Donald Trump’s Appointment Of John Bolton Means Regime Change Is Coming To Iran

By Derrick Broze, Activist Post | 

The latest neo-conservative warmonger to join the Trump Administration does not bode well for the people of Iran.

On Thursday Donald Trump announced that John Bolton, a former official in George W. Bush’s administration and former ambassador to the UN, would be his new National Security Advisor. Bolton is a warhawk who called for the invasion of Iraq in search of non-existent weapons of mass destruction and has for years called for the invasion of Iran.

Middle East Eye collected a number of quotes from Bolton over the years that indicate his plans for Iran and other nations viewed as a threat to national security of the U.S. government. And by that I mean the people who secretly wield control of corporate and state power. In 2009, Bolton said that regime change is “ultimately, the only thing that will stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons.” As recent as 2015 Bolton call for a U.S./Israel joint bombing campaign.“Such action should be combined with vigorous American support for Iran’s opposition, aimed at regime change in Tehran.”

Meanwhile, Senator Rand Paul questioned the appointment. “It concerns me that Trump would put someone in charge who is unhinged as far as believing in absolute and total intervention,” Paul stated. Bolton’s appointment was also criticized by Trita Parsi, leader of the National Iranian American Council.

Further, it seems that Bolton and former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani have already promised the regime change would be happening within the next year. “Just eight months ago, at a Paris gathering, Bolton told members of the Iranian exile group, known as the Mujahedeen Khalq, MEK, or People’s Mujahedeen, that the Trump administration should embrace their goal of immediate regime change in Iran and recognize their group as a ‘viable’ alternative,” The Intercept reports.

“The behavior and the objectives of the regime are not going to change and, therefore, the only solution is to change the regime itself,” newly appointed National Security Advisor John Bolton told the crowd. The Intercept also noted that Iranian expatriate journalist Bahman Kalbasi reported that Bolton ended his talk by promising, “And that’s why, before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran!”

At a recent celebration of the Persian New Year, Rudy Giuliani promised the audience that “if anything, John Bolton has become more determined that there needs to be regime change in Iran, that the nuclear agreement needs to be burned, and that you need to be in charge of that country.” Disturbingly, Giuliani reportedly led the crowd in a chant of “regime change!”.

It should also be noted that Bolton is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, an organization whose members have influenced the state of geopolitics for the last few generations. Bolton was also a member of the neo-conservative, warhawk think tank, “Project for the New American Century,” which was enthusiastically promoting the lie about Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction.

In 2000, PNAC released a report titled Rebuilding America’s Defenses which outlined a strategy of regime change in Iraq and beyond. Under a section titled “Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force,” the think tank wrote the following controversial line:

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”

Less than a year later, 10 of the 18 men who signed the paper became members of the Bush administration. The attacks of 9/11 would come soon after and the neocons had their “catastrophic and catalyzing event” and an excuse to invade Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and soon possibly, Iran. The men included Bush’s Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, John Bolton, Zalmay Khalilzad, the White House liaison to the Iraqi opposition; William Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard magazine, and Richard Perle, chairman of the advisory Defense Science Board.

In addition to the well-known Pearl Harbor quote, the paper goes on to describe the eventual outcome of the initial regime change. “Thus, this report advocates a two-stage process of change – transition and transformation – over the coming decades.” If the last 15 years of war, violence, and death in the Middle East have been the “transition” phase, John Bolton and Trump may be preparing to shift gears and move into the “transformation” phase – beginning with the invasion of Iran. However, based on PNAC’s track record, they might be looking for a new catastrophic event to generate support for intervention in Iran.

So much for draining the swamp…

The post Donald Trump’s Appointment Of John Bolton Means Regime Change Is Coming To Iran appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Global Crisis Events: The Weird Keeps Getting Weirder

This report was originally published by Brandon Smith at Alt-Market.com

While the mainstream media and general public tend to assume that every new day is bringing us closer to a better future, many alternative analysts focus on the underlying weirdness of our world and all of the crisis factors that average people don’t want to think about. I have to say, in my view the “weirdness” has been escalating rather swiftly lately, and I don’t think that very many analysts, alternative or mainstream, appreciate the potential consequences.

The most important issue of course has always been the global economy. With nearly every sector of our system resting on massively inflated financial bubbles driven by central bank fiat printing and artificially low interest rates, there is only one question that really needs to be asked: How long before a geopolitical or economic shock event takes down the entire house of cards?

The mainstream philosophy seems to be that the economy is now impervious to such events. As the media now argues often, stock markets in particular do not appear to care whenever international threats present themselves. I would argue that this is because nothing substantial has actually happened quite yet. We have had a steady build-up of domestic and global political tensions, but the markets have so far been presented with a world that is comfortably predictable. It is a dangerous world with numerous potential pitfalls, but still predictable nonetheless.

And this is the very odd position we find ourselves in. A system which grows progressively more unstable year by year, and a society that has grown ignorantly used to it. To wake people up to the threats ahead would require a surprise, a slap to the face, something entirely unexpected. Here are a few developing powder kegs around the world that may present such a shock.

U.S. Debt Ceiling And The Government Shutdown Battle

I think a lot of people are missing some major points on the government shutdown situation. First, consider this — every new deal to keep the federal government funded offers a shorter stopgap than the last. The latest deal would only keep funding in place for three more weeks, then the same conflict over budget and spending initiatives happens all over again. It is not outlandish to expect that one day soon we will be faced with weekly or bi-weekly funding battles in D.C., while the greater problem of the U.S. debt ceiling is generally ignored.

You see, the “fight” within the federal government is not so much over whether or not more debt is a “bad thing.” In fact, both sides support more debt and bigger government. Instead, the fight is over the allocation of funds (debt) to certain projects and away from others. Who gets the money? And how can a government shutdown be used as leverage to gain the upper hand politically?

The thing is, this is all theater. There are no “sides” to the debate in Washington, and there is no battle. This is all designed to condition the American public into believing that the two parties are separate and opposed when they are in fact not. Beyond that, the shutdown battle also achieves a certain stress factor for the economy that many people are not aware of.

Among alternative analysts, cynicism runs rampant over a government shutdown. “Who cares?!” many of them will say, “Let it shut down!” But there are some concerns here, primarily the concern of full faith in U.S. debt issuance.

While I am all for the notion of the federal government going the way of the Dodo bird, I do not think many alternative analysts are considering the trade-off required when the system does in fact “reset.” For example, while the U.S. Treasury is supposed to remain functional during a government shutdown and certainly remains functional during stop gaps and debates over funding, this internal conflict though theatrical in nature can still produce a lack of faith in Treasury bonds and the dollar internationally. And frankly, faith is all that our economy has left to sustain itself.

If the funding battle continues with ever shorter stop gaps or with an extended period of government shutdown, there is a possibility that the largest foreign investors in U.S. debt and the dollar will begin dumping their holdings. When this is done, it will be done quietly and will be fully denied if questions arise. If China, for example, begins decoupling from U.S. debt, we will not find out until it is far too late. The Chinese would seek to be the first to dump their holding in order to avoid a vast international rush for the exits. They would want to be the first to sell, not the last.

Again, if the funding fight continues to become more aggressive and more absurd, eventually we will see a foreign dump of U.S. debt, and with it an unprecedented crisis. Whether or not this “needs” to happen is not what I am debating here, only that when it does happen, there will be consequences for us all, and being prepared for them is essential.

Syria Back On The Table

So, if you thought the Syrian situation could not get any weirder, the past week might have been a surprise.

The last major development was Vladimir Putin’s orders to pull a large percentage of standing Russian troops from the region, leaving the Assad government particularly vulnerable. This move did not surprise me in the least. In fact, I predicted that Russia would step aside in Syria in interviews last year. I also wrote about the possible problems this would cause in my article ‘A Review Of The Most Disturbing Events Of 2017’. One of these problems would be Putin leaving the door wide open for a foreign force to invade Syria, drawing in other nations like Iran or Lebanon into the fight and expanding the war tenfold.

What did surprise me, though, was the brazen launch of forces into the region by Turkey in particular. Erdogen has been pecking away at Kurdish tribes in Syria for quite some time, but his latest measures are something entirely new. Keep in mind that Turkey is still technically a NATO member and an ally of the U.S., despite Erdogen’s anti-NATO rhetoric and threats to leave the multi-nation defense pact. Also keep in mind that the U.S. government is giving monetary and weapons support to the Kurds. So, to clarify, a U.S. ally is ignoring the tense situation in Syria and the possibility of triggering a wider regional war to hunt and destroy another U.S. ally, all while Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, Lebanon, Russia, etc., hover on the periphery waiting to jump into the fray.

This is not a recipe for diplomatic discourse. This is a recipe for disaster. Will Syria lead to WWIII as some people suggest? Probably not in the way most of them imagine. War takes many forms, including sporadic region by region conflicts, as well as economic conflicts. Global nuclear war is unlikely considering such an event would virtually vaporize decades of investment by the elitist establishment in control grids around the world. But, constant regional combat and financial disasters? THAT is a strategy that benefits them greatly.

North Korea And The Olympic-Sized Target

First let me say that the very fact that South Korea and the Olympic committee feels compelled to continue the games in the region at a time of such heightened tensions is extremely odd to me. The notion may simply be that the games will “heal” divisions in the Korean peninsula. I am not so sure about that…

I recently wrote about the North Korean war scenario and the potential false flag event during the Olympics in my article ‘Olympic Games In South Korea – Perfect Opportunity For A False Flag Attack?’. I would add to my analysis another interesting development; the negative response by South Koreans to the North’s participation in the Olympic games.

I have continually had to remind people that a war in North Korea would be the most effective trigger event for economic downturn and global distraction, though some skeptics seem to think the situation is going nowhere. Yet, all the elements are now present, including an array of naval forces ready for kinetic response, the escalation of North Korea’s missile technology to include ICBMs capable of striking the U.S. mainland, the war rhetoric grows on both sides, with the Department of Defense being the most aggressive, and now even the South Korean citizenry seems to be shunning diplomacy as they burn photos of Kim Jong Un during Olympic processions and demand a stop to cooperation with the North during the games.

This is a rather sharp break from the mainstream narrative in the U.S., which has told us that South Koreans are seeking generally passive and diplomatic relations with the North, and that the US involvement is universally unwanted. That is to say, the desire for conflict is not limited to U.S. warhawks and North Korean “fanatics,” it is also a large portion of the South Korean population that appears to prefer less-than peaceful solutions.

Add to this the latest CIA claims that North Korea’s nuclear weapons technology will be a full threat to the U.S. in a matter of months, and the news that North Korea’s armies are confiscating food stores from the citizenry at a greater rate than usual, and anyone with any sense can see what is developing here. CIA director Mike Pompeo has asserted that the Trump Administration will act to prevent North Korea from developing an arsenal of ICBMs capable of striking the U.S.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: This is going to end in war. There is no way around it.

The U.S. Dollar Continues Its Rapid Decline

I outlined this interesting development a couple weeks ago in my article ‘The Strange Case Of The Falling Dollar – And What It Means For Gold’, and so far it seems that the downward spiral of the dollar is continuing, now falling at a speed not seen since 2003.

This trend is very strange for a number of reasons – the most prominent being the fact that the dollar index is ignoring policy moves by the Federal Reserve to hike interest rates and reduce its balance sheet. Under normal economic conditions, this should trigger a dollar spike, not a dollar collapse. I predict that the Fed, under “new leadership” through Jerome Powell, will pursue highly aggressive fiscal tightening measures in 2018, including expanded interest rate hikes in the name of tempering the dollar’s decline.

If this takes place, the insane stock market bubble now in full steroid mode will feel a sudden swift kick to the nether regions. However, such a move may still not stop the dollar’s decline. This could be the first stage of the stagflationary crisis I and a few other alternative analysts have been warning about for years.

Growing Accustomed To The Weird

I think if you asked most people if they would have believed the developments of today were possible five to 10 years ago, they would say no. The danger is that when a society becomes too accustomed to instability and conflict, they become complacent in terms of their own security and their own freedoms. They might not even notice until it is too late that both necessities have been stolen away from them.

That great global slap in the face is coming, make no mistake, but the question is, can we prepare enough people for it in time to make a difference in the outcome? Reporting on these issues is often compared to “doom and gloom,” but really, it is an act of optimism. I and many other analysts are operating on the assumption that we can tip the balance by informing the public and creating a shield against calamity. Maybe this is a foolish assumption, maybe not. We shall see in due course.

***

If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.

You can contact Brandon Smith at: brandon@alt-market.com

After 8 long years of ultra-loose monetary policy from the Federal Reserve, it’s no secret that inflation is primed to soar. If your IRA or 401(k) is exposed to this threat, it’s critical to act now! That’s why thousands of Americans are moving their retirement into a Gold IRA. Learn how you can too with a free info kit on gold from Birch Gold Group. It reveals the little-known IRS Tax Law to move your IRA or 401(k) into gold. Click here to get your free Info Kit on Gold.

Before & After Photos Prove the US is Funding a War on Human Rights in Syria

The United States’ intervention in Syria has been fueled by the notion that the U.S. must save the Syrian people from the oppressive government under Bashar al-Assad. As the war wages on, Americans should be asking the question: Has U.S. intervention helped the human rights of the Syrian people, or has it turned Syria into yet another case of failed regime change sponsored by American taxpayers?

Aleppo has become known as one of the most infamous war-torn cities in Syria, since the United States began funding the rise of the “Free Syrian Army” in 2011. Former President Obama pushed for the action at the time, insisting that it was the only way to fight back against Assad’s regime.

When it was time put the United States’ mission to arm and train prominent groups of Syrian rebels on the backburner, the public focus shifted towards fighting the newly trained and funded “Islamic State of Iraq & Syria.” The U.S. was joined by a coalition that included Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates in 2014.

Advertisment

The following photos show Aleppo’s historic citadel from Aug. 28, 2008 to Dec. 13, 2016.

In March, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based war monitor, reported that in the six years since the start of Syria’s civil war, nearly half a million people have been killed or have gone missing.  

The Observatory claimed that more than 321,000 were killed, and more than 145,000 people have been reported as missing, including 96,000 women and children.

READ MORE:  ISIS Jihadists Now Using Facebook to Sell Sex Slaves

The latest reports out of Aleppo claim that the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces “blocked the water from the Euphrates Dam that feeds into the Khafsa Pumps, halting the supply to people of Aleppo City,” which has “obstructed water to over 1 million residents of Aleppo City.”

One of the most impactful images from Aleppo depicts the quality of life of the women in the city. The following images show the transformation of Syrian women in Aleppo in 1968, to Syrian women in ISIS-occupied Aleppo in 2016.

Images via Sarah Abdallah, Twitter

As the U.S. warns of a possible chemical attack on behalf of Assad’s government, it should be noted that the U.S. is blatantly ignoring the role it has played in the deterioration of what was once a sovereign nation.

In addition to blaming the Syrian government for an alleged chemical attack with no investigation and no proof in April, the U.S. has ramped up its bombing campaign, and has killed nearly 500 Syrian civilians in the last month.

Tillerson Endorses Regime Change in Iran

[image: Reuters]Saying “(o)ur Iranian policy is under development,” Tillerson responded affirmatively when asked if the Trump administration supports regime change in Iran.

Washington relies on “elements inside” the country to pursue its objectives, Tillerson explained.

In 2009, after its June election, days of US-orchestrated street protests followed – a so-called “green revolution” attempt to replace its government with a pro-Western puppet one, CIA dirty hands involved in the failed scheme.

Decades of US efforts to transform the Islamic Republic into a subservient client state consistently failed. Does Trump intend another attempt?

Tillerson said the administration’s Iranian policy hasn’t yet been presented to the president. He lied claiming “we certainly recognize Iran’s continued destabilizing presence in the region, their payment of foreign fighters, their export of militia forces in Syria, in Iraq, in Yemen, their support for Hezbollah.”

“And we are taking action to respond to Iran’s hegemony. Additional sanctions actions have been put in place against individuals and others.”

“We continually review the merits both from the standpoint of diplomatic but also international consequences of designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in its entirety as a terrorist organization.”

“Our policy towards Iran is to push back on this hegemony, contain their ability to develop obviously nuclear weapons, and to work toward support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government. Those elements are there, certainly as we know.”

On Thursday, Tillerson’s predecessor John Kerry said unnamed Middle East leaders pressured Obama to bomb Iran – likely Netanyahu and the Saudi family dictatorship.

“Leaders in the region were saying to me personally and to…Obama (to) bomb these guys…We were hurtling toward conflict,” Kerry said.

Maybe Trump intends crossing un unthinkable red line, Russia likely getting involved if he does, maybe China as well. Attacking Iran would amount to a major escalation of global conflict.

Responding to the threat, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qassemi called Tillerson’s remarks “interventionist, in gross violation of the compelling rules of international law, unacceptable and strongly condemned.”

“Since the 1950s, the United States tried to meddle in Iranian affairs by different strategies such as coup d’etat, regime change, and military intervention.”

Iran is the region’s leading proponent of peace and stability. America’s ruthless agenda is polar opposite.

REPORT: Least Peaceful Nations on Earth Were All Given ‘Democracy’ by the US

The 2017 Global Peace Index found that the top 5 least peaceful countries were all sovereign nations that have felt the wrath of U.S. democracy in recent years.

US Imperial Wars Waged for Regime Change

America’s New World Order calls for establishing dominion over planet earth, its ruling authorities, resources and populations – by color revolutions or preemptive wars, assuring all nations are subservient to US interests.

Syria is in the eye of the storm. Hours ahead of Trump’s aggression, Secretary of State Tillerson said there’s “no role for (Assad) to govern the Syrian people.”

America intends “work(ing) collectively with our partners around the world through a political process that would lead to Assad leaving…(S)teps are underway,” he added with no further elaboration.

Following Trump’s aggression, he lied, saying Assad “carried out chemical attacks…on civilians, including women and children,” other CW attacks earlier.

He lied claiming,

“(w)e have a very high level of confidence that the attacks were carried out by aircraft under the direction of the Bashar al-Assad regime, and we also have very high confidence that the attacks involved the use of sarin nerve gas.”

He lied saying Syria failed to “surrender their chemical weapons under the supervision of the Russian government.”

He lied claiming Russia failed to fulfill its obligation as “guarantor that these weapons would no longer be present in Syria.”

He lied saying “either Russia has been complicit or Russia has been simply incompetent in its ability to deliver on its end of that agreement.”

He lied claiming Trump’s aggression was justified – never under international and constitutional law.

Homs governor Talal al-Barazi said US aggression killed 14 Syrians, including nine civilians – stressing the attack aimed to support anti-government “terrorist groups,” along with “weakening the fighting capacity of the” Syrian military.

“This aggression (on) Syria is not the first and is unlikely to be the last.” A US cruise missile struck Al-Hamrat village, killing four civilians, including a child, another seven wounded when another US missile hit homes in Al-Manzul.

Turkey’s Erdogan welcomed Trump’s aggression, urged more, said he wants a no-fly zone established. His aim is annexing northern Syrian and Iraqi territory, discussed in previous articles.

The neocon Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI), formerly the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), said Friday’s US airstrike on Syria is “insufficient.”

“To make a difference, (it) must become part of a coherent and durable plan to restrain Assad and empower a moderate opposition” – a clear call for regime change by brute force.

Moscow-based National Defense magazine editor Igor Korotchenko believes Trump “unsealed Pandora’s box,” showing he intends being “a global policeman,” despite campaign rhetoric otherwise.

It’s unlikely Friday’s airstrike was the last. Expect more to come, risking direct confrontation with Russia.

Trump’s aggression came while hosting China’s President Xi Jinping, showing how America may act anywhere unilaterally.

Is escalated war on Syria coming? Bet on it. Is North Korea Trump’s next target? Unknown so far but possible given his aggressiveness.

America’s rage for war threatens humanity’s survival. Trump showed he’s as recklessly hawkish as his predecessors.

Trump Wants Assad Ousted

(image: SANA via AP)

Replacing him with a pro-Western puppet is what escalating US aggression in northern Syria and attacking its Shayrat airbase is all about.

It’s also about destroying the Syrian Arab Republic, balkanizing it, looting its resources, exploiting its people, and creating longterm war-related violence, instability and chaos, a pretext for America’s regional presence.

Will Trump order shock-and-awe terror-bombing of Damascus, repeating an Afghanistan/Iraq/Libya scenario? Obama bears full responsibility for destroying Aleppo, Syria’s commercial hub. Is Damascus next?

On CNN’s State of the Union airing Sunday, neocon US UN envoy Nikki Haley said “(t)here’s not any sort of option where a political solution is going to happen with Assad at the head of the regime.”

“If you look at his actions, if you look at the situation, it’s going to be hard to see a government that’s peaceful and stable with Assad. Regime change is something that we think is going to happen.”

She lied saying defeating ISIS is the administration’s top priority, created and supported by Washington, Trump no different than his predecessors.

On Saturday, Lavrov and Tillerson spoke by phone.  Reuters quoted Russia’s Foreign Minister, saying “an attack on a country whose government fights terrorism only plays into the hands of extremists, creates additional threats to regional and global security.”

Accusing Syria of using CWs in Kahn Sheikhoun on April 4 doesn’t correspond to reality, he added. No evidence suggests it. He called for a thorough, impartial investigation, what Washington won’t tolerate.

On April 11 and 12, Tillerson is scheduled to be in Moscow. Russia should cancel his visit in protest against Trump’s aggression. Meeting with him won’t change US imperial policy. Neocon generals run it, not him.

Separately, UK Defense Minister Michael Fallon irresponsibly blamed Russia for “every civilian death” from CWs in Khan Sheikhoun last week.

He called Russia responsible “by proxy” as Assad’s “principal backer. This latest war crime happened on their watch,” he ranted.

“In the past few years, they have had every opportunity to pull levers and stop this civil war. Russia must show the resolve necessary to bring this regime to heel.”

He called Trump’s aggression “justified and appropriate,” a despicable perversion of truth. “We need a longterm solution to this conflict,” urging Assad’s ouster, saying he “cannot be the future leader of Syria.”

Britain allies with all US wars of aggression. Both countries, Israel and their rogue partners want the Syrian Arab Republic destroyed, Iran isolated ahead of pursuing regime change against its sovereign government.

Endless regional wars rage, peace prospects bleak.

A Final Comment

On Friday, Assad issued a statement, saying “(i)n an unjust and arrogant aggression, the United States targeted at dawn on Friday the airport of al-Shairat in the countryside of Homs.”

“Targeting an airport of a sovereign state by the US is an outrageous act that clarifies in conclusive evidence once again what Syria has been saying that the succession of administrations of this regime does not change the deep policies of its entity which is represented by targeting states, subjugating peoples and the attempting to dominate the world.”

Washington’s ruthlessness may end up destroying it.

Tulsi Gabbard: To Solve Refugee Crisis, Stop Funding Terrorism

(ANTIMEDIA) Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, the politician who previously accused the U.S. of arming ISIS, is still calling on the U.S. government to stop its disastrous regime change policies in the Middle East.

According to a press release made public on Tuesday, Gabbard has again called for the U.S. to stop aiding terrorists like al-Qaeda and ISIS. Gabbard’s guest at the presidential address to Congress, a Kurdish refugee activist, also called for an end to the U.S. policy of “regime change in Syria.”

We"re revolutionizing the news industry, but we need your help! Click here to get started.

Gabbard said:

“In the face of unimaginable heartbreak, Tima has been a voice for the voiceless, a champion for refugees worldwide, and a strong advocate for ending the regime change war in Syria. I am honored to welcome her to Washington tonight as we raise our voices to call on our nation’s leaders to end the counterproductive regime change war in Syria that has caused great human suffering, refugees, loss of life, and devastation. We urge leaders in Congress to pass the Stop Arming Terrorists Act and end our destructive policy of using American taxpayer dollars to provide direct and indirect support to armed militants allied with terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS in Syria, who are fighting to overthrow the Syrian government.”

Gabbard also reportedly told Russian state-owned news station RT:

“For years, our government has been providing both direct and indirect support to these armed militant groups, who are working directly with or under the command of terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS, all in their effort and fight to overthrow the Syrian government.”

The activist, Tima Kurdi, is more widely known as the aunt of a three-year-old boy who drowned on the shores of Turkey in September 2015. The image went viral on social media and was easily manipulated by the mainstream media to further the United States’ agenda in the region, never once laying blame to the U.S. military establishment for spending over $1 billion a year arming Syrian rebels.

According to the press release, Kurdi said the following:

“I am proud to stand with Tulsi and support her work to end regime change war in Syria. My people have suffered for more than six years—enough is enough. Tulsi understands that arming the so-called “rebels” in Syria has only led to more bloodshed, more suffering, and created more refugees. A military solution in Syria is not the answer. I hope that President Trump will stop arming terrorists and commit to a political solution in Syria—it is the only way to restore peace.”

Gabbard came under fire earlier this year when she took a secretive trip to Syria and met with President Assad, as well as a number of other people on the ground. The fact that her proposed policies have the backing of the relative of the drowned Syrian refugee — whose images the media exploited in 2015 to advance the western narrative against Assad — should speak volumes about the efficacy of Gabbard’s approach. Despite this, the media hardly pays heed to Gabbard’s ideas.

In 2014, PBS ran a report in which they interviewed Syrian rebels who had been trained by the CIA at a camp in Qatar. According to one of the fighters:

“They trained us to ambush regime or enemy vehicles and cut off the road…They also trained us on how to attack a vehicle, raid it, retrieve information or weapons and munitions, and how to finish off soldiers still alive after an ambush.” [emphasis added]

The latter emboldened section is a blatant war crime and is also the standard operating procedure for ISIS. Regardless of the banner these rebels operate under, this is a terrorist tactic, and it is ultimately what American taxpayer dollars have been doing in Syria.

‘Stop Operation Soros’ – Massive Movement to Overthrow Soros Takes Off in Macedonia

Macedonia – Only a week after Hungary announced plans to purge all NGO groups funded by globalist progressive mega-donor George Soros, a new global initiative – Stop Operation Soros (SOS) – dedicated to the countering the influential political/social engineering the billionaire activist is now engaged in across the globe through his Open Society Foundations, was announced in Macedonia.

During a press conference last week, SOS founders called on all “free-minded citizens,” regardless of race, ethnicity or religion, to “fight against one-mindedness in the civil sector, which is devised and led by George Soros,” the Vecer newspaper reported.

This move comes on the heels of the Hungarian government announcing that it will use “all the tools at its disposal” to target and “sweep out” all non-governmental organizations funded by Soros, a Hungarian-born financier who has become one of the U.S. Democratic Party’s major sources of funding, according to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s ruling party.

Co-founder of the movement, Nikola Srbov, called out Soros for hijacking civil society, in an effort force his own personal ideology upon others by monopolizing civil discourse through strategically funding certain organizations via his group Open Society Foundations.

At the press conference, the group announced that their first step would be to work at uncovering ‘subversive’ activities by Soros-funded NGOs.

“We’ve witnessed the takeover of the entire civil sector and its abuse and instrumentalization to meet the goals of one political party. That is unacceptable and goes beyond the principles of civic organizing,” Srbov said at the press conference.

“The Open Society Foundation, operating under the Soros umbrella, used its funding and personnel to support violent processes in Macedonia. It has monopolized the civil society sector, pushing outside any organization which disagrees with the Soros ideology,” he stated.

READ MORE:  In the Last 24-hours, Russia Has Destroyed Nearly All ISIS Ammunition & Heavy Vehicles

Co-founder, Cvetin Cilimanov, editor-in-chief of the state-run MIA news agency, noted that Soros worked to undermine Macedonian sovereignty by colluding with the opposition center-left SDSM party and outside globalist interests. By cooperating with foreign embassies and organizations such as USAID, Cilimanov believes Soros-backed groups have interfered in the political process of Macedonia.

“This is unacceptable and has largely contributed to a feeling in the public that the traditional relations of partnership Macedonia enjoyed with some countries are being undermined,” Cilimanov told journalists.

These complaints are par for the course with the Soros’ Open Society Foundations, as Russia has banned a progressive charity founded by globalist hedge fund billionaire George Soros in 2015 – noting that the organization posed a threat to both state security and the Russian constitution.

In a statement, Russia’s General Prosecutor’s Office said two branches of Soros’ charity network — the Open Society Foundations (OSF) and the Open Society Institute (OSI) — would be placed on a “stop list” of foreign non-governmental organizations whose activities have been deemed “undesirable” by the Russian state.

The Open Society Foundation (OSF) was created by the Hungarian-born billionaire with the stated aim of helping former Eastern bloc countries transition from communism. However, instead, it operates as a lever in the domestic politics of states by funding subversive political activities. For example, Soros publicly supported the violent overthrow of the legitimately-elected government in Ukraine during the ‘Euromaidan’ revolution.

Subsequently, leaked memos, appearing on DC Leaks, exposed Soros’ plan to destabilize and overthrow Putin – the ultimate prize for Soros.

READ MORE:  BREAKING: Putin Reveals ISIS Funded by 40 Countries, Including G20 Members

The document details in an extensive bullet point list, “what must be done” to destabilize Russia, focusing on many recurrent neo-liberal themes that Soros uses to infect host nations and overturn governments.

Essentially, Soros works to install his political will on states, under the guise of promoting a free and open society. In reality, he looks to capitalize on the installation of puppet governments that are largely beholden to him and his OSF in an attempt to increase his massive fortune and create a globalist system of governance that supersedes national sovereignty.

Obama Just Quietly Sent US Marines to Fight in Afghanistan

January 9, 2017   |   admintam

(RPI – Op-Ed) Last week, as the mainstream media continued to obsess over the CIA’s evidence-free claim that the Russians hacked the presidential election, President Obama quietly sent 300 US Marines back into Afghanistan’s Helmand Province. This is the first time in three years that the US military has been sent into that conflict zone, and it represents a final failure of Obama’s Afghanistan policy. The outgoing president promised that by the end of his second term, the US military would only be present in small numbers and only on embassy duty. But more than 8,000 US troops will remain in Afghanistan as he leaves office.

When President Obama was first elected he swore that he would end the US presence in Iraq (the “bad” war) and increase US presence in Afghanistan (the “good” war). He ended up increasing troops to both wars, while the situation in each country continued to deteriorate.

Why are the Marines needed in the Helmand Province? Because although the foolish and counterproductive 15-year US war in Afghanistan was long ago lost, Washington cannot face this fact. Last year the Taliban controlled 20 percent of the province. This year they control 85 percent of the province. So billions more must be spent and many more lives will be lost.

Will these 300 Marines somehow achieve what the 2011 peak of 100,000 US soldiers was not able to achieve? Will this last push “win” the war? Hardly! The more the president orders military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, the worse it gets. In 2016, for example, President Obama dropped 1,337 bombs on Afghanistan, a 40 percent increase from 2015. According to the United Nations, in 2016 there were 2,562 conflict-related civilian deaths and 5,835 injuries. And the Taliban continues to score victories over the Afghan puppet government.

The interventionists in Washington continue to run our foreign policy regardless of who is elected. They push for wars, they push for regime change, then they push for billions to reconstruct the bombed-out countries. When the “liberated” country ends up in worse shape, they claim it was because we just didn’t do enough of what ruined the country in the first place. It’s completely illogical, but the presidents who keep seeking the neocons’ advice don’t seem to notice. Obama – the “peace” candidate and president – has proven himself no different than his predecessors.

What will a President Trump do about the 15 year failed nation-building experiment in Afghanistan? He has criticized the long-standing US policy of “regime-change” and “nation-building” while on the campaign trail, and I would like to think he would just bring the troops home. However, I would not be surprised if he accelerates US military action in Afghanistan to “win the war” once and for all. He will not succeed if he does so, as the war is not winnable – no one even knows what “winning” looks like! We may well see even more US troops killing and being killed in Afghanistan a year from now if that is the case. That would be a terrible tragedy.

---

This article (Obama Just Quietly Sent US Marines to Fight in Afghanistan) by Ron Paul originally appeared on RonPaulInstitute.org and was used with permission. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

Why Obama And Hillary Wanted Libya’s Gaddafi Toppled And Killed

 

October 20 marked the fifth anniversary of Muammar Gaddafi’s sodomized-related death – US imperial viciousness responsible for his murder and destruction Africa’s most developed, socially responsible nation.

Endless violence and chaos replaced a society safe and fit to live in. Gaddafi provided Libyans with important benefits  Americans can’t imagine. More on this below.

Hillary orchestrated war to eliminate him, wanting US-controlled puppet governance replacing Libyan sovereign independence.

In early 2011, made-in-the-USA protests preceded US-led NATO terror-bombing, indiscriminately massacring civilians, creating charnel house conditions.

Endless violence continues daily, exacerbated by ISIS fighters infesting parts of the country, Washington supporting them with funding, weapons and other material aid.

Obama and Hillary wanted Gaddafi eliminated for instituting policies all nations should embrace. Previous articles discussed them.

He supported pan-Africanism, a United States of Africa free from imperial domination. He wanted Libyans sharing in the country’s oil wealth, a notion foreign to America and other Western powers.

Under his 1999 Decision No. 111, all Libyans got free healthcare, education, electricity, water, training, rehabilitation, housing assistance, disability and old-age benefits, interest-free state loans, as well as generous subsidies to study abroad, buy a new car, help couples when they marry, practically free gasoline, and more.

Literacy under Gaddafi rose from 20 – 80%. Libya’s hospitals and private clinics were some of the region’s best. Now they’re in shambles.

Vital public services he provided no longer exist. Pre-war, Libyans had African’s highest standard of living. Homelessness was nonexistent.

Gaddafi believed all Libyans had a right to a home or rent-free apartment, notions unheard of in the West.

He rejected farcical Western-style money-controlled democracy (sic), deplored crony capitalism and neoliberal harshness.

During his tenure, women had the right to vote, participate politically, as well as own and sell property independently of their husbands.

Clause 5 of Libya’s 1969 Constitution granted them equal status with men, notably for education and employment.

In January 2011, weeks before US-led NATO naked aggression began, the UN Human Rights Council praised Gaddafi for instituting and supporting important political, economic, education, social and cultural rights.

He called his Great Man-Made River (GMMR) development of an ocean-sized aquifer beneath Libya’s sands the “Eighth Wonder of the World” – wanting all Libyans sharing in its benefits.

Washington and rogue Western partners wanted it privatized for exclusive corporate gain.

Under Gaddafi, the Central Bank of Libya was state-owned, the interest-free Libyan dinar used for productive economic growth, not speculation, profits and bonuses for predatory bankers.

He funded Africa’s only communications satellite, saving hundreds of millions of dollars for low-cost incoming and outgoing calls.

He provided two-thirds of the $42 billion needed to launch a public African Central Bank, Monetary Fund and Investment Bank.

He supported a new gold standard, replacing dollars with gold dinars, aiming to provide real monetary wealth and value, free from predatory Western lending agencies.

Washington wants dollar hegemony, maintaining it as the world’s reserve currency, an agenda challenged by Russia, China and other nations, increasingly trading bilaterally in their own currencies.

Russia’s Vladimir Putin is threatened. Neocons infesting Washington want regime change. His redoubtable leadership prevents it.

Will nuclear war on Russia follow Hillary’s ascension to power next year? Will the unthinkable become reality?

‘Plan-B’ — Obama Paves Way to Give Syrian ‘Moderate Rebels’ Anti-Aircraft Weapons to Fight Russia

President Obama contemplated arming the already controversial ‘moderate’ Syrian rebels weapons to “defend themselves against Russian aircraft and artillery” as his Plan B for Syria when all else failed in the effort to oust Assad — but although this treacherous plan has been effectively shelved, it remains an option for whomever next ascends to the White House.

According to a new report from the Washington Post, Obama’s Plan B has neither been “approved or rejected” in the U.S.’ disintegrating and increasingly complex campaign to depose Syrian President Bashar al Assad — which has, of course, precipitated a perilous proxy war with staunch Syrian ally, Russia.

Skepticism over allowing the CIA to provide various anti-Assad terrorists — euphemistically termed moderate rebels by the U.S. — with “truck-mounted antiaircraft weapons that could help rebel units but would be difficult for a terrorist group to conceal and use against civilian aircraft” apparently forced the plan to be tabled, the Post reports.

In the U.S. program to topple Assad, the CIA has armed and trained defectors from Syrian military known as the Free Syrian Army — whose own defectors went on to form the Islamic State — as well as other terroristic groups virtually indistinguishable from one another except for their political ideologies.

These issues factored into restrictions on weapons the U.S. would provide to their sponsored rebels; but, as the Post explains:

“Rebels chafed at the restriction, complaining that it left them vulnerable to air attack by Assad and, more recently, Russia.”

Plan B was envisaged as a compromise by the CIA.

But the complex state of affairs in Syria has led not only the FSA, but other ‘moderates,’ to ‘radicalize’ — complicating U.S.’ goals and frustrating Russian efforts to purge the embattled nation of terrorists. While the Pentagon’s public goal has duly sought to wrest control from Assad and fight the Islamic State, the CIA program of arming rebels is widely considered counterproductive — if not, perhaps, nefarious.

Plan B, despite potentially devastating repercussions, retains stolid support from top officials, including unsurprisingly CIA Director John Brennan and Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter — but has lost favor recently with former proponents, including Secretary of State John Kerry.

Kerry and other skeptics rightly grasp providing heavy artillery to rebels fighting Russia-backed Syrian government forces to down Russian aircraft — which would undoubtedly turn the smoldering U.S. proxy battle into an all-out war with Russia.

Additionally, the Post reports, a growing number of U.S. officials feel the contentious CIA program has only proven to bedevil the ultimate goal of regime change, and, as one unnamed ‘senior official’ noted, CIA units are “not doing any better on the battlefield, they’re up against a more formidable adversary, and they’re increasingly dominated by extremists,” adding, “What has this program become, and how will history record this effort?”

Proponents of the program, however, have not vacillated from the apparent imperative to remove Assad at all costs, as another anonymous official insisted, “The FSA remains the only vehicle to pursue those goals.”

However, as political language intends, grouping the whole of U.S.-assisted fighters under either the label moderate or as the Free Syrian Army belies untold complexities of the intricate situation in war-ravaged nation.

In fact, a number of splinter groups have exploited training and weaponry provided by the CIA to commit atrocities befitting everyone’s enemy, the Islamic State.

In July, for instance, members of U.S.-armed and funded Nour al-Din al-Zinki — officially deemed ‘moderate rebels’ — filmed themselves gleefully beheading a 12-year-old boy. Those ‘rebels’ claimed the child had been a fighter with pro-Syrian government paramilitary faction Liwa al-Quds, which the latter group vehemently denied.

Amnesty International released a scathing report detailing horrific abuses of the Nour al-Din al-Zinki Movement leaving little to differentiate these U.S.-supported fighters from the infamous Islamic State terrorists. Although the State Department — forced to respond to international fury over the video — vowed the gruesome death would be the vehicle to review its support for such laughably-termed moderate rebels, the program continues to this day.

Providing deadlier weapons to such groups for the explicit purpose of downing Russian aircraft could not only facilely spark all-out war, but would assuredly worsen the carnage against Syrian civilians.

“We continue to press for options that will decrease violence in Aleppo and alleviate the suffering of the Syrian people,” an unnamed senior Obama administration official vaguely explained, ignoring the logical contradiction of arming violent groups to stop violence. “We and our partners will continue to provide support to the opposition and Syrian civil society in a manner that advances those objectives.”

Other officials lamented the chaotic entanglement gripping Syria thanks to yet another American program of regime change — and the assistance Assad has received from his powerful ally.

“It’s a fine mess we’ve gotten ourselves into. There’s a huge risk here since the Russians entered,” an anonymous former administration official, ‘directly involved’ with the implementation of the program, told the Post. “The lesson out of this is that if you don’t take action early on, you should almost expect the options to get worse and worse and worse.”

Indeed, toppling Assad has embroiled the United States government in worsening relationships with longstanding allies and led all of us down the path toward a third world war. It’s widely believed the White House’s only tenable alternative is to tuck tail and halt the antagonistic Syrian campaign — an option which, though it might prevent all-out war, would be akin to admitting failure.

Shelving Plan B without a distinct decision, the aforementioned former administration official noted, should not be seen as significant.

However, without definitively canning the proposal to arm rebels with anti-aircraft weapons to shoot down Russian jets, Plan B remains a potential option for whomever assumes office in January — and that, given a host of unknowns, could indeed be highly consequential.