Showing posts with label Syria. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Syria. Show all posts

Crisis, What Crisis?—The al-Qaeda Takeover of Syria

written by neil clark - monday april 27, 2015





This weekend it was reported that al-Qaeda affiliated rebels were “almost completely in control” of the last major government held city in the Idlib province in northern Syria.



This is really big news as it means that the Syrian government’s coastal heartlands including the important port of Latakia, a Baathist stronghold are under direct threat. It’s a major advance for the cause of al-Qaeda, yet what is most revealing is the lack of reaction or any concern from Western leaders.



You‘d think that Western leaders would be alarmed at the al-Qaeda advances given how much they warn us of the “threat” from radical Islamists and how many Western troops were lost in the “war on terror” in Afghanistan.



In fact, the lack of concern regarding the militants’ gains in Syria exposes the fundamental deceit at the heart of Western foreign policy. The elites claim to be fighting radical Islamists, yet in Syria they’re doing everything they possibly can to ensure that the side that’s fighting radical Islamists, the secular Syrian government, is weakened and eventually defeated.



Last month, Syria’s President Assad drew attention to the West’s phony war against ISIS. He noted that there were only about 10 raids a day from the coalition of “rich and advanced” countries against the Islamic State. “The Syrian air force, which is very small in comparison with this coalition, conducts in a single day, many times the number of air strikes conducted by a coalition which includes sixty countries. This doesn‘t make sense. This shows the lack of seriousness…there is no serious effort to defeat terrorism,” Assad said.



Far from trying to defeat terrorism — the West and its regional allies have been supporting it.



Israel, the country which we’re repeatedly told by its cheerleaders in the West is in the “front line” of the “war on terror,” has been acting as al-Qaeda’s de facto ally in Syria. It’s made at least ten bombing raids on the country since 2012 — but tellingly, not a single one up to now has been directed at the radical Islamists fighting Assad‘s forces. All have been on Syrian government/army targets or on groups fighting with the Syrian army against the terrorists — such as January‘s attack, which killed a senior Iranian general and six Hezbollah fighters. (Today, news broke that another Israeli air strike had killed “four militants” on the Israel/Syria border, but we don’t know which groups the "militants" belong to.)



In March, it was reported that Israel had opened its borders with Syria to provide medical treatment to wounded al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda affiliated Nusra Front soldiers and after treating them, released them straight back over the Syrian border to continue their fight against a secular government which protects Christians and other religious minorities.



The help that the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) has given to Syrian rebels at the Golan Heights has been documented in a series of UN reports.



Israel clearly doesn’t want its activities in Syria to be subject to too much scrutiny.



READ THE REST HERE


More Unlawful Presidential Killing

By Judge Andrew Napolitano - Published on Sep 17, 2014




"On Monday of last week, the White House announced that in its pursuit of ISIS, the U.S. will go wherever it finds ISIS targets, and if ISIS hides in Syria and the government of Syria does not permit U.S. jets to use its airspace, the U.S. will attack Syria. That sounds like Russian President Vladimir Putin in the Ukraine.



Attacking Syria because its government denied the U.S. airspace would be an unprovoked and unlawful act of war that would probably provoke Putin. Congress rejected declaring war on Syria just a year ago. If it does so now, there would be no lawful or moral basis for such a declaration, as Syria is a sovereign country, lawfully entitled to control its airspace, that poses no present threat to American freedom or security. The U.S. can no more legally commandeer Syrian airspace than Syria can commandeer ours.



Something is amiss here. Last year the president wanted to help ISIS indirectly by degrading the Syrian military. Now he wants to help Syria indirectly by degrading ISIS, but only if Syria stays out of our way. And he is prepared to violate the Constitution, break the law and lie to the American people to achieve his purposes.



Why all the unlawfulness, when he could and should leave these disputants to their own devices and keep the American military at home for genuine defensive purposes?" ~ Judge Andrew Napolitano





Read the Entire Article "Unlawful Presidential Killing" by Judge Andrew Napolitano Here 

The Emperor Has No Clothes - Putin Tells Emperor Obama

Vladimir Putin is no angel. He is an authoritarian dictator tramples the rights of his people. But, though maybe hypocritical, called out Obama and his statements in his timely speech the day before the anniversary of 9-11.  He went on to talk against America's Empire foreign policy that twists the arms of other nations to bend them to its will, and how the rest of the world is tired of the bullying foreign policy, carried on by the majority of the US administrations of the past 60 years.

If one would really study the foreign policy carried on by US administrations he was spot on. He basically told the Emperor that he had on No Clothes. Putin, while his motives are suspect because he and his nations policies have been no better, was not attacking the US itself, just its administrations whose policies basically stay the same no matter which party or president sites in the oval office.

Part of Putin's letter to Obama is posted here:

No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.
It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”
But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.
No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.
The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.
(read the entire article here)

Is it time for the Tea Party to become a political party?

I don't always agree politically with Judson Phillips, but I saw this article in the Washington Times Community Section, and he is spot on 100% regarding this issue of the Republican Party using the Tea Party with nothing in return for the Tea Party.

But while I agree 100% with his synopsis in this particular article about how the GOP Establishment only uses and manipulates the Tea Party, while it disdains them and then ignores them and offers them nothing in return, if the Tea Party does become a political party will it be born with basically the same divide it has now?


Especially the divide on foreign policy? Will a new party with mostly the same old cast of characters from the old Republican Party who latch on to the Tea Party, even if its in name only, avoid the same pitfalls of the current Republican Party?


Yes it will be devoid of the John McCains, Lindsay Graham's, John Boehners and Eric Cantors because of issues like amnesty and capitulation to Obama and the democrats, but it will still have the foreign policy divide, among a few other issues, that we are currently witnessing in a fight between libertarian conservatives and neoconservatives.


What's the point of starting a new 'Tea Party' party, if we just carry the baggage from one party to another? You tell me.


Here is a snippet of the article so you can decide:



It is time for the Tea Party to divorce the Republican Party and start its own political party.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and the Tea Party swept into the political vacuum left by the Republican Party in 2009. There was no voice for conservatives. The GOP had surrendered to its big government wing. And because of that, the GOP had been shellacked in 2006 and 2008.

The GOP would not stand up for conservative principles and the Tea Party was born.
In 2010, the Tea Party swept the Republicans into power in the House of Representatives.
What does the Tea Party have to show for it?

For the last two and a half years, the Tea Party has watched House Speaker John Boehner raise his freshly laundered white flag of surrender time and time again. (Read the Article Here)

*Partial article posted here for news reporting purposes only

Foreign Policy Showdown - Rand Paul Emphatically States: Obama Will Not Get Away With a Syria Strike On My Watch


In 1971, Secretary of State John Kerry famously questioned: “How can you ask a man to be the last one to die for a mistake?” I would ask Secretary Kerry how can you ask a man to be the first one to die for a mistake? That is what he would be doing if the U.S. intervened in the Syrian civil war. 
While the death and destruction stemming from the Syrian civil war is difficult to watch, I believe the U.S. must exercise maximum restraint and uphold the constitutional requirement that grants Congress, not the president, the right to declare war. The president’s announcement that he will seek congressional approval before unilaterally going to war is a step in the right direction.
From a strategic standpoint, there are three questions that should always be asked and sufficiently answered before going to war: What is the U.S. national interest? What is the military objective? What is the exit strategy?
We should also be skeptical of the Islamic rebels that our nation would be fighting alongside. Our knowledge of the relationship with these rebels is murky at best. What reason do we have to believe that they have America’s best interest? The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend. On one side, we have Assad; on the other, we have Al-Qaeda. On one side we have Islamic jihadists; on the other, we have Christians. We have priests and civilians kidnapped and killed by Islamic rebels. It seems on all sides we have chaos and it is unclear if any side will, in the end, be a friend to the United States.  (Read Entire Article Here)

What The Media Isn't Telling You About Syria (Watch Video)

Those wanting to go to war with Syria need to really think about what is going on there, and what we are not being told by our government and the media. Not to mention it is Unconstitutional to go to war with a nation when there is no direct imminent threat to the United States. And Democrats Obama, John Kerry, and Nancy Pelosi and Republicans John McCain and Lindsey Graham are on the same team? (read more). 

Add Eric Cantor and John Boehner to Obama's team to attack Syria with air strikes. (Read about it here)

At the very least this is going to incite the Cold War all over again. Should I mention our troops will be fighting alongside Al Qaeda? 

At the worst...yes. WWIII is a strong potential...and that is the unfortunate reality. 
Contact your representatives in the US House and Senate with links below the video.

Watch this video to learn more:

At the very least this is going to incite the Cold War all over again. Should I mention our troops will be fighting alongside Al Qaeda? 

At the worst...yes. WWIII is a strong potential...and that is the unfortunate reality. Contact your reps Below

*Visit their Local Office if you can. Call their Local and Washington office in that order. People at the Local office worry a little more about their jobs than the career staffers in Washington.
Contact Sen. Mark Warner here:
Richmond Office:
919 E. Main Street
Suite 630
Richmond, VA 23219

Richmond Phone:
804-775-2314
DC Phone:
202-224-2023
Form Email:


Contact Sen. Tim Kaine here:
Richmond Office:
507 East Franklin Street, First Floor

RichmondVA 23219
Richmond Phone:
804-771-2221
DC Phone: 
202-224-4024
Form Email: 


Contact Rep. Eric Cantor here:
Richmond Office:
4201 Dominion Blvd. #110
Glen Allen, VA 23060
Richmond Phone: 
804-747-4073
DC Phone:
202-225-2815

Form Email:


Contact Rep. Randy Forbes here:
Chesterfield District Office:
9401 Courthouse Road, Suite 201
Chesterfield, VA 23832
Chesterfield Phone:
804-318-1363
DC Phone:
202-225-6365
Form Email:


Contact Rep. Bobby Scott here:

Richmond Office:
400 N. 8th Street
Suite 430
Richmond, VA 23219
Richmond Phone:
804-644-4845
DC Phone:
202-225-8351
Form Email:


Also call the White House 
comment line
at 202-456-1111

What is the purpose of the US Military?

The armed forces of the United States of America are to be used for one purpose and one purpose only - the defense of the United States of America and/or its citizens and interests abroad. Syria has not attacked the United States of America or any of its citizens or interests abroad (That I have heard of) thus, we have no business being there in any military capacity whatever. Those who feel strongly about "spreading freedom" to those who lack it may seek to move to those countries and join the armed forces of said countries for that purpose. For example, Israel's IDF has a division strictly for non-Jews/Israeli's who believe that protecting Israel is of paramount importance. I am sure other countries have similar accommodations.

If it is to become the purpose of our military to "spread democracy" around the globe and free the oppressed peoples of the world, then who do we attack next? When does it end? How many more of our men and women in the military must we lose or bring home minus limbs in our efforts to "save the world?" China has a long record of oppressing and abusing its people. Ask the folks in Tibet how the Chinese government treats people. Is China next on our list? How about North Korea? If not, then why not? How do we pick and choose? Why countries in the Middle East and not those in the Far East or elsewhere?

Do we really need to be involved in this?


http://home.peoplepc.com/psp/newsstory.asp?category=TopStories&id=20130824/9830fd8a-b5bb-4501-a6f5-7b2be967159c


Jack Hunter attacked by conservatives because of supporting states rights or is their more to the story?

Published on Jul 10, 2013

Yesterday you saw some hawks, whose ideology is dying and whose worldview is being discredited every day, launch an attack on Senator Rand Paul by attacking one of his brilliant aides, Jack Hunter.
Jack’s sin in their eyes was having spoken favorably of states’ rights, and negatively of Lincoln. They can’t seem to recognize that states’ rights--even secession--does not equal racism; it constitutes a brake on the feds’ march to totalitarianism. Most modern day states’ rights advocates recognize the sovereignty of the states and their inherent ability to nullify and avoid federal violations of the Constitution in order to protect life and liberty from an overgrown, intrusive federal leviathan that literally now interferes in or spies on every facet of our lives. And most historians and legal scholars who appreciate personal liberty and limited government recognize that the history of Lincoln’s assaults on civil liberties is a topic capable of divergent views and worthy of exposure. Read More Here

Buy One of Judge Naps great books below: