How Chrystia Freeland Organized Donald Trump’s Coup in Venezuela

How Chrystia Freeland Organized Donald Trump’s Coup in Venezuela


How Chrystia Freeland Organized Donald Trump’s Coup in Venezuela

On Monday, February 5th, Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland announced that the 14 countries of the Lima Group — who had actually formed themselves under her direction into this new group on 8 August 2017 in order to overthrow and replace Venezuela’s current President Nicholas Maduro — have now been joined (though she didn’t say to what extent) by the EU, and by 8 other individual countries. She stated:

“Today, we have been joined by our Lima Group partners, from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, and Saint Lucia. We have also been joined in our conversations with our partners from other countries, for this Lima Group ministerial meeting. These include Ecuador, the European Union, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States.”

She, along with US President Donald Trump, had, all along, been the actual leaders of this international diplomatic effort, to violate the Venezuelan Constitution blatantly, so as to perpetrate the coup in Venezuela.

Her active effort to replace Venezuela’s Government began with her formation of the Lima Group, nearly two years ago.

Canada’s Ottawa Citizen headlined on 19 August 2017, “Choosing Danger”, and their reporter Peter Hum interviewed Canada’s Ambassador to Venezuela, Ben Rowswell, who was then retiring from the post. Rowswell said that Venezuelans who wanted an overthrow of their Government would continue to have the full support of Canada’s Government: “‘I think that some of them were sort of anx­ious that it (the em­bassy’s support for hu­man rights and democ­racy in Venezuela) might not con­tinue after I left,’ Rowswell said. ‘I don’t think they have any­thing to worry about be­cause Minister (of For­eign Af­fairs Chrys­tia) Free­land has Venezuela way at the top of her pri­or­ity list.’”

Maybe it wasn’t yet at the top of Trump’s list, but it was at the top of hers. And she and Trump together chose whom to replace Venezuela’s President, Nicholas Maduro, by: Juan Guaido. Guaido had secretly courted other Latin American leaders for this, just as Freeland had already done, by means of her secretly forming the Lima Group.

On 25 January 2019, the AP bannered “AP Exclusive: Anti-Maduro coalition grew from secret talks” and reported that the man who now claims to be Venezuela’s legitimate President (though he had never even run for that post), Juan Guaido, had secretly visited foreign countries in order to win their blessings for what he was planning:

In mid-December, Guaido quietly traveled to Washington, Colombia and Brazil to brief officials on the opposition’s strategy of mass demonstrations to coincide with Maduro’s expected swearing-in for a second term on Jan. 10 in the face of widespread international condemnation, according to exiled former Caracas Mayor Antonio Ledezma, an ally.

Playing a key role behind the scenes was Lima Group member Canada, whose Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland spoke to Guaido [9 January 2019] the night before Maduro’s swearing-in ceremony [on 10 January 2019] to offer her government’s support should he confront the socialist leader [Maduro], the Canadian official said. Also active was Colombia, which shares a border with Venezuela and has received more than two million migrants fleeing economic chaos, along with Peru and Brazil’s new far-right President Jair Bolsonaro.

To leave Venezuela, he sneaked across the lawless border with Colombia, so as not to raise suspicions among immigration officials who sometimes harass opposition figures at the airport and bar them from traveling abroad, said a different anti-government leader, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss security arrangements.

During the last days in office of Canada’s Ambassador to Venezuela Rowswell, US President Donald Trump went public with his overt threat to invade Venezuela. On 11 August 2017, McClatchy’s Miami Herald bannered “Trump was making friends in Latin America — before he raised Venezuela ‘military option’”, and Patricia Mazzei reported that “President Donald Trump’s unexpected suggestion Fridaythat he might rely on military force to deal with Venezuela’s pressing political crisis was an astonishing statement that strained not only credulity but also the White House’s hard-won new friendships in Latin America.” Even a spokesperson from the Atlantic Council (which is the main PR agency for NATO) was quoted as saying that “US diplomats, after weeks of carefully building the groundwork for a collective international response, suddenly find their efforts completely undercut by a ridiculously over the top and anachronistic assertion. It makes us look imperialistic and old-time. This is not how the US has behaved in decades!” However, Peru’s Foreign Minister, Ricardo Luna, was just as eager for a coup in Venezuela as were Trump and Freeland.

On 26 October 2017, Peru’s Gestion TV reported that Luna was the co-Chair of the meeting of the Lima Group in Toronto, which Freeland chaired, and that (as translated into English here) “Luna added that the objective of the meeting of the Group of Lima ‘is to create a propitious situation’ so that the regime of Nicolás Maduro ‘feels obligated to negotiate’ not only an exit to the crisis, ‘but also an exit to his own regime’.” This gang were going to make Maduro an offer that he couldn’t refuse. So, the Lima Group, which was founded by Luna and by Freeland, was taking the initiative as much and as boldly as Trump was, regardless of what NATO might think about it. The topic of that news-report, and its headline, was “Peru proposes Grupo de Lima to involve the UN to face the Venezuelan crisis.” Four days later, Freeland and Luna met privately at the UN, in New York, with the Secretary General, Antonio Guterres. Inner City Press reported that “The title of the meeting is ‘the situation in Venezuela and efforts by regional organizations to resolve the crisis per Chapter VIII of the UN Charter’ [see it here] and the briefer will be not USG [Under Secretary General] Jeffrey Feltman but his Assistant, ASG [Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs] Miroslav Jenca.” Jeffrey Feltman was the person who, in the secretly recorded 27 January 2014 phone-conversation in which US President Barack Obama’s agent, Victoria Nuland — planning and overseeing the February 2014 coup that overthrew Ukraine’s democratically elected President — instructed the US Ambassador to Ukraine, that, after Ukraine’s President is ousted, Arseniy “Yats” Yatsenyuk was to be appointed as Ukraine’s ‘interim’ leader as the new Prime Minister, to replace the President. She also said: “I talked to Jeff Feltman this morning; he had a new name for the UN guy Robert Serry. … He’s now gotten both Serry and Ban ki-Moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. That would be great, I think, to help glue this thing, and to have the UN help glue it, and, you know, fuck the EU.” So, the still Under Secretary General of the U.N, Mr. Feltman, is still America’s fixer there, who “glues” whatever the US President orders the UN to do, and his Assistant was filling in for him that day. Therefore, if Trump and Freeland turn out to be as successful as Obama was, then the UN will “glue” the outcome. Chrystia Freeland happens also to be a friend of Victoria Nuland, and a passionate supporter of her coup in Ukraine.

Freeland’s parents were Ukrainian and supported the Nazis during World War II. Cameron Pike headlined about Freeland at The Saker, on 2 February 2019, “Canada’s Nazi Problem” and opened:

In the 1960’s the Polish government, still reeling from their role as the main course of the European ‘meat-sandwich’ that was the second world war, went on the hunt for Nazi aiders and abettors who destroyed their people. Contrary to what mainstream readers are allowed to know, WWII Nazi and Waffen SS leaders, Goebbels’s publishers and editors (otherwise known as propagandists), willing and outright Nazi collaborators and vicious killers, made their way out of conquered Germany to the United States [under CIA direction] and to Canada, under MI-6 direction, [and Canada] took in 2000 of them. Most of them ‘made their way’ to Ontario and Alberta. One of them even became the President of the University of Alberta. I repeat, one of them EVEN BECAME THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. … It was this former Waffen SS soldier-turned University President who created the Ukrainian Studies department at the U of A. … Michael Chomiak, another of these significant Nazis who were never caught, lived out his days after the war as a farmer in Alberta. His Nazi identification documents were uncovered by the Polish Government in the 1960’s. “Chomiak’s records show he was trained in Vienna for German espionage and propaganda operations, then promoted to run the German press machine for the Galician region of Ukraine and Poland during the 4-year occupation. So high-ranking and active in the Nazi cause was Chomiak that the Polish intelligence services were actively hunting for Chomiak until the 1980s – without knowing he had fled for safety to an Alberta farm in Canada.” [Editing note: Please see link for John Helmer’s extensive work on uncovering Freeland’s Nazi family history.] Poland was on the hunt but lost the trail because he was well hidden by their WWII ‘ally’, the British, unbeknownst to my fellow peaceful Canadians.

Chomiac was Chrystia Freeland’s father. Chrystia Freeland loves him very much and is unshakably loyal to his memory and to his far-right beliefs, which she proudly supports. She also is a close friend of George Soros, who likewise is entirely unembarrassed at, and unapologietic about, his having, as a supposed Christian child in Hungary, helped the Nazis take the property of other Jews, before they were sent off to the concentration camps. He chose to do that — help the Nazi regime — rather than die as a Jew himself. Of course, subsequently, he founded the rabidly anti-Russian Open Society Foundation and other political ‘charities’ to tax-exempt his global political donations. Soros, too, is a passionate supporter of the US coup in Ukraine and of Ukraine’s far-right, and helped to finance (tax-exempt via his International Renaissance Fund) Obama’s Ukrainian coup by being one of the three top donors to Hromadske TV, which propagandized for slaughtering at least one and a half million of the people in the far eastern region of Ukraine, where Obama’s imposed far-right Ukrainian government was totally rejected. It’s the region that had voted over 90% for the Ukrainian President whom Obama-Nuland overthrew, and George Soros was a top funder of such exterminationist propaganda. So, it’s reasonable that his fellow anti-Russian fanatic, Freeland, is a friend of his.

That’s the “liberal” side of fascism. The “conservative” side of it is represented by such people as John Bolton and the Koch brothers.

Of course, the man whom the US and Canadian regimes and the Lima Group are trying to install as Venezuela’s President, Juan Guaido, had been well groomed for that job, but not by political and electoral experience, of which he has almost none, but by his foreign sponsors. On 29 January 2019 the Gray Zone Project bannered “The Making of Juan Guaidó: How the US Regime Change Laboratory Created Venezuela’s Coup Leader”, and their two star investigative journalists, Dan Cohen and Max Blumenthal, opened: “Juan Guaidó is the product of a decade-long project overseen by Washington’s elite regime change trainers. While posing as a champion of democracy, he has spent years at the forefront of a violent campaign of destabilization.” This report also noted that “The ‘real work’ began two years later, in 2007, when Guaidó graduated from Andrés Bello Catholic University of Caracas. He moved to Washington, DC to enroll in the Governance and Political Management Program at George Washington University, under the tutelage of Venezuelan economist Luis Enrique Berrizbeitia, one of the top Latin American neoliberal economists. Berrizbeitia is a former executive director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) [and the IMF is a central part the operation that’s described in John Perkins’s now-classic Confessions of an Economic Hit Man] who spent more than a decade working in the Venezuelan energy sector, under the old oligarchic regime that was ousted by Chávez.” Moreover, ”Stratfor and CANVAS – key advisors of Guaidó and his anti-government cadre – devised a shockingly cynical plan to drive a dagger through the heart of the Bolivarian revolution. The scheme hinged on a 70% collapse of the country’s electrical system by as early as April 2010.” Etc. This is how ‘democracy’ now functions. It’s not democracy — it is fascism. The euphemisms for it are “neoliberalism” and “neoconservatism.”

Regardless of whether or not the Trump-Freeland-Luna program for Venezuela succeeds, democracy and human rights won’t be advanced by it; but, if it succeeds, the fortunes of US-and-allied billionaires will be. It’s part of their global privatization program.

PS: If you want to understand what was the historical context where Inner City Press reported that “The title of the meeting is ‘the situation in Venezuela and efforts by regional organizations to resolve the crisis per Chapter VIII of the UN Charter’”; then Luk Van Langenhove has summarized that context, by saying: “Few invocations of Chapter VIII’s provisions were made during the cold war period. But when the bipolar world system collapsed and spawned new global security threats, the explosion of local and regional armed conflicts provoked a renewed interest in regional organizations and their role in the maintenance of regional peace and security. The United Nations was forced to acknowledge its inability to solely bear the responsibility for providing peace and security worldwide.” So, “during the cold war period,” this provision of the UN Charter remained virtually inactive. Then, suddenly, after 1991, when the Soviet Union and its communism and its Warsaw Pact military alliance to counter America’s NATO military alliance, all ended (with no concessions being made on the American side), America could no longer use ‘communism’ as a ‘justification’ to invade or perpetrate coups against foreign governments that were friendly toward or else allied with Russia. So, now, this provision of the UN’s Charter became activated by the US and its allies, in order to be able to say that The West’s coups and invasions aren’t actually to build-out the US empire, but are instead for (in the terms of this part of the UN’s Charter) “the maintenance of international peace and security” — so as to ‘authorize’ coups and international invasions by the US and its vassal nations, such as are the members of NATO. This is what US President G.H.W. Bush had in mind to rely upon, when he told the leaders of the US regime’s vassal states, secretly at Camp David, on the night of 24 February 1990, that the ‘Cold War’ would now continue secretly on the US-allied side, against Russia and against any nation’s leaders (such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, and Viktor Yanukovych) that aren’t hostile toward Russia, by Bush’s saying then to them, that no compromise must ever be allowed “with Moscow,” because “To hell with that! We prevailed, they didn’t.” In other words, whereas the UN had been set up by FDR to evolve ultimately into the global democratic federation of nation-states — a democratic world-government — so as to become the sole possessor of control over all strategic weaponry, and thus to become the democratic republic of the entire world authorized to settle international disputes peacefully, the subterranean Nazis and other fascists whom US President Truman and the Bilderberg group represented, were determined that the US and its vassal nations would ultimately become the dictatorship over all nations, the entire world. That’s what Ukraine, and now Venezuela, and many other US coups and invasions, are — and have been — really about. It’s about the ‘peace’ of the graveyard, NOT any democracy, anywhere at all.

That’s their dream. They want to monopolize the corruption everywhere, not to end it, anywhere. And that’s why they distort and blatantly lie about Venezuela’s democratic constitution now, just as they did about Ukraine’s democratic constitution in February 2014. It’s, essentially, a lawless international gang of billionaire thugs. It is the international Deep State. It consists of the under 2,000 people who are international billionaires in the US and secondarily in the US-allied countries, and of those billionaires’ millions of hirees. 585 of those under-2,000 are Americans. But the wealthiest person on the planet isn’t even listed on any of the standard lists of billionaires, and he is the King of Saudi Arabia. That person is the US aristocracy’s #1 international ally, because ever since the 1970s when gold no longer backed the US dollar but instead oil did, that person’s decisions have enabled the US dollar to continue as being the world’s reserve currency, no matter how big the US economy’s trade deficits are, and no matter how high the US Government’s fiscal deficits are.

Below those billionaires (and trillionaire), and below their millions of hirees, are the billions of serfs; and, below those, at the very bottom, are the approximately 40 million slaves, and the many millions imprisoned — virtually all of whom have extremely low (if any) net worth at all, since slavery and imprisonment are, in the real world, only for the very poor, not at all for the international gangsters, except for a very few exceptions (such as, perhaps, “El Chapo”).

The billionaires command, and the governments obey; that’s ‘democracy’, and it’s ‘the rule of law’, today. Everything to the contrary is propaganda, such as that what Trump-Freeland-Luna want for Venezuela is to decrease corruption and to increase democracy and human rights.

At least the more blatant fascist John Bolton was honest when he said on January 28th: “It will make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela.” But he would have been lots more honest if he had acknowledged, instead, that “It will make a big difference to the United States billionaires economically if we could have American oil companies invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela.” This is all that the fascists ever really cared about. Mussolini called it “corporationism.” Now, decades in the wake of the Allies’ supposed ‘victory against fascism’ — against the Axis powers — in WW II, we all (at least the realists) are acknowledging that we clearly are staring in the face the raw fact that fascism has finally won, or at least very nearly totally won, in the world.

Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito, died; but their ideological followers today rule the world, and FDR would be turning in his grave.


الردع اليمني: سنة رابعة

الردع اليمني: سنة رابعة

مارس 27, 2018

ناصر قنديل

– في مثل هذا اليوم من عام 2015 كانت واشنطن توقع اتفاق الإطار إلى جانب كل من روسيا والصين وبريطانيا وفرنسا وألمانيا بمشاركة الأمم المتحدة والاتحاد الأوروبي مع إيران كأساس للتفاهم النووي الذي وقع في منتصف شهر تموز من العام نفسه. وفي مثل هذا اليوم شنت السعودية عدوانها على اليمن بلا غطاء عربي أو دولي، لتحصل لاحقاً بدعم أميركي إسرائيلي على ما تريد في الجامعة العربية وفي الأمم المتحدة. وكان واضحاً من الخطاب الأميركي الذي رافق نهاية المفاوضات في فيينا في تشرين الثاني عام 2014 بعد عام كامل من التفاوض أن مهلة الشهور السبعة لإنهاء الاتفاق والموزعة بين أربعة شهور للتفاوض تنتهي في نهاية آذار، وثلاثة أخرى تنتهي في نهاية حزيران للصياغات التقنية، أنّها مهلة تمنحها واشنطن لحلفائها وخصوصاً السعودي والتركي والإسرائيلي لاتخاذ الترتيبات التي تجعلهم قادرين على مواجهة مرحلة ما بعد إنجاز التفاهم، كما قال يومها جيفري فيلتمان المزدوج الصفة الأممية الأميركية.

– ترجمت تركيا استثمار هذه المهلة بدخولها إلى إدلب شمال سورية ودعمها لجبهة النصرة بالسلاح والعتاد والنيران والوحدات الخاصة تمهيداً لسيطرة النصرة ومَن معها على حلب بينما شنّت «إسرائيل» غارات على القنيطرة جنوب سورية استهدفت مجموعة قيادية لحزب الله والحرس الثوري الإيراني في محاولة لرسم قواعد اشتباك جديدة وخطوط حمراء أعلنتها ومحورها، أن جنوب سورية منطقة محرّمة على المقاومة ولن تخضع لمعادلات الردع التي تحكم جبهة جنوب لبنان، وحماية لمشروع إقامة حزام أمني حدودي تتولاه جبهة النصرة يشبه ما فعله العميل أنطوان لحد في جنوب لبنان قبل الهزيمة الإسرائيلية عام 2000 بينما كان الاستثمار السعودي للمهلة بشن العدوان على اليمن وفق نظرية قوامها إنهاء وضع اليمن عسكرياً خلال ما تبقى من المهلة لتوقيع التفاهم النووي مع إيران، وأملاً بأن تجلب وقائع الحرب وسرعة الإنجاز ما يُقنع واشنطن بالتراجع عن التوقيع والثقة بأن لدى حلفائها ما يفعلونه لتغيير موازين القوى.

– توقّف النجاح التركي عند حدود إدلب بعد شهور قليلة بفعل الدخول الروسي المباشر على خطّ الحرب، وفشل محاولاتهم ترويض موسكو بإسقاط الطائرة الروسية، ليضطروا لاحقاً إلى التموضع بعد تحرير الجيش السوري مدعوماً من روسيا وإيران لحلب، ضمن معادلة أستانة والبحث عن بدائل كان آخرها دخولهم عفرين، ولا يزال التجاذب قائماً حول مستقبل ما رسمه الأتراك من رهانات، بينما أخفقت «إسرائيل» في رسم قواعد اشتباك جديدة بعد الرد النوعي للمقاومة في مزارع شبعا واضطرار الإسرائيليين للإقرار بمعادلات الردع، لكن التجاذب بقي مستمراً حول الرهان على التغيير، حتى تمّ إسقاط الطائرة الإسرائيلية الـ «إف16» بواسطة الدفاعات الجوية السورية، وصولاً لطلب حكومة الاحتلال إعادة نشر وحدات الأندوف على خط فصل القوات في الجولان المحتلّ وتسليمها بسقوط مشروع الحزام الأمني الذي بدأته مع جبهة النصرة.

– مضت الأيام التي راهن عليها السعوديون للحسم في اليمن وصارت أسابيع، ثم مضت الشهور، ونفدت المهلة الأميركية ومُدّدت لأسبوعين بطلب سعودي أملاً بنجاح محاولات الفوز في اليمن، وصرح ممثل منصور هادي في الجامعة العربية في قمة شرم الشيخ التي نالت الرياض فيها غطاء عربياً بالقول، إن «إسرائيل» باتت بمأمن من الصواريخ البالستية التي يخزّنها الحوثيون في الحديدة لاستهداف إيلات في أي حرب مقبلة بين إسرائيل وحزب الله. ووقع الأميركيون التفاهم النووي مع إيران وتواصلت الحرب السعودية، ومرت سنة وسنتان وثلاث وها هي الرابعة تبدأ، والرياض من فشل إلى فشل، والصواريخ التي أرادت جماعة السعودية إراحة «إسرائيل» من خطرها صارت سلاح الردع الذي يرسم معادلة اليمن، والذي تتّجه المساعي لجعله طرفاً في التسوية وفقاً لمعادلة، وقف الصواريخ على العمق السعودي مقابل فك الحصار الجوي والبحري عن اليمن، وتستمرّ الحرب ويسقط الأمل السعودي بالفوز بها، ويرسم صمود اليمن صورة المنطقة بتحويل السعودية من دولة إقليمية كبرى إلى دولة مأزومة تبحث عن مخرج لمأزقها.

Related Videos

Related Articles

Who does adopt Feltman’s orphans? أيتام فيلتمان مَن يتبنّاهم؟

 Who does adopt Feltman’s orphans?

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The words issued unofficially by the US Ambassador in Lebanon commenting on the official speech of the President of the Republic the General Michael Aoun who sticks to the role of the resistance weapons raised inquiries that are circulated among the political circles affiliated to the forces of the Fourteenth of March especially Al Mustaqbal Movement and the Lebanese Forces  about the possibilities of the US escalation to the extent of talking about banning the US nationals from traveling to Lebanon, enlisting Lebanon in the US travel banning,  and stopping the cooperation with the Lebanese army, depending on the special status afforded by the administration of the US President Donald Trump to the security of Israel and the relationship with it.

To classify Hezbollah on the US lists allocated to the terrorism is not new, to consider it a ruthless opponent according to its vision of the interests in the region is an admission in its place, and to make every effort along with the new administration to exert pressure on the Lebanese country for not covering the resistance weapons within the concept of the US support to Israel, then this is a fact which will continue, and when Washington puts its importance to barter Russia for any cooperation in Syria by not allowing the achievement of Iran of any gains that affects Israel, which means the seek to alienate Hezbollah away from the success of fortifying and strengthening the structure of the resistance for the post stage of the stability of Syria then this is the conflict law.

The question is revolving somewhere else. Will Washington raise the pace of pressures in favor of its hostile vision toward the resistance which is accused vitally with the security of Israel, to the extent of exposing Lebanon to instability due to the position of its President who sticks to the resistance and its weapons?, and were these positions hidden in front of Washington before his election? Does Washington consider the stability of Lebanon a secondary matter and the war on terrorism especially ISIS a secondary matter too? Is it ready to sacrifice with them and to freeze this war and considering it mere a platform for the bargains in the war on Hezbollah which proceeds as a priority? Are Washington and Israel in a state of escalation toward the war? Most importantly, did the President of the Republic the General Michael Aoun raise the ceiling of his position which sticks to the resistance and its weapons, while he could saying that the weapons is a matter that the country is unable to bear outside the comprehensive national dialogue that started and will continue till achieving the results according to the words of the former President Michael Suleiman?, maybe this was meanly intended by the inquirers about the purposes of the words of the US Ambassador.

The Deputy UN Secretary-General Jeffrey Feltman who never stop being the most reflective honestly about the positions of the successive US administrations towards the weapons of Hezbollah and its resisting role simply said that if Washington has an escalation agenda then the first platforms for moving will be the United Nations through the gate of the committees to apply the resolution 1701 and linking it with the resolution 1559. Feltman who is the crucial player who has the passwords in the two issues said that in Lebanon there is a miracle its basis is the presence of weapons at the hands of the counterbalanced group outside the country, which is Hezbollah. Despite the crisis and the war as the size of what is going on in the neighboring Syria, Lebanon was not destabilized. These words are contrary to what is anticipated from Feltman the godfather of the hostile decisions and campaigns against Hezbollah and its weapons. They are contrary to the call of organizing UN campaigns that target and affect Lebanon and through it Hezbollah under the title of the weapons, as long as this weapon has proved its eligibility by not turning into a factor for destabilization. The words of Feltman grant the words of the President of the Republic legitimacy and credibility against the circulated speech by the US Ambassador, because the most prominent of what was said by the President was that Hezbollah’s weapons do not constitute a reason for destabilization.

The words of Feltman disclosed those who inquired “innocently” and made them his foundlings after they were his orphans, after he gave up their fatherhood, so they become Americans more than the Americans themselves if not more.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

أيتام فيلتمان مَن يتبنّاهم؟

مارس 8, 2017

ناصر قنديل

– أثار الكلام الصادر عن السفيرة الأميركية في لبنان بشكل غير رسمي تعليقاً على الكلام الرسمي لرئيس الجمهورية العماد ميشال عون المتمسّك بدور سلاح المقاومة، تساؤلات عن احتمالات التصعيد الأميركي تداولتها الأوساط السياسية المنتمية للرابع عشر من آذار، خصوصاً في تيار المستقبل والقوات اللبنانية، وصلت حدّ الحديث عن وقف سفر الرعايا الأميركيين إلى لبنان وإدراج لبنان على لائحة حظر السفر إلى أميركا ووقف التعاون مع الجيش اللبناني، مستندة إلى المكانة الخاصة التي توليها إدارة الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب لأمن «إسرائيل» والعلاقة معها.

– أن تُصنّف أميركا حزب الله على لوائحها الخاصة بالإرهاب ليس جديداً، وأن تعتبره خصماً شرساً في رؤيتها لمصالحها في المنطقة، فهذا اعتراف في مكانه، وأن تبذل مع الإدارة الجديدة كلّ ما تستطيع كي تضغط على الدولة اللبنانية لعدم تغطية سلاح المقاومة ضمن مفهوم الدعم الأميركي لـ«إسرائيل»، فذلك ما كان وما هو كائن وما سيكون، وأن تضع واشنطن ثقلَها لمقايضة روسيا لأيّ تعاون في سورية بعدم السماح بتحقيق إيران لمكاسب تؤذي «إسرائيل» والقصد السعي لإبعاد حزب الله عن النجاح في تمكين وتمتين بنية المقاومة لمرحلة ما بعد استقرار سورية، فذلك هو قانون الصراع.

– السؤال يدور في مكان آخر، وهو هل سترفع واشنطن وتيرة الضغوط لحساب رؤيتها العدائية للمقاومة والمهتمّة بصورة حيوية بأمن «إسرائيل»، لدرجة تعرّض لبنان للاهتزاز بسبب موقف رئيسه المتمسك بالمقاومة وسلاحها؟ وهل كانت هذه المواقف غائبة عن واشنطن قبل انتخابه؟ وهل واشنطن تعتبر استقرار لبنان ثانوياً والحرب على الإرهاب، خصوصاً داعش، شأناً ثانوياً أيضاً، وهي مستعدة للتضحية بهما، وتجميد هذه الحرب واعتبارها مجرد منصة للمساومات في الحرب على حزب الله، التي تتقدّم كأولوية؟ وهل واشنطن وإسرائيل بالتالي، في وضعية التصعيد نحو الحرب؟ والأهم من كل ذلك وبناء عليه، هل غامر رئيس الجمهورية العماد ميشال عون برفع سقف موقفه المتمسك بالمقاومة وسلاحها، وكان بمستطاعه القول إنّ السلاح شأن فوق طاقة الدولة على معالجته خارج حوار وطني شامل بدأ وسيستمر حتى بلوغ نتائج وفقاً للغة الرئيس السابق ميشال سليمان، ولعل هذا ما قصد بلوغه المتسائلون بغير براءة عن مقاصد كلام السفيرة الأميركية؟

– يأتي كلام معاون الأمين للأمم المتحدة جيفري فيلتمان الذي لم يكفّ عن كونه الأشدّ تعبيراً بأمانة عن مواقف الإدارات الأميركية المتعاقبة تجاه سلاح حزب الله ودوره المقاوم، ليقول ببساطة إنه لو كان لدى واشنطن روزنامة تصعيد، فأول منابر التحرّك ستكون الأمم المتحدة عبر بوابة لجان تطبيق القرار 1701 وربطه بالقرار 1559، وفيلتمان هو اللاعب الحاسم الذي يمتلك كلمة السر في العنوانين، فإذ بفيلتمان يخرج ليقول إنّ في لبنان معجزة قوامها أنّ وجود سلاح وازن بيد فئة وازنة خارج الدولة، هو حزب الله، وبجوار وتداخل مع أزمة وحرب بحجم ما يجري في سورية، لم يزعزع استقرار لبنان. وهذا الكلام عكس ما يُنتظر من فيلتمان عراب القرارات المعادية والحملات المعادية لحزب الله وسلاحه، وهو عكس السير بالدعوة لتنظيم حملات استهداف وتضييق أممية على لبنان ومن خلاله على حزب الله تحت عنوان السلاح، طالما أنّ هذا السلاح أثبت أهليته بعدم تحوّله عاملاً يزعزع الاستقرار، لا بل إن كلام فيلتمان يمنح كلام رئيس الجمهورية مشروعية وصدقية بوجه الكلام المتداول عن لسان السفيرة الأميركية، لأنّ أبرز ما قاله الرئيس كان أنّ هذا السلاح لا يشكل سبباً لزعزعة الاستقرار.

– كلام فيلتمان يفضح المتسائلين بـ«براءة» ويجعلهم لقطاء فيلتمان، بعدما كانوا أيتامه، وتخلّى فيلتمان عن أبوّتهم، وصاروا أميركيين أكثر من الأميركيين كي لا نقول أكثر.

(Visited 2٬767 times, 138 visits today)
 Related Videos
Related Articles

Assad, Aoun and US Elections الأسد وعون والانتخابات الأميركية

سامي كليب

جريدة السفير بتاريخ 2016-10-24

قبل 8 تشرين الثاني المقبل يجب أن يُحسم ملف الانتخابات الرئاسة اللبنانية، وقبل نهاية الشهر المقبل ينبغي حسم مصير حلب. لو حصل هذا فعلا، يكون الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد قد نجح في البقاء رئيساً الى فترة غير محددة، ويحقق الجنرال ميشال عون حلمه وحلم كثيرين معه في الوصول الى سدة الرئاسة آخر الشهر. هكذا تكون المنطقة اذاً أمام انقلاب كامل في المشهد لمصلحة محور سوريا – إيران ـ «حزب الله» برعاية روسية. بالمقابل، يستطيع حينها الرئيس باراك أوباما توديع آخر أيامه في الحكم بتقديم تحرير الموصل على أنه انتصار أميركي كبير على «داعش».

لكن ماذا لو لم يحصل ذلك؟ هل تتعقد الأمور وتعود الى نقطة الصفر مع الفوز المتوقع لهيلاري كلينتون التي ستضع الملف السوري في أولوياتها؟

ماذا، أولاً، في الوقائع؟

ختم الأمين العام لـ «حزب الله» السيد حسن نصرالله الأسبوع المنصرم بالحديث عن «الانتصار». قال «إن معالم فشل المشروع الآخر بدأت تتضح وإن هزيمته باتت قريبة ونتطلع الى الانتصار الحقيقي». يستطيع قول ذلك لو بقي حليفه السوري ولو فاز حليفه اللبناني.

ما قاله نصرالله ينطبق تماماً مع ما صرّح به السفير الأميركي السابق في سوريا والسعودية ريتشارد مورفي بقوله لصحيفة «الأخبار» حرفياً: «إن الأسد ليس على وشك ترك السلطة. يقول البعض إن على الأسد الرحيل، قبل البدء بأي عملية مصالحة. أعتقد أن واشنطن غيّرت موقفها، وهي تقول إن ذلك لن يحصل على أرض الواقع، ويجب إطلاق مفاوضات يمكن أن تؤدي إلى الاعتراف بالأسد رئيساً انتقالياً». يقول مورفي ما يفكر به كثيرون هذه الأيام مقابل بعض الصقور الذين وصلوا الى حد الحديث عن احتمال اغتيال الأسد (راجع الفورين بوليسي).

ما قاله مورفي ونصرالله يلتقي تماما مع كلام مفاجئ من الناطق باسم الكرملين ديمتري بسكوف الذي قال إن «التدخل العسكري الروسي في سوريا يهدف الى تحريرها من الإرهابيين وبقاء الأسد». هذا تطور مهم في الموقف الروسي الذي كان يتجنب الحديث عن شخص الأسد.

أوروبياً، حققت زيارة وزير الخارجية التشيكي الى دمشق تقدماً في سياق بعض الانفتاح الغربي على سوريا، خصوصاً أن قدوم الزائر الأوروبي لم يحصل إلا بعد التنسيق الدقيق مع وزيرة خارجية الاتحاد الأوروبي فيديريكا موغيريني وفق معلومات دقيقة من الاتحاد.

عربياً، كشف التصويت المصري لمصلحة مشروع القرار الروسي في مجلس الأمن، ثم الإعلان السوري شبه الرسمي عن زيارة رئيس مكتب الأمن الوطني اللواء علي المملوك الى القاهرة، ثم نشر السفير السوري في القاهرة د. رياض سنيح مقالة في « الأهرام» بعنوان «مصر وسوريا رسالة الحق للبشرية»، أن ثمة موقفاً مصرياً يتغير يوماً بعد آخر حيال دمشق حتى ولو تخطى بعض الخطوط الحمراء الخليجية.

ولو توقفنا مع الخطاب الأخير للرئيس سعد الحريري نجد عنده أيضاً رغبةً في تحييد لبنان عن سوريا (خلافاً للانخراط السابق) ولكننا نجد أيضا تمهيداً لإعادة فتح العلاقات معها. هو قال: «إذا ما انتهت الأزمة واتّفق السوريون على نظامهم وبلدهم ودولتهم، نعود إلى علاقات طبيعية معها». ماذا لو اتفق السوريون على بقاء الأسد؟

ماذا، ثانياً، في العقبات؟

فيما كانت كل هذه الأجواء الإيجابية توحي بشيء من الأمل في المنطقة، وبينما كان الجيش السوري يرسل تعزيزات كبيرة الى جبهة حلب ومعه «حزب الله» بغطاء روسي كبير، بدأ وزير الدفاع الأميركي آشتون كارتر يتصدر واجهة المشهد الأميركي ويتحدث عن حتمية الدور التركي في العراق وسوريا. هل جاء يهدئ اندفاعة الأتراك نحو الموصل والتي تعارضها الحكومة العراقية، أم جاء يعيد احتضان تركيا في مسعى لسحبها من سياق التقارب الكبير من روسيا ووضع أسس جديدة للتوازن العسكري مع الروس في سوريا؟ الأرجح أن يكون هدفه الأول إعادة احتواء هذه الدولة الأطلسية على حساب المحيط العربي وألا يسهل عمل الروس.

ما إن ودّع كارتر تركيا، حتى وصل اليها أمير قطر الشيخ تميم، على أن يزور وزير الخارجية التركي غداً الثلاثاء الدوحة. هذه اللقاءات القطرية التركية أعقبت لقاءات تركية خليجية حصلت على خلفية التصادم الخطابي بين الرئيس التركي رجب طيب اردوغان ورئيس وزراء العراق حيدر العبادي.

ترافقت هذه التحركات الديبلوماسية والأمنية مع محاولات حثيثة لتوحيد الفصائل المقاتلة في سوريا، تماماً كما تزامنت مع اختراق «داعش» لكركوك في العراق ولمناطق في دير الزور وغيرها. واضح اذاً أن محاولة استكمال الدولة السورية السيطرة على حلب بالتعاون مع ايران و «حزب الله» وروسيا ستصطدم بمواجهة قد تكشف عن وجود صواريخ مضادة للطائرات.

أما على صعيد العلاقات الروسية الأميركية، فالواضح من تبادل الاتهامات الأخيرة بين الطرفين على خلفية الرغبة الروسية بمراقبة الانتخابات الأميركية، وما تخللها من تلويح أميركي بريطاني بفرض عقوبات جديدة على روسيا وسوريا، أن نهاية عهد أوباما لن تحمل جديداً كبيراً باستثناء تهدئة متقطعة في حلب وتقديم مساعدات إنسانية، وهي خطوات قد تنهار جميعها لو بدأت المعركة الكبرى لاستعادة شرق حلب قريباً.

ماذا، ثالثاً، في المعلومات:

لا شك بأن لقاء الحريري مع سفيرة الولايات المتحدة الأميركية والسفير الروسي في لبنان عشية إعلانه ترشيح عون كان استمزاجاً إيجابياً لرأي البلدين. لكنّ ثمة انقساماً واضحاً عن الأميركيين حيال وصول «حليف حزب الله» الى الرئاسة. فالبعض يعتبر أنه ما عاد مهماً من يصل، ما دام لبنان قد تحوّل الى «مخيم كبير للاجئين السوريين» ويجب مساعدته، والبعض الآخر يرى أن وصول عون سيعزز فرص «حزب الله» وإيران وروسيا في المنطقة. لعل التحفظ الذي أبداه وزير الخارجية الأميركي جون كيري لم يكن صدفة حتى ولو تم توضيحه لاحقاً من الخارجية الأميركية بالقول إن أميركا ستؤيد ما يختاره الشعب اللبناني. (لا ندري أين ترى للشعب كلمة في هذا البازار؟).

تفيد بعض المعلومات بأن جيفري فيلتمان نائب الأمين العام للأمم المتحدة للشؤون السياسية، ومساعد وزيرة الخارجية الأميركية سابقاً، عبّر منذ فترة وعبر قنوات اتصال مع مسؤولين لبنانيين وبعضهم من أصدقائه عن تحفظ حيال خطوة الحريري بترشيح عون. لعله بذلك يعبّر عن وجهة النظر الأميركية الرافضة أو المتحفظة. لعل هذا ما جعل رئيس اللقاء الديموقراطي وليد جنبلاط أقرب الى التحفظ بشأن عون بالرغم من تواصل إيجابي حصل يوم الثلاثاء الماضي بين الطرفين عبر مبعوث جنبلاطي الى الرابية. حين تعود السفيرة الأميركية من واشنطن ستحمل جواباً يعرف بعض تفاصيله لا شك قائد الجيش الجنرال جان قهوجي الموجود هناك.

أما على الصعيد الأوروبي فتقول مصادر من داخل الاتحاد إن «الجميع يتابع بدقة ترشيح عون مع حرص على عدم إبداء أي موقف لا سلبي ولا إيجابي، وإن الشعور الطاغي هو وجوب ملء الكرسي بأي ثمن باعتبار أن الدخول في تقييم المرشحين هو ترف في الوقت الراهن. وإن الأولوية للأمن والاستقرار ومعالجة موضوع اللاجئين».

ثمة تطور مهم حيال الأزمة السورية داخل الاتحاد الأوروبي يفيد أنه من الضروري انتظار الانتخابات الأميركية قبل أن ينخرط الاتحاد بتنشيط دوره في الأزمة السورية ووضع استراتيجية أوسع للمرحلة النهائية لكونها تجعل المرحلة الانتقالية أكثر سهولة. هنا يبرز رأيان، ففرنسا وبريطانيا تحاولان كبح جماح الاتحاد الراغب بالانفتاح على كل الفرقاء (بمن فيها الأسد نفسه) والذي كان من نتيجته إرسال وزير الخارجية التشيكي الى دمشق. تريد باريس ولندن مزيداً من التشدد حيال سوريا وروسيا. يقول مسؤول أوروبي إنه «إذا تمكّن الروس من تهدئة احتقان الرأي العام الدولي بخصوص حلب من خلال الهدنات التجميلية، يمكن أن يساعدوا أوباما في تمرير الشهرين الباقيين كما يرغب، أي من دون خطوات دراماتيكية. أما مسار لوزان الذي يجري استكماله فما هو إلا لإنقاذ ماء وجه الجميع عبر التسلي باقتراح ستيفان دي ميستورا بالفصل بين «النصرة» وبقية الفصائل. فالاقتراح يلقى تشكيكاً أوروبياً باعتباره غير قابل للتنفيذ…».

المنطقة اذاً تبدو في سباق مع الوقت، فإما أن تحسم الأمور في الأسبوعين المقبلين في لبنان وحلب، أو اننا سندخل في مرحلة من إدارة الأزمة والحروب. ربما لذلك ثمة من يسارع الى حسم الرئاسة اللبنانية في 31 الجاري والانتهاء من شرق حلب في الأسابيع القليلة المقبلة… هذا بالضبط ما يعنيه نصرالله بقوله للطرف الآخر: «إن الحالة الوحيدة التي تعيدنا الى لبنان هي انتصارنا في سوريا». هل ثمة أكثر من هذا الربط بين الملفين؟ أوليس هذا شرطاً مسبقاً أمام الحريري مقابل الكلام عن «الحياد»؟ وهل كلام الرئيس نبيه بري عن «قانون جاستا» وتلميحاته الإيجابية حيال السعودية في جنيف سوى محاولة لترطيب الأجواء قبل الدخول في نفق ما بعد الانتخابات الأميركية؟

اقرأ أيضاً

 للكاتب نفسه

Imam and Scholar Zafar Bangash: Staging the “Revolution”

In Gaza

Imam and scholar Zafar Bangash on: Islamophobia, Harper’s proposed draconian new anti-terrorism legislation (Bill C-51), and Canada’s military mission in Iraq and Syria. Bangash is a world-renowned Muslim scholar, editor of Crescent International Magazine, author, and imam at the York Regional Islamic Centre in Markham, Ontario

**note: from around 16:00, Zafar lays out the behind-the-scenes meetings which planned the war on Syria (aka the “uprising”):

-former French Foreign Minister, Roland Dumastwo years before 2011, was told by British officials  that Britain would launch operations in Syria, would France be interested in joining?

-Haythem Manna (Syrian opposition leader): in Feb 2011, meeting in ParisUS Ambassador to Israel, Dan Shapiro; US former ambassador to Lebanon, Jeffrey Feldman, Saudi’s then intelligence chief, Bandar bin Sultan…At the meeting, was decided Saudi and US would supply weapons to Syrian people and start uprising in small town called “Dara’a”… 10 km from Jordan border. Normally, uprisings start in major cities, not small towns where hardly anyone would pay attention. They started their uprising in Dara’a, because only 10 km from Jordanian border and they could smuggle weapons in… which they did.  The Syrian opposition leader (Manna): “I was dead against this because I knew if they armed the opposition in Syria, there’s going to be total chaos, the country will be destroyed, and we won’t achieve any of our objectives.”

-Craig Whitlock, Washington Post reporter, Apr 17, 2011US has been involved in supporting Syrian opposition groups from as early as 2005. Quoting sources from Wikileaks, because these were secret American documents that came out in public.

-Philip Giraldi, ex-CIA: Dec 19, 2011: Americans have been supplying weapons to the Syrian rebels through Turkey for many years.

Feb 23 (2015): an Iraqi MP publicly stated that the Iraqi army has shot down 2 British transport planes that was supplying weapons to ISIS terrorists in northern Iraq.-Nov 2014, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei stated: We have evidence that the US has dropped weapons–allegedly for Kurdish forces–in areas controlled by ISIS terrorists, on five different occasions. They can make a mistake twice, but not five times. Five times is a deliberate policy. It means they are actually supplying weapons to these people.

SEE EXCERPTS FROM BANGASH’S MAR 2015 ISIS takfiris: McCain-Obama’s offspring

“…Horrific though it was, the video was produced to the best of Hollywood standards. Who was behind filming such a fantastic video and that too in the war zone? More critically, who is backing and supporting the takfiris? Muslim leaders — the Rahbar, Imam Seyyed Ali Khamenei of Iran, Hizbullah leader Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah and Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir — have stated quite clearly that the US and its allies or their intelligence agencies — CIA and Mossad — are behind the creation, support, and training of the takfiris. The former Cuban leader Fidel Castro has described them as John McCain’s creation.

…The former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas, an international lawyer, had provided an interesting insight two years earlier when interviewed by French TV station LCP in June 2013. He told the station,

“I’m going to tell you something. I was in England two years before the violence in Syria [started in March 2011] on other business. I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was organizing an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer minister for foreign affairs, if I would like to participate. Naturally, I refused, I said I’m French, that doesn’t interest me.”

Dumas pointed the finger specifically at Britain but the US has been deeply involved in instigating conflict in Syria long before the 2011 eruption. There is ample proof of Washington’s involvement that will be addressed later but first let us consider what US officials are currently saying in public.

…the US and Turkey signed an agreement on February 19 to train “moderate” Syrian rebels on Turkish soil. This brought into the open what has been going on for several years. Similar arrangements are in place with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. Isn’t it interesting that the US always trains “moderate” rebels; after all it could hardly claim to be training “extremists” or “terrorists” but how would the US distinguish between “moderate” and “extremist” rebels?

This is not a new policy. Since October 2012, the CIA and US Special Forces have been training “moderate” Syrian rebels at the Safawi military base in Jordan near the Syrian and Iraqi borders.

…American involvement in instigating trouble in Syria predates this barbaric act by nearly a decade as reported by Craig Whitlock in the Washington Post. Citing WikiLeaks cables, he confirmed that the US was funnelling money to Syrian opposition groups as early as May 2005. (Craig Whitlock, Washington Post, April 17, 2011). The London-based satellite channel Barada TV was also set up with US funding in 2009 with the express purpose of beaming anti-government propaganda into Syria. Since the 2011 eruption, Barada TV has ramped up its propaganda as part of the imperialists’ agenda.

“Barada TV is closely affiliated with the Movement for Justice and Development (Harakah al-‘Adalah wa-al-Bana’ fi Suriyah), a London-based network of Syrian exiles. Classified US diplomatic cables show that the State Department has provided as much as $6 million to the group since 2006 (that is when the group came into existence!) to operate the satellite channel and finance other activities inside Syria,” reported Whitlock.

As reported by the former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas, the Syrian crisis was instigated from abroad. There is precise information available, courtesy Dr. Haytham al-Manna‘, a Syrian opposition figure. He revealed that a meeting was convened in a European capital (presumably Paris) in early February 2011 attended by Syrian opposition figures plus US ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro, former US ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman and then Saudi intelligence chief Bandar bin Sultan. It was decided that the “uprising” against the Damascus regime would be launched in Der‘a, a small nondescript Syrian town near the Jordanian border, and that weapons paid for by the Saudis and Americans would be smuggled into Der‘a. Dr. al-Manna‘, present at the meeting, was strongly opposed to militarizing the opposition movement fearing it would face a similar fate to the one that befell Hama in 1981. The conspirators had made up their minds and went ahead with the diabolical plot.

Saudi Arabia has admitted to sending weapons to the opposition via Jordan (RT, March 13, 2012). The Washington Post corroborated this by reporting triumphantly that the mercenaries “have begun receiving significantly more and better weapons … paid for by Persian Gulf nations and coordinated … by the US” (Washington Post, May 15, 2012).  Even the Mossad-linked Israeli website, debkafile reported that “The Syrian rebels have received their first ‘third generation’ anti-tank weapons. They are supplied by Saudi and Qatari intelligence agencies following a secret message from President Barack Obama.” (, May 22, 2012).

Writing in the American Conservative, ex-CIA agent Philip Giraldi admitted that the US was involved in Syria and explained how the plan operates, “NATO is already clandestinely engaged in the Syrian conflict, with Turkey taking the lead as US proxy. Ankara’s Foreign Minister, Ahmet Davutoglu [now prime minister], has openly admitted that his country is prepared to invade as soon as there is agreement among the Western allies to do so. The intervention would be based on humanitarian principles, to defend the civilian population based on the ‘responsibility to protect’ doctrine that was invoked to justify Libya.” (, December 19, 2011)

Giraldi further revealed, “Unmarked NATO warplanes are arriving at Turkish military bases close to… the Syrian border, delivering weapons from the late Muammar Gaddafi’s arsenals as well as volunteers from the Libyan Transitional National Council who are experienced in pitting local volunteers against trained soldiers… French and British Special Forces trainers are on the ground, assisting the Syrian rebels while the CIA and US Spec Ops are providing communications equipment and intelligence.”

Patrick Cockburn of the British daily, The Independent was even more specific saying British MI6, the CIA and Turkish intelligence are involved in training Syrian rebels to destabilize the government of President Bashar al-Asad. (The Independent, Sunday 13 April 2014).  Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky also corroborated this information. Appearing at the NBC News program, “Meet the Press” on June 22, 2014, Paul said the US has been funding ISIS allies and supporting the terrorist group in Syria. “They’re emboldened because we’ve been supporting them… It could be Assad [could have] wiped these people out months ago,” Senator Paul told NBC. “I personally believe that this group would not be in Iraq and would not be as powerful had we not been supplying their allies in the war.”

And as recently as October 2014, Mark Mazzetti of the New York Times reported that

“in April 2013, President Obama authorized the CIA to begin a program to arm the rebels at a base in Jordan, and more recently the administration decided to expand the training mission with a larger parallel Pentagon program in Saudi Arabia to train ‘vetted’ rebels to battle fighters of the Islamic State, with the aim of training approximately 5,000 rebel troops per year.” (New York Times, October 14, 2014.)

Rebel mercenary fighters have perpetrated horrible crimes from the start of the anti-government campaign in Syria. These have been confirmed by the UN-mandated Commission of Inquiry report (UN Commission of Inquiry report, February 2012) documenting torture, taking of hostages, and executions by armed opposition fighters, as well as Human Rights Watch (Human Rights Watch, March 20, 2012) that accused armed rebel fighters of “kidnappings, the use of torture and executions… of security force members, individuals identified as members of government-supported militias, and individuals identified as government allies and supporters.”

According to Spiegel Online, in the Baba Amr neighborhood of Homs, extremist groups have formed their own laws, courts and death squads. Quoting Abu Rami, a rebel commander in Baba Amir, Spiegel Online reported (March 29, 2012) that in Homs, his group had executed between 200 and 250 people.

Unlike the uprisings in other places — Bahrain and Yemen — the “uprising” in Syria is not indigenous; it is instigated from abroad. Like the turmoil visited upon Libya that left it in shambles including the horrific public lynching of Colonel Muammar Qaddafi by a Western-backed terrorist mob (we came, we saw, he died — Hillary Clinton), the war on Syria is also foreign-inspired and funded. Unlike Libya, however, the Syrian plot did not go according to plan. It was not for lack of trying, shortage of weapons or funding. The Syrian army and establishment have not disintegrated. Similarly, Syria’s allies — Russia, Iran and Hizbullah — have not abandoned it because the stakes are so high. The war on Syria is part of the diabolical plot to undermine and destroy the resistance front to Zionist Israel.

There are two policies at work: the US establishment’s need for perpetual wars, and the protection of Zionist Israel. The first policy has been frequently spelled out starting with the document titled the “Project for the New American Century (PNAC)” prepared in 1997 by what are commonly referred to as the neocons. The group consists of representatives of weapons manufacturers, major corporations and the Israeli lobby. The PNAC called for launching perpetual wars in the Muslim East as a response to a catalytic “Pearl Harbor-type” attack on the United States. This came in the form of 9/11 leading many analysts to dub the September 11, 2001 attacks as an “inside job.”

Soon thereafter, the Pentagon decided to take down seven countries, according to General Wesley Clark, a four-star US Army General who had served as NATO Commander in 1999. In an interview with Democracy Now radio program on March 7, 2007, General Clark revealed that he learned about the plan to attack seven countries during a visit to the Pentagon around September 20, 2001.

Countries on the list included Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and finally Iran. Looking at the mayhem in these countries — some have already been destroyed, such as Somalia and Libya — and others are in various stages of destruction, we can see that the plan is going according to script.

While saving Israel is not spelled out in clear terms, it is always referred to as the US’ “indispensable” or “strategic” ally. Nothing is spared — cash, weapons, and political and diplomatic support — to protect and advance the Zionist project. Zionist rulers can do no wrong even when they kill innocent children in Gaza, Lebanon or elsewhere in the region.

To justify the US’ endless war project, there is need for perpetual enemies. That is where the takfiri terrorists come into play. It is completely hypocritical of the US to claim that it is fighting the terrorists when there is ample proof that the terrorists receive direct support from Washington. While addressing foreign guests at a conference in November 2014, the Rahbar, Imam Seyyed Ali Khamenei of Iran revealed that on five different occasions, the US had dropped weapons to the takfiri groups in Iraq. Each time, the US claimed to have made a “mistake.” The Rahbar pointed out that one could accept a mistake once or twice, but five times stretches the limits of credulity.

The Americans have also made other “mistakes.” In May 2013, Senator John McCain illegally entered Syria from Turkey. There he met not only General Salim Idriss of the Free Syrian Army but also Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the man who has since declared himself the khalifah of all Muslims! Al-Baghdadi was photographed with McCain and it was released by McCain’s office in what they said was an inadvertent mistake. His office then put out the lame excuse that McCain could not know everyone he was meeting! Really?

Al-Baghdadi had been incarcerated at Camp Buca in Iraq from 2006–2009 and it was there that he was recruited. Given the long history of US plans to destabilize and overthrow the government of President Bashar al-Asad in Syria, it is highly unlikely that McCain was unaware of who he was meeting from among the rebels in Syria. Besides, the US has been financing Syrian opposition groups since 2005.

The US launches strikes against Muslim countries killing innocent people that help recruit more people to the takfiri cause. The takfiris perpetrate horrible crimes — public beheadings, burning people alive, etc — to intensify humanity’s hatred for them, and by extension all Muslims, and to build support for more US wars. The takfiris are in fact an essential part of the American and Western establishment’s plan for perpetual war.”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian 


The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Dr. Shaaban reveal the reasons for the Syrian war and the prospects for a peaceful solution



Damascus, 8/1/2014 ~ Presidential Political and Media Advisor Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban stressed that Syria agreed to attend Moscow Meeting to hold talks on the bases of a Syrian-Syrian dialogue, indicating that what will take place is a consultative preliminary meeting during which the state and the opposition will sit to the table to consult together and discuss the bases according to which a dialogue conference will be held.

“What is suggested today is a dialogue between those who represent the Government and the people, and those who represent the opposition in Moscow, and Syria agreed on this Syrian-Syrian dialogue, indicating that there is more hope than what it was in Geneva”, Shabaan said in an interview with al-Mayadeen TV on Wednesday.

She added that the problem with Geneva was that those who target Syria were meeting with the opposition party everyday and they were telling them what they must say, reiterating that there is no comparison between the keenness of the Syrian state on Syria and some parties which ally with those who are against the country.

“The Americans want to see what Russia can do during the meeting (in Moscow), and if they see that the issue is suitable and serves their interests, they might join it and if they found that it doesn’t suit them, they can announce a different opinion, therefore, the US hasn’t officially declared till now any opinion in regard to the dialogue in Moscow,” Shaaban said.

She indicated that during her meeting with Jeffrey Feltman and Former US President Jimmy Carter in Norway, she felt that the Americans have at least started to understand the mistakes which they have committed in Syria and that they are convinced that the track which they have adopted will not lead to any place.

Shaaban added that Feltman was almost desperate regarding the opposition and he said

”We know that President al-Assad will stay, but we are searching for a way how to deal with that, ” While Carter was very enthusiastic to change the US stance and he announced in his deliberations before the conference which Shaaban attended that he advises the US administration “not to ask President al-Assad to step down.”

“They are searching for a road and they are not sure on which road they will walk … We have a problem as Arabs which is that we think that the West is always clear, know and ready…”NO”…They are confused,” Shaaban reiterated.

She clarified that what is taking place in the region should be seen from the perspective of a historical track and therefore, we can’t say that the war will end soon or will not end, but we can say that what is more difficult has ended, affirming the importance of recognizing the historic value of the Syrian people’s sacrifices, who sacrificed for a very importance issue which is Syria’ existence.

Shaaban said that the political move and atmosphere and the public international feeling indicate that the world has started to appreciate and understand Syria’s stance.

She affirmed that the performance of the Syrian people, army and government has been honorable in facing this war, it’s aim has been targeting the identity of Syria, indicating that Syria is more comforted on the political and military levels and on all tracks.

Shaaban said that those who destroy factories, schools and markets can’t be called opposition as the opposition all around the world is the opposition which is keen on preserving the homeland and there is no armed opposition in the world or an opposition which kill and destroy.

She stressed that we must get out of the notion of opposition, which has been made to us by the West to reach the concept of opposition in which the West believes regarding itself which is a national opposition that is keen on preserving the homeland and its people and institutions.

Commenting on the numbers of foreign takfiri terrorists in Syria and the concerns of the Western countries that they will return to them , Shaaban said that it is difficult to have specific numbers due to the nature of their existence in areas where they commit crimes, saying “The last number I have known is 20 thousand terrorists and if we include the Arabs there will be 60 thousand Arab and foreign fighters in Syria.”

She indicated that Syria has rejected security cooperation with the West and the US if it would’nt be accompanied by a political cooperation, adding that with regard to the airstrikes against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq “ISIS” “They tell us before striking a certain place”.

Shaaban stressed that what is required from Syria internationally and regionally is what has been always required from it, which is not to be a country of resistance and not to have an ideological army or to have an independent decision, adding that the independence of decision and will are the main targets of this war.

She added that we must believe that the Arab-Israeli conflict is the map which directs all of these destruction in the Arab world, indicating that terrorists have been going to the Israeli hospitals since a year ago and that what is taking place in Quneitra and Golan proves that Israel is involved in terrorism which is targeting Syria.

She called upon the Arabs to unify their ranks in the face of terrorism which targets all of them, saying that the Zionist enemy boasts of occupying Palestine or its international relations such as during its aggression against Gaza in 2014 when it was proud of its relations with the Arabs.

Shaaban added that there has been no noticeable change in the stances of Saudi Arabia, Qatar or Turkey which sees the region from an Ottoman viewpoint, not only Syria, considering that what is taking place is a Turkish aggression against Syria as Turkey finances terrorists and supplies them with weapons and facilitates their entrance to Syria.

She indicated that the profits of Turkey which came as a result of the war against Syria have exceeded USD 30 billion through what has been stolen from the Syrian factories, heritage and money.

Regarding the Egyptian stance, Shaaban said

” We have always been talking positively about Egypt which is a brotherly country and the Egyptian Army is the brother of the Syrian Army…There is a history of amity between the two countries, and Egypt is passing through difficult circumstances now and our circumstances are also difficult, yet the mutual respect, amity and desire might allow our relations to witness a positive development in the future.”

Shaaban also reviewed many secrets and documents about what has been mentioned in her book “Ten Years with Hafez al-Assad”, particularly about the Syrian-Israeli negotiations and the US-Syrian relations.


Dr. Shaaban reveal the reasons for the Syrian war and the prospects for a peaceful solution


يحدث اليوم _ حميدي العبد الله | تلاقي

مع الحدث_ الوزير السابق على قانصوه | المنار


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Hagel: Hizbullah is a threat to US interests in ME


Posted on 

doublespeak[1]On November 15, 2014, US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel in aspeech he delivered at Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, compared Lebanese Islamic Resistance Hizbullah with North Korea and Al-Qaeda.

For unknown reason, Hagel forgot to includeISIS  among his list of “dangerously provocative and terrorists non-state actors”.

In September, Cuban leader Fidel Castro claimed that ISIS is a creation of the US and Israel.

The event was the brainchild of the new publisher of Jew-owned The Washington Post, Fredrick J. Ryan Jr., former Chief of Staff for president Ronald Reagan (1989-95).

In 2007, Ryan co-founded Politico, a pro-Israel website and newspaper.

Interestingly, in Summer 2006, Chuck Hagel received the honor of being an “anti-Semite” for slamming the Zionist regime’s unprovoked retaliation against Hizbullah. Hagel wrote in his 2008 book, ‘America: Our Next Chapter’, that military retaliation – rightful or not – is not a political strategy that can end the threat posed by non-state groups”.

In May 2014, Lebanese prime minister Tammam Salam welcomed Iranian offer to provide military aid to Lebanon Armed Forces to defend the nation from future Israeli invasion and the US-funded foreign insurgents fighting in Syria.

Under pressure from the Jewish Lobby, Washington warned Lebanon over Iranian weapon donation. To counter Iranian donation, America’s top Arab puppet, the Saudi ‘royal’ offered $3 billion worth French weapons for Lebanese army. On July 3, 2014, Israeli news website Al-Monitor reported that the French weapons would be useless against Israel.

The French are approaching this issue from the standpoint of the interests of Israel and other international matters, mainly how to maintain the status quo in Southern Lebanon (Hizbullah base) in the face of Israeli attack. The French wouldn’t give Lebanon any sensitive weapon system or advanced technology that Israel might consider a threat,” reported Al-Monitor.

Hagel agrees with Barack Obama and the pro-Israel lobby, whom he called the “Jewish Lobby” as a Senator, that Iran must not be allowed to become the second nuclear nation in the Middle East and pose a threat to Israel, the only regional nuclear power. However, he said in 2006 that a US military strike on Iran to stop its nuclear program is not a “viable, feasible or responsible option”.

Hagel supports continuing US funding of such Israeli missile defense programs as Iron Dome and the Arrow interceptor, but doesn’t favor increasing annual military aid ($3 billion) to the Zionist entity.

Chuck Hagel who visited India in August 2014, called for a closer military ties between the two countries against China. India has become world’s largestimporter of arms. Its major arms suppliers are Russia, United States, Israel and France.

Jeffrey Feltman, former US ambassador to Lebanon and currently Ban Ki-moon’s top adviser on Middle East, is America’s top Israeli lobbyist. He reportedly told his friends at the US State Department that Israel has failed to defeat Hizbullah and the US must disarm Hizbullah.

Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, PhD, is a Lebanese academic, political analyst and author of the book, ‘Hizbullah: Politics and Religion’. On August 8, 2012, she wrote an Op-Ed, entitled Khamenei and Hizbullah: Leading in Spirit, in which she debunked several Zionist lies about Hizbullah-Iran relation.

On October 12, 2006, Alastair Crooke and Mark Perry co-authored an investigative article at Asia Time, detailing How Hizbullah Defeated Israel.

Listen to Scott McConnell, American journalist and founder-editor of the American Conservative, magazine on US-Israel “brotherly relationship”.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

%d bloggers like this: