With the anti-neocon Steve Bannon out, and nobody left in Trump’s inner circle to halt the simmering push for war in Aghanistan, North Korea, the Middle East and virtually everywhere else courtesy of Generals Kelly and McMaster, this morning Reuters reported, quoting Defense Secretary Mattis that Trump has a made a decision on the United States’ strategy for Afghanistan after a “sufficiently rigorous” review process.
However, Mattis did not provide details on when the White House would make an announcement or what the decision was on Afghanistan, where fighting still rages more than 15 years after U. S. forces invaded and overthrew a Taliban government. The Defense Secretary said he is satisfied with how the administration formulated its new Afghanistan war strategy. But he refused to talk about the new policy until it was disclosed by Trump.
“I am very comfortable that the strategic process was sufficiently rigorous and did not go in with a pre-set position,” Mattis told reporters traveling with him aboard a military aircraft to Jordan. “The president has made a decision. As he said, he wants to be the one to announce it to the American people.”
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Aug 20, 2017.
Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, a man who dares not travel in many parts of the globe due to fears of arrest, just made one of the most stunning admissions of his career to date.
In an article for CapX, a British online news website founded by the Centre for Policy Studies, Kissinger warned against defeating ISIS because doing so could lead to an ‘Iranian radical empire.’ He warned:
‘In these circumstances, the traditional adage that the enemy of your enemy can be regarded as your friend no longer applies. In the contemporary Middle East, the enemy of your enemy may also be your enemy. The Middle East affects the world by the volatility of its ideologies as much as by its specific actions.’
Unsurprisingly, Kissinger, a documented war criminal, displayed a complete disregard for international law while expressing his major concerns. Kissinger said:
‘The outside world’s war with Isis can serve as an illustration. Most non-Isis powers – including Shia Iran and the leading Sunni states – agree on the need to destroy it. But which entity is supposed to inherit its territory? A coalition of Sunnis? Or a sphere of influence dominated by Iran?’
This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on AUGUST 15, 2017.
Jack Thompson and Oliver Thrnert argue that President Trumps administration is laying the groundwork for the U. S. to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal. However, they suggest that if the U. S. were to end its participation in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on Iran’s nuclear program, it would severely damage transatlantic relations and the nuclear non-proliferation regime. As a result, Thompson and Thrnert urge European governments to talk with Trump’s most influential advisers and convince them that a unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA will leave the U. S. isolated.
U. S. President Trump seems determined to kill the nuclear deal with Iran. European leaders should strive to prevent this, as it would severely damage transatlantic relations and the nuclear non-proliferation regime.
Key Points The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) of 2015, which would have been impossible without close transatlantic cooperation, brought Iran back into compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
U. S. President Trump and some of his political advisors are preparing to end participation in the JCPOA, possibly as early as October 2017. Iran is gaining ever more influence in the Middle East, they contend, which is why sanctions need to be reinforced, not lifted.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Aug 15, 2017.
Those in favor of the burkini argue that women should be allowed to wear whatever they choose. Critics of the garment say it is an Islamic religious and political symbol which impedes integration and is incompatible with the liberal principles of secularism and gender equality. In recent months, the debate has added another dimension: public health and hygiene. “Secularism and religion are irrelevant here. The burkini is not a Koranic prescription, but another manifestation of political Islam, militant, destructive, seeking to question our way of life, our culture, our civilization.” – French commentator Yves Thrard in Le Figaro. Europe’s burkini debate has now spread to the Middle East. In Algeria, thousands of women have joined a “bikini revolt” to reclaim the public space from Islamists who oppose the bikini as a symbol of Western values. A woman who wore a burkini to swim in a pool in southern France has been charged 490 ($580) to pay for cleaning costs at the facility. The incident, which sparked accusations of Islamophobia, is the latest salvo in an ongoing debate over Islamic dress codes in France and other secular European states.
Those in favor of the burkini argue that women should be allowed to wear whatever they choose. Critics of the garment say it is a religious and political symbol which impedes integration and is incompatible with the liberal principles of secularism and gender equality. In recent months, the debate has added another dimension: public health and hygiene.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Aug 14, 2017.
The following video was published by X22Report on Aug 7, 2017
Rand Paul is speaking out against civil asset forfeiture and how it violates the foundation of the constitution Michael Savage wants to know if we are on the verge of a civil breakdown. Why is Prince Harry invited to Google’s secret meeting. Maduro stopped a coup d’etat in his country, he reports that the US funded it. The deep state who controls the new organization not just in this country but in many have been pushing the NK threat. Tillerson and Lavrov met and they are pushing to work together to calm the situation down. Rybakov says the US is not ready for talks, its not NK that is the problem. Russia wants a working relationship with Libya. The US is threatening Russia because they understand that Russia and China are unwinding the empire building that has taken place in the middle east. Russia and China are now countering the deep state.
In October 1973, the world shuddered when the Arab members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries imposed an oil embargo on the United States and other nations that provided military aid to Israel in the Yom Kippur war. At the same time, they ramped up prices.
The United States realized it was dependent on imported oil – and much of that came from the Middle East, with Saudi Arabia the big swing producer. It shook the nation. How had a few foreign powers put a noose around the neck of the world’s largest economy?
Well, it could happen again and very soon. The commodity that could bring us to our knees isn’t oil, but rather a group of elements known as rare earths, falling between 21 and 71 on the periodic table.
This time, just one country is holding the noose: China.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Aug 6, 2017.
For a time back in 2015, there were widespread concerns that the spike in terrorist attacks in Germany in the aftermath of Angela Merkel’s open door policy which admitted 1 million refugees in Germany from the middle east would lead to a popular wave of unrest, perhaps culminating with the unseating of Angela Merkel as Chancellor. It now appears that the Germans had more pressing concerns on their mind like… global warming.
According to a new poll ahead of the German national election in September, Germans are more concerned about the future state of the environment than they are about more headline-grabbing topics like terrorism or the refugee crisis. The survey released on Tuesday conducted by research group Kantar Emnid Institute on behalf of publishing group Funke Mediengruppe found that 71% of respondents said they were personally more concerned about climate change. This worry ranked higher than the possibility of new wars, listed by 65% of survey participants, and also above terror attacks, listed by 63%.
Crime was noted as a worry by 62% of the 1,000 participants surveyed, who were able to list more than one fear.
But the most surprising finding is that less than half of those polled, or 45%, said they were anxious about the immigration of refugees into the country, while the lowest concern was unemployment 33% .
Ironically, as the Local.de points out, while climate change was the biggest concern named by Germans, the topic doesn’t seem to be winning any more support for the environment-conscious Green party, which is currently polling at around 8% .
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Aug 2, 2017.
As ISIS has shown in their own magazine, they’ll probably never try to pull off a massive terror attack on American soil. Instead, they’ll indoctrinate useful idiots who already live here, and convince them to engage in numerous small attacks, similar to the bombings, knifings, and shootings that have plagued Europe in recent years. It’s a strategy that is far less likely to be foiled, costs significantly less, and can be maintained long after ISIS is overrun in the Middle East.
And what also makes this strategy so enticing is that these small attacks, which are so much more difficult to prevent, is that they can add up over time. They have the potential to accumulate death tolls that dwarf previous terror attacks, and there is little doubt that groups like ISIS are working to make that happen right now.
For instance, a 22-year-old man named Amer Sinan Alhaggagi from Oakland, California was indicted on terror related charges last week, after he allegedly ‘attempted to provide services and personnel to the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS).’ However, that justice department statement is a very sanitized version of what he’s actually being accused of. His plans, which were unearthed by undercover agents working for the FBI, suggest that he intended to kill as many as 10,000 people in the Bay Area with a wide variety of attacks; which included bombings, mass poisonings, and arson.
This post was published at shtfplan on July 31st, 2017.
While we’ve carefully documented the dynamics in play behind Trump’s decision to end the CIA’s covert Syria program, as well as the corresponding fury this immediately unleashed among the usual hawkish DC policy wonks, new information on what specifically impacted the president’s thinking has emerged.
Thomas Joscelyn, a Middle East analyst for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, explains in the August edition of The Weekly Standard:
Earlier this year, President Donald Trump was shown a disturbing video of Syrian rebels beheading a child near the city of Aleppo. It had caused a minor stir in the press as the fighters belonged to the Nour al-Din al-Zenki Movement, a group that had been supported by the CIA as part of its rebel aid program.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jul 31, 2017.
You may recall this bizarre incident that occurred last month in Venezuela. A rogue police officer by the name of Oscar Perez, who is also well known in Venezuela for starring in several B-rated action movies, commandeered a helicopter, before dropping grenades on the nation’s Supreme Court building and strafing the Interior Ministry with gunfire. It was without a doubt, the strangest moment to come out of that nation’s ongoing civil unrest.
But this brazen attack isn’t just odd. In fact, it may portend something much more serious that is simmering under the surface of Venezuela’s slow motion social collapse. It’s a sign that Venezuela is very close to erupting into a full-blown civil war.
Recently, a stolen police helicopter attacked the Venezuelan Supreme Court with grenades and automatic weapons. While no one was hurt, the incident should serve as a wake-up call for the entire Western Hemisphere, including the United States. The attack demonstrates a quantum escalation of the hunger-fueled conflict that has consumed the country for close to a year. Hunger is the key word. Hunger is the most basic of human suffering. Remember that rising food prices helped fuel the Arab Spring, which has left the world with a chaotic, fractured, refugee-hemorrhaging Middle East.
This post was published at shtfplan on July 24th, 2017.
What has been an open secret across the Arab world is not a secret anymore even in the U.S.: What happened last month in the deep recesses of the House of Saud with the ascension of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, aka MBS, was in fact a white coup.
Nearly a month ago, as I’ve written elsewhere, a top Middle East source close to the House of Saud told me: ‘The CIA is very displeased with the firing of Mohammad bin Nayef. Mohammad bin Salman is regarded as sponsoring terrorism. In April 2014 the entire royal families of the UAE and Saudi Arabia were to be ousted by the US over terrorism. A compromise was worked out that Nayef would take over running the kingdom to stop it.’
The source also referred to an insistent narrative then pervading selected Middle East geopolitical circles, according to which U.S. intel, ‘indirectly’, had stopped another coup against the young Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim al-Thani, orchestrated by Mohammed bin Zayed, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, with help from Blackwater/Academi’s army of mercenaries in the United Arab Emirates. Zayed, crucially, happens to be MBS’s mentor.
But instead of a coup in Doha, what happened was actually a coup in Riyadh. According to the source, ‘the CIA blocked the coup in Qatar and the Saudis reacted by dumping the CIA-selected Mohammed bin Nayef, who was to be the next king. The Saudis are scared. The monarchy is in trouble, as the CIA can move the army in Saudi Arabia against the king. This was a defensive move by MBS.’
Now, almost a month later, confirmation of the white coup/regime change in Riyadh has been splashed on the front page of The New York Times, attributed mainly to the proverbial ‘current and former United States officials’.
This post was published at Asia Times
When thousands of migrants began pouring into EU nations two years ago, it seemed totally unexpected. Though Europe had been open to accepting immigrants from third world countries for several generations, the flood of over 1 million migrants from the Middle East and North Africa was unprecedented. It has also left an indelible mark on the continent that could have serious ramifications, ranging from the full blown displacement of aging Europeans, to the disintegration of the EU.
However, the Refugee crisis only came as a surprise to the average person. It turns out that in the year 2000, the UN published a document that essentially predicted a future refugee crisis, and promoted the idea that developed nations should open their borders to millions of migrants.
The document – ‘Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Aging Populations?’ – details the plunging birthrates across Europe and identifies a solution: mass immigration.
The 17-year-old document contended mass immigration was necessary to replace the aging populations of developed countries. Without the migration of populations from the developing world, it reasons, economies will suffer because of labor shortages and falling tax revenues.
This post was published at shtfplan on July 24rd, 2017.
The secret is out: the ascension of Mohammad bin Salman, displacing CIA favorite Mohammad bin Nayef as Crown Prince, was in fact a white coup…
What has been an open secret across the Arab world is not a secret anymore even in the US: What happened last month in the deep recesses of the House of Saud with the ascension of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, aka MBS, was in fact a white coup.
Nearly a month ago, as I’ve written elsewhere, a top Middle East source close to the House of Saud told me:
‘The CIA is very displeased with the firing of [former Crown Prince] Mohammad bin Nayef. Mohammad bin Salman is regarded as sponsoring terrorism. In April 2014 the entire royal families of the UAE and Saudi Arabia were to be ousted by the US over terrorism. A compromise was worked out that Nayef would take over running the kingdom to stop it.’
The source also referred to an insistent narrative then pervading selected Middle East geopolitical circles, according to which US intel, ‘indirectly’, had stopped another coup against the young Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim al-Thani, orchestrated by Mohammed bin Zayed, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, with help from Blackwater/Academi’s Eric Prince’s army of mercenaries in the United Arab Emirates. Zayed, crucially, happens to be MBS’s mentor.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jul 24, 2017.
This post was published at OpenMind
Setting off a predictable fire in the Western corporate media, there is now weeping and wailing over the new Trump decision to end the policy of the CIA arming terrorists in Syria. Mainstream outlets are now leaping over themselves to demonize Trump, Assad, Putin, and Russia in general. According to some outlets and analysts, Trump has ‘fallen into a Russian trap’ by directing the CIA to stop funding terrorists. If that sounds ridiculous, it’s because it is.
Still, while the new policy is cause for celebration, the fact is that there is more to the story than what is being reported both in the mainstream and alternative press outlets. Many individuals who have opposed the war in Syria are now celebrating the end of the Syrian war and Trump as an anti-war peacemaker. Others simply do not believe that the change in policy is relevant. The reality, however, is most likely something in between. In order to understand the significance of Trump’s new decision, it is important to look at facts and history so that one may understand the direction in which we are headed in regards to Syria.
The New Policy
President Donald Trump decided to end the CIA’s ‘covert’ program of arming and training terrorists (aka, ‘Moderate Rebels’) in Syria. The program is set to be phased out over a period of a few months. The Western corporate press is, of course, reporting the news as if the family dog just died. Notorious pro-terrorist and pro-war commentator and senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, Charles Lister, even described the decision as a ‘Russian Trap.’
This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on JULY 21, 2017.
Barack Obama campaigned for the presidency in 2008 as a peace candidate. He signaled that he would fundamentally change America’s course after the reckless carnage unleashed by the George W. Bush administration. However, by the end of Obama’s presidency, the United States was bombing seven different foreign nations.
But Obama’s warring rarely evoked the protests or opposition that the Bush administration generated. Why did so many Bush-era anti-war activists abandon the cause after Obama took office?
One explanation is that the news media downplayed Obama’s killings abroad. Obama was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize less than 12 days after taking office – not because of anything that he had achieved, but because of the sentiments he had expressed. Shortly after he accepted the Peace Prize, he announced that he would sharply increase the number of American troops in Afghanistan. Much of the media treated Obama’s surge as if it were simply a military campaign designed to ensure that the rights of Afghan women were respected. The fact that more than 2,000 American troops died in Afghanistan on Obama’s watch received far less attention in the press than did the casualties from Bush’s Iraq war.
In early 2011, popular uprisings in several Arab nations spurred a hope that democracy would soon flourish across North Africa and much of the Middle East. Violent protests in Libya soon threatened the long-term regime of dictator Muammar Qaddafi, who had become a U. S. ally and supporter in recent years. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other advisors persuaded Obama to forcibly intervene in what appeared to be a civil war.
This post was published at Ludwig von Mises Institute on July 21, 2017.
This post was published at The Alex Jones Channel
The U.S. has announced fresh sanctions against Iran over its ballistic missile programme and what it says is Iran’s support for terror organisations.
The U.S. state department said 18 entities or individuals would be affected by the new measures.
It said all 18 had supported Iran’s ballistic missile programme or the elite Republican Guards Corps.
The statement also criticised Iran’s support for the Syrian government and groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas.
“The United States remains deeply concerned about Iran’s malign activities across the Middle East, which undermine regional stability, security and prosperity,” it added.
This post was published at BBC
In Islamic symbolism, Crdoba is the lost Caliphate. Political authorities in Crdoba dealt a blow to the Catholic Church’s claim of ownership of cathedral by declaring that “religious consecration is not the way to acquire property”. But this is how history works, especially in the lands where Christianity and Islam fought hard for dominion. Why are secularists not pressing Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to give Christians back the Hagia Sophia? No one has raised an eyebrow that “Christendom’s greatest cathedral has become a mosque”. The Spanish left, governing the region, would like to convert the church into “a place for the meeting of faiths”. Nice ecumenical words, but a death trap for the Islamic domination over other faiths. If these Islamists, supported by the militant secularists, will be able to bring Allah back inside the Cathedral of Crdoba, a tsunami of Islamic supremacism will submerge Europe’s decaying Christianity. There are thousands of empty churches just waiting to be filled by the voices of muezzins. The Western attempt to free Jerusalem in the Middle Ages has been condemned as Christian imperialism, while the Muslim campaigns to colonize and Islamize the Byzantine Empire, North Africa, the Balkans, Egypt, the Middle East and most of Spain, to name but a few, are celebrated as a season of enlightenment. Muslim supremacists seem to have fantasies — as well as a long history — of converting Christian sites to Islamic ones. Take, for example, Saint-Denis, the Gothic cathedral named for the first Christian bishop of Paris who was buried there in 250, and the burial place of Charles Martel, whose victory stopped the Muslim invasion of France in 732. Now, according to the scholar Gilles Kepel, this burial place of most of France’s kings and queens is “the Mecca in Islam of France”. The French Islamists are dreaming of taking it over and replacing the church bells with the call of the muezzin.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jul 19, 2017.
Iranian officials have struck back at the Trump administration’s verbal attacks on Iran, suggesting the U. S. should worry about its own domestic problems before turning a critical eye towards them. According to al-Monitor, an arguably pro-Tehran media site:
‘Iranian officials have condemned US Secretary of Defense James Mattis for calling for regime change in Iran. During an interview with a high school newspaper, Mattis said US relations with Tehran will have to wait ‘until the Iranian people can get rid of this theocracy.’ He also referred to Iran as ‘the most destabilizing influence in the Middle East.’ The interview, published June 20, went viral July 10 and was picked up by a number of English-language media outlets.’
Mattis’ statements reek of hypocrisy considering the most extreme theocracies in the Middle East continue to maintain close relationships with the U. S. as the U. S. singles out Iran because of its independent foreign policy interests.
This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on JULY 18, 2017.