An American Coup in Egypt?
By As’ad AbuKhalil – 7 December, 2012 – Angry Corner – Al Akhbar

What is happening in Egypt warrants historical contextualization. When Sadat first took over after Nasser in 1970, his chances of survival in power were nil. He had no political stature and no power base of his own. He began to build up his power in 1971 when he announced the existence of a wide leftist conspiracy by Nasser’s chief advisors (he called them “marakiz al-qiwa” – centers of power). His case was based on secret tapings of phone conversations. It was never before revealed whether the US government supplied Sadat’s with the “evidence” in order to help him eliminate his Nasserist rivals. It was only a year later that Sadat ordered the Soviet advisers out of Egypt, probably as a payback to the US government. The rest of the history of Sadat and Mubarak is too well-known: the US government helped construct and supervise the repressive security state in Egypt, which would become a cornerstone of US-Israeli policies in the Middle East.

It is too early to analyze the nature of the Egyptian regime of Mubarak, but there are some clear signs and indications. The US government has reached the conclusion that it (and Israel) can do business with the Muslim Brotherhood as long as they don’t touch or interfere in the foreign policies of Sadat-Mubarak. Egyptian intelligence service has been constructed by the US and operates as an extension of the CIA station in Egypt. It is fair to say that the Muslim Brotherhood has basically allowed the intelligence service to retain control over the foreign policies of Egypt. The top appointments at the foreign ministry have been undertaken by the mukhabarat apparatus, and the foreign ministers in the new Egypt are graduates of Sadat ‘s school of diplomacy. The American administration and Congress have made it very clear that the only criterion that matters to the US is the preservation of the Egyptian-Israeli treaty.

But the Muslim Brotherhood needed time to prove their loyalty and subservience to US security interest and orders. The US was watching closely and it was very clear to Arab watchers that the Ikhwan underwent a swift makeover. Gone were all the speeches about jihad with its grotesque anti-Semitic rhetoric and the standard Islamist references to “the descendants of apes and monkeys,” and in was a new insistence on the necessity of respect for “the international treaties and obligations.” Of course, the redundant references by the new Egyptian government to the respect for “international treaties” were in no way related to Egypt’s bilateral treaties with African and Asian countries. It became a euphemism or a code language of sorts for the new government of the Ikhwan: it was sent as a signal to the US that they are willing to preserve the same foreign policies of Mubarak-Sadat in return for support in power.

The Brotherhood sent emissaries to Washington, DC and held talks with prominent members of the Zionist establishment in the city. Senator John McCain (a man to the right of Ariel Sharon), became a sudden champion of the Ikhwan in the US and went regularly on Fox News to promote the notion of a “moderate Muslim Brotherhood.” The IMF (a mere tool of US foreign policy) quickly joined in and promised a generous loan in return for good behavior.

But the Gaza war was the golden opportunity: it would be years before we really know how the Gaza war erupted and how it was managed, but the Ikhwan earned the trust of the US and Israel very quickly. After the savage Israeli war on Gaza, the Muslim Brotherhood and preachers of holy war against Jews – this is the classical rhetoric of the Ikhwan – argued that the Mursi government’s recall of the Egyptian ambassador to Israel is the strongest possible response, very much along the lines of Mubarak’s foreign policy argument. The Brotherhood worked very closely with the Obama administration, and Zionists in the US showered praise on the Mursi government and on the new responsible behavior of the Muslim Brotherhood. …more

U.N. Rights Chief Cites ‘Disastrous’ Situation in Egypt
By NICK CUMMING-BRUCE – 7 December, 2012

GENEVA — Navi Pillay, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, expressed alarm on Friday at the rising casualty toll in Egypt’s deepening political turmoil and said flaws in the substance of its draft constitution and the process of preparing it were a major cause of the “disastrous situation” unfolding there that has resulted in at least six deaths.

The constitution proposed by President Mohamed Morsi, which is to be put to a referendum next week, includes “very worrying omissions and ambiguities” that could mean it is weaker than the 1971 Constitution introduced under ousted President Hosni Mubarak it is supposed to replace.

Speaking out on Egypt for the third time in a week, Ms. Pillay praised the new constitution for restricting the president to two four-year terms and for the freedom that it provides to set up civil associations and institutions simply by notifying the authorities rather than by seeking their permission.

But Ms. Pillay, in a statement, expressed dismay over the new constitution’s failure to give legal standing to a range of international treaties that protect civil and political rights and forbid torture and racial or gender discrimination. That failure opens the way to national laws that may conflict with Egypt’s international obligations, legal experts in her office warn.

Many of the new constitution’s provisions referred to existing laws that are out of step with international human rights norms, Ms. Pillay said, and concentrate powers in the hands of the president that could undermine the independence of the judiciary.

The new charter, she said, guarantees equality but does not explicitly prohibit discrimination on grounds of sex, religion or origin. It guarantees freedom of religion but only specifies three faiths Ms. Pillay added. And while it provides some protection for press freedom, that is “ taken back with certain clauses dealing with national security,” Mona Rishmawi, a legal and constitutional expert in Ms. Pillay’s office, said.

People had the right to protest peacefully, Ms. Pillay reminded Mr. Morsi this week, and since his government had come to power on the back of similar protest it should be “particularly sensitive to the need to protect protesters’ rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.” …source

Infant suffocated by Chemical Gas fired by Bharain Security Forces – 7 December, 2012

US tightens military noose around Syria
By Bill Van Auken – 7 December 2012 – WSWS

Amid an escalating drumbeat about a supposed threat that Syria’s government is preparing to use chemical weapons against its own people, Washington has deployed a naval armada off the country’s coast.

The USS Eisenhower carrier strike group was sent through the Suez Canal from its deployment in the Persian Gulf earlier this week and has reportedly arrived in the Mediterranean near Syrian shores. The deployment joins that of an amphibious battle group already present in the eastern Mediterranean, consisting of the USS Iwo Jima, the USS New York and the USS Gunston Hall, which together carry a contingent of 2,500 US Marines.

Between the two naval forces, Washington now has 17 warships, 70 fighter-bombers and 10,000 military personnel within close striking distance of Syria. This is in addition to the Air Force’s 39th Air Base Wing stationed at the Incirlik base in Turkey together with tens of thousands of US ground troops deployed in Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

Citing US military sources, the Times of London reported Wednesday that Washington is ready to launch a military attack on Syria “within days.”

“It won’t require major movement to make action happen,” an unnamed US official told the British newspaper. “The muscle is already there to be flexed.”

Pentagon sources have suggested that an intervention carried out on the pretext of securing Syria’s chemical weapons would require some 75,000 troops.

In a further threat of direct US-NATO intervention, NATO governments are moving ahead to implement Tuesday’s decision of the NATO foreign ministers conference to deploy Patriot missile batteries on Turkey’s border with Syria. Germany’s defense and foreign ministers announced a decision to deploy some 400 German troops on the border. Similar detachments will also be sent by the US and the Netherlands.

While Turkey claimed it needed the missiles to defend itself from a supposed threat that Syria would fire missiles carrying chemical weapons towards its border, the Patriot batteries could also be used to impose a de facto “no-fly zone” over northern Syria, allowing the US-backed “rebels” to consolidate control over territory and creating the conditions for the installation of a Western-backed government on Syrian soil.

US officials have reiterated threats made by President Barack Obama and others in the administration about the government of President Bashar al-Assad crossing a “red line” and facing military action if it uses chemical weapons. …more

Protesters demand Bahrain PM’s ouster
AFP – 7 December, 2012

Thousands of demonstrators in a village near the Bahraini capital on Friday demanded the premier’s ouster in the first officially sanctioned protest since a ban at the end of October, witnesses said.

“Get out, Khalifa!” they chanted, referring to Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman al-Khalifa, an uncle of King Hamad, who was held the premiership of the Sunni-ruled regime in the Gulf kingdom since 1974.

“We don’t want an appointed government, we want a prime minister who serves the people,” Sheikh Ali Salman, head of the main Shiite opposition grouping Al-Wefaq, told the crowd.

The gathering was the first to be officially allowed since the end of October when the authorities banned all protests to ensure “security is maintained.”

Bahrain’s opposition is demanding that the country’s premier come from the parliamentary majority, and not be appointed from among the ranks of the ruling Al-Khalifa family.

Sheikh Salman on Friday asked protesters not to chant slogans calling for the downfall of the Sunni dynasty, a demand of more radical elements of the Shiite opposition.

He said the right to peaceful protest was guaranteed under international conventions, and demanded the reinstatement of the former Pearl Square, epicentre of month-long 2011 protests but now razed and turned into a junction.

Bahrain has experienced unrest since early last year when authorities crushed protests led by the Shiite Muslim majority demanding a constitutional monarchy and greater rights.

Manama came under strong criticism from international human rights organisations over last year’s deadly crackdown on the protests.

An international panel commissioned by King Hamad to investigate the clampdown found that excessive force and torture had been used against protesters and detainees.

According to the International Federation for Human Rights, around 80 people have been killed in Bahrain since the violence began on February 14, 2011.
…source

Saudi Arabia Releases Head of “Terrorist Factory” Who Mentored 9/11 Hijacker
6 December, 2012 – By Daniel Greenfield – FrontPage

The Saudis have released so many of the terrorists that they “rehabilitated” that stories like these are almost not worth mentioning, but Sulayman al-Alwan is a bit different because the 9/11 Commission Report links him directly to the attacks of September 11.

According to the head of one of the training camps in Afghanistan, some were chosen by unnamed Saudi sheikhs who had contacts with al Qaeda. Omari, for example, is believed to have been a student of a radical Saudi cleric named Sulayman al Alwan. His mosque, which is located in al Qassim Province, is known among more moderate clerics as a “terrorist factory.”

So what happened to the head of this terrorist factory who mentored and chose one of the 9/11 hijackers?

Sulayman al-Alwan has been “reformed” in the Saudi prisons. He’s out and ready to take on the world. He was the spiritual advisor to 9-11 hijacker, Abdul Aziz al Omari. And since that time can be seen on radical videos preaching religious justifications for violent jihad against the West.

Saudi Arabia, our greatest ally in the War on Terror. Or Al Qaeda’s greatest ally in the war on us. …source

This Weekend in Bahrain: Will U.S. Officials Stand Up for Freedom?
By Sunjeev Bery – 6 December, 2012 – Amnesty International

In the island nation of Bahrain in the Persian Gulf, a man by the name of Nabeel Rajab is sitting in jail for the “crime” of peaceful protest. But the government that has imprisoned him is a U.S. military ally, and the Obama Administration has done little to push for his release. When U.S. officials arrive in Bahrain this weekend for a global conference, will they finally change course?

Rajab is the President of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, and this fact has everything to do with his three year prison sentence. That’s why Amnesty International members worldwide are calling for his freedom, as part of our global “Write for Rights” campaign.

Like Saudi Arabia and other U.S. allies in the region, Bahrain’s ruling Al Khalifa family has imprisoned many people who have dared to criticize the government. And while the U.S. government has issued mild statements of concern along the way, the Obama Administration has fundamentally failed to hold its repressive military ally accountable.

Bahrain didn’t have to be this way. After a massive crackdown on protests in 2011, the King of Bahrain signaled a desire to back away from the tactics his government had employed. He created an independent commission, put a prominent human rights lawyer in charge, and essentially allowed an honest investigation of his own government.

It was a rare occurrence for any government, and the commission issued a public report (PDF) whose conclusions were not kind. But one year later, despite promising to change course, the government of Bahrain has stuck to its old ways. Amnesty International’s latest report (PDF) documents exactly how Bahrain has escalated its repression, including:

A sweeping ban on all protests
Laws making it illegal to criticize the government
Reports of torture by Bahraini security forces, including beatings, electric shocks, and threats of rape
Court decisions upholding the imprisonment of nonviolent critics
The detention of as many as 80 children under the age of 18, many of whom were arrested during demonstrations.

Despite these terrible developments, the Obama Administration has continued to prioritize its military relationship with Bahrain over support for basic freedom. Bahrain is host to the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, and the U.S. naval base there is a major focus of the U.S.-Bahrain conversation. Perhaps that is one reason why the U.S. government’s statements on Bahrain have been far milder than criticisms of human rights violations in a country like Iran.

Instead of condemning the Bahraini government’s human rights violations, U.S. diplomats have offered somewhat cautious expressions of concern. These have included calls for Bahraini officials and opposition voices to engage in dialogue. But how can dialogue be possible when a government keeps some of its most prominent critics in prison?

This weekend, U.S. officials will have an important opportunity to change direction. Representatives from some 30 nations will gather in Bahrain’s capital for the Manama Dialogue, a regional conference on security issues. For the U.S. government, this is a significant moment. While Bahraini prisoners of conscience languish in jail cells, will U.S. and Bahraini officials continue with business as usual? Or will there be consequences for the relationship when a U.S. military ally represses its citizens?

While in Bahrain, Obama Administration representatives should publicly condemn the repressive actions of Bahrain’s government. This should include a blunt call to end the countrywide ban on protests and a call for the reversal of the decision to strip 31 Bahraini opposition voices of their citizenship. U.S. officials should also push to meet directly with nonviolent Bahraini critics who have been imprisoned by the monarchy.

Meanwhile, the rest of us should be paying close attention as well. When it comes to U.S. military allies, successive U.S. administrations have demonstrated that they are most likely to push for human rights when the American public makes it difficult for them to look the other way. If the message out of Bahrain this weekend is more of the same, it will take an engaged American public to achieve something different. …source

With $66.3 Billion In Agreements, U.S. Arms Sales Break Record In 2011
by Eyder Peralta – 27 August, 2012 – NPR

A U.S. Air Force F-16 multi role fighter Falcon during an exercise at the U.S. airbase in Osan, South Korea. Enlarge image

A U.S. Air Force F-16 multi role fighter Falcon during an exercise at the U.S. airbase in Osan, South Korea.
Lee Jin-man/AP

The United States was the biggest provider of weapons to other countries, last year. In terms of how much money it moved, it tripled its 2010 purchases and moved $66.3 billion worth of arms.

According to a Congressional Research Service report (pdf), that is the biggest amount in the history of the United States and most of it comes from sales of weapons to Saudi Arabia.

The New York Times reports:

“The previous high was in fiscal year 2009, when American weapons sales overseas totaled nearly $31 billion.

“A worldwide economic decline had suppressed arms sales over recent years. But increasing tensions with Iran drove a set of Persian Gulf nations — Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Oman — to purchase American weapons at record levels.

“These Gulf states do not share a border with Iran, and their arms purchases focused on expensive warplanes and complex missile defense systems.”

Saudi Arabia, the report concludes, bought about $33.7 billion worth of weapons. $33.4 billion were purchased from the United States. India followed with $6.9 billion and the United Arab Emirates came in third with $4.5 billion.

Russia, by the way, was the second biggest seller with $4.8 billion in agreements.

Foreign Policy zooms in on Saudi Arabia’s spending. It points out that its 2011 purchases are several times bigger than Iran’s entire defense spending.

“Put it another way, that purchase alone would give Saudi Arabia the world’s 11th highest military spending,” Foreign Policy reports. “Given that the Kingdom’s total spending in 2011 was just $48.5 billion according to SIPRI, the purchase was a pretty significant upgrade.”

The report notes that the Saudi purchases distort the market, which is likely not growing as those figures might suggest.
…source

Saudi Arabia remains the world’s top financier of terrorism and sponsor of fundamentalist Islam throughout the Arab Spring. U.S. media and Treasury officials don’t really like to discuss it in public, but a report earlier this fall from France 24 gives further confirmation, if you needed it, of the fact that Saudi petrodollars are behind the latest Salafist inroads in the Middle East.

Saudi Arabia still head of terror finance octopus – How Saudi petrodollars fuel rise of Salafism
December 7, 2012 – Money Jihad – By Marc DAOU

Since the 2011 Arab revolts, a loose network of underground zealots has evolved into a potent and highly vocal force. Behind the remarkable rise of Salafism lies the world’s leading producer of oil – and extremist Islam: Saudi Arabia.

When protesters incensed by an anti-Muslim video scaled the walls of the US embassy in Cairo on September 11, tearing down the Stars and Stripes, a black flag could be seen floating above the battered compound. From Sanaa, in Yemen, to Libya’s Benghazi, the same black banner, emblem of the Salafists, soon became a ubiquitous sight as anti-US protests spread like wildfire across the Arab world. The 2011 Arab uprisings have served the Salafists well. With the old dictators gone, a once subterranean network of hardliners has sprung into prominence – funded by a wealthy Gulf patron locked in a post-Arab Spring rivalry with a fellow Gulf monarchy.

The ‘predecessors’

A puritanical branch of Islam, Salafism advocates a strict, literalist interpretation of the Koran and a return to the practices of the “Salaf” (the predecessors), as the Prophet Mohammed and his disciples are known. While Salafist groups can differ widely, from the peaceful, quietist kind to the more violent clusters, it is the latter who have attracted most attention in recent months.

In Libya and Mali, radical Salafists have been busy destroying ancient shrines built by more moderate groups, such as Sufi Muslims. Fellow extremists in Tunisia have tried to silence secular media and destroy “heretical” artwork. And the presence of Salafist fighting units in Syria has been largely documented. Less well known is who is paying for all this – and why.

‘Export-Wahhabism’

For regional experts, diplomats and intelligence services, the answer to the first question lies in the seemingly endless flow of petrodollars coming from oil-rich Saudi Arabia. “There is plenty of evidence pointing to the fact that Saudi money is financing the various Salafist groups,” said Samir Amghar, author of “Le salafisme d’aujourd’hui. Mouvements sectaires en Occident” (Contemporary Salafism: Sectarian movements in the West).

According to Antoine Basbous, who heads the Paris-based Observatory of Arab Countries, “the Salafism we hear about in Mali and North Africa is in fact the export version of Wahhabism,” a conservative branch of Sunni Islam actively promoted and practised by Saudi Arabia’s ruling family. Since the 1970s oil crises provided the ruling House of Saud with a seemingly endless supply of cash, “the Saudis have been financing [Wahhabism] around the world to the tune of several million euros,” Basbous told FRANCE 24.

Opaque channels

Not all of the cash comes from Saudi state coffers. “Traditionally, the money is handed out by members of the royal family, businessmen or religious leaders, and channelled via Muslim charities and humanitarian organizations,” said Karim Sader, a political analyst who specializes in the Gulf states, in an interview with FRANCE 24.

Until the Arab Spring revolts upended the region’s political landscape, these hidden channels enabled the Salafists’ Saudi patrons to circumvent the authoritarian regimes who were bent on crushing all Islamist groups. These were the same opaque channels that allegedly supplied arms to extremist groups, particularly in Pakistan and Afghanistan, according to Western intelligence officials.

Free education

Other, slightly less shadowy recipients of Saudi petrodollars include the numerous religious institutions built around the Arab world to preach Wahhabi Islam, as well as the growing list of Saudi satellite channels that provide a platform for radical Salafist preachers. A large share of the booty also goes to Arab students attending religious courses at the kingdom’s universities in Medina, Riyadh and the Mecca.

“Most of the students at Medina University are foreigners who benefit from generous scholarships handed out by Saudi patrons, as well as free accommodation and plane tickets,” said Amghar. “Once they have graduated, the brightest are hired by the Saudi monarchy, while the rest return to their respective countries to preach Wahhabi Islam”. According to Amghar, the members of France’s nascent Salafist movement follow a similar path. …more

Bahraini Opposition Returns Massively to Fields
Local Editor – Al-Manar

The Bahraini opposition announced organizing a massive rally Friday which will take off from Janosan Roundabout to Saar Roundabout under the slogan “People Demanding Democracy”.

BahrainThe opposition stressed that the call is an acitvation to the right of demonstrating, and invited everyone to return to the fields and join the masses under the slogan “People are the Source of Decision”.

Moreover, as it pointed out that “protests and peaceful calls for democracy and freedom and are a basic and legitimate right ensured by international conventions and treaties, and by the natural human right,” it assured that “people will stick to their demands and the peaceful movement which they presented great sacrifices for, and on top were the martyrs who gave their souls to transform Bahrain into a field of freedom, democracy and dignity.”

In a related context, Bahrain Forum for Human Rights accused the Bahraini authorities of terrorizing citizens even with the presence of the human rights international delegation in the country.

The forum added that “the Bahraini officials’ statement, starting with the prime minister to the interior minister when meeting with the delegation, that Bahrain is a democratic, reformatory country that respects rights and ensures freedom is a political falsity.

In a statement, it demanded the international community and the international rights assemblies to end any kind of cooperation with the Bahraini government, as it has no respect for the international rights organizations. …more

‘West moves in for Syrian endgame and war on Iran’
5 Decemebr, 2012 – By Finian Cunningham – PressTV

After 21 months of international conspiracy, the American-led propaganda war on Syria seems to be moving towards the endgame of providing the political cover for direct Western military attack on that unfortunate country. This is, of course, outrageously criminal. But it is entirely predictable from the bigger picture strategic agenda of Washington and its allies: to roll over the anti-imperialist Syrian enemy, install a pliable pro-Western regime, and then pave the way for the next round of war in the region – against Iran.”

US President Barack Obama’s renewed warning against Syria this week, that any use of chemical weapons by Syrian government forces is a red line triggering direct military assault on the country, can be seen as the Western powers moving towards their endgame of “regime change.”

Washington first raised the specter of Syrian chemical weapons several months ago and warned then that it would be forced to act militarily in order to “secure” such alleged stockpiles.

Now the American president and his officials are rekindling fears of this contingency, with the added alleged development that the Syrian government of President Bashar Al Assad has become so desperate to survive that it is preparing to mobilize chemical warheads.

Speaking in Washington, Obama upbraided the Syria government that “the world is watching” and that there would be “consequences” for any such deployment.

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton echoed the warning and described the use of these weapons as “a red line.” Tellingly, she added that if there is “any evidence” that the Syrian military had begun to use chemical warheads then “we are certainly planning to take action.”

Various Western media reported that American officials have over the past week stepped up contact with counterparts in other Western states to formulate a military response. This is said to include limited air strikes and the dispatch of thousands of ground forces.

Previously, the US and other Western governments had declined to commit military forces to Syria, as they had done in Libya last year, preferring the covert option of proxy forces, including Persian Gulf Arab weapon suppliers and mercenary fighters. That calculus seems to be now changing.

The first point to note from above is that the allegations of Syria mobilizing chemical weapons are stemming from unnamed and unverifiable American military intelligence sources, who have been busily briefing, anonymously, the major news media organizations, including CNN and the New York Times. These “reports” are then amplified by other Western media outlets, such as the Washington Post, BBC, Financial Times and Britain’s Guardian newspaper.

This is the same process of disinformation that set Iraq up for an illegal nine-year war of aggression, beginning in 2003 – with over one million people killed – over that country’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction.

It is the same scurrilous, criminal process that has set up Iran up for crippling – and illegal – economic sanctions over unfounded allegations of nuclear weapons, which are in turn fuelling tensions towards a possible all-out war on the Islamic Republic.

That’s why Obama and Clinton’s latest warning words to Syria are ominous. “The world is watching… for any evidence of chemical weapons.” In other words, the world is being prepared for a “shocking revelation” by American and Western spy agencies and ventriloquist media, who are about as trustworthy as a nest of scorpions and rattlesnakes.

The second point to note is that the Syrian government has repeatedly denied possession of chemical weapons and that if it had such munitions it would not deploy them against its own citizens.

Apart from the CIA and other anonymous secret service agents doing their best through trusty media outlets to whip up hysteria about sarin, VX, mustard gas and other horrors, the other tactic by Western forces is to portray the Damascus government as increasingly panicky and therefore sufficiently under duress that it would resort to such weapons.

White House spokesman Jay Carney told media, “We believe that with the regime’s grip on power loosening, with its failure to put down the opposition through conventional means, we have an increased concern about the possibility of the regime taking the desperate act of using its [alleged] chemical weapons.”

Well, a big part of the reason unmentioned by the White House for why the Syrian military is failing to put down the opposition is because of the criminal, massive flow of weapons, funds, logistics, mercenaries and covert personnel that the American government and its Western allies and regional proxies have been funneling into Syria.

There is no doubting that after 21 months of unrelenting violence, the Western-backed insurgents and foreign mercenaries are taking a heavy toll on Syrian society and the Damascus government’s control.

Reports of recent significant military gains by the foreign-backed militants have indeed intensified efforts by the government to maintain its authority over the ravaged country.

In particular, American-made surface-to-air missiles, reportedly supplied by Qatar and also possibly Saudi Arabia, appear to have lately given the anti-government militants crucial extra firepower and important tactical and territorial advantages.

Western military sources are reportedly of the view that the Syrian national army and air force retain the upper-hand and are too strong to be seriously threatened with defeat.

Nevertheless, with the Western-fomented havoc wreaking Syria – up to 700,000 refugees, five million displaced, 30-50,000 dead out of a population of 20 million – it is all too easy to portray and perceive an atmosphere of doom and desperation, which is then cited by the White House and its anonymous media agents as a “tipping point” for the imminent deployment of alleged chemical weapons of mass destruction.

To this end, there seems to be a concerted effort in the past few days to convey the image of a country falling apart. …more