Obama – Putin, different deliveries
Obama – Putin, different deliveries
Hillary Clinton constantly denies that she has in any way, shape, or form helped arm terrorist. She wants us to take her word for it, but we know better than that, don’t we patriots?!
Wikileaks (via the Political Insider) released more information proving Hillary actually DID sell weapons to terrorists, and now it is time to hold her accountable.
During a recent interview, Assange stated, “So, for example, the disastrous, absolutely disastrous intervention in Libya, the destruction of the Gaddafi government, which led to the occupation of ISIS of large segments of that country, weapons flows going over to Syria, being pushed by Hillary Clinton, into jihadists within Syria, including ISIS, that’s there in those emails.”
Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is a controversial character. But there’s no denying the emails he has picked up from inside the Democrat Party are real, and he’s willing to expose Hillary Clinton.
Now, he’s announcing that Hillary Clinton and her State Department were actively arming Islamic jihadists, which includes the Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria.
Clinton has repeatedly denied these claims, including during multiple statements while under oath in front of the United States Senate.
WikiLeaks is about to prove Hillary Clinton deserves to be arrested:
In Obama’s second term, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton authorized the shipment of American-made arms to Qatar, a country beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood, and friendly to the Libyan rebels, in an effort to topple the Libyan/Gaddafi government, and then ship those arms to Syria in order to fund Al Qaeda, and topple Assad in Syria.
Clinton took the lead role in organizing the so-called “Friends of Syria” (aka Al Qaeda/ISIS) to back the CIA-led insurgency for regime change in Syria.
Under oath Hillary Clinton denied she knew about the weapons shipments during public testimony in early 2013 after the Benghazi terrorist attack.
In an interview with Democracy Now, Wikileaks’ Julian Assange is now stating that 1,700 emails contained in the Clinton cache directly connect Hillary to Libya to Syria, and directly to Al Qaeda and ISIS.
Here is the incredible transcript:
Generally historical revision takes place long after events unfold and the victors attempt to bury humiliating or inconvenient truths. Today, in the age of information, these would-be victors are finding it increasingly necessary to revise history in real-time through a strategy of increasingly repetitive, but decreasingly effective propaganda.
Phase I: Justifying Chaos
It was only in 2007 that US foreign policy openly sought to pursue war against Iran, Syria, and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, while undercutting pro-Iranian factions in Iraq which at the time the US was still occupying. Failing to accomplish this directly, the US planned a not-so-covert proxy war that would include funding, politically backing, and even arming groups ranging from the Muslim Brotherhood to militants aligned with Al Qaeda itself.
This is perhaps best summarized by the prophetic 2007 report “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” written by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh and published in the New Yorker.
It stated (emphasis added):
To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has cooperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
Hersh would also go on to chronicle American political and financial support that was being provided to the Muslim Brotherhood, even then under then US President George Bush. In all, the supposedly “spontaneous” uprisings referred to by the Western media as the “Arab Spring” in 2011 were being engineered years ahead of time – not in an attempt to promote peaceful pro-democratic aspirations, but to serve as cover for ultra-violent foreign-backed insurrections that would leave a trail of destruction stretching along Africa’s northern coast, all the way to the borders of Iran, Russia, and even China.
Phase II: The War
After denying any role in the “Arab Spring” unrest, the US would soon not only openly support the protesters in the streets, but also support armed militants that followed in the wake of protests. This support included that of a military dimension – with militants in Libya being provided aircover and special forces initially, to eventually the air-dropping of weapons, equipment, and other supplies.
US Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) would even travel to the terrorist capital of Libya – Benghazi – and offer US support in person. He would stand literally upon the footsteps of Benghazi’s courthouse where Al Qaeda rallies would be held shortly after, promising weapons to men who would later slaughter a US ambassador in that very city.
After the destruction of Libya’s government amid NATO’s intervention, Benghazi would serve as a terrorist epicenter where weapons, cash, and fighters were being staged before being sent to NATO-member Turkey and then to fight in northern Syria. Among these terrorists were seasoned militants of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), an official Al Qaeda franchise in North Africa. One of their leaders, Abdelhakim Belhadj would eventually find himself in power in Tripoli after the collapse of the Libyan government, and even have his photograph taken with Senator McCain.
Predictably, as NATO shifted resources and attention from the overthrow of Libya to the overthrow of Syria, the conflict aimed at Damascus escalated. It did not however succeed. Instead, the West found itself in a protracted proxy war in which its role in arming, aiding, and abetting hardcore sectarian extremists became increasingly obvious.
Phase III: The “Rise” of ISIS
Clearly, the rise of the so-called “Islamic State” or ISIS, did not happen overnight, nor by accident. It was not only the logical result of the United States continuing its strategy of proxy warfare it had carried out against Libya, now unfolding in Syria, it was also the premeditated, documented result of what veteran journalist Seymour Hersh had warned about in 2007.
It is a threat that not only Syria understands all too well, but a threat its allies including Iraq, Iran, and Russia fully understand and are mobilizing against.
The US has found itself revising history, attempting to explain the existence of ISIS lurking in the footprints of its massive support of so-called “moderates” in Syria’s ongoing conflict. The US has attempted to claim ISIS has built itself on “donations,” selling oil to the black market, and by taking hostages for ransom. If only building a multinational terrorist mercenary force was that easy, we could imagine Syria, Iraq, and Iran would likewise have vast mercenary armies to outmatch ISIS in an afternoon.
The reality is, to explain how the US and its regional partners have provided “moderates” with billions in aid only to have ISIS rise up and displace these “moderates,” we must realize that there were never any “moderates” to begin with, and that the US intentionally armed and funded terrorists, just as Hersh warned in 2007, to create a terrorist mercenary army that “espouses a militant vision of Islam” and is “sympathetic to Al Qaeda.”
ISIS didn’t displace the “moderates,” the truth of what America has done in the Middle East has displaced the lies the West has been telling the public starting in 2011 at the height of the so-called “Arab Spring.”
It is essential that people around the world continue to spread this this truth faster than the West can spread its chaos.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Webster Griffin Tarpley, an author and historian from Washington, about the crisis in Syria.
The following is an approximate transcript of the interview.
Press TV: With the Syrian army being able to gain more ground and kill more insurgents, just how do you assess the Syrian crisis at this point in time?
Tarpley: On the one hand, the military developments of the past 24 hours or so confirmed this pattern of slow, steady, inexorable progress by the Syrian army against the rebels, of course, facilitated by the fact that the rebels are avidly fighting among themselves, killing each other, assassinating each other’s leaders and so forth. This then leads to a very grim political situation for the rebels and their international backers.
There’s going to be a friends of Syria meeting – again, that ironically named gathering. They’re going to be meeting in London next week. They really are in total disarray.
On the one hand, the Syrian National Coalition, supposedly linked to the Free Syrian Army, now says that they will not attend any Geneva talks, although there are factions of them that say they might after all attend. Total confusion!
Then we’ve got, I think really, the symptoms of mental disintegration on the part of the backers of the rebels. For example, the Saudi government was offered a seat on the United Nations Security Council, one of the rotating seats, and Saudi Arabia says that they’re not happy with what the Security Council has done so they’re going to go home. It’s like a tantrum. They’re not going to participate in the Security Council. It’s really an absurd thing.
Then we have Secretary of State John Kerry who is reported to be under psychiatric observation for symptoms of schizophrenia. Two weeks ago he was praising the Syrian government for complete cooperation, total cooperation with the survey and inspection of the chemical weapons arsenal which are in the process of being eliminated, and then at the beginning of this week he then had a rage fit and began ranting about his personal opinion that President Assad is illegitimate and has to go. One week it’s “thank you to the Syrian government for your responsible behavior”, and this week it’s “but, by the way, you have to go”.
The political disintegration of this entire adventure couldn’t be any clearer.
Press TV: Briefly doctor, just how much can the Syrian crisis be solved diplomatically and speaking of diplomacy, just what are the chances for a successful Geneva II conference?
Tarpley: Well, it’s obviously important for people of goodwill to try to secure a diplomatic solution. That’s what Russia is doing. That’s what the Assad government has accepted. That’s what quite a number of other governments have supported.
But of course, the Syrian rebels are incorrigible. They simply will not negotiate and that’s the most recent authoritative word we have from the Syrian National Council. So, if they won’t negotiate, one might say that those same rebels are making a military solution at their expense inevitable. If they won’t cooperate with some political solution then only the military solution is actually left.
I suspect that it’s going to be a military solution at the expense of the rebels taking several more months. But I think the die is cast and the situation is going in the direction of the elimination of these micro-states or mini-state or emirates that the rebels have been creating in northern Syria which are absolutely intolerable for the people who live there. The popularity of these people as rulers is at an all time low and most Syrians would like to get rid of them.
At that rate, I think it’s going to be ultimately their military liquidation that will end this.
GMA / HSN
Muslims from all over the World: Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, Former Soviet Republics, Palestinians, Algeria etc… who have been deceived by Saudi Arabia, and Qatar tell their tales of being a Jihadist in Syria; fighting Assad to overthrow the Syrian government to establish a Qalifah that will fight the “Global Jihad” against Europe and USA.
The alleged chemical weapons use in Syria is a provocation carried out by the rebels to attract a foreign-led strike, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at the G20 summit.
There was no 50/50 split of opinion on the notion of a military strike against the Syrian President Bashar Assad, Putin stressed refuting earlier assumptions.
Only Turkey, Canada, Saudi Arabia and France joined the US push for intervention, he said, adding that the UK Prime Minister’s position was not supported by his citizens.
Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil, South Africa and Italy were among the major world’s economies clearly opposed to military intervention.
President Putin said the G20 nations spent the “entire” Thursday evening discussing the Syrian crisis, which was followed by Putin’s bilateral meeting with UK Prime Minister David Cameron that lasted till 3am Moscow time.
Russia “will help Syria” in the event of a military strike, Putin stressed as he responded to a reporter’s question at the summit
“Will we help Syria? We will. And we are already helping, we send arms, we cooperate in the economics sphere, we hope to expand our cooperation in the humanitarian sphere, which includes sending humanitarian aid to support those people – the civilians – who have found themselves in a very dire situation in this country,” Putin said.
Putin said he sat down with US President Barack Obama on the sidelines of the G20 summit and talked for about half an hour in “a friendly atmosphere”.
Although the Russian and the American leaders maintained different positions regarding the Syrian issue, Putin said they “hear” and understand each other.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry will continue discussing the situation in Syria “in the short run,” Putin said.
Meanwhile, President Obama reiterated in his summit speech that the US government believes Syrian President Bashar Assad’s forces were behind the chemical weapons use.
Obama pledged to make a good case on the issue for both the international community and the American people, saying many nations are already “comfortable” with the US’ opinion.
While admitting “a number of countries” at the summit stressed any military action plan should go through the UN Security Council, Obama said the US is in a different “camp” that questioned the UNSC effectiveness.
Just as Americans were led astray by the cable news media about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction prior to the disastrous U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, once again, viewers of cable news channels are being subjected to another information warfare campaign. This time it is an alleged Syrian government chemical attack on “thousands” of civilians in the Ghouta region outside of Damascus.
Syrian rebel sources, trained in the art of disinformation by CIA, MI-6, and Mossad advisers, claim between 1000 and 1300 Syrian civilians were killed in a chemical weapons attack. However, the dubious reports are not merely imprecise of numbers of civilians killed but are even inconsistent in what type of chemical weapon was used. Some reports claim it was mustard gas and others say it was nerve gas.
The Syrian attack was said to have occurred as UN chemical weapons inspectors arrived in Syria, certainly an unwise time for President Bashar al Assad’s forces to use chemical weapons on civilians.
What proof do the rebels provide of the attack? Suspiciously, they only offer up video footage taken by the rebels themselves and some statements by rebel-supporting “eyewitnesses.”
The timing of the report of the attack and the video footage coincided with Al Jazeera America’s (AJAM) debut on four U.S. cable services — Verizon Fios, Direct TV, Comcast, and Dish Network — previously denied to the Qatar-based news network. In fact, AJAM’s first news reports for its American audience featured the scenes of dead Syrian civilians, including a number of children, provided, of course, by the very same rebels supported militarily and financially by Qatar’s Muslim Brotherhood-supporting government.
A war of words erupted Sunday over Syria as Washington said it is ready to take action over chemical weapons attacks and Tehran warned US intervention would carry “harsh consequences”.
Pressure mounted on Damascus to allow a UN probe of chemical attacks, with French President Francois Hollande saying evidence indicated the regime in war-ravaged Syria was to blame and Israel demanding action against its neighbour.
The Al-Nusra Front, a fierce Al-Qaeda-linked group fighting the regime of Bashar al-Assad, vowed revenge against villages of the Syrian president’s minority Alawite community.
Doctors Without Borders said 355 people died this week of “neurotoxic” symptoms, after Syria’s opposition claimed regime forces unleashed chemicals east and southwest of Damascus on Wednesday causing more than 1,300 deaths. [EDITOR’S NOTE: NGO Doctors Without Borders ha been and is still being complicit of the ‘Al-Qaeda Franchise Al-Nusra Front. We will demonstrate it in a future post.]
If confirmed, it would be the deadliest use of chemical agents since late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein gassed Iranian troops and Kurdish rebels in the 1980s.
US President Barack Obama said a year ago that the use of chemical weapons by Assad’s forces was a “red line” that could trigger Western intervention.
On Sunday a strident warning came from Washington’s archfoe Iran.
“If the United States crosses this red line, there will be harsh consequences for the White House,” armed forces deputy chief of staff Massoud Jazayeri said.