White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know


John Kerry 2013-08-30
http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg

Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg


///


Full Text Of Speeches:


John Kerry 2013-08-30
http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm

Barack Obama 2013-08-31
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html


-----------

Eliminator - ZZ Top
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

America’s Israel Lobby Demands “Direct Militery Strikes” Against Syria
August 31, 2013
http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/content/foreign-policy-experts-urge-president-obama-respond-assads-chemical-attack


“The objectives should be … to ensure that Assad’s chemical weapons no longer threaten … our allies in the region”
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/maps_and_graphs/2013/1/31/1359637361805/Israel-Syria-airstrike-001.png


The names of the “experts” seeking a “decisive response” against Syria:

Karl Rove
Senator Joseph I. Lieberman
Ammar Abdulhamid
Ambassador Robert G. Joseph Elliott Abrams
Dr. Robert Kagan
Dr. Fouad Ajami
Lawrence F. Kaplan
Michael Allen
James Kirchick
Dr. Michael Auslin
Irina Krasovskaya
Gary Bauer
Dr. William Kristol
Paul Berman
Bernard-Henri Levy
Max Boot
Dr. Robert J. Lieber
Ellen Bork
Ambassador L. Paul Bremer
Tod Lindberg
Matthew R. J. Brodsky
Mary Beth Long
Dr. Eliot A. Cohen
Dr. Thomas G. Mahnken
Senator Norm Coleman
Dr. Michael Makovsky
Ambassador William Courtney
Ann Marlowe
Seth Cropsey
Clifford D. May
James S. Denton
Dr. Alan Mendoza
Paula A. DeSutter
David A. Merkel
Dr. Larry Diamond
Dr. Joshua Muravchik
Dr. Paula J. Dobriansky
Ambassador Andrew Natsios
Thomas Donnelly
Governor Tim Pawlenty
Dr. Michael Doran
Martin Peretz
Mark Dubowitz
Danielle Pletka
Dr. Colin Dueck
Dr. David Pollock
Dr. Nicholas Eberstadt
Arch Puddington
Ambassador Eric S. Edelman
Douglas J. Feith
Randy Scheunemann
Reuel Marc Gerecht
Dan Senor
Abe Greenwald
Ambassador John Shattuck
Christopher J. Griffin
Lee Smith
John P. Hannah
Henry D. Sokolski
Dr. Jeffrey Herf
James Traub
Peter R. Huessy
Ambassador Mark D. Wallace
Dr. William Inboden
Michael Weiss
Bruce Pitcairn Jackson
Leon Wieseltier
Ash JainKhawla
Yusuf Dr. Kenneth Jensen
Robert Zarate
Allison Johnson
Dr. Radwan Ziadeh

[The Starmaker]

thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
> >
> >
> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
> >
> > Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> > http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
> >
> >
> > ///
> >
> >
> > Full Text Of Speeches:
> >
> >
> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
> >
> > Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
> >
> >
> > -----------
> >
> > Eliminator - ZZ Top
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo
>
> America’s Israel Lobby Demands “Direct Militery Strikes” Against Syria
> August 31, 2013
> http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/content/foreign-policy-experts-urge-president-obama-respond-assads-chemical-attack
>

I don't think striking Sryia is a good idea....especially if Israel for
it. Anything they for, Obama should be against. It makes
good foreign policy.


Let Israel strike Syria.



The Starmaker

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

As a nation of laws, it would be much better if the United States observed international law instead of going it alone like a rogue state and bombing a foreign government as punishment for allegedly breaking international law.

The United States government has for 2 years covertly and aggressively worked to overthrow the Assad/Syrian government. The CIA weapons running from Libya to Syria last year was endorsed by the same government officials who today are alleging war crimes by the Syrian government. The blood of 100 thousand Syrian civilians is partially on the hands of the United States Government.

Ironically, the 2013 aerial bombing of Syria by a Nobel Peace Prize recipient will begin around the anniversary of the aerial Twin Towers attack 12 years ago.

They hate us for our freedoms, right? Our freedom to assemble, our freedom to privacy, our right to be secure in our homes without warrant-less searches or wiretaps.

There is no light between the United States and Israel, and by that I mean both countries are morally in the dark.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Syria Chemical Weapons Attack 'False Flag'

Ron Paul
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/08/29/ron_paul_chemical_weapons_in_syria_a_false_flag.html

Julian Assange
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/08/30/ron-paul-julian-assange-syria

Patrick Buchannan
http://www.mediaite.com/online/buchanan-syria-chemical-weapons-attack-reeks-of-false-flag-operation/

Michael Savage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BeYxqHXE-I


----------

The Israeli Periphery
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 By Reva Bhalla
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/israeli-periphery
http://www.stratfor.com/about/analysts/reva-bhalla

The state of Israel has a basic, inescapable geopolitical dilemma: Its national security requirements outstrip its military capabilities, making it dependent on an outside power. Not only must that power have significant military capabilities but it also must have enough common ground with Israel to align its foreign policy toward the Arab world with that of Israel's.

///

INSIGHT - military intervention in Syria, post withdrawal status of forces
By Reva Bhalla
http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/1671459_insight-military-intervention-in-syria-post-withdrawal.html

They dont believe air intervention would happen unless there was enough media attention on a massacre, like the Ghadafi move against Benghazi. They think the US would have a high tolerance for killings as long as it doesn't reach that very public stage.

///


The Case to Congress
Posted on August 31, 2013 by emptywheel
http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/31/the-case-to-congress/
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-to-make-1-15-p-m--statement-on-syria-161723103.html


As you’ve no doubt heard, President Obama gave a statement today in which he said he had decided to strike Syria. But then said he plans to have Congress approve the strike.

Here’s how the Administration plans to sell this to Congress:

And they detailed the coming campaign to get Congress on board:

-Hammer home the potential threat to staunch ally Israel’s security <-----

-Provide detailed intelligence about the alleged attack

-Underline that the United States ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention, and make a case that American legitimacy — not just his own — is at stake.

-Make the argument that failure to act could lead, one day, to terrorists acquiring chemical weapons from regimes like Assad’s — and turning them on America.


Item One: Assad’s alleged decision to use Chemical Weapons that he originally obtained to deter Israel against rebels presents “a potential threat to staunch ally Israel’s security.”

In recent months, Israel has successfully struck at Syria twice, and Syria didn’t even try to retaliate. Why does the US have to take a stand for the norm against using CW, when the Israelis are perfectly capable of doing so. I get that Israel can never be viewed as a neutral party with Syria, they do have unrivaled ability to stand against the use of gas against civilians.

Item Three: The US ratified the Chemical Weapons Treaty. But Syria did not. In the same way that Israel didn’t sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Why do we expect Syria to abide by the former when we don’t require Israel to abide by the latter?

Item Four: A strike on Assad is likely to strengthen the Syrian rebels. Who are made up, increasingly, of a bunch of extremists with ties to al Qaeda. If we make it easier for the rebels to replace Assad, doesn’t that actually raise the likelihood terrorists will get Assad’s CW?

I’m glad the Administration has decided to go to Congress. But their argument is just as weak as it was.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

The Troodos Conundrum
by craig on August 31, 2013
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/08/the-troodos-conundrum/



The GCHQ listening post on Mount Troodos in Cyprus is arguably the most valued asset which the UK contributes to UK/US intelligence cooperation. The communications intercept agencies, GCHQ in the UK and NSA in the US, share all their intelligence reports (as do the CIA and MI6). Troodos is valued enormously by the NSA. It monitors all radio, satellite and microwave traffic across the Middle East, ranging from Egypt and Eastern Libya right through to the Caucasus. Even almost all landline telephone communication in this region is routed through microwave links at some stage, picked up on Troodos.

Troodos is highly effective – the jewel in the crown of British intelligence. Its capacity and efficiency, as well as its reach, is staggering. The US do not have their own comparable facility for the Middle East. I should state that I have actually been inside all of this facility and been fully briefed on its operations and capabilities, while I was head of the FCO Cyprus Section in the early 1990s. This is fact, not speculation.

It is therefore very strange, to say the least, that John Kerry claims to have access to communications intercepts of Syrian military and officials organising chemical weapons attacks, which intercepts were not available to the British Joint Intelligence Committee.

On one level the explanation is simple. The intercept evidence was provided to the USA by Mossad, according to my own well placed source in the Washington intelligence community. Intelligence provided by a third party is not automatically shared with the UK, and indeed Israel specifies it should not be.

But the inescapable question is this. Mossad have nothing comparable to the Troodos operation. The reported content of the conversations fits exactly with key tasking for Troodos, and would have tripped all the triggers. How can Troodos have missed this if Mossad got it? The only remote possibility is that all the conversations went on a purely landline route, on which Mossad have a physical wire tap, but that is very unlikely in a number of ways - not least nowadays the purely landline route.

Israel has repeatedly been involved in the Syrian civil war, carrying out a number of illegal bombings and missile strikes over many months. This absolutely illegal activity by Israel- which has killed a great many civilians, including children - has brought no condemnation at all from the West. Israel has now provided “intelligence” to the United States designed to allow the United States to join in with Israel’s bombing and missile campaign.

The answer to the Troodos Conundrum is simple. Troodos did not pick up the intercepts because they do not exist. Mossad fabricated them. John Kerry’s “evidence” is the shabbiest of tricks. More children may now be blown to pieces by massive American missile blasts. It is nothing to do with humanitarian intervention. It is, yet again, the USA acting at the behest of Israel.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Victor Ostrovsky, "The Other Side of Deception"


A Trojan was a special communication device that could be planted by naval commandos deep inside enemy territory. The device would act as a relay station for misleading transmissions made by the disinformation unit in the Mossad, called LAP, and intended to be received by American and British listening stations. Originating from an IDF navy ship out at sea, the prerecorded digital transmissions could be picked up only by the Trojan. The device would then rebroadcast the transmission on another frequency, one used for official business in the enemy country, at which point the transmission would finally be picked up by American ears in Britain.

The listeners would have no doubt they had intercepted a genuine communication, hence the name Trojan, reminiscent of the mythical Trojan horse. Further, the content of the messages, once deciphered, would confirm information from other intelligence sources, namely the Mossad. The only catch was that the Trojan itself would have to be located as close as possible to the normal origin of such transmissions, because of the sophisticated methods of triangulation the Americans and others would use to verify the source.

[Ed Stasiak]

> thinbluemime2

>
> As a nation of laws, it would be much better if the United States observed
international law instead
> of going it alone like a rogue state and bombing a foreign government as
punishment for allegedly

> breaking international law..

How 'bout the administration observes _American law_ and gets a
declaration of war from Congress?

In fact, something so serious as going to war, should only be declared by
a nation wide vote of the People.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

That's the ideal...follow the Constitution, but you know the Constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office has his Sunday morning talk show pundits already acknowledging he (Obama) is not obliged to follow the mandate of Congress even if Congress votes NO to a Syrian attack.

You can't have a theater-of-war without theater.

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/374185961594183680
https://twitter.com/attackerman/status/374156325212524544

[The Starmaker]

I don't know any Syrains. I don't anybody who hates Syrians or met one. Is it on the otherside of the planet?


If the Obama wants to go to war and have a popluar vote in the world, he should attack Israel. Who in the world would
be against that? Who?? Name one country!


Israel is not an ally of the United States. It is an enemy of the United States. Bomb Israel and you will have world peace.



The Starmaker


Don't forget the shelters...


you need to send u.s. troops to fire bomb all the shelters.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

You need to change your name to Adolf if you think a holocaust for Jewish babies is just.

The goal here is not to murder innocent people, but to promote peace and justice by calling out government officials when they do wrong.

[Dano]

"Ed Stasiak" wrote in message news:b7ccfax...@news.ezprovider.com...

==================================================

As a "Devil's advocate"...can you not EVER envision a scenario where a
president must act without assembling the Congress first...you know...those
clowns who can't agree if the sun is in the sky or not? Seems like a good
thing for enemies to NOT know.

[Ed Stasiak]

> Dano
> > Ed Stasiak

> >
> > In fact, something so serious as going to war, should only be declared
> > by a nation wide vote of the People.
>

> As a "Devil's advocate"...can you not EVER envision a scenario where a
> president must act without assembling the Congress first.

Syria isn't bombing Pearl Harbor and when the Japanese did,
FDR still went to Congress for a declaration of war.

Our system of government was set-up at the time when sending
a letter from Philadelphia to New York took a week on horseback,
but there is no reason in today's world why the People can't directly
decide for themselves to go to war or not (or other major issues).

[Dano]

"Ed Stasiak" wrote in message news:jvddfax...@news.ezprovider.com...

============================================

Well many claim that FDR and the government actually had forewarning of
Pearl Harbor but felt they wouldn't get that backing without such an attack
on us.

Just saying...

[The Starmaker]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S21tC-JxWXA


you don't know a thing about politics, do you thinbluemine? not a single thing. you think you do, but you don't! You don't.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

The Obama administration is using a time-tested pitch to get Congress to back military strikes in Syria: It will help protect Israel.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/white-house-congress-syria-protect-israel-96133.html


In an interview Sunday, radio giant Michael Savage defended his claim that Israel has been pushing U.S. President Barack Obama to attack Syria.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/savage-israels-hand-in-obama-speech/


“It would be a mistake to overplay the Israeli interest,” said Itamar Rabinovich, who was Israel’s ambassador to the United States and also its chief negotiator with Syria in the 1990s. “It’s bad for Israel that the average American gets it into his or her mind that boys are again sent to war for Israel. They have to be sent to war for America.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/world/middleeast/obamas-syria-decision-greeted-silently-by-israel.html?_r=0

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-obama-syria-iran-israel-20130902,0,5827.story



WASHINGTON -- President Obama’s strategy for winning congressional support for military strikes on Syria relies on two of lawmakers’ most powerful impulses: to challenge Iran and to protect Israel.

The issue is a sensitive one for Israel, because it doesn’t want to be seen as urging that U.S. troops be put in harm’s way for Israel’s protection. For that reason, the Israeli government can be expected to keep a low profile, and pro-Israel groups probably will want to avoid too prominent a role on the issue, said an official of one such group, who declined to be identified because his organization hasn't taken a public position.

Michael Hertzog of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy wrote in an analysis that “while Israel is taking care not to appear involved in the crisis, it quietly expects Washington to take meaningful action....

///

TimesofIsrael: Obama unleashes horror in Jerusalem http://dlvr.it/3tzYBd
2:07 PM - 1 Sep 13
https://twitter.com/RJCHQ/status/374277348528771072

It is now fearful that, in the end,

domestic politics or global diplomacy

will ultimately lead the US to hold its fire altogether.

[BTR1701]

In article <l014cj$a7j$1...@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the point that FDR went to
Congress for authorization before striking back.

[Adam H. Kerman]

BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>"Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>"Ed Stasiak" wrote:
>>Dano wrote:

>>>Ed Stasiak wrote:

>>>>In fact, something so serious as going to war, should only be declared
>>>>by a nation wide vote of the People.

>>>As a "Devil's advocate"...can you not EVER envision a scenario where a
>>>president must act without assembling the Congress first.

>>Syria isn't bombing Pearl Harbor and when the Japanese did,
>>FDR still went to Congress for a declaration of war.

>>Our system of government was set-up at the time when sending
>>a letter from Philadelphia to New York took a week on horseback,
>>but there is no reason in today's world why the People can't directly
>>decide for themselves to go to war or not (or other major issues).

>>============================================

>>Well many claim that FDR and the government actually had forewarning of
>>Pearl Harbor but felt they wouldn't get that backing without such an
>>attack on us.

>Which has absolutely nothing to do with the point that FDR went to
>Congress for authorization before striking back.

That was after the Japanese ambassador had advised that we weren't about
to be attacked, the worst diplomatic breach in all of history. War was never
declared against Germany, just Japan; Germany declared war on us. Really,
Congress didn't want to get into WWII and was desperate to stay out of it.
The enemies had to go to extraordinary lengths to force us into war.

People forget that we never declared war on Germany, so it's not like we
followed literal constitutional law in getting into WWII. FDR was illegally
smuggling aid to UK before our entry into WWII, despite Congress having
proclaimed neutrality by law.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Leader Cantor Statement on Syria and Regional Conflict
September 3, 2013
http://majorityleader.gov/blog/2013/09/leader-cantor-statement-on-syria-and-regional-conflict.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Cantor


"I intend to vote to provide the President of the United States the option to use military force in Syria.

“The Syrian conflict is not merely a civil war; it is a sectarian proxy war that is exacerbating tensions throughout the Muslim world. It is clear Iran is a principal combatant in this conflict, and its direct involvement is an integral part of Iran’s bid to establish regional hegemony. Were Assad and his Iranian patrons to come out on top it would be a strategic victory for Iran, embolden Hizballah, and convince our allies that we cannot be trusted.

“Furthermore, sectarian tensions and extremist terrorism are already spilling over beyond Syria's borders, with terrorist attacks and assassinations on the rise in neighboring countries. It is not just an abstract theory that the Syrian conflict threatens the stability of key American partners in the region. It is a reality.

---------------

mumble....humanitarian....mumble, reasons, blah blah, blah blah blah

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>

‘NYT’ deletes references to AIPAC’s role in pushing strike on Syria
Phil Weiss with Max Blumenthal and Annie Robbins on September 3, 2013
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/nyt-deletes-references-to-aipacs-role-in-pushing-strike-on-syria.html
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/rec.arts.tv/LSsTPlP3nbI



Last night MJ Rosenberg posted an excerpt from a New York Times article published yesterday about the White House’s efforts to convince Congress of the wisdom of a strike on Syria. The excerpt said the Israel lobby group AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) was pushing a strike so that the US would also stand up to Iran, and it quoted a White House official calling AIPAC the “800-pound gorilla in the room.”

Here’s the excerpt:

Administration officials said the influential pro-Israel lobby group Aipac was already at work pressing for military action against the government of Mr. Assad, fearing that if Syria escapes American retribution for its use of chemical weapons, Iran might be emboldened in the future to attack Israel. In the House, the majority leader, Eric Cantor of Virginia, the only Jewish Republican in Congress, has long worked to challenge Democrats’ traditional base among Jews.

One administration official, who, like others, declined to be identified discussing White House strategy, called Aipac “the 800-pound gorilla in the room,” and said its allies in Congress had to be saying, “If the White House is not capable of enforcing this red line” against the catastrophic use of chemical weapons, “we’re in trouble.”

Last night both Annie Robbins and Max Blumenthal followed Rosenberg’s link to the Times article, and noted that it had been changed. Robbins tweeted at 9 PM:

@MJayRosenberg @nytimes cut #aipac “the 800-pound gorilla in the room,” quote from article. no mention of aipac. they are ‘silent’!

Blumenthal sent out an email: “I am unable to find it anywhere on the Times’ website. What happened, and why has the New York Times not acknowledged replacing one article with another one in a matter of hours?”

MJ Rosenberg then did a post on the deletion.

This UK site shows 11 revisions of the Times article. Between Version 5 and 6, it lost the 800-pound gorilla and AIPAC’s role in pushing an attack on Syria.

Blumenthal asks, “I have never witnessed anything like this before. Is it standard practice for online New York Times reports to be scrubbed from existence and replaced with revised, updated articles containing different content? And if so, why was the replacement not acknowledged somewhere in the text of the article?”

The Times’s Robert Mackey has defended the deletion. On twitter, he says that many articles morph on the Times website in the internet age. He points readers to the original version of the article, on the Times website. Titled “President Seeks to Rally Support for Syria Strike,” it is bylined Michael Gordon and Jackie Calmes and includes the 800-pound gorilla quote and the direct reference to AIPAC’s push for war.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Marshall Wittmann, mwit...@aipac.org

September 3, 2013

AIPAC STATEMENT ON SYRIA RESOLUTION
http://www.aipac.org/resources/aipac-publications/publication?pubpath=PolicyPolitics/Press/AIPAC%20Statements/2013/08/AIPAC%20STATEMENT%20ON%20SYRIA%20RESOLUTION
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.arts.tv/8atLN_SLP20



AIPAC urges Congress to grant the President the authority he has requested to protect America’s national security interests and dissuade the Syrian regime's further use of unconventional weapons. The civilized world cannot tolerate the use of these barbaric weapons, particularly against an innocent civilian population including hundreds of children.

Simply put, barbarism on a mass scale must not be given a free pass.

This is a critical moment when America must also send a forceful message of resolve to Iran and Hezbollah -- both of whom have provided direct and extensive military support to Assad. The Syrian regime and its Iranian ally have repeatedly demonstrated that they will not respect civilized norms. That is why America must act, and why we must prevent further proliferation of unconventional weapons in this region.

America's allies and adversaries are closely watching the outcome of this momentous vote. This critical decision comes at a time when Iran is racing toward obtaining nuclear capability. Failure to approve this resolution would weaken our country's credibility to prevent the use and proliferation of unconventional weapons and thereby greatly endanger our country’s security and interests and those of our regional allies. AIPAC maintains that it is imperative to adopt the resolution to authorize the use of force, and take a firm stand that the world’s most dangerous regimes cannot obtain and use the most dangerous weapons.


Consistently ranked as the most influential foreign policy lobbying organization on Capitol Hill, AIPAC is a bipartisan American membership organization that seeks to strengthen the relationship between the United States and Israel. For more than 50 years, AIPAC has been working with Congress to build a strong, vibrant relationship between the U.S. and Israel. With more than 100,000 members across the United States, AIPAC works throughout the country to improve and strengthen that relationship by supporting U.S.-Israel military, economic, scientific and cultural cooperation.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/asia/israel/flag/Flagbig.GIF




Pro-Israel groups publicly back U.S. action in Syria
By Patricia Zengerle WASHINGTON | Tue Sep 3, 2013
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/03/us-syria-crisis-usa-israel-idUSBRE98213V20130903


(Reuters) - Three influential pro-Israel groups urged U.S. lawmakers on Tuesday to authorize President Barack Obama to launch an attack on Syria, signaling a stepped-up lobbying effort for American military action.

The statements by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) represented the groups' most public show of support for U.S. military action since the August 21 attack near Damascus in which Syria's government is accused of using chemical weapons to kill more than 1,400 people.

During the past two weeks, the groups had been unusually quiet as the Obama administration sought to build a case for limited strikes against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government.

Supporters of the groups and government sources acknowledged that the groups had made it known that they supported U.S. action. But, the sources said, the groups generally want the debate to focus on U.S. national security rather than how a decision to attack Syria might help Israel - a reflection of their sensitivity to being seen as rooting for the United States to go to war.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Just one example how the Israel Lobby works to influence public opinion to support the attack on Syria:

///

How Concerns For Israel's Security Enters Into Sryria Plan
September 04, 2013 4:00 AM
http://www.npr.org/2013/09/04/218811161/how-much-does-israeli-security-enter-into-u-s-decision-on-syria

Renee Montagne talks to analyst David Makovsky of The *Washington Institute for Near East Policy* about the degree to which concern for Israel is shaping the Obama administration's thinking on Syria.

///

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Institute_for_Near_East_Policy#Criticism

John Mearsheimer, a University of Chicago political science professor, and Stephen Walt, academic dean at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, describe it as "part of the core" of the Israel lobby in the United States.[17] Discussing the group in their book, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, Mearsheimer and Walt write: "Although WINEP plays down its links to Israel and claims that it provides a 'balanced and realistic' perspective on Middle East issues, this is not the case. In fact, WINEP is funded and run by individuals who are deeply committed to advancing Israel’s agenda … Many of its personnel are genuine scholars or experienced former officials, but they are hardly neutral observers on most Middle East issues and there is little diversity of views within WINEP’s ranks

[Mason Barge]

Have we had an actual declaration of war since WW2?

[The Starmaker]

If Obama needed authorization to attack Israel he would get it in a New York Minute. What country in the world would be againt it? Name one country!


one. just one! name one!!


But, attacking Israel would be differcult...because everyone runs
to the shelters and those shelters have gas masks.

At least 60 percent Israel people have shelters....that's too many. What country you know have that many shelters for theri people?


They...being Israel must be expecting an attack....well of course if you're goal is to start World War Three!!!






"We must be in a position to respond to every act of opposition
by war with the neighbors of that country which dares to oppose us:
but if these neighbors should also venture to stand collectively
together against us, then we must offer resistance by a universal
war." -Israel's foreign policy


The Starmaker



a universal war.



Hey, i'm gettin political!! i'm turning into a thinbluemime!!!


60 percent is a lot of firebombings...you cannot let those roaches get away.

[David Johnston]

What constitutes an actual declaration of war?

[Adam H. Kerman]

David Johnston <Da...@block.net> wrote:
>On 9/4/2013 11:26 AM, Mason Barge wrote:
>>On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 09:39:23 -0700, BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>"Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>"Ed Stasiak" wrote in message news:jvddfax...@news.ezprovider.com...

>>>>>Dano wrote:

>>>>>>Ed Stasiak wrote:

>>>>>>In fact, something so serious as going to war, should only be declared
>>>>>>by a nation wide vote of the People.

>>>>>As a "Devil's advocate"...can you not EVER envision a scenario where a
>>>>>president must act without assembling the Congress first.

>>>>Syria isn't bombing Pearl Harbor and when the Japanese did,
>>>>FDR still went to Congress for a declaration of war.

>>>>Our system of government was set-up at the time when sending
>>>>a letter from Philadelphia to New York took a week on horseback,
>>>>but there is no reason in today's world why the People can't directly
>>>>decide for themselves to go to war or not (or other major issues).

>>>>============================================

>>>>Well many claim that FDR and the government actually had forewarning of
>>>>Pearl Harbor but felt they wouldn't get that backing without such an
>>>>attack on us.

>>>Which has absolutely nothing to do with the point that FDR went to
>>>Congress for authorization before striking back.

>>Have we had an actual declaration of war since WW2?

>What constitutes an actual declaration of war?

Legislation invoking the war power of Congress:

Constitution of the United States

Article I Section 8

The Congress shall have Power . . .

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and
make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 4, 2013 6:39:28 PM UTC+1, The Starmaker wrote:
> thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know


>

> If Obama needed authorization to attack Israel he would get it in a New York Minute. What country in the world would be againt it? Name one country!
>
>
> one. just one! name one!!
>
>
> But, attacking Israel would be differcult...because everyone runs
> to the shelters and those shelters have gas masks.
>
> At least 60 percent Israel people have shelters....that's too many. What country you know have that many shelters for theri people?
>
>
> They...being Israel must be expecting an attack....well of course if you're goal is to start World War Three!!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "We must be in a position to respond to every act of opposition
> by war with the neighbors of that country which dares to oppose us:
> but if these neighbors should also venture to stand collectively
> together against us, then we must offer resistance by a universal
> war." -Israel's foreign policy
>
>
> The Starmaker
>
>
>
> a universal war.
>
>
>
> Hey, i'm gettin political!! i'm turning into a thinbluemime!!!
>
>
> 60 percent is a lot of firebombings...you cannot let those roaches get away.

Submitted for your approval...


Karen Armstrong: How to deal with "roaches"
http://www.ted.com/talks/karen_armstrong_makes_her_ted_prize_wish_the_charter_for_compassion.html

[anim8rFSK]

In article <n8re291is3ipob2b9...@4ax.com>,

Not a formal one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States
I didn't know we'd declared war against Romania. One pictures vampires
versus GIs ...

--
Wait - are you saying that ClodReamer was wrong, or lying?

[The Starmaker]

don't you have your own opinions?

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

Are you opposed to an Other point of view?

[The Starmaker]

I'm a soldier...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtQucipCzW8

it's how you do things...

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

EXCLUSIVE: House Staffer Tells Me What AIPAC Is Doing
MJ Rosenberg September 4, 2013
http://mjayrosenberg.com/2013/09/04/exclusive-house-staffer-tells-me-what-aipac-is-doing/



...So what does AIPAC pressure feel like? How does it work?

I called a friend who is a foreign policy aide to a House member and, after I promised not to identify him in any form, he told me this.

First come the phone calls from constituents who are AIPAC members. They know the Congressman and are nice and friendly and just tell him, or whichever staffer the constituent knows, just how important this vote is to him and his friends back in the district.

Then the donors call. The folks who have hosted fundraisers. They are usually not only from the district but from New York or LA or Chicago. They repeat the message: this vote is very important.

Contrary to what you might expect, they do not mention campaign money. They don’t have to. Because these callers are people who only know the Congressman through their checks, the threat not to write any more of them is implicit. Like the constituents, the donors are using AIPAC talking points which are simple and forceful. You can argue with them but they keep going back to the script. Did I mention the rabbis? We only have a few in our district but we get calls from all of them and from other rabbis from around the state.

Then there are the AIPAC lobbyists, the professional staffers. They come in, with or without appointments. If the Congressman is in, they expect to see him immediately. If not, they will see a staffer. If they don’t like what they hear, they will keep coming back. They are very aggressive, no other lobby comes close, They expect to see the Member, not mere staff.

Then there are the emails driven by the AIPAC website, the editorials in the one Jewish newspaper we have in our state. And then the “Dear Colleague” letters from Jewish House members saying how important the vote is for Israel and America. They also will buttonhole the Members on the House floor. Because my boss is not Jewish, he tends to defer to his Jewish colleagues. It is like they are the experts on this. And, truth be told, all the senior Jewish Members of the House are tight with AIPAC. Also, the two biggest AIPAC enforcers, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and his Democatic counterpart, Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, are fierce AIPAC partisans, and they make sure to seek out Members on the floor to tell them how they must vote. On anything related to Israel, they speak in one voice: AIPAC’s.

My friend concluded:

Obviously, there is no counterpart to this on the antiwar side. No anti-AIPAC to speak of. AIPAC owns this issue. It gets what it wants. It will get this and, sad to say, my boss, who hates the idea of using more war as a means to end war, will probably vote “yes.” He says he will never support an attack on Iran but, when the time comes, this Syria push will look like nothing. Syria is just a tactic for AIPAC. But its #1 goal, at least from the vantage point of Capitol Hill, is war with Iran.

Yeah, it’s scary.

[The Starmaker]

isn't that what i'm asking you?

[Mason Barge]

On Wed, 04 Sep 2013 11:55:41 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
wrote:

Both houses of Congress pass bills that say "we declare war on X". I
suppose "formal" might be a more precise word than "actual".

[Adam H. Kerman]

Er, both houses would have to pass the same bill.

[Steve Bartman]

On Wed, 04 Sep 2013 18:58:17 -0400, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com>
wrote:

There has been no declaration of war since WWII. This gradual
assumption on an "everyone knows" basis that Congress has to grant the
president authority to use the military is constitutionally
interesting.

Steve

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

Hassan Rouhani
@HassanRouhani

As the sun is about to set here in #Tehran I wish all Jews, especially Iranian Jews, a blessed Rosh Hashanah. pic.twitter.com/tmaf84x7UR
8:27 AM - 4 Sep 13

https://twitter.com/HassanRouhani/status/375278962718412800/photo/1

[The Starmaker]

'They should live so long?'


Perfect day for a second Holocaust....God willing.



The Starmaker

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

These Aren't The Jewss You're Looking For

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>

> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Rep. Alan Grayson: Syria Intelligence Manipulated
Steven Nelson September 5, 2013
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/09/05/alan-grayson-syria-intelligence-manipulated




Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., who is aggressively lobbying against a military strike on Syria, says the Obama administration has manipulated intelligence to push its case for U.S. involvement in the country's two-year civil war.

Grayson made the accusation in an interview published Wednesday by The Atlantic and offered more detail in a Thursday discussion with U.S. News. He says members of Congress are being given intelligence briefings without any evidence to support administration claims that Syrian leader Bashar Assad ordered the use of chemical weapons.

Grayson said he cannot discuss the classified briefings, but noted details in the administration's public, non-classified report are being contested.

The White House released its four-page public report Aug. 30, arguing that Assad's government killed 1,429 people on Aug. 21 with a planned chemical weapon attack. Evidence cited in that report included "intercepted communications involving a senior official intimately familiar with the offensive who confirmed that chemical weapons were used."

Grayson, however, says "the claim has been made that that information was completely mischaracterized."

He points to an article published by The Daily Caller that alleges the communications actually showed Syrian officers were surprised by the alleged chemical weapon attack. The communications, according to unnamed sources paraphrased in article, were intercepted by Israeli intelligence and "doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion."

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

http://www.ips-dc.org/files/4406/ObamaAIPAC.jpg


AIPAC to go all-out on Syria
By MANU RAJU | 9/5/13
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/aipac-syria-96344.html


The powerful pro-Israel lobby AIPAC is planning to launch a major lobbying campaign to push wayward lawmakers to back the resolution authorizing U.S. strikes against Syria, sources said Thursday.

Officials say that some 250 Jewish leaders and AIPAC activists will storm the halls on Capitol Hill beginning next week to persuade lawmakers that Congress must adopt the resolution or risk emboldening Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear weapon. They are expected to lobby virtually every member of Congress, arguing that “barbarism” by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated, and that failing to act would “send a message” to Tehran that the U.S. won’t stand up to hostile countries’ efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction, according to a source with the group.

“History tells us that ambiguity [in U.S. actions] invites aggression,” said the AIPAC source who asked not to be named. The source added the group will now be engaged in a “major mobilization” over the issue.

[The Starmaker]

thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
> >
> >
> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
> >
> > Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> > http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
> >
> >
> > ///
> >
> >
> > Full Text Of Speeches:
> >
> >
> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
> >
> > Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
> >
>
> http://www.ips-dc.org/files/4406/ObamaAIPAC.jpg
>
> AIPAC to go all-out on Syria
> By MANU RAJU | 9/5/13
> http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/aipac-syria-96344.html
>
> The powerful pro-Israel lobby AIPAC is planning to launch a major lobbying campaign to push wayward lawmakers to back the resolution authorizing U.S. strikes against Syria, sources said Thursday.
>
> Officials say that some 250 Jewish leaders and AIPAC activists will storm the halls on Capitol Hill beginning next week to persuade lawmakers that Congress must adopt the resolution or risk emboldening Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear weapon. They are expected to lobby virtually every member of Congress, arguing that “barbarism” by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated, and that failing to act would “send a message” to Tehran that the U.S. won’t stand up to hostile countries’ efforts to develop
>

> “History tells us that ambiguity [in U.S. actions] invites aggression,” said the AIPAC source who asked not to be named. The source added the group will now be engaged in a “major mobilization” over the issue.

You mean Israel want to buy a war? We can sell them the popcorn...

Israel loves to watch Americans soldiers loose their legs and arms.


They think, "Better you than me, SUCKERS!"



The Starmaker



Has an Israelie soldier ever been wounded in combat? I don't think they know what 'combat' is...a TV show maybe.



These guys are scary looking...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-VzAWJ1yK4#t=66

you slap one and they all cry

[Ed Stasiak]

> The Starmaker
> > thinbluemime2

> >
> > The powerful pro-Israel lobby AIPAC is planning to launch a major lobbying
campaign
> > to push wayward lawmakers to back the resolution authorizing U.S. strikes
against Syria,
> > sources said Thursday.
>

> Israel loves to watch Americans soldiers loose their legs and arms.

Seems that some in the U.S. military are seeing the light;

http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2013/09/02/404289.jpg

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>

A Congressional veto of Obama on Syria would harm Israel and its supporters
Chemi Shalev | Sep. 6, 2013
http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.545616
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.arts.tv/VJ7Ni7IamB4


...it’s true that AIPAC and Jewish groups have steered clear of mentioning Israel as a reason for America to attack Syria, citing the need to maintain America’s stature in the world and to make sure that “barbarism on such a mass scale is not given a free pass”. That doesn’t diminish, of course, the absolute identification of Israel with the lobby that carries its name and the fallout that both would suffer if Congress rejects their claims.

The Administration, in any case, has publicly and prominently placed the welfare of Israel and the deterrence of Iran high on the list of factors that mandate an attack against Damascus. Secretary of State John Kerry has gone even further, comparing inaction against the Syrian regime to American and international inaction in the face of the Jewish Holocaust in Europe. It may be unclear how this line is playing out in Peoria or Topeka, but it has certainly stirred Jewish sentiments and strengthened the hand of those who had urged the community to end its self-imposed vow of silence and to come out swinging in favor of the Administration.

Indeed, for most Jewish leaders, as well as for the overwhelming majority of Israeli decision-makers, the argument for a military strike against Syria and against a Congressional veto is almost a no-brainer. Israelis may have viewed Obama’s hesitation to respond immediately to the August 21 attacks and his decision to seek Congressional approval as a sign of weakness, but most agree now that a Congressional veto that would scuttle an American attack would wreak untold damage on America’s power of deterrence, in the region and towards Iran in particular, and thus undermine Israel’s national security as well.

It is no wonder, therefore, that a lobby and an American Jewish establishment that purports to support Israel would step up to the plate at such a critical time, though one may question the tactical wisdom of moving so directly and abruptly from total silence to “going all out”, as the Jewish organizations did just a few days ago.

A defeat for the Administration could turn into a significant and potentially negative milestone for Israel and its lobby as well, not only in Congress and the media, but with the American public as well.

It is public opinion, after all, that is said be driving members of Congress against a Syrian attack: Americans are turning away from being “the world’s policeman” but in the process, even if unintentionally, they may be turning their backs on Israel as well.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Obama Warned on Syrian Intel
September 6, 2013
http://consortiumnews.com/2013/09/06/obama-warned-on-syrian-intel/
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.arts.tv/38g-eal7OW8


Cui bono?

That the various groups trying to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have ample incentive to get the U.S. more deeply involved in support of that effort is clear. Until now, it has not been quite as clear that the Netanyahu government in Israel has equally powerful incentive to get Washington more deeply engaged in yet another war in the area. But with outspoken urging coming from Israel and those Americans who lobby for Israeli interests, this priority Israeli objective is becoming crystal clear.

Reporter Judi Rudoren, writing from Jerusalem in an important article in Friday’s New York Times addresses Israeli motivation in an uncommonly candid way. Her article, titled “Israel Backs Limited Strike Against Syria,” notes that the Israelis have argued, quietly, that the best outcome for Syria’s two-and-a-half-year-old civil war, at least for the moment, is no outcome. Rudoren continues:

“For Jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective, seems preferable to either a victory by Mr. Assad’s government and his Iranian backers or a strengthening of rebel groups, increasingly dominated by Sunni jihadis.

“‘This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don’t want one to win — we’ll settle for a tie,’ said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. ‘Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that’s the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there’s no real threat from Syria.’”

We think this is the way Israel’s current leaders look at the situation in Syria, and that deeper U.S. involvement – albeit, initially, by “limited” military strikes – is likely to ensure that there is no early resolution of the conflict in Syria. The longer Sunni and Shia are at each other’s throats in Syria and in the wider region, the safer Israel calculates that it is.

That Syria’s main ally is Iran, with whom it has a mutual defense treaty, also plays a role in Israeli calculations. Iran’s leaders are not likely to be able to have much military impact in Syria, and Israel can highlight that as an embarrassment for Tehran.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Bob Schieffer makes a bold Joe Biden fashion statement
CBS News Charlie Rose interview
http://postimg.org/image/ec9dkkn05/

--------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tpqj5ImY0is
Sunday 2013-09-08

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>

> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo



Will there be fallout from the NSA sharing intel with Israel?
Ahmed Moor on September 11, 2013
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/will-there-be-fallout-from-the-nsa-sharing-intel-with-israel.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-personal-data-israel-documents


It’s easy to make hyperbolic statements about the thorough infiltration of American policy-making by agents of Israel. It’s easy to claim things like: Capitol Hill is Israeli-occupied territory. Or, Zionists qualify or disqualify Americans from holding high office or public positions of power in America.

Over time however, the very agents whose existence is assumed to be rendered only in the minds of conspiracy theorists, anti-Semites, kooks and wackos have validated at least some of those hyperbolic, overwrought theses. The pipeline American war on Syria illustrates the point. John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt claimed that an Israel lobby functions to impact American foreign policy in ways that other lobbies like the NRA do. They were smeared by an array of Zionists from either end of the (admittedly narrow) “Go Israel!” spectrum.

Then Barack Obama walked himself down a damp, fetid hole. When he turned to look he found the rest of the country camped on higher ground. So he called Benjamin Netanyahu to ask for help in whipping Congress – into a martial frenzy. Lobbyists descended by the hundreds to push everyone else into the mire… But still, the Israel lobby is a construct erected in the minds of the feeble by a pair of wonky anti-Semites.

_______

A week ago, it would have been wildly inappropriate to claim that the American spy (and “Stasi“) agency, the NSA, was treasonously spying on Americans on behalf of Israel. Besides being inappropriate, it would have been unbelievable. Literally unbelievable.

Yet, the Guardian claims that the NSA collects information on the American people and American politicians and that it provides that information – uncurated, untreated and unviewed – to the Israelis. And with no meaningful controls on how that information is used:

The memorandum of understanding, which the Guardian is publishing in full, allows Israel to retain “any files containing the identities of US persons” for up to a year. The agreement requests only that the Israelis should consult the NSA’s special liaison adviser when such data is found.

Notably, a much stricter rule was set for US government communications found in the raw intelligence. The Israelis were required to “destroy upon recognition” any communication “that is either to or from an official of the US government”. Such communications included those of “officials of the executive branch (including the White House, cabinet departments, and independent agencies), the US House of Representatives and Senate (member and staff) and the US federal court system (including, but not limited to, the supreme court)”.

It should be noted at this point that Israelis are not Americans. They are Israelis. Which is to say they are not Americans.

So now important questions need to be asked. Nixon was impeached for spying on politicians and lying about it. Obama appears to have spied on other politicians (and regular people – but that’s nothing to be outraged over) – for another country’s politicians! So what? Does it mean anything?

It’s not hyperbolic to claim that the Israelis control a great deal of information and are capable of whipping Congress. It’s a settled fact. But so what? Do Americans care? Does it mean anything? Will ordinary Americans rise up? Will Representatives Justin Amash and Rand Paul be the only elected officials to speak out? Will things change?

They might. But they might not. Open secrets sometimes suppurate and fester in the heat. Weeds thrive in the sunlight

------------

OT: The Hypocrisy of the United States
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/QUesqH-33Zw/vRplhiajjToJ

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Obama’s Almost First Act in Office: Spy on Americans for Israel!
Scott McConnell • September 12, 2013, 2:10 AM
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/obamas-almost-first-act-in-office-spy-on-americans-for-israel/


The Guardian (relying on Edward Snowden’s revelations) reports that the NSA agreed in March 2009 to routinely share its eavesdropping information on American citizens with Israeli intelligence.

I know people who are unsurprised by this—knowledgeable as they are about the degree of subservience of the United States towards Israel. I am surprised. Actually I’m shocked.

When Snowden’s revelations came out, I wasn’t as blown away as many of my libertarian-leaning colleagues were. I’ve long sort of assumed the US government spied on its citizens, heard some pretty clear hints on that score in the 1990s from a former aide to a highly trusted European ally. And I must admit, I wasn’t that alarmed. I wasn’t one of those who said, “So what, I’ve got nothing to hide.” But in a pretty long life, I’ve known enough American officials, in the CIA or FBI or State Department or whatever, to not especially fear them. I’d say the same thing about New York cops, troubling as I find many aspects the NYPD’s program of spying on New York City’s Muslims.

When push comes to shove, almost all such officials at the higher levels understand the Constitution, understand that political dissent is tolerated in America, even welcomed, etc. Granted, perhaps if I wasn’t a fairly conservative, law-abiding, white male I wouldn’t feel this way. But when America goes wrong it still seems to me an aberration, not the norm.

Giving up personal eavesdropped information of American citizens to Israel is an entirely different matter. Israeli for no good reason has created for itself a “legitimacy crisis.” Not content to live by international law and on the territory most everyone agrees is rightfully theirs, Israelis have managed to persuade themselves that everyone who opposes their subjugation of the Palestinians is an “enemy” seeking to “destroy” Israel. And understandably it sees such enemies in the most dire and exaggerated terms, terms colored by the tragic history of European Jewry.

And so no, I have no confidence that Israel would treat my personal or financial information with the same prudence that an American spy agency would. And I ask why the hell is the American government giving it to them.

I suppose this explains at least in part why Obama so lost his cool about Edward Snowden, a whistleblower many of Obama’s supporters thought he might have welcomed and embraced.

The ugly truth we now know is that two months after assuming office, Obama or an underling acting in Obama’s name signed an agreement to transfer Americans’ personal and private information to Israel. I am shocked and appalled, disgusted beyond measure.

I’ve known for a long time about elite Beltway deference to Israel. For decades, top American officials have acted almost as if they can’t think for themselves, they see everything in the Mideast through the optic of whether it is “good for Israel.” But this is different than that, and worse.

The Americans in Israel’s camp at least think that “what’s good for Israel is good for America”—or at least so they proclaim, publicly. But no one can imagine that feeding Israel eavesdropped information on Americans is good for those Americans—that’s why this ugly program has been kept secret.

We have Edward Snowden to thank, otherwise we might never have known how far the rot has gone.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>

> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Jeez — is Hagel’s tie supposed to look like the Israeli flag?
Philip Weiss on November 1, 2013
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/11/hagels-supposed-israeli.html


Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel walks back just about every critical word he’s ever said about Israel and the lobby, in an address to the Anti Defamation League centennial gathering. He’s even wearing a white tie with blue stripes. Egad. And notice that he speaks of the Iran threat in the context of Yad Vashem, and the Holocaust, echoing Israeli fears. I assume this is tactical– we’re not going to attack Iran– but it’s still upsetting. Excerpts:

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the Middle East, where the United States and our allies are facing an unprecedented set of complex challenges.

For Israel, this shifting landscape has brought new threats and new dynamics. Even as Israel takes important steps toward peace and the two-state solution, these challenges remain on its borders. There are no margins for Israel.

Egypt’s future remains uncertain. There is a humanitarian crisis in Syria, along with disease and hunger compounding the scourge of sectarian violence and civil war. These challenges demand unprecedented cooperation between the United States and Israel.

Israel’s self-defense capabilities and its qualitative military edge are central to both Israel and U.S. security interests. The United States has provided important support for Israel’s Iron Dome system, which has proven very successful in protecting Israeli citizens.

And earlier this year, the United States reached a historic agreement, an agreement to open up even more advanced military capabilities to Israel. One of these capabilities is the V-22 Osprey, a tilt-rotor aircraft that will greatly enhance the range and effectiveness of Israeli special forces.

Tonight, I am pleased to announce that we are working with the Israeli government to provide them with six new V-22s. I have directed the Marine Corps to make sure that this order is expedited. That means Israel will get six V-22s out of the next order to go on the assembly line, and they will be compatible with other IDF capabilities.

The Israeli and American defense relationship is stronger than ever. That isn’t due just to where I am at my time. That’s due to previous secretaries of defense., Panetta, Gates, all the previous secretaries, this organization, the American people, our Congress, past presidents – we’ve all worked together to strengthen this relationship.

Another area of our common security interests is preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

The United States is presently testing Iranian intentions for a diplomatic solution. As we engage Iran along with our partners, we are very clear-eyed about the reality in the Middle East. Iran is a state sponsor of terror, responsible for spreading hatred and extremism throughout the region.

But foreign policy is not a zero-sum game. If we can find ways to resolve disputes peacefully, we are wise to explore them.

Engagement is not appeasement, nor is it containment. We know what those are, we know where they lead, and we will not pursue them.

And President Obama has repeatedly made clear that words are not enough. Action must match words.

We understand why this is so important to so many people. Because we’ve all been to Yad Vashem.

Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to revisit Yad Vashem. I had been there before, but this time was special for, because I brought my son, Ziller, with me. I wanted him to see the harsh realities of the depths of evil, and the beautiful tribute to the victims of the past. Yad Vashem is an instruction for future generations – like all great memorials. A warning to never ever again stand idly by in the face of hatred and bigotry.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J


The Mondoweiss Guide to Accessorizing for Israel
Katie Miranda on November 20, 2013
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/11/mondoweiss-accessorizing-israel.html#13849680820153&event=close



http://f8wee1vvia32pdxo527grujy61.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/accessorize.png


About Katie Miranda

Katie Miranda is an illustrator, jewelry designer, and cartoonist living in Oakland, CA. She is currently working on a graphic novel called "Tear Gas in the Morning" which is a memoir about the nonviolent resistance movement in Palestine. Visit katiemiranda.com to learn more. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/katiemiranda.bazaarkhalil Twitter: @KatieMirandaArt

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Hersh: Obama "Cherry-Picked" Intelligence to Justify Assad Strike
Max Rivlin-Nadler on GawkerSyria 2013-12-08
http://gawker.com/hersh-obama-cherry-picked-intelligence-to-justify-as-1479093293
http://www.lrb.co.uk/2013/12/08/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin




Seymour Hersh, one of the best-sourced journalists in America, reports that the Obama administration "cherry-picked" intelligence to justify an attack on the Assad regime, ignoring reports that the sarin gas attack on civilians last August could have been carried out by a fundamentalist rebel group instead.

Writing in the London Review of Books, Hersh explains that various sources in the intelligence community have told him that the Obama administration knowingly ignored valuable intelligence, and even altered past intelligence reports, while moving unilaterally forward with a plan to topple the Assad regime.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

Secretary of State John Kerry urged the Syrian opposition on Thursday to attend next week's peace conference in Switzerland.

The opposition groups say it should lead to a transitional government that would see Syrian President Bashar Assad step down.

The government rejects the demand and says Assad may run for re-election.

WASHINGTON January 16, 2014 (AP)
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/kerry-urges-opposition-attend-syrian-conference-21560652

http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/01/219915.htm

------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXdO4onI4AU

[thinbluemime2]

On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:49:09 -0500, <thinbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>>
>>
>> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>>
>> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>>

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXdO4onI4AU


28 December 2006, Senators Chris Dodd and Kerry had wide ranging
discussions with Assad in Damascus that focused on Iraq, Lebanon, and the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict according to US State Department cables
obtained by WikiLeaks [#06DAMASCUS5447, #06DAMASCUS5448 ]. They were there
following the recommendation of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group Report
on the situation in Iraq that had been released on 6 December 2006 and
recommended that the US move from the Bush policy of isolation towards
Iran and Syria to one of engagement. The Israeli news outlet Haaretz told
of the report’s recommendations with regards to Syria:

In relation to Israel, the Baker-Hamilton panel is recommending talks
along two main axes: Syria-Lebanon and the Palestinians.The committee sets
the conditions Damascus must fulfill to be considered an effective
interlocutor, some of which are similar to those posed by the Bush
administration to the Assad regime in exchange for dialogue.

The U.S. continues to demand that Syria avoid interference in Lebanon’s
domestic affairs; that it cooperate in the investigation of the murder of
former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri; that it cease all assistance
to Hezbollah and undertake efforts to persuade Hamas to recognize Israel’s
right to exist.

At the same time, the panel concludes that Israel must return the Golan
Heights to Syria as part of a peace treaty, and says that in exchange
Israel will be granted security guarantees from the United States on this
front.

This report was widely praised by many leading Democrats, including
Speaker of the House designate Nancy Pelosi and Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN)
and a number of Republicans including Senators Chuck Hagel and Susan
Collins, but the neocons hated it, the conservatives criticized it and
President Bush ultimately rejected it’s recommendations, including direct
talks with Iran and Syria, instead opting for escalation in Iraq and
isolating Iran and Syria.

The Democrats had already taken back Congress but Bush was still in the
driver’s seat with regards to foreign policy. Most objective Middle East
observers could already see that his attempt to isolate Syria along with
Iran was a dismal failure and was even undermining the goal that most of
them agreed on: isolating Iran. While the Bush sanctions were hurting the
Syrian economy, they weren’t creating a situation that threatened the
regime’s grip on power. With Assad’s close alliance with Iran and through
his influence with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, both of which
had headquarters in Damascus, Assad made himself the indispensable player
in any Middle East peace plan.


http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=2442

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
>
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>

> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
>
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

New analysis of rocket used in Syria chemical attack undercuts U.S. claims
Matthew Schofield January 15, 2014
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/01/15/214656/new-analysis-of-rocket-used-in.html


A new study suggests the U.S. intelligence assessments of the August 2013 chemical weapons attack outside Damascus, Syria, were flawed. The study says the design of rocket used in the attack, its likely payload and its possible trajectories show that it would have been impossible for the rocket to have been fired from inside areas controlled by the Syrian government.

In the report, titled “Possible Implications of Faulty U.S. Technical Intelligence,” Richard Lloyd, a former United Nations weapons inspector, and Theodore Postol, a professor of science, technology and national security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, argue that the question about the rocket’s range indicates a major weakness in the case for military action initially pressed by Obama administration officials.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
>
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
>
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
>
>
>

> ///

>
>
>
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
>
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
>
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

> Eliminator - ZZ Top
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

On Aug. 30, in a speech pressing for war, Kerry declared, 35 times, that "we know" that the chemical attack was launched by the Syrian government. But the "evidence" that he provided at the time boiled down to "trust us."

The quieting of the war drums infuriated the neocons - and their fury has flared up periodically since then, even as the case against Assad as the guilty party in the Sarin attack crumbled.

The evidence piling up over the past several months has included two impressive investigative reports by Pulitzer Prize-winner journalist Seymour Hersh describing doubts within the U.S. intelligence community about Syria's guilt and citing sources pointing the finger at Turkey and the rebels.






WPost Seeks US-Patrolled 'Safe Zone' in Syria
May 25, 2014 By Ray McGovern
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/05/25/wpost-seeks-us-patrolled-safe-zone-in-syria/


Exclusive: Neocons never blush at their own hypocrisies, demanding Russia respect international law and do nothing to protect eastern Ukrainians, while demanding President Obama ignore international law and create a rebel "safe zone" in Syria, writes ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.




The Israeli Factor

But why should Washington care so much about sponsoring another "regime change" in the Middle East, especially given the disastrous results in Iraq and Libya? It is rather simple: Because Israel cares about preventing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from prevailing.

Indeed, I define a neocon as one who has difficulty distinguishing between the national interests of Israel, on the one hand, and those of the United States, on the other. At this point, one would have to be blind not to see that the State Department continues to be dominated by neocon thinking.

Who profits from the turmoil in Syria and, specifically, the prospect of deeper U.S. involvement? Obviously, the various groups trying to overthrow Assad have a strong incentive to draw in the U.S. So, do the Saudis who are seeing their major investment in ousting Assad fall apart. And Assad is an ally of their regional enemy, Iran.

Over the past year or so, it also has become clear that the Netanyahu government in Israel continues to have a powerful incentive to get Washington more deeply engaged in yet another war in the area. This Israeli priority, also driven by Israel's view of Iran as its primary enemy, has been manifested in many ways.

A report on Sept. 6, 2013, by the New York Times' Judi Rudoren, writing from Jerusalem, addressed Israel's thinking in an uncommonly candid way. Her article, titled "Israel Backs Limited Strike Against Syria," noted that the Israelis have argued, quietly, that the best outcome for Syria's civil war, at least for the moment, is no outcome. Rudoren wrote:

"For Jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective, seems preferable to either a victory by Mr. Assad's government and his Iranian backers or a strengthening of rebel groups, increasingly dominated by Sunni jihadis.

"'This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don't want one to win -- we'll settle for a tie,' said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. 'Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that's the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there's no real threat from Syria.'"

Later in September, then-Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren told the Jerusalem Post that if Israel did have to pick a winner, it would prefer the jihadis over Assad. "The greatest danger to Israel is by the strategic arc that extends from Tehran, to Damascus to Beirut. And we saw the Assad regime as the keystone in that arc," he explained.

Oren, who is considered very close to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, added that Israel favors the more moderate elements among the Syrian rebels, but still wanted Assad's ouster even if it would result in radical Sunni Islamists coming to power in Damascus.

"We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren't backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran," Oren said, adding that this was the case even if the other "bad guys" were affiliated with al-Qaeda.

If this is actually the way Israel's leaders look at the unconscionable carnage in Syria, they seem to believe that deeper U.S. involvement, including military action, is likely to ensure that there is no early resolution of the conflict or at least that Assad will not be able to bring the country back under his control.

More broadly, Israeli leaders seem to believe that the longer Sunni and Shia are at each other's throats in Syria and across the region, the safer Israel calculates that it is. Thus, it is key not to let Assad win. And military involvement by the U.S. would be welcomed by Israel as increasing the chances that the jihadis also would not win.

The fact that Syria's main ally is Iran, with whom it has a mutual defense treaty, also plays a role in Israeli (and Saudi) calculations. If another "regime change" can be implemented in Syria, it would be a strategic blow against Iran.

[thinbluemime2]

FREDERIC HOF: Syrian civilians are being subjected to a true
abomination. There is a mass homicide program going on in Syria. So the
question is how to stop it. It’s clear to me that whatever is being done
here is fully inadequate.

NARRATOR: For now, the rebels are taking what they can get from the
Americans, though they are increasingly frustrated.

REBEL COMMANDER: [through interpreter] The impression I got from their
support is that they don’t actually want us to defeat the regime, but they
don’t want the regime to defeat us, either. They told us they would train
30,000 to 40,000 men. I asked them, “How can you ever train that many if
our training course is limited to 85 recruits at a time?” In a year, you
can only train a thousand recruits. You would have to keep training men
for 30 or 40 years. Is the revolution going to go on for that long?


FRONTLINE Syria: Arming the Rebels - May 27, 2014
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/foreign-affairs-defense/syria-arming-the-rebels/transcript-63/

> More broadly, Israeli leaders seem to believe that the longer Sunni and
> Shia are at each other's throats in Syria and across the region, the
> safer Israel calculates that it is. Thus, it is key not to let Assad
> win. And military involvement by the U.S. would be welcomed by Israel as
> increasing the chances that the jihadis also would not win.
>

--
This communication may be unlawfully collected and stored by the National
Security Agency (NSA) in secret. The parties to this email do not consent
to the retrieving or storing of this communication and any related
metadata, as well as printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, or
otherwise using it. If you believe you have received this communication in
error, please delete it immediately.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
>
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
>

> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
>
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

Going it alone: Obama may bypass Congress on Syria airstrikes
Dave Boyer - The Washington Times - Monday, August 25, 2014
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/25/obama-might-bypass-congress-airstrikes-syria/


The White House said Monday that President Obama won't necessarily seek congressional approval for airstrikes in Syria against militants of the Islamic State, while Syria warned the U.S. it would consider any unilateral attack an act of "aggression."

As Mr. Obama's advisers debated how to contain the terrorist group whose advances have caught the administration off guard, Obama officials also acknowledged they were caught flat-footed by a joint Egyptian-United Arab Emirates air attack against Islamist forces in Libya. The allies and military partners of the U.S. carried out two attacks in the past week in Libya without notifying Washington or seeking permission.

Mr. Obama, who met Monday with Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on his first day back from vacation, "has not made a decision to pursue any military action in Syria," said White House press secretary Josh Earnest. But he said the president doesn't see the need to seek congressional approval as he did a year ago when he was considering an attack on the regime of Syrian leader Bashar Assad for its use of chemical weapons.

"That was a different situation," Mr. Earnest said. "These are complicated situations, and they always will be."

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem said Monday that Damascus would not tolerate unilateral action by the U.S. against the extremists, even in the parts of the country that the government no longer controls. He said Syria is "ready to cooperate and coordinate on the regional and international level in the war on terror," but said any airstrikes should be conducted with the approval of the Syrian government.

That scenario would put Mr. Obama in the awkward position of working with a brutal regime whose downfall he has called for repeatedly. White House aides said Monday that the administration is not interested in helping the Assad regime.

As the threat from the Islamic State grows, the administration also tried Monday to put a new spin on Mr. Obama's characterization of the group as the "jayvee" team of terrorist groups. The comment in a magazine interview has become Exhibit A for administration critics who accuse Mr. Obama of not taking seriously the threat from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

"It's important to understand the context," Mr. Earnest said. "The president was not singling out [the Islamic State]. He was talking about the very different threat that is posed by a range of extremists around the globe."

[thinbluemime2]

On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 12:52:49 -0400, <thinbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J
>
>> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>>
>> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>>
>> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>>
>> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>> Full Text Of Speeches:
>>
>> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>>
>> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
>>
>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>>
>
>
> Going it alone: Obama may bypass Congress on Syria airstrikes
> Dave Boyer - The Washington Times - Monday, August 25, 2014
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/25/obama-might-bypass-congress-airstrikes-syria/
>
>
> The White House said Monday that President Obama won't necessarily seek
> congressional approval for airstrikes in Syria against militants of the
> Islamic State, while Syria warned the U.S. it would consider any
> unilateral attack an act of "aggression."

> That scenario would put Mr. Obama in the awkward position of working
> with a brutal regime whose downfall he has called for repeatedly. White
> House aides said Monday that the administration is not interested in
> helping the Assad regime.

The Fun of Empire: Fighting on All Sides of a War in Syria
By Glenn Greenwald 26 Aug 2014
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/08/26/fun-empire-fighting-sides-war


U.S. President Barack Obama (R) joined by Vice President Joe Biden
delivers a statement on Syria in the Rose Garden of the White House on
August 31, 2013 in Washington, DC.



CBS News, August 18, 2011:

President Barack Obama officially demanded that Syrian President Bashar
Assad resign for the sake of his own people, saying he was no longer fit
to lead after “imprisoning, torturing, and slaughtering his own people”
during a crackdown on pro-reform protesters.



New York Times, October 24, 2012:

Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply
Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going
to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups
that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle
Eastern diplomats.



Barack Obama, August 31, 2013:

Now, after careful deliberation, I have decided that the United States
should take military action against Syrian regime targets. . . . [W]e are
the United States of America, and we cannot and must not turn a blind eye
to what happened in Damascus.



New York Times, today:

President Obama has authorized surveillance flights over Syria, a
precursor to potential airstrikes there, but a mounting concern for the
White House is how to target the Sunni extremists without helping
President Bashar al-Assad. . . . The flights are a significant step toward
direct American military action in Syria, an intervention that could alter
the battlefield in the nation’s three-year civil war. . . .

On Monday, Syria warned the White House that it needed to coordinate
airstrikes against ISIS or it would view them as a breach of its
sovereignty and an “act of aggression.” But it signaled its readiness to
work with the United States in a coordinated campaign against the
militants.

It was not even a year ago when we were bombarded with messaging that
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is a Supreme Evil and Grave Threat, and
that military action against his regime was both a moral and strategic
imperative. The standard cast of “liberal interventionists” – Tony Blair,
Anne-Marie Slaughter, Nicholas Kristof and Samantha Power - issued
stirring sermons on the duties of war against Assad. Secretary of State
John Kerry actually compared Assad to (guess who?) Hitler, instructing the
nation that “this is our Munich moment.” Striking Assad, he argued, “is a
matter of national security. It’s a matter of the credibility of the
United States of America. It’s a matter of upholding the interests of our
allies and friends in the region.”

U.S. military action against the Assad regime was thwarted only by
overwhelming American public opinion which opposed it and by a resounding
rejection by the UK Parliament of Prime Minister David Cameron’s desire to
assume the usual subservient British role in support of American wars.

Now the Obama administration and American political class is celebrating
the one-year anniversary of the failed “Bomb Assad!” campaign by starting
a new campaign to bomb those fighting against Assad – the very same side
the U.S. has been arming over the last two years.

It’s as though the U.S. knew for certain all along that it wanted to fight
in the war in Syria, and just needed a little time to figure out on which
side it would fight. It switched sides virtually on a dime, and the
standard Pentagon courtiers of the U.S. media and war-cheering foreign
policy elites are dutifully following suit, mindlessly depicting ISIS as
an unprecedented combination of military might and well-armed and
well-funded savagery (where did they get those arms and funds?). Something
very similar happened in Libya: the U.S. spent a decade insisting that a
Global War on Terror – complete with full-scale dismantling of basic
liberties and political values – was necessary to fight against the Unique
Threat of Al Qaeda and “Jihadists”, only to then fight on the same side as
them, and arming and empowering them.

Nobody disputes the brutality and extremism of ISIS, but that is a
completely different question from whether the U.S. should take military
action against it. To begin with, the U.S. not only ignores, but actively
supports, all sorts of brutal and extreme parties in the region.

More important, what are air strikes going to accomplish? All one has to
do is look at the horrific chaos and misery in Libya - the Successful
Humanitarian Intervention™ - to know that bombing Bad People out of
existence accomplishes little in the way of strategic or humanitarian
value. If one really wants to advocate that the U.S. should destroy or at
least seriously degrade ISIS, then one should honestly face what that
actually entails, as detailed by the New America Foundation’s Brian
Fishman:

No one has offered a plausible strategy to defeat ISIL that does not
include a major U.S. commitment on the ground and the renewal of
functional governance on both sides of the Iraqi-Syrian border. And no one
will, because none exists. . . .

Bombing ISIL will not destroy it. Giving the Kurds sniper rifles or
artillery will not destroy it. A new prime minister in Iraq will not
destroy it. . . . [W]ar makes the jihadist movement stronger, even in the
face of major tactical and operational defeats.

The conflicts in Syria and Iraq strengthen ISIL because war is the only
force terrible enough to hold together a broad and extreme enough Sunni
coalition to be amenable to ISIL. Abu Mus’ab al-Zarqawi recognized this in
2004 and built a strategy of provoking Shia militias in order to
consolidate fearful Sunni groups. . .

Without war, ISIL is a fringe terrorist organization. With war, it is a
state. . . . This is where I am supposed to advocate a brilliant strategy
to defeat ISIL by Christmas at some surprisingly reasonable cost. But it
won’t happen. The cost to defeat ISIL would be very high and would require
a multi-year commitment. . . .

The country must be ready to accept the sacrifices necessary to achieve
grand political ends. Until then, any call to “defeat ISIL” that is not
forthright about what that will require is actually an argument for
expensive failure.

If you like running around sermonizing on the need to destroy ISIS, at
least be honest enough to acknowledge what that will really require and
then advocate that. Anything short of that is just self-glorifying deceit:
donning the costume of Churchillian Resolve and Moral Purpose without any
substance.

It seems pretty clear at this point that U.S. military action in the
Middle East is the end in itself, and the particular form it takes – even
including the side for which the U.S. fights – is an ancillary
consideration. That’s how the U.S., in less than a year, can get away with
depicting involvement in the war in Syria – on opposite sides – as a
national imperative. Ironically, just as was true of Al Qaeda, provoking
the U.S. into military action would, for the reasons Fishman explained,
help ISIS as well.

But the only clear lesson from all of this is that no matter the
propagandistic script used, U.S. military action in that region virtually
never fulfills the stated goals (nor is it intended to do so), and
achieves little other than justifying endless military action for its own
sake. How long before we hear that U.S. military action is needed (again)
in Libya to restrain the chaos and extremism unleashed by the NATO
intervention in Libya? Does anyone really believe that “limited” bombing
of Syria and Iraq in a rage against ISIS will result in anything other
than more justifications for military action in that region?



UPDATE: The U.S. “is sharing intelligence about jihadist deployments with
Damascus through Iraqi and Russian channels,” the Agence France-Presse
reports today, citing one source as saying: ”The cooperation has already
begun.”

From The New Hitler (back) to U.S. Partner in less than a year: an
impressive feat for both Assad and U.S. propaganda.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, September 7, 2013 12:17:49 PM UTC-4, thinbluemime2 wrote:
> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> > http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> >
>
> > Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>
> > http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > ///
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Full Text Of Speeches:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> > http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> >
>
> > Barack Obama 2013-08-31
>
> > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Obama Warned on Syrian Intel
>
> September 6, 2013
>
> http://consortiumnews.com/2013/09/06/obama-warned-on-syrian-intel/
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.arts.tv/38g-eal7OW8
>
>
>
>
>
> Cui bono?
>
>
>
> That the various groups trying to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have ample incentive to get the U.S. more deeply involved in support of that effort is clear. Until now, it has not been quite as clear that the Netanyahu government in Israel has equally powerful incentive to get Washington more deeply engaged in yet another war in the area. But with outspoken urging coming from Israel and those Americans who lobby for Israeli interests, this priority Israeli objective is becoming crystal clear.
>
>
>
> Reporter Judi Rudoren, writing from Jerusalem in an important article in Friday's New York Times addresses Israeli motivation in an uncommonly candid way. Her article, titled "Israel Backs Limited Strike Against Syria," notes that the Israelis have argued, quietly, that the best outcome for Syria's two-and-a-half-year-old civil war, at least for the moment, is no outcome. Rudoren continues:
>
>
>
> "For Jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective, seems preferable to either a victory by Mr. Assad's government and his Iranian backers or a strengthening of rebel groups, increasingly dominated by Sunni jihadis.
>
>
>

> "'This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don't want one to win -- we'll settle for a tie,' said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. 'Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that's the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there's no real threat from Syria.'"


"In an effort to avoid unintentionally strengthening the Syrian government, the White House could seek to balance strikes against the Islamic State with attacks on Assad regime targets."



Possible airstrikes in Syria raise more questions
KEN DILANIAN AND JULIE PACE 2014-08-26
http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_268798/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=HhRZK0ku



WASHINGTON (AP) - The intelligence gathered by U.S. military surveillance flights over Syria could support a broad bombing campaign against the Islamic State militant group, but current and former U.S. officials differ on whether air power would significantly degrade what some have called a "terrorist army."

Further complicating the plans, any military action against Islamic State militants in Syria would also have the effect of putting the U.S. on the same side as Syrian President Bashar Assad, whose ouster the Obama administration has sought for years.

The Islamic State group is headquartered in the Syrian city of Raqqah and has been fighting the Assad government, though it is also at war with moderate rebels who have received arms and funding from the U.S. The group, which controls a large part of eastern Syria, crossed into Iraq earlier this year and has captured much of the Sunni sections of northern and western Iraq, prompting U.S. airstrikes to protect American personnel in that region.

U.S. officials say that surveillance drones and spy planes had begun flying over Syria on the orders of President Barack Obama, who is considering a series of military options against the extremist group that also killed an American, journalist James Foley, and is holding an American woman hostage.

In recent months, the threat from the Islamic State has eclipsed the issue of Assad, who escaped U.S. military action after Obama pulled back planned airstrikes one year ago in order to consult with Congress. The hostage-takings have galvanized a U.S. government that already had been trying to respond to the militant group's surge with airstrikes that seem to have the public's approval.

The U.S. military has been bombing the Islamic State group's positions for weeks, helping break its hold on a dam near the city of Mosul. U.S. attacks destroyed two more militant vehicles Tuesday near the Kurdish city of Irbil, bringing to 98 the total number of U.S. air strikes in Iraq since Aug. 8.

The decision to expand surveillance flights into Syria will boost intelligence gathering there, because the flights provide far better imagery and other data than do spy satellites in space orbit. Drones, for example, can hover over targets for hours, and both drones and spy planes can carry equipment that intercepts ground communications.

The U.S. is not cooperating or sharing intelligence with the Assad government, Pentagon and State Department spokesmen said. But the U.S. flights are occurring in eastern Syria, away from most of Syria's air defenses. And experts expressed doubt that Syria would attempt to shoot down American aircraft that are paving the way for a possible bombing campaign against Assad's enemies.

As Obama contemplates options, military officials are sorting through what kind of campaign it would take to defeat or contain the Islamic State group. Obama has ruled out sending large ground formations.

Targeted drone missile strikes against al-Qaida groups in Yemen and Pakistan had significant impact, American officials say, but only after many months of intensive, on-the-ground intelligence gathering that would be difficult, if not impossible, to replicate in Iraq and Syria.

Yet some air war planners argue that since the Islamic State group acts more like an army - massing in large formations of vehicles and moving over open terrain - a sustained air campaign could smash it.

"You can make a big impact on ISIL by actually using air power as a tool," said retired Gen. Charles Wald, who commanded the air campaign that drove the Taliban from power after the Sept. 11 attacks, using an alternative acronym for the Islamic State group. "You could kick their butt if you had the right kind of campaign."

It would require the insertion of special operations troops or CIA officers on the ground helping direct the bombing, as happened in late 2001, Wald said. It would also require a sustained, massive air campaign, said David Deptula, who planned the bombing campaign against Saddam Hussein's forces in the 1991 Gulf War.

"Air power needs to be applied like a thunderstorm, not a drizzle," Deptula said, entailing "24-7 overwatch with force application on every move of ISIL personnel."

One senior congressional official said intelligence suggests that such an approach has its limits, because the Islamic State militants would be likely to melt into civilian areas as soon as the U.S. began bombing. Such a move by militants would complicate further bombing efforts, said the official, who was not authorized to discuss intelligence matters by name and spoke on condition of anonymity.

But if the Islamic State group hides among civilians in cities, Wald said, that may constitute a sort of victory.

In an effort to avoid unintentionally strengthening the Syrian government, the White House could seek to balance strikes against the Islamic State with attacks on Assad regime targets. However, that option is largely unappealing to the president given that it could open the U.S. to the kind of long-term commitment to Syria's stability that Obama has sought to avoid.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest on Monday tried to tamp down the notion that action against the Islamic State group could bolster Assad, saying, "We're not interested in trying to help the Assad regime." However, he acknowledged that "there are a lot of cross pressures here."

___

Associated Press writers Robert Burns and Bradley Klapper contributed to this report.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
>
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
>
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
> ///
>
>
>
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
>
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
>
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>

They come runnin' just as fast as they can
'Cause every girl crazy 'bout a sharp dressed man.

> Eliminator - ZZ Top
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Barack Obama’s tan suit sparks #YesWeTan craze
August 29, 2014
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/fashion/barack-obamas-tan-suit-sparks-yeswetan-craze/story-fnks7u94-1227040960869

US PRESIDENT Barack Obama held an important press conference at the White House today, where he discussed extremely serious topics. Nobody listened, because everyone was distracted by Mr Obama’s suit.

///


Transcript: President Obama’s Aug. 28 remarks on Ukraine, Syria and the economy
2014-08-28
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/transcriptpresident-obamas-aug-28-remarks-on-ukraine-and-syria/2014/08/28/416f1336-2eec-11e4-bb9b-997ae96fad33_story.html


QUESTION: Do you need Congress's approval to go into Syria?

OBAMA: You know, I have consulted with Congress throughout this process. I am confident that as commander in chief I have the authorities to engage in the acts that we are conducting currently. As our strategy develops, we will continue to consult with Congress, and I do think that it'll be important for Congress to weigh in and we're -- that our consultations with Congress continue to develop so that the American people are part of the debate.

But I don't want to put the cart before the horse. We don't have a strategy yet. I think what I've seen in some of the news reports suggests that folks are getting a little further ahead of where we're at than we currently are. And I think that's not just my assessment, but the assessment of our military, as well. We need to make sure that we've got clear plans, that we're developing them. At that point, I will consult with Congress and make sure that their voices are heard.

But there's no point in me asking for action on the part of Congress before I know exactly what it is that is going to be required for us to get the job done.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

A plague on all those houses
Israel trusts no one on its newly chaotic border with Syria
Sep 6th 2014 | QUNEITRA | From the print edition
http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21615643-israel-trusts-no-one-its-newly-chaotic-border-syria-plague-all-those



NO SOONER had Israel finished one war with the Islamist fighters of Hamas in Gaza, on its southern border, than al-Qaeda began knocking on its gates at the other end of the country, in the north. On August 27th Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaeda's affiliate in Syria, overran the Syrian army's positions at the Quneitra border-crossing on the Golan Heights, which Israel has occupied for almost half a century. For most of the three-year-long rebellion in Syria, Israel has tried to keep out of the fray. But now it may lean towards favouring President Bashar Assad.

The UN has long patrolled the Syrian side of the Golan Heights, with a 1,250-strong Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF). But at the end of August Jabhat al-Nusra scattered the UN's Filipino contingent and has since held hostage another 45 Fijian soldiers. UNDOF's Austrian, Croatian and Japanese units had previously withdrawn. The Filipinos are set to go, too.

Israel is in a quandary. Until recently, it reckoned that the military frontier with Syria was the quietest of its four borders with Arab states (the others being with Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon). But the Syrian side is now in the hands of Islamist rebels virulently hostile to it, with neither the UN nor Syria's army in place to uphold a longstanding armistice.

When Syria's uprising erupted three years ago, Israel's government stood aloof but quietly hoped that, if Mr Assad went, the hostile Shia axis that extended from Iran through Damascus to southern Lebanon, where Hizbullah prevails, would be broken. Israel's then defence minister predicted that Mr Assad would soon fall.

But Israel's attitude wavered as Jabhat al-Nusra, whose leader, Abu Muhammad al-Jolani, takes his name from the Israeli-occupied Heights, bested the more moderate Free Syrian Army in Syria's south. Now that the Islamists have taken over the Quneitra crossing, the Israeli government may be tacitly approving of Mr Assad's bombing of rebel positions inside the narrow demilitarised zone. "It's in Israel's interest that Assad controls the gate and not radical Islamist groups," says Kobi Marom, a retired Israeli brigadier, watching from a hill above Quneitra.

On the wider front, the rise of the anti-Western and anti-Israeli Islamic State (IS) in eastern Syria is making a growing number of Israeli planners think that Mr Assad's survival is their least-bad option, says Eyal Zisser, an Israeli expert on Syria. And yet, conversely, some of Israel's security men worry that a major counter-attack by Mr Assad's army against rebel positions near Quneitra may lead to a menacing build-up of Iranian and Hizbullah forces there. No outcome for Israel is palatable.

But at least the Syrian Druze may become more friendly. IS's advance is prompting the 20,000 Druze who inhabit the Golan Heights, alongside a similar number of Israelis, to shift their allegiance. For decades under Israeli occupation they professed their loyalty to Syria. But now, as adherents of an esoteric offshoot of Islam that IS and Jabhat al-Nusra excoriate, they are quietly loosening their ties to Syria. They have stopped exporting their apples there--and their brides. Druze applications for Israeli citizenship have risen sharply, says the Israeli-appointed mayor of Majdal Shams, the biggest of the four Druze towns. Many Druze now look to Israel (and particularly to its Israeli Druze soldiers stationed on the heights) to protect their secular world, where women walk and drive their cars unveiled.

This raises the hopes of those in Israel's hawkish government who want to extend the annexation of the Golan Heights indefinitely. Whereas a more dovish Israeli government in 1999 came close to a land-for-peace deal with Syria, few Israelis nowadays contemplate such a thing. Indeed, Israel's current leaders often remind their voters how vulnerable Israel would have been to the threat of jihadists if its border with Syria had been realigned along the shore of Lake Galilee, as was mooted.

An army division, newly equipped with drones, and a new iron fence, are meant to secure the border. The nearby vineyards look set to provide Israel with excellent, if expensive, wine for some years to come.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
>
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
>
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>

> Full Text Of Speeches:


> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
>
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html


> Eliminator - ZZ Top
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Strategy on Islamic State includes support for Syrian opposition
WASHINGTON Wed Sep 10, 2014
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/10/us-iraq-crisis-obama-idUSKBN0H42JA20140910


"Obama came close to direct military action a year ago in Syria to support what Washington considers more moderate rebel forces fighting President Bashar al-Assad, but held off given strong opposition in Congress. After disgust in America over the videotaped beheading of two American journalists by Islamic State in the past month, resistance in Congress has diminished."




(Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Wednesday will announce his plan to defeat Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria in a speech to Americans that the White House said will discuss direct U.S. military action as well as support for forces fighting the group in both countries.

The White House, in a statement ahead of the speech, said the United States "will pursue a comprehensive strategy to degrade and ultimately destroy" the Islamic organization. The speech will be carefully watched for indications of how much Obama is prepared to intervene directly into Syria, riven by civil war and whose leader Washington has sought to dislodge.

Obama is schedule to speak at 9 p.m. EDT (0100 GMT Thursday).

He also will discuss his administration's effort to build international support for the U.S. plan among allies and others in the region and work with Congress, the statement said.

The White House has said Obama has the authority he needs to take action against the Sunni Muslim group, which is seeking to establish an Islamic state and has taken over huge swathes of land in Iraq and Syria. U.S. officials have said there is no imminent threat of attack against the United States but the group has beheaded two U.S. captives in the region in recent weeks.

So far, the United States has carried out limited airstrikes in parts of Iraq aimed at destabilizing the organization and Obama has ruled out sending in U.S. combat forces.

Obama could order airstrikes on an expanded list of targets within Iraq and has been considering strikes in Syria as well, on condition that moderate rebels there be in a position to hold territory cleared of Islamic State fighters by the strikes.

Obama came close to direct military action a year ago in Syria to support what Washington considers more moderate rebel forces fighting President Bashar al-Assad, but held off given strong opposition in Congress. After disgust in America over the videotaped beheading of two American journalists by Islamic State in the past month, resistance in Congress has diminished.

But Washington's failure since then to support the moderate groups has left them weakened and it is unclear how the United States can build up such forces quickly enough to create a useful military ally on the ground.

Obama has shown a willingness to intrude militarily into Syrian space with an unsuccessful operation in July to try to rescue Americans held hostage by Islamic State, and he said in an interview that aired on Sunday that Washington was prepared to hit the group's leaders wherever it could.

Iraq's formation of a relatively inclusive government on Monday has cleared the way for wider U.S. action in support of Iraqi armed forces and Kurdish forces in a country where the United States was engaged in a bitter military struggle for nine years after overthrowing President Saddam Hussein. Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in Baghdad on Wednesday to meet with Iraqi leaders and discuss efforts to combat Islamic State.

Polls this week show the majority of Americans support action against the militants.

More than 70 percent of Americans support airstrikes in Iraq and 65 percent support using them in Syria, a Washington Post-ABC News opinion poll found. An NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll showed 61 percent said military action against the group was in the interest of the United States.

Still, Obama, who was elected in 2008 on a promise to get U.S. troops out of Iraq and did so by the end of 2011, must make his case to the public and build support from Congress.

Obama met with key lawmakers on Tuesday and administration officials are expected to give wider briefings on Thursday. U.S. lawmakers have been mixed on whether Congress must authorize any wider U.S. military action in the region.

Representative Mike Rogers, the Republican head of the House Intelligence Committee, told CNN that Obama's speech was critical and called it "a good start" to combating a serious threat, saying the president needs to leave room for other possible action, such as sending in special U.S. forces.

Senator Angus King, a Maine independent and member of the Senate intelligence and armed service committees, cautioned it will be impossible to oust the militants with air power alone.

"There are going to be boots on the ground. The only question is whether they're American or Iraqi or Kurdish," he told CNN. "The real question we have to face is: is the safe haven argument sufficient to justify significant American engagement."


(Reporting by Susan Heavey and Steve Holland; Editing by Bill Trott)

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
>
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
>
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
>
>
>

> ///

>
>
>
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
>
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
>
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
>
>
>

> -----------

>
>
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

"He (Obama) made clear the intricacy of the situation, though, as he contemplated the possibility that Mr. Assad might order his forces to fire at American planes entering Syrian airspace. If he dared to do that, Mr. Obama said he would order American forces to wipe out Syria's air defense system, which he noted would be easier than striking ISIS because its locations are better known. He went on to say that such an action by Mr. Assad would lead to his overthrow, according to one account."




Paths to War, Then and Now, Haunt Obama
PETER BAKERSEPT. 13, 2014
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/world/middleeast/paths-to-war-then-and-now-haunt-obama.html



WASHINGTON -- Just hours before announcing an escalated campaign against Islamic extremists last week, President Obama privately reflected on another time when a president weighed military action in the Middle East -- the frenzied weeks leading up to the American invasion of Iraq a decade ago.

"I was not here in the run-up to Iraq in 2003," he told a group of visitors who met with him in the White House before his televised speech to the nation, according to several people who were in the meeting. "It would have been fascinating to see the momentum and how it builds."

In his own way, Mr. Obama said, he had seen something similar, a virtual fever rising in Washington, pressuring him to send the armed forces after the Sunni radicals who had swept through Iraq and beheaded American journalists. He had told his staff, he said, not to evaluate their own policy based on external momentum. He would not rush to war. He would be deliberate.

"But I'm aware I pay a political price for that," he said.

His introspection that afternoon reflected Mr. Obama's journey from the candidate who wanted to wind down America's overseas wars to the commander in chief who just resumed and expanded one. For Mr. Obama, that spring of 2003, when President George W. Bush sent troops to topple Saddam Hussein, has framed his own presidency. He has spent nearly six years trying to avoid repeating it.

In forming a plan to destroy the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria using airpower and local forces, but not regular American ground troops, he searched for ways to avoid the mistakes of the past. He felt "haunted," he told his visitors, by the failure of a Special Forces raid to rescue the American hostages James Foley and Steven J. Sotloff -- "we just missed them," he said -- but their subsequent murders were not the real reason he opted for war, although he noted that gruesome videos released by ISIS had helped galvanize public support for action.

He was acutely aware that the operation he was about to embark on would not solve the larger issues in that region by the time he left office. "This will be a problem for the next president," Mr. Obama said ruefully, "and probably the one after that." But he alternated between resolve as he vowed to retaliate against President Bashar al-Assad if Syrian forces shot at American planes, and prickliness as he mocked critics of his more reticent approach to the exercise of American power.

"Oh, it's a shame when you have a wan, diffident, professorial president with no foreign policy other than 'don't do stupid things,' " guests recalled him saying, sarcastically imitating his adversaries. "I do not make apologies for being careful in these areas, even if it doesn't make for good theater."

Mr. Obama went on to reveal his thoughts on challenges he faces in combating the threat from ISIS. He expressed his frustration with the French for paying ransoms to terrorists, asserted that Americans are kidnapped at lower rates because the United States does not, resisted the idea of Kurdistan's breaking away from Iraq and even speculated on what he would have advised ISIS to do to keep America out of the war in the region.

This account of Mr. Obama's thinking as he arrived at a pivotal point in his presidency is based on interviews with 10 people who spoke with him in the days leading up to his speech Wednesday night. In quoting his private remarks, the people were recalling what he said from their best memories.

The president invited a group of foreign policy experts and former government officials to dinner on Monday, and a separate group of columnists and magazine writers for a discussion on Wednesday afternoon. Although three New York Times columnists and an editorial writer were among those invited to the second session, this account is drawn from people unaffiliated with The Times, some of whom insisted on anonymity because they were not supposed to share details of the conversations.

The president they described was calm and confident, well versed on the complexities of the ISIS challenge and in no evident rush to end the discussions. A briefing book sat in front of him during the second of the sessions, but he never opened it. Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Secretary of State John Kerry joined him for the dinner, and Denis McDonough, the White House chief of staff, and Susan Rice, the national security adviser, sat in on the meeting with the journalists, but none of them said very much.

Mr. Obama was relaxed enough, as he discussed the array of foreign policy crises facing him, that at one point he ridiculed President Vladimir V. Putin's rationale for intervening in Ukraine to protect Russian speakers by saying the United States should intervene in Mexico to protect enclaves of Americans. When a writer jokingly asked if he was announcing plans to invade Mexico, he laughed and said no, Canada, because it has more oil.

The guests came away with different impressions; some said they thought he still seemed ambivalent about the course he was taking in Iraq and Syria, while others said he appeared at peace.

"It's fair to say when the president imagined where he'd be in this sixth year, I doubt he expected to be here," said Richard N. Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations and a former Bush administration official who was among the guests at the dinner Monday. "But he's been forced to react to events here."

Jane Harman, a former Democratic congresswoman from California who now heads the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, said she thought Mr. Obama had evolved. "He was all in," she said. "I don't know what the definition of reluctant is, but I certainly think he's totally focused, this man at this time."

If his thinking has evolved, Mr. Obama admitted no errors along the way. While some critics, and even his former secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton, have faulted him for not arming moderate Syrian rebels years ago, Mr. Obama does not accept the premise that doing so would have forestalled the rise of ISIS.

"I have thought that through and tried to apply 20-20 hindsight," he told some of his guests, as one recalled. "I'm perfectly willing to admit they were right, but even if they were right, I still can't see how that would have changed the situation."

He defended his decision to wait to approve airstrikes until last month in Iraq and last week in Syria, saying he wanted first to force Iraq to replace its government with a more inclusive coalition that could draw disaffected Sunnis away from supporting ISIS and take on the task of combating it.

But while Mr. Obama sees bolstering the new Iraqi government as his path to ultimate success on that side of the border, he struck his guests as less certain about the endgame on the Syrian side, where he has called for Mr. Assad to step down and must now rely on the same moderate Syrian rebels he refused to arm in the past.

Mr. Obama acknowledged it would be a long campaign, one complicated by a dearth of intelligence about possible targets on the Syrian side of the border and one that may not be immediately satisfying. "This isn't going to be fireworks over Baghdad," he said.

Asked by one of the columnists what he would do if his strategy did not work and he had to escalate further, Mr. Obama rejected the premise. "I'm not going to anticipate failure at this point," he said.

He made clear the intricacy of the situation, though, as he contemplated the possibility that Mr. Assad might order his forces to fire at American planes entering Syrian airspace. If he dared to do that, Mr. Obama said he would order American forces to wipe out Syria's air defense system, which he noted would be easier than striking ISIS because its locations are better known. He went on to say that such an action by Mr. Assad would lead to his overthrow, according to one account.

Mr. Obama dwelled on the killings of the two American journalists, Mr. Foley and Mr. Sotloff, telling guests that he had authorized the Pentagon to develop a rescue attempt this summer on the same day the matter was brought to him. It was conducted within days and executed flawlessly, he said. He noted that the United States does not pay ransom to terrorists, but remarked with irritation that President François Hollande of France says his country does not, when in fact it does.

Mr. Obama had what guests on Wednesday afternoon described as a bereft look as he discussed the murders of Mr. Foley and Mr. Sotloff, particularly because two other Americans are still being held. Days later, ISIS would report beheading a British hostage with another video posted online Saturday.

But the president said he had already been headed toward a military response before the men's deaths. He added that ISIS had made a major strategic error by killing them because the anger it generated resulted in the American public's quickly backing military action.

If he had been "an adviser to ISIS," Mr. Obama added, he would not have killed the hostages but released them and pinned notes on their chests saying, "Stay out of here; this is none of your business." Such a move, he speculated, might have undercut support for military intervention.

It was clear to the guests how aware Mr. Obama was of the critics who have charged him with demonstrating a lack of leadership. He brought up the criticism more than once with an edge of resentment in his voice.

"He's definitely feeling it," said one guest. At one point, Mr. Obama noted acidly that President Ronald Reagan sent Marines to Lebanon only to have hundreds of them killed in a terrorist attack because of terrible planning, and then withdrew the remaining ones, leaving behind a civil war that lasted years. But Reagan, he noted, is hailed as a titan striding the earth.

"He's not a softy," Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter and attended the dinner Monday, said of Mr. Obama. "I think part of the problem with some of his critics is they think he's a softy. He's not a softy. But he's a person who tries to think through these events so you can draw some long-term conclusions."

Mr. Haass said attention to nuance was a double-edged attribute. "This is someone who, more than most in the political world, is comfortable in the gray rather than the black and white," he said. "So many other people in the political world do operate in the black and white and are more quote-unquote decisive, and that's a mixed blessing. He clearly falls on the side of those who are slow or reluctant to decide because deciding often forces you into a more one-sided position than you're comfortable with."

[thinbluemime2]

On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:23:21 -0400, <thinbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

>> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>>
>> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>>
>> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>>

>> Full Text Of Speeches:
>> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>>
>> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
>>
>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>>

>> Eliminator - ZZ Top
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

> Mr. Obama went on to say that such an action by Mr. Assad would lead to
> his overthrow

> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/world/middleeast/paths-to-war-then-and-now-haunt-obama.html

"the two parties ...promise not to attack each other because they consider
the principal enemy to be the...Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s Alawite
regime."




Report: ISIS, Syrian rebels reach ceasefire
Rebecca Shabad - 09/13/14
http://thehill.com/policy/international/217645-syrian-rebels-isis-agree-to-non-aggression-pact


Moderate Syrian rebels and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS)
reportedly struck a cease-fire deal on Friday, according to a group that
has monitored Syria's civil war.

The groups agreed to a non-aggression pact in which they promised not to
attack each other.

The development could influence members of Congress to vote “no” on an
authorization to train and equip moderate rebel groups as early as next
week. The White House has requested the authorization, but some lawmakers
have already been skeptical the opposition groups can be trusted.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a monitoring group based in the
United Kingdom, said the groups reached the agreement in a suburb of
Damascus, Syria’s capital.

Under the deal, "the two parties will respect a truce until a final
solution is found and they promise not to attack each other because they
consider the principal enemy to be the Nussayri regime,” Agence
France-Presse reported.

Nussayri is a negative term for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s Alawite
regime.

This comes as House lawmakers mull over the option to provide Obama with
the authorization to train and arm the Syrian rebels. A vote on a
short-term spending bill was delayed this week after the White House asked
House Republicans to attach the authorization to the bill.

It’s possible GOP leaders might decide to hold a separate vote on the
authorization to equip the rebels.

Some Republicans and Democrats have long called on the administration arm
the rebels, but other lawmakers in both parties are afraid the weapons
could wind up in the wrong hands.

A spokesman for the family of slain journalist Steven Sotloff told CNN
this week that Sotloff was captured by “so-called moderate rebels” in
Syria and was sold to ISIS.

ISIS militants released videos in the last month showing them beheading
Sotloff and U.S. journalist James Foley.

[thinbluemime2]

On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:23:21 -0400, <thinbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> He made clear the intricacy of the situation, though, as he contemplated
> the possibility that Mr. Assad might order his forces to fire at
> American planes entering Syrian airspace. If he dared to do that, Mr.
> Obama said he would order American forces to wipe out Syria's air
> defense system, which he noted would be easier than striking ISIS
> because its locations are better known. He went on to say that such an
> action by Mr. Assad would lead to his overthrow

Saudi Prince War Against ISIS Really About Removing Assad
Published on Sep 25, 2014
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTeyRAx7eZ4&feature=youtu.be

[thinbluemime2]

Department of Defense Press Briefing by Rear Adm. Kirby in the Pentagon
Briefing Room
Presenter: Press Secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby
September 19, 2014

"There's three things, really, that we're going to help train and equip
the moderate opposition to deal with."
"And then of course, third, to counter the Assad regime."
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=5504



"The moderate opposition was formed as you know in an effort overthrow the
Assad regime,"
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/217772-pentagon-gives-three-objectives-for-syria


Yes We Know
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Sources: Obama seeks new Syria strategy review to deal with ISIS, al-Assad
By Elise Labott, Thu November 13, 2014

Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama has asked his national security team for another review of the U.S. policy toward Syria after realizing that ISIS may not be defeated without a political transition in Syria and the removal of President Bashar al-Assad, senior U.S. officials and diplomats tell CNN.

The review is a tacit admission that the initial strategy of trying to confront ISIS first in Iraq and then take the group's fighters on in Syria, without also focusing on the removal of al-Assad, was a miscalculation.

Rep. Ed Royce, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Thursday on CNN's "New Day" that he had also heard that the White House was shifting its strategy, in part because Turkey and other Gulf states -- which are hosting refugees from Syria -- were pushing for the removal of Assad.

///



The Red Line and the Rat Line
Seymour M. Hersh on Obama, Erdoğan and the Syrian rebels
17 April 2014
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

Last August, after the sarin attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta, (Obama) was ready to launch an allied air strike, this time to punish the Syrian government for allegedly crossing the ‘red line’ he had set in 2012 on the use of chemical weapons.

Last May, more than ten members of the al-Nusra Front were arrested in southern Turkey with what local police told the press were two kilograms of sarin. In a 130-page indictment the group was accused of attempting to purchase fuses, piping for the construction of mortars, and chemical precursors for sarin. Five of those arrested were freed after a brief detention. The others, including the ringleader, Haytham Qassab, for whom the prosecutor requested a prison sentence of 25 years, were released pending trial. In the meantime the Turkish press has been rife with speculation that the Erdoğan administration has been covering up the extent of its involvement with the rebels. In a news conference last summer, Aydin Sezgin, Turkey’s ambassador to Moscow, dismissed the arrests and claimed to reporters that the recovered ‘sarin’ was merely ‘anti-freeze’.

‘Investigators interviewed the people who were there, including the doctors who treated the victims. It was clear that the rebels used the gas. It did not come out in public because no one wanted to know.’

By the end of 2012, it was believed throughout the American intelligence community that the rebels were losing the war. ‘Erdoğan was pissed,’ the former intelligence official said, ‘and felt he was left hanging on the vine. It was his money and the cut-off was seen as a betrayal.’ In spring 2013 US intelligence learned that the Turkish government – through elements of the MIT, its national intelligence agency, and the Gendarmerie, a militarised law-enforcement organisation – was working directly with al-Nusra and its allies to develop a chemical warfare capability.

Without US military support for the rebels, the former intelligence official said, ‘Erdoğan’s dream of having a client state in Syria is evaporating and he thinks we’re the reason why. When Syria wins the war, he knows the rebels are just as likely to turn on him – where else can they go? So now he will have thousands of radicals in his backyard.’

As intercepts and other data related to the 21 August attacks were gathered, the intelligence community saw evidence to support its suspicions. ‘We now know it was a covert action planned by Erdoğan’s people to push Obama over the red line,’ the former intelligence official said. ‘They had to escalate to a gas attack in or near Damascus when the UN inspectors’ – who arrived in Damascus on 18 August to investigate the earlier use of gas – ‘were there. The deal was to do something spectacular. Our senior military officers have been told by the DIA and other intelligence assets that the sarin was supplied through Turkey – that it could only have gotten there with Turkish support. The Turks also provided the training in producing the sarin and handling it.’ Much of the support for that assessment came from the Turks themselves, via intercepted conversations in the immediate aftermath of the attack.

Barring a major change in policy by Obama, Turkey’s meddling in the Syrian civil war is likely to go on. ‘I asked my colleagues if there was any way to stop Erdoğan’s continued support for the rebels, especially now that it’s going so wrong,’ the former intelligence official told me. ‘The answer was: “We’re screwed.” We could go public if it was somebody other than Erdoğan, but Turkey is a special case. They’re a Nato ally.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>

> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Israel Establishes Syrian Rebel Base in Israel, Treats Radical Islamist Wounded
Richard Silverstein on December 7, 2014
http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2014/12/07/israels-offers-aid-to-radical-islamists-in-syria/


For much of the length of the Syrian rebellion, news media have claimed that Israel has maintained neutrality between Pres. Assad and the rebels. Israel officially makes the same claim. But this is not true and has never been true. At least five times the IAF has attacked Syrian government positions, in several cases in an attempt to destroy advanced Russian weapons being shipped to Hezbollah, Assad's ally. A few weeks ago, Israel shot down a Syrian plane it claimed had strayed yards into Israeli territory after it had returned to Syria, another breach of Syrian territorial sovereignty.

In the past few days, Lebanese media reports the army fired on Israeli drones inside Lebanese airspace in the Bekaa Valley. By one account, the drones were monitoring a Syrian airport on behalf of rebels forces who were trying to take it from loyalist troops.

Now, the UN peacekeeping force on the Israel-Syria border, which has been under threat from Syria rebels, reports on the increasing level of explicit support offered by the Israeli military to the rebels. Some time ago, I reported about a FoxNews story which filmed Israeli commandos inside Syria, returning from operation in support of Golani Syrian Druze forces opposed to Assad.

The latest report shows not only that Israel has accepted wounded rebel fighters for medical treatment inside Israel, it is accepting them from those who are the most radical Islamists among them: the al-Nusra Front:

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Monday, May 26, 2014 at 6:29:07 AM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know

> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> >
> > http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg

> > Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> >
> > http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
> >

> > Full Text Of Speeches:

> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> >
> > http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm

> > Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> >
> > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
> >

> On Aug. 30, in a speech pressing for war, Kerry declared, 35 times, that "we know" that the chemical attack was launched by the Syrian government. But the "evidence" that he provided at the time boiled down to "trust us."
>
> The quieting of the war drums infuriated the neocons - and their fury has flared up periodically since then, even as the case against Assad as the guilty party in the Sarin attack crumbled.
>
> The evidence piling up over the past several months has included two impressive investigative reports by Pulitzer Prize-winner journalist Seymour Hersh describing doubts within the U.S. intelligence community about Syria's guilt and citing sources pointing the finger at Turkey and the rebels.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> WPost Seeks US-Patrolled 'Safe Zone' in Syria
> May 25, 2014 By Ray McGovern
> http://consortiumnews.com/2014/05/25/wpost-seeks-us-patrolled-safe-zone-in-syria/
>
>
> Exclusive: Neocons never blush at their own hypocrisies, demanding Russia respect international law and do nothing to protect eastern Ukrainians, while demanding President Obama ignore international law and create a rebel "safe zone" in Syria, writes ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.
>
>
>
>
> The Israeli Factor
>
> But why should Washington care so much about sponsoring another "regime change" in the Middle East, especially given the disastrous results in Iraq and Libya? It is rather simple: Because Israel cares about preventing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from prevailing.
>
> Indeed, I define a neocon as one who has difficulty distinguishing between the national interests of Israel, on the one hand, and those of the United States, on the other. At this point, one would have to be blind not to see that the State Department continues to be dominated by neocon thinking.
>
> Who profits from the turmoil in Syria and, specifically, the prospect of deeper U.S. involvement? Obviously, the various groups trying to overthrow Assad have a strong incentive to draw in the U.S. So, do the Saudis who are seeing their major investment in ousting Assad fall apart. And Assad is an ally of their regional enemy, Iran.
>
> Over the past year or so, it also has become clear that the Netanyahu government in Israel continues to have a powerful incentive to get Washington more deeply engaged in yet another war in the area. This Israeli priority, also driven by Israel's view of Iran as its primary enemy, has been manifested in many ways.



> A report on Sept. 6, 2013, by the New York Times' Judi Rudoren, writing from Jerusalem, addressed Israel's thinking in an uncommonly candid way. Her article, titled "Israel Backs Limited Strike Against Syria," noted that the Israelis have argued, quietly, that the best outcome for Syria's civil war, at least for the moment, is no outcome. Rudoren wrote:
>
> "For Jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective, seems preferable to either a victory by Mr. Assad's government and his Iranian backers or a strengthening of rebel groups, increasingly dominated by Sunni jihadis.




> "'This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don't want one to win -- we'll settle for a tie,' said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. 'Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that's the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there's no real threat from Syria.'"

Date 2014-10-17 04:07:49
From lynton, michael
To lilil...@yahoo.com

Face it the entire thing is a gigantic mess and if it were not for Israel we would let them all kill each other and wait for the dust to settle. We don't need the oil, and I am not sure it is worth the time or effort to try and broker the nations at the edge. It is a dog's breakfast plain and simple and I am not sure there is any role for America here. On reflection, Israel may be in the catbird seat. Let them all kill each other around the Jewish state and pick up the pieces after they have exhausted themselves. Probably what they are thinking in Tel Aviv.

https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/134715

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>

> ///

>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>

> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Syrian opposition group to Israel: Next year we celebrate Independence Day in Damascus
YASSER OKBI/ MAARIV HASHAVUA \ 04/23/2015
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Syrian-group-in-greeting-to-Israel-Next-year-we-celebrate-Independence-Day-in-Damascus-399005



An official from one of the main opposition groups in Syria sent a letter of congratulations to Israel for Independence Day on Thursday in which he said he hoped that next year the day would be marked at the Israeli embassy in Damascus.

The letter was sent by the Free Syrian Army's Mousa Ahmed Nabhan to Mendi Safadi who served as chief of staff for Likud's newly-elected Druse MK Ayoub Kara.

Safadi has independently met with members of the liberal and democratic Syrian opposition who oppose the Islamist groups in Syria and want friendly relations with Israel.

In the letter, shared with The Jerusalem Post's Hebrew sister publication Maariv, Nabhan wrote:

"On behalf of Free Syrian Army, we extend our very best wishes and congratulations to the State of Israel and the great people on the anniversary of the sixty-seventh of the independence of the State of Israel."

Nabhan said his hope to celebrate with Israel in Damascus next year would come after Syria was, "liberated from axis of evil criminals led by Iran through its customers in the region, headed by the criminal Bashar al-Assad [Syrian President Bashar Assad] and his Nazi regime, who were brought to Syria radical terrorist groups, in order to demonize the revolution and prevent the free world's sympathy with her, and threatened the security and stability of the region and the world."

Nabhan who is responsible for foreign relations of his movement, said he was thankful for the Israeli leadership's, "esteemed humanitarian positions overseeing towards the Syrian revolution and its people," adding that his movement would not forget, "all the state and the state and stood next to him in his ordeal and supported their legitimate issues."

He added that the "overwhelming majority of the Syrian people" is moderate and has been "looking forward for a long time to establish best special relations at all levels with the Israeli neighbors."

"With best wishes to the leadership of the State of Israel and its people for health, happiness, progress and success," Nabhan concluded.

Following Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's election win last month, Nabhan sent him a congratulatory letter in which he expressed the hope that Israel would, "continue to provide the necessary support to the Syrian people, which are fond of you and looking to build the best of relations on all levels."

Ariel Ben Solomon contributed to this report.


----------------

bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb....

http://mycatbirdseat.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Sens.-John-McCain-and-Joe-Lieberman.jpg

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know



> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Israel's Education Minister Naftali Bennett is calling for the world to recognize its 1981 annexation of the Golan Heights because "Syria no longer functions as a country that could reclaim the strategic plateau" according to the Jerusalem Post.

Mr. Bennett is taking advantage of Syrian government's ongoing civil war with the rebels and the Islamic State known as ISIS or ISIL. Bennett is also "undermining support for Palestinian statehood on other land Israel occupied in the 1967 Six-Day War" according to the report. Bennett called on the international community to recognize the Golan Heights as part of Israel when he said "I call on the international community: Stand with us, recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights now," Bennett said in a speech to the Herzliya Conference, an annual Israeli policy forum. "Borders are changing daily.

Syria, as a state, no longer exists. So this is the time for initiative."


http://silentcrownews.com/wordpress/?p=4182

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Secret CIA effort in Syria faces large funding cut
Greg Miller and Karen DeYoung June 12, 2015
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/lawmakers-move-to-curb-1-billion-cia-program-to-train-syrian-rebels/2015/06/12/b0f45a9e-1114-11e5-adec-e82f8395c032_story.html





"At $1 billion, Syria-related operations account for about $1 of every $15 in the CIA's overall budget"





Key lawmakers have moved to slash funding of a secret CIA operation to train and arm rebels in Syria, a move that U.S. officials said reflects rising skepticism of the effectiveness of the agency program and the Obama administration's strategy in the Middle East.

The House Intelligence Committee recently voted unanimously to cut as much as 20 percent of the classified funds flowing into a CIA program that U.S. officials said has become one the agency's largest covert operations, with a budget approaching $1 billion a year.

"There is a great deal of concern on a very bipartisan basis with our strategy in Syria," said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the intelligence panel. He declined to comment on specific provisions of the committee's bill but cited growing pessimism that the United States will be in a position "to help shape the aftermath" of Syria's civil war.

The cuts to the CIA program are included in a preliminary intelligence spending bill that is expected to be voted on in the House next week. The measure has provoked concern among CIA and White House officials, who warned that pulling money out of the CIA effort could weaken U.S.-backed insurgents just as they have begun to emerge as effective fighters. The White House declined to comment.

Recent CIA assessments have warned that the war is approaching a critical stage in which Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is losing territory and strength, and might soon be forced to relinquish all but a narrow corridor of the country to rebel groups -- some of them dominated by Islamist militants.

"Regime losses across the front lines are edging the conflict closer to [Assad's] doorstep," a U.S. intelligence official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. The Syrian president "is not necessarily on the verge of defeat," the official said, noting that Russia and Iran continue to support him and could help him stave off collapse. But because of regime losses in Idlib and elsewhere, the official said, "many people are starting to openly talk about an endgame for Assad and Syria."

The projections have prompted a flurry of discussions at the White House, CIA, Pentagon and State Department regarding post-Assad scenarios, officials said, and whether U.S.-backed moderate forces will be in a position to prevent the country from being overrun by extremist groups, including the Islamic State, which has beheaded Western hostages and declared a caliphate encompassing large parts of Syria and Iraq.

This week, President Obama expanded the U.S. military's role against the Islamic State, unveiling plans to deploy U.S. advisers to new bases in Iraq, while announcing no change to the limited American-led bombing campaign that began in Iraq and Syria last year. A separate Defense Department program authorized to train moderate fighters to combat the Islamic State has not yet begun.

But the sudden contraction of Assad's sphere of control has focused renewed attention on Syria and the CIA program set up in 2013 to bolster moderate forces that still represent the United States' most direct involvement on the ground in Syria's civil war.

The cost of that CIA program has not previously been disclosed, and the figure provides the clearest indication to date of the extent to which the agency's attention and resources have shifted to Syria.

At $1 billion, Syria-related operations account for about $1 of every $15 in the CIA's overall budget, judging by spending levels revealed in documents The Washington Post obtained from former U.S. intelligence contractor Edward Snowden.

U.S. officials said the CIA has trained and equipped nearly 10,000 fighters sent into Syria over the past several years -- meaning that the agency is spending roughly $100,000 per year for every anti-Assad rebel who has gone through the program.

The CIA declined to comment on the program or its budget. But U.S. officials defended the scale of the expenditures, saying the money goes toward much more than salaries and weapons and is part of a broader, multibillion-dollar effort involving Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey to bolster a coalition of militias known as the Southern Front of the Free Syrian Army.


Much of the CIA's money goes toward running secret training camps in Jordan, gathering intelligence to help guide the operations of agency-backed militias and managing a sprawling logistics network used to move fighters, ammunition and weapons into the country.

The move by the House intelligence panel to cut the program's funds is not mentioned in the unclassified version of the spending bill. But statements released by lawmakers alluded to some of their underlying concerns, including a line calling for an "effort to enhance the metrics involved in a critically important [intelligence community] program."

That language, officials said, was a veiled reference to members' mounting frustration with the program and a perceived inability by the agency to show that its forces have gained territory, won battles or achieved other measurable results.

"Assad is increasingly in danger, and people may be taking bets on how long he can last, but it's largely not as a result of action by so-called moderates on the ground," said a senior Republican aide in Congress, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the subject.

In the past two years, the goal of the CIA's mission in Syria has shifted from ousting Assad to countering the rise of extremist groups including al-Qaeda affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State, which is also known as ISIS and ISIL.

"Unfortunately, I think that ISIS, al-Nusra and some of the other radical Islamic factions are the best positioned to capi-tal-ize on the chaos that might accompany a rapid decline of the regime," Schiff said.

Even defenders of the CIA program acknowledge that moderate factions in Syria have often performed poorly and are likely to be overwhelmed in any direct showdown with the Islamic State.

Still, officials said U.S.-backed fighters have made significant gains in recent weeks -- including the seizure of a government army base -- and represent the only meaningful prospect for the United States and its allies to maintain a foothold in the country if Assad falls.


"This is especially true in southern Syria, where [the U.S.-backed coalition] is emerging as a significant force capable of capturing key regime bases," the U.S. intelligence official said. "Slowly but surely, U.S. government support to the moderate opposition forces has paid off."

Opposition leaders in southern Syria, where the CIA-trained fighters are concentrated, said the groups have recently become better organized and more effective in their use of heavier weapons, including U.S.-made TOW antitank missiles.

"They have coherent command and control and have unified Sunni groups," said Oubai Shahbandar, a former top adviser to the opposition leadership who maintains regular contact with rebels on the ground. Moderate militias have kept control of border crossings into Jordan and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and are fighting on the outskirts of Damascus.

The training program, Shahbandar said, "is a precedent in terms of what works." Rather than cut funds, he said, the United States "should really double down on its southern program."

Rebel units in the area have set up functioning civilian governments that could be models for the kind of political transition the United States says it seeks as a replacement for Assad, said Lina Khatib of the Carnegie Middle East Center.

Despite those gains south of Damascus, experts and officials said that the most significant pressure on Assad's regime is in northern Syria, where the Islamic State is on the offensive. At the same time, a separate coalition of rebel groups known as the Army of Conquest has taken advantage of infusions of new weapons and cash from Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar.

The intelligence spending bill would set budgets for the fiscal year beginning in October. The chairman of the House intelligence panel, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), declined a request for an interview.

The Senate Intelligence Committee is expected to begin work this month on its own budget for U.S. spy agencies. U.S. officials said the White House has signaled that it will seek to persuade the Senate panel to protect the CIA program from the cuts sought by the House.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Israel Helped Obama Skirt 'Red Line' on Syria
60 JUN 15, 2015 Eli Lake
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-06-15/israel-helped-obama-skirt-red-line-on-syria



(Michael)Oren writes in his memoir that Israel did not oppose U.S. airstrikes in late August 2013, saying the Jewish state saw no downside with Obama enforcing his red line and hopefully deterring Syria's ally, Iran.

But at the same time, he credits Steinitz and Netanyahu with helping prepare the diplomacy that allowed Obama to climb down from the air strikes that Oren himself believed at the time were all but a certainty.


The revelation in Oren's memoir is particularly significant since Washington's pro-Israel lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee had agreed to help lobby for a war resolution against Syria at the request of the White House. Oren writes that Obama's national security adviser, Susan Rice, personally asked AIPAC to lobby for the resolution and that AIPAC complied.



---------------

Israeli officials have consistently made the case that enforcing Mr. Obama's narrow "red line" on Syria is essential to halting the nuclear ambitions of Israel's archenemy, Iran. More quietly, Israelis have increasingly argued that the best outcome for Syria's two-and-a-half-year-old civil war, at least for the moment, is no outcome.

...said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. "Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that's the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there's no real threat from Syria."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/world/middleeast/israel-backs-limited-strike-against-syria.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 10:24:45 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J
>
>
> > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
>
> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
> >
> > Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> > http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
> >

> > Eliminator - ZZ Top
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo



> Israel's Education Minister Naftali Bennett is calling for the world to recognize its 1981 annexation of the Golan Heights because "Syria no longer functions as a country that could reclaim the strategic plateau" according to the Jerusalem Post.

> Syria, as a state, no longer exists. So this is the time for initiative."
>
>
> http://silentcrownews.com/wordpress/?p=4182

Israel says Syria's Assad may be left with rump state
TEL AVIV Tue Jun 30, 2015
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/30/us-mideast-crisis-syria-israel-idUSKCN0PA0UQ20150630




A senior Israeli defense official said President Bashar al-Assad controlled just a fifth of Syria and may end up in charge of a rump state dominated by his minority Alawite sect.

Israel and its neighbor Syria are long-term enemies, but the remarks by Amos Gilad, strategic adviser to Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon, reflect concerns by states across the region that Syria is undergoing a de facto partition after four years of civil war.

"Syria is gone. Syria is dying. The funeral will be declared in due time. This Bashar Assad, he will be remembered in history textbooks as the one who lost Syria," Gilad told an intelligence conference organized by the Israel Defense journal on Monday.

"Until now he has lost 75 percent of Syria ... He is, practically, governor of 20 percent of Syria. And his future, if I may predict it, is shrinking all of the time. And maybe we will have him as the president of 'Alawistan'," Gilad added.

Since March, Assad has steadily lost territory in the northwest, south and central Syria to an array of groups including Islamic State, the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front, and rebels who profess a more moderate vision for Syria.

Many analysts believe pro-government forces are focusing their efforts on shoring up control over a western area of Syria stretching north from Damascus through Homs and Hama to the Mediterranean coast, including the heartland of the Alawites.

However, the Syrian government is still fighting to maintain outposts in other parts of the country, including the cities of Hasaka and Qamishli in the northeast, Deir al-Zor city in the east, Deraa in the south and Aleppo in the north.

Israel has largely sought to keep out of the insurgency next door, worried that Assad could be toppled by more hostile Sunni Islamist insurgents. However, Israel has also provided humanitarian relief to rebels fighting Assad's forces.

Despite efforts toward peace in the 1990s, Syria and Israel are long-running enemies, having fought wars in 1948, 1967 and 1973. In the 1967 war, Israel captured the Golan Heights from Syria and retains the territory, a high plateau overlooking southwest Syria and the approach to Damascus.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>

> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>

> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

David Petraeus, Whose Greatest Aptitude Lies in Rewriting History
Published September 1, 2015 | By emptywheel
https://www.emptywheel.net/2015/09/01/david-petraeus-whose-greatest-aptitude-lies-in-rewriting-history/


As always in stories involving David Petraeus, this story about his plan to work with al Qaeda to defeat ISIS involves some rewriting or forgetting of history. There's the fiction that what is usually called the surge but here is at least called co-opting members of al Qaeda "worked."

The former commander of U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan has been quietly urging U.S. officials to consider using so-called moderate members of al Qaeda's Nusra Front to fight ISIS in Syria, four sources familiar with the conversations, including one person who spoke to Petraeus directly, told The Daily Beast.

The heart of the idea stems from Petraeus' experience in Iraq in 2007, when as part of a broader strategy to defeat an Islamist insurgency the U.S. persuaded Sunni militias to stop fighting with al Qaeda and to work with the American military.

The tactic worked, at least temporarily. But al Qaeda in Iraq was later reborn as ISIS, and has become the sworn enemy of its parent organization. Now, Petraeus is returning to his old play, advocating a strategy of co-opting rank-and-file members of al Nusra, particularly those who don't necessarily share all of core al Qaeda's Islamist philosophy. [my emphasis]

To be fair to the Daily Beast, they call it a "tactic," not a strategy, which is correct and part of the problem with it -- it provides no path to lasting peace and can easily lead to the metastasis of new violent groups -- as DB makes clear happened with the rise of al Qaeda in Iraq. The description of how Petraeus engaged the Sons of Iraq also neglects to mention the financial payoff, which seems important both to understand the play but also its limitations. Thus far, though, DB at least hints as why Petraeus' plan is so batshit crazy.

Then there's the silence in the story about how every attempt to train allied troops that Petraeus has been involved with has turned to shit: Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya. That seems worth mentioning.

But I'm most interested in this claim:

Petraeus was the CIA director in early 2011 when the Syrian civil war erupted. At the time, he along with then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta reportedly urged the Obama administration to work with moderate opposition forces. The U.S. didn't, and many of those groups have since steered toward jihadist groups like the Nusra Front, which are better equipped and have had more success on the battlefield.

While it is true that Obama did not systematically arm rebels in Syria in 2011, it is also a public fact that the CIA was watching (and at least once doing more than that) Qatar and Saudi Arabia move arms from Libya before Petraeus' departure in 2012, and Obama approved a covert finding to arm "moderate" rebels in April 2013, with CIA implementing that plan in June.

That's all public and confirmed.

So how is it that we once again are pretending that the CIA -- the agency Petraeus led as it oversaw a disastrous intervention in Libya that contributed to radicalization both there and in Syria -- didn't arm purported moderates who turned out not to be?

In other words, the story here should be, "David Petraeus, after overseeing a series of failed training efforts and covert efforts that led to increased radicalization, wants to try again."

Which would make it even more clear how crazy this idea is.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Obama's Fateful Syrian Choice
September 18, 2015 By Robert Parry
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/09/18/obamas-fateful-syrian-choice/


There is an obvious course that President Barack Obama could follow if he wants to lessen the crises stemming from the Syrian war and other U.S. "regime change" strategies of the past several decades, but it would require him to admit that recent interventions (including his own) have represented a strategic disaster.

Obama also would have to alter some longstanding alliances - including those with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Israel - and correct some of the false narratives that have been established during his administration, such as storylines accusing the Syrian government of using sarin gas on Aug. 21, 2013, and blaming the Russians for everything that's gone wrong in Ukraine.

In retracting false allegations and releasing current U.S. intelligence assessments on those issues, the President would have to repudiate the trendy concept of "strategic communications," an approach that mixes psychological operations, propaganda and P.R. into a "soft power" concoction to use against countries identified as U.S. foes.

"Stratcom" also serves to manage the perceptions of the American people, an assault on the fundamental democratic precept of an informed electorate. Instead of honestly informing the citizenry, the government systematically manipulates us. Obama would have to learn to trust the people with the truth.

Whether Obama recognizes how imperative it is that he make these course corrections, whether he has the political courage to take on entrenched foreign-policy lobbies (especially after the bruising battle over the Iran nuclear agreement), and whether he can overcome his own elitism toward the public are the big questions - and there are plenty of reasons to doubt that Obama will do what's necessary. But his failure to act decisively could have devastating consequences for the United States and the world.

In a way, this late-in-his-presidency course correction should be obvious (or at least it would be if there weren't so many layers of "strategic communications" to peel away). It would include embracing Russia's willingness to help stabilize the political-military situation in Syria, rather than the Obama administration fuming about it and trying to obstruct it.

For instance, Obama could join with Russia in stabilizing Syria by making it clear to putative U.S. "allies" in the Mideast that they will face American wrath if they don't do all that's possible to cut off the terrorists of the Islamic State and Al Qaeda from money, weapons and recruits. That would mean facing down Turkey over its covert support for the Sunni extremists as well as confronting Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Persian Gulf sheikdoms over secret funding and arming of these jihadists.

If Obama made it clear that the United States would take stern action - such as inflicting severe financial punishments - against any country caught helping these terrorist groups, he could begin shutting down the jihadists' support pipelines. He could also coordinate with the Russians and Iranians in cracking down on the Islamic State and Al Qaeda strongholds inside Syria.

On the political front, Obama could inform Syria's Sunni "moderates" who have been living off American largesse that they must sit down with President Bashar al-Assad's representatives and work out a power-sharing arrangement and make plans for democratic elections after a reasonable level of stability has been restored. Obama would have to ditch his mantra: "Assad must go!"

Given the severity of the crisis - as the refugee chaos now spreads into Europe - Obama doesn't have the luxury anymore of pandering to the neocons and liberal interventionists. Instead of talking tough, he needs to act realistically.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

U.S. says Assad must go, timing down to negotiation
Sat Sep 19, 2015 BY LESLEY WROUGHTON
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/19/us-mideastcrisis-kerrytalks-idUSKCN0RJ0FX20150919



U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said on Saturday Syria's President Bashar al-Assad has to go but the timing of his departure should be decided through negotiation.

Speaking after talks with British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond in London, Kerry called on Russia and Iran to use their influence over Assad to convince him to negotiate a political transition.

Kerry said the United States welcomed Russia's involvement in tackling the Islamic State in Syria but a worsening refugee crisis underscored the need to find a compromise that could also lead to political change in the country.

"We need to get to the negotiation. That is what we're looking for and we hope Russia and Iran, and any other countries with influence, will help to bring about that, because that's what is preventing this crisis from ending," said Kerry.

"We're prepared to negotiate. Is Assad prepared to negotiate, really negotiate? Is Russia prepared to bring him to the table?"

Russia's buildup at Syria's Latakia airbase has raised the possibility of air combat missions in Syrian airspace. Heavy Russian equipment, including tanks, helicopters and naval infantry forces, have been moved to Latakia, U.S. officials say.

Kerry said of Assad's removal: "For the last year and a half we have said Assad has to go, but how long and what the modality is ...that's a decision that has to be made in the context of the Geneva process and negotiation."

Kerry added: "It doesn't have to be on day one or month one ... there is a process by which all the parties have to come together and reach an understanding of how this can best be achieved."

Kerry said he did not have a specific time frame in mind for Assad to stay. "I just know that the people of Syria have already spoken with their feet. They're leaving Syria."

Hammond, who on Sept. 9 said Britain could accept Assad staying in place for a transition period, said Assad could not be part of Syria's long-term future "but the modality and timing has to be part of a political solution that allows us to move forward."

Hammond said the situation in Syria was now more complicated with Russia's increased military involvement in the country.

"Because of the Russian engagement the situation in Syria is becoming more complicated and we need to discuss this as part of a much bigger problem - the migration pressures, the humanitarian crisis in Syria as well as the need to defeat ISIL," he said.

Kerry and Hammond said they also discussed conflicts in Yemen, Libya and Ukraine.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 7:16:36 PM UTC-4, thinbluemime2 wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 11:20:29 PM UTC+1, The Starmaker wrote:
> > thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> > >
> > > On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > > > http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
> > > >
> > > > Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> > > > http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ///
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Full Text Of Speeches:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > > > http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
> > > >
> > > > Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> > > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----------
> > > >
> > > > Eliminator - ZZ Top
> > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo
> > >

> > > America's Israel Lobby Demands "Direct Militery Strikes" Against Syria
> > > August 31, 2013
> > > http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/content/foreign-policy-experts-urge-president-obama-respond-assads-chemical-attack
> > >
> >
> >
> > I don't think striking Sryia is a good idea....especially if Israel for
> > it. Anything they for, Obama should be against. It makes
> > good foreign policy.



> As a nation of laws, it would be much better if the United States observed international law instead of going it alone like a rogue state and bombing a foreign government as punishment for allegedly breaking international law.
>
> The United States government has for 2 years covertly and aggressively worked to overthrow the Assad/Syrian government. The CIA weapons running from Libya to Syria last year was endorsed by the same government officials who today are alleging war crimes by the Syrian government. The blood of 100 thousand Syrian civilians is partially on the hands of the United States Government.
>
> Ironically, the 2013 aerial bombing of Syria by a Nobel Peace Prize recipient will begin around the anniversary of the aerial Twin Towers attack 12 years ago.
>
> They hate us for our freedoms, right? Our freedom to assemble, our freedom to privacy, our right to be secure in our homes without warrant-less searches or wiretaps.
>
> There is no light between the United States and Israel, and by that I mean both countries are morally in the dark.





The Obama administration needs to own up to the quagmire in Syria
Annie Robbins on September 22, 2015
http://mondoweiss.net/2015/09/own-up-obama




The crisis in Syria is still in full throttle. President Obama pretends to be a powerless bystander in Syria when in fact US policy has played an important role in creating the quagmire now playing out. For example, the events of this past weekend present a microcosm of how US policy has failed and it's time for the US president to take responsibility and to change US policy while he still has a chance.

Let's start by taking a look at the last few days.

Last week news came out that "Division 30", a heavily criticized $500 million plan approved by Congress as a last ditch effort to recruit a U.S.-trained fighting force of "moderate rebels" to take on ISIS in Syria, had produced "just four or five American-trained fighters." Then over the weekend news broke that a group of 75 US-trained rebels entered Syria from Turkey to join Division 30 but several of the US-trained fighters instead joined a group called Suqur al-Jabal instead.

Now, news is coming out that none of the US-trained force actually made it to Division 30 and instead "betrayed their American backers and handed their weapons over to al-Qaeda in Syria immediately after re-entering the country."

Obama has washed his hands of blame over this ongoing fiasco. Last week New York Times White House correspondent Peter Baker's, Finger-Pointing, but Few Answers, After a Syria Solution Fails, got a lot of attention, from American Enterprise Institute "[T]hey made me do it", to Mother Jones' "[T]he buck stops in the Oval Office". Baker reported Obama had always been skeptical of training Syrian rebels and "the White House says it is not to blame."

I agree with Obama's critics, he should own up. It's not enough to just say 'I was always skeptical and this proves I was right all along'. The outcome of the program should not come as a surprise to the administration. A classified 2012 US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report (PDF), recently released by Judicial Watch, warned that empowering opposition forces would strengthen Islamist forces. And this is exactly what has happened. Regardless of who ever pushed this plan ("Exactly what the supporting powers of the opposition want"), Obama approved it.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf

Division 30 is just part of a massive influx of resources the US is putting towards the fighting in Syria. At Monday's press briefing John Kirby stated we had, thus far, invested $4.5 billion since the start of the refugee crisis. David Ignatius reported in August that Division 30, the overt Special Operations program, was separate from the "parallel covert program run by the CIA" in Syria. According to Washington Post's Greg Miller and Karen DeYoung that program "has become one the agency's largest covert operations, with a budget approaching $1 billion a year." But whatever we spend pales in comparison to the suffering on the ground.

Meanwhile, GOP politicians including several presidential candidates are blaming Obama for the Russian build up in Syria. At Monday's State Department press briefing Admiral Kirby parried questions about Russia's "expanding their military presence on the ground", U.S. intentions regarding Assad's departure/"political transition," concerns about the US negotiations regarding Syria with Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the acknowledgement that "Iran would have to be a part of the process"


Imagine that. There's only one person at the helm of U.S. foreign policy and that's President Obama. He's got another 15 months in office. If the U.S. can be part of a diplomatic solution to bring stability to Syria, this would be the time to do it.

Own up Obama, to your mistakes and your power.



( READ THE COMMENTS at the page bottom: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/09/own-up-obama )

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

The Wicked War on Syria: Hillary Clinton in Her Own Words
by RICK STERLING SEPTEMBER 30, 2015
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/09/30/the-wicked-war-on-syria-hillary-clinton-in-her-own-words/




Key leaders from around the world are present at the United Nations this week to discuss critical issues; one of the most pressing is Syria. How did we get to this point with half the Syrian population (almost 12 million) displaced and under-populated but huge areas of Syria now controlled by ISIS, Al Qaeda (Nusra) and other fanatical fundamentalist groups?

Hillary Clinton's 2014 book Hard Choices reveals important information about the first years of the Syrian conflict and how we got where we are today. Clinton's account conveys the perception, priorities and bias at the top level of the Obama Administration. It describes policy differences within the administration and the common assumptions and goals which have led to the current disastrous situation.

Clinton's chapter on Syria is titled "Syria: A Wicked Problem". It documents how the US and regional allies tried to overthrow the Damascus government. The "wicked problem" is that there was no easy way. Attack directly? Train proxy army? Supply the armed opposition with weapons secretly or publicly? Apply "No Fly Zone"? Bomb Damascus? These are the question considered. The dominance of neoconservative mentality in Washington and western media is demonstrated by the fact that foreign demands that "Assad must go" are rarely questioned despite the fact it's in clear violation of international law and the UN Charter.

Clinton's unwillingness to let go of the "regime change" requirement regarding a sovereign state, coupled with a moralistic but biased outrage, suggests someone who does not respect international law and could be dangerous as President: hypocritical, prejudiced and self-righteous.

Following are specific points of interest from "Syria: A Wicked Problem".

Clinton echoes the western narrative about the Syrian conflict:

"The crisis began in early 2011, when Syrian citizens, inspired in part by the successful peaceful protests in Tunisia and Egypt, took to the streets to demonstrate against the authoritarian regime of Bashar al Assad. As in Libya, security forces responded with excessive force and mass detentions which in turn led some Syrians to take up arms to defend themselves and, eventually, to try to topple Assad." (p 447)

This description is widespread but misleading. In his 2007 article Seymour Hersh exposed the U.S. promotion of Sunni fundamentalists to undermine Syria and Iran. In 2010 Secretary of State Clinton pressed Syrian President Bashar al Assad to comply with Israeli and US calls to stop supporting the Lebanese resistance and break relations with Iran. Was Clinton especially hostile to the Syrian President because he did not comply with her requests/demands and soon after forged an agreement with Iran? She makes no mention of this in her book but it is obviously relevant to the issue of Syria-USA relations.

Regarding the so-called peaceful protesters, in fact there was a violent element from the start. In Deraa in March 2011 several police were killed. In the original "capital of the revolution", Homs, a very credible eye-witness reported armed demonstrators initiating the violence.

Clinton confirms the anti-Assad obsession of the Gulf monarchies: "Sunni countries, especially Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states, backed the rebels and wanted Assad gone" (p 450).

This presents a baffling inconsistency: If the Syrian uprising was about "freedom and democracy" why was it being heavily promoted by repressive monarchies Saudi Arabia and Qatar?

Clinton was focused on building the anti-Assad forces instead of working toward diplomatic resolution. She recounts: "As the crisis unfolded, one of the biggest challenges we faced was helping the opposition unite across the country's many religious, geographic and ideological lines". (p 449) In early 2012 she coordinated the cynically named "Friends of Syria" coalition. This was the group of countries hostile to Syria and collectively agreeing how they would support a political front, support an armed insurrection and promote the "activists" fighting for freedom and democracy while on the payroll. At the first meeting in Tunisia in February 2012, as chaos was spreading in neighboring Libya, the "Friends of Syria" discussed the implementation of economic and other sanctions against Syria, training of "Syrian civil opposition leaders". Clinton records "behind the scenes there was a lot of talk in Tunis about funneling weapons to the rebels". (p452).

Clinton distorts the history in several areas. For example, regarding the findings of the Arab League mission which toured Syria in December-January of 2011/2 she says "Arab monitors went to Syria's battle-scarred cities ....once again it became clear that Assad had no intention of keeping his word. In late January 2012, the Arab League pulled the observers out in frustration and asked the UN Security Council to back its call for a political transition." (p 450)

In contrast with Clinton's description, the mission report speaks about the Syrian government's cooperation. The mission wanted to continue but was stopped by the Arab League itself, presumably because the findings were contradicting the policy of the dominant powers in the Arab League.

Among other things, the Arab League mission report documented:

* violence by rebels against government and civilians including the bombing of a civilian bus;

* false and exaggerated reports in the international media;

* pro and anti government demonstrations which were NOT disrupted ;

* overall Syrian government cooperation and compliance with requests.

Clinton casually dismisses the consequences of the "No Fly Zone" in Libya. The campaign in Libya began with an innocent sounding UN Security Council Resolution calling for the protection of civilians. Both China and Russia abstained rather than voting to veto the resolution. Then they realized they had been tricked. In her book, Clinton describes how Russia "chafed as the NATO-led mission to protect civilians accelerated the fall of Qaddafi". In reality the NATO led mission "to protect civilians" resulted in vastly more civilian deaths than had occurred before it began.

Horace Campbell and Maximilian Forte have written two solid accounts describing the reality versus myths of regime change in Libya. Clinton's characterization of "accelerating" the fall of Qaddafi is a cynical understatement, like her self congratulatory comment that "we came, we saw, he died" after rebels killed Qaddafi on the street. Many of the refugees drowning in the Mediterannean Sea or reaching the shores of Italy today are a direct consequence of that operation. Yet who has been held to account?

Clinton chastises Russian and Chinese diplomats for not supporting UN Security Council resolutions that place all the blame for the Syrian conflict on the Damascus government while making no demands of foreign states pumping weapons and jihadis into the country. Clinton describes the Russian and Chinese actions as "despicable": "Are we for peace and security and democratic future, or are we going to be complicit in the continuing violence and bloodshed? I know where the United States stands ....Russia and China used their veto power to prevent the world from condemning the violence. To block this resolution was to bear responsiblity for the horrors on the ground. It was, as I said later, despicable." (p 452)

Clinton maintains the public facade that the Obama Administration did not supply weapons in the early years of the conflict. On page 460 she claims "We provided the rebels with 'nonlethal' aid, including communications gear and rations, starting in March 2012, but we held the line against contributing arms and training." This was the public stance but in reality the CIA was heavily involved in transferring weapons to the Syrian armed opposition beginning late 2011. Just as Ronald Reagan and Oliver North used subterfuge to supply weapons to the Contras in Nicaragua in the 1980's, so the CIA and Obama Administration found the perfect way to get weapons to the Syrian opposition without having it recorded or accounted for: they stole weapons from the Libyan military arsenal and shipped them to the Syrian armed opposition as confirmed in this declassified DIA report.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2015/05/18/defense-department-documents-given-to-judicial-watch-under-foia-suit/




The Wicked Witch of the West - Hillary 2016
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/NmuXPeGMvrM/J3PA25A3CAAJ

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 7:16:36 PM UTC-4, thinbluemime2 wrote:
> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 11:20:29 PM UTC+1, The Starmaker wrote:
> > thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

> > > > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > > > http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
> > > >
> > > > Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> > > > http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ///
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Full Text Of Speeches:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > > > http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
> > > >
> > > > Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> > > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----------
> > > >
> > > > Eliminator - ZZ Top
> > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo
> > >

> > > America's Israel Lobby Demands "Direct Militery Strikes" Against Syria
> > > August 31, 2013
> > > http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/content/foreign-policy-experts-urge-president-obama-respond-assads-chemical-attack
> > >
> >
> >
> > I don't think striking Sryia is a good idea....especially if Israel for
> > it. Anything they for, Obama should be against. It makes
> > good foreign policy.
> >
> >

> > Let Israel strike Syria.
> >
> >
> >
> > The Starmaker

>
> As a nation of laws, it would be much better if the United States observed international law instead of going it alone like a rogue state and bombing a foreign government as punishment for allegedly breaking international law.
>
> The United States government has for 2 years covertly and aggressively worked to overthrow the Assad/Syrian government. The CIA weapons running from Libya to Syria last year was endorsed by the same government officials who today are alleging war crimes by the Syrian government. The blood of 100 thousand Syrian civilians is partially on the hands of the United States Government.
>
> Ironically, the 2013 aerial bombing of Syria by a Nobel Peace Prize recipient will begin around the anniversary of the aerial Twin Towers attack 12 years ago.
>
> They hate us for our freedoms, right? Our freedom to assemble, our freedom to privacy, our right to be secure in our homes without warrant-less searches or wiretaps.
>
> There is no light between the United States and Israel, and by that I mean both countries are morally in the dark.

WikiLeaks cables shed light on US foreign policy failures
Documents show Washington backing of regime change is a major problem
October 6, 2015 Mark Weisbrot
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/10/wikileaks-cables-shed-light-on-us-foreign-policy-failures.html




Some the most important historical information for understanding current events comes, not surprisingly, from sources that were intended to be shielded from the public. From November 2010 to September 2011, more than 250,000 communications between U.S. diplomats that were never meant to see the light of day were made public. They are available at WikiLeaks, the nonprofit media organization that accepts confidential information from anonymous sources and releases it to news sources and the public. A number of researchers have put together a treasure trove of information and analysis that can be immensely clarifying. (The recently released book from this research, published by Verso, is "The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to U.S. Empire.")

Consider Syria, which is dominating the international news because of increased Russian military intervention as well as a surge of some 500,000 refugees from the region arriving in Europe. Why has it taken so long for Washington to even begin -- yes, it is unfortunately just beginning -- to reconsider the policy of requiring Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to agree to resign before any meaningful negotiations can take place? After all, any diplomat could have told the White House that demanding the political suicide of one party to a civil war as a condition for negotiations is not how civil wars end. Practically speaking, this policy has been a commitment to indefinite warfare.

The answer can be found in diplomatic communications released by WikiLeaks, which show that regime change in Syria has been the policy of the U.S. government as far back as 2006. Even more horrifying -- after hundreds of thousands of deaths, untold lives ruined and 4 million people displaced -- is the evidence that Washington has had a policy of promoting sectarian warfare in the country for the purpose of destabilizing the Assad government. A cable from the top U.S. embassy official (the chargé d'affaires) in Damascus in December 2006 offers suggestions for how Washington could exacerbate and take advantage of certain "vulnerabilities" of the government of Syria. Vulnerabilities to be exploited include "the presence of transiting Islamist extremists" and "Sunni fears of Iranian influence."

Describing this strategy in "The WikiLeaks Files," Robert Naiman writes:

At that time, no one in the U.S. government could credibly have claimed innocence of the possible implications of such a policy. This cable was written at the height of the sectarian Sunni-Shia civil war in Iraq, which the U.S. military was unsuccessfully trying to contain. U.S. public disgust with the sectarian civil war in Iraq unleashed by the U.S. invasion had just cost Republicans control of Congress in the November 2006 election. The election result immediately precipitated the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld as secretary of defense. No one working for the U.S. government on foreign policy at the time could have been unaware of the implications of promoting Sunni-Shia sectarianism.

The cables also show that U.S. support for efforts to overthrow the Syrian government beginning in 2011 were not a response to the Assad government's repression of protests but rather a continuation of a years-long strategy by more directly violent means. They explain why the U.S. government could get so carried away by the protests and then the armed struggle that it helped to promote as to ignore what a large number of Syrians, were thinking: Whatever they thought of Assad, a glance at the mess in Iraq (even before the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant) showed that a much worse fate for their country was possible.

The cables also show how Honduras, under the government of President Manuel Zelaya, became an enemy state for becoming too friendly with other left governments.

That scenario has materialized. With hundreds of thousands of people dead and a military stalemate, both of which could have easily been foreseen, finally Barack Obama's administration is showing some flexibility toward meaningful negotiations, a move strongly encouraged by many House Democrats. Why couldn't this have happened earlier?

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

A Glimmer of Hope for Syria
October 29, 2015 By Robert Parry
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/10/29/a-glimmer-of-hope-for-syria/





"With new negotiations starting in Geneva - and with Iran now allowed to participate - there is finally a glimmer of hope that the Syrian slaughter might end. But that will require concessions from all sides and President Obama standing up to the neocons who put "regime change" ahead of peace"






Despite all the ranting from armchair-warriors across Official Washington - urging attacks on the Syrian military and even Russian warplanes inside Syria - cooler heads may have finally prevailed with Secretary of State John Kerry agreeing to a formula that will let Iran participate in Syrian peace talks set to begin Friday in Geneva.

The point here is that Iran and Russia, as allies of the Syrian government, are in a strong position to urge concessions from Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, much as Russian President Vladimir Putin did in 2013 when he pressured Assad to surrender Syria's chemical weapons arsenal. Also, in late 2013, Putin helped wrest concessions from Iran over its nuclear program.

Assuming Kerry shows corresponding flexibility by relenting on the U.S. demand that "Assad must go" as a precondition to negotiations - and puts pressure on the U.S.-backed Syrian opposition to accept some compromise with Assad - perhaps this humanitarian catastrophe can be brought under some measure of control.

It is way past time for sanity and realism to replace the endless "tough guy/gal" posturing that has consumed Official Washington since 2011 as a quarter million Syrians have been killed and millions have fled as refugees across the Mideast and into Europe.

The only narrative that's been allowed in the mainstream U.S. press is that Assad is responsible for nearly every bad thing that's happened, ignoring the support that Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and even Israel have provided to jihadist fighters, including Al Qaeda's Nusra Front and Al Qaeda's spinoff, the Islamic State (also known as ISIS, ISIL or Daesh).

President Barack Obama has been part of the problem, too, as he has bent to the "regime change" demands of "liberal interventionists" and their close cousins, the neoconservatives.

To appease those political/media voices, Obama has "covertly" intervened in the Syrian conflict by arming and training some rebel forces. Though the administration insists that it has armed and trained only "moderate" rebels, the reality is that such a "moderate" force is largely mythical, with many of the CIA's recruits later joining Islamist armies and surrendering U.S.-supplied weapons to these extremists.

How U.S. officials have defined "moderate" is also in question. A source briefed on this strategy told me that the CIA supplied 500 TOW anti-tank missiles to Ahrah ash-Sham, an Islamist force founded, in part, by Al Qaeda veterans. Ahrah ash-Sham collaborates with Al Qaeda's Nusra Front as the two leading militias in the Saudi-backed Army of Conquest.

The sophisticated TOW missiles have been "credited" with enabling the Army of Conquest to make major advances around the city of Idlib and block counter-offenses by the Syrian army. In other words, U.S. support for "moderate" rebels has strengthened the military position of Al Qaeda, even if the administration can technically argue that it isn't giving weapons to Al Qaeda's Nusra Front.

[Obveeus]

On 10/29/2015 1:16 PM, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>>
>>
>> John Kerry 2013-08-30
>> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>>
>> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
>> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg

The GOP debate last night was supported in part by a product placement:
https://vine.co/v/eYFrgWHVDuE

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

Trump Has Strongest Jewish *Ties* of all GOP Candidates
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_Tower


U.S.-Israeli *ties* are a particularly important component of Huckabee's appeal to religious conservatives in the Republican base.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/2016-candidate-mike-huckabee-heads-to-israel/



Trump can win Huckabee's support by simply guaranteeing Huckabee an upper management position in the Elite Towers for life. Huckabee will die from excitement and finally go to his heaven, LOL







----------

Yep, it's a word play...or is it?

http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>

> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html

> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

16 times Obama said there would be no boots on the ground in Syria
Gregory Korte, USA TODAY 3:25 p.m. EDT October 30, 2015
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2015/10/30/16-times-obama-said-there-would-no-boots-ground-syria/74869884/



WASHINGTON -- Since 2013, President Obama has repeatedly vowed that there would be no "boots on the ground" in Syria.

But White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the president's decision Friday to send up to 50 special forces troops to Syria doesn't change the fundamental strategy: "This is an important thing for the American people to understand. These forces do not have a combat mission."

Earnest said the promises of "no boots on the ground" first came in the context of removing Syrian President Bashar Assad because of his use of chemical weapons. Since then, Syria has become a haven for Islamic State fighters.

Here's a recap of Obama's no-boots pledge:

President Obama delivers a statement on Syria during
President Obama delivers a statement on Syria during a meeting with Latvia President Andris Berzins, Estonia President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Lithuania's President Dalia Grybauskaite and Vice President Joe Bidenat the White House August 30, 2013. (Photo: JIM WATSON, AFP/Getty Images)
Remarks before meeting with Baltic State leaders, Aug. 30, 2013

"In no event are we considering any kind of military action that would involve boots on the ground, that would involve a long-term campaign. But we are looking at the possibility of a limited, narrow act that would help make sure that not only Syria, but others around the world, understand that the international community cares about maintaining this chemical weapons ban and norm. So again, I repeat, we're not considering any open-ended commitment. We're not considering any boots-on-the-ground approach."

President Obama speaks about Syria from the Rose Garden
President Obama speaks about Syria from the Rose Garden on August 31, 2013. (Photo: JIM WATSON, AFP/Getty Images)
Remarks in the Rose Garden, Aug. 31, 2013

"After careful deliberation, I have decided that the United States should take military action against Syrian regime targets. This would not be an open-ended intervention. We would not put boots on the ground. Instead, our action would be designed to be limited in duration and scope."

Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio and National
Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio and National Security Adviser Susan Rice listen as President Obama delivers a statement on Syria during a meeting with members of Congress at the White House in Washington, DC, September 3, 2013. Obama told congressional leaders that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad needs to be held accountable for allegedly carrying out the August 21 attack near Damascus, which US officials say killed nearly 1,500 people, including hundreds of children. (Photo: JIM WATSON, AFP/Getty Images)
Statement before meeting with congressional leaders, Sept. 3, 2013

"So the key point that I want to emphasize to the American people: The military plan that has been developed by our Joint Chiefs -- and that I believe is appropriate -- is proportional. It is limited. It does not involve boots on the ground. This is not Iraq, and this is not Afghanistan."

President Obama gestures during his press conference
President Obama gestures during his press conference with the Swedish prime minister at the chancellery Rosenbad in Stockholm, Sweden, Sept. 4, 2013. (Photo: JONAS EKSTROMER, AP)
News conference in Stockholm, Sweden, Sept. 4, 2013

"I think America recognizes that, as difficult as it is to take any military action -- even one as limited as we're talking about, even one without boots on the ground -- that's a sober decision."

President Obama speaks in St. Petersburg, Russia Sept.
President Obama speaks in St. Petersburg, Russia Sept. 6, 2013, days before giving a national address on Syria. (Photo: Pablo Martinez Monsivais, AP)
News conference in St. Petersburg, Russia, Sept. 6, 2013

"The question for the American people is, is that responsibility that we'll be willing to bear? And I believe that when you have a limited, proportional strike like this -- not Iraq, not putting boots on the ground; not some long, drawn-out affair; not without any risks, but with manageable risks -- that we should be willing to bear that responsibility."

President Obama delivers a weekly radio address on
President Obama delivers a weekly radio address on Syria Sept. 7, 2013. (Photo: The White House)
Weekly radio address, Sept. 7, 2013

"What we're not talking about is an open-ended intervention. This would not be another Iraq or Afghanistan. There would be no American boots on the ground. Any action we take would be limited, both in time and scope, designed to deter the Syrian Government from gassing its own people again and degrade its ability to do so."

President Obama speaks to the PBS Newshour's Gwen Ifill
President Obama speaks to the PBS Newshour's Gwen Ifill on Syria Sept. 9, 2013. (Photo: PB Newshour)
Interview with the PBS Newshour, Sept. 9, 2013

"Tomorrow I'll speak to the American people. I'll explain this is not Iraq; this is not Afghanistan; this is not even Libya. We're not talking about -- not boots on the ground. We're not talking about sustained airstrikes. We're talking about a very specific set of strikes to degrade his chemical weapons capabilities in terms of delivery."

In this handout photo provided by CBS News, President
In this handout photo provided by CBS News, President Obama speaks with CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley at the White House on September 9, 2013. (Photo: Handout, Getty Images)
Interview with CBS Evening News, Sept. 9, 2013

"What I'm going to try to propose is that we have a very specific objective, a very narrow military option, and one that will not lead into some large-scale invasion of Syria or involvement or boots on the ground; nothing like that. This isn't like Iraq. It's not like Afghanistan. It's not even like Libya. Then hopefully people will recognize why I think this is so important."

In this Sept. 10, 2013, photo, President Obama addresses
In this Sept. 10, 2013, photo, President Obama addresses the nation in a live televised speech from the East Room of the White House. (Photo: Evan Vucci, AP)
Address to the Nation, Sept. 10, 2013

"Many of you have asked, won't this put us on a slippery slope to another war? One man wrote to me that we are 'still recovering from our involvement in Iraq.' A veteran put it more bluntly: 'This nation is sick and tired of war.' My answer is simple: I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria. I will not pursue an open-ended action like Iraq or Afghanistan. I will not pursue a prolonged air campaign like Libya or Kosovo. This would be a targeted strike to achieve a clear objective: deterring the use of chemical weapons and degrading Assad's capabilities."

President Obama gestures while speaking in the East
President Obama gestures while speaking in the East Room of the White House Feb. 27, 2014, the same day as an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg View. (Photo: Evan Vucci, AP)
Interview on Bloomberg View, Feb, 27, 2014

"We are doing everything we can to see how we can do that and how we can resource it. But I've looked at a whole lot of game plans, a whole lot of war plans, a whole bunch of scenarios, and nobody has been able to persuade me that us taking large-scale military action even absent boots on the ground, would actually solve the problem."

President Obama speaks at a press conference on the
President Obama speaks at a press conference on the second day of the NATO 2014 Summit at the Celtic Manor Resort in Newport, South Wales, on September 5, 2014. (Photo: SAUL LOEB, AFP/Getty Images)
News conference in Newport, Wales, Sept. 5, 2014

"With respect to the situation on the ground in Syria, we will not be placing U.S. ground troops to try to control the areas that are part of the conflict inside of Syria. I don't think that's necessary for us to accomplish our goal. We are going to have to find effective partners on the ground to push back against ISIL."

In this Sept. 6, 2014 image released by NBC, Chuck
In this Sept. 6, 2014 image released by NBC, Chuck Todd speaks with President Obama prior to an interview for "Meet the Press" at the White House in Washington. (Photo: William B. Plowman, AP)
Interview with Meet the Press, Sept. 7, 2014

"(You) cannot, over the long term or even the medium term, deal with this problem by having the United States serially occupy various countries all around the Middle East. We don't have the resources. It puts enormous strains on our military. And at some point, we leave. And then things blow up again. So we've got to have a more sustainable strategy, which means the boots on the ground have to be Iraqi. And and in Syria, the boots on the ground have to be Syrian. ... I will reserve the right to always protect the American people and go after folks who are trying to hurt us wherever they are. But in terms of controlling territory, we're going to have to develop a moderate Sunni opposition that can control territory and that we can work with. The notion that the United States should be putting boots on the ground, I think would be a profound mistake. And I want to be very clear and very explicit about that."

President Obama delivers a prime time address from
President Obama delivers a prime time address from the Cross Hall of the White House on September 10, 2014. Vowing to target the Islamic State with air strikes "wherever they exist", Obama pledged to lead a broad coalition to fight IS and work with "partner forces" on the ground in Syria and Iraq. (Photo: SAUL LOEB, AFP/Getty Images)
Address to the Nation on Syria, Sept. 10, 2014

"I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil. This counterterrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out ISIL wherever they exist, using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground."

President Obama gestures as he answers a question from
President Obama gestures as he answers a question from the media during a press conference at the conclusion of the G-20 summit in Brisbane, Australia, Nov. 16, 2014. (Photo: Rob Griffith, AP)
News conference in Brisbane, Australia, Nov. 16, 2014

"Yes, there are always circumstances in which the United States might need to deploy U.S. ground troops. If we discovered that ISIL had gotten possession of a nuclear weapon, and we had to run an operation to get it out of their hands, then, yes, you can anticipate that not only would Chairman Dempsey recommend me sending U.S. ground troops to get that weapon out of their hands, but I would order it. So the question just ends up being, what are those circumstances? I'm not going speculate on those. Right now we're moving forward in conjunction with outstanding allies like Australia in training Iraqi security forces to do their job on the ground."

President Obama delivers a statement on the legislation
President Obama delivers a statement on the legislation he sent to Congress to authorize the use of military force against Islamic State, beside US Vice President Biden in the Roosevelt Room of the White House. (Photo: MICHAEL REYNOLDS, EPA)
Remarks at the White House, Feb. 11, 2015

"The resolution we've submitted today does not call for the deployment of U.S. ground combat forces to Iraq or Syria. It is not the authorization of another ground war, like Afghanistan or Iraq. ... As I've said before, I'm convinced that the United States should not get dragged back into another prolonged ground war in the Middle East. That's not in our national security interest, and it's not necessary for us to defeat ISIL. Local forces on the ground who know their countries best are best positioned to take the ground fight to ISIL, and that's what they're doing."

President Obama speaks alongside Secretary of Defense
President Obama speaks alongside Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter following a meeting with top military officials about the military campaign against the Islamic State at the Pentagon. (Photo: SAUL LOEB, AFP/Getty Images)
Remarks at the Pentagon, July 6, 2015

"There are no current plans to do so. That's not something that we currently discussed. I've always said that I'm going to do what's necessary to protect the homeland. One of the principles that we all agree on, though, and I pressed folks pretty hard because in these conversations with my military advisers I want to make sure I'm getting blunt and unadulterated, uncensored advice. But in every one of the conversations that we've had, the strong consensus is that in order for us to succeed long-term in this fight against ISIL, we have to develop local security forces that can sustain progress. It is not enough for us to simply send in American troops to temporarily set back organizations like ISIL, but to then, as soon as we leave, see that void filled once again with extremists."



--------------

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html

"Keep in mind that we have run special ops already"

> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Obama Defends Decision to Send Special Forces to Syria

President Obama has made his first public comments on his decision to deploy U.S. special operations forces to Syria. Speaking on NBC's Nightly News, Obama denied the move breaks his pledge not to put troops on the ground.

President Obama: "Keep in mind that we have run special ops already, and really this is just an extension of what we are continuing to do. We are not putting U.S. troops on the front lines fighting firefights with ISIL. But I've been consistent throughout that we are not going to be fighting like we did in Iraq with a--battalions and occupations. That doesn't solve the problem."

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/11/3/headlines

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html

> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

US Senator: Obama Made Mistake Having Pushed for Assad's Resignation
Thu Nov 12, 2015
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20151111/1029931039/obama-mistake-us-senator.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l7hhtrPS_w




TEHRAN (FNA)- US President Barack Obama made a mistake when he insisted on the immediate resignation of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, US Senator Tim Kaine said.

"I think when the President said Assad must go it was probably a little bit of a mistake. He got ahead of himself when he said those words," Kaine told MSNBC.

The senator pointed out that Washington was also involved in the regime change in other Arab countries, including Iraq, Libya and Egypt.

"When the United States has tried to say who the leader of another country should be in this region, we usually have not done a very good job at it," Kaine said.

According to him, having called for Assad's resignation Obama raised some expectations in Syria and then he did not follow through because "he realized the limits of America's ability to change a regime."

Kaine also underscored that Russia and Syria have common interests in restoring stability in the country.

"Russian President and Syrian ally Vladimir Putin has committed to keeping the Assad regime in power, therefore maintaining his interests in the region," he said.

Having criticized Obama's policy Kaine pointed out that Congress shared responsibility for the "chaos in the Middle East".

Kaine said that the US lacks a cohesive strategy in the Middle East. Obama's plan in Syria has three purposes - fighting the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) terrorist group, ousting Assad and providing relief for a humanitarian crisis. According to Kaine, the three facets do not mesh together under the current program.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>

> -----------

>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Military to Military
Vol. 38 No. 1 · 7 January 2016 pages 11-14 | 6831 words
Seymour M. Hersh on US intelligence sharing in the Syrian war
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military



Barack Obama's repeated insistence that Bashar al-Assad must leave office - and that there are 'moderate' rebel groups in Syria capable of defeating him - has in recent years provoked quiet dissent, and even overt opposition, among some of the most senior officers on the Pentagon's Joint Staff. Their criticism has focused on what they see as the administration's fixation on Assad's primary ally, Vladimir Putin. In their view, Obama is captive to Cold War thinking about Russia and China, and hasn't adjusted his stance on Syria to the fact both countries share Washington's anxiety about the spread of terrorism in and beyond Syria; like Washington, they believe that Islamic State must be stopped.

The military's resistance dates back to the summer of 2013, when a highly classified assessment, put together by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, then led by General Martin Dempsey, forecast that the fall of the Assad regime would lead to chaos and, potentially, to Syria's takeover by jihadi extremists, much as was then happening in Libya. A former senior adviser to the Joint Chiefs told me that the document was an 'all-source' appraisal, drawing on information from signals, satellite and human intelligence, and took a dim view of the Obama administration's insistence on continuing to finance and arm the so-called moderate rebel groups. By then, the CIA had been conspiring for more than a year with allies in the UK, Saudi Arabia and Qatar to ship guns and goods - to be used for the overthrow of Assad - from Libya, via Turkey, into Syria. The new intelligence estimate singled out Turkey as a major impediment to Obama's Syria policy. The document showed, the adviser said, 'that what was started as a covert US programme to arm and support the moderate rebels fighting Assad had been co-opted by Turkey, and had morphed into an across-the-board technical, arms and logistical programme for all of the opposition, including Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State. The so-called moderates had evaporated and the Free Syrian Army was a rump group stationed at an airbase in Turkey.' The assessment was bleak: there was no viable 'moderate' opposition to Assad, and the US was arming extremists.


https://infotomb.com/gz2on

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

Seymour Hersh: US military provided indirect intelligence to Assad
American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh's controversial new theory on US military intelligence sharing during the Syrian War
21 December 2015


http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03cqm4y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYTcxN72CNs

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

Seymour Hersh discusses the US military's covert opposition to the Obama administration's "Assad must go" policy in Syria, including intelligence-sharing with the Syrian army to prevent Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State from taking over.
http://scotthorton.org/interviews/2015/12/22/122215-seymour-hersh/


Defense Department documents given to Judicial Watch under FOIA suit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/6S0GkrEuZ50/iKix7ts8BgAJ

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 7:16:36 PM UTC-4, thinbluemime2 wrote:
> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 11:20:29 PM UTC+1, The Starmaker wrote:

> > thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > > > http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
> > > >
> > > > Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> > > > http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ///
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Full Text Of Speeches:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > > > http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
> > > >
> > > > Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> > > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----------
> > > >
> > > > Eliminator - ZZ Top
> > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo
> > >

> > > America's Israel Lobby Demands "Direct Militery Strikes" Against Syria
> > > August 31, 2013
> > > http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/content/foreign-policy-experts-urge-president-obama-respond-assads-chemical-attack
> > >
> >
> >
> > I don't think striking Sryia is a good idea....especially if Israel for
> > it. Anything they for, Obama should be against. It makes
> > good foreign policy.
> >
> >
> > Let Israel strike Syria.

> As a nation of laws, it would be much better if the United States observed international law instead of going it alone like a rogue state and bombing a foreign government as punishment for allegedly breaking international law.

U.S. held secret communications with Syrian government - WSJ
Thu Dec 24, 2015
http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKBN0U715L20151224




"U.S. officials held secret communications with members of President Bashar al-Assad's government to encourage a military coup in 2011"





WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. officials held secret communications with members of President Bashar al-Assad's government to try to limit violence in Syria, and explored ways to encourage a military coup in 2011 as the civil war got under way, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.

American intelligence officials identified army officers belonging to Assad's minority Alawite sect who could lead a coup, but they found few weak spots to exploit, the Journal said, citing interviews with more than two dozen people, including current and former U.S. officials.

The moves were made as Assad's government began cracking down on protests and soldiers started leaving the army, the Journal said,

"The White House's policy in 2011 was to get to the point of a transition in Syria by finding cracks in the regime and offering incentives for people to abandon Assad," a former senior administration official was quoted as saying.

The Obama administration shifted away from trying to influence Assad's government and toward supporting Syrian rebels in 2012, the newspaper reported.

Senior officials from the United States and Syria spoke directly to each other or sent messages through third parties, including Syrian allies Russia and Iran, the newspaper said.

Deputy Secretary of State William Burns made two phone calls to Syrian foreign minister Walid al-Moallem to warn the Assad regime against using chemical weapons on a large scale, U.S. officials told the newspaper. Burns retired last year.

One senior U.S. official said the secret communications were unlike those held with Cuba or Iran, in which the United States thought it could quietly resolve issues, but were more focused on specifics.

"We have had times where we've said: 'You could create a better environment for cease-fires if you stop dropping barrel bombs,'" a senior U.S. official told the Journal.

(Writing by Doina Chiacu; Editing by Alistair Bell)

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

Seymour Hersh on US strategy regarding Assad
Published on Dec 23, 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BU9iAJ_J0fM


RT's Anya Parampil interviews Seymour Hersh, who recently published a bombshell investigation in the London Review of Books. Hersh alleges that the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff has indirectly provided the Syrian military with intelligence on Islamic extremists, fearing the Obama administration's agenda to oust Bashar Assad will engender total chaos in Syria. The White House position on Assad's future is reminiscent of a game of cards, he says.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Pentagon Mutiny on Syria Dismissed by 'Liberal' Media
Posted: 12/26/2015 Michael Hughes
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/pentagon-mutiny-on-syria_b_8879792.html


The American mainstream press has both neglected and disparaged Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh recently for reporting on how, for more than two years, senior U.S. military leaders subverted President Obama's strategy to overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad, with some attacking Hersh for having the temerity to rely on unnamed sources. The so-called liberal media has exhibited a tendency to defend the Obama administration mantra that Assad "must go," and Hersh's account runs counter to this well-established gospel.


https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/TLwiOXfV_hY/4w1AiUqlCwAJ

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, December 22, 2015 at 1:52:45 AM UTC-5, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/b4w1cikaCgAJ

Chuck Hagel on US Syria Policy
JANUARY 13, 2016
http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/news/in-the-news/chuck-hagel-on-united-states-syrian-policy



Defense News features the Atlantic Council event "Reflections of a Former Secretary of Defense," quoting Atlantic Council Distinguished Statesman and former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel on US Syria policy:


The US has backed itself into a corner by insisting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad be removed from power before the Obama administration will work with Russia and Iran to fight the Islamic State group, former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said.

"We have allowed ourselves to get caught and paralyzed on our Syrian policy by the statement that 'Assad must go,'" Hagel said at a Wednesday event hosted by the Atlantic Council.


-------------

Chuck Hagel to the next president: 'Listen'
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/265518-chuck-hagel-to-the-next-president-listen
http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/12/hagels-message-to-the-next-president-listen-to-our-military/


Reflections of a Former Secretary of Defense
AtlanticCouncil Jan 13, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj9cdOycL3s


US' Syria Policy 'Paralyzed' by Rhetoric that Assad Must Go, Says Hagel
http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/us-syria-policy-paralyzed-by-rhetoric-that-assad-must-go-says-hagel

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, September 1, 2013 at 12:51:14 PM UTC-4, thinbluemime2 wrote:

> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:54:47 PM UTC+1, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
> >
> >
> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
> >
> > Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> > http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
> >
> >
> > ///
> >
> >
> > Full Text Of Speeches:
> >
> >
> > John Kerry 2013-08-30
> > http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
> >
> > Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
> >
>

> The Troodos Conundrum
> by craig on August 31, 2013
> http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/08/the-troodos-conundrum/
>
>
>
> The GCHQ listening post on Mount Troodos in Cyprus is arguably the most valued asset which the UK contributes to UK/US intelligence cooperation. The communications intercept agencies, GCHQ in the UK and NSA in the US, share all their intelligence reports (as do the CIA and MI6). Troodos is valued enormously by the NSA. It monitors all radio, satellite and microwave traffic across the Middle East, ranging from Egypt and Eastern Libya right through to the Caucasus. Even almost all landline telephone communication in this region is routed through microwave links at some stage, picked up on Troodos.
>
> Troodos is highly effective - the jewel in the crown of British intelligence. Its capacity and efficiency, as well as its reach, is staggering. The US do not have their own comparable facility for the Middle East. I should state that I have actually been inside all of this facility and been fully briefed on its operations and capabilities, while I was head of the FCO Cyprus Section in the early 1990s. This is fact, not speculation.
>
> It is therefore very strange, to say the least, that John Kerry claims to have access to communications intercepts of Syrian military and officials organising chemical weapons attacks, which intercepts were not available to the British Joint Intelligence Committee.
>
> On one level the explanation is simple. The intercept evidence was provided to the USA by Mossad, according to my own well placed source in the Washington intelligence community. Intelligence provided by a third party is not automatically shared with the UK, and indeed Israel specifies it should not be.
>
> But the inescapable question is this. Mossad have nothing comparable to the Troodos operation. The reported content of the conversations fits exactly with key tasking for Troodos, and would have tripped all the triggers. How can Troodos have missed this if Mossad got it? The only remote possibility is that all the conversations went on a purely landline route, on which Mossad have a physical wire tap, but that is very unlikely in a number of ways - not least nowadays the purely landline route.
>
> Israel has repeatedly been involved in the Syrian civil war, carrying out a number of illegal bombings and missile strikes over many months. This absolutely illegal activity by Israel- which has killed a great many civilians, including children - has brought no condemnation at all from the West. Israel has now provided "intelligence" to the United States designed to allow the United States to join in with Israel's bombing and missile campaign.
>
> The answer to the Troodos Conundrum is simple. Troodos did not pick up the intercepts because they do not exist. Mossad fabricated them. John Kerry's "evidence" is the shabbiest of tricks. More children may now be blown to pieces by massive American missile blasts. It is nothing to do with humanitarian intervention. It is, yet again, the USA acting at the behest of Israel.





SPIES IN THE SKY
Israeli Drone Feeds Hacked By British and American Intelligence
Jan. 28 2016 Cora Currier, Henrik Moltke
https://theintercept.com/2016/01/28/israeli-drone-feeds-hacked-by-british-and-american-intelligence/


AMERICAN AND BRITISH INTELLIGENCE secretly tapped into live video feeds from Israeli drones and fighter jets, monitoring military operations in Gaza, watching for a potential strike against Iran, and keeping tabs on the drone technology Israel exports around the world.

Under a classified program code-named "Anarchist," the U.K.'s Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ, working with the National Security Agency, systematically targeted Israeli drones from a mountaintop on the Mediterranean island of Cyprus. GCHQ files provided by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden include a series of "Anarchist snapshots" -- thumbnail images from videos recorded by drone cameras. The files also show location data mapping the flight paths of the aircraft. In essence, U.S. and British agencies stole a bird's-eye view from the drones.

See hacked images from Israel's drone fleet Several of the snapshots, a subset collected in 2009 and 2010, appear to show drones carrying missiles. Although they are not clear enough to be conclusive, the images offer rare visual evidence to support reports that Israel flies attack drones -- an open secret that the Israeli government won't acknowledge.

"There's a good chance that we are looking at the first images of an armed Israeli drone in the public domain," said Chris Woods, author of Sudden Justice, a history of drone warfare. "They've gone to extraordinary lengths to suppress information on weaponized drones."

The Intercept is publishing a selection of the drone snapshots in an accompanying article.

Additionally, in 2012, a GCHQ analyst reported "regular collects of Heron TP carrying weapons," referring to a giant drone made by the state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries, known as IAI.

Anarchist operated from a Royal Air Force installation in the Troodos Mountains, near Mount Olympus, the highest point on Cyprus. The Troodos site "has long been regarded as a 'Jewel in the Crown' by NSA as it offers unique access to the Levant, North Africa, and Turkey," according to an article from GCHQ's internal wiki. Last August, The Intercept published a portion of a GCHQ document that revealed that NSA and GCHQ tracked weapons signals from Troodos, and earlier reporting on the Snowden documents indicated that the NSA targeted Israeli drones and an Israeli missile system for tracking, but the details of the operations have not been previously disclosed.

"This access is indispensable for maintaining an understanding of Israeli military training and operations and thus an insight to possible future developments in the region," a GCHQ report from 2008 enthused. "In times of crisis this access is critical and one of the only avenues to provide up to the minute information and support to U.S. and Allied operations in the area."

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 7:11:48 AM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

"Let them bleed"



Join Game of Thrones cast and the IRC to help Syrian refugees
Published on Mar 12, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCe0Nz7Ie90


The Game of Thrones cast and the IRC came together to bring awareness of the plight of Syrian refugees.
Learn more at http://feature.rescue.org/gameofthrones





------------

H/T to Ed for the link
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/6YjjNDWrDDE/lsDnM8TjIwAJ

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.arts.tv/2K2dHJ8kGHE/ham0DpSIHx8J

> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Kerry's Secret War Plan for Syria
March 14, 2016 By Gareth Porter
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/03/14/kerrys-secret-war-plan-for-syria/




Secretary of State Kerry urged President Obama to launch secret missile attacks inside Syria without admitting the U.S. role, a plan that Obama rejected






Jeffrey Goldberg's newly published book-length article on Barack Obama and the Middle East includes a major revelation that brings Secretary of State John Kerry's Syrian diplomacy into sharper focus: it reports that Kerry has sought on several occasions without success over the past several months to get Obama's approval for cruise missile strikes against the Syrian government.

That revelation shows that Kerry's strategy in promoting the Syrian peace negotiations in recent months was based on much heavier pressure on the Assad regime to agree that President Bashar al-Assad must step down than was apparent. It also completes a larger story of Kerry as the primary advocate in the administration of war in Syria ever since he became Secretary of State in early 2013.

Goldberg reports that "on several occasions" Kerry requested that Obama approve missile strikes at "specific regime targets," in order to "send a message" to Assad - and his international allies - to "negotiate peace." Kerry suggested to Obama that the U.S. wouldn't have to acknowledge the attacks publicly, according to Goldberg, because Assad "would surely know the missiles' return address."

Goldberg reports that Kerry had "recently" submitted a "written outline of new steps to bring more pressure on Assad." That is obviously a reference to what Kerry referred to in Senate testimony in February as "significant discussions" within the Obama administration on a "Plan B" to support the opposition that would be more "confrontational." Kerry made no effort in his testimony to hide the fact that he was the chief advocate of such a policy initiative.

But Goldberg's account makes it clear that Obama not only repeatedly rejected Kerry's requests for the use of force, but also decreed at a National Security Council meeting in December that any request for the use of military force must come from his military advisers in an obvious rebuff to Kerry. Immediately after Kerry had suggested that a "Plan B" was under discussion in the administration, it was a senior Pentagon official who dismissed the idea that any confrontational move was under consideration, including the well-worn idea of a "no-fly zone."

Kerry's campaign for cruise missile strikes actually began soon after he became secretary in February 2013. At that point Assad was consolidating his military position, while al-Nusra Front (Al Qaeda's affiliate0 and its extremist allies were already in a dominant position within the armed opposition, according to U.S. intelligence. It was hardly a favorable situation for trying to build an opposition force that could be the instrument of the negotiated settlement he had in mind.

At Kerry's urging Obama signed a secret presidential "finding" in May 2013 for a covert CIA operation the objective of which was to provide enough support to the rebels so they wouldn't lose, but not enough so they would win. But that was a compromise measure that Kerry believed would be inadequate to support a negotiated settlement.

He wanted much more, an urgent program of aid to the opposition, and he resorted to a shady bureaucratic tactic to advance his aim. Beginning in March 2013 and throughout that spring, the armed opposition accused the Assad regime of using Sarin gas against opposition population centers on several occasions. The evidence for those accusations was highly doubtful in every case, but Kerry seized on them as a way of putting pressure on Obama.

In June 2013, he went to the White House with a paper assuming the truth of the accusations and arguing that, if the United States did not "impose consequences" on Assad over his supposed use of chemical weapons, he would view it as "green light" to continue using them. At a National Security Council meeting that month, Kerry urged shipments of heavy weapons to the rebels as well as U.S. military strikes, but Obama still said no.

After the Aug. 21, 2013 Sarin attack in the Damascus area, Kerry was the leading figure on Obama's national security team arguing that Obama had to respond militarily. But after initially agreeing to a set of U.S. missile strikes on regime targets, Obama decided against it. One of the reasons was that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper acknowledged to him privately that the intelligence was not a "slam dunk," according to Goldberg's account.

In lieu of a missile strike, however, Obama agreed in October 2013 to a very risky major escalation of military assistance to the Syrian opposition. That fall the Pentagon sold 15,000 U.S. TOW anti-tank missiles to the Saudis, and throughout 2014, the Saudis doled them out to armed groups approved by the United States. Dispensing anti-tank missiles was a reckless policy, because it was recognized by then that many of the groups being armed were already fighting alongside Nusra Front in the northwest. The missiles were crucial to the capture of all of Idlib province by the Nusra-led "Army of Conquest" in April 2015.

Kerry was ready to take a risk on Nusra Front and its allies becoming unstoppable in order to jump-start his strategy of diplomatic pressure on Assad. But Kerry overplayed his hand. The Assad regime and Iran feared that the newly strengthened military force under Nusra Front control might break through to take over the Alawite stronghold of Latakia province. They prevailed on Russian President Vladimir Putin to intervene with Russian airpower.

As the Russian campaign of airstrikes began to push back the extremist-led military forces and even threaten their lines of supply, Kerry's strategy to pressure the Assad regime to make a major diplomatic concession became irrelevant.

Kerry's demands for U.S. cruise missile strikes became even more insistent. Without them, he argued, he couldn't get the Russians to cooperate with his peace negotiations plan. Goldberg quotes a "senior administration official" as saying, "Kerry's looking like a chump with the Russians, because he has no leverage."

Obama, who had already succumbed in 2014 to domestic political pressure to begin bombing the Islamic State, saw no reason to get into even deeper war in Syria in support of Kerry's plan - especially under the new circumstances. Assad was not likely to step down, and in case, the war would only end if Nusra Front and its Salafist-jihadi allies were no longer able to get the heavy weapons they need to fight the regime.

The real origin of the present Syrian peace negotiations is thus Kerry's ambition to pursue the illusory aim of winning a diplomatic victory in Syria by much greater pressure on the Assad regime. Ironically, in setting in motion the military build-up of an Al-Qaeda-dominated armed opposition, Kerry sowed the seeds of the military reversal that ensured the failure of his endeavor. As a result he became the rather pathetic figure shown in Goldberg's account pleading in vain for yet another US war in Syria.

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Hillary Clinton Email Archive

NEW IRAN AND SYRIA 2.DOC

From: To: Date: 2000-12-31 22:00 Subject: NEW IRAN AND SYRIA 2.DOC

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05794498 Date: 11/30/2015 RELEASE IN FULL

The best way to help Israel deal with Iran's growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad.

Negotiations to limit Iran's nuclear program will not solve Israel's security dilemma. Nor will they stop Iran from improving the crucial part of any nuclear weapons program -- the capability to enrich uranium. At best, the talks between the world's major powers and Iran that began in Istanbul this April and will continue in Baghdad in May will enable Israel to postpone by a few months a decision whether to launch an attack on Iran that could provoke a major Mideast war. Iran's nuclear program and Syria's civil war may seem unconnected, but they are.

For Israeli leaders, the real threat from a nuclear-armed Iran is not the prospect of an insane Iranian leader launching an unprovoked Iranian nuclear attack on Israel that would lead to the annihilation of both countries.

What Israeli military leaders really worry about -- but cannot talk about -- is losing their nuclear monopoly.


https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_NovWeb/293/DOC_0C05794498/C05794498.pdf
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/18328#source

[thinbl...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-4, thinbl...@gmail.com wrote:


> White Shirt, Blue Tie - Yes We Know


> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://s14.postimg.org/rmka6heyp/John_Kerry_2013_08_30.jpg
>
> Barack Obama, accompanied by Joe Biden 2013-08-31
> http://s24.postimg.org/8pmak279h/Barack_Obama_accompanied_by_Joe_Biden_2013_08_3.jpg
>
>
> ///
>
>
> Full Text Of Speeches:
>
>
> John Kerry 2013-08-30
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213668.htm
>
> Barack Obama 2013-08-31
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/10278442/Barack-Obama-on-Syria-text-in-full.html
>
>
> -----------
>
> Eliminator - ZZ Top
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn2-b_opVTo

Netanyahu: Israel has carried out dozens of strikes in Syria
Apr 11, 2016
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-israel-idUSKCN0X81TO



Israel has launched dozens of strikes in Syria, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday, acknowledging for the first time such attacks against suspected arms transfers to Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrillas.

Though formally neutral on Syria's civil war, Israel has frequently pledged to prevent shipments of advanced weaponry to the Iranian-backed group, while stopping short of confirming reports of specific air operations.

Netanyahu did not specify what kind of strikes Israel had conducted in Syria. He also gave no timeframe or other details regarding the strikes.

Israel welcomed the cessation of hostilities in Syria in February but has indicated it could still launch attacks there if it sees a threat from Hezbollah, which holds sway over southern Lebanon and whose fighters have been allied with President Bashar al-Assad.

Israeli leaders have sought assurances from Russia, which sent forces to Syria last year to help Assad, that it would not allow Iran and Hezbollah to be bolstered by the partial military withdrawal that Moscow announced last month.