There are few realists who will argue that the MSM isn’t functioning as a propaganda bureau for Obama. There are a few operatives for the Left who complain with righteous indignation that media is in the “tank” for the GOP, but no one in touch with reality takes this outlandish diversion seriously. Most people are intuitive enough to recognize blatant dishonesty, especially when the subject matter requires the reader/viewer to ignore common sense to accept the premise of the deception.

Vogue is the medium, Asma al-Assad (wife of the Syria’s hereditary dictator for life) is the subject, and deception is the game, but deception for the sake of deception is little more than the musings of a pathological liar. No indeed, our propagandists are not pathological liars, they have definitive purposes to justify their lies and deceit.

To understand the nuances, we must travel back in time to the period leading up to the Islamic Spring of 2011. When Americans were asking why our president only backed certain Islamic Fundamentalists in their bids for freedom and seemed to ignore secular struggles, like those by students in Iran and Syria. It was as if he had a secret playbook and would only use the considerable leverage of America when we could help those closely aligned with our enemies, like the Muslim Brotherhood.

It is times like this that fluff rags like Vogue can gin up support for the president’s peculiar partisan support of radical Islamic Fundamentalists by portraying a murderous dictator’s wife as a beautiful reformer and as a positive influence on the bloody henchman that is her husband. Unfortunately, propaganda can often be exposed, even in innocuous articles like “A Rose In The Desert.”

“Asma al-Assad is glamorous, young, and very chic – the freshest and most magnetic of first ladies,” writes Joan Juliet Buck, of Syria’s first lady, for her introduction of Asma in the fluff article of the type for which Vogue is well known and respected. She describes her “energetic grace” and stylish shoes. Ms Buck tends to get carried away with her flowery penmanship:

“The 35-year-old first lady’s central mission is to change the mind-set of six million Syrians under eighteen, encourage them to engage in what she calls ‘active citizenship.’ ”

While writing the glowing and meaningless report, Buck never thought to do independent research. Journalism is not part of her mission, her mission is to provide covering for Obama and his exposed ass in the wind. If she must write believable prose that dresses tyranny up as a fashion statement, she will do it; otherwise, her role in the propaganda industry becomes vulnerable.

Unfortunately, Buck’s propaganda appeared on news stands as Syrians took to the streets to demonstrate against the tyranny that Buck tried so desperately to mask for her president. Unfortunately, the blood splatter from 9,000 victims of Assad’s stained the pages of Vogue and the face of Ms Buck.

First Lady Asma made no attempts to mask her priorities or her contempt for young people seeking “active citizenship,” for while her young people were being slaughtered in the streets by her husband’s goons, Asma continued to shop online, according to leaked emails, for designer shoes and jewelry from boutiques in Paris and London, but Ms Buck did mention Asma’s keen sense of fashion and when you are married to Syria’s hereditary president for life, you must look your best, especially when the blood of martyrs is flowing in the streets.

Oh the article caused many people, who, like the author, peruse magazine covers in grocery checkout lanes, to gasp in disbelief when the March 2011 Vogue magazine featured Asma. However, Vogue had the presence of mind to make the glowing propaganda that had turned sour disappear. Oh, the printed page is history, but the cyber ink is no longer in existence. There were 3,200 words of cyber ink, and now there are none. The article and its CTPA (covering the president’s ass) motive has been scrubbed from Vogue’s website. Obviously, the article will be around a long time despite the hypocrisy and deception of Vogue.

Propaganda seems to be a benign enterprise; especially, when you are promoting and supporting your “Gift from God” (Nancy Pelosi quote), but there are often unintended consequences for writing lies and deception. Ms Buck and Conde Nash, the author and owner of Vogue, have just experienced what it is like to be humiliated when your lies and deceptions are exposed.

Ms Buck is now saying it was “horrifying” to be near the Assads and her biggest regret is that Vogue asked her to cover the story. Is her regret a result of being exposed as a fraud or an honest appraisal. Since honesty and integrity are compromised from the onset of this debacle, we may safely assume Ms Buck is horrified at the thought of being exposed as a liar.

Still the world is left to ponder why President Obama allows the wholesale slaughter of secular dissidents with western style philosophies of freedom, but not dissidents who are Islamic Fundamentalists. Sadly, propaganda never uses the truth, unless it benefits the purpose of the promotion; consequently, it is hard to judge the truth from the lies. Therefore, by applying simple logic, none of the product of the MSM media can be judged as being factual or legitimate.

Epilogue: Apparently the Assads liked the article, they are the ones who have chosen to preserve it for prosperity, oh the irony of failed propaganda.

Who is this Obama, who asks us to accept both his ethnocentric Narcissism and his anti-Semitic vision, a vision tempered by hatred and honed with prejudice. He stands invincible, a knight in silk suits; a legend in his own mind who knows no defeat or wrong decisions.

“There is a wisdom that is woe; but there is a woe that is madness. And there is a Catskill eagle in some souls that can alike dive down into the blackest gorges, and soar out of them again and become invisible in the sunny spaces. And even if he for ever flies within the gorge, that gorge is in the mountains; so that even in his lowest swoop the mountain eagle is still higher than other birds upon the plain, even though they soar.”

- Moby Dick, Herman Melville

On an international stage, our President manipulates the truth with such audacity and imprecision, without challenge or ridicule, that even rational literate men can begin to question their own logic.

While the world tries to decipher and separate the dubious metaphor with lofty expression from concrete policy reflecting reality from within Obama’s latest speech, a speech that was primarily meant to bolster sagging polls and his image as a sage and distinguished diplomat of the world, the damage from his message will inevitably cause more bloodshed and turmoil in the Middle East and compromise the position of the United States.

Obama was self-ingratiating as he described his accomplishments in facilitating the stage for Democratic reform in the Middle East. Accomplishments that seem bizarre when viewed in light of recent history; especially, when anti-theocracy marchers were slaughtered, arrested, and tortured in Iran. Obama’s commitment to Democracy was not to meddle in the affairs Islamic states that are committing atrocities against their own citizenry. While Bashar Assad was killing his own people by the hundreds if not thousands with automatic rifles and machine guns, Obama hailed him as a reformer. In Obama’s convoluted logic, Iraq has become an example of success due to his diplomacy; yet, within recent history, he called for the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq by 2008 and wrote off the Surge and the war itself as dismal failures. Unfortunately, history and the truth follow relentlessly and closely on the coattails of a prevaricator; especially, one who wallows in hypocrisy to avail himself of fleeting glory from actions he had previously condemned.

Middle East authoritarian governments blame the US and Israel for their problems and failures as contributing nations of the modern world. Sponsoring terror has become a convenient conduit for striking back at their straw men or scapegoats to show progress on the sources of Middle East problems and to appease the semi-literate mind, thus the tribal barbarian vents his rage over celebrations of senseless bloodshed and misery, that defines the method of the terrorist, rather than looking at the root causes of their malfunctioning societies: tribalism, religious intolerance and fundamentalism, statism, totalitarian government, the virtual slavery of women, and perpetuating ideas and hatreds from the Dark Ages. Obama excuses these problems and refuses to even mention the word Islam in his speech; instead, he gallantly carried the Middle Eastern banners of hatred and blame toward the US and Israel.

Is it a coincidence, other than the rather bizarre attack on Libya, a former enemy that had been neutralized as a terror threat, but steadfastly refused to tolerate the radical Islamic fundamentalists, that the only dictatorships Obama has turned on, have been allies of the US and could be considered marginal Islamic theocracies that were semi-tolerant of other religions. He neglected to explain why Qadaffi received our wrath for threatening his people, but a homicidal maniac like Assad, who actually kills thousands of unarmed marchers is without blame.

Our most notable Arab ally in the ME, Saudi Arabia, was ignored except for an indirect plea to pump more oil; presumably, to help with the pump price at home; although, he promised skyrocketing energy prices in his initial election campaign, the reality of the situation is that he wanted to raise the price with restrictive taxes not higher crude prices. Thus he faces the negativity of skyrocketing energy prices with no confiscatory tax gain for a federal government that is anxiously awaiting to expand and encompass an ever growing share of the economy.

Again we are faced with the illogical logic of Obama: the ME can relieve oil prices by pumping more oil and Brazil can relieve the cost of energy by drilling in the Atlantic, so it is necessary to give them billions so that they can sell us oil, but it is foolish to think that Americans drilling in America and off our coasts can affect the cost of oil or decrease our dependence on foreign oil.

Now, President Obama is proposing that the US give billions to ME governments and indirectly to Hamas for some obscure reasons that we as Americans are compelled to accept, for we often equate lunacy as sound foreign policy and we ignore the obvious fact that these oil rich nations who relish greed as a way of life, could much more easily afford to promote terrorism against the US than expecting the US to pay for the terror that will be unleashed against the US and Israel. The president assumes by enriching Hamas, an organization that is about to become part of the Palestinian government and is unashamedly sworn to the annihilation of Israel, will see the error of their ways and come to love Obama and decide not to cut the throat of every Jew in the world.

The president assumes that by instructing Israel to reform the pre ’67 borders, Palestinians will lose their hatred of Israel and the Jew: the problem is not the boundaries or the humiliating defeat of the Arab world in the Six Day War, it is the failure of the Palestinian people to establish a workable constitutional government in the modern sense of a governing body in the modern world of nations. While the Palestinians and Jew haters salivate at the thought of pre ’67 borders, we who have normal cerebral function, trust it is hardly a prelude to peace and love for the Jew; not at all, it is merely seen as a way to stage an attack, to weaken Israel and to deliver the killing blow to the Jew. Do any of us in our wildest imaginations believe president Obama would stop the second Holocaust? Hell no, he would dither and wait to see how it played out, while his beloved Muslim Brotherhood governments and Palestinians obliterate the Jewish people. And are our American Progressive Socialists naive or stupid enough to think after the destruction of Israel, the homicidal maniacs would rest content and stop their blood lust? If they are that stupid they deserve the knife of the Islamic Fundamentalist, but the rest of us don’t.

The president is free with US dollars to Muslim nations who hate America, but ignores the disasters like unemployment, flooding, exorbitant energy prices, and fires at home; again, we are expected to accept the illogic logic of Obama by some convoluted process that is hard even for his state directed media to justify. Perhaps Obama should remember the old paradox, “you can’t buy friends or the friends that you buy, you don’t want”.

Unfortunately, this paradox of friends and money defines the thugocracy that is the precept of Obama philosophy: you buy loyalty and you buy friends, and the best way to accomplish it, is with other people’s money.

The president promoted the concept of Democracy in the ME and without exception, he will be promoted as an outstanding orator and statesman by the state directed media and the emptiness and naiveté of his blathering will be hailed with awe and wonder; only to be forgotten after the absurdity and irrelevance of Obama’s illogical logic is used for as much advantage and leverage as possible by his propaganda bureau.

Rather than believing his own press like the proverbial empty headed fool, Obama would be well served to read the old Polish proverb: “Watch the faces of those who bow the lowest.” The homicidal maniac of the ME is cunning and recognizes weakness; he will faun over Obama until it is time to strike.

The epitasis (denouement or climax, just before catastrophe in Greek theatre) is building in the ME. We may regard Obama’s speech as a faux Ciceronian effort to be pitied for it’s circumlocution and naive pandering, but for the semi-literate mind, caught up in the Middle Ages, it indicates weakness and capitulation that serves to embolden and strengthen their resolve. Thus the speech isn’t inconsequential in the sense of anemic posturing; no not at all, it is seen as a great morale builder for the disaffected of the Muslim World, a confirmation of their hatred and prejudices. Thus Obama perhaps gains a self-serving, but false standing in the ME, literally at the expense of the American taxpayer and by compromising the Jewish state and eventually America itself.

Protests in Syria have claimed 120 lives over the last two days.

BEIRUT – Syrian security forces fired on funeral processions that drew tens of thousands Saturday, one day after the bloodiest crackdown so far in the uprising against President Bashar Assad. The shootings pushed the two-day death toll to more than 120 and two lawmakers and a religious leader resigned in disgust over the killings.

Syrian forces fired on funerals as well.

At least 10 people died Saturday after Syrian security forces opened fire on mourners at funeral processions in the Damascus suburb of Douma and the southern town of Izraa, according to witness accounts, adding to a rapidly growing death toll.

Obama has condemned these actions in a sternly worded email:

“The United States has repeatedly encouraged President Assad and the Syrian government to implement meaningful reforms, but they refuse to respect the rights of the Syrian people or be responsive to their aspirations,” Obama said. “President Assad is blaming outsiders while seeking Iranian assistance in repressing Syria’s citizens through the same brutal tactics that have been used by his Iranian allies.”

Curiously, Obama avoids the use of the word “slaughter.” Or maybe not so curiously. Use of the word slaughter would mean that Obama would have take action to prevent “slaughter” which was the pretense for getting the US mired in Libya. But Libya has something that Syria does not.

Oil.

Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa and the ninth largest oil reserves in the world.

Libya was always about oil, no matter what Obama said otherwise. It’s useful to remember that at the onset of the Libyan conflict we were going to diplomatically support the no-fly zone and not be actively involved.

Obama told Congressional leaders that “he had not authorized troops on the ground or airplanes,” a staffer to one of the Congress members briefed Friday said on condition of anonymity. “He stressed the U.S. is diplomatically supporting the no-fly zone, not the enforcement itself.”

No oil, no Obama.

The reasons for Barack Obama’s intervention in Libya has never been really clear- or honest. The most commonly offered explanation given for bombing Libya has been the prevention of a humanitarian disaster. Sunday morning, Obama’s Abbott and Costello foreign policy team said that Libya was a direct threat to US national interest and at the same time that it was not. Of course, that does not explain why we interfere in Libya but not in other regions in which human rights are being oppressed- like North Korea, Iran or China.

Or Syria.

In 2010 Barack Obama renewed sanctions on Syria, calling Syria an “unusual and extraordinary threat.” At that time Obama had little good to say about Syria.

But he said that Syria’s “continuing support for terrorist organisations and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and missile programmes, continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States”.

In the wake of those comments, Hillary Clinton declared that the US would not intervene in Syria even though more than 60 “protesters” were killed in a week of violence. In her statement excluding Syria from intervention Clinton went so far as to call Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad a “reformer.”

So why are we in Libya but not Syria?

First, let’s have a look at the countries in Sarkozy’s coalition (This really is Sarkozy’s coalition. Obama was very late to the game but fully expect Obama to take credit for anything that comes out well).

COALITION COUNTRIES – LIBYA 2011
United States
France
United Kingdom
Italy
Canada
Belgium
Denmark
Norway
Qatar
Spain
Greece
Germany
Poland
Jordan
Morocco
United Arab Emirate

Now let’s look at a diagram. It is a diagram of where Libyan oil goes.

You might notice that the major consumers of Libyan oil are Italy, France, China, Germany and Spain.

Libya has the greatest oil reserves in Africa.

As of 2008 the US was receiving over 100,000 barrels of oil per day from Libya.

Several US oil companies have interests in Libya and so does Halliburton.

Note: A few weeks before Obama began bombing Libya, the US State Department allowed Moammar Gaddafi’s son to visit the US, spending a few weeks in the US, touring ports and military facilities.

Let’s look at another diagram. This one depicts the destinations of Libyan refugees.

Refugees from Libya are flooding into the neighboring countries (Primarily Egypt and Tunisia) and Italy. More ominously, it is thought that between 750,000 and 2 million Libyans could flood into Europe.

He (Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini) also warned of the potential danger of a power vacuum leading to the formation of an Islamic state in the east of the country. Mr Frattini predicted that the collapse of the regime would lead to the “self proclamation of the so-called Islamic emirate of Benghazi”.

Some of us believe that this is already a fait accompli even if the country does not split.

These are the real reasons we are bombing Libya- the flow of oil and the Muslim exodus. One could understand coming to the aid of Italy and France and prevent a huge Muslim flood into Europe. One could understand our allies seeking to maintain the flow of oil. But that’s not what the President stipulated as the reasons for our involvement and it once again shows why you’re an idiot to believe anything Barack Obama says.

Right now we are not protecting “civilians.” We are engaged as the air cover for the rebel war against Gaddafi. The goal is to remove Gaddafi from power. Do not for one moment think it is anything else. And it could all end very badly.

So….if our President cares soooooo much about the suffering (and little about our national interest) why is he stopping at Syria?

Dozens of people have been killed in a number of Syrian cities after protests against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime flared up more than a week ago.

Ten people, including members of the security forces, residents and two members of “armed elements” died in the Latakia violence, the state-run news agency said, adding that at least two people were killed by rooftop snipers. Around 200 others, mostly members of the security forces, were reported to have been injured.

Ammar Qurabi, an exile in Egypt who heads Syria‘s National Organisation for Human Rights, told the Associated Press that dozens of people had protested in Latakia before attacking the Ba’ath party’s offices in the city.

Demonstrators also attacked a police station and the Ba’ath party offices in the town of Tafas, six miles (10km) north of the southern border city of Daraa, the epicentre of the anti-government protests.

An activist in Daraa told AP that up 1,200 people were still holding a silent sit-in the al-Omari mosque.

I mean isn’t this the yardstick for Obama? It sure isn’t national interest, as admitted to by our Secretary of Defense:

On “This Week,” ABC News’ Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper asked Gates, “Do you think Libya posed an actual or imminent threat to the United States?”

“No, no,” Gates said in a joint appearance with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “It was not — it was not a vital national interest to the United States, but it was an interest and it was an interest for all of the reasons Secretary Clinton talked about. The engagement of the Arabs, the engagement of the Europeans, the general humanitarian question that was at stake,” he said.

But the yardstick is now the brutal crackdown of a rebellion correct?

Obama helped push an ally out of power with Egypt, and then started a war in Libya….because he wanted to side with the “rebels.” Nevermind actually finding out who they really are and in what interest do they act.

But still, he wanted to back the “rebels.”

When it came to Iran, not so much.

And now with Syria…..can’t be bothered.

Interesting:

Indeed, the crackdown calls into question the entire American engagement with Syria. Last June, the State Department organized a delegation from Microsoft, Dell and Cisco Systems to visit Mr. Assad with the message that he could attract more investment if he stopped censoring Facebook and Twitter. While the administration renewed economic sanctions against Syria, it approved export licenses for some civilian aircraft parts.

The Bush administration, by contrast, largely shunned Damascus, recalling its ambassador in February 2005 after the assassination of a former Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri. Many Lebanese accuse Syria of involvement in the assassination, a charge it denies.

When Mr. Obama named Mr. Ford as his envoy last year, Republicans in the Senate held up the appointment for months, arguing that the United States should not reward Syria with closer ties. The administration said it would have more influence by restoring an ambassador.

But officials also concede that Mr. Assad has been an endless source of frustration — deepening ties with Iran and the Islamic militant group Hezbollah; undermining the government of Saad Hariri in Lebanon; pursuing a nuclear program; and failing to deliver on promises of reform.

Some analysts said that the United States was so eager to use Syria to break the deadlock on Middle East peace negotiations that it had failed to push Mr. Assad harder on political reforms.

So let’s see. Assad supports Iran, supports Hezbollah, and supports Hamas. Most of all he and his regime supported those who killed our troops in Iraq:

In recent years Syria has become the logistical rear for global jihadists operating in Iraq and the main crossroads for the jihadists en route to Iraq to fight the American troops. Furthermore, it is where an extensive supply of false Syrian passports are issued to these volunteers. In fact, Syria allowed key al-Qaeda activists in Iraq to use its territory for weapons supplies and financing. Public disclosure of this activity emerged following the killing of Badran al-Mazidi (Abu al-Ghadiyah), a senior al-Qaeda logistics operative in Iraq, in an American Delta Force commando operation in the Syrian village of Sukkariyeh near the Iraqi border on October 26, 2008. According to American intelligence sources, Abu al-Ghadiyah had been operating in Syria for a number of years, smuggling money, weapons, and fighters on behalf of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al-Qaeda commander in Iraq. When Zarqawi was killed in 2006, Abu al-Ghadiyah continued to operate under Abu Ayyub al-Masri, Zarqawi’s successor. US intelligence indicates that Abu al-Ghadiyah would supply global jihadists with false passports, train them, provide them with safe houses, and supply them with weapons and other supplies. These volunteer jihadists came from many countries in the region – Morocco, Libya, Algeria, Egypt, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. Abu al-Ghadiyah made housing arrangements for them in Damascus and the port city of Latakia with the help of Syrian intelligence officers. After moving the volunteers into Iraq, Abu al-Ghadiyah’s men on the east side of the border would continue to see to their logistical needs.

Moreover, American military sources stated that in addition to the logistical support that global jihadists receive in Syria, the Syrian president allows al-Qaeda operatives to train on Syrian soil. The Sunday Times, for example, following a visit to Sukkariyeh where Abu al-Ghadiyah operated, quoted a local leader who explained that everyone in the village knew that jihadists were active in the area. “You can often hear gunfire near the border that has nothing to do with clashes but are just the fighters training,” he said. He added that “there are regions along the border that the Syrian security service (the Mukhabarat) has closed, and I think that that is where the jihadists are. Those places have the best access to Iraq.” According to senior American officials, Syria and Iran also supply al-Qaeda networks in Iraq with bomb-making materials and help them improve the quality of their explosives.

Most importantly, until recently Syria was the main source of the suicide bombers active in Iraq. Thus in 2007, American military sources claimed that “85-90 percent of the suicide terrorists in Iraq enter the country through Syria,” and despite repeated appeals Syria has not managed – or not wanted – to stop the flow of Sunni suicide bombers into Iraq. In the course of 2008, though the situation improved and the flow of suicide terrorists into Iraq slowed significantly, American sources maintain that this resulted from successful activity on the part of Iraqi and coalition forces along the border with Syria.

And supports terrorists of all stripes and colors:

Since the 1960s, the Syrian regime has used terrorism to advance its goals in both the internal and regional arenas. Syrian terrorist activity has included a range of methods, such as assassinations of rivals athome and abroad and various attacks on Israeli, Jewish, and Western targets around the world. The tactics Syria has used over the years have varied according to needs and circumstances. The regime in Damascus has at times sent its own agents to launch terrorist attacks, and at timeshas operated proxy organizations such as al-Saiqa. At other times Syria has provided close support for various organizations serving its interests, such as the Fatah Revolutionary Council (Abu Nidal) and the Popular Front–General Command under Jibril’s command. On a few occasions, the regime provided more passive aid to Palestinian terrorist organizations such as the Popular Front and even to foreign terrorist organizations such as the Kurdish PKK and the Japanese Red Army.

These organizations were granted shelter in Syria and used Syria as a base of operations for activity abroad. This policy, which began under Hafez el-Asad, continues to serve his son Bashar. At the same time, Syria under Bashar is concentrating its efforts primarily on indirect help, especially for Hizbollah, and on mostly passive aid for Palestinian terrorist organizations, Hamas and Islamic Jihad in particular. The non-Arab foreign terrorist organizations that formerly operated in Syria were asked to leave. In addition, the Syrian regime is avoiding, at least for now, using its own agents for terrorist activity. The exception is Syria’s activity in Lebanon where Syria has no qualms about eliminating its political rivals.

The change in Syria’s operational terrorism policy stemmed mostly from the international risks involved in being directly implicated in terrorist attacks. Ever since 9/11, it has been clear even to the Syrian regime that staging terrorist attacks is liable to provoke a harsh international response. Thus a significant portion of Syrian support for terrorism is channeled indirectly to global jihad elements, which are not operated by Syria as proxy organizations, rather are allowed to reside in Syrian territory and operate out of it freely against enemies of the Syrian regime. Today, the primary arena where Syria-based global jihad elements are active is Iraq and to a lesser extent Lebanon.

So with “rebels” fighting against the Syrian regime why shouldn’t the US go in and help out, as we did in Libya?

Why, because Assad is a “reformer”

“No,” Clinton said, when asked on the CBS “Face the Nation” program if the U.S. would intervene in Syria’s unrest. Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s security forces clashed with protesters in several cities yesterday after his promises of freedoms and pay increases failed to prevent dissent from spreading across the country.

Clinton said the elements that led to intervention in Libya — international condemnation, an Arab League call for action, a United Nations Security Council resolution — are “not going to happen” with Syria, in part because members of the U.S. Congress from both parties say they believe Assad is “a reformer.”

What a mess of a President, what a mess of administration, and what a mess they have all got us into to.

Anything to help out the Arab League it appears.

Hypocrites one and all.

We keep hearing about these “freedom fighters” in Tunisia, Egypt. Libya, and Yemen. We are told by the press that the people of these countries have spontaneously rose up to overthrow the oppressive dictatorships that have long held them imprisoned in poverty and despair. But who are these “freedom fighters” really, and how are they being trained and equipped? This paper questions whether what at first glance appears to be random events, might actually be a highly coordinated strategic war against the West by a surreptitious yet highly successful foe whose intent is upon global domination.

While we have been chasing Al’ Qaeda across the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan, Osama Ben Laden and Ayman Al Zawahiri have been busily fomenting revolutions throughout the Middle East. From Egypt to Yemen, from Bahrain to Libya, Al Qaeda is on the rise, and we are helping them remove the stumbling blocks (current regimes) from their path. Should they succeed in their quest, they will establish an Islamic Caliphate over the entire Middle East and control a good portion of the World’s oil. I do not make this claim lightly. This is their strategy and they are following it to the letter. It is their intention to destabilize the entire region in order for the Caliphate to emerge as the only credible option. As of the time of this article, revolutions are currently under way in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, Bahrain with demonstrations also in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco and Algeria. As we shall see, It is not unreasonable to assume the Al Qaeda has a hand in all of them. But for the purpose of this essay we will focus primarily on just one, Egypt.

Egypt

Although Egypt was not the first to fall, it is thus far the largest and perhaps most significant. Although the press constantly refer to Hosni Mubarak’s ouster as a “democratic revolution”, it remains to be seen whether a democracy actually takes shape. There are strong forces pushing for an Islamic state similar to Iran’s theocracy. This has been the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood first and later the Egyptian Islamic Jihad from their beginning. These are the also the groups that have been engaged in the “jihad” or “struggle” for Islamic supremacy since the assassinations of Nasser and Sadat. Members of both groups have been jailed and/or executed for various and sundry crimes against the state, including conspiracy, assassination and murder. There is little doubt that both these groups are involved up to their eyebrows in the current revolution. But there may also be another group equally committed to the collapse of the Mubarak regime and the end of Western influence in Egypt, possibly a group which also seeks the formation of an Islamic Caliphate…Al’ Qaeda.

To prove that Al’ Qaeda is tied to the Egyptian revolution is not difficult. To begin with Al’ Qaeda has a long history with both the Muslim Brotherhood and Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Indeed, Al’ Qaeda’s number 2 man, Ayman Al Zawahiri was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood from the age of 14 before becoming a founding member of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, whose stated goal was to overthrow the government of Egypt in order to establish an Islamic Caliphate. To achieve this end, Zawahiri has engaged in numerous acts of terror including, the November 19, 1995 bombing of the Egyptian Embassy in Islamabad and possibly the tourist massacre at Luxor, Egypt on November 17,1997 for which Zawahiri was tried and found guilty in abstentia by an Egyptian court in 1999. The attack was brutally successful and tourism to Egypt dropped precipitously under concerns that the Egyptian government could not guarantee the safety of foreign tourists to their ancient sites.

According to sources, after meeting Osama ben Laden in Peshawar, Pakistan, merged his Egyptian Islamic Jihad cell into Al’ Qaeda. Since their union, Osama ben Laden and Ayman Al Zawahiri have embarked on a relentless crusade to destabilize the West in order to institute the long awaited Islamic Caliphate throughout the Middle East. They have spawned Al’ Qaeda cells throughout the world spreading their doctrine of Islamic purity and supremacy. They have also been directly linked to terrorist acts of murder and mayhem around the globe, and they are dead set on establishing a world wide Islamic Caliphate, no matter how many people they have to sacrifice in order to make that happen, or how long it might take. Just prior to the fall of the Mubarak regime, on February 28, 2011, Zawahiri released a tape on behalf of Al’ Qaeda praising the Egyptian revolution and calling for the installation of the Caliphate. (see: Al Qaeda looks to co-opt Egypt, Tunisia unrest)

Since the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, many of the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad prisoners have been released, including Ayman Al Zawahiri’s own brother, who has been imprisoned for the past ten years, supposedly in order to gain intelligence about Al Qaeda’s number two. Should any sort of elections occur, the Muslim Brotherhood, with its attendant military wing, the Islamic Jihad, is well positioned to influence, if not control, a new government, especially if support from the military is forthcoming. Should that happen, the Caliphate will have begun and in all likelihood will expand with other Islamacist regimes having to cast aside their differences in order to merge with the Caliphate, especially if the Caliphate becomes headquartered in Saudi Arabia wherein lies Mecca and Medina, or better yet Jerusalem, where Mohammed purportedly flew to heaven on his magical horse, Buraq. Obviously Israel would have to cease to exist for this to occur, so the Israelis have been taking a hard, nervous look at these revolts popping up around the Middle East.

Like a neutron star pulling other systems into its gravitational field, so would the nascent Caliphate draw all Muslim regimes unto itself, beginning with the ones closest, spreading ever outward until the entire muslim world falls under its power. These are the plans of Al’ Qaeda. And if you think they are not well on their way in accomplishing their goal, think again!

Below are some links to Al Qaeda’s push to take over the region. In addition to where we know Al’ Qaeda already maintains a presence, ie Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Indonesia…

Interpol Says Al-Queda is a Growing Threat in Africa

Al Qaida commander backs Libyan rebels in message

Al Qaeda in Yemen Worries the West

Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)

Is al-Qaeda working in Nigeria?

Six Al-Qaeda suspects detained in Bahrain

Morocco breaks up al Qaeda terror cell

Reuters

President Obama’s idea of waging “aggressive personal diplomacy“? Attacking President Bush for blustering belligerence:

But he asserted that Iran’s support for militant groups in Iraq reflected its anxiety over the Bush administration’s policies in the region, including talk of a possible American military strike on Iranian nuclear installations.

Yup. That explains Iranian aggression for the last 30 years against the United States.

Meanwhile, Israel seizes 500 tons of Iranian weapons on Wednesday:

Israel displayed on Wednesday the contents of the ship it seized off Cyprus – crates filled with rockets, missiles, mortars, anti-tank weapons and munitions – the largest such haul in the country’s history. Israel’s claim that the weapons came from Iran were bolstered by Iranian markings on the sides of the containers and what it said was a document proving the ship had set off from an Iranian port.

Israel has not publicly shown the document, however, nor offered evidence to back its assertion that the weapons were headed for Lebanon’s Hezbollah fighters.
ad_icon

“Hezbollah categorically denies it has any connection with the weapons which the Zionist enemy claims it seized,” the group said in a statement faxed to The Associated Press in Beirut on Thursday.

There was no comment from Lebanese officials.

Israeli defense officials said the arms cache would have given Hezbollah, which fought a monthlong war against the Jewish state in 2006, enough firepower to sustain a full month of fighting on the scale of that war.

However, the officials also said the weapons would not have significantly enhanced Hezbollah rockets’ ability to reach deeper into Israel, as the haul consisted of weapons already in Hezbollah’s possession.

The defense officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the military has yet to formally comment on the potential value of the shipment’s contents to militants.

Iran has never acknowledged giving weapons to Hezbollah. Proof of large-scale Iranian weapons shipments to its proxy forces on Israel’s borders could reinforce Israeli demands for tough action – possibly even a pre-emptive strike – against Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Israel sees Iran as its biggest threat because of what it believes to be Tehran’s ambitions to acquire atomic weapons. Iran says its nuclear program seeks only to generate energy.

Anyone believe that?

Apparently, President Obama’s allure is losing its luster from Iranian dissidents themselves. Pro-Democracy protesters are echoing the “you’re either with us, or with the terrorists” language of President Bush:

Today, the fundamentalist government in Tehran held protests to commemorate the event, as usual burning the American flag and encouraging shouts of “Death to America.”

This time, pro-democracy protesters — many wearing the movement’s signature green — were heard to shout, “Death to dictators.”

But the demonstrators, who risked beatings, imprisonment and even death to stage their rebellion, also had a message for the White House.

Witnesses said the protesters could be heard chanting: “Obama, Obama — either you’re with them or you’re with us.”

The Obama administration has so far been reluctant to convey American support for the demonstrators, fearful it would undercut the protest movement and allow President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad (who some claim can be seen in the 1979 photo above as a young revolutionary) to brand the pro-democracy movement as the work of foreign agitators.

So the White House has so far kept its distance from the movement as the West attempts to negotiate with Iran over its nuclear facilities.

Is it too much to ask of our president that he promote peace by showing support for freedom and democracy across the globe? That he take the time out of his busy schedule to recognize historic significance and symbolism in the advancement of democracy?

Munitions seized by Israeli authorities on a ship near Cyprus, are presented in the port of the Israeli city of Ashdod, Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2009. Israeli commandos seized a ship Wednesday that defense officials said was carrying hundreds of tons of weapons from Iran bound for Lebanon’s Hezbollah guerrillas, the largest arms shipment Israel has ever commandeered.(AP Photo/Tsafrir Abayov ) (Tsafrir Abayov – AP)

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Pentagon’s second-in-command says North Korea’s missiles could threaten the continental United States if the reclusive rogue nation continues to develop its weapons.

Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn agreed with an assessment by Sen. John McCain that the U.S. should be prepared for a “worst-case scenario” with North Korea.

Pentagon officials also told the Senate Armed Services Committee Tuesday that North Korea is working with other nations, including Iran and potentially Syria, to develop ballistic missiles.

Well, they called it “fear-mongering” when Bush Admin made this claim, so I guess it’s still “fear-mongering.” Unless…it’s true.

Apparently, about a week ago in Beirut, Christopher Hitchens could not help but be who he is, and stand on principle:  Seeing a sign from the Syrian Social Nationalist Party with the swirling swastika logo hanging on Hamra Street, Hitchens promptly began defacing it.

Michael Totten:

Christopher wanted to pull down their marker, but couldn’t. He stuck to his principles, though, and before I could stop him he scribbled “No, no, F*** the SSNP” in the bottom-right corner with a black felt-tipped pen.

I blinked several times. Was he really insulting the Syrian Social Nationalist Party while they might be watching? Neither Christopher nor Jonathan seemed to sense what was coming, but my own danger signals went haywire.

An angry young man shot across Hamra Street as though he’d been fired out of a cannon. “Hey!” he yelled as he pointed with one hand and speed-dialed for backup on his phone with the other.
“We need to get out of here now,” I said.

But the young man latched onto Christopher’s arm and wouldn’t let go. “Come with me!” he said and jabbed a finger toward Christopher’s face. They were the only words I heard him say in English.

Christopher tried to shake off his assailant, but couldn’t.

“I’m not going anywhere with you,” he said.

The young man said something sinister-sounding in Arabic.

“Do you speak English?” I said.

He didn’t, and I’m not sure why I even bothered to ask. I hoped to calm him down, but Christopher, Jonathan, and I needed to leave. Standing around and trying to reason with him would serve his needs, but not ours. His job was to hold us in place until the muscle crew showed up in force.

“Let go of him!” I said, and shoved him without result. He clamped onto Christopher like a steel trap.

I stepped into the street and flagged down a taxi.

“Get in the car!” I said.

Christopher, sensing rescue, managed to shake the man off and got into the back seat of the taxi. Jonathan and I piled in after him. But the angry young man ran round to the other side of the car and got in the front seat.

I shoved him with both hands, but I didn’t have the leverage to eject him with the back of the front seat between us. The driver could have tried to push the man out, but he didn’t. I sensed he was afraid.

So my companions and I got out of the car on the left side. The SSNP man bolted from the front seat on the right side. Then I jumped back in the car and locked the doors on that side.

“He’ll just unlock it,” Jonathan said.

He was right. I hadn’t noticed that the windows were rolled down on the passenger side. The young man reached in, laughed, and calmly unlocked the front passenger door.

I stepped back into the street, and the young man latched once again onto Christopher. No one could have stopped Jonathan and me had we fled, but we couldn’t leave Christopher to face an impending attack by himself. The lone SSNP man only needed to hold one of us still while waiting for his squad.

A police officer casually ambled toward us as though he had no idea what was happening.
“Help,” Christopher said to the cop. “I’m being attacked!”

Our assailant identified himself to the policeman, and the officer took three steps back as though he did not want any trouble. He could have unholstered his weapon and stopped the attack on the spot, but even Lebanon’s armed men of the law fear the Syrian Social Nationalist Party.
A Lebanese man in his thirties ran up to me and offered to help.

“What’s happening?!” he said breathlessly as he trembled in shock and alarm.

I don’t remember what I told him, and it hardly matters. There wasn’t much he could do, and I did not see him again.

“Let go of him!” I said to the SSNP spotter and tried once more to throw him off Christopher.
“Hit him if you have to,” I said to Christopher. “We’re out of time and we have to get out of here.”

“Back to the hotel,” Christopher said.

“No!” I said. “We can’t let them know where we’re staying.”

Christopher wouldn’t strike his assailant, so I sized the man up from a distance of six or so feet. I could punch him hard in the face, and he couldn’t stop me. I could break his knee with a solid kick to his leg, and he couldn’t stop me. He needed all his strength just to hold onto Christopher while I had total freedom of movement and was hopped up on adrenaline. We hadn’t seen a weapon yet, and I was pretty sure he didn’t have one. I was a far greater threat to him at that moment than he was to me by himself.

Christopher, Jonathan, and I easily could have joined forces and left him bleeding and harmless in the street. I imagine, looking back now, that he was afraid. But I knew the backup he’d called would arrive any second. And his backup might be armed. We were about to face the wrath of a militia whose members can do whatever they want in the streets with impunity. Escalating seemed like the worst possible thing I could do. The time to attack the young man was right at the start, and that moment had passed. This was Beirut, where the law of the jungle can rule with the flip of a switch, and we needed to move.

I saw another taxi parked on the corner waiting for passengers, and I flung open the door.
“Get in, get in,” I said, “and lock all the doors!”

Traffic was light. If the driver would step on the gas with us inside, we could get out of there. Christopher managed to fling the man off him again. It looked hopeful there for a second. But you know where this story is going.

We knew it, too, because six or seven furious men showed up all at once and faced us in the street. They stepped in front of the taxi and cut off our escape.

Read the rest at Michael Totten.

Christopher Hitchens- God bless his soul (haha!)- has cajones. A man acting alone like he did can get himself killed; but if others who believe as he does about the need to tear down symbolic swastikas, about not tolerating evil, act in concert to put on a collecive brave face of zero tolerance, then the danger lessens; and the likelihood of swastikas posted in public streets diminishes and dissolves. Those who cower in fear for their own safety at the expense of making a principled stand, enable and empower the evil of organizations like the SSNP to do as they please and intimidate.

“You know these guys are widely suspected for setting off most or all of the car bombs,” I said.

“They weren’t ready for that then,” he said.

“They weren’t,” I said, “but they’re dangerous.”

“Once you credit them like that,” he said, “you do all their work for them. They should have been worried about us. Let them worry. Let them wonder if we’re carrying a tool or if we have a crew. I’d like to go back, do it properly, deface the thing with red paint so there’s no swastika visible. You can’t have the main street, a shopping and commercial street, in a civilized city patrolled by intimidators who work for a Nazi organization. It is not humanly possible to live like that. One must not do that. There may be more important problems in Lebanon, but if people on Hamra don’t dare criticize the SSNP, well fuck. That’s occupation.”