Iran since 1979 and recently have issued Fatwas against the building or use of Nuclear Weapons and other WMDs.

The Gravest Threat to World Peace By Noam Chomsky "Information Clearing House" January 4, 2013

...The "Iranian threat" is overwhelmingly a Western obsession, shared by Arab dictators, though not Arab populations.

As numerous polls have shown, although citizens of Arab countries generally dislike Iran, they do not regard it as a very serious threat. Rather, they perceive the threat to be Israel and the United States; and many, sometimes considerable majorities, regard Iranian nuclear weapons as a counter to these threats.

In high places in the U.S., some concur with the Arab populations' perception, among them Gen. Lee Butler, former head of the Strategic Command. In 1998 he said, "It is dangerous in the extreme that in the cauldron of animosities that we call the Middle East," one nation, Israel, should have a powerful nuclear weapons arsenal, which "inspires other nations to do so."

Still more dangerous is the nuclear-deterrent strategy of which Butler was a leading designer for many years. Such a strategy, he wrote in 2002, is "a formula for unmitigated catastrophe," and he called on the United States and other nuclear powers to accept their commitment under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to make "good faith" efforts to eliminate the plague of nuclear weapons.

Nations have a legal obligation to pursue such efforts seriously, the World Court ruled in 1996: "There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control." In 2002, George W. Bush's administration declared that the United States is not bound by the obligation.

A large majority of the world appears to share Arab views on the Iranian threat. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has vigorously supported Iran's right to enrich uranium, most recently at its summit meeting in Tehran last August.

'US claims on Iran nuclear issue, bogus'

Published on 4 Jan 2013 by Ralph Schoenman

The Full Story of Iran's Nuclear Program - Robert Fisk Dec. 2, 2008

Chossudovsky: Obama doesn't want a nuclear free world
Uploaded on 21 May 2010

During the Cold War, both the United States and Russia placed tactical nuclear weapons in certain parts of Europe. It's basically a small nuclear bomb that could demolish a major city, Russia took back to its own weapons stockpiles. However, America still has their own mini nukes out and in various parts of Europe. All this is in accordance with the new NATO mission statement but why are the weapons still there?

Obama's hypocrisy.
Obama refuses to get rid of America's nukes while criticizing other nations for wanting their own nuclear weapons.

Obama says treaties must be kept yet the US breaks treaties and breaches International Law when it suits America's agenda.

If Obama was serious about reducing Nuclear weapons he could set an example by destroying a large percentage of America's nuclear stockpile and remove nuclear weapons from Europe and elsewhere controlled by America.

Obama if he were sincere in stopping nuclear weapons proliferation he would allow United Nations nuclear inspectors to have authority to examine Israel's nuclear weapons program.

Given that Obama and previous US presidents have done nothing to curb Israel's nuclear weapons program while condemning North Korea for its nuclear weapons program and Iran for its non-existent nuclear weapons programs it is the height of hypocrisy and an example of double standards when it comes to America's nuclear weapons program and that of Israel's nuclear weapons program.

Obama warns North Korea, Iran on nuclear ambitions‎

SEOUL, South Korea — U.S. President Barack Obama has said that he is pushing for "a world without nuclear weapons" and is committed to deterring nuclear proliferation, ahead of a two-day 53-nation nuclear summit in Seoul.

"The danger of nuclear terrorism remains one of the greatest threats to global security. That is why in Seoul we need to keep at it," he said before the summit focussing on reducing nuclear access by terror groups to radioactive material and build a nuclear bomb.

Obama also assured that the United States can further reduce its nuclear weapons stockpile while maintaining its strategic deterrent and international commitments.

Obama on Iran's Nuclear Program at UN
Published on 25 Sept. 2012

During his speech at the UN General Assembly Tuesday, President Obama defended continuing efforts by the U.S. to block Iran's development of a nuclear weapon. The President went on to say that "America wants to resolve this issue through diplomacy and we believe there is still time and space to do so, but that time is not unlimited."

and so it goes,

No comments: