Syria has invaded israel now and israel dares not respond.
golan syria
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/11/04...rk-israel/
Syrians are willing to die in israel
since syrian army is already dying in syria.
Syria knows that its real enemies are
usa and israel who are behind
all the attacks on syria.
in 4 hours syria will now launch 60 thousand missiles and
destroy israel and sink 5 usa aircraft carriers and
200 other usa warships and destroy all usa mideast bases.
syria is not about to waste its missles on turkey.
syria does not give a flying fk about turkey bs
being shilled on this site.
US Senate Armed Service Committee asserts that the Syria army
has actually become battle hardened, tougher, stronger and
more disciplined over the past several months from fighting usa syrian ciaratshos and usa special forces.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/11/02...-damascus/
usa does not care about war expense.
usa never uses cheap war methods--
usa pays trillions for crap fighter jets
it never can use (F15 F22)
usa pays bp 400 a gallon for fuel in afg iraq etc.
micro nukes are small and sneaky.
usa likes sneaky.
and it really is much cheaper to use
old outdated micronukes to
blow up someone than
it is to dispose of old micronukes in an
environmentally safe manner.
usa nuked+poison gasssed iraq afghan
libya lebanon
syria knows all this and that is why
syria will fight to the last man against usa
because it knows its fate is sealed like
iraq afghan libya
and the longer syria fights, the longer
they postpone the
bloodthirsty occupation by the rabid usa.
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-How-do-C...pid4171064
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Marine-u...pid4149670
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-WESTERN-...O-IN-SYRIA
http://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/201...oms-video/
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/11/01...ion-force/
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/11/01...vt-troops/
Syria’s exiled opposition accused Washington of undermining the so-called revolution by seeking to overhaul how the Syrian National Council is organized.
http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetai...&eid=73121
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/11/02...to-israel/
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/11/02...-for-west/
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/10/30...ria-truce/
organ theft kosovo serbia kla
http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/278137
http://aangirfan.blogspot.ca/2012/09/nat...syria.html
http://aangirfan.blogspot.ca/2012/08/nat...araya.html
http://aangirfan.blogspot.ca/search/label/Syria
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Syria-pr...pid4407353
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Syria-pr...pid4443522
post 9 page 1
see
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Lebanese...pid4402756
page 1 post 15
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Romney-w...pid4413675
page 2 post 46 47 45 44
Real Reason America Is Drifting Towards Fascism
http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/279961
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IghqeK9-c...r_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...ghqeK9-cbs
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Zero-Hou...pid4395867
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Zero-Hou...pid4389870
see post 1494 page 100
see post 1302 page 87
see post 1221 page 82
see post 1469 page 98
see post 1528 page 102
see
The intelligence chief of Lebanon's Internal Security Forces, General Wissam al-Hassan, is reported to be among those killed in the explosion. He had recently dismantled an Israeli spy cell in Lebanon.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/10/19...t-bombing/
http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetai...id=46&s1=1
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/10/19...t-bombing/
http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetai...id=46&s1=1
in the Wall Street Journal in July 2011.
The article, “Iran, Iraq, Syria Sign $10 Billion Gas-Pipeline Deal,” reported that a new Middle East pipeline, changing the geopolitical complexion of the region with dire consequences for the West, would run from the Iranian South Pars gas field to Damascus via Iraq territory.
According to the deal, Syria would purchase 20 million cubic meters of Iranian gas a day with Iraq acting as a transit agent.
Also-
In August 2011, Syrian exploration companies discovered a huge new gas field in Homs near its border with Lebanon and just east of the Russian-leased Naval port of Tartus on the Mediterranean situated above the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.
Syria ultimately plans to extend the planned pipeline from Damascus to its Mediterranean port of Tartus where it would be delivered to energy-thirsty EU markets.
Any export of Syrian-purchased Iranian gas to the EU would thus be transited through the Russian-docked port of Tartus.
Russia acting as shipper and liaison with its established European energy market via its energy giants, Gazprom and Rosneft, Russia’s role as the EU’s leading natural gas and oil supplier would be enhanced by the Syrian pipeline.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...50392.html
http://whatreallyhappened.com/content/pu...line-syria
http://uprootedpalestinians.blogspot.ca/...other.html
http://www.ilsussidiario.net/News/Englis...els/286710
http://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/category/cristiani
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...a3nL71ZVs8
http://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/201...eat-video/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...a3nL71ZVs8
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCH8nht2MNmGdUKRv9teqf4Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbMdll58l...ults_video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lET_8a8QAeM&featu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lET_DbMdll58&featu
http://terrasantalibera.wordpress.com/20...e-4-video/
http://oraprosiria.blogspot.ca/2012/06/i...usati.html
http://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/201...al-arabic/
http://aangirfan.blogspot.ca/2012/06/chi...rches.html
Lying and intricate duplicity are the quintessence
and bedrock of ALL parties of the usa military industrial
complex gummt dictatorship-
You know--"full spectrum lying"-
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?c...a&aid=3237
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?c...&aid=20759
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?c...themeId=33
http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetai...id=46&s1=1
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/05/disi...front.html
http://aangirfan.blogspot.ca/2012/06/wal...d-mob.html
http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/270866
http://aangirfan.blogspot.ca/2012/05/new...lions.html
http://libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.com/2...terranean/
http://libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.com/2...-industry/
http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/279961
Leo Strauss is the father of the Neo-Conservative movement, including many leaders of recent American administrations. Indeed, many of the main neocon players – including Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Stephen Cambone, Elliot Abrams, and Adam Shulsky – were students of Strauss at the University of Chicago, where he taught for many years.
The people pushing for war against Iran are the same neocons who pushed for war against Iraq. See this and this. (They planned both wars at least 20 years ago.) For example, Shulsky was the director of the Office of Special Plans – the Pentagon unit responsible for selling false intelligence regarding Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. He is now a member of the equivalent organization targeting Iran: the Iranian Directorate.
What did Strauss teach?
Strauss, born in Germany, was an admirer of Nazi philosophers such as Carl Schmitt and of Machiavelli (more on Schmitt later).
Strauss believed that a stable political order required an external threat and that if an external threat did not exist, one should be manufactured. Specifically, Strauss thought that:
A political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat . . . . Following Machiavelli, he maintained that if no external threat exists then one has to be manufactured.
(the quote is by one of Strauss’ main biographers).
Indeed, Stauss used the analogy of Gulliver’s Travels to show what a Neocon-run society would look like:
“When Lilliput the town was on fire, Gulliver urinated over the city, including the palace. In so doing, he saved all of Lilliput from catastrophe, but the Lilliputians were outraged and appalled by such a show of disrespect.” (this quote also from the same biographer)
Moreover, Strauss said:
Only a great fool would call the new political science diabolic . . . Nevertheless one may say of it that it fiddles while Rome burns. It is excused by two facts: it does not know that it fiddles, and it does not know that Rome burns.
So Strauss seems to have advocated governments letting terrorizing catastrophes happen on one’s own soil to one’s own people — of “pissing” on one’s own people, to use his Gulliver’s travel analogy. And he advocated that government’s should pretend that they did not know about such acts of mayhem: to intentionally “not know” that Rome is burning. He advocated messing with one’s own people in order to save them from some artificial “catastrophe”. In other words, he proposed using deceit in order to demonize an adversary and artificially turn him into a dangerous enemy.
Genesis of the Meme: Carl Schmitt
Painting by William Banzai 7
But to really understand Strauss – and thus the Neocons – one must understand his main influence: Carl Schmitt. Schmitt was the leading Nazi legal scholar and philosopher who created the justification for “total war” to destroy those labeled an “enemy” of the Nazi state.
Strauss was a life-long follower of Schmitt, and Schmitt helped Strauss get a scholarship which let him escape from Germany and come to America.
Not only was Strauss heavily influenced by Schmitt, but Strauss and Schmitt were so close that – when Strauss criticized Schmitt for being too soft and not going far enough – Schmitt agreed:
Schmitt himself recommended Strauss’s commentary on Schmitt's writing to his friends as one that he believed saw right through him like an X-ray.
Schmitt’s philosophy argued that the sovereign was all-powerful in being able to to declare a state of emergency. As Neil Levi explains:
The sovereign is the name of that person (legal or actual) who decides not only that the situation is a state of exception but also what needs to be done to eliminate the state of exception and thus preserve the state and restore order. Note the circularity of the definitions: the sovereign is the one who decides that there is a state of exception; a state of exception is that which the sovereign deems to be so.
Moreover:
The sovereign eliminates the state of exception to restore order, but the content of this order is historically contingent, because it is dependent on the sovereign’s will. All that matters to Schmitt is, as Slavoj Žižek puts it, “the decision for the formal principle of order as such.” Similarly, Schmitt says nothing, can say nothing, about what it is that makes a principle worth defending with one’s life, what substance and concrete content could or should compel one to make such a commitment to preserve this form.
Indeed, Schmitt says that “politics” is not the process of debate, making trade-offs, building consensus or letting the best ideas win. Instead, the sovereign – through an act of will – makes a decision, and then the political system should carry it out, and the military effectuate it.
George W. Bush’s statement that he was the “decider” fits in nicely with Schmitt’s theories.
Moreover, Schmitt argued that war against one’s enemy is total – lacking any legal constraints – but the sovereign can use ever-shifting definitions of who the enemy is:
War is the existential negation of the enemy.
+
As with the state of exception, there are not rational criteria for distinguishing friend from enemy. All conflict is situational conflict.
Similarly, Al Qaeda has been our “mortal enemy” since 9/11 … but now they are our close ally.
Indeed, Schmitt said that those who are like our “brothers”, who are as much the same as different from us, must be demonized so that we don’t feel any compassion for them. They are either “with us or against us”, regardless of whether or not they are good people, or how close to us they may be.
The Georgetown University Law Center notes:
Schmitt denounces all “neutralizations and depoliticizations,” which for him are the hallmarks of liberalism. There are no neutralizations: if you are not with us you are against us and we will destroy you: “If a part of the population declares that it no longer recognizes enemies, then, depending on the circumstance, it joins their side and aids them.”
Indeed, Schmitt believed that demonization and war must be maintained for their own sake, or else a horrible world where peace and culture reined would be created:
Schmitt writes that if war became impossible, then “the distinction of friend and enemy would also cease” and what remained would be “neither politics nor state, but culture, civilization,economics, morality, law, art, entertainment, and so on”….
A continuous “state of emergency” is required for the type of leadership advocated by Schmitt and Strauss. In 2002, Slavoj Žižek pointed out how this continuous state of emergency works:
A notable precursor in this field of para-legal ‘biopolitics’, in which administrative measures are gradually replacing the rule of law, was Alfredo Stroessner’s regime in Paraguay in the 1960s and 1970s, which took the logic of the state of exception to an absurd, still unsurpassed extreme. Under Stroessner, Paraguay was – with regard to its Constitutional order – a ‘normal’ parliamentary democracy with all freedoms guaranteed; however, since, as Stroessner claimed, we were all living in a state of emergency because of the worldwide struggle between freedom and Communism, the full implementation of the Constitution was forever postponed and a permanent state of emergency obtained. This state of emergency was suspended every four years for one day only, election day, to legitimise the rule of Stroessner’s Colorado Party with a 90 per cent majority worthy of his Communist opponents. The paradox is that the state of emergency was the normal state, while ‘normal’ democratic freedom was the briefly enacted exception. This weird regime anticipated some clearly perceptible trends in our liberal-democratic societies in the aftermath of 11 September. Is today’s rhetoric not that of a global emergency in the fight against terrorism, legitimising more and more suspensions of legal and other rights? The ominous aspect of John Ashcroft’s recent claim that ‘terrorists use America’s freedom as a weapon against us’ carries the obvious implication that we should limit our freedom in order to defend ourselves. Such statements from top American officials, especially Rumsfeld and Ashcroft, together with the explosive display of ‘American patriotism’ after 11 September, create the climate for what amounts to a state of emergency, with the occasion it supplies for a potential suspension of rule of law, and the state’s assertion of its sovereignty without ‘excessive’ legal constraints. America is, after all, as President Bush said immediately after 11 September, in a state of war. The problem is that America is, precisely, not in a state of war, at least not in the conventional sense of the term (for the large majority, daily life goes on, and war remains the exclusive business of state agencies). With the distinction between a state of war and a state of peace thus effectively blurred, we are entering a time in which a state of peace can at the same time be a state of emergency.
Columbia Law School professor Scott Horton notes that Schmitt’s philosophy formed the basis of the famous torture memos:
Where exactly did Department of Justice torture memo author John Yoo come up with the analysis that led to the purported conclusions that the Executive was not restrained by the Geneva Conventions and similar international instruments in its conduct of the war in Iraq? Yoo’s public arguments and statements suggest the strong influence of one thinker: Carl Schmitt.
+
Perhaps the most significant German international law scholar of the era between the wars, Schmitt was obsessed with what he viewed as the inherent weakness of liberal democracy. He considered liberalism, particularly as manifested in the Weimar Constitution, to be inadequate to the task of protecting state and society menaced by the great evil of Communism. This led him to ridicule international humanitarian law in a tone and with words almost identical to those recently employed by Yoo and several of his colleagues.
Beyond this, Yoo’s prescription for solving the “dilemma” is also taken straight from the Schmittian playbook. According to Schmitt, the norms of international law respecting armed conflict reflect the romantic illusions of an age of chivalry. They are “unrealistic” as applied to modern ideological warfare against an enemy not constrained by notions of a nation-state, adopting terrorist methods and fighting with irregular formations that hardly equate to traditional armies. (Schmitt is, of course, concerned with the Soviet Union here; he appears prepared to accept that the Geneva and Hague rules would apply on the Western Front in dealing with countries such as Britain and the United States). For Schmitt, the key to successful prosecution of warfare against such a foe is demonization. The enemy must be seen as absolute. He must be stripped of all legal rights, of whatever nature. The Executive must be free to use whatever tools he can find to fight and vanquish this foe. And conversely, the power to prosecute the war must be vested without reservation in the Executive – in the words of Reich Ministerial Director Franz Schlegelberger (eerily echoed in a brief submission by Bush Administration Solicitor General Paul D. Clement), “in time of war, the Executive is constituted the sole leader, sole legislator, sole judge.” (I take the liberty of substituting Yoo’s word, Executive; for Schmitt or Schlegelberger, the word would, of course, have been Führer). In Schmitt’s classic formulation: “a total war calls for a total enemy.” This is not to say that in Schmitt’s view the enemy was somehow “morally evil or aesthetically unpleasing;” it sufficed that he was “the other, the outsider, something different and alien.” These thoughts are developed throughout Schmitt’s work, but particularly in Der Begriff des Politischen (1927), Frieden oder Pazifismus (1933) and Totaler Feind, totaler Krieg, totaler Staat (1937).
Dov Zakheim (dual israel citizen)was the Comptroller of the Pentagon during the period that
this enormous sum of money went missing(2.3 trillion dollars to 9.1 trillion dollars.)
However, on 9/11, yet another fortunate coincidence (from the standpoint of those
individuals responsible for the missing $2 trillion) occurred. According to Barbara Honegger,
the accountants who were working on uncovering the evaporated trillions were killed in
the attack on the Pentagon. To this writer’s knowledge, the missing money has never officially been found.
Zak was then the Comptroller of the Pentagon when 2.3 trillion dollars came up missing,
where the investigators appointed to sort out the discrepancy were killed on 9/11,
and the story itself was announced in a very questionable manner
the day before 9/11 which distracted and covered it.
Zaks company claimed that
their remote FTS is a fully developed system that is capable of
remote controlling, interacting, and terminating aircraft and
can be used on commercial and military jets
in addition to the standard drone aircraf
Zakl was the former CEO (and thus had very close ties) to a Corporation which
developed and produced technology that could control and terminate
civilian jet planes, a technology which many
have suggested was used to guide the planes into the World Trade Center 1 and 2.
Zaks company contracted to aid and oversee the investigation into the
first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, (TRIDATA Corporation, is actually subsidiary of SPC).
Thus, TRIDATA would have gained significant knowledge of the makeup, structure,
and other relevant information to use in the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center in 2001.
On September 10, 2001, Pentagon Chief and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
held a press conference where he announced that 2.3 trillion dollars had simply gone missing
from the Pentagon. Such an announcement would have been a major scandal
had it not been for the tragic events that unfolded the next day,
which forever overshadowed the missing money –
yet another fortunate coincidence for a group of individuals
who experienced an unbelievable amount of fortunate circumstances on or around 9/11.
9/10, interestingly enough, as Veterans Today reports, “was the first and last time that
any significant political figure has ever chosen to announce major bad news on a Monday.”
it is highly irregular behavior to announce information that would put the reigning
administration in a bad light on a Monday, the biggest news day of the week.
It is well known both in the halls of government and the mainstream media that
evidence of scandals are always revealed on Fridays (particularly the evenings)
so that the story gets lost over the weekend of partying, vacationing, entertainment,
and varied schedules of news consumption amongst the general public.
Thus, Rumsfeld’s announcement was an abrupt departure from public relations tradition.
Zak was also a member of the Project For A New American Century,
the organization that, one year before 9/11, lamented the absence of a “new Pearl Harbor”
in order to further their goals for an America more to their liking.
Dov Zakheim was the Comptroller of the Pentagon during the period that this
enormous sum of money went missing. (It should be noted that Susan Lindauer,
CIA whistleblower, claims the sum was actually 9.1 trillion dollars.)
However, on 9/11, yet another fortunate coincidence (from the standpoint of those
individuals responsible for the missing $2 trillion) occurred. According to Barbara Honegger,
the accountants who were working on uncovering the evaporated trillions were killed in
the attack on the Pentagon. To this writer’s knowledge, the missing money has never officially been found.
http://aangirfan.blogspot.ca/2012/07/med...ation.html
cia chief casey (died mysteriously drowning
day before he was to testify)
in 1981 he said-
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete
when everything the American public believes is false."
George Soros Switches From Physical Gold to Gold Stocks and That is Very Bullish for Gold Prices
