Archive | May 6, 2016

First Muslim Mayor amidst Rampant Regional Xenophobia*

First Muslim Mayor amidst Rampant Regional Xenophobia*

By Justin Salhani

In this April 28, 2016 photo, Candidate for London Mayor Sadiq Khan speaks during an assembly at the London Mayor election event of London Citizens in London


Londoners elected the city’s first Muslim mayor in a historic victory Friday, against the backdrop of rising xenophobia and anti-Muslim sentiment throughout Europe.

The Labour Party’s Sadiq Khan, 45, an MP and son of working class Pakistani immigrants, defeated the Conservative candidate Zac Goldsmith, who is the son of a billionaire. London’s 8.6 million overwhelmingly elected Khan, despite attacks that portrayed him as a “radical” and linked him to “extremist” figures.

“Critics have suggested the core strategy of Mr Goldsmith’s campaign is to draw attention to Mr Khan’s faith,” the Independent reported last month.

On Sunday, Goldsmith published an op-ed in the Mail with a picture of a bus destroyed in the 7/7 attacks, criticizing Khan and Labour by saying they are a party where “terrorists are its friends.” Current London Mayor Boris Johnson, who is a Conservative, tried to link Khan to former London mayor and Labour party member Ken Livingstone — recently lambasted and later suspended for saying Hitler was a supporter of Zionism in the 1930s. Prime Minister David Cameron has also attacked Khan under similar pretenses.

While the Conservative Party has highlighted instances of anti-Semitism among certain members of the Labour Party, the Conservatives have alienated many Muslim constituents of late. Apart from attacks on Khan, Cameron has made a number of statements that have been described as a “disgraceful stereotyping of British Muslims,” by the Ramadhan Foundation, an organization that focuses on education and needs of Britain’s Muslim community. The disconnect between the party and the Muslim community has taken its toll, especially considering one in eight Londoners identifies as a Muslim, according to the Financial Times.

While Khan identifies as a Muslim and says he partakes in certain religious practices such as fasting during Ramadhan, he has said his personality contains multitudes.

 “We all have multiple identities,” he recently told GQ.

“I am a dad, a husband, Londoner, Asian, British, Muslim. I never run away from my faith but I don’t proselytize.”

Khan is the first Muslim elected to mayor in a major Western city, though he follows in the footsteps of Rotterdam’s popular Moroccan-born Mayor Ahmed Aboutaleb. Aboutaleb is widely regarded in the Netherlands although the country is facing widespread anti-Muslim backlash. Khan holds up his own story as one of successful integration, one more easily attained in Britain than in other parts of Europe.

“Compared with Europe, in London you see more confidence about the integration of ethnic minorities, in politics, civic society and business,” Khan said.

“On the left and the right you see a growing number of ethnic minority politicians. In European cities you don’t tend to see it on the right.”

Khan’s election comes just seven weeks before Britain votes on whether it should remain in the European Union.

London’s mayor has less power than those in other cities, but the authority does extend to policing, transportation, housing, the fire department, emergency services, environmental services, culture, and economic development.

“The mayor retains just seven per cent of taxes raised in the city,” Khan told GQ in an interview earlier this week.

“In New York, it is 50 per cent. In Tokyo, 70 per cent. This is the most centralized democracy in the world. We have police, fire, planning, Tube, DLR, parts of the Overground. The next things the mayor and local authorities should have are skills, further education, planning of education places, commuter trains, more powers on housing, the ability to borrow to build, issue bonds.”


Related Topics:

How the Israel Lobby Manufactured U.K. Labour Party’s Anti-Semitism Crisis*

Far Right Islamophobic Foundation in the U.K. Financed by Tea-Party Conservatives*

U.K. Doctors Accuse Israel of Medical Torture*

U.S, U.K., Israel, China, Saudia behind Myanmar’s Rohingya Genocide*

Britain Expert Facilitators in Sectarian Violence*

Genetically Modified Human Embryos Allowed in U.K.*

Britain’s Most Segregated Town Speaks Lithuanian*

U.K. to Put Fluoride in Milk for School Children*

The Americans Declared Independence From Us. We Can Do the Same*

Petition of 100,000+ for Snap U.K. Elections*

Thousands of U.K. Parents to take Children out of School in Protest*

From Europe the Islamophobic Soldiers of Odin’s Arrive in the U.S.*

Israel Accepts Invitation to Hold Permanent Mission at NATO’s HQ*

Israel Accepts Invitation to Hold Permanent Mission at NATO’s HQ*

A public stamp of approval for continued genocide…

NATO headquarters in Brussels. © Thierry Charlier / Reuters


Israel will accept the invitation to open a permanent mission at the block’s headquarters in Brussels, Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli PM has said. The move became possible after Turkey reportedly lifted its veto on Jerusalem’s cooperation with the bloc.

“I declare that Israel will accept the invitation and open an office in the near future,” Netanyahu said during a Cabinet meeting on Wednesday.

The reasons for NATO’s interest in cooperation include Israel’s “determined fight against terror, our technological know-how, our intelligence network and other things,” Netanyahu said.

Upgrading ties with the 28-member NATO block was “something we worked on for many years,” he added.

Netanyahu also confirmed that the decision to allow Israel to open a permanent mission at NATO HQ was made after Turkey, a member of the alliance since 1952, lifted its veto on Israeli activity within the bloc, Israeli media reported Wednesday.

Unanimous consent of all NATO members is required for collaborating with unaffiliated countries, such as Israel.

Israel views the decision to lift the veto as another sign of Ankara’s desire to normalize relations with Jerusalem, a senior Israeli source told Haaretz.

Israel’s Ambassador to the E.U., David Walzer, will be heading the country’s permanent mission in Brussels, Foreign Ministry spokesman Emmanuel Nahshon told The Times of Israel.

Previously, NATO issued a statement, saying that “the North Atlantic Council has agreed ‎to accept the request that an official Israeli Mission be established at NATO headquarters.”

“Israel is a very active partner of the Alliance as a member of NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue, established in December 1994,” the statement said.

It was pressure by other NATO members on Turkey that allowed for the invitation of Israel, Tommy Steiner, from the Institute for Policy and Strategy near Tel-Aviv, told AFP.

“Since the introduction of the new [NATO] partnership policy in 2014 Israel was formally invited. But Israel never did that because there was a Turkish veto on such a measure,” he said.

According to the NATO-Israeli relations expert, it is “not on the cards” for Israel to become a full member of NATO.

Turkey cut ties with former ally, Israel, and imposed veto on its cooperation with NATO after the Mavi Marmara incident in 2010, when Israeli special forces killed 10 Turkish activists aboard a vessel that tried to breach the naval blockade on Gaza.

After years of mutual accusations, Ankara and Jerusalem held two rounds of secret talks in December and February. Another round of negotiations is expected to take place in mid-May, with the sides expected to settle most of their disputes. Israel even agreed to scale back on the blockade of Palestine’s Gaza Strip, allowing Turkey to build power and desalination plants in the area.

The main unresolved issue is the Turkish offices of Hamas, which Israel views as a terrorist organization, according to Haaretz. Last week, both Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said that reconciliation with Jerusalem was near.


Related Topics:

Egypt Votes for Israel at U.N. on ‘Peaceful Uses of Outer Space’*

Anti-NATO Protesters March Through Florence before Inter-Parliamentary Meeting*

U.S. and NATO Launch Disinformation Terror War*

U.S.-NATO Next Battle Front towards WWIII in Crimea Causes National Blackouts*

U.S. Led NATO to send 4,000 Troops to Russian Borders*

#AleppoIsBurning Campaign Created By U.S. and NATO to Facilitate a “No Bomb Zone”*

U.S. Sends 5,000 Tons of Ammunition to Germany ‘to help NATO alliance’*

NATO’s Military Commander Suggests very Few Terrorists are Entering with Refugees*

NATO’s Jihad Operation in Brussels*

British Military Expert, Israel Must Strike Iran – On Its Own*

Freemasons Rule in One Swedish City*

Freemasons Rule in One Swedish City*

They take an oath of secrecy, swear each other eternal fidelity and go through controversial rituals together. The Swedish Freemasonry has turned out to have a strong foothold in the city of Umeå, with many of its members, high-ranking politicians and could be a problem for democracy.

A total of 277 local businessmen and politicians representing different parties in the Swedish city of Umeå are members of the same Masonic lodge and support each other in many ways, reports Västerbottens-Kuriren (VK). While the politicians publicly play the role of opponents, they have sworn each other eternal fidelity and loyalty and have even undergone bizarre bonding rituals as Freemasons.

A senior politician, who desired to remain anonymous, described the situation as follows:

“So we are sitting at a conference table, and then suddenly a politician is a Freemason appears. His arguments can get another politician, also a Freemason, to completely reverse his opinion.”

An investigation carried out by the local newspaper revealed that a number of well-known politicians and officials, all freemasons, kept contact with representatives of the business community. They met at least once a week in closed rooms, dressed in either tuxedos or dark suits and black ties.

Håkan Järvå, a psychologist with extensive knowledge of manipulation and influence in closed groups, has conducted a research on the impact various cults have on their members and has penned a book about influence and peer pressure.

“Rituals help strengthen a community, creating ties that happen to be stronger than laws and regulations. The members will be more like a family,” he told Västerbottens-Kuriren.

Peter Ullgren, associate professor of history at Lund University, pointed out that Freemasons make use of various ways to help and support each other. According to him, this is clearly a problem for Swedish democracy as Freemasons may be perceived as a “mafia-like” organization.

“They can also destroy the careers of non-Masons who fail to do what they want,” he told Västerbotten Kuriren.

“It happened that Freemasons within the academia questioned my competence and even tried to sully me,” he said.

Ccity of Umeå

Historian Andreas Önnerfors thinks that there is a historic undertone to the new revelation, as there was the same tendency in provincial Sweden a century ago, which still lingers on.

“The phenomenon was that the headmaster, the police chief, the judge and the newspaper editor was in the same lodge. This was very common in provincial towns some 100 years ago. Such things may tend to persist,” Andreas Önnerfors told Västerbottens-Kuriren.

According to the newspaper, a number of present and former members declined to appear in the article “for fear of their lives being destroyed.”

Freemasonry in Sweden dates back almost 300 years. The country’s largest Masonic lodge numbers some 15,000 members.


Related Topics:

All Candidates Should Experience this for a Month: Swedish Politician Becomes a Beggar for 5 Hours*

Sweden Recycles 99per cent of Its Waste*

Israeli Lobby Forces Swedish Minister to Resign*

Secret Archive: Jack the Ripper Was a Freemason Committing Ritualistic Murders along with Royals and the Elite*

The Illuminati, What Are?

The Knights Templar were Descendants of Jewish Elders!?*

The “Free Syrian Army” Media Campaign is a British Government Operation*

The “Free Syrian Army” Media Campaign is a British Government Operation*

The U.S. government, via its CIA, has financed the “moderate” anti-Syrian mercenaries fighting against the legitimate Syrian government with at least $1 billion a year. The Wahhabi dictatorships in the Middle East have added their own billions to finance al-Qaeda’s efforts against the Syrian people. The U.S. continues to purchase and transport thousands of tons of weapons and ammunition to feed the war against the Syrian people. It also pays the various fighters and opposition groups. The U.S. efforts for regime change in Syria have been running since at least 2006 when the U.S. government started to finance anti-Syrian exile TV stations and held intensive planning talks with various anti-Syrian Islamist elements.

Together with the British government it also runs the current pro-mercenary public relation show to influence the “western” public to support its imperial meddling in Syria.

The Guardian now unveils one of the British government efforts to effectively run the complete “Free Syrian Army” media show:

The British government is waging information warfare in Syria by funding media operations for some rebel fighting groups, …

Contractors hired by the Foreign Office but overseen by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) produce videos, photos, military reports, radio broadcasts, print products and social media posts branded with the logos of fighting groups, and effectively run a press office for opposition fighters.

Materials are circulated in the Arabic broadcast media and posted online with no indication of British government involvement.

Through its Conflict and Stability Fund the government is spending £2.4m on private contractors working from Istanbul to deliver “strategic communications and media operations support to the Syrian moderate armed opposition” (MAO).

The contract is part of a broader propaganda effort focused on Syria, with other elements intended to promote “the moderate values of the revolution” …

The documents call for contractors to “select and train a spokesman able to represent all the MAO groups as a single unified voice”, as well as providing media coaching to “influential MAO officials” and running a round-the-clock “MAO central media office” with “media production capacity”. One British source with knowledge of the contracts in action said the government was essentially running a “Free Syrian army press office”

The British and the U.S. media also run various “civil” groups to further their regime change goals.

The “White Helmets”, known for fake “rescue” videos and their strong cooperation with al-Qaeda (vid), are financed with $23 million by the U.S. government through USAID, with £18.7 million by the U.K. Foreign Office and with several millions more from other governments. But are the “White Helmets” not “moderates” who only want to help people? The U.S. government does not seem to believe that. It just banned the head of the “White Helmets” from entering the United States even though it finances his activities.

Many social media accounts like @raqqa_sl, which are promoted in “western” media, also distribute fake pictures and videos as part of these propaganda efforts.

But even when these media manipulation campaigns and fake “moderates” get exposed their operations continues unabated. The Guardian, after publishing the above, will not for one moment reflect on how its own publishing on Syria was influenced by the government financed fakes. It is, just like other mainstream media, an integrated part of the campaign.

No unveiling of the truth about the “western” attack on the Syrian state and its people seems to any effect on the ongoing media operations. On April 20 the U.S. military spokesperson for the anti-Islamic State coalition told some truth about the role of al-Qaeda in the “rebel” occupied eastern Aleppo city:

That said, it’s primarily al-Nusra who holds Aleppo, and of course, al-Nusra is not part of the cessation of hostilities.

Only two weeks later the NYT propagandist Anna Barnard has the Chutzpah to claim that al-Qaeda only “has a small presence in Aleppo”

Lies get repeated even after they have been debunked again and again. The relentlessness of the propaganda onslaught is effective in suppressing any larger opposition to it.


Related Topics:

So-Called Free Syria Army on a Stealing Spree of 1,000 Factories

Does the anti-Assad Free Syrian Army Exist?*

Britain Expert Facilitators in Sectarian Violence*

Britain Expert Facilitators in Sectarian Violence*

Britain Expert Facilitators in Sectarian Violence*

By Dan Glazebrook

The Gulf monarchies are the main facilitators of Britain’s support for sectarian death squads in the Middle East. This should be no surprise because Britain brought them to power precisely because of their sectarianism.

“What we want is not a united Arabia: but a weak and disunited Arabia split up into little principalities so far as possible under our suzerainty, but incapable of coordinated action against us” – so claimed a memorandum written by the Foreign Department of the British Government of India in 1915.

A more succinct summary of British policy towards the Arab world – both then and now – would be hard to find.

As we outlined in the first piece in this series, Britain’s weapon of choice in its attempt to destroy the independent regional powers of West Asia and North Africa in recent years has been its sponsorship of violent sectarianism. Its support for racist death squads in Libya not only achieved the destruction of the Libyan state, but also brought terrorism to every country in the region from Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria to Chad, Nigeria and Cameroon; whilst its training and equipping of death squads in Syria has been directly responsible for the rise of ISIS.

These forces, by setting Sunni against Shia, Muslim against Christian, and Arab against Black, are helping to bring about precisely that “weak and disunited Arabia” that the British officials in India dreamed of one hundred years ago.

Alongside the direct support and recruitment provided by British intelligence and the British government, one of the main conduits for arms and fighters has been the gulf monarchies: Qatar and Saudi Arabia in particular. That the Gulf States should play this role should, of course, be no surprise – as they were very largely the creations of the same British Government of India that wrote that memo in the first place.

In 1857, British colonial rule of India was challenged as never before, as what started as a mutiny rapidly spread across the country to become a mass insurgency, the first war of Indian independence. One of the reasons it was so potent is that Hindus and Muslims had joined forces – leading to what became the biggest anti-colonial uprising of the nineteenth century. Britain learned the lessons – and began to cultivate sectarian divisions more assiduously than ever before.

As Mark Curtis notes in Secret Affairs:

“After 1857 the British promoted communalism, creating separate electorates and job and educational reservations for Muslims. ‘Divide et imperia [divide and rule]’ was the old Roman motto, declared William Elphinstone, the early nineteenth-century governor of Bombay, ‘and it should be ours’. This view pervaded and became a cornerstone of British rule in India”.

Curtis quotes one document after another to demonstrate just how pervasive this view became: one Secretary of State advising the governor general that

“we have maintained our power in India by playing off one part against the other and we must continue to do so. Do all you can, therefore, to prevent all having a common feeling”; another informing the Viceroy that

“this division of religious feeling is greatly to our advantage”; a senior civil servant writing that “the truth plainly is that the existence side by side of these hostile creeds is one of the strong points in our political position in India. The better clashes of Mohammedans are already a source to us of strength and not of weakness”, and so on, ad nauseam.

Yet, Curtis notes, it was not in India but in the Middle East that this divide and rule strategy “reached its apogee”.

The British Government of India began cultivating alliances with family clans in the Arabian peninsula from around the late eighteenth century, formalizing these relationships through official treaties over the course of the next hundred and fifty years. Even before the discovery of oil, the region was deemed strategically important as part of the land route from India, as well for its surrounding sea routes, and the Indian government took steps to ensure that it be placed firmly under British control.

By the nineteenth century, Britain was already the pre-eminent naval power in the region, and had become powerful enough to make or break the fortunes of those to whom it lent (or withdrew) its ‘protection’. So it is interesting to note that those families which Britain did choose to turn into ruling classes of the new states that were being carved out – the Al Saud, the Al Thani, the Al Khalifa and others – all seemed to have two things in common: a history of regular warring with their neighbours; and an, at best, shaky control of the territories they claimed to rule. These factors were not coincidental – for what they produced was a dependence on British protection that effectively turned them into little more than vassals of Empire.

The al-Khalifa clan, for example, today’s rulers of Bahrain, originally hailed from Umm Qasr in Iraq, from where they were expelled by the Ottomans due to their regular attacks on trade caravans. They first seized control of Bahrain in 1783 after Persian rule began to crumble, but lost control two decades later falling out with the Wahhabis with whom they were briefly allied. It was only after signing a treaty with the British in 1820 that their rule was consolidated. This treaty, and the others that followed, effectively placed foreign policy in the hands of the British in exchange for Britain propping up the al Khalifa’s rule of the country – an arrangement that has continued, to all intents and purposes, right up to the present day.

Being effectively an alien force in the country, the al Khalifa were permanently at risk from the population they sought to rule, especially given their persecution of the Shia majority. This made British protection that much more important, and increased British leverage accordingly; whenever any particular Khalifa emir began to act too independently, the British would simply replace them.

Lieutenant Colonel Trevor, the Deputy Political Agent in Bahrain after the First World War, put it bluntly when, after receiving a series of demands from the new crown prince he noted that

“The Shaikh forgets that he and his father were made Shaikhs by the British government.”

Shortly afterwards, the British sent warships to the gulf to force the Sheikh to sign an agreement ceding all powers to his other son – a British protégé.

Formal independence was granted in 1971, but given that power was being handed over to the same family that had ruled Bahrain on Britain’s behalf for the past century and a half, this changed little. The most notable difference was perhaps the flags on the foreign warships at the country’s naval base, which changed from British to U.S.

Fast forward to the present day, and it is clear that the essence of the 1820 treaty – al Khalifa rule propped up by Western armaments, with foreign policy in the hands of the West – is still very much in place. Whilst David Cameron was proclaiming democracy (a euphemism for state collapse) for Libya and Syria, he was in Bahrain selling weapons to the Khalifas to suppress their own ‘Arab Spring’; whilst three years later the U.S. fifth fleet would be firing hellfire missiles into Syria from its Bahraini base.

But British support for the al Khalifas has never been absolute; rather they built up the al-Thani clan as a ‘counterweight’ to the Khalifa in order to guarantee their continued dependence on the British. Up until 1867, Qatar had been essentially a semi-autonomous province of Bahrain, its government effectively ‘sub-contracted’ to the Al Thanis. In that year, however, a war between the Al Thanis and the Al Khalifas broke out; Britain intervened on the side of the Al Thanis, carving out Qatar out as a separate political entity and recognising the Al Thanis as its rulers. The border between the two countries was left devilishly ambiguous, and remained a running sore in Qatari-Bahraini relations right up until 2001; a “weak and disunited Arabia” indeed.

Further agreements were signed with the Al Thanis in 1935, offering them protection against internal and external threats in exchange for oil concessions. Qatar too gained formal independence in 1971, but the deep links forged during the period of the protectorate remain; indeed both the Emirs that have ruled since then were educated at Sandhurst Military Academy, with the current Sheikh educated at elite English private school Sherborne before that.

The relationship between Britain and the ruling families of Bahrain and Qatar continues to follow that same basic principle forged centuries ago, and now also extended to the U.S: whilst the ruling families act as regional agents of Western imperial policy, their rule is maintained by Western weaponry. Nothing illustrates this more clearly than the events of the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. The protests breaking out across the Arab world in early 2011 soon spread to Bahrain, where angry crowds demanded an end to the monarchy’s policies of discrimination and exclusion against the Shia majority. Cameron’s immediate response was to head to the region to sell the embattled regime the weapons it needed to crush the movement. The following year, the country’s interior minister, Rashid bin Abdulla al-Khalifa, visited the Foreign Office to gather “lessons learnt from our experience in Northern Ireland”, according to a British government statement. This experience was particularly relevant; the problem faced by the British in the North of Ireland was, after all, broadly analogous to that faced by the Bahraini monarchy: how to maintain an oppressive sectarian rule and crush movements calling for equality. The sight of British APCs in the street shooting down demonstrators, now common in the Bahraini capital, will be familiar to Belfast’s nationalist communities; and so too will the latest human rights reports coming out of Bahrain describing “detainees being beaten, deprived of sleep, burned with cigarettes, sexually assaulted, subjected to electric shocks and burnt with an iron”, all common practices in British army barracks in 1970s Ireland. Britain’s Bahraini students are quick learners. The U.S. Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain and used to fire missiles into Syria and Libya, is in safe hands.

Image Credit: Vox

Qatar, meanwhile, was a lynchpin in not only the militarization of the ‘Arab Spring’ and its capture by violent sectarian forces, but also its ideological whitewashing. The Al Jazeera TV channel was established by the Qatari government in 1996, effecting to what amounted to a ‘brown-facing’ of the BBC Arabic channel, which was closed down the same year before transferring a large chunk of its staff to the ‘new’ station. Al Jazeera built its credibility across the region – and, indeed, the world – with its critical coverage of Western and Israeli attacks on Iraq and Gaza. But in 2011 it would use this credibility to serve as NATO’s propagandist-in-chief, amplifying and disseminating every lie it could get its hands on – from African mercenaries, to mass rape, to ‘bombing his own people’, to ‘impending massacre’ – in order to demonize Gaddafi and sell the case for war. It would be a war in which Qatar would play a major role.

In the early days of the West’s attack on Libya, anti-Gaddafi rebel forces (led by the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, Al Qaeda’s Libyan franchise), even with NATO air support, proved spectacularly ineffective at capturing and holding territory from the Libyan government. For the first few months, most of the towns they ‘captured’ thanks to NATO incineration of government soldiers would simply be retaken by the Libyan army days later. But NATO countries were wary of risking a domestic political backlash by openly committing too many of their own troops or resources to tip the balance. The solution found was to let Qatar and the Gulf states carry out its dirty work. They played a leading role in training and equipping rebel fighters, allowing NATO to be pretending to observe the arms embargo to which U.N. resolutions committed them. As the Royal United Services Institute noted,

“the UAE established a Special Forces presences in the Zawiyah district and started to supply rebel forces in that area with equipment and provisions by air. Qatar also assumed a very large role; it established training facilities in both Benghazi, and, particularly the Nafusa Mountains on May 9 and acted as a supply route and conduit for French weapons and ammunition supplies to the rebels (notably in June), including by establishing an airstrip at Zintan.” They added that,

“Western special forces could have confidence in the training roles undertaken by Qatar and the UAE, because the special forces in those countries have in turn been trained by the U.K. and France over many years”.

In addition to this major training and arming role, Qatari jets also joined NATO in pounding Libya, and the country issued $100million of loans to the rebel groups. But most important was the Qatari ground invasion of Tripoli.

As Horace Campbell has documented in his book ‘Global NATO and the Catastrophic Failure in Libya’, by the summer of 2011, NATO were nearing a crisis-point: the 60-day period in which the U.S. president could engage in hostilities without Congressional support was over, and the U.N. mandate for military intervention was to expire in September. Calls were growing within the A.U. and the U.N. for a negotiated settlement, and rivalry between militias continued to dog the rebels’ progress. NATO needed to take Tripoli quickly if their regime change operation was not to be stalled in its tracks.

So in mid-August, NATO massively stepped up its bombing of Tripoli. Checkpoints, manned by citizens pledged to defend the capital were repeatedly targeted, and Obama sent the last two training drones left in the US to the Libyan front-line. That paved the way for what Campbell called “NATO’s triple assault – by air, land and sea”; not a ‘people’s uprising’ but rather a ground invasion to crush the people who had risen to defend their city. Troops were shipped in and disguised as ‘rebel fighters’, with, according to Le Figaro, five thousand Qatari troops chief amongst them. It was they who, finally, captured Tripoli for NATO, installing Abdul Hakim Bel Haj, now suspected leader of ISIS in Libya, as the new military chief of the conquered city.

Bahrain and Qatar are just two examples of the enduring alliances that the British government has cultivated over centuries as it groomed handpicked ruling families for their anointed role as agents of imperial policy. In exchange for a British guarantee of their absolute power domestically, they have provided military bases and have acted as willing agents for those tasks their patron was either unwilling or unable to carry out itself. Today, that means acting as an ‘arms-length’ distributor of both BBC propaganda and British violence, in far more ways than have been possible to articulate here (Qatar’s role in managing the various Muslim Brotherhood offshoots that have been destabilizing Syria, Egypt and elsewhere, for example, would need a full article in its own right). But even more significant than the British alliance with the al Khalifas and al Thanis is that that was established with the al-Saud family, the subject of our next piece. For it is this relationship, forged during the slow decline of the Ottoman Empire, that ultimately created a new multinational fighting force of fighters in the 1980s – the ‘database’ – that has been doing Britain’s bidding in Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria ever since.

This is Part Two. Read Part One here.


Related Topics:

The Butcher of Bahrain is British*

U.K. Starts Building New, Permanent Navy Base in Bahrain*

The Eight Families’ Rigged Oil Game

British SAS Special Forces “Dressed Up as ISIS Rebels” Fighting Assad in Syria*

How the British Empire aka New World Order Sowed Seeds of Destruction towards Islam*

British Government Killed 10 Million Iranians In 1919*

A Housewife Reports from War-torn Yemen*

Reality of British Empire should be taught in Schools – Corbyn*

British Soldiers Throw War Medals to the Floor*

Britain at Forefront of Deadly Mercenary Trade*

Over 100,000 British Orphans were Sent Overseas as ‘child migrants’*

American and British Taxes Paying for Eugenics in India*

British Empire Spending Increases with Oil and Gas Discovery in Falkland Islands*

British Banking System the Pumping Heart of Terror Finance and Global Drug Trade*

American Civil War: When Russia Blocked British-led Intervention against the Union

The British Empire aka NWO alive and Kicking!?*

Ireland Marks 100 Years Since Easter Rising Rebellion Against British Rule*

Britain’s Secret Plan for the Invasion of Grenada*

Slavery: The Anniversary of the Official Ending of a System that Bankrolled and Civilized Cameron’s British Empire*

41,000 Kenyans to Sue Britain for Maltreatment*

British Forces Face Criminal Probe Over 52 Afghan Murders*

U.S., Britain and Israel are the Biggest Terrorists on the Planet.

Child Survivors of Nepal Earthquake Sold to Rich British Families*

The British Monarch Vetoes Legislation that Doesn’t Serve It’s Interests*

Multiple Casualties in Bombing of Refugee Camp Near Aleppo *

Multiple Casualties in Bombing of Refugee Camp Near Aleppo *

The U.N. has condemned the bombing of a Syrian refugee camp in Sarmada, a city 30km from Aleppo, in which dozens of civilians, including women and children, were allegedly killed or injured. A video has emerged showing the aftermath of attack.

Sarmada is located in Syria’s northwestern Idlib province close to the Turkish border and is said to be controlled by rebel factions fighting the government of President Bashar Assad. The makeshift camp which was targeted is said to have been accommodating up to 2,000 people who fled war-torn areas seeking safety.

While no party has claimed responsibility for what reports have called an airstrike, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said U.S.-led coalition warplanes were not on a mission in the stricken area, while stressing that “there is no justifiable excuse for carrying out an airstrike against innocent civilians who have already once fled their homes to escape violence.”

U.N. Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator Stephen O’Brien condemned the attack in a statement, while calling for an “immediate, impartial and independent investigation into this deadly incident.”

According to the reports cited by O’Brien, at least 30 people fell victim to the airstrikes that devastated two settlements, while over 80 people were injured. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights had reported those numbers earlier.

If the deliberate nature of the attack is proven, the incident will “amount to a war crime,” the U.N. official added.

U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner refused to immediately lay the blame for the attack on any party, including the Syrian armed forces, citing a lack of details concerning the incident. “We [US] don’t have eyes on the ground,” he stressed.

“We’ve seen early claims that this was a regime strike, but we just want to be absolutely sure before we level blame at somebody,” he told journalists at a press briefing on Thursday.

A video allegedly depicting the deserted Kamounia camp after the airstrike was posted on YouTube by the Syria Civil Defense group, which describes itself as a non-political humanitarian organization. The footage shows firefighters attempting to stifle a blaze with debris strewn around the camp, while sheet-covered bodies were being carried to an ambulance.


According to the group’s estimates, more than 30 people lost their lives in the bombing.

While there is no conclusive information on the perpetrator of the attack, U.K. Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond immediately rushed to blame the bombing on the Syrian government.

“The Assad regime’s contempt for efforts to restore the cessation of hostilities in Syria is clear for all to see,” he said in a statement, while describing the reports pertaining to the attack as “horrifying.”

The attack comes just a day after at least 12 people were killed and 45 injured in suicide blasts in the Syrian city of Homs.

Moscow and Washington confirmed on Wednesday that they had brokered a 48-hour ceasefire in Aleppo, which has been the scene of heavy fighting recently. The deal came into force on May 3 and should have been observed until 12 am on May 6.


Global meditation

Please join us at 9pm Cairo/Central European time, 3pm EST, 12pm PST, any night


Related Topics:

U.S. Army Captain Files Lawsuit against Obama over ‘Illegal’ War in Iraq and Syria*

#AleppoIsBurning Campaign Created By U.S. and NATO to Facilitate a “No Bomb Zone”*

Hack of Netanyahu Chief of Staff Shows Israeli Control of ISIS*

Aleppo Doctor Attacks Western Media for Bias, Censorship and Lies*

ISIS Stealing and Selling Ancient Syrian Artefacts to Buyers from the U.S. and Europe*

U.S.-Backed Terrorists Shell Aleppo Hospital, but Blame Russia and Syria*

The Occult Reasoning behind the Cabal’s Battle for Syria*

Congressional Testimony Exposes the Truth of the Vaccine-Autism Cover-up*

Congressional Testimony Exposes the Truth of the Vaccine-Autism Cover-up*

On July 29, 2015, Congressman Bill Posey presented details of omission and destruction of study records by colleagues of Dr. William Thompson, senior scientist at the CDC. Dr. Thompson admitted that the destroyed 2004 study results showed a connection between the MMR vaccination and autism in African-American infants.

The following are parts of an unofficial transcript prepared by Adriana Gamones of the Age of Autism. The video may be viewed to hear the contents of the congressional report.

Congressman Bill Posey (R-FL) speaks at 1:02:29.

Original Link:

Congressman Posey reported:

“In August, 2014, Dr. William Thompson, a senior scientist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention worked with a whistleblower attorney to provide my office with documents related to a 2004 CDC study that examined the possibility of a relationship between the mumps, measles and rubella vaccines and autism. In a statement released in August, 2014, Dr. Thompson stated, ‘I regret that my co-authors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the Journal of Pediatrics.’

Mr. Speaker, I respectfully request the following excerpts from the statement written by Dr. Thompson be entered into record.”

Now, quoting Dr. Thompson:

“My primary job duties while working in the Immunization Safety Branch from 2000 to ’06 were lead or co-lead three major vaccine safety studies—the MADDSP MMR Autism Cases Control study was being carried out in response to the Wakefield Lancet study that suggested an association between the MMR vaccine and an autism-like health outcome. There were several major concerns among scientists and consumer advocates outside the CDC in the fall of 2000 regarding the execution of the Verstraeten study.

One of the important goals that was determined up front in the spring of ’01, before any of these studies started, was to have all three protocols vetted outside the CDC prior to the start of the analyses so that consumer advocates could not claim that we were presenting analyses that presented our own goals and biases. We hypothesized that if we found statistically significant effects at either 18 or 36 month thresholds, we would conclude that vaccinating children early with MMR could lead to autism-like characteristics or features. We all met and finalized the study protocol and analysis plan. The goal was to not deviate from the analysis plan to avoid the debacle that occurred with the Verstraeten thimerosal study published in Pediatrics in’03. At the September 5th meeting, we discussed in detail how to code race for both the sample and the birth certificate sample.

At the bottom of Table 7 it also shows that for the non-birth certificate sample, the adjusted race effect statistical significance was huge. All the authors and I met and decided sometime between August and September ’02 not to report any race effects for the paper. Sometime soon after the meeting, we decided to exclude reporting any race effects, the co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can. However, because I assumed it was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DOJ requests, I kept hard copies of all documents in my office and I retained all associated computer files. I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper.”

Congressman Bill Posey continued:

“Mr. Speaker, I believe it’s our duty to ensure that the documents that Dr. Thompson provided are not ignored. Therefore I will provide them to members of Congress and the house committees upon request. Considering the nature of the whistleblower’s documents, as well as the involvement of the CDC, a hearing and a thorough investigation is warranted. So, I ask Mr. Speaker, I beg, I implore my colleagues on the appropriations committees to please, please take such action. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I yield back.” 

Blackout by Mainstream Media of Cover-up Of MMR Vaccine-Autism Study Results

While this important news was covered widely by the alternative media sources, as usual, there was virtually a blackout by mainstream media. This reality is fairly well known, accepted and criticized by those in the holistic health community. It explains why alternative news sources are so critical for those seeking news outside of sources supporting conventional medicine protocols.

Mainstream media is funded largely by their advertisers. Pharmaceutical companies comprise a large part of media’s funding dollars.

The powers and pressures yielded by pharmaceutical companies are immense. Pharmaceutical dollars influence physicians, members of Congress and news reporting. It is quite likely that they impacted the showing of the Vaxxed movie at the Tribeca Film Festival.

Vaxxed Was Removed From The Tribeca Film Festival, But Picked Up By Cinema Libre

The important Vaxxed documentary was scheduled to be shown at the Tribeca Film Festival, but was pulled after extreme pressure for its removal. Cinema Libre picked up the film and is in the process of showing the film throughout the U.S.

Cinema Libre Chairman Philippe Diaz said in a statement:

“We chose to distribute this film to correct a major issue, which is the suppression of medical data by a governmental agency that may very well be contributing to a significant health crisis. The media storm of last week also revealed another issue: the hyper-mediatization by some members of the media and the documentary community who had not even seen the film, as well as Tribeca executives, which condemned it as anti-vaccine.”

Richard Castro, head of distribution, said,

‘It’s disturbing that an American film festival can succumb so easily to pressure to censor a film that it has already selected and announced. On Friday I received a call from Tribeca executives expressing concerns about showing the film, but no opportunity was afforded our filmmakers to even address those concerns. When I questioned the rationale, it was indicated that sponsors’ interest was a factor.’”

Robert DeNiro with his autistic son

Robert DeNiro and The Vaxxed Movie

Robert DeNiro is one of the founders of the Tribeca Film Festival, now in its fifteenth year. In an interview on the Today show, DeNiro supported the contents of the film Vaxxed and he emphasized the importance of the film being viewed.

He called out mainstream investigative journalists for failing to do their jobs and implored them to actually investigate the connection between vaccinations and autism. DeNiro shared that he has an 18 year-old child who suffers from autism and that his wife recalls their child’s regression following the MMR vaccine. DeNiro is personally touched by autism and wants research done that will uncover causes and treatments.

Respected Medical Journalist Del Bigtree and Vaxxed

Del Bigtree is an Emmy award-winning medical journalist who produced the film Vaxxed. In an excellent interview, Bigtree revealed how he became acquainted with Dr. Andrew Wakefield and made the decision to produce the important documentary.

When questioned as to his objective in producing the film Vaxxed, Bigtree stated:

“I want the media to be held accountable for the weeks and weeks of covering a measles outbreak at Disneyland, terrifying people when only 644 people were affected. That’s .000002% of the people in this country, which effectively translates to zero, when one in 45 kids is now diagnosed with autism. I’d like the media to explain why it won’t cover the story of a top CDC scientist who admits they committed fraud on the MMR study when they discovered a causal link between the vaccine and autism, a disease that is accelerating so fast it could spell the end of our society. If that’s not a story, what is?

I also hope the film will be a tipping point that will allow tons of doctors to come forward and admit they’ve long known there’s a link between vaccines and autism. It should create questions among mainstream audiences about the whole nature of safety testing in medicine. Drugs have to undergo rigorous studies which are far more expensive than the limited safety work done with vaccines. I want parents to realize that their kids’ vaccines are not being appropriately studied—they haven’t been studied nearly as well as Viagra. We’ve been playing Russian roulette with the health of the children in this country.”

The Media’s Expected, Biased, Unfair Response To Vaxxed

A quick news search will reveal tremendous media support maintaining the denial between the MMR vaccine and autism. Wakefield is painted as a quack and demonized unfairly, while the movie Vaxxed is criticized severely.

Use of Quackery Label To Discredit Alternative Medicine

The esteemed and brilliant physician Dr. Andrew Wakefield is commonly portrayed by conventional physicians and mainstream media as a quack. The use of the term quackery is calculated and meant to immediately discredit any individual or treatment which threatens the profits of mainstream medical practices.

This strategy to demonize any health practice, research or physician which threatens conventional medicine protocols is longstanding. It began early in the history of medicine. Quackery name calling has aggressively been used to destroy the reputations of chiropractors, along with successful practitioners who safely treated and cured cancer patients using alternative treatments.

Why See and Support The Film Vaxxed: From Cover-Up To Catastrophe

Vaxxed is an excellent film that exposes the truth about autism and the coverup of research connecting the MMR vaccination to autism. The documentary includes many important experts. It provides information that cannot be obtained from mainstream media.

The film includes interviews with Dr. Brian Hooker, with whom Dr. Thompson leaked documents. Vaxxed also interviews several autism experts and physicians, including Dr. Doreen Granpeesheh, Mark Blaxill, and Dr. James Sears. Former drug representatives and Representative Bill Posey are also included in the film.

The NYC Movie Guru gave Vaxxed an excellent review on April 1, 2016. The following is a small excerpt from his review:

“The controversial doc Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe, about the CDC’s cover-up of data in a 2004 study that links MMR (Measles-Mumps-Rubella) vaccines to autism, will open your eyes to the corruption of a government agency whose job is to protect public welfare. Dr. Andrew Wakefield, the film’s director, combines fair and balanced interviews with sources ranging from parents of autistic children who were harmed by MMR vaccines to politicians, doctors and a former pharmaceutical rep along with archival footage of congressional audio recordings of Dr. William Thompson, CDC whistleblower who called Dr. Brian Hooker, a biologist, to confess that the CDC had covered-up and even manipulated crucial data in the 2004 study. Vaxxed does bring up the fact that Dr. Wakefield was accused of fraud in his 1998 report on MMR vaccines and autism, but he was falsely accused.”

For more information, see Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe.


Related Topics:

Courts Confirm MMR Vaccine Causes Autism*

African-American Autism and Vaccines*

Why Is Polio With 68 Cases Worldwide This Year A “Global Emergency” But Autism Not With 1 in 25 Families Affected?*

Money and Fear is Why Congress is Stalling Autism Cover-up Hearings*

CDC Admits MMR Vaccine Increases Autism Risk, Particularly in African American Boys.

After 32 Vaccine Shots Boy Diagnosed with Autism*

Murdered Holistic Doctors Discovered Autism/Cancer-Causing Enzyme Intentionally Being Added to All Vaccines*

Waking Up to Vaccine Discrimination*

Knowledge of Vibration and the Power of Human Emotions*

Knowledge of Vibration and the Power of Human Emotions*

Related Topics :

The Charity of Love

The Healing Sounds of Life

Turkey: Music Therapy in Modern Healthcare

Reasons to Convert Your Music to 432hz*

A Peak at the Mind Control Music Industry*

Delivering Music Therapeutics to the Homeless

Dr. Emoto: The Passing away of a Legend*

The Science of Sound – Proves You Are a Cosmic Instrument*

Russian Space Agency Reveals the ‘Sounds of the Universe’*

Einstein’s Letter to His Daughter about the Universal Force of Love*

Unified Field of Consciousness*

Alchemy of the Heart

The Problem is in the Mind, and the Solution’s in the Heart*

The Heart – An Agent of Transformation*