Saturday, 31 August 2013

Saudi Arabia, on US-British behalf, gave chemical weapons to terrorists in Syria. They provoked the last massacre.

The European Union Times

Saudis Go On Full Alert As Putin War Threat Stuns Muslim World

Posted: 30 Aug 2013 10:22 AM PDT

The Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) is reporting today that President Putin’s orders this week to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation for a “massive military strike” against Saudi Arabia in the event that the West attacks Syria has “stunned” the Sunni Muslim world and forced the Saudis to go on “full war alert.”
The Arabic Al-Ahd News Service confirmed the Saudis war alert by further stating:

“The Saudi Army is on full alert since today due to the increased possibility of a military attack by the U.S. military against Syria. The ground force operations command of the Saudi Army has ordered all the military units in Saudi Arabia to stand at a level 2 alert and fears were bolstered by recent statements by the Russian President Vladimir Putin in terms of a possible military strike against Saudi Arabia by Moscow.”

The GRU is also reporting today that Pakistan’s largest religious-political party Jamiat Ahle Hadith (JAH) is now threatening Russia too over Putin’s “war order” against Saudi Arabia, and as we can read as reported by The International News Service:

“Addressing a Press conference on Thursday, JAH Vice President Allama Zubair Ahmad Zaheer said that his party would hold demonstrations in all major cities to express solidarity with Saudi Arabia, and to condemn Russian president for his wild and unscrupulous threats.
He warned Putin that he would invite wrath from entire Muslim world if he dared to attempt harm Saudi Arabia. He demanded Islamabad to sever ties with Moscow since Putin’s threat was not meant for Saudi Arabia alone but was a threat to entire Muslim Ummah. He said Russian president’s threat would be treated as a declaration of war against Islam and a strong Jihad would be waged against Russia from all over the world.”

This GRU report notes that both the Saudis “war moves” and Pakistan’s “provocative threats” against Russia are being engineered by Obama regime apparatchiks who now control the largest secret intelligence organization ever created in modern human history and which the Washington Post News Service, using top-secret documents released to them by whistleblower Edward Snowden, reports cost over $52 billion and employs over 107,000 spies.
The Obama regimes rush to attack Syria, this GRU report continues, was dealt a “severe blow” yesterday after the British Parliament revolted against Prime Minister David Cameron and refused to allow the United Kingdom to participate in any war action against the Syria people.
Though not being told to the American people by the Obama regime (or their propaganda mainstream media), this GRU report says, the unraveling of British support for the Obama regimes planned war against Syria came after new reports from the Associated Press News Service revealed that the chemical weapons attack being investigated by the United Nations were, indeed from Saudi Arabia.
The American InfoWars.Com News Service confirms this Saudi connection to chemical weapons being used in Syria, and as we can, in part, read:

“Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press journalist Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.
“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” writes Gavlak.
Rebels told Gavlak that they were not properly trained on how to handle the chemical weapons or even told what they were. It appears as though the weapons were initially supposed to be given to the Al-Qaeda offshoot Jabhat al-Nusra.
“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” one militant named ‘J’ told Gavlak.
His claims are echoed by another female fighter named ‘K’, who told Gavlak, “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them. We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”
Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of an opposition rebel, also told Gavlak, “My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” describing them as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.” The father names the Saudi militant who provided the weapons as Abu Ayesha.
According to Abdel-Moneim, the weapons exploded inside a tunnel, killing 12 rebels. “More than a dozen rebels interviewed reported that their salaries came from the Saudi government.”

Important to note, and as we had previously reported, Putin’s extraordinary “war order” against Saudi Arabia came after he became “enraged” after his early August meeting with Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan who warned that if Russia did not accept the defeat of Syria, Saudi Arabia would unleash Chechen terrorists under their control to cause mass death and chaos during the Winter Olympics scheduled to be held 7-23 February 2014 in Sochi, Russia.

Prince Bandar went on to say that Chechens operating in Syria were a pressure tool that could be switched on an off. “These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role in Syria’s political future.”
Putin replied to Prince Bandar by 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” [Putin said referring to footage showing a Jihadist rebel eating the heart and liver of a Syrian soldier HERE], and which Prince Bandar in turn warned that there can be “no escape from the military option” if Russia declines the olive branch.
In spite of the truth of Saudi Arabia and their terrorist allies being responsible for chemical weapons use in Syria, this GRU report concludes, the Obama regime continues on its path to war against the Syrian people in spite of it being illegal under both United States and International law.
Where illegal wars matter most to the Americans, however, and as we have seen too many tragic times in the past, is when oil and gas are involved. And in this case, the Obama regime, along with its Saudi Arabian and Gulf puppet state allies (some of the most repressed nations on Earth), are prepared at all costs to prevent the proposed Iran-Iraq-Syrian gas pipeline from being completed… which is, in its starkest truth, what this conflict is really all about in the first place.
Source

Obama should be deprived of Nobel Peace Prize, if USA strikes Syria: Moscow

Posted: 30 Aug 2013 09:45 AM PDT

American President Barack Obama received a Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people.”
The head of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs Alexei Pushkov suggested U.S. President Barack Obama should be deprived of the Nobel Peace Prize in the event the Americans strike a military blow on Syria, he wrote on Twitter on Friday, August 30.
“If the United States strike Syria without a sanction from the UN, the world community must demand the Nobel committee should deprive Obama of the Peace Prize,” he wrote.
It is worthy of note that U.S. leader Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people.”
Previously, the draft resolution providing for the use of force against Syria had not been approved at the UN Security Council: Russia and China did not support the document.
In addition, the British Parliament opposed the country’s participation in the military operation against Syria. The draft resolution from the government received the support from 272 deputies, 285 voted against it.
Source

Oregon man robs bank for $1 to be arrested and get free healthcare

Posted: 30 Aug 2013 09:02 AM PDT

Timothy Dean Alsip

A homeless man has allegedly held up and robbed a Portland bank for $1, then sat down and waited for police to arrest him so he could receive healthcare in prison.
Timothy Dean Alsip, a 50-year-old homeless man, was arrested by the Clackamas County Sheriff’s Department and thrown in jail on suspicion of second-degree robbery.
Deputy Mark Nikolai, spokesman for the sheriff’s office, told the Oregonian that the homeless man entered a Bank of America on the morning of Aug. 23, where he approached a teller with a note demanding $1.
“He handed over a note saying, ‘This is a hold up. Give me a dollar,’” Nikolai said. After receiving the dollar, he “had a seat in the lobby.”
Holding the $1 bill, Alsip waited in the lobby of the bank until police arrived and arrested him. He was originally charged with both second-degree robbery and third-degree theft, but his robbery charge was later dismissed. His bail was initially set at $250,000, but later reduced to $40,000.
Alsip allegedly told police officers that he ‘robbed’ the bank so he could receive medical care in jail. The 50-year-old homeless man has no previous criminal record, but has recently showed signs of desperation to get help. Alsip asked strangers for assistance and on multiple occasions called 911 on himself, complaining of various imaginary problems, such as being hit by a car and overdosing on drugs, CBS Seattle reports.
“His behavior today is consistent with the behavior he has displayed over the last week,” Nikolai said.
Alsip isn’t the first homeless man to intentionally get himself arrested for medical care: two years ago, an unemployed North Carolina man robbed a bank for a dollar, hoping to to receive free healthcare in prison. Richard James Verone, a 59-year-old man who was suffering from numerous health problems at the time of his arrest,demanded that a bank teller in Gastonia, N.C., hand over a $1 bill.
“When you receive this a bank robbery will have been committed by me,” read Verone’s note to the teller. “This robbery is being committed by me for one dollar. I am of sound mind but not so much sound body.”
Verone later told reporters that he was hoping for a three-year prison sentence, which would allow him to get the back and foot surgery he needed, as well as shelter until he was old enough to collect Social Security checks.
Although the man only robbed the bank for a dollar, the cost of jailing someone for one year in North Carolina is an estimated $23,000, plus legal fees. For those who have crippling health conditions and nothing else to lose, the prospect of going to prison is sometimes appealing. If an inmate at the Federal Bureau of Prisons has a health condition that cannot be treated by prison doctors, the inmate is sent off to an outside hospital. Some end up in world-class facilities like the Minnesota-based Mayo Clinic, according to the Daily Beast.
“Imagine a place where you don’t have to pay anything or no more than $5 for a visit to the medical clinic,” Roberto Hugh Potter, an expert in the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Central Florida wrote in an article about the future of universal health care, “Where your physician-prescribed medications cost you nothing, where there is no penalty for missing work or school to go to the clinic, and where every individual has an absolute right to access and receive ‘adequate, reactive’ health care. Welcome to prison!”
In Oregon this week, the Clackamas County Sheriff’s Department is trying to find out more information about the Alsip and is urging anyone who knows or has encountered the homeless man to contact the office.
Alsip is scheduled to be arraigned on Monday. A third-degree theft is a Class C misdemeanor, which can result in a maximum jail term of 30 days and/or a maximum fine of $1,250, meaning Alsip’s time in county jail will most likely be short-lived.
Source

President Obama meets national security team on Syria again

Posted: 30 Aug 2013 08:39 AM PDT

President Obama meets with his national security team

A US official says President Barack Obama meets his national security team over Syria again.
The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, added that the US president was meeting his National Security Council at the White House over plans for a possible military action against Syria.
Washington is also expected to release a report it claims contains intelligence gatherings over a chemical weapons attack on the outskirts of the Syrian capital of Damascus last week.
Senior American officials, including President Obama himself, have earlier pointed their fingers at the Syrian government forces for carrying the attack.
During a 90-minute briefing in the US Congress on Thursday night, the Obama administration tried to make its case over plans to attack Syria by claiming to have evidence proving that Syrian government forces carried out the deadly chemical weapons attack near Damascus.
Several lawmakers, however, said they were not convinced by the evidence.
The efforts of the Obama administration and some of its Western allies to attack Syria comes as a UN team, which has been in Syria at the invitation of Damascus to probe other chemical attacks by the foreign-backed insurgents, is yet to announce its findings over the latest chemical attack.
Source

British Parliament votes against military intervention in Syria

Posted: 30 Aug 2013 08:17 AM PDT

British Prime Minister David Cameron trying to sell his war ploy at the House of Commons.

The MP’s vote against military intervention in Syria marked a wonderful day for democracy in Britain, because at long last, the Parliament listened to public opinion and voted accordingly, casting a huge blow to the powerful British neo-con clique.
In the great anti-war film All Quiet on the Western Front there’s a wonderful scene when Paul, on leave from the front, returns to his old school where his warmongering teacher and arch-hypocrite Kantorek is still urging his pupils to enlist, despite not volunteering himself. To Kantorek’s horror Paul launches an anti-war tirade, and turns on his old teacher. ‘He tells you go out and die, but it’s easier to say go out and die than it is to do it and it’s easier to say it than to watch it happen’.
I thought of that powerful scene this morning when I heard the news that the British Parliament had voted against military action against Syria.
In the same way that Paul had turned on his warmongering teacher, so British Parliamentarians – and the British public – have turned against the neo-con and ‘liberal interventionist’ hypocrites who, like Kantorek, are so keen on war, so long as its other people and their children- who do the fighting- and the dying.
These serial warmongers told us that ‘something must be done’ in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria, producing no evidence to back up their claims that the Syrian government was responsible. But this time- unlike in the cases of Kosovo, Iraq and Libya- they’ve not been listened to. And the neo-cons and ‘liberal interventionists’, who trumpet so loudly their commitment to spreading ‘democracy’ around the globe, are not very happy at this wonderful and long overdue sign of a democratic resurgence in Britain. A newspaper poll showed that just 8% of Britons wanted immediate weapons strikes on Syria, but despite that the ‘Democracy by Bombs’ brigade are condemning yesterday’s vote as a black day for democracy. Oh, the irony!
The vote is a huge blow to the tiny but powerful British neo-conservative clique who must have been confident that they’d get their way once again. But things have changed a lot since 2003, and even since 2011, when the neocons got their ‘intervention’ against Libya.
The Rupert Murdoch media empire, at the forefront for propagandising for the US-led wars of the last two decades, is now isolated in its obsessive screeching for military action and the facts that MPs ignored bellicose pro-’intervention’ editorials in Murdoch papers shows us how much they are declining in influence.
The Murdoch-owned Times must have thought it was being frightfully clever in wheeling out Tony Blair, the High Priest of ‘Liberal Interventionism’ to support an attack on Syria earlier this week but it showed just how laughably out of touch it was with public opinion by promoting the views of a man whom a large percentage of Britons regard- quite rightly- as a war criminal and who should be in a prison cell at The Hague.
Opposition to British involvement in an attack on Syria was widespread across the political spectrum. It wasn’t just the genuine anti-war left who opposed starting World War Three, but traditional conservatives too, with Conservative-supporting newspapers such as The Daily Express taking a strong line against intervention. UKIP opposed it, Respect opposed it, and so did the Greens, the Communists and other groups too.
With the vast majority of people turning against their devilish plans for Permanent War, the small, self-adoring gang of neo-cons and ‘liberal interventionists’, who have exercised so much influence on our politics in Britain since 1997, are now more isolated than ever. Their obsession with military intervention in Syria to topple a secular government fighting the very same Al-Qaeda terrorists and affiliates who are supposed to be our number one enemies, has exposed them for the crazed fanatics that they are.
People are sick and tired of being told by elitist neo-con pundits sitting in comfy offices in London, New York or Washington that ‘something must be done’ as its a record that we’ve all heard many times before. Iraq lies in ruins after the invasion of 2003 and Libya is in chaos too. Yet despite the disastrous record of US-led military interventions in recent years, and the lies told to justify them, we plebs were still expected to obediently fall into line and support the latest instalment of the neo-cons’ Permanent War- an attack on Syria. Its been truly nauseating to see the people who destroyed Iraq and Libya pose as concerned humanitarians in Syria, but now more people than ever before are seeing through the charade.
There’s still a long way to go before we get the foreign policy in Britain that the vast majority of ordinary people in Britain want, but make no mistake, last night’s vote was a hugely important step in the right direction.
The truculent reaction of the serial warmongers to this renewal of British democracy tells us just how significant it was. They’re finding out, like Kantorek in All Quiet on the Western Front, that you can only get away with it for so long.
Source

Fifth US warship deployed to Syria

Posted: 29 Aug 2013 01:32 PM PDT

The United States is sending a fifth warship towards Syria, defense officials said Thursday, upping the ante as a showdown between the US and President Bashar al-Assad’s regime remains all but declared.
A 505-foot-long guided missile destroyer, the USS Stout, has been sent to the Mediterranean Sea to assist the four US warships already deployed to await potential orders to strike Syria amid an international investigation into Assad’s reported use of chemical weapons to gas innocent civilians outside of Damascus last week.
Should the White House ask for an assault on Assad’s regime, the USS Stout and the rest of the seafaring fleet will join an arsenal of US, UK and French warheads already surrounding Syria in every which direction.
The Stout left its home port in Norfolk, Virginia more than a week ago with hundreds of soldiers on board en route to the Mediterranean. In the days since, however, Obama administration officials have suggested that the president has not taken the possibility of ordering a military strike against Syria off the table. Now should an assault be ordered from Washington, the US will have one more option at its disposal with regards to striking from the sea.
Norfolk’s WAVY News reported Thursday morning that the Stout was already on patrol in the eastern Mediterranean, but is now heading east to relieve one of the ships stationed within striking distance of Syria.
According to Sky News, a US defense official said the ship will replace the USS Mahan, but noted that both vessels may remain in place for the time being.
In an official Navy document, the Stout is said to be “equipped with the world’s most sophisticated weapon system,”
The Stout, said the Pentagon paper, “can guide vertically-launched standard missiles to intercept hostile aircraft and missiles at extended ranges.” It’s equipped to fire anti-ship cruise missiles as far away as 65 nautical miles and can perform a sea-to-land attack with deadly Tomahawk missiles.
Meanwhile, Pres. Obama is meeting with members of Congress on Thursday to discuss what the US intelligence community has discovered about the reported use of chemical gas last week.
Earlier in the week, White House press secretary Jay Carney said the administration had not ruled out a strike, and that evidence linking Assad’s regime to chemical weapon use would merit a response that might include military force.
“[W]e have made clear for a long time, notwithstanding our views about the fact that we don’t envision US boots on the ground in Syria, that we retain—and the president retains—all options available to him in Syria, and that includes military options,” Carney said. “And that is the case here in response to this transgression.”
“Broadly speaking,” Carney said during a press briefing Tuesday at the White House, “I think it’s important to note that it is in the clear national security interest of the United States that the use or proliferation of chemical weapons on this scale not go unanswered. The consequences of a dissolution of that norm would be profoundly not in the interest of the United States or in the international community, in particular in this highly volatile region, but also around the world.”
On Wednesday, the Associated Press quoted two unnamed White House officials who said on condition of anonymity that the administration is struggling to decide what Syrian targets could be hit and what kind of response the US would want as a result.
“If there is action taken, it must be clearly defined what the objective is and why” and based on “clear facts,” one of those officials said.
“They are looking at what is just enough to mean something, just enough to be more than symbolic,” a second official told the Los Angeles Times on condition of anonymity.
Now with a five ships all outside of Syria, at least for now, any strike against Assad’s regime could call upon more firepower than before.
As RT reported earlier this week, the US and its allies have all-but surrounded Syria. The US has military bases in the neighboring countries of Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, and air-defense Patriot missiles are available to the north and south of Syria in Turkey and Jordan, respectively.
Additionally, at least one British cruise missile-carrying nuclear submarine and one French vessel could be sent towards Syria, and the US, UK and Turkey have airbases in the region that could assist with an air-to-land strike using F-16 fighter jets.
During Tuesday’s briefing, Carney said the president would consult with Congress before a strike but did not say explicitly that Obama would ask for permission. According to Carney, confirmation that Assad ordered the use of chemical weapons would violate international norms and warrant a response that would not be necessitated by congressional approval. Pres. Obama will reportedly make available a declassified intelligence report justifying any response aimed towards Syria should elect to take action.
Source

Syria: US Aided Terrorists in Chemical Attack, Europe Next

Posted: 29 Aug 2013 01:28 PM PDT

View through face mask of two soldiers wearing protective chemical weapons clothing holding guns in foxhole.

In an explosive declaration, Syria’s deputy foreign minister has now come out on record in declaring that the US, Britain, and France were instrumental in aiding the chemical attacks on Syria through a network of terrorists inside the country.
Going further with the intel on the subject, the Syrian official now says that the next target will be Europe. Confirming earlier reports by myself and powerhouse journalist Paul Joseph Watson that there was a US government element involved in the planning of the key chemical attacks as documented by Yahoo News, the deputy foreign minister told reporters outside of the Four Seasons hotel in Damascus that he had even presented the United Nations chemical weapons inspectors with bombshell information that reveals the US helped in ‘arming terrorist groups’ to carry out the attacks.
The admission is now featured on Reuters as a headline piece titled ‘Syria says ‘terrorists’ will strike Europe with chemical weapons’. The report goes on to state:
“Syria’s deputy foreign minister said on Wednesday that the United States, Britain and France helped “terrorists” use chemical weapons in Syria, and that the same groups would soon use them against Europe. Speaking to reporters outside the Four Seasons hotel in Damascus, Faisal Maqdad said he had presented U.N. chemical weapons inspectors with evidence that “armed terrorist groups” had used sarin gas in all the sites of alleged attacks.”
To break it down plainly, the deputy foreign minister is now adding power behind the January 2013 leaked emails that revealed plans for a major chemical attack as a pretext to war. And regardless of the validity of these emails, it highlights the consistent patterns of staged attacks in order to launch military action. In one such report from Yahoo News, the story reads:
“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. As per the scheme ‘Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to usechemical weapons,’ the Daily Mail reports.”
But it’s not just the Syrian government saying this, or even just the largest website in the world (Yahoo) publishing this information through AIN. Even World Net Daily and highly reputable researcher Dr. Jerome Corsi have reached the same conclusions in their own investigations that this chemical attack was likely carried out by the Obama-backed rebels. Yesterday, Dr. Jerome Corsi shared similar revelations that now coincide with this groundbreaking report.
Source

World’s Ridiculous Laws that Will Definitely make you Laugh

Posted: 29 Aug 2013 01:15 PM PDT

There are many people in the world, who may feel dissatisfied about the existence of laws. However, few of them dare to challenge the consistency of laws, their relevance and need to restore justice, punish evil, or prevent crime. However, in some countries there are legal provisions that are difficult to explain from the standpoint of common sense.
In Europe, there are a lot of ridiculous laws. For example, in the UK you can not turn a post stamp with an image of the royal family the sticky side up – it is regarded as treason. One is not allowed to wear knightly armor in the building of the English Parliament. Archery on the Welsh in Chester is possible only after midnight. Men are allowed to urinate in public places, only if it is being done standing by the rear wheel of the car, with the right hand put on the car. In London, according to the established law, men can beat their wives only after nine o’clock in the evening, not to disturb neighbors. In Scotland, if someone knocks on to your house and asks to use your toilet, the law requires you to let the person in.
There is an unusual law in Iceland: anyone is allowed to provide medical services if they have a “Scottulaejir” sign, which translates as “witch doctor”. In France, one should treat signs and names with caution. For example, it is illegal to call a pig “Napoleon.” Compare it to Russia, where goats are often named as Boris, and every other rascal red cat is named Chubais. No one is going to be jailed for that.
In addition, it is officially considered criminal to park flying saucers in vineyards throughout France. In Denmark, there is a special attitude to means of transport too. For example, it is forbidden to start a car if there is someone underneath it. Interestingly, according to Danish law, any vehicle passing by a horse cart and scaring the horse must pull over. If the horse does not calm down, the driver is obliged to cover the car with something.
Israeli authorities take great care of animals as well. In the city of Haifa, for example, it is forbidden to bring bears to city beaches. In Arad, it is illegal to feed animals in public places. In Ranat-Gasharon, one can not keep Rottweilers. In addition, the country’s laws prohibit blowing one’s nose on the streets on Saturdays. In the town of Kiryat-Motzkin, one can not turn a bright light on and speak loudly.
The Italians have a special attitude to cheese. Sleeping at work at a cheese factory in Ferrara may entail a prison term. In addition, according to the laws passed a few centuries ago, women of bad behavior are forbidden to even come close to a cheese factory. Interestingly, according to local laws, women named Mary, do not have the right to engage in prostitution to avoid associations with the Virgin Mary.
In Singapore, people pay great attention to tidy and clean streets. A person, three times caught for throwing garbage on the street, will have to wash sidewalks on Sundays.” Such penalties are broadcast on local television.
Interesting laws were adopted in China. In the country, it is forbidden to save a drowning person, as it is considered interference in their fate. Attending college is allowed only to smart Chinese students. There is an unconventional approach to education in Saudi Arabia, where women are forbidden to become doctors. In addition, male doctors are not allowed to examine women.
There are surprising laws in India. In this country, it is illegal to leave more than five rat hairs or pieces of litter per kilogram of rice, wheat, corn or barley. In the state of Bihar, in northern India, a person who kills a cow is executed by hanging. Those, who dare to clean after the sacred animal, will have their hands chopped off.
In Australia, people pay special attention to clothes. For example, the Australians are prohibited to go out wearing dark clothes, soft shoes and with shoe polish on the face. It is also forbidden to walk on the opposite (right) lane. The law that has been preserved from the time of horse-drawn carriages, prohibits taxi drivers from going on the street without armfuls of hay. Probably drivers have to keep the hay in the trunk.
Canada has its own unusual laws. Thus, it is not allowed to pay for an item worth 50 cents with coins worth 1 cent. Every fifth song, broadcast on local radio, should be performed by Canadian-born singers, whereas all street signs should be written in French. If a business owner wants to use a sign with English lettering, English letters should be twice as small as the letters written in French.
The number of ridiculous laws is the largest in the United States. According to the law of the State of Florida, housewives are not allowed to break more than three plates per day, or to beat the edges of more than four cups and/or saucers. According to the laws of the State of Indiana, citizens are forbidden from going to the theater or cinema, nor can they ride a tram for four hours after eating garlic. The state also forbids taking baths in the period between October and March. In Arizona, it is strictly forbidden to put a donkey to sleep in a bathroom. Hunting for camels is prohibited as well. Interestingly, according to the laws of the state, a thief, caught while stealing soap, will have to wash with this soap until it ends.
A large number of ridiculous laws exist in the state of Alabama. In Montgomery, pedestrians are prohibited from opening umbrellas in the streets, so as not to frighten horses. In Alabama, it is forbidden to drive a car blindfolded. It is also considered a crime to carry ice cream in pockets, to spit in the presence of women, to wear fake mustache in a church and appear masked in the streets.
In Pennsylvania, authorities pay great attention to clean homes. According to the laws of the state, housewives are not allowed to hide dirt and dust under the carpet. It is also considered illegal for more than 16 women to live in one house. The law, however, allows 120 men to live together. In the state of Idaho, it is forbidden to fish while sitting on a camel.
In Minnesota, the law prohibits to hang men’s and women’s underwear on the same rope. Sleeping naked is illegal too. In Cleveland, Ohio, women are prohibited from wearing patent leather shoes, because men can see a reflection of underwear in them. In Oxford, Ohio, women can not undress, standing in front of a portrait of a man. In Seattle, Washington, a woman, who sits without a pillow on the lap of a man in buses or trains, will face a prison term of one year. In New York, the law prohibits the presence of naked mannequins in shop windows. In the town of Carmel, also located in the State of New York, a man faces a fine if he goes out wearing pants that do not fit his jacket. The authorities of the state of Washington went even further: it is officially banned to pretend having wealthy parents. Also in Washington, the people, who came to the U.S. with intent to commit a crime, must at first call the police and inform them about the availability of such plans.
Interestingly, according to the laws of the State of Kentucky, a person is considered sober as long as he or she can stand on their feet. In Kentucky, it is also prohibited for women to walk on a highway in a bathing suit unaccompanied. In Hartford, Connecticut, it is forbidden to cross the road on hands.
In North Carolina, public organizations are not allowed to meet, if their members wear one and the same outfits. The law was enacted to prevent meetings of local Ku Klux Klan activists, who wear white robes.
In Eureka, Illinois, mustached men are not allowed to kiss women. In Baltimore, it is not allowed to come to the theater with lions. In the city of Providence, Rhode Island, it is prohibited to sell a toothbrush and toothpaste to one and the same customer on Sundays. The law of Alaska prohibits throwing live moose out of a plane. In Oklahoma, one can go to jail by deciding to tease dogs and bite off a piece from someone else’s hamburger. In Michigan, a woman can not cut her hair without her husband’s consent. In the state of West Virginia, students can not attend school if they smell onions. In Marietta, Georgia, it is prohibited by law to spit out of cars or buses. Spitting out of trucks is perfectly legal, though.
Certainly, the list of unusual laws can go on and on. Such reckless bans refer to the time when they were relevant and practical. Nowadays, these rules are outdated, but the authorities in many countries simply do not consider it necessary to review legislation. Such laws can only make foreigners smile. Nevertheless, one may find themselves in very uncomfortable situations in foreign countries because of the lack of knowledge of history of this country.
Source

Russia deploying warship, missile cruiser to Mediterranean

Posted: 29 Aug 2013 01:02 PM PDT

Russia has announced plans for deploying an anti-submarine ship and a missile cruiser to the Mediterranean, amid the escalating Western war rhetoric against Syria.
“The well-known situation shaping up in the eastern Mediterranean called for certain corrections to the make-up of the naval forces,” an unnamed source in the Russian General Staff was quoted by Russian news agency Interfax as saying on Thursday.
“A large anti-submarine ship of the Northern Fleet will join them (the existing Russian naval forces) over the next few days. Later it will be joined by the Moskva, a rocket cruiser of the Black Sea Fleet,” the source added.
Moscow is strongly opposed to any military strike on Syria, with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov believing that the move will critically destabilize the region.
Earlier in the day, the Russian Foreign Ministry quoted Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov as saying that “Declared plans by some states to inflict a military strike on Syria are an undisguised challenge to the key provisions of the UN Charter and other norms of international law.”
The war rhetoric against Syria gained momentum after the militants operating inside the country and the foreign-backed Syrian opposition claimed on August 21 that hundreds had been killed in a government chemical attack on militant strongholds in the Damascus suburbs of Ain Tarma, Zamalka and Jobar.
Damascus has categorically rejected the allegations.
Since August 27, speculations became stronger about the possibility of a military attack on Syria. Media outlets reported US plans for likely surgical attacks, which would be in the form of “cruise-missile strikes,” and “could rely on four US destroyers in the Mediterranean [Sea].” The plan was said to be awaiting US President Barack Obama’s go-ahead.
Iran, Russia and China, among other countries, have warned against foreign military intervention in Syria.
Meanwhile, reports say Britain has deployed six Typhoon jets to its Akrotiri base in Cyprus.
Source

Obama reportedly considering 2-day strike on Syria

Posted: 29 Aug 2013 12:58 PM PDT

White House officials say the United States may launch a limited military strike on Syria as early as this Thursday as the intelligence community prepares to release a report justifying action and allies are rallied.
Senior officials in the Obama administration told the Washington Post for an article published on Tuesday that the White House is weighing a limited strike on Syria and said on condition of anonymity that “We’re actively looking at the various legal angles that would inform a decision.”
According to the Post, the likely response from Washington would be a sea-to-land strike from the Mediterranean that would last no longer than two days and would not be directed towards targets where the chemical weapons arsenal is believed to be stored.
But while an attack is all but imminent and will likely be launched from warships already mobilized in the Mediterranean by the week’s end, public support in the US has teetered towards nil as of late. The Obama administration says there is undeniable proof that chemical weapons were used on civilians outside of Damascus on August 21, but a five-day-long Reuters poll taken during that time concluded only nine percent of Americans favor intervention.
Notwithstanding that lack of support, US Secretary of State John Kerry hinted Monday at a response which will jolt Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and ideally worsen the odds that his regime will implement chemical warheads again.
Despite insistence from Assad and allies in Russia that the Syrian government is not guilty of using chemical weapons, Sec. Kerry said during a press conference on Monday that “our understanding of what has already happened in Syria is grounded in facts, informed by conscious and guided by common sense.” Kerry called Assad’s reported attempt to cover-up the alleged use of chemical weapons “cynical” and said, “President Obama believes there must be accountability for those who would use the world’s heinous weapons against the world’s most vulnerable people.”
One day earlier, Sec. Kerry admitted that Pres. Obama was considering his options with regards to a strike and was to meet with lawmakers in Congress as well as with international leaders. According to the Post article, however, the president may forego getting approval from Capitol Hill and will instead rely on striking Syria due to “undeniable,” as the White House puts it, war crimes.
“The administration has said that it will follow international law in shaping its response,” Karen DeYoung and Anne Gearan wrote for the Post, adding, “But much of international law is untested, and administration lawyers are also examining possible legal justifications based on a violation of international prohibitions on chemical weapons use, or on an appeal for assistance from a neighboring nation such as Turkey.” Additionally, the US has already received assurance of support from Britain, France and Turkey.
According to senior administration officials who spoke to CBS News on condition of anonymity, Pres. Obama met with his national security team this past weekend and has ordered that a declassified intelligence report showing the rationale for any attack on Syria be released before it occurs.
While only nine percent of the respondents polled in the Reuters survey between August 19 and 23 said they want the White House to respond to Assad’s reported use of chemical weapons immediately, 25 percent said they would favor intervention if the US concludes with certainty that those warheads were illegally used. A Reuters/Ipsos poll from earlier in the month found that 30.2 percent of Americans would support intervention if Assad is linked to using chemical weapons.
Sec. Kerry said the indiscriminate slaughter of women and children apparently being carried out by the Assad regime constitutes a “moral obscenity.”
Source

22 reasons why starting World War III in Middle East is a really bad idea

Posted: 28 Aug 2013 12:38 PM PDT

While most of the country is obsessing over Miley Cyrus, the Obama administration is preparing a military attack against Syria which has the potential of starting World War 3. In fact, it is being reported that cruise missile strikes could begin “as early as Thursday“. The Obama administration is pledging that the strikes will be “limited”, but what happens when the Syrians fight back?
What happens if they sink a US naval vessel or they have agents start hitting targets inside the United States? Then we would have a full-blown war on our hands. And what happens if the Syrians decide to retaliate by hitting Israel? If Syrian missiles start raining down on Tel Aviv, Israel will be extremely tempted to absolutely flatten Damascus, and they are more than capable of doing precisely that. And of course Hezbollah and Iran are not likely to just sit idly by as their close ally Syria is battered into oblivion.
We are looking at a scenario where the entire Middle East could be set aflame, and that might only be just the beginning. Russia and China are sternly warning the U.S. government not to get involved in Syria, and by starting a war with Syria we will do an extraordinary amount of damage to our relationships with those two global superpowers. Could this be the beginning of a chain of events that could eventually lead to a massive global conflict with Russia and China on one side and the United States on the other? Of course it will not happen immediately, but I fear that what is happening now is setting the stage for some really bad things. The following are 22 reasons why starting World War 3 in the Middle East is a really bad idea…
#1 The American people are overwhelmingly against going to war with Syria…
Americans strongly oppose US intervention in Syria’s civil war and believe Washington should stay out of the conflict even if reports that Syria’s government used deadly chemicals to attack civilians are confirmed, a Reuters/Ipsos poll says.
About 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria’s civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Barack Obama should act.
#2 At this point, a war in Syria is even more unpopular with the American people than Congress is.
#3 The Obama administration has not gotten approval to go to war with Syria from Congress as the US Constitution requires.
#4 The United States does not have the approval of the United Nations to attack Syria and it is not going to be getting it.
#5 Syria has said that it will use ”all means available” to defend itself if the United States attacks. Would that include terror attacks in the United States itself?
#6 Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem made the following statement on Tuesday…
“We have two options: either to surrender, or to defend ourselves with the means at our disposal. The second choice is the best: we will defend ourselves”
#7 Russia has just sent their most advanced anti-ship missiles to Syria. What do you think would happen if images of sinking US naval vessels were to come flashing across our television screens?
#8 When the United States attacks Syria, there is a very good chance that Syria will attack Israel. Just check out what one Syrian official said recently…
A member of the Syrian Ba’ath national council Halef al-Muftah, until recently the Syrian propaganda minister’s aide, said on Monday that Damascus views Israel as “behind the aggression and therefore it will come under fire” should Syria be attacked by the United States.
In an interview for the American radio station Sawa in Arabic, President Bashar Assad’s fellow party member said: “We have strategic weapons and we can retaliate. Essentially, the strategic weapons are aimed at Israel.”
Al-Muftah stressed that the US’s threats will not influence the Syrain regime and added that “If the US or Israel err through aggression and exploit the chemical issue, the region will go up in endless flames, affecting not only the area’s security, but the world’s.”
#9 If Syria attacks Israel, the consequences could be absolutely catastrophic. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is promising that any attack will be responded to “forcefully“…
“We are not a party to this civil war in Syria but if we identify any attempt to attack us we will respond and we will respond forcefully”
#10 Hezbollah will likely do whatever it can to fight for the survival of the Assad regime. That could include striking targets inside both the United States and Israel.
#11 Iran’s closest ally is Syria. Will Iran sit idly by as their closest ally is removed from the chessboard?
#12 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with Russia. On Tuesday, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that the West is acting like a “monkey with a hand grenade.”
#13 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with China. And what will happen if the Chinese decide to start dumping the massive amount of US debt that it is holding? Interest rates would absolutely skyrocket and we would rapidly be facing a nightmare scenario.
#14 Dr. Jerome Corsi and Walid Shoebat have compiled some startling evidence that it was actually the Syrian rebels that the US is supporting that were responsible for the chemical weapons attack that is being used as justification to go to war with Syria…
With the assistance of former PLO member and native Arabic-speaker Walid Shoebat, WND has assembled evidence from various Middle Eastern sources that cast doubt on Obama administration claims the Assad government is responsible for last week’s attack.
#15 As Pat Buchanan recently noted, it would have made absolutely no sense for the Assad regime to use chemical weapons on defenseless women and children. The only people who would benefit from such an attack would be the rebels…
The basic question that needs to be asked about this horrific attack on civilians, which appears to be gas related, is: Cui bono?
To whose benefit would the use of nerve gas on Syrian women and children redound? Certainly not Assad’s, as we can see from the furor and threats against him that the use of gas has produced.
The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war.
#16 If the Saudis really want to topple the Assad regime, they should do it themselves. They should not expect the United States to do their dirty work for them.
#17 A former commander of US Central Command has said that a US attack on Syria would result in “a full-throated, very, very serious war“.
#18 A war in the Middle East will be bad for the financial markets. The Dow was down about 170 points today and concern about war with Syria was the primary reason.
#19 A war in the Middle East will cause the price of oil to go up. On Tuesday, the price of US oil rose to about $109 a barrel.
#20 There is no way in the world that the US government should be backing the Syrian rebels. As I discussed a few days ago, the rebels have pledged loyalty to al-Qaeda, they have beheaded numerous Christians and they have massacred entire Christian villages. If the US government helps these lunatics take power in Syria it will be a complete and utter disaster.
#21 A lot of innocent civilians inside Syria will end up getting killed. Already, a lot of Syrians are expressing concern about what “foreign intervention” will mean for them and their families…
“I’ve always been a supporter of foreign intervention, but now that it seems like a reality, I’ve been worrying that my family could be hurt or killed,” said one woman, Zaina, who opposes Assad. “I’m afraid of a military strike now.”
“The big fear is that they’ll make the same mistakes they made in Libya and Iraq,” said Ziyad, a man in his 50s. “They’ll hit civilian targets, and then they’ll cry that it was by mistake, but we’ll get killed in the thousands.”
#22 If the US government insists on going to war with Syria without the approval of the American people, the US Congress or the United Nations, we are going to lose a lot of friends and a lot of credibility around the globe. It truly is a sad day when Russia looks like “the good guys” and we look like “the bad guys”.
What good could possibly come out of getting involved in Syria? As I wrote about the other day, the “rebels” that Obama is backing are rabidly anti-Christian, rabidly anti-Israel and rabidly anti-western. If they take control of Syria, that nation will be far more unstable and far more of a hotbed for terrorism than it is now.
And the downside of getting involved in Syria is absolutely enormous. By attacking Syria, the United States could cause a major regional war to erupt in the Middle East which could eventually lead to World War 3.
I don’t know about you, but I think that starting World War 3 in the Middle East is a really bad idea.
Let us hope that cooler heads prevail before things spin totally out of control.
Source

Humans invented music as remedy

Posted: 28 Aug 2013 12:33 PM PDT

Some believe that music appeared out of rhythm, which helped dancers in ritual dancing. Others believe that music appeared as a synchronizer of movements during group work. Recently, however, two American scientists suggested that the appearance of music was primarily related to its ability to bring people together and unite them with the help of good spirits.
It is generally believed that music, like other forms of art, was born at the dawn of civilization. Musical instruments of the Stone Age period were made from specially processed mammoth bones that produced sound at impact, like bone pipes. It is not surprising that one of the theories says that music emerged as a supplement to dancing, so it was rhythm that originally played the dominant role in music – it helped dancers move in synch with music. Another hypothesis says that music was formed as a form of assistance during work. Here, the main role also belongs to rhythm, for it was easier to make concerted movements.
The linguistic theory of the origin of music, which looks into its relationship with speech intonation, has received broad recognition as well. This theory explains, for example, why the viscous Oriental music is so unlike the upbeat Western music. In traditional Chinese, Thai and Vietnamese music, decreasing and increasing tones are plentiful.
The same can be said of native languages of representatives of these cultures. Both in speech and in music of these peoples, there are not many short melodic intervals – that is they rarely put two consecutive notes next to each other. Intonations of these languages to first-time listeners seem to be “jumping” or “floating”. But in Western music, just like in Western languages, there are more short intervals – one or two semitones, that is less than or equal to the major second. The sound pattern of phrases is more even.
Charles Darwin believed that music was a sexual attraction. The rivalry of males for females was conducted at different levels: those who win fights with enemies, who look better and brighter and, of course, those who were more vociferous had the advantage. Psychologist and neuroscientist at the University of Colorado (USA), Chris Loersch, adheres to another hypothesis, which, however, can also be called an “evolutionary” one. He and his colleague Nathan Arbuckle suggested that music was a way to unite our ancestors in a close-knit group.
Arbuckle and Loersch paid attention to the unifying effect of music. Indeed, it can be seen in how a small group of people like to relax together with a guitar, and how crowds of people go to huge arenas and stadiums for music concerts. A song that people listen to and sing along, charges them with the general mood, transforming a bunch of disparate people in a community with a common attitude.
To test their hypothesis, the scientists conducted seven series of experiments, with the participation of 879 students from various countries. The experimenters studied emotional reactions to music and the feeling of involvement in groups of listeners. It was found that those respondents, whom music influenced most, admitted the need to be recognized as a part of a team more frequently than others.
“At many concerts, there is some feeling of community, there are rules of human interaction – says Loersch. – There are extensive ties being formed between people, everyone around are like family members. People on stage raise their hands up in the air, and people in the audience repeat all that smiling. Just look at their faces – forty thousand people are bound together by music,” the scientist said.
Of course, the found correlation is not enough to confirm the theory. Yet, the assumption of Arbuckle and Loersch look truthful. Loersch believes that in such moments, music connects even strangers, thus satisfying their need to belong to social community.
“Our primary motivation in life is to be a good member of this or that group. People feel wonderful throwing off their individuality and becoming a part of a larger whole. If someone does not fulfill their obligations under the “social contract,” they get booed and it does not matter how good this musician is.”
Moreover, the scientists assumed that listening to music alone is self-deception. In reality, at this moment our thoughts are interacting with other people – with those, who like listening to this music as well, and even with those who perform it. Incidentally, one of the most effective “communicators,” according to Loersch, is Stevie Wonder: “I think he’s incredibly effective at communicating emotions. He makes you feel what he feels. And he clearly feels a lot.”
Source

Syrian, Iranian Officials Say Israel Will Be “Set On Fire” If US Strikes

Posted: 28 Aug 2013 12:24 PM PDT

Netanyahu calls up reserve forces; Huge US military build up in Qatar; Russia evacuates citizens from Syria.
Senior Syrian and Iranian officials have again warned that should the US pursue military action in Syria, the state of Israel will find itself firmly and immediately in their crosshairs.
“If Damascus comes under attack, Tel Aviv will be targeted too and a full-scale war against Syria will actually issue a license for attacking Israel,” said a Syrian army official in comments to Iran’s Fars News Agency.
“We are rest assured that if Syria is attacked, Israel will also be set on fire and such an attack will, in turn, engage Syria’s neighbors,” the official said, maintaining anonymity during the interview.
The army official also stated that if the US chooses to help Al Qaeda-linked jihadists in Syria, their will be significant blowback in Israel.
“Weakening the central government in Damascus will actually start growing attacks on Israel and will create insecurity for that regime,” he said.
“Thus, a U.S. attack on Syria will herald frequent strikes and attacks on Israel, not just by Damascus and its allies in retaliation, but by extremist groups who will find a ground for staging their aspirations,” the official added.
Senior Iranian officials echoed the comments, with Hossein Sheikholeslam, the director-general of the parliament for International Affairs telling Fars News that “the Zionist regime will be the first victim of a military attack on Syria.”
Iranian Member of Parliament Mansur Haqiqatpur was also quoted as saying that “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 fresh threats come in the wake of similar comments made earlier in the week by Syrian Deputy Information Minister Halaf Al-Maftah who warned that Israel will “come under fire” should the United states strike against the Assad regime. He added that the Syrian government has “strategic weapons aimed at Israel,” and warned that “If the US or Israel err through aggression and exploit the chemical issue, the region will go up in endless flames, affecting not only the area’s security, but the world’s.”
Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom quoted Muftah as also warning “It’s possible to say unambiguously that a process of war against Syria could lead to an all-out world war. The responsibility for that will rest on the US and the Zionist entity’s shoulders.”
The Beirut Daily Star quoted a “senior source close to” Hezbollah as saying that in the event of major Western strike against Syria “Hezbollah will fight on various fronts,” and predicting an immediate “inferno of a war with Israel.”
Pro-Hezbollah cleric, Afif Nabulsi, who is closely aligned with the Syrian and Iranian governments, was also quoted as saying that “any [US] strike against Syria will be met by harsh responses against US interests in the region and against Israel directly.”
Lebanese Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour stated in a radio interview that the country would retaliate if Israel “exploits a strike against Syria to attack Hezbollah.”
In response to the threats, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said “The State of Israel is ready for any scenario.” Following a meeting with security officials in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said “We are not part of the civil war in Syria, but if we identify any attempt whatsoever to harm us, we will respond and we will respond in strength.”

According to Israeli intelligence website DEBKAfile, the Israeli security cabinet held another emergency meeting today, ordering the partial mobilization of select, qualitative IDF reserve forces: Rocket, Air Force, missile interception, Home Defense command and intelligence units.
DEBKAfile’s military sources report that an American military operation on Syria is scheduled to start Friday night, early Saturday Aug. 30-31. The report adds that US forces are finalizing a a major buildup at the huge US Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar.
“US air force reinforcements in Qatar will stand ready to rush to the aid of US allies – Israel, Jordan and Turkey – in the event of their coming under Syrian Scud attack.” the report states, adding that on the opposite side the Syrian army has been scattering personnel, weapons and air assets to pre prepared fortified shelters in order to limit damage and losses.
“Syrian army command centers in Homs, Hama, Latakia and the Aleppo region were also being split up and dispersed, after a tip-off to Syrian and Russian intelligence that they would be targeted by the US strike.” the report adds.
The Associated Press also reports that Israel has ordered a special call-up of hundreds of reserve troops to beef up civil defense preparations and to operate air-defense units near the border. Defense officials have confirmed the deployment of Iron Dome and Patriot missile-defense batteries in areas near the Syrian border, stating that they believe a US strike on Syria is imminent.
Israeli security and rescue forces are also engaged in a two-day drill in the Golan Heights along the Syrian border.
The intelligence supposedly handed to the US and its allies suggesting that the Syrian army was involved in the chemical attacks last week is said to have come predominantly via Israeli intelligence agencies.
While Chinese and Russian officials continue to warn of the grave global consequences of a US strike on Syria, Russian citizens are currently being evacuated out of the country.
Meanwhile even firebrand broadcaster Glenn Beck has come out against intervention in Syria, warning that because of China and Russia’s alignment with Iran and Syria, a wider war in the middle east would mean that the US “would not survive”.
Beck warned that “this is World War 3 in the making,” noting the Obama administration is on the exact same destructive warpath that the Bush government set out on 12 years ago.
Beck desperately appealed to his conservative listener base to find common ground with real liberals and hold huge anti-war rallies.

Source

Kucinich says US war on Syria could become WWIII

Posted: 28 Aug 2013 12:07 PM PDT

Former US Congressman Dennis Kucinich

Former outspoken Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich has warned that a US military attack against Syria could become “World War Three.”
He lashed out at the administration of President Barack Obama for “rushing” into a war based on questionable evidence.
The Syrian opposition accused the government of President Bashar al-Assad of launching a chemical attack on militant strongholds in the suburbs of Damascus last week, an allegation that many say has turned into a “casus belli” for US military intervention.
“This is being used as a pretext,” Kucinich said in an interview with The Hill. “The verdict is in before the facts have been gathered. What does that tell you?”
UN inspectors are in Syria to determine whether chemical weapons were used in the attack but have yet to release their report.
Kucinich, who voted against the Iraq war, also argued that airstrikes on Syria would turn the US military into “al-Qaeda’s air force.”
“So what, we’re about to become al-Qaeda’s air force now?” Kucinich said. “This is a very, very serious matter that has broad implications internationally. And to try to minimize it by saying we’re just going to have a ‘targeted strike’ – that’s an act of war. It’s not anything to be trifled with.”
On Tuesday, senior US officials said the Obama administration has plans to launch missile strikes against Syria “as early as Thursday.”
The US has beefed up its military presence in the eastern Mediterranean. Several nuclear-powered submarines are reportedly in the waters near Syria, also cruise-missile equipped.
US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has reiterated that the US military is ready attack Syria should President Obama give the green light.
According to Kucinich, Obama would be violating the Constitution if he does not get congressional approval before taking any military action against Syria. Congress is on summer recess until September 9.
Commenting on the alleged chemical attack, White House spokesman Jay Carney said Tuesday that “suggestions that there’s any doubt about who’s responsible for this are as preposterous as suggestions that the attack itself didn’t occur.”
Meanwhile, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Vladimir Titov said on Wednesday that the UN Security Council should wait for inspectors to present their report on the alleged gas attack.
“It would be premature, at the least, to discuss any Security Council reaction until the UN inspectors working in Syria present their report,” Titov said.
Analysts say US claims about Syria are similar to the discredited intelligence on weapons of mass destruction that led to the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Source

US gave Saddam blessing to use toxins against Iranians

Posted: 28 Aug 2013 11:55 AM PDT

As Washington ponders over whether to hammer Damascus over unidentified use of toxic agents in Syria, declassified CIA documents reveal that 25 years ago the US actually indulged ruthless Saddam Hussein to use chemical warfare gases in war with Iran.
The recently declassified documents at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland, suggest that the US was closely following the use of chemical weapons by the Saddam Hussein’s regime both against the enemy in the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) and against Iraq’s Kurdish population, reports Foreign Policy magazine.
Despite the fact that the US establishment regarded Saddam Hussein as ‘anathema’ and his officials as ‘thugs’, the policies of President Ronald Reagan’s administration through 1980s was to ensure that Iraq would win the war with Iran, the FP stated.
Former CIA official retired Air Force Colonel Rick Francona has said exclusively to Foreign Policy that starting from 1983 the US had no doubts that Hussein’s Iraq was using prohibited chemical weapons (mustard gas) against its adversary, while Iran lacked solid proof and could not bring the case to the UN.
Experienced Arabic linguist Rick Francona, who worked for both the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), shared that the first time he had proof of Iraq using toxins against Iranians was in 1984, while he was serving as the US Air attaché in Amman, Jordan. He had solid proof that Iraqis had used Tabun nerve agent (GA) against Iranian troops advancing in southern Iraq.
It has also been revealed that Saddam Hussein’s military industrial complex could not produce shells with toxic chemical substances itself and was heavily dependent on foreign equipment, with Italy been mentioned as one of the sources for the special equipment.
But Reagan’s administration was willing Baghdad to win the war, so it turned a blind eye on Iraq using lethal nerve agents against Iran, since that could turn the tide of war into a right direction, Foreign Policy reports.
The 1925 Geneva Protocol banned chemical warfare, while the Chemical Weapons Convention banning production and use of chemical arms was introduced in 1997. Iraq never bothered to sign the document, while the US did so in 1975, and by 1980s the US had international obligations to prevent the use of chemical weapons.
During the war with its neighbor, Iran was in a state of heavy international isolation that followed the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and Iran’s military was lagging behind if compared to Iraqi Army.
Still, with the population fanatically supporting the Islamic leadership, Iran used inhumane tactics of ‘human wave’ attacks, turning its soldiers into expendables and thus nullifying Iraq’s military superiority.
In 1987, US satellite intelligence suggested that Iran was concentrating troops for a powerful offensive on Iraq’s southern Fao Peninsula in the direction of the key city of Basrah. The US believed that in spring of 1988 the Iranians might undertake a decisive attack, capitalizing on tactical mistakes by the Iraqi military which could result in Iraq’s defeat.
According to Francona, after acknowledging with the intelligence data, President Ronald Reagan wrote a margin for the US Secretary of Defense Frank C. Carlucci: “An Iranian victory is unacceptable.”
Thus, the Americans opted to share intelligence information with Baghdad, authorizing the DIA to give detailed data on exact locations of all Iranian combat units, Air Force movements, air defense systems and key logistics facilities.
Rick Francona described the satellite imagery and electronic intelligence provided as “targeting packages” enabling the Iraqi Air Force to destroy Iranian targets.
In 1988, Iraq conducted four highly successful chemical attacks on Iranian troops with sarin nerve agent, killing hundreds, if not thousands on the spot. The attacks preluded heavy artillery assaults and were disguised, being accompanied with use of smoke shells.
Official Iranian statistics of the dead in these attacks is still unavailable.
At the time Francona was serving as the US military attaché in Baghdad and he witnessed the aftermath of the attacks himself. He visited the Fao Peninsula shortly after it had been captured by the Iraqis. On the battlefield he saw hundreds of spent syringes with atropine, which Iraqi troops had been using as antidote to sarin’s lethal effects. Francona took several of these injectors to Baghdad as proof of chemical weapons use.
Francona told Foreign Policy that Washington was “very pleased” with the Iranians being stricken preemptively to prevent them from launching their offensive.
Also, in March 1988, Iraq launched a nerve gas attack on separatist Kurdish village of Halabja, some 240km northeast of Baghdad, killing 5,000, while 7,000 more suffered long-lasting health problems.
The last of the chemical attacks launched by Iraq in 1988 was dubbed the Blessed Ramadan Offensive and became the largest use of chemical weapons in modern history – probably until the recent attack launched in a suburb of the Syrian capital, Damascus, with casualty figures ranging from dozens to almost 1,300 deaths.
Source