Britain says response to Syria chemical attack possible without unanimous UN backing

 

Updated: 1:55 PM

 

 

Members of the British Royal Navy frigate HMS Westminster (Reuters / Jon Nazca)

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/news/uk-response-without-un-backing-979/

A response to the use of chemical weapons in Syria is possible without the unanimous consent of the UN Security Council, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague has said.

“I would argue yes it is, otherwise it might be impossible to respond to such outrages, such crimes, and I don't think that's an acceptable situation," Hague said on BBC radio, when asked whether it would be possible to respond to the use of chemical weapons without the backing of the UN Security Council.

Meanwhile, Britain’s Royal Navy is reportedly moving ships into place for a possible strike with the US on Syria in the next few days.

Citing government sources, British daily The Telegraph wrote that as military commanders were discussing a list of potential targets, the Royal Navy is deploying vessels for a series of cruise missile strikes on Syria.

Since last week’s chemical weapons attack on a Damascus suburb that left over 300 civilians dead, political rhetoric has been building against President Bashar Assad, alleging the regime carried out the attack against its own citizens. On Sunday, Britain added its voice to the chorus of countries urging for intervention in Syria.

Foreign Secretary William Hague condemned the Assad regime, stating that “all the evidence points in one direction.”

"We cannot, in the 21st century, allow the idea that chemical weapons can be used with impunity, that people can be killed in this way, and there are no consequences for it," he said.

Branding Assad a dictator, Hague stressed a “strong response” was essential in light of the use of chemical weapons to “slaughter” Syrian citizens.

Syrian President Bashar Assadresponded to the calls for an international reaction to the chemical attack, warning that any international intervention in Syria would end in failure.

"The comments [accusing the regime of using chemical weapons] made by politicians in the West and other countries are an insult to common sense... It is nonsense," Assad said, adding the accusations were completely “political.”

Russia also urged caution, calling on Washington to avoid “repeating past mistakes.”

“All of this makes one recall the events that happened 10 years ago, when, using false information about Iraqis having weapons of mass destruction, the US bypassed the United Nations and started a scheme whose consequences are well known to everyone,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Moscow has also said a UN investigation into last Wednesday’s attack is of paramount importance and it was essential that its results were not influenced before time.

A team of UN experts arrived at the site of the attack on Monday in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta, however doubts have already been raised over the validity of an investigation.

Washington has already alleged that an investigation would be “too late to be credible.” The British government echoed the US, stating that valuable evidence could have been destroyed in subsequent bombing of the area or tampered with.

"The fact is that much of the evidence could have been destroyed by that artillery bombardment. Other evidence could have degraded over the last few days and other evidence could have been tampered with," Hague told reporters on Saturday.

The toxic gas attack in Ghouta triggered a wave of media hysteria with mixed reports alleging that thousands had been killed. On Saturday, French charity Medcins sans Frontieres (Doctors without Borders) said that 355 people had died and over a thousand were exhibiting systems related to neurotoxic poisoning. However, the non-profit organization said it was impossible to discern who was behind the attack.

--------------------------------------------

Saudi spy chief hails UK role in persistent Syrian civil war

 

 

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/26/320534/saudi-spy-chief-hails-uk-role-in-syria/

Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar Bin Sultan has in a secret meeting briefed Britain’s MI6 chief Sir Robert Sawers on Riyadh’s role in stoking the Syrian civil war and thanked London for its strategic cooperation to that end.

"At the meeting, the Saudi intelligence chief briefed Sawers on Riyadh's latest moves on Syria, including the supply of over 400 tons of weapons to the militants in Syria via Turkey," Fars News Agency quoted unnamed sources as saying.

“We have made the Syrian army engage in a civil war and of course this strategic mission could not be accomplished without your (MI6) cooperation,” the source quoted Prince Bandar as saying during the meeting.

According to the report, the Saudi National Security Council Secretary and Intelligence Chief also reiterated that his country is sending the Salafi and other extremist fighters to Syria to get them killed and trigger religious discord among different Muslims groups in the region.

"The Prince also reminded the different advantages of the Saudi plan in Syria, saying that extremist groups, including the Salafis, have been engaged in the war in Syria and killed in there, while the Lebanese Hezbollah movement has also been pushed into direct confrontation with radical Sunni Muslims," the source said.

Prince Bandar also reportedly ensured Sawers of control over the extremist mercenaries in Syria so that they do not turn up against Saudi Arabia and its western allies.

Lebanon’s Assafir newspaper reported back in June that Prince Bandar has been an intermediary between the western governments and the Syrian militants to deliver heavy weapons to the terrorists.

--------------------------------------

Updated: 2013 August 26, 1:55 PM

 

US cannot afford to wait for UN to attack Syria: Officials

 

 

US President Barack Obama meets with his national security team

 

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/26/320575/us-cannot-afford-to-wait-for-un-to-attack-syria/

Rep. Eliot Engel (NY), the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has said “this is time for us” to launch cruise missile strikes on Syria, and that the US government cannot afford to wait for the United Nations.

“The world is a better place when the United States takes leadership; this is time for us to do this. I hope we’ll do it soon,” the American lawmaker said on Fox News Sunday.

A growing number of Republicans and Democrats in Congress are urging President Barack Obama to approve military action against Syria following reports of a deadly chemical attack in the suburbs of Damascus last week.

Engel said that the United States had to respond quickly and could not afford to wait for the United Nations.

“We could even destroy the Syrian Air Force if we wanted to… We have to move and we have to move quickly.”

Other senior US officials have also indicated that instead of seeking a UN approval for military action, Washington could work with its partners such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or the Arab League.

"We'll consult with the UN. They're an important avenue. But they're not the only avenue," a senior administration official said.

The Syrian government has allowed UN inspectors to visit a site that allegedly came under chemical attack on Wednesday. Obama administration officials, however, have dismissed as too late the Syrian offer.

Although there is still no evidence to blame the chemical attack on the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a senior administration official said there was “very little doubt” that Damascus was behind the attack.

“Based on the reported number of victims, reported symptoms of those who were killed or injured, witness accounts and other facts gathered by open sources, the US intelligence community, and international partners, there is very little doubt at this point that a chemical weapon was used by the Syrian regime against civilians in this incident,” the unnamed official said in a written statement on Sunday, as reported by the New York Times.

The Syrian government and the army categorically denied any role in Wednesday’s chemical attack which killed hundreds of people. Russia, a key ally of Syria, insists that the attack was "clearly provocative in nature," and that it was staged by foreign-backed militant groups to incriminate the Assad government.

In recent days, the Pentagon has moved more warships into place in the eastern Mediterranean Sea and American war planners have updated strike targets that include government and military installations inside Syria, officials said.

President Obama met with his national security advisers at the White House over the weekend to discuss “a range of options” for Syria, but officials said late Sunday that the president had yet to decide how to proceed.

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel reiterated Sunday that the Pentagon has prepared “options for all contingencies” and is ready to use force if the president gives the green-light.

Meanwhile, the US top military leader is in Jordan to discuss possible strikes on neighboring Syria.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey was set to meet with his Jordanian counterpart and other regional defense chiefs during his visit.

"The exchange is designed to increase the collective understanding of the impact of regional conflicts on nations, foster ongoing dialogue and improve security relationships," Defense Department spokeswoman Lt. Col. Cathy Wilkinson said.

President Obama said last year that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government was “a red line” that would provoke a military response

 

 

Read More

Russia warns US of extremely dangerous fallout of strike on Syria

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/26/320519/russia-warns-us-against-attack-on-syria/

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has warned the United States against the ‘extremely dangerous consequences’ of military action against Syria.

Lavrov made the remarks during a telephone conversation with US Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday.

“Sergei Lavrov drew attention to the extremely dangerous consequences of a possible new military intervention for the whole Middle East and North Africa region,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

It added that Moscow was “deeply alarmed” by Washington’s statement about its readiness to intervene in Syria.

Foreign Minister Lavrov urged restraint during the conversation with John Kerry, the statement said.

US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said on August 23 that the Pentagon was positioning military forces as part of “contingency options” provided to US President Barack Obama regarding Syria.

France and the Israeli regime have also called for military action against the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

Hagel’s comments have been interpreted as a tacit suggestion that the US may be preparing for a military strike on Syria. The US defense secretary repeated similar remarks on Sunday during a visit to Malaysia.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said in a recent interview with the Russian newspaper Izvestia that any military intervention by the US would end in “failure.”

The United Nations says over 100,000 people have been killed and a total of 7.8 million of others displaced due to the turmoil that has gripped Syria since March 2011.


 

Read More

Pentagon considering strikes on Syria Officials

 

Update: 2013 August 24

 



Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/23/320085/us-considering-strikes-on-syria/

In response to recent allegations of chemical attacks in Syria, the Pentagon has begun refining its military options for possible strikes in the Middle Eastern country, US officials said.

Officers at the Pentagon said they were updating target lists for potential airstrikes on a number of government and military installations in Syria, should President Barack Obama give the green-light to a military assault, officials said Thursday, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The military options being revised at the Pentagon range from possible strikes on Syrian military "delivery capabilities and systems" to command-and-control facilities and artillery batteries, officials said.

US officials, however, said the purpose of the military options would not be "regime change" but to "punish" President Bashar al-Assad if there was conclusive evidence that his government was behind the alleged chemical attacks.

Syria's foreign-backed opposition claimed on Wednesday that around 1,300 people were killed in a government chemical attack on militant strongholds in the Damascus suburbs of Ain Tarma, Zamalka and Jobar.

Washington has said that it does not have all the facts to determine the veracity of that claim.

US State Department spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said on Thursday that President Obama had directed the US intelligence community to gather information about the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria.

"At this time, right now, we are unable to conclusively determine CW (chemical weapons) use," Psaki said. "We are doing everything possible in our power to nail down the facts."

Other administration officials used a stronger language when talking to the media about the incident.

"There are strong indications there was a chemical weapons attack-clearly by the government," an unnamed senior administration official was quoted as saying by the Wall Street Journal. "But we do need to do our due diligence and get all the facts and determine what steps need to be taken."

The Syrian government and the army categorically denied any role in the alleged chemical attack.

In March, dozens of people were killed in a chemical attack in the northern province of Aleppo. A Russian-led inquiry said militants were behind the deadly attack.

---------------------------

 

Russia slams “Unacceptable” calls to use force in Syria

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/23/320107/russia-slams-calls-to-use-force-in-syria/

Russia has slammed as “unacceptable” calls by some European countries for use of force against the Syrian government, following claims that it had used chemical weapons in a recent deadly attack.

In a statement released on Friday by the country’s Foreign Ministry, it said Moscow is against further propaganda targeting the Syrian regime.

"Against the background of another anti-Syrian wave of propaganda, we believe calls from some European countries to apply pressure on the UN Security Council and already now take a decision on the use of force are unacceptable," Russian Foreign Ministry said in the statement.

In addition, Russian Foreign Ministry said evidence was mounting that the attack was "clearly provocative in nature" and that footage posted online claiming to incriminate the Syrian regime had been posted before the chemical attack took place. It also accused the insurgents of "directly impeding an objective investigation" of the incident.

There were also calls by the Ministry earlier on Friday for Takfiri militants operating in Syria to “ensure safe access” for the UN investigation team to the area where chemical weapons were allegedly used.

The head of the so-called Syrian National Coalition, George Sabra, claimed on August 21 that 1,300 people were killed in a government chemical attack on militant strongholds in Damascus suburbs of Ain Tarma, Zamalka and Jobar.

However, the Syrian government vehemently dismissed the baseless claims, saying the new accusations were fabricated to distract the visiting team of the UN chemical weapons experts and to cover up militants’ losses.

Meanwhile, the UN children’s agency, UNICEF, reported on the same day that one million Syrian children now live as refugees abroad and another two million are displaced within the country as a result of the ongoing fighting.

According to the UN, more than 100,000 people have been killed and millions of others displaced in Syria since March 2011.

----------------------------

Update: 2013 August 24

 

 

US positioning forces for possible military action on Syria - Hagel

 

 

 

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/24/320182/hagel-says-us-ready-for-war-on-syria/

Pentagon chief Chuck Hagel says the United States was positioning naval forces and assets in case President Barack Obama decides to order a military strike against Syria.

"The Defense Department has responsibility to provide the president with options for all contingencies," Hagel told reporters aboard his plane en route to Malaysia on Friday.

"And that requires positioning our forces, positioning our assets, to be able to carry out different options - whatever options the president might choose," he was quoted as saying by Reuters.

His remarks come after some American defense officials said earlier on Friday that Washington was considering military options against Syria over the allegations of the chemical weapons use by the Syrian government.

An unnamed defense official said the USS Mahan is set to stay in the region after it had finished its deployment and was due to head back to its home base in Norfolk, Virginia.

When asked if it was fair to report that the US had moved assets, Hagel said, "I don't think I said that. I said that we're always having to prepare - as we give the president options - prepare our assets and where they are and the capability of those assets to carry out the contingencies we give the president."

On Wednesday, Syria's foreign-backed opposition claimed that around 1,300 people were killed in a government chemical attack on militant strongholds. The Syrian government denied the allegations.

A team sent by the United Nations is set to investigate the latest claim of chemical weapons use outside Damascus.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Thursday asked Syria to allow UN inspectors to investigate "without delay" the alleged chemical attack.

Meanwhile, President Barack Obama said the United States cannot attack Syria without a UN mandate for the allegations.

"If the US goes in and attacks another country without a UN mandate and without clear evidence that can be presented, then there are questions in terms of whether international law supports it. Do we have the coalition to make it work? And, you know, those are considerations that we have to take into account," he said in an interview with CNN on Friday.

 

 

 

 

Read More

Bloodbath that is not a bloodbath - Why Egypt is doomed

 

 

Egyptians mourn over bodies wrapped in shrouds at a mosque in Cairo on August 15, 2013 (AFP Photo / Mahmoud Khaled)

By: Pepe Escobar

Source: Russia Today
http://rt.com/op-edge/egypt-protests-terror-muslim-brotherhood-526/

Egypt's ‘bloodbath that is not a bloodbath’ has shown that the forces of hardcore suppression and corruption reign supreme, while foreign interests - the House of Saud, Israel and the Pentagon - support the military's merciless strategy.

Stop. Look at the photos. Linger on dozens of bodies lined up in a makeshift morgue. How can the appalling bloodbath in Egypt be justified? Take your pick. Either it’s Egypt’s remix of Tiananmen Square, or it’s the bloodbath that is not a bloodbath, conducted by the leaders of the coup that is not a coup, with the aim of fighting “terror”.

It certainly was not a crowd clearing operation – as in the New York Police Department ‘clearing’Occupy Wall Street. As a Sky journalist tweeted, it was more like “a major military assault largely on unarmed civilians”, using everything from bulldozers to tear gas to snipers.

Thus the scores indiscriminately killed – with crossfire estimates ranging from the low hundreds (the “interim government”) to at least 4,500 (the Muslim Brotherhood), including at least four journalists and the 17-year-old Asmaa, daughter of top Muslim Brotherhood politician Mohamed El Beltagy.

El Beltagy, before being arrested, said, crucially, “If you do not take to the streets, he [as in General Abdul-Fattah al-Sisi, the leader of the coup that is not a coup who appointed the interim government] will make the country like Syria.”

Wrong. Sisi is not Bashar al-Assad. Don’t expect passionate Western calls for “targeted strikes” or a no-fly zone over Egypt. He may be a military dictator killing his own people. But he’s one of “our” bastards.

What we say goes

Let’s look at the reactions. The lethargic poodles of the European Union called for “restraint”and described it all as “extremely worrying.” A White House statement said the interim government should “respect human rights” – which can be arguably interpreted as the Manning/Snowden/droning of Pakistan and Yemen school of human rights.

That pathetic excuse for a diplomat, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, at least was blunt: “Egypt is an important partner for NATO through the Mediterranean Dialogue.” Translation: the only thing we really care about is that those Arabs do as we say.

 

A man grieves as he looks at one of many bodies laid out in a make shift morgue after Egyptian security forces stormed two huge protest camps at the Rabaa al-Adawiya and Al-Nahda squares where supporters of ousted president Mohamed Morsi were camped, in Cairo, on August 14, 2013 (AFP Photo / Mosaab El-Shamy)

Stripped of all rhetoric – indignant or otherwise – the key point is that Washington won’t cut its $1.3 billion annual aid to Sisi’s army no matter what. Wily Sisi has declared a “war on terror”. The Pentagon is behind it. And the Obama administration is tagging along – reluctantly or not.

Now let’s see who’s in revolt. Predictably, Qatar condemned it; after all Qatar was bankrolling the Morsi presidency. The Islamic Action Front, the political wing of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, encouraged Egyptians to keep protesting to “thwart the conspiracy” by the former regime – as in Mubarakists without Mubarak.

Turkey – which also supports the Muslim Brotherhood - urged the UN Security Council and the Arab League to act quickly to stop a “massacre”; as if the UN and the Saudi-controlled Arab League would interrupt their three-hour-long expense account lunches to do anything.

Iran – correctly - warned of the risk of civil war. That does not mean that Tehran is blindly supporting the Muslim Brotherhood – especially after Morsi had incited Egyptians to join a jihad against Assad in Syria. What Tehran has noted is that the civil war is already on.

Let’s aim for the kill

“Byzantine” does not even begin to explain the blame game. The bloodbath that is not a bloodbath happened as the Sisi-appointed “government” had promised it would engage in a military-supported “transition”that would be politically all-inclusive.

Yet, fed up with six weeks of protests denouncing the “coup that is not a coup,” the interim government changed the narrative and decided to take no prisoners.

According to the best informed Egyptian media analyses, Deputy Prime Minister Ziad Baha Eldin and Vice President for foreign affairs Mohamed ElBaradei wanted to go soft against the protesters, while Interior Minister Gen. Mohammad Ibrahim Mustafa and the Defense Minister - Sisi himself - wanted to go medieval.

The first step was to pre-emptively blame the Muslim Brotherhood for the bloodshed – just as the Muslim Brotherhood blamed Jemaah Islamiyah for deploying Kalashnikovs and burning churches and police stations.

 

An Egyptian woman mourns over the body of her daughter wrapped in shrouds at a mosque in Cairo on August 15, 2013 (AFP Photo / Khaled Desouki)

A key reason to launch the “bloodbath that is not a bloodbath” this Wednesday was an attempt by the Muslim Brotherhood to march on the perennially dreaded Interior Ministry. Hardcore Ibrahim Mustafa would have none of it.

Sisi’s minions appointed 25 provincial governors, of which 19 are generals, in perfect timing to “reward” the top military echelon and thus solidify the Egyptian “deep state”, or actually police state. And to crown the “bloodbath that is not a bloodbath,” Sisi’s minions declared martial law for a month. Under these circumstances, the resignation of Western darling ElBaradei won’t make Sisi lose any sleep.

The original spirit of Tahrir Square is now dead and buried , as a Yemeni miraculously not targeted by Obama’s drones, Nobel Peace Prize winner Tawakkul Karman, pointed out.

The key question is who profits from a hyper-polarized Egypt, with a civil war pitting the well-organized, fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood against the military-controlled “deep state”.

Both options are equally repulsive (not to mention incompetent). Yet the local winners are easily identifiable: the counter-revolution, as in the fulool – diehard Mubarakists – a bunch of corrupt oligarchs, and most of all the deep state itself.

Hardcore repression rules. Corruption rules. And foreign domination rules (as in Saudi Arabia, who’s now paying most of the bills, alongside the UAE).

Internationally, the big winners are Saudi Arabia (displacing Qatar), Israel (because the Egyptian army is even more docile than the Brotherhood), and – who else – the Pentagon, the Egyptian army’s pimp. Nowhere in the Milky Way this House of Saud/Israel/Pentagon axis can be spun as “good for the Egyptian people”.

Sheikh Al-Torture is our man

A quick recap is in order. In 2011, the Obama administration never said, “Mubarak must go”until the last minute. Hilary Clinton wanted a “transition” led by CIA asset and spy chief Omar Suleiman – widely known in Tahrir Square as “Sheikh al-Torture”.

 

Reporters run for cover during clashes between Muslim Brotherhood supporters of Egypt's ousted president Mohamed Morsi, and police in Cairo on August 14, 2013 (AFP Photo / Mosaab El-Shamy)

Then a Washington inside joke was that the Obama administration had gleefully become a Muslim Brotherhood cheerleader (allied with Qatar). Now, like a yo-yo, the Obama administration is weighing on how to spin the new narrative - the ‘loyal’Egyptian army courageously wiping out the “terrorist” Muslim Brotherhood to “protect the revolution.”

There was never any revolution to begin with; the head of the snake (Mubarak) was gone, but the snake remained alive and kicking. Now it’s met the new snake, same as the old snake. Additionally, it’s so easy to sell to the uninformed galleries the Muslim Brotherhood = al-Qaeda equation.

Pentagon supremo Chuck Hagel was glued on the phone with Sisi as the July 3 “coup that is not a coup” was taking place. Pentagon spin would want us to believe that Sisi promised Hagel he would be on top of things in a heartbeat. Virtually 100% of the Beltway agreed. Thus the official Washington spin of “coup that is not a coup.”Tim Kaine from Virginia, at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, even extolled those model democracies, the UAE and Jordan, in their enthusiasmfor the “coup that is not a coup.”

It’s essential to outline the five countries that have explicitly endorsed the “coup that is not a coup.” Four of them are GCC petro-monarchies (members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, also known as Gulf Counter-Revolution Club); Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait and Bahrain. And the fifth is that little monarchy, Jordan, the GCC wants to annex to the Gulf.

Even more pathetic than Egypt’s so-called liberals, some leftists, some Nasserists and assorted progressives defending Sisi’s bloodlust has been the volte-face of Mahmoud Badr, the founder of Tamarrod – the movement that spearheaded the massive demonstrations that led to Morsi’s ouster. In 2012, he blasted Saudi Arabia. After the coup, he prostrated himself in their honor. At least he knows who’s paying the bills.

And then there’s Ahmed al-Tayyeb, the Grand Imam of al-Azhar, the Vatican of Sunni Islam. He said, “Al-Azhar…did not know about the methods used for the dispersal of the protests except through media channels.” Nonsense; he has repeatedly praised Sisi

 

Egyptian Muslim brotherhood supporters of Egypt's ousted president Mohamed Morsi evacuate a wounded man during clashes with riot police at Cairo's Mustafa Mahmoud Square after security forces dispersed supporters Morsi on August 14, 2013 (AFP Photo / Str)

Feel free to adore my eyelashes

There’s no other way of saying it; from Washington’s point of view, Arabs can kill each other to Kingdom Come, be it Sunnis against Shiites, jihadis against secularists, peasants against urbanites, and Egyptians against Egyptians. The only thing that matters is the Camp David agreements; and nobody is allowed to antagonize Israel.

So it’s fitting that Sisi’s minions in boots asked Israel to keep their drones near the border, as they need to pursue their “war on terror” in the Sinai. For all practical purposes, Israel runs the Sinai.

But then there’s the cancellation of a delivery of F-16s to Sisi’s army. In real life, every US weapons sale across the Middle East has to be “cleared” with Israel. So a case can be made that Israel – for the moment - is not exactly sure what Sisi is really up to.

It’s quite instructive to read what Sisi thinks of “democracy” – as demonstrated when he was at the US War College. He’s essentially an Islamist – but most of all he craves power. And the MB is standing in his way. So they have to be disposed of.

Sisi’s “war on terror” is arguably a roaring success as a PR stunt to legitimize his run for a popular mandate. He’s trying to pose as the new Nasser. He’s Sisi the Savior, surrounded by a bunch of Sisi groupies. A columnist wrote in Al-Masry Al-Youm that Sisi doesn't even need to issue an order; it’s enough to “just flutter his eyelashes”. The Sisi-for-president campaign is already on.

Anyone familiar with US-propped 1970s tin-pot Latin American dictators is able to spot one. This is no Savior. This is no more than an Al-Sisi-nator – the vainglorious tin-pot ruler of what my colleague Spengler bluntly defined as a banana republic without the bananas.

About: Pepe Escobar

Pepe Escobar is the roving correspondent for Asia Times/Hong Kong, an analyst for RT and TomDispatch, and a frequent contributor to websites and radio shows ranging from the US to East Asia

 

Read More

Obama NOT to reduce spying

 

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/11/318206/obama-not-to-reduce-spying/

We’ve spent much of the afternoon detailing some of President Obama’s statements concerning his response to the NSA surveillance revelations, combined with some of the documents released by the administration. But a key point in all of this is highlighted in the Associated Press’s coverage of the press conference: President Obama flat out admitted that this was about appeasing a public that doesn’t trust the administration, not about reducing the surveillance.

President Barack Obama made it clear Friday he has no intention of stopping the daily collection of American phone records. And while he offered “appropriate reforms,” he blamed government leaks for creating distrust of his domestic spying program.

In an afternoon news conference, the president acknowledged the domestic spying has troubled Americans and hurt the country’s image abroad. But he called it a critical counterterrorism tool.

Even more to the point, his comments represent a fundamental misunderstanding of why the public doesn’t trust the government. That’s because he keeps insisting that the program isn’t being abused and that all of this collection is legal. But, really, that’s not what the concern is about. Even though we actually know that the NSA has a history of abuse (and other parts of the intelligence community before that), a major concern is that scooping up so much data is considered legal in the first place. So, when President Obama says that we should blindly trust the government not to abuse the data, that’s missing the point:

“Understandably, people would be concerned,” the president said. “I would be, too, if I weren’t inside the government.”

That’s not particularly comforting.

 

Read More

CIA seeks significant expansion of its assassination drone fleet

 

American premier spy agency the CIA has called for a significant expansion of its fleet of assassination drones to bolster the agency’s terror campaign of targeted bombings in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/10/19/267543/cia-seeks-to-expand-terror-drone-fleet/

American spy agency, the CIA, has called for a significant expansion of its fleet of assassination drones to bolster the agency’s terror campaign of targeted bombings in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere.

The plan, submitted to the White House by CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) Director David Petraeus, would enable the spy agency not only to boost its persisting campaign of deadly strikes against suspected militant areas in Yemen and Pakistan, but also shift the assassination drones to “emerging al-Qaeda threats in North Africa or other trouble spots,” US daily The Washington Post reported on Friday, quoting officials that spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the issue.

One American official said the request by Petraeus, a former top military official who commanded US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, reflects a US concern that “political turmoil across the Middle East and North Africa has created new openings for al-Qaeda and its affiliates,” according to the report.

“With what happened in Libya, we’re realizing that these places are going to heat up,” said the official, referring to the September 11 incident at the US Consulate in the Libyan city of Benghazi, where four Americans, including the US ambassador to the African country, were killed following a massive anti-US demonstration to protest the release of a film that grossly insulted Muslims and their highly revered Prophet Mohamed (PBUH).

No decision has so far been taken about shifting armed CIA assassination drones into the North Africa region but contingency plans are being mapped out, according to the official. “I think we’re actually looking forward a little bit.”

American officials at the White House, the CIA and the Defense Department have refused to comment on the drone expansion proposal, says the daily, and those who did, spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Washington officials, says the report, are “particularly concerned” about the emergence of pro-al-Qaeda militants in North Africa, following the downfall of pro-US regimes in Libya and Mali.

Seeking to reinforce their intelligence surveillance in the region, the US has been forced to “rely on small, unarmed turboprop aircraft disguised as private planes.”

The CIA, according to the report, also maintains a separate fleet of stealth surveillance drones, the use of which were exposed when one of them was brought down intact in 2011 by Iranian forces while on a surveillance flight over the country. Such drones were also used to monitor “bin Laden’s compound” in Pakistan before a US military assault to kill him, the daily claims.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration has promoted collaborations between the CIA and the military in what it advertises as “counterterrorism operations,” leading to “a blurring of their traditional roles,” according to the Post. In Yemen, the CIA routinely “borrows” the aircraft of the military’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) to carry out strikes. The joint command is growingly engaged in operations that resemble espionage.

Moreover, says the daily, any decision to extend the reach of CIA’s fleet of armed assassination drones would most likely require the spy agency to establish additional secret bases overseas. The CIA relies on American military pilots to fly the drones from bases in the southwestern US “but has been reluctant to share overseas landing strips with the Defense Department.”

The CIA’s pilotless Predators used in terror strikes over Pakistan are flown out of airstrips along the border in Afghanistan. The agency established a secret base on the Arabian Peninsula when it began its drone attacks over Yemen, even though JSOC drones are flown from a separate facility in Djibouti.

On Wednesday, Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik announced that contrary to US claims, 80 percent of people killed by US assassination drone strikes in the country are innocent civilians.

Talking to reporters outside the Parliament, Malik added that the total of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) attacks conducted by US drones in Pakistan amounted to 336 attacks, killing nearly 2,300 people.

Despite Islamabad’s repeated calls on Washington to end the terror drone attacks, the US government continues its strikes on the tribal regions of the country.

Meanwhile in Yemen, a recent report by the country’s National Organization for Defending Rights and Freedoms states that over 300 people have been killed in the strikes carried out in the southern regions of the country so far in 2012.

The aerial attacks were initiated by former US President George W. Bush, but have escalated under President Barack Obama.

The United Nations has censured American drone attacks as targeted killings and says they flout international law.

Read More

NATO will defend Turkey against Syria as Ankara moves F-16s to border

 

Turkish soldiers taking position in the Turkish-Syrian border. (AFP Photo / Bulent Kilic)

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/news/syria-turkey-shelling-nato-021/

NATO has promised to back Ankara in its escalating conflict with Syria, as Turkey adds 25 new F-16 fighter jets to its border protection force. It follows days of retaliation from Turkey after Syrian shells started coming over the border last month.

"We have all the necessary plans in place to protect and defend Turkey if necessary," NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told journalists before a defense ministers meeting in Brussels.

Meanwhile, Turkish news agencies report that 25 F-16 jet fighters have arrived at the Diyarbakir base, 100 kilometers from the Syrian border. Local officials say the aircraft have been designated for operations in Kurdistan, the nearby zone of a long-simmering separatist conflict.

A separate convoy of armed vehicles and transports carrying tanks arrived at another border town.

Turkey has endorsed the uprising against Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad for the past 18 months, providing logistics, funding and safe havens for rebels on its side of the 900-kilometer border.

But the antagonism ratcheted up last month when artillery shells fired from inside Syria hit Turkish border towns for several consecutive days. Five civilians were killed in one strike last Wednesday.

Turkey has since replied with barrages of its own.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has secured support from parliament to conduct “hot pursuit” missions that could cross into Syrian territory.

"From now on, every attack on us will be responded to immediately. Every attack that targets our sovereignty, our security of life and property will find its response," said Turkish government spokesman Bulent Arinc.

Turkey enjoys a sizable advantage over its neighbor both in terms of troop numbers and military technology.

With nearly one million troops and 400 war planes, Turkey has the second-largest army and third biggest air force in NATO.

Syria has a nominal army three times smaller, which has been exhausted by more than a year of constant fighting, and a fleet of relatively outdated Russian planes.

But Rasmussen urged both sides not to blow up the face-off into a full-scale conflict.

"We hope that all parties involved will show restraint, and avoid an escalation of the crisis. I do believe that the right way forward in Syria is a political solution."

Meanwhile, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon demanded that Assad take the first step in ending the civil war.

"It is unbearable for the Syrian people to continue like this. That is why I have conveyed to the Syrian government a strong message that they should immediately declare a unilateral ceasefire,” he said during a press conference in Paris.

The UN estimates that over 20,000 Syrians have been killed and 700,000 made refugees during the conflict.

Read More

Turkey retaliates at Syria for sixth consecutive day

A Turkish army armoured personnel carrier is dug in on the border with Syria near Akcakale on October 7, 2012 (AFP Photo

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/news/turkey-syria-attack-retaliation-921/

Turkey has returned fire after mortar from Syria landed in Turkey’s Hatay province, Reuters reports. It's the sixth day of retaliation, as Syrian fighting continues to spill across the border.

The round from Syria landed 150-200 meters within Turkey's border in the district of Hacipasa, according to a local official.

The retaliatory fire comes just two days after Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu warned that the country would respond forcefully to every Syrian shell that lands on Turkish soil.

Turkish soldiers were deployed along the border near Akcakale earlier on Monday.

Some residents in the town have abandoned their homes and students have been asked to stay home.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has warned of the consequences that the Syria-Turkey conflict could bring to the region.

“The escalation of the conflict along the Syrian-Turkish border and the impact of the crisis on Lebanon are extremely dangerous,” Ban said at the opening of the World Forum for Democracy in Strasbourg, France.

Just yesterday, a mortar from Syria hit near a plant belonging to the Turkish Grain board, several hundred meters from the center of Akcakale.

A short time later, at least six mortars could be heard fired from Turkey. The mayor of the town, Abdulhakim Ayhan, confirmed that Turkish artillery immediately had returned fire.

No casualties resulted from Sunday’s exchange.

The crisis between the two countries began on Wednesday, when Syrian mortar shells killed a woman and four children from the same family in Akcakale. The shells also wounded at least 13 people. The incident prompted artillery strikes from neighboring Turkey.

The recent exchanges of fire have stoked fears that Syria’s conflict will escalate into regional instability.

Read More

White House doesnt address privacy concerns in cybersecurity executive order draft

 

Reuters / Lucas Jackson

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/usa/news/cybersecurity-executive-order-sharing-362/

A copy of the cybersecurity executive order currently being written by the Obama administration has been leaked to the Web, and the contents do little to calm the fears of those who suspected their privacy concerns wouldn’t be considered.

Only days after journalists with both Federal News Radio and TechDirt.com claimed to have come into possession with a copy of a cybersecurity executive order being readied by the White House, a draft assumed to be authored for the president has been leaked, and in it the Obama administration lays down the groundwork for interim cybersecurity measures following Congress’ failure to come to agreement on legislation of their own. But while the alleged executive order does not discuss the specifics of what the White House has in mind for protecting the country’s e-grid, it also fails to provide any safe guards for making sure that any sharing of personal information does not raise privacy concerns or cause any civil rights violations.

“It is therefore essential that a mutually beneficial arrangement for public-private collaboration be further developed,” the introduction of the draft declares. Over the course of the 18 pages that follow, the Obama administration authors repeatedly remark about the necessity for streamlining the sharing of information held by private sector companies with the federal government. Nowhere, however, has the White House explained how it plans to protect the rights of Americans.

Under earlier cyber legislation considered by Congress, private-sector entities, including businesses and telecom providers, would be offered federal incentives for openly providing the government with personal details offered up by their customers — the American public. Although the leaked copy does not describe any specific-handouts, it heavy handedly avoids explaining anything that will be done to handle the privacy concerns that were caused by earlier attempts at cyber bills.

In one excerpt of the draft, the establishment of a “risk management framework” is discussed, explaining it as something that would “facilitate streamlined collaboration and information sharing mechanisms,” as well as “address interdependencies among critical infrastructure sectors.”

“Because the majority of the Nation’s crucial infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector, efforts to strengthen and maintain secure, functioning and resilient critical infrastructure required effective and routine collaboration and information exchange between all levels of government and critical infrastructure owners and operators,” it continues.

Elsewhere in the draft, “information sharing”between private and federal entities is considered imperative and a call to arms it made to “facilitate an optimization of resources to advance our collective ability to act when a threat is present or an incident occurs.” Not only does the vague wordage included in the draft leave the possibility of information collection and sharing open-ended, but suggests that this act is only the starting point of what sort of cyber-sharing protocols are yet to be put to use.

The draft, according to the copy released by TechDirt, also calls for the establishment of a “24/7 situational awareness and crisis monitor” system managed by the US Department of Homeland Security, which will “facilitate information sharing, interaction and collaboration among and between SSAs and other Federal department agencies, critical infrastructure, owners and operators and international partners.” In another section, the White House rallies for a National Cybersecurity Center to exist with “the ability to enable and support situational awareness and a common operating picture for cyberspace across private sector, Federal, SLTT and international entities y integrating information obtained from such entities and providing cyber information to support the Secretary of Homeland Security.”

The process, writes the White House, will include “an institutionalized capability to facilitate information sharing.” Nowhere, though, do they discuss how they will facilitate the civil liberties concerns raised by the sharing of sensitive intelligence.

Although the White House has not yet weighed in on the authenticity of the alleged draft, the Obama administration does admit to be at work on readying a copy for release.

"Following congressional inaction, the President is determined to use existing executive branch authorities to protect our nation against cyber threats," National Security Adviser John Brennan confirmed in a letter sent from the White House on Friday. "Specifically, we are exploring an Executive Order to direct executive branch departments and agencies to secure our nation's critical infrastructure by working with the private sector."

Read More

White House demands military prisons for Americans under NDAA

 

The White House Logo.(Reuters / Adrees Latif)

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/usa/news/ndaa-hedges-appeal-obama-339/

The White House has asked the US Second Circuit Court of Appeals to place an emergency stay on a ruling made last week by a federal judge so that the president’s power to indefinitely detain Americans without charge is reaffirmed immediately.

On Wednesday, September 12, US District Court Judge Katherine Forrest made permanent a temporary injunction she issued in May that bars the federal government from abiding by the indefinite detention provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, or NDAA. Judge Forrest ruled that a clause that gives the government the power to arrest US citizens suspected of maintaining alliances with terrorists and hold them without due process violated the Constitution and that the White House would be stripped of that ability immediately.

Only hours after Judge Forrest issued last week’s ruling, the Obama administration threatened to appeal the decision, and on Monday morning they followed through.

At around 9 a.m. Monday, September 17, the White House filed an emergency stay in federal appeals court in an effort to have the Second Circuit strip away Judge Forrest’s ruling from the week earlier.

“Almost immediately after Judge Forrest ruled, the Obama administration challenged the decision,” writes Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist that is listed as the lead plaintiff in the case. According to Hedges, the government called Judge Forrest’s most recent ruling an “extraordinary injunction of worldwide scope,” and Executive Branch attorneys worked into the weekend to find a way to file their stay.

“The Justice Department sent a letter to Forrest and the Second Circuit late Friday night informing them that at 9 a.m. Monday the Obama administration would ask the Second Circuit for an emergency stay that would lift Forrest’s injunction,” Hedges writes. “This would allow Obama to continue to operate with indefinite detention authority until a formal appeal was heard. The government’s decision has triggered a constitutional showdown between the president and the judiciary.”

Attorney Carl Mayer, a counsel for Hedges and his co-plaintiffs, confirmed to RT early Monday that the stay was in fact filed with the Second Circuit.

“This may be the most significant constitutional standoff since the Pentagon Papers case,” Carl Mayer says in a separate statement posted on Mr. Hedge’s blog.

Bruce Afran, who serves as co-lead counsel along with Mayer, tells Hedges that the White House could be waging a war against the injunction to ensure that the Obama administration has ample time to turn the NDAA against any protesters participating in domestic demonstrations.

“A Department of Homeland Security bulletin was issued Friday claiming that the riots [in the Middle East] are likely to come to the US and saying that DHS is looking for the Islamic leaders of these likely riots,” Afran tells Hedges. “It is my view that this is why the government wants to reopen the NDAA — so it has a tool to round up would-be Islamic protesters before they can launch any protest, violent or otherwise. Right now there are no legal tools to arrest would-be protesters. The NDAA would give the government such power. Since the request to vacate the injunction only comes about on the day of the riots, and following the DHS bulletin, it seems to me that the two are connected. The government wants to reopen the NDAA injunction so that they can use it to block protests.”

Hedges, who has previously reported for papers including the New York Times and the Christian Science Monitor, argued that his job as a journalist requires him to routinely interact and converse with persons that may be considered terrorists in the eyes of the US government.

Under the NDAA, Americans “who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners" can be held in prison cells “until the end of hostilities,” vague verbiage that essentially allows for those suspect of such associations to be decided under the discretion of US President Barack Obama or any federal agent underneath him.

“Because the language is so vague in this law,” Mr. Mayer explains to RT, “if any journalist or activist is seen as reporting or offering opinions about groups that could somehow be linked not just to al-Qaeda but to any opponent of the United States or even opponents of our allies”

“I spent many years in countries where the military had the power to arrest and detain citizens without charge,” Hedges wrote when he first filed his suit in January. “I have been in some of these jails. I have friends and colleagues who have ‘disappeared’ into military gulags. I know the consequences of granting sweeping and unrestricted policing power to the armed forces of any nation. And while my battle may be quixotic, it is one that has to be fought if we are to have any hope of pulling this country back from corporate fascism.”

Monday morning, Hedges once more responded to the White House’s relentless attempts to reauthorize powers granted under the NDAA, asking, “If the administration is this anxious to restore this section of the NDAA, is it because the Obama government has already used it? Or does it have plans to use the section in the immediate future?”

“The decision to vigorously fight Forrest’s ruling is a further example of the Obama White House’s steady and relentless assault against civil liberties, an assault that is more severe than that carried out by George W. Bush,” writes Hedges. “Obama has refused to restore habeas corpus. He supports the FISA Amendment Act, which retroactively makes legal what under our Constitution has traditionally been illegal — warrantless wire tapping, eavesdropping and monitoring directed against US citizens. He has used the Espionage Act six times against whistle-blowers who have exposed government crimes, including war crimes, to the public. He interprets the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force Act as giving him the authority to assassinate US citizens, as he did the cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. And now he wants the right to use the armed forces to throw U.S. citizens into military prisons, where they will have no right to a trial and no defined length of detention.”

In his latest blog post, Hedges acknowledges, “The government has now lost four times in a litigation that has gone on almost nine months.”

Read More