The Syria Thread 2011 - Present

[8bitagent]

What's funny is is that everything the US.gov does is always legitimized with Great Britain being involved.

It's the unspoken WW2 thing. Handshake over the pond. Big brother, little brothers. Parsons/Crowley. The US returned the favor of course by using the CIA to topple Iran for BP oil interests. They been BFF freiendsies ever since.
Captured in the public view with little smirking leprechaun Blair was dancing to Bush's every tune.

[coffin_dodger]

What's funny is is that everything the US.gov does is always legitimized with Great Britain being involved.

It's the unspoken WW2 thing. Handshake over the pond. Big brother, little brothers. Parsons/Crowley. The US returned the favor of course by using the CIA to topple Iran for BP oil interests. They been BFF freiendsies ever since.
Captured in the public view with little smirking leprechaun Blair was dancing to Bush's every tune.

I think it's got equally as much to do with the hegemony of the US/UK centric financial system and the power that endows upon the both the senior and junior partners.

[seemslikeadream]

Hans Blix: U.S. has “poor excuse” for Syria incursion now
Seeing echoes of Iraq, weapons inspector says "political dynamics are running ahead of due process"
BY NATASHA LENNARD
Following Secretary of State John Kerry’s Monday announcement that it was “undeniable” that the Syrian regime had used chemical weapons in a rebel-held suburb, calls among Western leaders for military intervention have reached fever pitch.

Hans Blix, the chief U.N. arms inspector for Iraq from 2000 to 2003, who famously decried the Bush administration’s over-hyping of the threat of WMD in Iraq to justify war, is seeing a similar pattern with regards to Syria and chemical weapons.

Blix told the Huffington Post:

The indications are certainly in the direction of the use of chemical weapons. Also, the circumstantial evidence points to the Assad regime carrying out the use of such weapons.

However, since the Western powers have asked for United Nations inspections — and Syria has accepted and inspectors have been put in the field — we all should wait to see the report of the inspectors before action is taken.

As we’ve seen before, the political dynamics are running ahead of due process.

… If the aim is to stop the breach of international law and to keep the lid on others with chemical weapons, military action without first waiting for the UN inspector report is not the way to go about it.

This is about world police, not world law.

[8bitagent]

"we can expect some civilian casualties", cuz ya know that's just the nature of war...said in that smarmy CFR MSNBC talking point sort of way
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 ... s-say?lite

What's funny is is that everything the US.gov does is always legitimized with Great Britain being involved.

It's the unspoken WW2 thing. Handshake over the pond. Big brother, little brothers. Parsons/Crowley. The US returned the favor of course by using the CIA to topple Iran for BP oil interests. They been BFF freiendsies ever since.
Captured in the public view with little smirking leprechaun Blair was dancing to Bush's every tune.

I think it's got equally as much to do with the hegemony of the US/UK centric financial system and the power that endows upon the both the senior and junior partners.

That too.

Saudi intelligence liasons writing 9/11 hijackers checks from British BAE defense/oil systems money, and all that jazz.

[Nordic]

Wow, I was just forced to listen to some NPR, at work, and can someone tell me how NPR differs from Fox News again? They are absolutely no different.

"pressure is mounting". Oh really. What kind of pressure? Peer pressure? Pressure from the people of America? No. Financial pressure? They dont say. Its just that slogan "pressure is mounting" like its an abcess under your toenail that has to be lanced.

"Obama has done everything he can to avoid military intervention". Oh reeeeealy. That one is just fucking laughable.

It just goes on and on. Pure propaganda, far worse than anything i heard ten years ago which made me forever boycott them.

Hey y'all!!! We're goin to war!!!! Yeeeeee hawww!!

[justdrew]

strange as it may seem, I just don't think it's going to happen. No cruise missile or other such attack will happen. (not going to say there'll be no war with Syria. What the hell else do you call it when you fund, train, arm a rebel force to topple the existing government? That's war. It's politely not acknowledges as such since Syria can't really defend itself). Possibly even the training and arming may stop.

[MayDay]

Iran warns west against military intervention in Syria
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/a ... erry/print

Tehran threat comes as John Kerry says US would respond to 'undeniable' use of chemical weapons by Assad regime
Beta

Paul Lewis in Washington, Martin Chulov in Beirut, Julian Borger and Nicholas Watt
The Guardian, Monday 26 August 2013

Iran has warned that foreign military intervention in Syria will result in a conflict that would engulf the region.

The threatening rhetoric from Tehran came in response to a statement by the secretary of state, John Kerry, on Monday that the US would respond to the "undeniable" use of chemical weapons in Syria.

In the strongest signal yet that the US intends to take military action against the Assad regime, Kerry said President Bashar al-Assad's forces had committed a "moral obscenity" against his own people.

"Make no mistake," Kerry said. "President Obama believes there must be accountability for those who would use the world's most heinous weapon against the world's most vulnerable people. Nothing today is more serious, and nothing is receiving more serious scrutiny".

Iranian foreign ministry spokesman, Abbas Araqchi, indicated it was equally resolved to defend Assad.

"We want to strongly warn against any military attack in Syria. There will definitely be perilous consequences for the region," Araqchi told a news conference. "These complications and consequences will not be restricted to Syria. It will engulf the whole region."

Shi'ite Iran is Syria's closest ally and has accused an alliance of militant Sunni Islamists, Israel and western powers of trying to use the conflict to take over the region.

The White House immediately echoed Kerry's comments, and said it would release an intelligence assessment about the use of chemical weapons in the coming days.

"The fact that chemical weapons were used on a widespread basis, against innocent civilians, with tragic results is undeniable," said White House spokesman Jay Carney. "And there is very little doubt in our minds that the Syrian regime is culpable."

He added that while the president is still considering the appropriate response, he had already concluded that the attack constituted a "horrific violation of an international norm".

Pressed on whether the US would take military action, Carney said the last time the administration determined chemical weapons had been used, "on a smaller scale", it had decided to provide opposition fighters with assistance. On that occasion, in June, the US announced the CIA would begin supplying rebel groups with small arms and ammunition.

"The incident we're talking about now is of a much more grave and broader scale, and merits a response accordingly," Carney said, adding that the attack in Damscus was "obviously significantly more serious, with dramatically more heinous results".

The hardening of Washington's response came on a day which saw the UK, France, Germany and Turkey join the calls for intervention. David Cameron cut short his holiday in Cornwall to return to work in Downing Street on Tuesday ahead of a meeting of the National Security Council on Wednesday. However, Russia maintained its opposition to military action, with its foreign minister appearing to rule out becoming embroiled in any conflict.

On Monday night the rift between Russia and the western allies appeared to deepen when the White House postponed a meeting with diplomats from Moscow that had been scheduled for Wednesday in The Hague.

Washington said the high-level talks meant to discuss a Syria peace conference, had been put off because of "ongoing consultations" over the alleged chemical weapons attack But Russia's deputy foreign minister, Gennady Gatilov, said it was a "regrettable" decision that the US had taken unilaterally.

Kerry said that Obama was liaising with world leaders to determine the appropriate response to an "indiscriminate use of chemical weapons" in Syria, but provided no timetable, and no further indication about what form any US-led action might take.

On Monday night the White House announced Obama had spoken with Kevin Rudd, the prime minister of staunch wartime ally Australia, about the Syrian situation and "possible responses by the international community".

Australia takes the rotating chair of the UN security council from Sunday. Speaking in Sydney on Tuesday, Rudd said: "I do not believe the world can simply turn a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons against a civilian population resulting in nearly 300 deaths, or more, and some 3,600 people hospitalised."

UN inspectors were able to access some of the alleged sites of chemical attacks in the east Ghouta region of Damascus on Monday, but had to cut short their trip after regime officials warned that they could not guarantee the inspectors' safety.

The UN team collected some biological and environmental samples but refused to accept other samples of blood and urine that had already been taken by medical workers, presumably because they were unable to verify their source.

Earlier in the day two mortars landed near the Four Seasons hotel where the inspectors are staying before they set off for east Ghouta, and on the way there their convoy was hit by gunfire as they crossed the buffer zone from the regime-controlled centre of Damascus to the rebel-held east of the city.

The presence of the inspectors had been a central demand of the UN and their belated permission to enter the affected areas did little to calm the situation.

A build-up of military aircraft on RAF Akrotiri on Cyprus suggested that planning had reached a developed stage. With Russia and China likely to block a UN resolution, the UK and US have both signalled that they are prepared to act without a UN mandate. International law experts say intervention could be legally justified without a security council resolution under the UN's "responsibility to protect".

Earlier the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, was outspoken over the necessity to act if his inspectors found evidence of chemical weapons use. "If proven, any use of chemical weapons by anyone under any circumstances is a serious violation of international law and an outrageous crime. We cannot allow impunity in what appears to be a grave crime against humanity," he said.

Under the terms of its mandate negotiated in the security council, the UN inspection team under Swedish scientist, Ake Sellstrom, can determine whether chemical agents have been used, but not who has used them.

Kerry said that regardless of the outcome of the UN weapons inspections, the US had already concluded that Syria had used chemical weapons. "Anyone who could claim that an attack of this staggering scale could be contrived or fabricated needs to check their conscience and their own moral compass," he said "What is before us today is real. And it is compelling."

Chemical weapons could only have been used by Assad's forces, which has "custody" over chemical weapons in the country, Kerry said. He added that failure to co-operate with UN weapons inspectors for five days, and its decision to shell the affected neighbourhoods, "destroying evidence", indicated an attempt to conceal the truth. "That is not the behaviour of a government that is has nothing to hide," he said. "That is not the behaviour of a regime eager to prove to the world that it had not used chemical weapons".

"Our sense of basic humanity is offended, not only by this cowardly crime, but also by the cynical attempt to cover it up," Kerry said. He said the decision to allow weapons inspectors to the scene of the attack on Monday "is too late, and is too late to be credible".

"What we saw in Syria last week should shock the conscience of the world," Kerry said. "It defies any code of morality. The indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent bystanders by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity. By any standards, it is inexcusable, and despite the excuses and equivocations that some have manufactured, it is undeniable," Kerry said, adding that the US and its allies had gathered more information about the atrocity which it would release in the "days ahead".

In Britain, No 10 said that the prime minister earlier clashed with Vladimir Putin over whether the Assad regime was responsible for the attack. In a telephone conversation, the Russian president said Moscow had no evidence as to whether such an attack had taken place – or who was responsible – after Cameron said there was "little doubt" that the Syrian regime was responsible.

Nick Clegg has cancelled a trip to Afghanistan to allow him to attend the NSC amid a growing expectation that parliament could be recalled before the end of the week to allow MPs to debate developments in Syria.

William Hague, who insisted Britain shared a common position with the US and France, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "We have tried those other methods – the diplomatic methods – and we will continue to try those. But they have failed so far."

Meanwhile, General Sir Nick Houghton, chief of the UK defence staff, discussed military options with his US counterpart, General Martin Dempsey, and other allied military chiefs at a military summit in the Jordanian capital Amman.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: "The chief of defence staff has met with General Dempsey in Amman as part of pre-planned talks with the Americans and other allies to consider how the international community should best respond to the ongoing crisis in Syria.

"As you would expect, the discussions have focused on the chemical weapons attack in Damascus last Wednesday. No decisions have been taken – as we've said, we are looking at all the options."

On Monday night, British government sources were downplaying expectations that a strike could be imminent. They said that Britain and the US wanted to consider the findings of the UN weapons inspectors with care before deciding whether to act. Downing Street said it would consult attorney general Dominic Grieve on the legalities of intervention.

However, it seemed unlikely on Monday night that the findings of the UN inspection team would heal the deep rift over Syria in the UN security council. Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, warned that any attack on Syria without security council sanction would be "a crude violation of international law." He compared the situation to the run-up to the Iraq invasion in 2003. Asked what Russian would do if missile strikes were launched, he appeared to rule out military retaliation, saying Russia is "not planning to go to war with anyone".

In a reminder of the potential for any military action to escalate across the Middle East, Israel warned that it would hit back if there were any Syrian reprisals in the wake of western air strikes. The Israeli minister for intelligence and strategic affairs, Yuval Steinitz, said on Monday: "If we are under attack, we will protect ourselves and we will act decisively."

In Paris, France's president, Francois Hollande, said it was unthinkable that the international community would fail to respond to the use of chemical weapons, telling the Parisien newspaper: "Everything will be decided this week."

• Additional reporting: Mona Mahmood, Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem, Constanze Letsch in Istanbul, Kate Connolly in Berlin, Alec Luhn in Moscow, and Kim Willsher in Paris

[smiths]

same in Australia ...

i watched the ABC (government broadcaster) this morning and Ben Knight, the Washington correspondent, explained emphatically that the "United States has done everything it can to avoid being involved in Syria"
he almost mocked anyone that dared to think anything other than the official line, or dared to consider that maybe, just maybe, we might not be getting truthful information from our leaders

unfortunately the video doesnt seem to be working, umm

[seemslikeadream]

Attack on Syria would trigger one on Israel, Iran warns
THOMAS ERDBRINK
The New York Times News Service
Published Tuesday, Aug. 27 2013, 8:43 PM EDT
Last updated Tuesday, Aug. 27 2013, 8:49 PM EDT

Iranian lawmakers and commanders issued stark warnings to the United States and its allies Tuesday, saying any military strike on Syria would lead to a retaliatory attack on Israel fanned by “the flames of outrage.”

The warnings came against a backdrop of rising momentum among Western governments for a military intervention in the Syria conflict over what the United States, Britain, France and others have called undeniable evidence that President Bashar Assad’s forces used banned chemical weapons on civilians last week, killing hundreds. Assad has accused the insurgents who are trying to topple him of using such munitions.

Iran, which itself came under chemical weapons assault by Iraq during their eight-year war in the 1980s, has been a loyal ally of the Syrian government. Iranian hard-liners often say Syria is Iran’s first trench in a potential war with hostile Western powers. Iran has blamed Israel for the conflict in Syria, saying Israel is trying to bring down Assad.

“In case of a U.S. military strike against Syria, the flames of outrage of the region’s revolutionaries will point toward the Zionist regime,” the semiofficial Fars news agency quoted Mansur Haqiqatpur, an influential member of Parliament, as saying Tuesday.

At the same time, Iran has always taken the moral high ground on the issue of chemical weapons, actively opposing their use. If it turns out that Assad’s side deployed the weapons, it will be difficult for Iranian leaders to explain their support for the Syrian president to their people, analysts point out.

A potential U.S. military intervention in Syria also represents a test for Iran’s new president, Hasan Rowhani.

Many analysts close to Rowhani privately say that Syria is an obstacle to change inside Iran. The country’s hard-liners say any attack on Syria is in fact an act of war against Iran, and point to a support pact in which both nations have vowed to defend each other in case of a military attack by a third country.

“Naturally Iran does not want to lose Syria as a foothold in the region,” said Davoud Hermidas-Bavand, a professor of international relations at Allameh Tabatabaei University in Tehran. “But in the long run a solution for Syria will mean that officials in Tehran can soften their stance towards the U.S. It means we would have a more open domestic atmosphere.”

[justdrew]

White House: possible action on Syria 'not about regime change' – live | World news | theguardian.com - 'The goal here is to make clear that this is unacceptable'

Architect of Syria War Plan Doubts Surgical Strikes Will Work | The Cable

Making War In Syria - Esquire - We aren't sending troops. We're going to be sending cruise missiles and dropping bombs because that is how you make war without going to war and, if you make war without going to war, then it's a lot easier to pretend back home that you're not at war. Again.

“Experts” Who Are Always Wrong About Everything Want to Bomb Syria - Lawyers, Guns & Money

The Fog of the Syrian Civil War

Eschaton: Morning Thread - Here's Juan Cole: "Either way, the people of Homs and other contested cities will likely go on suffering the regime’s indiscriminate assaults, and it is unlikely that a few Tomahawk strikes will affect the course of the war." So what's the point?

[elfismiles]

So ... has this not been posted? I just came across it in a series of links sent from an email chain...

What's the level of fudge factor with "ANI" via Yahoo?

US 'backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria, blame it on Assad govt': Report
ANI | ANI – Wed 30 Jan, 2013

London, Jan 30 (ANI): The Obama administration gave green signal to a chemical weapons attack plan in Syria that could be blamed on President Bashar al Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country, leaked documents have shown.

A new report, that contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence, showed a scheme 'approved by Washington'.

As per the scheme 'Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons,' the Daily Mail reports.

Barack Obama made it clear to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that the U.S. would not tolerate Syria using chemical weapons against its own people.

According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

The emails were released by a Malaysian hacker who also obtained senior executives resumes and copies of passports via an unprotected company server, according to Cyber War News.

According to the paper, the U.S. State Department has declined to comment on the matter. (ANI)

http://in.news.yahoo.com/us-backed-plan ... 48224.html

EDIT / ADD: FLASHBACK...

Hacked Emails Reveal ‘Washington-Approved’ Plan to Stage Chemical Weapons Attack in Syria
Obama administration complicit in war crime?

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
January 28, 2013

UPDATE: Britam has admitted that it was hacked but denied that the emails released by the hacker were genuine. Click here for a statement by a Britam spokesman.

Alleged hacked emails from defense contractor Britam reveal a plan “approved by Washington” and funded by Qatar to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime, fulfilling what the Obama administration has made clear is a “red line” that would mandate US military intervention.

The leaked emails, obtained by a hacker in Germany, feature an exchange (click here for screenshot) between Britam Defence’s Business Development Director David Goulding and the company’s founder Philip Doughty;

Phil

We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.

We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.

Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?

Kind regards
David

The fact that the plan involves delivering a CW (chemical weapon) that is “similar to those Assad should have,” clearly suggests that the idea is to stage a false flag chemical weapons attack that could be blamed on Assad by Gulf states like Qatar and NATO powers.

If the claim that such as plot was “approved by Washington” can be verified, then the Obama administration is complicit in a war crime.

According to Cyber War News, which details the process of how the emails were hacked and includes screenshots of the leaked documents, the hack also uncovered, “extremely personal information,” including copies of passports of Britam employees, some of whom appeared to be mercenaries.

A full list of all the hacked documents can be found here. One software systems administrator who analyzed the ‘header’ details from the email in question concluded, “I have to admit that the email does indeed look genuine….all these facts check out. So with Mythbusters objectivity I have to call this one plausible.”

Online business profiles confirm that both David Goulding and Philip Doughty work for Britam Defence.

Last year, reports began to circulate that that US-backed rebel fighters in Syria had been given gas masks and were willing to stage a chemical weapons attack which would then be blamed on the Assad regime to grease the skids for NATO military intervention.

Soon after in August, President Barack Obama warned that the use or even transportation of chemical weapons by the Assad regime would represent a “red line” that would precipitate military intervention. French President Francois Hollande followed suit, stating that the use of such weapons “Would be a legitimate reason for direct intervention.”

At around the same time, a source told Syrian news channel Addounia that a Saudi company had fitted 1400 ambulance vehicles with anti-gas & anti-chemical filtering systems at a cost of $97,000 dollars each, in preparation for a chemical weapons attack carried out by FSA rebels using mortar rounds. A further 400 vehicles were prepared as troop carriers.

The attack would be blamed on the Syrian Army and exploited as an excuse for a military assault. A March 2012 Brookings Institution report entitled Saving Syria: Assessing Options For Regime Change outlined this very scenario – where a manufactured humanitarian crisis would be cited as justification for an attack.

Yesterday, Israel’s vice premier Silvan Shalom told reporters that if Syrian rebels obtained chemical weapons from stockpiles belonging to the Assad regime, such a development would force Israel to resort to “preventive operations,” in other words – a military strike on Syria.

In December, a shocking video emerged of Syrian rebels testing what appeared to be a form of nerve gas on rabbits, bolstering claims that the rebels had already obtained chemical weapons.

As Tony Cartalucci also highlights, “Mention of acquiring chemical weapons from Libya is particularly troubling. Libya’s arsenal had fallen into the hands of sectarian extremists with NATO assistance in 2011 in the culmination of efforts to overthrow the North African nation . Since then, Libya’s militants led by commanders of Al Qaeda’s Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) have armed sectarian extremists across the Arab World, from as far West as Mali, to as far East as Syria.”

Last month, 29 different US-backed Syrian opposition groups pledged their allegiance to Al Nusra, an Al-Qaeda-affiliated group which, as the New York Times reported, “killed numerous American troops in Iraq.

Numerous reports confirm that Al Nusra is the leading front line fighting force in Syria and is commanding other rebel groups. Given their prominent role, allied with the fact that the terror group has been responsible for numerous bloody attacks in Syria, the notion that the Obama administration would approve a plot that could see chemical weapons fall into the hands of Al-Qaeda terrorists could represent a foreign policy scandal even bigger than Benghazi-Gate.

In a related story, the Syrian Electronic Army, a separate hacktivist group, continues to release hacked files and emails from numerous sensitive foreign ministry and military websites belonging to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, including emails sent between these countries.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

This article was posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 at 6:01 am

Tags: foreign affairs, terrorism, war

http://www.infowars.com/hack-reveals-wa ... -in-syria/

[coffin_dodger]

Meet Saudi Arabia's Bandar bin Sultan: The Puppetmaster Behind The Syrian War - Zero Hedge
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-2 ... syrian-war

Yesterday the Telegraph's Evans-Pritchard dug up a note that we had posted almost a month ago, relating to the "secret" meeting between Saudi Arabia and Russia, in which Saudi's influential intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan met with Putin and regaled him with gifts, including a multi-billion arms deal and a promise that Saudi is "ready to help Moscow play a bigger role in the Middle East at a time when the United States is disengaging from the region", if only Putin would agree to give up his alliance with Syria's al-Assad and let Syria take over, ostensibly including control of the country's all important natgas transit infrastructure. What was not emphasized by the Telegraph is that Putin laughed at the proposal and brushed aside the Saudi desperation by simply saying "nyet." However, what neither the Telegraph, nor we three weeks ago, picked up on, is what happened after Putin put Syria in its place. We now know, and it's a doozy.

Courtesy of As-Safir (translated here), we learn all the gritty details about what really happened at the meeting, instead of just the Syrian motives and the Russian conclusion, and most importantly what happened just as the meeting ended, unsuccessfully (at least to the Saudi). And by that we mean Saudi Arabia's threats toward Russia and Syria.

First, some less well-known observations on who it was that was supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt even as US support was fading fast:

Bandar said that the matter is not limited to the kingdom and that some countries have overstepped the roles drawn for them, such as Qatar and Turkey. He added, “We said so directly to the Qataris and to the Turks. We rejected their unlimited support to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere. The Turks’ role today has become similar to Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war. We do not favor extremist religious regimes, and we wish to establish moderate regimes in the region. It is worthwhile to pay attention to and to follow up on Egypt’s experience. We will continue to support the [Egyptian] army, and we will support Defense Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi because he is keen on having good relations with us and with you. And we suggest to you to be in contact with him, to support him and to give all the conditions for the success of this experiment. We are ready to hold arms deals with you in exchange for supporting these regimes, especially Egypt.”

So while Saudi was openly supporting the Egyptian coup, which is well-known, it was Turkey and most importantly Qatar, the nation that is funding and arming the Syrian rebels, that were the supporters of the now failed regime. One wonders just how much Egypt will strain Saudi-Qatari relations, in light of their joined interests in Syria.

Second, some better-known observations by Putin on Russia's relationship with Iran:

Regarding Iran, Putin said to Bandar that Iran is a neighbor, that Russia and Iran are bound by relations that go back centuries, and that there are common and tangled interests between them. Putin said, “We support the Iranian quest to obtain nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. And we helped them develop their facilities in this direction. Of course, we will resume negotiations with them as part of the 5P+1 group. I will meet with President Hassan Rouhani on the sidelines of the Central Asia summit and we will discuss a lot of bilateral, regional and international issues. We will inform him that Russia is completely opposed to the UN Security Council imposing new sanctions on Iran. We believe that the sanctions imposed against Iran and Iranians are unfair and that we will not repeat the experience again.”

Then, Putin's position vis-a-vis Turkey, whom he implicitly warns that it is "not immune to Syria's bloodbath."

Regarding the Turkish issue, Putin spoke of his friendship with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan; “Turkey is also a neighboring country with which we have common interests. We are keen to develop our relations in various fields. During the Russian-Turkish meeting, we scrutinized the issues on which we agree and disagree. We found out that we have more converging than diverging views. I have already informed the Turks, and I will reiterate my stance before my friend Erdogan, that what is happening in Syria necessitates a different approach on their part. Turkey will not be immune to Syria’s bloodbath. The Turks ought to be more eager to find a political settlement to the Syrian crisis. We are certain that the political settlement in Syria is inevitable, and therefore they ought to reduce the extent of damage. Our disagreement with them on the Syrian issue does not undermine other understandings between us at the level of economic and investment cooperation. We have recently informed them that we are ready to cooperate with them to build two nuclear reactors. This issue will be on the agenda of the Turkish prime minister during his visit to Moscow in September.”

Of course, there is Syria:

Regarding the Syrian issue, the Russian president responded to Bandar, saying, “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters. During the Geneva I Conference, we agreed with the Americans on a package of understandings, and they agreed that the Syrian regime will be part of any settlement. Later on, they decided to renege on Geneva I. In all meetings of Russian and American experts, we reiterated our position. In his upcoming meeting with his American counterpart John Kerry, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will stress the importance of making every possible effort to rapidly reach a political settlement to the Syrian crisis so as to prevent further bloodshed.”

Alas, that has failed.

So what are some of the stunning disclosures by the Saudis? First this:

Bandar told Putin, “There are many common values and goals that bring us together, most notably the fight against terrorism and extremism all over the world. Russia, the US, the EU and the Saudis agree on promoting and consolidating international peace and security. The terrorist threat is growing in light of the phenomena spawned by the Arab Spring. We have lost some regimes. And what we got in return were terrorist experiences, as evidenced by the experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the extremist groups in Libya. ... As an example, I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics in the city of Sochi on the Black Sea next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us, and they will not move in the Syrian territory’s direction without coordinating with us. These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role or influence in Syria’s political future.”

It is good of the Saudis to admit they control a terrorist organization that "threatens the security" of the Sochi 2014 Olympic games, and that house of Saud uses "in the face of the Syrian regime." Perhaps the next time there is a bombing in Boston by some Chechen-related terrorists, someone can inquire Saudi Arabia what, if anything, they knew about that.

But the piece de resistance is what happened at the end of the dialogue between the two leaders. It was, in not so many words, a threat by Saudi Arabia aimed squarely at Russia:

As soon as Putin finished his speech, Prince Bandar warned that in light of the course of the talks, things were likely to intensify, especially in the Syrian arena, although he appreciated the Russians’ understanding of Saudi Arabia’s position on Egypt and their readiness to support the Egyptian army despite their fears for Egypt's future.

The head of the Saudi intelligence services said that the dispute over the approach to the Syrian issue leads to the conclusion that “there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate. We believe that the Geneva II Conference will be very difficult in light of this raging situation.”

At the end of the meeting, the Russian and Saudi sides agreed to continue talks, provided that the current meeting remained under wraps. This was before one of the two sides leaked it via the Russian press.

Since we know all about this, it means no more talks, an implicit warning that the Chechens operating in proximity to Sochi may just become a loose cannon (with Saudi's blessing of course), and that about a month ago "there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate." Four weeks later, we are on the edge of all out war, which may involve not only the US and Europe, but most certainly Saudi Arabia and Russia which automatically means China as well. Or, as some may call it, the world.

And all of it as preordained by a Saudi prince, and all in the name of perpetuating the hegemony of the petrodollar.

P.S. Russia and Saudi Arabia account for 25% of global oil production.

[justdrew]

the hack could be real, maybe 99% of it is real, with one addition, not seen the whole trove. no way to prove it's real.

[MayDay]

Here's the word from Iran's state propaganda machine, Press TV:

http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/01/30/286331/ukqatari-plot-against-syria-revealed/
UK-Qatari plot against Syria revealed
Leaked documents from a UK-based defense contractor has revealed a Qatari proposal to the firm to counterfeit a plan to claim that Syria has given the go-ahead for the use of chemical weapons in the country.


The document, which was allegedly hacked from the UK-based company Britam Defence’s website, disclosed Qatar’s proposal to the contractor in return for a large sum of money, Lebanese Al-Manar TV reported on Tuesday.

An email exchange between two senior officials at Britam suggested that the scheme was approved by Washington, explaining that Qatar would fund the militants in Syria to use chemical weapons.


“We've got a new offer. It's about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington,” a part of the leaked email read.

According to the documents, Qatar also suggested smuggling chemical warheads and rockets from Libya to the Syrian city of Homs.

Qatar apparently asked the British company to employ and film a Ukrainian person speaking and pretending to be Russian as part of “evidence” against Syria.

The new development comes as the head of Syria's opposition coalition, Ahmed Moaz al-Khatib, recently announced that Qatar has pledged USD 20 million to the coalition.

The recent scheme is devised at a time when the Syrian army forces have managed to clear the capital, Damascus and its surrounding areas of the militants and restore security to northwestern mountainous regions, including Idlib.

The Syrian unrest began in March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of army and security personnel, have been killed ever since.

The Syrian government says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

Damascus blames the West and its regional allies Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey for supporting the armed groups.

AO/PKH/HJL

We're being lied to from all directions as usual, and no way of telling what's real. PKD is alive and we're all dead.

[8bitagent]

China, Israel, Iran, Hezbollah, al Qaeda. Even North Korea, half a world away and always eager to make trouble, tried to export gas masks to Syria — believed to be for government forces — before they were seized in Turkey along with arms and ammunition, a Japanese newspaper reported Tuesday.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 ... world?lite

Nice to see the lines being drawn. Axis of evil 2.0. Funny Israel is mentioned. I PUT NOTHING behind Saudi Arabia and their BFF Israel, knowing any shenanigans will drag their favorite lapdog America in tow.