America’s “progressives” support imperialism. The anti-war movement is dead

Global Research, April 09, 2017

Trump’s Punitive Airstrikes against Syria. Noam Chomsky Favors “Regime Change”

Neoliberals, Neocons, Corporate media and “Progressives” (collectively, the Deep State) praising Trump for the illegal airstrike against Syria, uniformly calling for more war, and vociferously attacking all those opposing war. Many figures who opposed Bush’s war making have become totally “controlled puppets” who say and do what they are ordered to do—regardless of consistency with past views and actions.”
Larry Chin, April 8, 2017

Segments of the anti-war movement which opposed the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq are tacitly supportive of  Trump’s punitive airstrikes directed against the “Assad regime” allegedly involved in “killing their own people”, gassing them to death in a premeditated chemical weapons attack. According to Trump “Assad choked out the lives of helpless men women and children”.

America’s “Progressive Idol” Noam Chomsky in an April 5 interview with “Democracy Now” (aired two days before Trump’s punitive airstrikes) favors “regime change”, intimating that a negotiated “removal” of Bashar Al Assad could lead to a peaceful settlement.

According to Chomsky: “The Assad regime is a moral disgrace. They’re carrying out horrendous acts, the Russians with them.” Strong statement with no supporting evidence and documentation provided. The victims of imperialism are casually blamed for the crimes of imperialism:

…You know, you can’t tell them, “We’re going to murder you. Please negotiate.” That’s not going to work. But some system in which, in the course of negotiations [with the Russians], he [Bashar al-Assad] would be removed, and some kind of settlement would be made. The West would not accept it, …  At the time, they believed they could overthrow Assad, so they didn’t want to do this, so the war went on. Could it have worked? You never know for sure. But it could have been pursued. Meanwhile, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are supporting jihadi groups, which are not all that different from ISIS. So you have a horror story on all sides. The Syrian people are being decimated.

(Noam Chomsky on Democracy Now, April 5, 2017, See the video of the Democracy Now interview with Chomsky here

Who was behind the Chemical Weapons Attack?

No research, no investigative reports, no historical review have been conducted by Western governments and the mainstream media to support president Trump’s allegations directed against the Syrian government. (See Trump’s April 6 address below)

Financial Times screenshot. Trump nationwide statement on April 6, announcing the illegal airstrikes against Syria

While there is no evidence that president Al-Assad ordered the chemical weapons attack, there is ample evidence –including a comprehensive UN report– that the opposition “rebels” (supported by US-NATO) have since 2012 stockpiled and used chemical weapons against Syrian civilians as well as SAA soldiers.

There is also evidence that Washington and its allies had previously planned and supported “False Flag” chemical weapons attacks perpetrated by the “rebels” (including the 2012 East Ghouta attacks) with a view to incriminating the Damascus government.

See:   The East Ghouta Chemical Attacks (2013): US-Backed False Flag? Killing Syrian Children to Justify a “Humanitarian” Military Intervention By Julie Lévesque and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, originally published in 2013.

The UN Mission to Investigate Allegations of the Use of Chemical Weapons (2013)


According to Carla del Ponte on behalf of the UN Mission to Investigate Allegations of the Use Chemical Weapons in the Syrian Arabic Republic:

“evidence from casualties and medical staff indicated that rebel forces in the civil war had used the deadly nerve agent sarin.

‘Our investigators have been in neighbouring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals, and there are strong, concrete suspicions, but not yet incontrovertible proof, of the use of sarin gas,’ said Del Ponte in an interview with Swiss-Italian television.

‘This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities.’

The comments by Ms Del Ponte, a member of the U.N. panel probing alleged war crimes in Syria, contradict claims by Britain and the U.S. that intelligence reports showed Syrian soldiers had used chemical weapons.

She said that the United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces having used chemical weapons, which are banned under international law. (See Daily Mail Online, May 6, 2013))

“We still have to deepen our investigation, verify and confirm (the findings) through new witness testimony, but according to what we have established so far, it is at the moment opponents of the regime who are using sarin gas,” (The Independent, May 6, 2013)

To consult the complete UN Report which has been heavily redacted click here 

The final version of the UN report was watered down: the role of opposition rebels acknowledged by the UN mission of investigators was omitted. The use of chemical weapons against both civilians and Syrian SAA soldiers is nonetheless documented and acknowledged.

On page 19 (para 111) of the UN report:

“Khan al Asal, 19 March 2013: 111. The United Nations Mission collected credible information that corroborates the allegations that chemical weapons were used in Khan al Asal on 19 March 2013 against soldiers and civilians.” [the report is careful not to mention that the attacks were conducted by opposition rebels and the attacks were directed against government forces]

Page 19 (para 111)

“Jobar, 24 August 2013: 113. The United Nations Mission collected evidence consistent with the probable use of chemical weapons in Jobar on 24 August on a relatively small scale against soldiers…” [by opposition rebels]

Page 19 (para 113)

See the official UN report, see also Carla Stea’s review article entitled: UN Mission Report Confirms that “Opposition” Rebels Used Chemical Weapons against Civilians and Government Forces, Global Research, December 31, 2013

The Training of Opposition Rebels in the Use of Chemical Weapons

Moreover, acknowledged by mainstream media reports, Western special forces on contract to the Pentagon were involved in training the Al Qaeda affiliated rebels in the use of chemical weapons.

For details see Michel Chossudovsky, Pentagon Trained Syria’s Al-Qaeda Rebels in the use of Chemical Weapons, Global Research, April 6, 2017.

See also Michel Chossudovsky, The Syria Chemical Weapons Saga: The Staging of a US-NATO Sponsored Humanitarian Disaster, originally published in December 2012

Paying Lip Service to US imperialism?

Whereas US-NATO inflicts death and destruction across the Middle East, not to mention its support of Al Qaeda affiliated terror groups, the victims of US aggression are casually blamed for “carrying out [these] horrendous acts” committed by the US and its allies.

Many “Progressives” view Syria as a “civil war” rather than a US-NATO supported terrorist insurgency. Noam Chomsky is largely supportive of “regime change” in Damascus in derogation of international law.

And anti-war activists concur, American “progressives” tow the line, follow suit in Chomsky’s footsteps.

In an earlier interview with Alternet, Chomsky avoids addressing US foreign policy, casually placing the blame on the “Assad regime”:

EF: To what extent is the US administration responsible for Syria’s implosion?

NC It’s hard to say. The Assad regime is absolutely monstrous and responsible for a large majority of the atrocities. IS [Islamic State] is another monstrosity. The al-Qaida affiliated al-Nusra Front is not much better than IS [Islamic state], while some of the other major groups are closely linked to it. … Noam Chomsky, AlterNet, August 25, 2016. emphasis added)

“…is the US administration responsible? It’s hard to say.”

In response to Emron Feroz (EF), Chomsky conveniently lumps the “Assad regime” together with the terrorists. Moreover, he fails to acknowledge that the Syrian government is fighting both Al Qaeda and the Islamic State and that these terror groups are supported and financed by the Western military alliance.

Both Al Qaeda and the Islamic State (ISIS) are creations of US intelligence.

War has become peace. Realities have been turned upside down.

Trump’s illegal punitive airstrikes against Syria are heralded as a humanitarian act against Bashar Al Assad who is “killing his own people”.

The illegal cruise missile airstrikes have set the stage: “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P).

More airstrikes including direct US military intervention are envisaged.

And “Progressives” applaud. The anti-war movement is dead.

“Fake news” and crimes against humanity: Amnesty International admits Syrian “Saydnaya” report created entirely in UK

Global Research, February 09, 2017
Land Destroyer 9 February 2017

Amnesty International’s 48 page report titled, “Syria: Human Slaughterhouse: Mass Hangings and Extermination at Saydnaya Prison, Syria,” boasts bold claims, concluding:

…the Syrian authorities’ violations at Saydnaya amount to crimes against humanity. Amnesty International urgently calls for an independent and impartial investigation into crimes committed at Saydnaya.

However, even at a cursory glance, before even reading the full body of the report, under a section  titled, “Methodology,” Amnesty International admits it has no physical evidence whatsoever to substantiate what are admittedly only the testimony of alleged inmates and former workers at the prison, as well as figures within Syria’s opposition.

What you are looking at is a 3D model fabricated entirely in the United Kingdom, based solely on satellite pictures and hearsay. Passed off as evidence this technique of “forensic architecture” may soon become a new tool in the dissemination of war propaganda if it is not exposed.

Within the section titled, “Methodology,” the report admits:

Despite repeated requests by Amnesty International for access to Syria, and specifically for access to detention facilities operated by the Syrian authorities, Amnesty International has been barred by the Syrian authorities from carrying out research in the country and consequently has not had access to areas controlled by the Syrian government since the crisis began in 2011. Other independent human rights monitoring groups have faced similar obstacles.

In other words, Amnesty International had no access whatsoever to the prison, nor did any of the witnesses it allegedly interview provide relevant evidence taken from or near the prison.

The only photographs of the prison are taken from outer space via satellite imagery. The only other photos included in the report are of three men who allege they lost weight while imprisoned and a photo of one of eight alleged death certificates provided to family members of detainees who died at Saydnaya.

The alleged certificates admittedly reveal nothing regarding allegations of torture or execution.

Articles like, “Hearsay Extrapolated – Amnesty Claims Mass Executions In Syria, Provides Zero Proof,” provide a detailed examination of Amnesty’s “statistics,” while articles like, “Amnesty International “Human Slaughterhouse” Report Lacks Evidence, Credibility, Reeks Of State Department Propaganda,” cover the politically-motivated nature of both Amnesty International and the timing of the report’s promotion across the Western media.

However, there is another aspect of the report that remains unexplored – the fact that Amnesty International itself has openly admitted that the summation of the report was fabricated in the United Kingdom at Amnesty International’s office, using a process they call “forensic architecture,” in which the lack of actual, physical, photographic, and video evidence, is replaced by 3D animations and sound effects created by designers hired by Amnesty International.

Amnesty Hired Special Effects Experts to Fabricate “Evidence” 

In a video produced by Amnesty International accompanying their report, titled, “Inside Saydnaya: Syria’s Torture Prison,” the narrator admits in its opening seconds that Amnesty International possesses no actual evidence regarding the prison.

Continue reading

“Support MH17 Truth”: OSCE monitors identify “shrapnel and machine gun-like holes” indicating shelling. No evidence of a missile attack. Shot down by a military aircraft

Global Research, October 18, 2015
Global Research 31 July 2014

su25

Su-25 aircraft

The evidence presented in this article first published by GR on July 31, 2014 (updated in September 2014) contradicts the recently released report of the Dutch Safety Board.

The evidence confirms that MH17 was not brought down by a surface to air missile.

The West accuses Russia and the Donbass separatists of having brought down the plane with a surface to air missile. IT’S A LIE. 

The evidence available in September 2014 –including a BBC report which the BBC decided to suppress– refutes the official story.

As we recall, the alleged role of Russia in bringing down the plane was used as a justification to implement the economic sanctions regime against Moscow. 

Michel Chossudovsky, July 29, 2015, minor update October 18,  2015

*     *     *

According to the report of German pilot and airlines expert Peter Haisenko, the MH17 Boeing 777 was not brought down by a missile.

What he observed from the available photos were perforations of the cockpit: 

 The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of speculation: The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile. (Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” Global Research, July 30, 2014)

[click image right to enlarge]

Based on detailed analysis Peter Haisenko reached  the conclusion that the MH17 was not downed by a missile attack:

This aircraft was not hit by a missile in the central portion. The destruction is limited to the cockpit area. Now you have to factor in that this part is constructed of specially reinforced material

The OSCE Mission

It is worth noting that the initial statements by OSCE observers (July 31) broadly confirm the findings of Peter Haisenko:

Monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe reported that shrapnel-like holes were found in two separate pieces of the fuselage of the ill-fated Malaysia Airlines aircraft that was believed to have been downed by a missile in eastern Ukraine.

Michael Bociurkiw of the OSCE group of monitors at his daily briefing described part of the plane’s fuselage dotted with “shrapnel-like, almost machine gun-like holes.” He said the damage was inspected by Malaysian aviation-security officials .(Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2014)

The monitoring OSCE team has not found evidence of a missile fired from the ground as conveyed by official White House statements. As we recall, the US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power stated –pointing a finger at Russia– that the Malaysian MH17 plane was “likely downed by a surface-to-air missile operated from a separatist-held location”:

The team of international investigators with the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are uncertain if the missile used was fired from the ground as US military experts have previously suggested, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported. (Malay Mail online, emphasis added)

The initial OSCE findings tend to dispel the claim that a BUK missile system brought down the plane.

Evidently, inasmuch as the perforations are attributable to shelling, a shelling operation conducted from the ground could not have brought down an aircraft traveling above 30,000 feet.

Ukraine Su-25 military aircraft within proximity of MH17

Peter Haisenko’s study is corroborated by the Russian Ministry of Defense which pointed to a Ukrainian Su-25 jet in the flight corridor of the MH17, within proximity of the plane.

Ironically, the presence of a military aircraft is also confirmed by a BBC  report conducted at the crash site on July 23.

All the eyewitnesses  interviewed by the BBC confirmed the presence of a Ukrainian military aircraft flying within proximity of Malaysian Airlines MH17 at the time that it was shot down: 

Eyewitness #1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it broke apart. And [the fragments] blew apart like this, to the sides. And when …

Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it. Everybody saw it.

Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen. It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.

Eyewitness #3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky. They came from the sky. Then this plane made a sharp turn-around like this. It changed its trajectory and headed in that direction [indicating the direction with her hands].

BBC Report below

<iframe width=”640″ height=”360″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/zUvK5m2vxro&#8221; frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen><!–iframe>

The original BBC Video Report published by BBC Russian Service on July 23, 2014 has since been removed from the BBC archive.

In a bitter irony, The BBC is censoring its own news productions.

This is the BBC Report, still available on Youtube

Media Spin

The media has reported that a surface to air missile was indeed fired and exploded before reaching its target.  It was not the missile that brought down the plane, it was the shrapnel resulting from the missile explosion (prior to reaching the plane) which punctured the plane and then led to a loss of pressure.

According to Ukraine’s National security spokesman Andriy Lysenko in a contradictory statement, the MH17 aircraft “suffered massive explosive decompression after being hit by a shrapnel missile.”  (See IBT, Australia)

In an utterly absurd report, the BBC quoting the official Ukraine statement  says that:

The downed Malaysia Airlines jet in eastern Ukraine suffered an explosive loss of pressure after it was punctured by shrapnel from a missile.

They say the information came from the plane’s flight data recorders, which are being analysed by British experts.

However, it remains unclear who fired a missile, with pro-Russia rebels and Ukraine blaming each other.

Many of the 298 people killed on board flight MH17 were from the Netherlands.

Dutch investigators leading the inquiry into the crash have refused to comment on the Ukrainian claims.

“Machine Gun Like Holes”

The shrapnel marks should be distinguished from the small entry and exit holes “most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile” fired from a military aircraft. These holes could not have been caused by a missile explosion as hinted by the MSM.

While the MSN is saying that the “shrapnel like holes” can be caused by a missile (see BBC report above), the OSCE has confirmed the existence of what it describes as “machine gun like holes”, without however acknowledging that these cannot be caused by a missile.

In this regard, the GSh-302 firing gun operated by an Su-25 is able to fire 3000 rpm which explains the numerous entry and exit holes.

According to the findings of Peter Haisenko:

If we now consider the armament of a typical SU 25 we learn this: It is equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 / AO-17A, equipped with: a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order. The cockpit of the MH 017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the entry and exit holes are found on the same fragment of it’s cockpit segment (op cit)

The accusations directed against Russia including the sanctions regime imposed by Washington are based on a lie.

The evidence does not support the official US narrative to the effect that the MH17 was shot down by a BUK missile system operated by the DPR militia.

What next? More media disinformation, more lies?

See:

Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” By Peter Haisenko, July 30, 2014

What is the Debaltsevo cauldron hiding?

From Fort Russ


February 8, 2015
Newsli.ru

What’s inside in the Debaltsevo cauldron? Why did the leaders of Europe rush to Russia?

Admittedly, when “the mousetrap” began to shut, everyone began to shout about the need… the need of what? Oh, about the need to follow the Minsk agreements..

The “Debaltsevo cauldron” was intended as a “Debaltsevo springboard” to start a victorious attack on DPR and LPR. In this regard, huge quantities of weapons, ammunition and food was brought to this area. This was confirmed by the militia after the capture of Uglegorsk. They got arsenals overflowing with weapons and warehouses with American food.

To foolishly lose such volume of weapons and “illegal American aid” for tens and hundreds of millions of dollars, and then to beg for the “ultimate weapon to defeat Putin” – this is the height of idiocy and helplessness of senior command.

Likely for this reason, to rehabilitate themselves in the eyes of sponsors, the Ukrainian offensive started today on all fronts at once, and with a simultaneous request for a truce…

It is a madhouse, and not a government and a General staff! They are so unpredictable, that honestly, it’s laughable! And yet, there are theories that in the arsenals of Debaltsevo one will find phosphorous and cluster shells and bombs, banned by international conventions, but used by the Ukrainian armed forces during the shelling of cities and towns. This could be evidence of war crimes…

 

http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/what-is-debaltsevo-cauldron-hiding.html

John Kerry tells journalists to look in the social media for proof of Russian troops in Ukraine

Posted on Fort Russ

John Kerry

February 5, 2015
Russian RT 
Translated by Kristina Rus

West and Kiev continue to accuse Russia of having troops in the conflict zone in the East of Ukraine. However, so far no evidence has been provided. Today during the press conference, US Secretary of State John Kerry was also unable to answer the question about the evidence of participation of the Russian military in the conflict in Donbass, and suggested to look for it on social networks.

Today during a joint press conference with Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk in Kiev, the head of the U.S. Department of State, John Kerry, again failed to answer the question if there is strong evidence that Russian soldiers are involved in the conflict in the East of Ukraine. Instead, he invited the journalists to look for it online.

“Social networks are filled with reports and photos of Russian soldiers, who are brought back to Russia dead. And the parents of these soldiers in Russia are told that their sons were killed somewhere in an accident, ” – Kerry said. – There are also prisoners of war who have provided proof of their participation in the conflict (in the East of Ukraine. – RT). And that’s enough.”

Thus, at the moment, neither the West nor Kiev can provide convincing evidence of the presence of the Russian armed forces in the conflict zone. Moreover, not so long ago, the chief of the General Staff of Ukraine, Viktor Muzhenko, said during a briefing that Ukrainian army does not wage battles against the Russian military units and that Kiev knows only about some Russians fighting on the side of the militia.

“Currently, the Ukrainian army is not fighting with the regular army of Russia”, – said the general. However, Muzhenko stated that the General Staff of the UAF possessed information about the participation of individual citizens of the Russian Federation, including military, in the ranks of illegal armed formations”.

These words of the chief of the General Staff, who has access to the full volume of operational information from the front, clearly are contrary to the official position of Kiev, which from the beginning of the conflict repeatedly declared about an organized invasion of the regular units of the Russian army of the territory of Ukraine.

Recall that recently the President of Ukraine arrived at the economic forum in Davos with a fragment of the bus, exploded near Volnovakha. Petro Poroshenko made an emotional speech in which he accused the tragedy on Russia. In addition, during his speech, he stated that allegedly 9 thousand Russian soldiers are fighting on the territory of Ukraine . However, besides the loud proclamations, no evidence of Moscow’s involvement in the incident with the bus or participation in hostilities of regular units of the Russian army, was presented by the Ukrainian leader.

These words of the President were picked up by the permanent representative of Ukraine to the United Nations, Yuriy Sergeyev. During the last meeting of the Security Council on Ukraine, he not only repeated the words of Poroshenko about 9 thousand Russian soldiers, but added that the military contingent of the army of the Russian Federation in Ukraine continues to grow and has reached 12 thousand people.

Source: http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/john-kerry-tells-journalists-to-look-in.html