US Must Stop Supporting Terrorists in Syria: Analyst

US Must Stop Supporting Terrorists in Syria: Analyst

Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Shamkhani says the crisis in Syria cannot be resolved through political approaches as long as terrorist groups, including Daesh and Jabhat al-Nusra are operating in the Arab state and supported by certain regional countries, according to Press TV.

He said some regional countries have expressed concern over the political initiatives of Iran, Russia and Turkey in Syria and do not have any sympathy for people in war-ravaged countries, but are worried that the terrorist groups they have been supporting are losing ground and on the decline.

An author and journalist believes as long as the United States supports the terrorists groups in Syria, there is no possibility of a political solution to the conflict in the war-torn country.

“I have said many times and I have wrote in many articles that as long as Obama remained in power, there was no possibility of a political solution to the conflict for the very simple reason that America supports the terrorist groups – ISIS (Daesh), al-Nusra, [and] al-Qaeda – in Syria,” Stephen Lendman told Press TV in an interview on Sunday.

“As long as this continues, there is no possibility of anything but a military solution,” he added.

The analyst also opined that there are no so-called moderate “rebel” groups operating in Syria, emphasizing that all of them are terrorists.

Lendman noted that it should be seen what exactly US President Donald Trump will do, given his comments about wanting to cooperate with Russia in combating Daesh.

However, he said, there have been “terrible” and “hostile” comments coming from US Defense Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson toward Iran and China.

Therefore, he said, there is no possibility of improving relations with Russia if the United States remains hostile to Iran and China which are Moscow’s allies.

The analyst further expressed fear that Trump will be manipulated to go the wrong way rather than the right way, asserting that the situation is very “dicey”.

The Trump-Putin Phone Call: New US-Russia Partnership? Hold the Cheers!

Global Research, January 29, 2017
Trump and Putin

Except for cooperating during WW II to defeat Nazism, America has been largely adversarial toward Russia for the past century.

On Saturday, Trump and Putin spoke by phone. Discussion lasted nearly an hour. Both leaders agreed to continue “regular personal contacts.”

They’ll meet later in the year for face-to-face talks on an unspecified date at a mutually acceptable venue. A White House statement said the following:

The positive call was a significant start to improving the relationship between the United States and Russia that is in need of repair.

Both President Trump and President Putin are hopeful that after today’s call the two sides can move quickly to tackle terrorism and other important issues of mutual concern.

A more detailed Kremlim press service statement said “(t)he pressing international problems, including tackling terrorism, the developments in the Middle East, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the strategic stability and non-proliferation area, the situation around Iran’s nuclear program and the Korean Peninsula were discussed in detail.”

The key aspects of the Ukrainian crisis have been touched upon as well. It has been agreed to establish partner-type cooperation in those and other areas.

The presidents spoke in favor of creating real coordination of Russian and American actions with a purpose to defeat the ISIL and other terrorist groups in Syria.

Both sides demonstrated their will to take joint steps to stabilize and expand the cooperation between Russia and the United States, on a constructive, equal and mutually beneficial basis.

It was stressed that it is important to restore the mutually advantageous trade and economic ties between business circles of the two countries, which could further enhance a gradual and sustainable development of bilateral relations.

Saturday’s conversation was the first one between both leaders since Trump’s inauguration. One phone call doesn’t erase a century of US-instigated hostility, its longstanding plans for regime change, thousands of US-led heavily armed NATO forces positioned on Russia’s borders, and virtually the entire Congress opposed to normalized relations.

Putin reportedly told Trump he sees Washington as Russia’s most important partner in fighting the scourge of terrorism.

After his deceptive reset outreach, Obama hugely soured bilateral relations. Stepping back from the brink won’t be easy, warm relations likely impossible after adversarial ones for so long.

Bipartisan congressional consensus irresponsibly considers Putin public enemy number one. America’s intelligence community and major media challenged Trump’s legitimacy.

Congress may block lifting sanctions on Russia by executive order. Trump said he’s open to doing it “if we can make some good (bilateral) deals…”

He tweeted and publicly said having good relations with Russia is a good thing. He warned only “fools” believe otherwise.

Moscow is no stranger to US duplicity, its practice of saying one thing and doing another. Putin will proceed cautiously in relations with Trump.

He’ll welcome anything positive, knowing things can change unacceptably any time for any reason. It happened so many times before.

Last week, addressing Russia’s lower house State Duma, Sergey Lavrov said “(w)e have no illusions that there will be a new reset with the United States. We have no naive expectations.”

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Visit his blog site at

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.


One China Policy Nonnegotiable, Says Beijing. America’s Adversarial Policy against China

Global Research, January 16, 2017
The US and China: One Side is Losing, the Other is Winning

The one China policy was first mentioned in the Shanghai Communique on February 28, 1972 during Nixon’s visit to China – stressing the importance for both countries to normalize relations.

On January 1, 1979, the Joint Communique on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations agreed to by Jimmy Carter and Deng Xiaoping formally established bilateral relations, ending official recognition of Taiwan, announced by Carter in December 1978.

The (1992 Consensus) one China principle affirms a single sovereign China comprised of the mainland and Taiwan.

Trump saying “(e)verything is under negotiation including one China” didn’t go down well in Beijing. On Saturday, its Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said it’s “nonnegotiable.”

One China alone exists, Taiwan an inalienable part of it, he stressed. The People’s Republic of China is its only legitimate government, “an internationally recognized fact, and no one can change it,” he explained.

We urge the relevant party in the United States to realize the high sensitivity of the Taiwan issue and abide by commitments made by previous US governments to the one China policy and the principles of the three joint communiques.

Normalized relations depend on it. If Trump demands Beijing play by Washington rules, trouble in the Pacific awaits him, perhaps undermining chances for improving relations with Moscow.

Sino/Russian ties stress unity. Each nation strategically supports the other. Together they’re a powerful counterweight to US hegemonic aims.

Harming the interests of one affects the other. Both countries will rally to defend each other’s mutual interests. Antagonizing Beijing by using the one China policy as a bargaining chip is sure to adversely affect Sino-Russia/US relations.

Trump has to decide if he wants mutual cooperation with other nations or continuation of adversarial relations with sovereign independent ones. Will he be a bully or responsible leader?

It’s his call for good or ill. Much depends on what he decides. China’s credibility at home and abroad depends on the one China policy.

It’s fundamentally important. Challenging or in any way disrupting it assures continuing Obama’s adversarial policy, maybe recklessly escalating it.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Visit his blog site at

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

Fake Bomb Threats in 16 US Jewish Centers


by Stephen Lendman

 In what appeared to be an orchestrated deception, a coordinated false flag, phony threats were reported at 16 Jewish centers in Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Tennessee. 
Police found no evidence of bombs in any of the centers. What happened occurred in the aftermath of America abstaining on Security Council Resolution 2334, affirming the illegality of Israeli settlements.
Were multiple incidents coordinated and staged to enlist support for Israel, portrayed as a safe haven for Jews, facing phony threats like the Monday phony ones in America – except by the regimes in both countries threatening world peace, stability and their own people.
Sixteen reported threats in nine states on the same day automatically triggered red flag suspicions – in this case, an intention to scare, not commit harm.
Maybe follow-up incidents will be nastier, perhaps real bombs, shootings or other violence taking lives. Anti-Defamation League claims about increased hate speech and anti-Semitism in America don’t pass the smell test.
Aside from pockets of extremism, domestically like most everywhere else, nothing suggests Jews in the country or in Europe face systematic threats.
Another possible motive behind what happened Monday could be another effort to denigrate Trump, accused of being racist and associated with the alt-right, falsely called anti-Semitic – even though one of his daughters and son-in-law are Jewish. 
Bomb threats in America most often lack credibility. They’re used as scare tactics to disrupt and intimidate – at times like Monday’s coordinated threats perhaps for political purposes alone.
Were the CIA and/or Mossad behind what happened?

Obama: Liar-in-Chief

Obama: Liar-in-Chief

by Stephen Lendman

Throughout his deplorable 8-year tenure, he broke every major promise made, including pledging:
  • hope and change;
  • peace in our time;
  • observance of democratic values;
  • ending torture, illegal spying and detention without trial;
  • “a new era of openness;”
  • helping Israel and Palestine “fulfill their national goals: two states living side by side in peace and security;”
  • on Afghanistan (October 27, 2007): “I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this (and the Iraq) war(s). You can take that to the bank,” implying an era of peace under his leadership; and
  • closing Guantanamo in one year; more on this below.
Instead we got endless wars of aggression. Hope and change became despair and continuity. Rule of law principles and democratic values were trashed.
Torture continues throughout America’s global gulag. Illegal spying is worse than ever. A “new era of openness” became the most secretive administration in US history, worse than Nixon.
Guantanamo remains open along with numerous other US torture prisons – run by the Pentagon and CIA, closure off-the-table.
Eight years after Obama pledged Guantanamo’s closure, it remains open – even though shuttering it and returning the land to Cuba, its rightful owner, is as simple as implementing his January 22, 2009 Executive Order, saying:
“The detention facilities at Guantanamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than 1 year from the date of this order.”
“If any individuals covered by this order remain, they shall be returned to their home country, released, transferred to a third country, or transferred to another United States detention facility in a manner consistent with law and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.”
No congressional approval is needed. Obama lied claiming otherwise. Guantanamo is a torture prison, illegally operating on occupied land Cuba wants back.
Only 59 prisoners remain, held for political reasons alone. Trump wants the facility kept open, saying he’s “gonna load it up with some bad guys,” maybe including US citizens accused of terrorism.
None were guilty of this high crime in modern memory – innocent patsies blamed for offenses they didn’t commit, some summarily executed. Dead men tell no tales.
Instead of closing Guantanamo before his tenure ends, Obama is renovating it, maybe expanding it – over $20 billion dollars earmarked for new dining, medical, housing, and perhaps other facilities for CIA and Pentagon personnel on the base. 
They’ll have all the comforts of home while brutalizing political prisoners unaccountably – no credible evidence proving anyone there now or earlier guilty of any crime

Russophobia and Anti-Trumpism Running Wild in America

Russophobia and Anti-Trumpism Running Wild in America

EDITOR’S CHOICE | 16.12.2016

Russophobia and Anti-Trumpism Running Wild in America

Wall Street, war-profiteers, neocons infesting the Obama administration, the CIA under John Brennan, NSA head admiral Michael Rogers, and other pro-Hillary dark forces are going all-out to assure no change in US geopolitics – along with wanting Trump denied the presidency he legitimately won.

They notably want adversarial relations with Russia maintained, heading for war between the world’s leading nuclear powers if not stopped.

For them, the notion of Trump wanting normalized ties, including cooperating with Vladimir Putin in combating terrorism, is anathema – to be quashed by whatever means necessary, a no-holds-barred assault for the status quo.

Throughout months of campaigning, media scoundrels played the lead role in denigrating Trump relentlessly, serving as press agents for Hillary, turning journalism into shameless advocacy.

They play the same role in longstanding vilification of Russia – not because of its policies, solely because of its sovereign independence and Putin’s outspoken anti-imperial, anti-war advocacy.

The fever pitch of things today is unprecedented in my memory, McCarthyism on steroids, along with a plot afoot to deny Trump his electoral triumph, things on a fast track toward full-blown tyranny.

The neocon, CIA-connected Washington Post long ago fell from grace, today making the National Enquirer look respectable by comparison.

Here are some fake news headlined reports on its current opinion page:

“Trump infrastructure will not include outfrastructure” – a cartoonist ridiculing Trump his way.

“The Putin-Trump bromance”

“Trump is the star of his own movie. Here is a review” – vilifying him, as expected.

“Trump is playing a risky spy game”

“What will be Trump’s legacy? Who cares” – writer Garrison Keillor has sunk from Lake Wobegon to WaPo fake news proliferator.

“Trump is already antagonizing the intelligence community, and that’s a problem” – former CIA director Michael Hayden the contributor.

“New York should seize Trump Tower”

“Trump is assembling an anti-government. Did Russia help get him here?”

“Trump’s dangerous diss of the CIA”

The prospect of Trump getting along with Putin intensified Russophobia and bashing him to a fever pitch.

The hyped notion about Russian interference in America’s election process for Trump is an absurdity on its face. It’s virtually impossible for any foreign nation or outside source to swing the any Western election for a preferred candidate.

Instead of setting the record straight, The New York Times headlined “The Perfect Weapon: How Russian Cyberpower Invaded the US.”

The fake news story claimed a modern-day version of Watergate, this time by Russian cyberattacking – “the burglary… from afar, directed by the Kremlin… hacking DNC emails and interfering in America’s election, The Times spuriously claimed.

Its account has a familiar foul odor. It never happened. It’s all made up – to vilify Russia and deny the legitimacy of Trump’s election to swing things for Hillary even though she decisively lost.

If pulled off, it would be a coup d’etat, either in the Electoral College or House if it gets to decide by denying Trump 37 or more votes he legitimately won.

The Times: “Many of Mrs. Clinton’s closet aides believe that the Russian assault had a profound impact on the election…”

NSA head admiral Michael Rogers was quoted, saying “(t)here shouldn’t be any doubt in anybody’s mind. This was not something that was done casually.”

“This was not something that was done by chance. This was not a target that was selected purely arbitrarily. This was a conscious effort by a nation-state to attempt to achieve a specific effect.”

Fact: The Times, Rogers and others claiming Russian interference in America’s election lied. Not a shred of evidence supports their allegations – entirely baseless without credible proof. None exists.

Things are likely in the early stage of the latest round of Russia bashing, along with tyrannical methods to prevent Trump from becoming America’s 45th president.

I’ll have lots more to say on this as events unfold – showing the deplorable state of things in America today, full-blown tyranny approaching, too few people understanding what’s going on in plain sight.


Will Trump Withdraw from NATO?

Global Research, November 19, 2016

It’s no more likely than the sun henceforth rising in the west once he’s inaugurated.

Though calling NATO “obsolete” and “costing us a fortune,” he said “I don’t want to pull (America) out,” adding “I think the distribution of costs has to be changed.”

“We’re paying disproportionately. It’s too much…(I)t’s a different world than it was when we originally conceived of the idea…(M)aybe we have to pay a lot less,” other countries more.

“(I)t doesn’t really help us. It’s helping other countries.” The media are “so totally dishonest.” They say “ ‘Trump doesn’t want NATO, wants to disband.’ “

That’s not what I said. I said you’ve got to pay your bills. And you know what? If they can’t pay their bills…they’ve got to go. Because we can’t do this.

“(T)he US must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves” if they won’t pay more. “We have no choice.”

What he and others in America and Europe never explain is why the alliance is needed when its only enemies are invented ones.

No countries anywhere threaten Western nations. ISIS and other terrorist groups are US creations. End support and they’ll fade away. They can’t exist and flourish without foreign help.

Humanity would be much safer if NATO disbanded – not the other way around. Yet Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg’s staff reportedly drafted a secret report, dealing with America possibly leaving the alliance, ending it in its current form.

Separately, Stoltenberg said NATO “allies have made a solemn commitment to defend each other” – against what he didn’t explain, failing to acknowledge no known threats exist.

Claims about “Russian aggression” are baseless – one among other phony reasons to justify NATO existence. When the Berlin wall came down in 1989, followed by the Soviet Union’s 1991 dissolution, the alliance should have been disbanded.

Instead, it expanded from 16 to 28 members, 22 partners, seven Mediterranean Dialogue allies, four Istanbul (Gulf) Cooperation Council Initiative states, and eight other global partners.

Stop NATO’s Rick Rozoff earlier called the alliance a “global missile” aimed at humanity’s heart, a killing machine planning expansion on every continent, threatening world peace, stability and security.

It works cooperatively with the UN, EU, and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. As long as NATO exists, world peace is unattainable.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Visit his blog site at

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network


%d bloggers like this: