Saturday, 18 April 2015

Saudi “Martyr” Required for One Million Riyals

Local Editor

Israa al-Fass

Saudi journalist Dawwod al-Shiryan

Whom will the Saudi journalist Dawood al-Shiryan insult this time by saying: "You have deceived our sons." You escaped punishment in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria "but this time you will not escape"? Will the journalist - one of Mohammad Bin Nayef's men - dare to say to the Saudi emirs: "You are traders of religion and strife"?

The call of the Saudi Mufti Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah al-Sheikh for enforcing obliged recruitment for young people, which is the first of its kind in the Kingdom, almost does not fulfill its task to provide fighters for the Saud dynasty's war, which is seen by many observers as a war intended to resolve the conflicts within the royal family before anything else.

The Kingdom hired preachers and proposed offers and benefits to attract "martyrs" ready to die on behalf of the Saudi princes. In conjunction with the Saudi aggression on Yemen, media have been mobilized, preachers have been dedicated, and money has been allocated in a way that reveals the mentality of those seizing power in the kingdom, who think that buying lives is quite easy as buying consciousness, the trade in which Saudi Arabia has succeeded to some extent.

One million riyals for every "martyr"

In an action that clearly considers the Saudi people dumb, the Saudi media promote a so-called "Martyr System" voted on by the Saudi Shura Council, which "unifies the characteristics of the "martyrs of duty", facilitates their actions, preserves their rights, and ensures the necessary care for their parents after their death," according to reports by the Saudi Middle East newspaper.

In a catchy offer by the Kingdom to attract what it calls "martyrs," "one million Riyals is to be granted to the family of the martyr, his debts will be paid off, his parents will receive monthly salaries, and his sons will be employed."

According to Saudi media, upon his "martyrdom", wives, sons, brothers, and siblings of the dead person will get jobs, as well as secure housing.

The credit of such motivations for committing murders on behalf of Saudi dynasty goes to a YouTube video entitled "Sample of the Decisive Storm against Yemen", showing a Saudi soldier declaring readiness to defend Salman bin Abdul Aziz had his debts been paid off.

Preachers on alert

The royal decision to discharge Abdul-Aziz Khoja from the ministry of information and culture in November 2014 as a result of his order to close the extremist "Wessal" TV channel surprising. Princes of the kingdom realize the effective role of the channel in mobilizing and inciting for wars that only serve the interests of Saudi princes.

Wessal channel, which is daily active in desecration terms employed in giving halo for the sectarian wars, posts on its screen a logo of Yemen map labeled "Decisive Storm", and enlisted programs for incitement and mobilization for the battle of killing one another in the name of religion.

Hate speeches are available to shed the blood of Muslims to serve battles of Saudi dynasty. Preachers (such as Salman al-Awda, Mohammad al-Arifi, Saad al-Breik, Adnan al-Aroor, and Mohsen al-Awaji) whom were attacked by journalists in the Kingdom like Shiryan (inspired by the power) following the failure in Syria, are re-employed today and platforms are being opened via the Saudi channel to mobilize the masses in the battles of the ruling family.

Adnan al-Aroor, who was accused someday by Shiryan of deceiving the young people motivated to "jihad" in Syria, is being employed today to mobilize masses to kill the Yemeni people.

Saad al-Breik, who was also attacked by Shiryan, saluted the Saudi fighters, describing the aggression on Yemen as a "victory for the religion of Allah and obedience to the governor."
Moreover, al-Awaj appeared on Safa TV channel, similar to Wessal TV, and hailed the Saudi decision about launching a decisive storm.

Alike Wessal and Safa, Al Arabiya TV network started to employ fatwas of preachers, focusing on a fatwa of the so-called "Global Body of Muslim Scholars," which believes that the aggression on Yemen "means undoubtedly an obligatory and legitimate jihad, which Muslims are ought to ally themselves for it."

Pictures and videos of a number of Saudi "advocates of deceit" have been published as part of motivating to "jihad" in the battles waged by kingdom against Muslims. Social websites circulate photos of Mohamad al-Arifi on the front line firing projectiles with the help of the Saudi troops, saying: "Oh Allah, let it hit and kill."

It became clear that "traders of religion and strife", as had been called once a day by Shiryan on the Saudi mbc TV channel, are agents of the real traders in the Saudi dynasty, who suspect that they can buy everything by money, including "martyrdom", after they succeeded in recruiting preachers and buying media consciousness.

Dawood al-Shiryan will keep silent today waiting for preachers to perform their job. Tomorrow, the Saudi kingdom is defeated, Shiryan will employ himself, by the vanquished, to come out again blaming the preachers, and repeating his famous quote: "This time you will not escape!"

Translated by Al-Manar English website


Source: Al-Manar Website	17-04-2015 - 14:09 Last updated 17-04-2015 - 16:28 \|

Related Articles

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

YARMOUK: UNDERSTANDING THE SITUATION

In Gaza

Given the immense amount of lies and war-mongering prevalent not only in the corporate media/MSM but also amongst Palestine supporters who either unknowingly have got the story of Yarmouk wrong or, worse, are collaborating with the war-mongerers against Syria, and thus against Palestine… I’ve collated some important articles for anyone who is genuinely interested in understanding what is happening in the Yarmouk district of Damascus and how this came to be. Additionally, one excellent investigative article details the situation of Palestinians in Syria and their involvement or not in the “crisis” (read: imperialist-zionist-fat gulf war against Syria).

PERMANENT PAGE ON YARMOUK–LINK

***Stealing Palestine: Who dragged Palestinians into Syria’s conflict?, Nov 10, 2014, Sharmine Narwani, RT.com

–Divided PLO unable to manage Yarmouk crisis–Tim Anderson, Apr 13, 2015, Professor Tim Anderson [on In Gaza for those without FB]

–ISIS Begins Withdrawal From Yarmouk Camp, Apr 17, 2015, Al Masdar News

–Palestinian official: Syria undergoes foreign aggression, keeping silent is treachery, Apr 14, 2015, Al Masdar News

–The crisis in Yarmouk camp after the invasion of ISIS, Amal Asfour, Apr 11, 2015, PFLP

–Evidence of Mossad-Israel hand in Yarmouk incidents comes to light, Apr 9, 2015, News 786

–Yarmouk: The Truth, by Moe Salhi, April 9, 2015, The Wall Will Fall

–Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO): “Syrian leadership deals with Yarmouk Camp with sensitivity, any decision will be jointly made”, Apr 10, 2015, SANA

-“Evacuation of refugees from ‪#‎Yarmouk‬ by the ‪#‎SAA‬ into safe areas held by the ‪#‎Syrian_Government‬“, Apr 8, Collated Articles, In Gaza

–The Deal in Yarmouk: End of the Tragedy or Empty Words?, Feb 12, 2014, al Akhbar

–Palestinian official: Up to 5,000 food packages entered al-Yarmouk camp, Feb 5, 2014, Sana

–Starving in Syria: Palestinian refugees die in rebel-held camp, Feb 1, 2014, RT.com, VIDEO

–‘We want to go out!’: 18,000 starving inside Syrian refugee camp, Feb 1, 2014, RT.com

–Aid reaches besieged Yarmouk refugee camp in Damascus, Jan 18, 2014, DW

–Palestinian minister says Syria rebels blocking Yarmuk aid, Jan 14, 2014, AFP

–There is no Palestinian issue for Syrian rebels, Nov 10, 2013, Nadezhda Kevorkova

–Palestinian fighters take on Syrian militants at Yarmouk camp, Jul 21, 2013, Press TV, VIDEO

–Syria: Civilians Come Under Fire From Rebels, May 15, 2013, Sky News

–Respect human life and rights in Yarmouk refugee camp, SSM

–SSM STATEMENT ON YARMOUK, SSM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Hillary Clinton – the ‘Liberal’ Puppet for War

Finian CUNNINGHAM 14.04.2015 00:00

Hillary Clinton this week launched her bid for the US presidential elections in 2016. Among the copious coverage in Western media was the small but highly significant detail: her presidential campaign will have a war chest of $2.5 billion. The former US Senator and Secretary of State is said to have a personal net worth of between $50-100 million. However, if she is selected by the Democratic party to make a run for the White House most of her presidential campaign will be bankrolled by corporations and super-wealthy backers like financier George Soros through his Democracy Alliance foundation. That alone tells where her political loyalties and priorities lie.

It is an indication of how warped US politics has become when Hillary Rodham Clinton is lambasted by Republicans as a «liberal».

Clinton voted for both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars in 2001 and 2003 under George W Bush during her time in the Senate – wars that killed more than one million people and whose nefarious legacy persists for the Central Asia and Middle East regions.

Later as Secretary of State in the Obama administration, Clinton pushed for the US-NATO destabilisation of Syria through covert support of terrorist proxies – a dirty war that still rages on. And she earnestly advocated the US-NATO bombing of Libya, also in 2011, which resulted in the overthrow and murder of Muammar Gaddafi and turned that once stable prosperous country into an ongoing cesspit of internecine violence. Publicly, she gloated about the horrific video-lynching of Gaddafi with the sickening joke: «We came, we conquered, he died».

It was Clinton who also takes responsibility for ratcheting up the current US aggression towards Russia. Back in March 2009, she was photographed jokingly presenting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov with a mock «reset button». That was supposed to herald a new era of partnership between Washington and Moscow. The reset button was quickly jettisoned by the US. Nearly three years later in December 2012, Clinton changed course sharply when she denounced the incipient Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) between Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan as «the re-Sovietisation» of the region.

Clinton said back in 2012 of the EEU: «There is a move to re-Sovietise the region. It won’t be called that but make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow it or prevent it».

By the end of 2013, Washington had figured out a way to thwart Vladimir Putin pursuing neighbourly relations, by instigating an illegal coup in Ukraine to usher in a Neo-Nazi regime. That regime has waged a war of aggression on Russia’s western border for the past year that has resulted in thousands of civilian deaths and more than one million refugees, invoking memories of the Ukrainian-assisted Nazi holocaust of the Second World War.

Therefore the only thing «liberal» about Clinton’s political record is liberal use of naked American state violence and lawlessness in pursuit of policy objectives.

On launching her presidential credentials at the weekend, Clinton’s Republican rivals or would-be rivals immediately fired the brickbats, accusing the 67-year-old former First Lady of being a «Washington insider» and the «embodiment of all that is wrong» in US politics. It’s a charge that easily sticks. Clinton has become a household name ever since her husband, Bill, became president for two terms back in 1993. The couple may have been «dead broke» when they left the White House, but they have made up for it ever since through their corporate-funded Clinton Foundation, thus joining the wealthy elite that resides and operates in the Washington Beltway.

Among the donors to the Clinton Foundation, a supposedly humanitarian concern, are foreign governments, including the despotic royal rulers of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who between them have donated over $20 million even while she was working at the State Department between 2009-2012. Only the wilfully gullible could believe that such largesse did not influence Clinton’s decision-making as Secretary of State, or in the future if she becomes president of the US.

The unintended irony of Clinton’s Republican detractors, who include rabid rightwing Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, as well as the maverick Senator Rand Paul, is that every single one of them will have to spend similar amounts of cash in their anticipated presidential campaigns.

Indeed, any other contender for the race to the White House will likewise have to find billions of dollars to fund their campaign. That is a paramount necessity. All of them will have to court the favours of corporate donors and wealthy individuals. In that regard, all American presidential candidates are by definition «Washington insiders». They are all beholden to Wall Street banks, the mega corporations of the military-industrial complex, the oil companies, the Israeli and Saudi lobby and the financial aristocracy personified by Soros and others.

So, in substance, there is no difference between any of the American presidential candidates, whether they are Democrat or Republican. All are bought-and-paid-for by the top one per cent of super-rich in American society.

What will emerge is a contest over perception and image-making. Already Clinton’s campaign-launch shows that she has has invested in slick advertising techniques to sell her image. Her campaign video features a diverse collection of «ordinary Americans» who tell of their hopes for success in personal and work matters. Clinton appears in the two-minute video for only half the allotted time. She is seen standing outside a suburban home (rather than her own two palatial mansions) and she tells viewers: «Everyday Americans need a champion, and I want to be that champion».

Clinton’s campaign over the next year is expected to focus on improving the economic benefits to working families and on the issue of income inequality, which has exploded in the US. How Clinton proposes to address those problems remains to be seen. She is said to be an advocate of increasing the minimum wage and for helping working mothers with childcare financial aid.

Such policy measures are tokenism given the scale of chronic wealth inequality that has been building over past decades across the US. It is reckoned that the top richest 400 individuals now possess wealth equivalent to the bottom half of the entire US population – or some 155 million Americans.

Nobel winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has called the US a «failed economy» in which inequality has become a structural condition.

But any politician in Washington who puts forward structural remedies for a structural problem will have no chance of entering the presidential campaign, never mind winning it. One such remedy to systematic inequality in the US is to introduce a thorough progressive tax system that comprehensively redistributes wealth from the financial oligarchy to the wider population. Decades of policy favouritism to the rich – under both Republicans and Democratic administrations alike – must be reversed.

However, such a campaign ticket would simply not happen. It is not so much that the wider American public would not rally to such a call. They most likely would. But in the anti-democratic, plutocratic system that is the US, it is simply the case that any potential contender with a structural remedy would be excluded from even getting near the race starting line by the corporate funding machine.

The financial oligarchy that pays for all presidential candidates is not a turkey that votes for Christmas. It will make sure that all the candidates – who need to raise billions of dollars to have any chance of entering the contest – do not in anyway threaten the privileges of the one per cent.

Incumbent president, Barack Obama, is a case in point. He cynically used the emotional plea of «Yes, we can make a change» when he ran for election in 2008 as the first African-American. Since then Obama has emerged as a dutiful servant of Wall Street and big business, as well as the Pentagon corporations, «earning» in the process a personal net worth of $ 5-10 million.

Clinton is likewise playing on the emotional appeal to Americans to vote for the «first female president». In other words, the «hope and change» nostrum is reprised all over again.

However, if American voters fall for that chimera, they will inevitably end up bitterly disappointed – again. America’s social, political and economic collapse is structural. The disease is a symptom of the historical demise of capitalism into a parasitic speculative, moribund system. No one in Washington can offer an effective solution because of the ring-fencing through Big Money. Hillary Clinton and all her rivals from America’s two main parties are hermetically sealed-in to ensure the one per cent are not in any way threatened with radical overhaul. That’s why the system is in terminal collapse. It has no way of correcting itself.

Americans will see no change under a Hillary Clinton presidency except for further deterioration in their social conditions. The rest of the world, and Russia in particular, can be sure that Clinton will pursue more of the same militaristic aggression that characterised her four-year stint as Washington’s top diplomat.

Whether described as «liberal», «conservative» or «hawk» – all American presidential candidates are the same in practice. Puppets for sale.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Friday, 17 April 2015

US Apparently Unconcerned About Americans Trapped in Yemen

Posted on April 15, 2015

by Richard Edmondson

While Russia has sent a ship to Yemen to evacuate its own citizens (and even some Americans, as the above video mentions) US citizens trapped in Yemen have received little to no help from their own government. This is actually not an unprecedented situation. If you’re not familiar with it, you might be interested in the story of Charles Horman, a US journalist who was trapped in Chile as the US carried out a coup in 1973.

Horman and fellow journalist Frank Teruggi, also American, were seized by Chilean soldiers and murdered, possibly with the knowledge or involvement of US officials. You can go here to see an interview with Horman’s widow conducted in 2013. A considerable amount of evidence that has come out in the 40-plus years since the coup, would suggest US complicity in the murder of its own citizens.

All of which kind of leads me to conclude–that if I were trapped in some country somewhere undergoing a violent coup, civil war, or some other vicious bloodletting of some sort, the US Embassy is probably the last place I would try and seek help.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Sayyed Nasrallah to KSA: Enough for Aggression, You’re to Face Great Threats...Yemenis Victorious

Zeinab Essa

17-04-2015 | 20:08

Hizbullah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah sent on Friday a clear message to the Saudi kingdom by saying: Enough for Aggression.

Addressing the huge crowd of people at Sayyed Shuhadda complex in Dahyieh [Southern Suburbs of Beirut] under the title, "Rally for Supporting Yemen: A Word of Right in Face of a Brutal Tyrant", Sayyed Nasrallah declared that Hizbullah's position is not the position of deaf hearts.

"We declare our rejection and condemnation to the US-Saudi aggression on Yemen as we reiterate our solidarity and sympathy with the oppressed people of Yemen," he said.
In parallel, His Eminence stated: "Nothing will stop us, neither repercussions nor threats, from declaring our condemnation to the US-Saudi aggression on Yemen and our support and solidarity with the people of Yemen."

According to Sayyed Nasrallah: "It is our human, jihadist and religious duty to take this stance and all the sons of this nation must reassess their responsibilities and take the appropriate stance. Intimidation or threats will not prevent us from continuing to declare our condemnation of the aggression against Yemen."

"They say it's a war of Arabs. However, have the Arab people authorized them to wage a war on Yemen? This is a war against an Arab people."

On the anniversary of the "Israeli" 1996 "Grapes of Wrath aggression on Lebanon", Sayyed Nasrallah said: "We stand with reverence before the sacrifices of our people in Lebanon, especially in its South. The Zionist enemy waged the Grapes of Wrath aggression against Lebanon with Arab and Western blessing and our army and resistance stood in its face."

"This paved the way for the 2000 victory, which transferred Arabs from the era of defeat to the era of victories," he asserted.

Responding to the Saudi claims for the reasons of the aggression, Sayyed Nasrallah clarified that "the war's real objective is restoring the Saudi-American hegemony over Yemen, as I have already announced."

In addition, His Eminence called those who talk about the so-called "War of Arabs", "look to their [Yemeni people's] dialect, language, eloquence, nobility, courage, generosity and presence, if the Yemeni people were not from the Arabs, who are the Arabs?""No one accepts to label the events in Yemen as a Shiite-Sunni war other than those who are controlled by money," he mentioned, noting that "Yemenis do not need to prove their Arab or Islamic identity and those invading Yemen today must seek to verify their Arab identity."

Moreover, the Resistance Leader wondered: "Does defending the Yemeni people means to kill the Yemenis?"

"They are saying that they are defending the Yemeni state. They are doing this through bombing the state's administrations, airports, ports and military bases. Is this how you defend the state?"

On this level, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed: "They said that the war's objective is to defend the Yemeni people. They are defending the Yemeni people through an air and sea blockade against 42 million Yemenis, who are being left without food, water or medical aid."

On the claims that the US-Saudi aggression was waged to protect the Holy mosques in al-Madina and Macca, His Eminence asked: "Who is threatening the Two Holy Mosques? Ansarullah? The Yemenis? I can confirm to you that there is a threat against the Two Holy Mosques, but it is coming from Daesh [ISIL], which after declaring a caliphate in Mosul announced that it will demolish the Holy Kaaba."

"After the founding king seized control of Hijaz, his Wahhabi followers - inspired by their culture - demolished all historic artifacts that have to do with the Prophet in April 1926," he mentioned.

Moreover, Hizbullah Secretary General wondered: "Where did the ideology of the groups that are destroying societies and countries come from? From which school of thought and books? From whose culture and fatwas? Who is spreading this ideology across the world? Who is building schools all over the world to teach Muslim youths this destructive, takfiri ideology? Very clearly it is Saudi Arabia. It is using the pilgrimage revenues in the process."

In addition, Sayyed Nasrallah highlighted: "They claimed that the objective is to prevent the arrival of the Yemeni army and People's Committees to Aden, but failed."

"They said that the goal of the aggression is to prevent the arrival of the army to the rest of the provinces and that also failed, and the provinces have become in the hands of the Yemeni army and al-Qaeda retreated. They said that the goal is to break the will of the Yemeni people and to subject it to conditions, but the Yemenis showed a great steadfastness."

He further said: "Remember the July War and observe the resemblance. A fierce media campaign was waged, but we "the adventurers" emerged victorious. It is the same war, same thinking and same management and the outcome will be the same."

"Does anyone believe that this war's objective is to return Abedrabbo Mansour to the presidency?" His Eminence questioned.

On another note, Sayyed Nasrallah hailed the Yemeni people and the revolutionary leadership of Ansar Allah, "This Great Leader Sayyed Abdul-Malik Badriddine al-Houthi, now has the chance to attack and infiltrate into Saudi Arabia. However, he doesn't because he is performing what is called a strategic patience."

He also predicted that the only outcome of the Saudi offensive is failure: "After 28 days of aerial and naval bombardment, fierce airstrikes and all forms of intelligence and logistical support that were offered by the Americans, there has been failure to return Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi to Yemen, as he is still in Riyadh."

To the Saudis, Sayyed Nasrallah said: "The tribal community doesn't forget its victims ... Because of this aggression, Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi has lost any chance to return to the presidency, and any political settlement cannot return him to the presidency."

"Yemenis so far did not go to their true choices. Till now the Yemenis did nothing. But you [the Saudis] have reached to the end of the line. You have no solution but to go to a ground invasion."

As His Eminence clarified that the ground offensive is futile and the aggressors' defeat is obvious, he urged the Yemenis to only depend on their resilience, which will defeat the aggression. "They must also prepare for a political solution but the war must stop first."

As for the consequences of the aggression, Sayyed Nasrallah confirmed that the intervention countered the desired outcome by aggravating the threat against Saudi Arabia.

"You turned a possible threat to an absolute one. You have taken yourself towards greater threats," he said, addressing the Saudi regime.

"It's going to take time for Saudi Arabia to realize that the Yemeni people will not kneel," he asserted, and pointed out that "but at the moment, no one is listening to calls for a political settlement and calls for dialogue."

Meanwhile, Hizbullah Secretary General emphasized that "the Saudis have failed to turn the confrontation into a domestic confrontation between the North and the South, and the result was a national posture in the face of the aggression."

"I do not want to open old files. What did the "kingdom of goodness" do in the Lebanese civil war in 1982, 1984 and 2006?"

On the international level, Sayyed Nasrallah confirmed that "most voices in the world have demanded an end to the war and called for a political solution."

He advised those leading this war to show modesty and seek an exit. "It's time to talk clearly, not a war by proxy. The Saudi Ambassador in Washington declared a war, and the Saudi army bombards, destroys, and kills."

His Eminence also added: "Although we call for a political solution. It is time for the Muslims, Arabs and the world to stand and to tell the Saudis: Enough."

"It's about time Muslims and Arabs told Saudi Arabia enough is enough."

To the Saudi people, Sayyed Nasrallah explained that "all what we want for Saudi Arabia is security and prosperity and we want stability for its people."

However, he called for rescuing Yemen from this tragedy.

Commenting on Pakistan's refrain from joining the US-Saudi strikes against the Yemeni people, he thanked the Pakistani government over its refusal to join the war.

In parallel, His Eminence called on Pakistan and the Egyptian leadership not to be partners in the war, "the same as they along with India prevented the demolition of the Holy Prophet's grave in 1920."

"I thank Syria today the same as I thanked it on March 8, 2005. Thank you for remaining resilient and thank you for not surrendering."

On the Iranian position from the aggression against Yemen, the Resistance Leader revealed that "Iran is ready and it believes in dialogue with the Islamic states and with Saudi Arabia, but the latter is being stubborn because it has failed in all countries - in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon - and it is seeking a success before going to the table of negotiations."

On the internal Front, Sayyed Nasrallah called on some parties in Lebanon not to do wrong calculations and not to prematurely declare the victory of the Firmness Storm campaign. "We do not want to have a dispute over Yemen in Lebanon."

"Yemen, will be like Syria, let us have our own thoughts, and let us express our differences. We want to live together, continue together and work together. We should work together, like we did to protect Lebanon from the conflict in Syria, in order to protect Lebanon from a spillover from Yemen," he concluded.

Source: al-Ahed news

RELATED

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Richard Engel and the "bad Assad" propaganda stories that built the case for the war on Syria

Via

The Richard Engel Kidnapping Fake - MoA

The Richard Engel Kidnapping Fake - MoA Scooped MSM By 28 Month

The veil is lifting a bit over the slew of the "bad Assad" propaganda stories that built the case for the war on Syria. The New York Times reports today: NBC News Alters Account of Correspondent’s Kidnapping in Syria

NBC News on Wednesday revised its account of the 2012 kidnapping of its chief foreign correspondent, Richard Engel, saying it was likely that Mr. Engel and his reporting team had been abducted by a Sunni militant group, not forces affiliated with the government of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.

Moon of Alabama questioned the original Richard Engel story at that time and found that the whole "kidnapping" and "rescue" was likely a completely staged event:

Professor As'ad AbuKhalil, the Angry Arab, has reason to not believe that story and has indications that these were not Assad loyalists but FSA insurgents playing the role of Assad loyalists for a fake media stunt.There is now new evidence that this was indeed a fake event and that, whatever Richard Engel may believe, he and the people with him (which included one ever unnamed "British engineer" who is more likely some special operations guy) were not in the hands of Shabiha but in the hand of well known experienced video fakers.

We had earlier looked at the fake citizen journalist Khaled Abu Salah who created and distributed fake videos about "Assad atrocities" sponsored by the shady U.S. para-government organization Avaaz. He was, as we documented, involved in the Richard Engels stunt. This led us to ask:

How come that this known serial producer of fake videos is involved in a murky kidnapping case that looks like a propaganda set up for "western" media consumption?
Further:

Who smuggled Richard Engel into Syria? Was it Avaaz?

Did "Danny" and Khaled Abu Salah knew that he was coming?

Did they prepare the kidnapping and the liberation of Richard Engel?

Some of the answers may be found if Richard Engel explains how he came to meet Khaled Abu Salah for this interview. Engel should urgently answer that question.

Engel still does not come clean on this issue. His new account of the fake kidnapping only comes, as HuffPo writes,

.. after new information surfaced suggesting he may have been misled about the identities of his captors, according to sources familiar with the matter.

The New York Times had recently started a new investigation about the case and only that has led Engel to "revisit" the issue - that is to cover his old lies with new ones.

His bosses at NBC put Engel on air with sectarian talk even when it knew that his story was very likely wrong:

NBC executives were informed of Mr. Ajouj and Mr. Qassab’s possible involvement during and after Mr. Engels’s captivity, according to current and former NBC employees and others who helped search for Mr. Engel, including political activists and security professionals. Still, the network moved quickly to put Mr. Engel on the air with an account blaming Shiite captors and did not present the other possible version of events.

Two years ago it was clear to the Angry Arab and to me that the Engel account was very wrong from start to end. The Daily Beast then added some details pointing out that NBC "reported" a story it knew to be wrong:

[T]he sources say the gunmen who seized the crew may also have included rogue members of the rebel FSA–something top FSA commanders are keen to obscure. According to one source, “NBC’s security advisers were convinced that there was some FSA involvement in this and contacted wealthy Syrian-American donors of the rebel group, pointing out that Richard had been supportive of the uprising against Assad. They urged them to put pressure on the FSA. They really screwed down on them.” Top FSA commanders were alarmed and promised to help.

How is that now, more than two years later, "new information"?

The alleged "Shabiah" show of the "kidnapped" Engel was clearly fake and the "rescue" by the fake "moderate Sunni rebel" journalist pointed to a bigger plot.

Engel's lies continue. He now admits that the dead "he had seen" were not seen by him at all.

In his Vanity Fair article, Mr. Engel described one of his captors lying dead. In his statement Wednesday, he acknowledged that he did not see bodies during the rescue.

Engel still speaks of dead kidnappers and a firefight during which he was "rescued". But the NYT found a witness that lets one seriously doubt this:

Thaer al-Sheib, another local man connected with the rebel movement who sought the NBC team, said that on the day of the release “we heard some random shots for less than a minute coming from the direction of the farm.” He said that Abu Ayman, the rebel commander credited with freeing the team, is related by marriage to Mr. Ajouj, and that he staged the rescue.

So Engel still does not say how he was really "rescued" and how he immediately thereafter came to sit down with the video and news faker Khaled Abu Saleh. In the video Khaled Abu Saleh gets lauded by Engel as part of the group that freed him. That group was Ahrar al Shams who are pure Bin Laden Jihadists. Did Engel, an Arabic speaker, not notice that? What by the way does Avaaz, with whom Khaled Abu Saleh cooperated, knew about his relation to Jihadists?

Neither has NBC's Richard Engel come clean on this nor have the NYT or HuffPo really dug out the back story.

That back story would reveal that "western" secret services, with the help of para-government organizations like Avaaz and some paid Syrian "revolutionaries", created false stories and videos about the "bad Assad regime". That back story would explain that "western" journalists from outlets like NBC, the NYT, including the writer of today's piece on NBC C.J.Chivers, and HuffPo willingly took part in and propagandized those scams even when they were known to be quite obvious lies.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Saudi Fell in US Trap: Egyptians Question Sisi’s Decision to Join Aggression on Yemen

Egyptians Question Sisi’s Decision to Join Aggression on Yemen

Local Editor

A public debate is unfolding in Egypt about whether to expand the country's role in military invention against the Houthis in Yemen, creating a political predicament that could undermine the Saudi-led campaign to support the government.

President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi meeting with his political and military officials

Speaking about Egypt joining the US-backed Saudi-led aggression on Yemen, one cannot but shed light on the previous Egyptian foray into Yemen in the 1960s which was a disaster and the country was beset by domestic problems.

Further to the point, Egypt claimed it would join the coalition in its aggression on Yemen. Egypt sent naval vessels to Yemen's coast and Egyptian officials had said that a ground assault was planned.

But now there were signs that public anxiety was creating a dilemma for Egypt's President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi, who must balance the concerns of a public worried about domestic security and social problems, and the pull of Saudi Arabia, a close ally that had donated billions to Egypt's government.

Moreover, the memory of Egypt's war in Yemen had been resurrected in recent weeks by skeptical pundits, newspaper columnists, and political parties who opposed sending troops.

Accordingly, the debate could complicate the calculations of Saudi officials as Saudi Arabia touted the participation of 10 countries in the coalition at the outset of the assault on Yemen.

Adding to that, the message was dealt as a setback last week when Pakistan's parliament voted against joining the intervention. The Pakistani decision, in turn, was front-page news in Egypt.

"This all puts the Saudi position in quite a quandary, if they intended something far more muscular, because they were clearly trying to rely on subcontractors, so to speak," said Yezid Sayigh, a senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.

He added the Saudis were now faced with the prospect that "unless they were willing to put their own army on the ground, then they have no ground option."

At this level, Saudi Arabia's Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud met President al-Sisi; they discussed the Yemen crisis but no announcement was made about a commitment of Egyptian troops to Yemen.

Not only this, but the Yemen debate also came when Egypt's military and security forces were battling an insurgency in the Sinai Peninsula and facing a steady string of bombs and armed attacks in Cairo and other cities where on Sunday alone, 13 people were killed in two separate bomb attacks in north Sinai.

"This is the kind of situation where they [the state] could face very real public disgruntlement and dissent. There are very few issues that could produce that kind of reaction. This seems like one," said Michael Hanna of the "Century Foundation in New York City".

He added, "There has been an interesting level of questioning. That hasn't been the case in the past year and a half."

Source: the Time, Edited by website team

Egypt’s Sisi: No Ground Troops Deployed in Yemen

Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi on Friday implied that Egypt has not sent ground troops to fight in a Saudi-US-led military aggression on Yemen.

Sisi

"Egypt is only participating in ‘Operation Decisive Storm’ with air and naval forces," Al-Sisi said in a speech at a military academy in the eastern Kafr al-Sheikh city.

"An announcement will be made if any other forces were deployed in the operation," he asserted.

Al-Sisi's visit to the military academy comes two days after two cadets were killed and three others injured when a bomb was detonated near a bus boarding a group of cadets.
Saudi Arabia and its Arab allies have been since March 25 pounding Yemeni cities killing and injuring hundreds of people.


Source: Websites	17-04-2015 - 14:51 Last updated 17-04-2015 - 14:51 \|

Egyptian Commander Says Army Won’t Fight in Yemen, Saudi Fell in US Trap

Local Editor

Bilal

The commander of the Egyptian forces in the Gulf war, Major General Mohammad Ali Bilal, said that his troops will fight outside Egypt except in case of defending its national security, in an indirect response to the claims that Cairo would join a possible ground invasion in Yemen.

The Egyptian commander noted that the geographical features of Yemen and the nature of the Yemeni makes any foreign intervention impossible.

Bilal wondered about the role that the US military is playing in Yemen as it was reported that the American troops saved two Saudi pilots in Aden on the second day of the Saudi aggression, hinting at the US role in entrapping Saudi in the war.

He also stressed that although the Egyptian official stance is not publicly announced, it supports the political solution in Yemen and Syria.