Posts from — September 2013

Death of activist sparks fresh protest in Bahrain
13 September, 2013 – PressTV

People in Bahrain have held yet another demonstration to protest the killing of a young opposition activist by Saudi-backed regime forces.

The protesters chanted anti-regime slogans during the rally in the village of Nouedrat on Saturday.

The rally was held in protest at the killing of Mohammed Abdul Jalil Yousif on Wednesday at the hands of the regime forces. Activists say Yousif was run over by a vehicle belonging to the security forces.

On Friday, several protesters were arrested in the north of Bahrain after Yousif’s mass funeral turned into a rally.

The situation has been volatile in the Persian Gulf country since anti-regime protests began in 2011.

Bahrainis primarily demanded political reform and a constitutional monarchy, a demand that later changed to an outright call for the ouster of the ruling Al Khalifa family following its brutal crackdown on popular protests.

Manama also called in Saudi-led Arab forces from neighboring states.

Scores of people have been killed, many of them under torture while in custody, and thousands more detained since the popular uprising in Bahrain began.

Protesters say they will continue holding anti-regime demonstrations until their demand for the establishment of a democratically-elected government and an end to rights violations are met.

On September 9, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay told the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) that she was frustrated with reports of human rights violations by Al Khalifa regime in Bahrain. …source

Voices in Danger: “They said I shouldn’t report because I was ruining my country’s reputation.”
Helena Williams – 9 September, 2013 – The Independent

Amid the chaos of the 2011 protests in Bahrain, France 24 correspondent Nazeeha Saeed was tortured and humiliated by police – and she’s still awaiting justice.

Nazeeha Saeed expected the phone call from al-Rifaa’a police station in Bahrain’s capital Manama, which asked her to come in for questioning during the early days of the 2011 uprising. What she did not expect, when she arrived on 22 May 2011, was to be taken in to custody, tortured and humiliated by police officers for thirteen hours.

A correspondent for French channels France 24 and Radio Monte Carlo Doualiya, she had been covering the chaos as Shia protesters, unhappy with the ruling of the Sunni Al-Khalifa royal family, clashed with security forces.

“It was a messy time,” she says.

Reports of people being detained, injured and killed were rife, emotions were running high. Journalists had been mistaken for activists and caught up in the crackdown.

She decided not to contact her family, expecting no more than a couple hours’ interrogation before returning home. But she did call France 24, and told them where she was going.

“I was blindfolded and beaten with a hose all over my body. I was harassed, I got electrical shocks – it was humiliating,” she told The Independent.

The beatings on her face, back, shoulders and legs were so severe that she was unable to walk for days.

That was just the beginning. During her ordeal, Nazeeha, who is 32, says she was accused of participating in the protests, lying in her reports and was interrogated about possible links to the Lebanese Shia Hezbollah television station al-Manar and the Iranian Arabic station Al-AlamIranian – serious accusations, as Iran had been accused of fomenting the largely Shia-Muslim majority demonstrations against the Sunni-Muslim ruling family. She vehemently denies these claims.

“They kept saying that I didn’t respect my country, that I’m a traitor,” she says. “They said I shouldn’t report because I was ruining my country’s reputation.

“I would care if it was about the reputation of my country I was ruining, but it was not – it was the police force’s reputation.”

“I didn’t do the things I thought would really upset the government. I just did my job – OK, not the way they would like it, but it’s my job.”

She told The Independent she was forced to sign a confession she was not allowed to read, and she was made to bray like a donkey.

She said that one police officer forced her head into a toilet and flushed it, while another tried to make her drink an unknown liquid.

Somebody in the room said it was urine. Nazeeha refused, so the officer spilled it over her clothes and hair, to which she had an allergic reaction.

I don’t know to this moment what it was,” she says. “Even the medics who examined me later didn’t know what it was.”

“I thought at that moment, ‘I’m not going to get out of this place, ever’. The way they treat you, and when you are locked in a room and blindfolded – you don’t know how long you are going to be there. It was too long for me. I didn’t know I was only there for thirteen hours. I thought it was a few days.”

“Thank God I informed my channel that I was on my way to the police station,” she says. …more

Bahrain: Schools open doors, students detained and pursued
FARS – 10 September, 2013

(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) – Schools opened doors in Bahrain on Sunday 8th September while tens of students remain behind bars and denied right to study. The arbitrary measures and violations of human rights continue to take place in Bahrain without legal or moral deterrent.

The Liberties and Human Rights Department (LHRD) in Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society said that more than 100 school students from different ages are detained. Some of whom have been convicted in political cases and cases related to freedom of expression and opinion. The youngest prisoner is 13 year old Mahdi Salman.

The LHRD mentioned that a group of minors were arrested two days before schools opened doors. The security forces had raided a swimming pool and arrested 15, including 9 children. The Public Prosecution ordered for their detention for 60 days under the Terrorism Law.

The LHRD confirmed that a number of children have been subjected to torture and mistreatment. It also mentioned that 10 children were denied access to lawyers in the Public Prosecution, this doubles concern over the violations they are subjected to.

Denial of right to education practiced by the Authority against students is considered one of the most aggressive violations against citizens, the LHRD added, tens of university students are denied right to education for the very same reasons.

“A big number of students are pursued by the security forces for reasons related to freedom of expression and demands for democratic transition” the LHRD said.

The Ministry of Educations remains silent in the police state that controls power subordinating all official institutions, a situation that is wasting all opportunities for political solution, the LHRD stated.

“The detained students must be given right to education in accordance to the constitution, law and universal covenants. Denying this right to students illustrates the Authority’s vengeful dealing with citizens, including children, in attempt to silence the people’s demands for justice and freedom”.

The Liberties and Human Rights Department (LHRD) in Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society demanded the immediate release of all students, stressing that their detention is a violation to their right, especially to education.

The Authorities in Bahrain had suspended thousands from jobs, universities and schools in a vengeful campaign following the eruption of the 14 February pro-democracy revolution in 2011.

The campaign, that targeted the majority of the people, was widely condemned by the international community and rights organizations. However, the regime is continuing in this campaign in many different ways. A number of those who were suspended have not yet been reinstated in jobs, or have been subordinated to lower positions. …source

Teargas, birdshot fired at protesters in Bahrain
14 August, 2013 – Gulf Times

Reuters/Manama – Bahraini police fired teargas and birdshot to disperse scattered protests across the country yesterday, as Shia Muslims responded to a call by online activists for pro-democracy demonstrations.

The main opposition group said around 60 rallies were held in 40 locations, in an upsurge of a two-and-a-half-year-old campaign for more democracy in the nation of 1.25mn people.

The US temporarily closed its embassy and Bahrani authorities tightened security after opposition figures used social media to call for rallies.

Small protests passed off peacefully across Bahrain earlier in the day, witnesses and activists said, but demonstrators and riot police clashed in some areas as evening fell.

Security forces converged on the Al Seef district of Manama after activists used Twitter to encourage demonstrators to gather there, in defiance of a blanket ban on protests in the capital.

In a village west of Manama, a standoff deteriorated into a clash between police on one side of a barbed wire fence they had erected overnight and about 300 demonstrators chanting anti-government slogans on the other.

Witnesses said police charged the crowd, firing birdshot and teargas. Similar clashes occurred in other Shia villages where demonstrators threw fire-bombs at police.

The Bahrain Centre for Human Rights activist group said at least 10 people suffered from teargas inhalation or were wounded by birdshot. A spokesman for the main opposition Al Wefaq Society said two people were in a serious condition.

“Despite the campaign of intimidation and surrounding villages with barbed wire, thousands of people turned up for the protests,” said Sayed Yousif al-Muhafda of the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights.

The interior ministry reported that an Asian worker had been injured by a fire-bomb as he tried to open a road blocked by protesters in a village south of Manama, and said burning tyres had been used to block a main road in Muharraq to the northeast.

It described the use of fire-bombs and roadblocks as “terrorism”, for which new laws passed this month allow tougher penalties including longer prison terms and the stripping of Bahraini nationality.

Police arrested a woman driver and other occupants of her car, saying she had tried to run over a policeman at a roadblock.

The concerted new pro-democracy push is being driven by “Tamarod” (Rebellion), a loose association of opposition activists who coalesced in early July.

Tamarrod is named after the Egyptian movement that helped muster massive protests against president Mohamed Mursi and his Muslim Brotherhood before the military removed the country’s first freely-elected leader on July 3. …more

Bahraini authorities prohibit distribution of books related to Hezbollah due to ‘promotion of sectarianism, hatred, extremist radical ideologies’
14 September, 2013 – ynetnews.com

Bahrain authorities banned the circulation of books that are about Hezbollah, written by people who are affiliated with the Shiite group or who support it, the Bahrain news agency reported Friday.

Authorities have reportedly shut down a publishing house affiliated with Hezbollah.

The state’s Information Affairs Authority issued a statement in which it explained the ban was due to the fact that publications related to the Lebanese organization were promoting “sectarianism, hatred and extremist radical ideologies,” and are “a direct threat to the safety and security of Bahrain.”

The statement, quoted in the Lebanese news website Naharnet, that any “attempt to import these books is a blatant and heinous violation against the will and sovereignty of Bahrain due to the poisonous sectarianism and ideologies that target the unity of the Bahraini society.”

Ties between Bahrain and Hezbollah have deteriorated after Hassan Nasrallah and his men announced they were in support of a 2011 uprising attempt in the country.

Bahrain had already blacklisted Hezbollah “due to its meddling in the country’s internal affairs.” …source

Article 19 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

– Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association

Manama regime threatens participants in Friday protest
13 September, 2013 – PressTV

Bahrain’s Interior Ministry has threatened to take legal action against anyone who takes part in an anti-regime demonstration scheduled to be held on Friday.

“Legal action will be taken against any participant in the rally planned by political associations, for flouting the law,” said Bahrain’s Public Security Chief Tariq Hassan Al-Hassan on Thursday.

Hassan further said the Bahraini Interior Ministry has banned the Friday protest, claiming that the demonstration has nothing to do with exercising the freedom of expression, as guaranteed by law.

The anti-regime gathering is due to be staged between Bahrain’s northern villages of Daih and Bilad al-Qadeem.

Meanwhile, Bahrain’s main opposition group al-Wefaq has criticized the interior ministry decision, calling on Bahrainis for a massive turnout at the protest.

The Manama regime’s human rights record has come under scrutiny over its handling of anti-regime protests that erupted across the country in early 2011.

Bahrainis demanded political reform and a constitutional monarchy, a demand that later changed to an outright call for the ouster of the ruling Al Khalifa family following its brutal crackdown on popular protests.

Manama also called in Saudi-led Arab forces from neighboring states. Scores of people have been killed and hundreds of others arrested in the clampdown.

On September 9, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay told the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) that she was frustrated with reports of human rights violations in Bahrain.

“The deep polarization of society and the harsh clampdown on human rights defenders and peaceful protesters continue to make a durable solution more difficult to secure,” Pillay said. …more

Bahrain: Eight Members of the AlMoqdad family in prison; Youngest is 15 years old
13 September, 2013 – Bahrain Center for Human Rights

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights condemns the continued attacks on the families of political dissidents, and the targeting of their relatives and children with arrests and trials as part of harassment campaign. The family of AlMoqdad has had eight of its members arrested so far, which started with the arrest of 2 prominent political leaders in 2011, and the last victims who are 15 and 16 year old boys arrested several days ago. A ninth member of the family is also on trial.

Jaffar Abduljalil AlMoqdad (15 years old) and his cousin Mohamed Ebrahim AlMoqdad (16 years old) along with seven other children and six adults were abducted by security men in civilian clothing accompanied by police vehicles at around 4am on the 5th of September 2013 from a swimming pool in Adari village. A worker at the swimming pool witnessed the beating of the detainees at time of arrest, as they were taken away in their swimwear.

Despite inquiring about them in several police stations in the morning, their families were not able to get any information about the children’s whereabouts or wellbeing. It took over 48 hours to get to know that the two children from the AlMoqdad were moved to the Dry Docks detention center (adult’s prison).

The lawyer of Jaffar said that the public prosecution interrogated him in absence of his lawyer despite being informed of the lawyers contact. The prosecutor ordered the detention under interrogation of all the detainees, including Jaffar and the other children, for 60 days under the terrorism law.

On the 9th of September, Jaffar called his family to inform them that he is at the Dry Docks detention center (adult’s prison) and he has a visit the next day. He briefly informed them that he was subjected to torture and he said he would give the details during the visit. He also informed them that he was forced to confess and to sign papers at the public prosecution without being able to read it. However, when the family went to visit him on the 10th of September, they were denied the visit without any explanation.

Other young children have been tried under the terrorism law, the youngest child being Hussain AlDallal, 14 years old.

Murtadha AbdulJalil AlMoqdad, who is currently pending a verdict that could include imprisonment for “illegal gathering” said that the authorities are refusing to return the passport documents of the family, which were taken by the security forces at time of arresting his father in March 2011. Without passports the family members cannot travel or apply for jobs. …more

Obama bin Sultan and Bandar ibn Israel

By Steve Weissman – 12 September, 2013 -rsn

How much did Obama’s threat of a not-so-limited U.S. military strike push Russia and Syria to accept, at least in words, the international control and destruction of Syrian chemical weapons?

How much did the threat of losing a Congressional vote on military authorization push Obama to grab onto Putin’s offer with its lack of specifics and enormous difficulties in implementation?

Americans will debate both questions well into the next presidential election. But these are only the political atmospherics surrounding a much larger strategic question. Will the redline issue of chemical weapons end up escalating the war against Bashar al-Assad? Or will the long-term Russian cooperation Obama will need to control and destroy Assad’s chemical weapons end up slowing down the brutal momentum of the Syrian civil war?

The point man behind all this global intrigue is an old Washington favorite, the Saudi prince Bandar bin Sultan al-Saud, who is pushing the U.S. to provide the military muscle for a Sunni takeover of Syria. Now, with Vladimir Putin’s masterful diplomacy, Bandar’s mission has become a whole lot trickier.

Appointed the director general of Saudi Intelligence this past July, Bandar took responsibility for installing a compliant Sunni regime in Damascus. As the Wall Street Journal reported, his appointment convinced officials inside the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency that Saudi Arabia “was serious about toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.”

Having previously served as Saudi ambassador to Washington from 1983 to 2005, Bandar pulled major strings under five U.S. presidents. He worked closely with the CIA to arm the anti-Soviet Mujihadeen in Afghanistan, which ended in the creation of the Taliban and al-Qaeda. He played a supporting role in the Iran-Contra scandal, and loudly urged the invasion of Iraq in 2003. As Craig Unger documented in “House of Bush, House of Saud,” he also grew so personally and financially close to the Bush family that George W nicknamed him Bandar Bush.

Slipping into the shadows in 2006, Prince Bandar encouraged Vice President Dick Cheney to join Sunni leaders in a new sectarian alliance against Iran and its Shia allies in Syria and Lebanon. Sy Hersh described this “redirection” of American policy in The New Yorker, and I showed the continuity in “How Obama Fans the Flames of Islam’s Holy Wars.” Far from doing nothing, as his hawkish detractors claim, Obama began using the CIA to help the gas-rich Qataris, and increasingly Bandar and the Saudis, fly in heavy arms to the Sunni rebels in Syria. Many of these Sunni rebels – like Jabhat-al-Nusrah – have links to al-Qaeda, an inconvenient truth that John Kerry and his new neocon allies are falling all over themselves to minimize.

The effort is embarrassing. Kerry’s chief source on the subject, Elizabeth O’Bagy, worked for the neocon Institute for the Study of War and was affiliated with the Syrian Emergency Task Force, which supported the supposedly moderate rebels that she, Kerry, and Senator John McCain were boosting. According to Politico, she has since been fired for falsely claiming to have completed her Ph.D.

Prince Bandar, Senators McCain and Lindsey Graham, and the die-hard neocons are all using the highly circumstantial evidence that Assad was behind the August chemical weapons attacks on the outskirts of Damascus. They are openly fanning the flames of a larger war all the way to Tehran. “Humanitarian interventionists” like Obama’s national security advisor Susan Rice and U.N. ambassador Samantha Power also seem to favor more war.

The Israelis are also backing the escalation in Syria. They had earlier hesitated because they had found Assad easy to deal with over the Golan Heights, which they continue to occupy. Their major interest remains building an alliance against Iran, and – unlike the Saudis – they would like to see the war in Syria go on without either side winning, hoping to grind down the Iranians, Hezbollah, and their Sunni antagonists. The prince has nonetheless grown close to Tel Aviv, and his Arab enemies have dubbed him “Bandar ibn Israel.”

Where, then, does Obama stand? In his Tuesday night speech, Obama sounded far more hawk than dove, playing up the very real suffering of those who underwent the gassing while hypocritically ignoring America’s own use of white phosphorus and depleted Uranium and its support of the Israelis and Saddam Hussein using chemical weapons. He appealed to the chauvinistic nonsense of “American exceptionalism,” and went out of his way to sell military intervention in Syria as part of his opposition to Iran’s nuclear program.

At the same time, he has U.S. Special Forces in Jordan training Sunni rebels to fight in Syria as part of what Bandar and the Saudis call their “southern strategy” for strengthening the opposition south and east of Damascus. The White House is also setting Putin up to be the fall guy for delaying military escalation in Syria.

The problem with all this is that it hardly encourages the kind of cooperation Obama needs to control and destroy Assad’s chemical weapons, a task that will take many years. It also ignores Putin’s own experience with Prince Bandar. According to the widely respected British journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Bandar met with the Russian leader at Putin’s dacha outside Moscow early in August.

“We understand Russia’s great interest in the oil and gas in the Mediterranean from Israel to Cyprus. And we understand the importance of the Russian gas pipeline to Europe. We are not interested in competing with that. We can cooperate in this area,” Bandar said, purporting to speak with the full backing of the U.S. He also pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if Assad was toppled.

Bandar made an interesting offer, with economic implications involving major Saudi arms purchases from Russia and global cooperation between OPEC and the Russians. But, reports Evans-Pritchard, Bandar also hinted at a Chechen terrorist attack on Russia’s Winter Olympics next year. “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year,” he allegedly promised. “The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us.”

If Putin did not go along, Bandar implied that the Saudis might allow the Chechens to attack the Winter Olympics. With Mafia-like threats of that sort, I doubt that Putin will prove terribly cooperative if Obama continues to channel Prince Bandar al-Sultan al Saud. …source

Meet Saudi Arabia’s Bandar bin Sultan: The Puppetmaster Behind The Syrian War
by Tyler Durden – 27 August, 2013 – Zero Hedge

Yesterday the Telegraph’s Evans-Pritchard dug up a note that we had posted almost a month ago, relating to the “secret” meeting between Saudi Arabia and Russia, in which Saudi’s influential intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan met with Putin and regaled him with gifts, including a multi-billion arms deal and a promise that Saudi is “ready to help Moscow play a bigger role in the Middle East at a time when the United States is disengaging from the region”, if only Putin would agree to give up his alliance with Syria’s al-Assad and let Syria take over, ostensibly including control of the country’s all important natgas transit infrastructure. What was not emphasized by the Telegraph is that Putin laughed at the proposal and brushed aside the Saudi desperation by simply saying “nyet.” However, what neither the Telegraph, nor we three weeks ago, picked up on, is what happened after Putin put Syria in its place. We now know, and it’s a doozy.

Courtesy of As-Safir (translated here), we learn all the gritty details about what really happened at the meeting, instead of just the Syrian motives and the Russian conclusion, and most importantly what happened just as the meeting ended, unsuccessfully (at least to the Saudi). And by that we mean Saudi Arabia’s threats toward Russia and Syria.

First, some less well-known observations on who it was that was supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt even as US support was fading fast:

Bandar said that the matter is not limited to the kingdom and that some countries have overstepped the roles drawn for them, such as Qatar and Turkey. He added, “We said so directly to the Qataris and to the Turks. We rejected their unlimited support to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere. The Turks’ role today has become similar to Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war. We do not favor extremist religious regimes, and we wish to establish moderate regimes in the region. It is worthwhile to pay attention to and to follow up on Egypt’s experience. We will continue to support the [Egyptian] army, and we will support Defense Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi because he is keen on having good relations with us and with you. And we suggest to you to be in contact with him, to support him and to give all the conditions for the success of this experiment. We are ready to hold arms deals with you in exchange for supporting these regimes, especially Egypt.”

So while Saudi was openly supporting the Egyptian coup, which is well-known, it was Turkey and most importantly Qatar, the nation that is funding and arming the Syrian rebels, that were the supporters of the now failed regime. One wonders just how much Egypt will straing Saudi-Qatari relations, in light of their joined interests in Syria.

Second, some better-known observations by Putin on Russia’s relationship with Iran:

Regarding Iran, Putin said to Bandar that Iran is a neighbor, that Russia and Iran are bound by relations that go back centuries, and that there are common and tangled interests between them. Putin said, “We support the Iranian quest to obtain nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. And we helped them develop their facilities in this direction. Of course, we will resume negotiations with them as part of the 5P+1 group. I will meet with President Hassan Rouhani on the sidelines of the Central Asia summit and we will discuss a lot of bilateral, regional and international issues. We will inform him that Russia is completely opposed to the UN Security Council imposing new sanctions on Iran. We believe that the sanctions imposed against Iran and Iranians are unfair and that we will not repeat the experience again.”

Then, Putin’s position vis-a-vis Turkey, whom he implicitly warns that it is “not immune to Syria’s bloodbath.”

Regarding the Turkish issue, Putin spoke of his friendship with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan; “Turkey is also a neighboring country with which we have common interests. We are keen to develop our relations in various fields. During the Russian-Turkish meeting, we scrutinized the issues on which we agree and disagree. We found out that we have more converging than diverging views. I have already informed the Turks, and I will reiterate my stance before my friend Erdogan, that what is happening in Syria necessitates a different approach on their part. Turkey will not be immune to Syria’s bloodbath. The Turks ought to be more eager to find a political settlement to the Syrian crisis. We are certain that the political settlement in Syria is inevitable, and therefore they ought to reduce the extent of damage. Our disagreement with them on the Syrian issue does not undermine other understandings between us at the level of economic and investment cooperation. We have recently informed them that we are ready to cooperate with them to build two nuclear reactors. This issue will be on the agenda of the Turkish prime minister during his visit to Moscow in September.”

Of course, there is Syria:

Regarding the Syrian issue, the Russian president responded to Bandar, saying, “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters. During the Geneva I Conference, we agreed with the Americans on a package of understandings, and they agreed that the Syrian regime will be part of any settlement. Later on, they decided to renege on Geneva I. In all meetings of Russian and American experts, we reiterated our position. In his upcoming meeting with his American counterpart John Kerry, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will stress the importance of making every possible effort to rapidly reach a political settlement to the Syrian crisis so as to prevent further bloodshed.”

Alas, that has failed.

So what are some of the stunning disclosures by the Saudis?

First this: Bandar told Putin, “There are many common values and goals that bring us together, most notably the fight against terrorism and extremism all over the world. Russia, the US, the EU and the Saudis agree on promoting and consolidating international peace and security. The terrorist threat is growing in light of the phenomena spawned by the Arab Spring. We have lost some regimes. And what we got in return were terrorist experiences, as evidenced by the experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the extremist groups in Libya. … As an example, I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics in the city of Sochi on the Black Sea next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us, and they will not move in the Syrian territory’s direction without coordinating with us. These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role or influence in Syria’s political future.”

It is good of the Saudis to admit they control a terrorist organization that “threatens the security” of the Sochi 2014 Olympic games, and that house of Saud uses “in the face of the Syrian regime.” Perhaps the next time there is a bombing in Boston by some Chechen-related terrorists, someone can inquire Saudi Arabia what, if anything, they knew about that.

But the piece de resistance is what happened at the end of the dialogue between the two leaders. It was, in not so many words, a threat by Saudi Arabia aimed squarely at Russia:

As soon as Putin finished his speech, Prince Bandar warned that in light of the course of the talks, things were likely to intensify, especially in the Syrian arena, although he appreciated the Russians’ understanding of Saudi Arabia’s position on Egypt and their readiness to support the Egyptian army despite their fears for Egypt’s future.

The head of the Saudi intelligence services said that the dispute over the approach to the Syrian issue leads to the conclusion that “there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate. We believe that the Geneva II Conference will be very difficult in light of this raging situation.”

At the end of the meeting, the Russian and Saudi sides agreed to continue talks, provided that the current meeting remained under wraps. This was before one of the two sides leaked it via the Russian press.

Since we know all about this, it means no more talks, an implicit warning that the Chechens operating in proximity to Sochi may just become a loose cannon (with Saudi’s blessing of course), and that about a month ago “there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate.” Four weeks later, we are on the edge of all out war, which may involve not only the US and Europe, but most certainly Saudi Arabia and Russia which automatically means China as well. Or, as some may call it, the world.

And all of it as preordained by a Saudi prince, and all in the name of perpetuating the hegemony of the petrodollar.

P.S. Russia and Saudi Arabia account for 25% of global oil production. …more

Head of Syrian Rebels Calls for Terrorist Attacks On America
by George Washington – 13 September, 2013 – Zero Hedge
immanent
We knew that the Syrian rebels are mainly Al Qaeda, and that the U.S. has been supporting these terrorists for years.

And we knew that rank-and-file Syrian rebels have:

– Burned American flags
– Threatened to attack America
– Said: “When we finish with Assad, we will fight the U.S.!”

– And said: “We started our holy war here and won’t finish until this [Al Qaeda] banner will be raised on top of the White House. Keep funding them, you always do that, remember? Al Qaeda for instance.”

But even we were shocked to learn that the head of the Syrian rebels is also the global boss of Al Qaeda … and that he is calling for fresh terrorist attacks on America.

CBS News reports:

Al Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahri called has called on Muslims to continue attacking Americans on their own soil in order to “bleed” the U.S. economy.

“To keep up the hemorrhage in America’s security and military spending, we need to keep the Unites States on a constant state of alert about where and when the next strike will blow,” Zawahiri said.

Reuters noted in February 2012 that al-Zawahri is backing the Syrian rebels, and asking his followers to fight the Syrian government.

But al-Zawahri has since taken control of the main Al Qaeda rebel terrorist group in Syria: al-Nusra.

Terrorism experts at the Bipartisan Center’s Homeland Security Project (co-chaired by 9/11 Chairs Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kean) report (page 24):

A recent illustration of the fractured nature of the al-Qaeda network was provided during the spring of 2013 when Zawahiri [the global head of Al Qaeda] personally intervened to settle a dispute between Jabhat al-Nusra and al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). Zawahiri rejected AQI’s assertion of control over al-Nusra and declared the Syrian group to be under his direction.

In doing so, Zawahiri was trying to assert control over two of al-Qaeda’s most virulent affiliates. AQI had mounted a series of spectacular attacks in Iraq over the past year, demonstrating that it was a force to be reckoned with. According to the Congressional Research Service, there were some dozen days in 2012 in which AQI carried out simultaneous multicity attacks that killed hundreds of Iraqis. And the al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria is widely acknowledged as the most effective fighting force in the war against Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

Let’s put this in context. Most of the Syrian “rebels” are Al Qaeda. The U.S. government has designated these guys as terrorists.

Things are getting better, not worse: Al Qaeda is gaining more and more power among the rebels.

And the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel have been backing these guys for years. Indeed, we’ve long known that most of the weapons we’re shipping to Syria are ending up in the hands of Al Qaeda. And they apparently have chemical weapons.

We’re arming the same guys who are threatening to blow us up.

This is even stupider than creating Al Qaeda in the first place to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. At least then, they didn’t threaten America while we were arming them. ...source

Syrian Rebels Say Saudi Arabia Is Stepping Up Weapons Deliveries
By ANNE BARNARD, 12 September, 2013 – NYT

BEIRUT, Lebanon — Saudi Arabia, quietly cooperating with American and British intelligence and other Arab governments, has modestly increased deliveries of weapons to rebels fighting in southern Syria, the rebels say.

But the shipments have not been large enough to assuage rebel frustration that they are being abandoned, as the United States shifts its focus to a possible Russian-initiated deal to quarantine the Syrian government’s chemical weapons, or to ease anxieties among the Persian Gulf leaders who have been the rebels’ primary backers.

Publicly, the Saudis expressed patience, with pro-monarchy newspapers saying that the negotiations over Syrian chemical weapons would probably founder and that American military strikes would follow sooner or later. But behind the scenes, analysts say, leaders in Saudi Arabia and allies like Qatar chafed as rebel leaders fumed that their larger need — a way to shift the balance in the two-year-old civil war and end the army’s bombardment of towns and neighborhoods — was being ignored.

The greatest fear of gulf leaders, said Hassan Hassan, who analyzes the gulf role in the Syria conflict at The National, a newspaper based in Abu Dhabi, in the United Arab Emirates, is that talks over Syria’s chemical weapons will shift the American focus to “talking with the Iranians and the regime and Russia rather than with the gulf.”

The gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia and Qatar, have positioned themselves as crucial players in Syria, working closely with the United States.

“Now all of a sudden the limelight has been taken away from them,” Mr. Hassan said. “They are afraid the situation can take another course.”

Since the chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs last month that American officials blame on the Syrian government, rebels and analysts say the Saudis have stepped up deliveries of light weapons and antitank guided missiles. The aim was initially to bolster the rebels’ ability to take advantage of any American strikes by storming damaged or undefended bases, analysts and rebels say — though the Saudis refrained from sending the antiaircraft missiles that the rebels covet most. The Syrian government has denied responsibility for the chemical attack.

Rebels in southern Syria who nominally answer to the loose-knit, Western-backed Free Syrian Army said Thursday that they had received new infusions of arms from Saudi Arabia, delivered through Jordan, and that the weapons had helped them gain ground near the border. …more

EU Parliament Expresses Human Rights Concerns For Bahrain
12 September, 2013 – Eurasia Review

“The legitimate right of Bahraini citizens to express their opinions freely, organise gatherings and demonstrate peacefully must be respected”, said MEPs in their resolution.

They further called on the authorities to immediately end all acts of repression, release all prisoners of conscience, and respect the rights of juveniles.

“The independent commission for the rights of prisoners and detainees should effectively monitor and improve their conditions”, they added, while “the Ministry for Human Rights and Social Development in Bahrain should act in accordance with international human rights standards and obligations”. …source

Complete EU Resolution HERE

U.S. Ambassador Donahoe Hits Back at Bahraini Media Distortion of Meeting with Regime Officials
11 Septemebr, 2013 – By Brian Dooley – Human Rights First

Once again the Bahraini media has proven that it plays fast and loose with the truth in its reporting of the regime’s meetings with foreign diplomats. An article in today’s English-language Gulf Daily News claimed that U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Human Rights Council at Geneva Eileen Donahoe refuted remarks made by earlier in the week by the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay in which she criticized the government of Bahrain.

A story titled “U.S. Backs Bahrain” reported from Geneva that a “Bahrain parliamentary team yesterday won superpower backing against ‘unfair’ comments,” and that “America’s Ambassador to the Geneva-based U.N. Human Rights Council, Eileen Donahoe, agreed that her remarks did not reflect reality.” Yesterday the state-controlled Bahrain News Agency (BNA) also reported that Donahoe met with Bahraini Members of Parliament and “agreed” that the Members “showcases the true nature incidents” (sic).

Ambassador Donahoe hit back on Twitter this morning, saying “Story is NOT accurate. #Bahrain gov del ask to meet after US joined JS: I expressed concern re Min of Justice order.” Earlier this week the Bahraini Minister for Justice announced that opposition figures in Bahrain would have to notify the government in advance if they intended to meet representatives of foreign governments. Also this week The United States, along with 46 other countries, signed a statement expressing concern over human rights violations in Bahrain.

This is not the first time the Bahraini media has been caught falsifying what happened at governments meetings. In June 2011, the BNA reported that Pillay had recognized that “misinformation” had been spread about the crisis in the Kingdom. In a statement the following day, a Pillay spokesperson described the BNA account of a meeting held with Bahraini officials as a “distortion of her words” and asked for a retraction.

The government-supported media in Bahrain media seems determined to cement its pants on fire reputation. The U.S. government should really wonder how reliable an ally Bahrain is when its state media distorts conversations with senior American officials. A full statement from Ambassador Donahoe about what was said and not said in the meeting would help clarify things.

Update: The U.S. Mission to the U.N. in Geneva posted a statement expressing its “deep disappointment and concern over gross factual inaccuracies” reported by the Bahrain News Agency and the Gulf Daily News. …source

OFFENDING STORY BELOW:

US backs Bahrain over human rights issue
Trade Arabia , 11 September, 2013

A Bahrain parliamentary team yesterday won superpower backing against ‘unfair’ comments by UN human rights chief Navi Pillay, a report said.

America’s Ambassador to the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council, Eileen Donahoe, agreed that her remarks did not reflect reality, according to the report in the Gulf Daily News, our sister publication.

Bahrain’s delegation, led by MP Dr Jamal Saleh and including Shura Council member Hala Ramzi, met the envoy following a statement by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Dr Saleh stressed the need to differentiate between hundreds of peaceful demonstrations allowed by authorities and terrorist attacks in which saboteurs frequently use Molotov cocktails, metal rods, firearms and homemade bombs and set fire to tyres in the streets.

This jeopardises people’s basic freedom of secure living, movement, and access to health and medical service besides other liberties, which are guaranteed by the Bahraini Constitution.

He said that the National Assembly was convened after exhausting all patience in the aftermath of a series of acts of terror and sabotage.

It set forth 22 recommendations for implementation by the government to eliminate acts of terrorism and vandalism.

Ramzi explained that Bahrain suffered from constant attacks on its public schools to an extent that parents fear for the safety of their children daily, in addition to continuous instances of road-blocking.

This necessitated a quick decision from the National Assembly to stop such acts of terrorism committed by miscreants seeking to destabilise Bahrain’s national security and infringe upon the freedom of its citizens and residents, she said.

Donahoe expressed her dismay at the violent demonstrations, burning of tyres and undermining of public interest.

She urged all parties to encourage peace, shun violence and resume dialogue to reach stability.

The UN rights chief’s comments had caused an uproar earlier with legislators terming it one-sided and alleging that it seemed to be ‘dictated’ by the opposition. – TradeArabia News Service …source

Thierry Meyssan analyses the contradictions and incoherences made by the US, British and French secret services about the so-called chemical massacre of Ghouta.

How the Western services fabricated the ’’chemical attack’’ of Ghouta
Voltaire Network, 13, September 2013, Thierry Meyssan

Introduction

Thierry Meyssan : The Western secret services are 100% sure of things that aren’t logical :

1. They think that combat gases can make the difference between men and women.

2. They observed while the concoction of combat gas was being made, but did not intervene to avoid it’s usage. On the other hand, they stepped forward to suggest punishing the ones who used it.

3. They explain that the children were killed on the 21st of August, while the video is dated from before that, and these children come from families that support the Syrian regime and Bashar el-Assad’s government.

4. They assure they possess telephone call recordings. But they are not the ones who made those telephone interceptions.

5. And, finally, the ’’red line’’ affair. According to the joint committee of the British Intelligence service, Jon Day, Syria would have supposedly used combat gas 14 times in the past. But this was never confirmed. Why 14 times before ? Because it is the number of times the US government had use of chemical weapons in Iraq, in 2003-2004. And, of course, it would only be the 15th time of use that would lead the punishment exerted by the great powers.
The Ghouta massacre
The contradictions of the Western secret services

TM : The US and French government assure that the Syrian Arab Army, the legitimate army of the Syria state, carried-out a chemical massacre in the Damascus suburbs, in the agricultural belt of Ghouta, which surrounds Damascus, on August 21st .

I I am going to show you that this affirmation is utterly fabricated and that is conforms in no way to reality. Therefore, I will first take support on official documents, published by the american government, as well as the british and French.

1- The number of victims varies from 1 to 5

TM : In the information note that was published by the american government, we can read that this attack caused the death of at least 1 429 people.

However, when we look at the French equivalent document, only 281 deaths are mentioned, that would have supposedly been counted by watching the internet videos. The same document states that a ’’non government related’’ organization – this has to be said with quotations marks -, Doctors without boarders, would have counted – for the French government – 355 deaths in the hospitals surrounding Damascus.

So, the difference of evaluation of the problem varies from 1 to 5, from source to source.

Then, the West leans solely on the videos to prove the veracity of the facts.

In conclusion, about these videos, almost no one agrees on the number of victims. From what the US document says, their are more that 100, whereas the French one only claims 47.

2- Paris and Washington have validated the videos dated from before August 21st

TM : When we look at these videos, we can notice that some of them are previous to the massacre.

Indeed, if you look on YouTube , you will see that they were posted on august 20th, which could be on the eve of the massacre, but not necessarily when you take into account the time change of 9 hours between Syria and California, where the Youtube server is. However, you can clearly see that the outside scenes are filmed during the time where the sun is at it’s highest.

So, it was filmed around noon and can’t possibly have been recorded before that date.

And yet, these are the unproven facts that the US and French government are relying on.

3- A gas that spares women

TM : In these documents is explained that most of the victims are children.

Indeed, you can see in the videos that many children are in agony. They are all about the same age. There are also adults. But all the adults are men. And generally, are at the age where they can fight.

There are no woman. Aside from two exceptions, there were no women in the officially announced victims. On the 1 429 official victims, only 2 are women.

It would be the first time that a gas would discriminate individuals according to their gender. …more

American Exceptionalism has come to mean, Americas leaders believe themselves to be above the law and exempt from norms of decency, designed to protect Human Rights and to protect protect Nations and Individuals Rights and Sovereignty from the belligerent aggression of Economically and Militarily dominate Nations.

IAEA envoy says Iran willing to cooperate on nuclear issue
Al Akhbar, 12 September, 2013

Iran’s new envoy to the UN nuclear agency said on Thursday he would cooperate with it to find a way to “overcome existing issues once and for all.”

But Ambassador Reza Najafi, at his first board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), also repeated Iran’s position that it would not give up what it sees as its legitimate right to a peaceful nuclear energy program.

“Based on its rights and obligations recognized under the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty), Iran is ready to faithfully engage and remove any ambiguity on its nuclear activities,” Najafi told the governing board of the Vienna-based UN agency.

Iran is at loggerheads with Western powers in particular, who fear its nuclear program may be designed to give it the capacity to build nuclear weapons. Tehran denies the accusation.

Separately from big power efforts to resolve a decade-old dispute that could trigger a Middle East war, the IAEA has held 10 rounds of talks with Iran since early 2012 in a bid to resume a stalled inquiry into suspected atom bomb research.

The negotiations have so far failed to yield results but a meeting is set for September 27 in Vienna, seen by Western states as a key test of the new Iranian government’s intentions.

Najafi, who was appointed to the Vienna post after President Hassan Rohani took office in early August, said there was a “strong political will” on the Iranian side to “constructively interact” on the nuclear issue.

“We are looking forward to working closely with the Director General (IAEA chief Yukiya Amano) and his team in the coming days,” Najafi, a career diplomat and disarmament expert, said.

Asked whether he was hopeful that an agreement could be reached in the Vienna meeting, he later told a brief news conference: “We sit together, we directly and frankly discuss the differences. We hope that we can solve those differences.”

Iran says it is enriching uranium only for civilian energy and medicine, denying any aim to acquire nuclear weapons.

Hitting out at Israel’s “clandestine nuclear weapons program”, Najafi said Iran’s nuclear program “has always been and continues to be exclusively for peaceful purposes” and that Tehran would never relinquish its “right” to peaceful atomic activities.

Rohani, who has vowed that Iran will be more transparent and less confrontational in talks both with the IAEA and the big powers, said this week that the time for resolving Iran’s nuclear dispute with the West was limited.

He said he would meet with the foreign ministers from some of the six powers – Russia, China, France, Britain, the United States and Germany – when he attends the UN General Assembly in New York this month.

Iran is ready for “meaningful, result-oriented and time-bound negotiations,” Najafi said, calling on the West not to speak to Iran “with a language of threat or sanctions”.

“We hope there would be the same approach and political will on the other side. In this context, we should not lose sight of the fact that interaction is not a one-sided road,” he said, according to the text of his remarks. …more

Saudis support Bahrain’s Khalifas in torturing women like Rihanna al Mousawi, who will be sentenced on 29th Sept, with no proper defence or prosecution sessions and 2 out of 3 judges are Khalifas. Nadia ali Yousef was picked up at a police check, should have been released oon 2nd Sept, now extended until 2nd Nov. and is 8 months pregnant. Zainab al Khalifa who’s NOT been allowed to walk in the fresh air since March.

Sheikh Mohammed Habib al Muqdad was sentenced to life for criticizing the corruption, repression and violation of human rights in Bahrain. He was tortured, had no access to lawyers and was affected by a smear campaign.

His brother Abduljalil Muqdad, is also in for life and two relatives Yousuf Ibrahim al Muqdad and Mohammed Habib al Muqdad were tortured and jailed.

The authorities, supported by the British and American Governments then attacked the children. Ebrahim al Muqdad (now 16) was arrested on 23rd
July 2012, is in the adult Dry Dock Prison on a 10 year sentence.

Mustafa al Muqdad (16) was arrested 17th May 2011, tortured, put in solitary, and had a 15 year sentence reduced to 3 in May 2013.

And finally 14 year old Jaffar al Muqdad and his cousin Yousif Ibrahim al Muqdad were abducted from a swimming pool in Athari last week. When a
child is abducted by the police, their family go round the police stations desperately trying to locate the children. The police deny knowledge of where they are and the parents only find the children after they have been tortured and forced to sign unseen confessions. The police also confiscated the passports of four family members and their mobiles and computers two years ago. They need their passports to apply for residential housing and for jobs or travel.

Please write on these issues and get others to do so. The House of Commons is feeling”virtuous” on the Syria vote, but we are still supporting an extremely nasty dictatorship in Bahrain. Only publicity will change that situation. Please see below four references.

The 2 leaders:
1- Mohamed Habib AlMiqdad http://bahrainrights.hopto.org/en/node/4800
2- Abdul Jalil Al Moqdad http://www.bahrainrights.org/en/node/4386

Other members of the family:
3- Mustafa Al Muqdad (17): http://bahrainrights.hopto.org/en/node/6134
4- Ebrahim Al Muqdad (17) http://bahrainrights.hopto.org/en/node/6155

under construction

Obama, Putin in battle over purported Syria chemical weapons evidence at G-20 summit in Russia
5 September, 2013 – CBS – AP

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia The Group of 20 summit kicking off Thursday on the Russian shores of the Baltic sea will bring the two men at the forefront of the geopolitical standoff over Syria’s civil war into the same room for meetings: President Obama and his Russian counterpart, President Vladimir Putin.

Alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria

As they arrive in St. Petersburg for two days of meetings, Mr. Obama and French President Francois Hollande are preparing for possible military strikes over what they insist was a chemical weapons attack by Syrian President Bashar Assad’s army in the suburbs of Damascus on Aug. 21.

Both presidents are effectively waiting, however, for the U.S. Congress to weigh in first, so bombs are unlikely to fall on Syrian government targets during the gathering in Russia. President Obama’s objective of backing from Congress came one step closer to reality on Wednesday with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee narrowly approving the use of U.S. military force in Syria.

In the meantime, Presidents Obama and Hollande are likely to continue lobbying other world leaders at the summit to accept their alleged evidence that Assad’s regime was behind the deadly attack on the eastern Ghouta suburbs, which the White House says killed more than 1,400 people.

G-20 host President Putin, however, is a staunch ally of President Assad’s regime, and he’ll be wielding his own evidence to convince the other heads of state in St. Petersburg that the U.S. and French governments are rushing into military action without solid proof of who was behind the chemical attack.

Putin issues warning to U.S. on going it alone in Syria

On his own turf and looking strong in the face of Western hesitancy to tangle militarily with Assad and his Russian backers, Putin said this week that any one-sided action would be rash. But he said he doesn’t exclude supporting U.N. action — if it’s proven that the Syrian government used poison gas on its own people.

President Obama said Wednesday during a one-day stopover in Sweden that armed groups fighting against Assad in Syria simply do “not have the capability” to have carried out the Ghouta attack.

“These weapons are in Assad’s possession, we have intercepts of people in the regime before and after the attack acknowledging it, we can show rockets going from Assad controlled areas into rebel territory with the weapons,” asserted Mr. Obama.

But if the White House has already shown that evidence to its partners in the United Nations Security Council — including, most crucially, the veto-wielding members Russia and China — it has failed to convince the vast majority of them of its veracity.

Heading into St. Petersburg, the only nation to say it will join in a military intervention not sanctioned by the Security Council is France.

Arguing over previous “evidence”

Russia’s Foreign Ministry, meanwhile, has reportedly handed its own 100-page report to the United Nations on a previous alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria. Russia said in July that tests conducted by Russian scientists on samples from the northern town of Khan al-Assal following an alleged March 19 chemical attack showed that rebel fighters were most likely to blame.

According to information posted this week to the Foreign Ministry’s website, tests carried out by the Russian scientists on samples from Khan al-Assal showed the missile used to deliver the chemical agent was “not a regular munition of the Syrian army,” but rather a “artisan-type” device which they concluded was likely built by the rebels. The report also says the explosives used in the projectile, and the chemical agents themselves, were not typical of the materials used by militaries in such weapons.

According to the Foreign ministry website, the nerve agents found in soil samples at Khan al-Assal, which it said named as sarin and diisopropyl fluorophosphate, did not appear to have been concocted in “an industrial environment.”

The March 19 attack in Khan al-Assal was one of two alleged chemical attacks that the Obama administration first furtively confirmed — and pinned “with some degree of varying confidence” on the Assad regime.

Shortly after letters from the White House to U.S. senators leveling that initial charge against the Syrian government were made public in April, Secretary of State John Kerry said on Capitol Hill that there were two instances of chemical weapons use — the one in Khan al-Assal and another near Damascus. …more

A war the Pentagon doesn’t want
By Robert H. Scales, 5 September, 2013 – Washington Post

Robert H. Scales, a retired Army major general, is a former commandant of the U.S. Army War College.

The tapes tell the tale. Go back and look at images of our nation’s most senior soldier, Gen. Martin Dempsey, and his body language during Tuesday’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on Syria. It’s pretty obvious that Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, doesn’t want this war. As Secretary of State John Kerry’s thundering voice and arm-waving redounded in rage against Bashar al-Assad’s atrocities, Dempseywas largely (and respectfully) silent.

Dempsey’s unspoken words reflect the opinions of most serving military leaders. By no means do I profess to speak on behalf of all of our men and women in uniform. But I can justifiably share the sentiments of those inside the Pentagon and elsewhere who write the plans and develop strategies for fighting our wars. After personal exchanges with dozens of active and retired soldiers in recent days, I feel confident that what follows represents the overwhelming opinion of serving professionals who have been intimate witnesses to the unfolding events that will lead the United States into its next war.

They are embarrassed to be associated with the amateurism of the Obama administration’s attempts to craft a plan that makes strategic sense. None of the White House staff has any experience in war or understands it. So far, at least, this path to war violates every principle of war, including the element of surprise, achieving mass and having a clearly defined and obtainable objective.

They are repelled by the hypocrisy of a media blitz that warns against the return of Hitlerism but privately acknowledges that the motive for risking American lives is our “responsibility to protect” the world’s innocents. Prospective U.S. action in Syria is not about threats to American security. The U.S. military’s civilian masters privately are proud that they are motivated by guilt over slaughters in Rwanda, Sudan and Kosovo and not by any systemic threat to our country.

They are outraged by the fact that what may happen is an act of war and a willingness to risk American lives to make up for a slip of the tongue about “red lines.” These acts would be for retribution and to restore the reputation of a president. Our serving professionals make the point that killing more Syrians won’t deter Iranian resolve to confront us. The Iranians have already gotten the message.

Our people lament our loneliness. Our senior soldiers take pride in their past commitments to fight alongside allies and within coalitions that shared our strategic goals. This war, however, will be ours alone.

They are tired of wannabe soldiers who remain enamored of the lure of bloodless machine warfare. “Look,” one told me, “if you want to end this decisively, send in the troops and let them defeat the Syrian army. If the nation doesn’t think Syria is worth serious commitment, then leave them alone.” But they also warn that Syria is not Libya or Serbia. Perhaps the United States has become too used to fighting third-rate armies. As the Israelis learned in 1973, the Syrians are tough and mean-spirited killers with nothing to lose.

Our military members understand and take seriously their oath to defend the constitutional authority of their civilian masters. They understand that the United States is the only liberal democracy that has never been ruled by its military. But today’s soldiers know war and resent civilian policymakers who want the military to fight a war that neither they nor their loved ones will experience firsthand.

Civilian control of the armed services doesn’t mean that civilians shouldn’t listen to those who have seen war. Our most respected soldier president, Dwight Eisenhower, possessed the gravitas and courage to say no to war eight times during his presidency. He ended the Korean War and refused to aid the French in Indochina; he said no to his former wartime friends Britain and France when they demanded U.S. participation in the capture of the Suez Canal. And he resisted liberal democrats who wanted to aid the newly formed nation of South Vietnam. We all know what happened after his successor ignored Eisenhower’s advice. My generation got to go to war.

Over the past few days, the opinions of officers confiding in me have changed to some degree. Resignation seems to be creeping into their sense of outrage. One officer told me: “To hell with them. If this guy wants this war, then let him have it. Looks like no one will get hurt anyway.”

Soon the military will salute respectfully and loose the hell of hundreds of cruise missiles in an effort that will, inevitably, kill a few of those we wish to protect. They will do it with all the professionalism and skill we expect from the world’s most proficient military. I wish Kerry would take a moment to look at the images from this week’s hearings before we go to war again.

Read more at PostOpinions: Dana Milbank: The White House’s Syria secrets Anne Applebaum: Obama’s mixed messages on Syria E.J. Dionne Jr: Syria and the return of dissent David Ignatius: Syria nears a turning point Greg Sargent: Why House Dems think Syria resolution could still pass Robert J. Samuelson: Syria and the myth that Americans are ‘war weary’ …source

G20 shows that world no longer trusts Obama
By: Thomas Walkom – National Affairs – 6 September, 2013

Politically, the latest G20 summit confirms what until now had only been whispered:

U.S. President Barack Obama no longer commands the moral authority he was once accorded by the rest of the world. Nor does America.

While controversial at home, Obama has always been viewed outside of the United States as a larger-than-life figure.

In part, this is because he is America’s first black president. But in part, Obama’s electoral successes convinced many that the U.S. was returning to sanity — that the dark malevolence represented by his predecessor George W. Bush (and particularly by Bush sidekick Dick Cheney) had finally passed; that America was preparing to become once again a force for good.

Perhaps, this was a naive hope. The U.S. is a great power and great powers are not always nice. Washington’s involvement in blatantly illegal enterprises predated Bush and Cheney.

Yet around the world, America was viewed — in general — as a country whose heart was in the right place.

And Obama was viewed as the leader who could makes U.S actions reflect that heart.

So high were the hopes around Obama that he was awarded the Nobel peace prize simply for being elected.

Over time, the cruel world of reality eroded those hopes. Obama promised to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp. He didn’t. He promised a short, sharp war that would defeat the Taliban and bring peace to Afghanistan. That never happened.

He authorized drone strikes against nations with which the U.S. is not at war, strikes that killed not only Americans but others whose only crime was to be in the wrong place.

He permitted the U.S. National Security Agency to snoop on U.S. citizens and foreign allies in an unprecedented manner.

He promised openness but went after whistleblowers like Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning and Edward Snowden with unprecedented zeal.

In an earlier time, any U.S. president who called for international action against chemical weapons would have received a sympathetic response from much of the world.

True, it is hypocritical to single out chemical weapons. Syria has not signed the international convention against chemical weapons. But the U.S. has not signed a similar convention against cluster bombs, which can be just as devastating.

Still, chemical weapons have the capacity to frighten. The idea of civilians being killed in war seems bad enough. The idea of civilians being killed without visible marks upon them seems, for some reason, worse.

In an earlier time, the moral outrage expressed by Obama and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry would have resonated worldwide.

These days, it does not. When Obama claims he has proof that the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad used chemical weapons, a great many people around the world — people who count themselves as friends of the U.S. — simply don’t believe him.

Russian President Vladimir Putin insists that Syrian rebels were behind any chemical attack. He calls Kerry a liar. In earlier times, Putin would have been discounted as a propagandist for Syria’s regime.

But so jaded is today’s world about American motives that the former KGB thug seems more credible than Obama.

Britain won’t join any U.S. attack because the British people no longer trust American leadership. Ditto Germany. Ditto most other nations. That became obvious at the two-day G20 summit in St. Petersburg.

Only 10 of the 20 signed a statement accusing Syria’s government of using chemical weapons. Of those 10, only France has suggested it would participate in a U.S. attack.

Even Canada’s vigorously pro-U.S. Conservative government refuses to lend Obama anything beyond moral support.

Ironically, Jean Chrétien offered the U.S. more military assets for its 2003 attack on Iraq — although the former prime minister technically opposed that war.

Yet in their reluctance to sign on fully to America’s latest war, Harper and Obama’s other recalcitrant allies are being politically rational. Their voters no longer give the U.S. and its vigorous young president the benefit of the doubt.

They are suspicious and rightly so. …source

Please Write or Contact Your Congress Person or MP

At least the doctors had the chance to speak in court and the defence
lawyers could forward a case, even if largely ignored. In this case, the
first 11 defendants in the Feb 14th Youth Coalition, the defendants
can’t speak, torture is ignored and the Judge leaves room whilst defence
lawyers are putting their cases. Instead of yapping on about bombing
Syria, US and UK should put pressure on Bahrain, a much easier place to
get change.

Naji is a human rights defender and Director of the Bahrain Youth
Society for Human rights. He has been tortured extensively, went to
hospital twice and boycotted today’s proceedings as Judge Dhahrani is
totally biased and a member of the Khalifa clan. Today’s session was
postponed and the next session on 29th September, will sentence eleven
people including Rihanna al Mousawi, who’ve had no real defence.

An act of aggression is illegal in the International Criminal Court and is defined as the use of armed force by one State against another State without the justification of self-defense or authorization by the Security Council. The definition of the act of aggression, as well as the actions qualifying as acts of aggression include for example invasion by armed forces, bombardment and blockade.

Putin presses US Congress over Syria, says Kerry lied
4 September, 2013 – Reuters

(Reuters) – Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday the U.S. Congress had no right to approve the use of force against Syria without a decision from the U.N. Security Council, and that doing so would be an “act of aggression”.

He said “anything that is outside the U.N. Security Council is aggression, except self-defense. Now what Congress and the U.S. Senate are doing in essence is legitimizing aggression. This is inadmissible in principle.”

In remarks that could raise tension further before he hosts President Barack Obama and other G20 leaders on Thursday, Putin also said U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry lied to Congress about the militant group al Qaeda’s role in the Syrian conflict.

“They lie beautifully, of course. I saw debates in Congress. A congressman asks Mr Kerry: ‘Is al Qaeda there?’ He says: ‘No, I am telling you responsibly that it is not’,” Putin said at a meeting of his human rights council in the Kremlin.

“Al Qaeda units are the main military echelon, and they know this,” he said, referring to the United States. “It was unpleasant and surprising for me – we talk to them, we proceed from the assumption that they are decent people. But he is lying and knows he is lying. It’s sad.”

Putin did not give any more details.

In an exchange with a senator, Kerry was asked whether it was “basically true” that the Syrian opposition had “become more infiltrated by al Qaeda over time. Kerry said: “No, that is actually basically not true. It’s basically incorrect”.

In another sign of tension, the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that since August 31, the U.S. State Department had repeatedly asked for a telephone call between Kerry and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov but Kerry had been unavailable and declined to set a time for the call. …source