October Surprise? Saudis Prepare for US Strike on Iran

Topher Morrison

PurpleSerf.com

Royal Saudi Air Force

With the financial world fundamentally in question after the recent LIBOR scandal rocked headlines, confirming once again the game is rigged, all that is left to assure laymen and markets is overt strength – a clear signal of who’s in control.

“It is already decided,” one Saudi prince told an unnamed European official, according to Debka File.  When asked by the ‘European’ if America will abstain from pursing its well-rehearsed plan to overthrow Tehran, the prince said, “Anything can happen, of course. But this time we’re sure the American decision to attack is final and we are already making appropriate preparations.”

To be sure, Saudi forces have been on high alert on the Jordanian border due to the escalating violence in Syria and U.S. Naval forces have been building in the Persian Gulf in response to threats from Iran to close the vital Strait of Hormuz.

If there was any doubt that U.S. challenges in the region reflected a genuine concern over Iranian nuclear ambitions they were confirmed when the New York Times reported last week the reshaping of American force projection is “about Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions,” according to a senior Defense Department official.

Keeping nations in their place and open for business is the crux of American foreign policy and what animates the strategy of containment around Russia, an emergent China and the renewed interest in the African continent not seen since the infamous days of Cecil Rhodes.  Should these countries attempt to orchestrate their own affairs especially outside the realm of the petrodollar severe consequences abound.

Muammar Ghaddafi, for instance, on March 2^nd of 2011 threatened to expel western oil companies from Libya.  March 14^th he invited their Chinese, Russian and Indian counterparts to fill their place.  Shortly thereafter, on March 17^th, UN no-fly resolution 1973 was passed of which the aforementioned countries including their BRICS ally Brazil abstained.

Professor Peter Dale Scott, author of American War Machine observed the following pattern prior to the Iraqi invasion in an article from Global Research:

"As Ellen Brown has pointed out, first Iraq and then Libya decided to challenge the petrodollar system and stop selling all their oil for dollars, shortly before each country was attacked.

Kenneth Schortgen Jr., writing on Examiner.com, noted that ‘[s]ix months before the US moved into Iraq to take down Saddam Hussein, the oil nation had made the move to accept Euros instead of dollars for oil, and this became a threat to the global dominance of the dollar as the reserve currency, and its dominion as the petrodollar..’

According to a Russian article titled ‘Bombing of Lybia – Punishment for Qaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar,’ Qaddafi made a similarly bold move: he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar. Qaddafi suggested establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency. … The initiative was viewed negatively by the USA and the European Union, with French president Nicolas Sarkozy calling Libya a threat to the financial security of mankind; but Qaddafi continued his push for the creation of a united Africa."

Libya’s huge gold stores and abundant oil supply made it a player in the region, able to chart its own course in world affairs.  The Central Bank of Libya, essentially off the globalist reservation, was a prime target for takeover.  Ghaddafi’s overtures to China, Russia and India merely served as the catalyst.

The last bank in the world not a part of the “hive of compliant nations” dominated by the banking cartel is the Central Bank of Iran.  Unfortunately Tehran is suffering from 50% inflation rates, EU oil sanctions and earlier this year was shut out of the international bank clearing system, called SWIFT.  Its central bank overseen by public office holders, unlike our privately held Federal Reserve, committed a similar transgression to that of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Ghaddafi.

“In its trade transactions with other countries, Iran does not limit itself to the U.S. dollar, and the country can pay using its own currency,” Reuters quoted central bank governor Mahmoud Bahmani as saying. “If a country should so choose, it can pay in gold and we would accept that without any reservation.”  While Iran is trying to escape from the globalist choke hold, this is undoubtedly the move others have paid dearly for.

MIT professor and U.S. foreign policy expert Noam Chomsky provided his insight in an article by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul at Beacon Equity Research.

“Iran broke ranks with the United States in 1979, and this is a crime for which it has to be punished,” said Chomski in a discussion with Gilbert Archcar for the book, Perilous Power.  “And it goes way beyond rational state interests.  As with Cuba, it’s the Mafia mentality: You can’t allow disobedience to exist; it’s too dangerous because other people might get the idea that they can be disobedient as well.  So Iran’s going to have to be punished for that act of disobedience.”

The end of exclusive American dominion is at hand and with it the reign of the global petrodollar economy.  China, Russia and others have been trading outside the U.S. premier world reserve currency for some time.

While the long-term trajectory of Pax Americana is obvious the wars over Iraq, Libya, Syria and coming soon Iran are the often erratic and always violent symptoms of an empire in decline.  Where there was once a free market, which spurred growth, expansion and innovation have now been replaced by the narrowing objectives of the state, which have demonstrably subsumed the private interests of large multinational corporations.  Its meddlesome and corrupt systems are made manifest in the energy and financial industries both of which as a result are in seemingly perpetual tumult.

Syria’s Srebrenica Blamed on Iranian Special Forces

Topher Morrison

PurpleSerf.com

Iran's Quds Force

The massacre in Srebrenica was the last best piece of propaganda of the 20th century.  Syria’s Houla massacre, if swallowed whole, will produce the same deceit.

In 1995, after the Dayton Peace Accords were signed in Ohio, purportedly 8,000 Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) were massacred during a summer in Srebrenica.  It was referred to as the worst mass murder since World War II and the blame was quickly laid at the feet of the usual suspects – Serbian forces.  The result was NATO’s aerial bombardment and the invasion of 60,000 troops under United Nations command.

The Bosnian invasion was predicated on the idea that Srebrenica was a result of “ethnic cleansing” the endgame of course to stymie if not eradicate the Bosniak bloodline.  The only problem was women and children were evidently put on buses and allowed to flee.  When the graves were exhumed and the bodies examined mostly men of fighting age were found.  It took over a decade for the Hague to exonerate Serbia in the action and place it squarely on a Croat, but by 2007 the damage was irreparable in more ways than one.  So goes the fog of war and propaganda.

Syria over the Memorial Day weekend suffered a microcosm of that massacre when 108 civilians (32 children under 10-years-old) in Hula, outside Homs, were summarily dispatched without mercy.  Initial reports suspected the Syrian army, if not, the Alawite Shabiha militia, loyal to the Assad regime.  A Syrian investigation, however, found the culprits to be an 800-man death squad.

Thus far the trial of the Houla Massacre has taken place in the court of public opinion, which has been severely biased in favor of the opposition since the beginning of the Arab Spring, imbued with democratic legitimacy.   In reality the Free Syrian Army (FSA) based from behind NATO lines in Turkey and under the direction of the Syrian National Council (SNC) is supplemented by a dubious international coalition of Islamic fundamentalists from all over the Middle East.

Rather than merely appealing for democratic reforms this sordid sum has created an environment of rampant sectarian violence not scene since Iraq in 2007.  Unfortunately like in Afghanistan and Iraq the grand irony is that the West’s “crusade” as it is often referred to has actually displaced hundreds of thousands of Christians.  According to French Bishop Philip Tournyol Clos:

“…the picture for us is utter desolation: the church of Mar Elian is half destroyed and that of Our Lady of Peace is still occupied by the rebels. Christian homes are severely damaged due to the fighting and completely emptied of their inhabitants, who fled without taking anything. The area of Hamidieh is still shelter to armed groups independent of each other, heavily armed and bankrolled by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. All Christians (138,000) have fled to Damascus and Lebanon, while others took refuge in the surrounding countryside.”

Continuing…

“the enemies of Syria have enlisted some of the Muslim Brotherhood in order to destroy the brotherly relations that traditionally existed between Muslims and Christians: Yet, to date,they are not able to: they have provoked a contrary reaction and the two communities are more united than before. The Syrian soldiers in fact, continue to face foreign fighters, mercenaries Libyans, Lebanese militants from the Gulf, Afghans, Turks”

This heartfelt testimony reflects what we have known for the better part of a year, that the “protestors” and “activists” in Syria are very much part of a larger proxy war which pulls support from a vast cross section of the NATO-Sunni alliance.  Funding of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood has been in the pipeline since at least 2007 when it was reported in the New Yorker that Israel and the US were funneling support through Saudi Arabia so as not to compromise the “credibility” of the ostensibly “Islamic” movement.  A similar tactic was utilized through Pakistan in creation of Al’ Qaeda in 1980s during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (we all know how that worked out).  As members of the Muslim Brotherhood are now honored guests at the White House, one must wonder if “credibility” is any longer an issue.

To continue with the Srebrenica analogy, while there has been no peace accord as there was in Bosnia former UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, has been attempting to monitor a ceasefire (part of his six point plan) as he did in Rwanda and Bosnia, which has by all accounts demonstrably failed as it did twice before.  To be sure, as the Washington Post’s distorted, but still revealing op-ed detailed, wherever Kofi goes killings follow.

The common narrative parroted throughout the MSM (here and here) is that these UN monitors are naively providing “cover” for the Assad regime’s reprisals and add credibility to the Syrian government under the idea that diplomatic solutions are being ardently pursued.  Given what we know about the composition of the insurgency, however, it is much more likely the opposite is true.  UN monitors legitimize the conflict itself as a wholly indigenous uprising that requires diplomacy and time rather than expose it for what it is – a foreign invasion aimed at dismantling a key ally of Iran and Russia.

Srebrenica “claimed 8,000 lives”, however, it later turned out those numbers were grossly exaggerated (more like 700) and the motive – ethnic cleansing – proved tenuous at best.  In reality it was another horror of war propagandized as the international version of a hate crime – a crime against humanity – ostensibly far worse and deserving of invasion.  In Houla, while the scene has changed the goal is very much the same: demonize a vulnerable target government, intervene with force and with overwhelming humanitarian legitimacy post-haste.

The massacre, however, retains all the hallmarks of a shake and bake propaganda piece: the group was nearly 1/3 children, the fatalities purportedly as a result of “tank shells” and while many victims were in fact “mutilated and killed by knives.”  Indeed, the footage was “released by the rebels” for Western consumption, that much is undeniable.   Thing is, the Syrian army doesn’t enjoy a monopoly on that type of ordinance since the FSA has been reported to have captured Syrian army tanks as well as receiving even more tanks from defectors.

What was true in Srebrenica (see the Srebrenica fact sheet) is most likely true in Houla, both parties are were responsible for the death and destruction rather than one fail swoop of merciless destruction at the hands of an all-powerful Assad hell bent on crushing the moral of his people and their wishes for democracy.

Tempered with the aforementioned facts, the understandable and demonstrable desire of the media to sensationalize the events, geopolitical interests and the thin evidence (lies of satellite photos showing pro Assad forces “at the time of the attack” were in fact a day old, testimony of defected “air force officer” with “super human” hearing and sight, and testimony from a child in shock and impressionable) an objective analysis may come forth.  Until that time beware the sirens call.

What is Qud’s Force Doing in Syria, Re-balancing or Massacring?

It has been reported that Iranian Revolutionary Guard General Ismail Qa’ani, second-in-command of Iranian Special Forces – Quds Force – has been training Assad’s soldiers since before the Syrian uprising.  This from the International Business Times:

“The Quds, named for the Farsi word for Jerusalem, are Iran’s special forces unit — in American equivalents, a mix between black-ops and the CIA. As the Revolutionary Guard’s external force, the Quds support and facilitate Islamic movements in other nations on Teheran’s behalf, movements that allegedly include terrorist organizations.”

OMG, so like terrorist organizations like NATO backed Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) or Nevada trained MEK both listed on the US State Department’s “Don’t Feed the Terrorists” list, those types of terrorists?  Looks like two can play at this game.

The state department attempted to connect the dots for us in the wake of the Houla massacre neglecting to brief us on the opposition’s questionable allegiances and design.  Its spokesperson, according to IBT:

"Victoria Nuland said that the Shabiha militia, accused of carrying out the Houla massacre, has been modeled after Iran’s paramilitary Basij force, suggesting that the Iranian military could have trained the Syrian civilian soldiers."

This could be true, but it doesn’t explain the inconsistencies and gaps in the favored fiction of Houla, rather it supplies a red hearing.

In reality the official narrative is fraying.  The IEDs, reports of wahabbists, displaced Christians and clandestine support are piling upon a delicate ruse.  The idea that the opposition’s “demonstrators” and “activists” are a homogenous, indigenous and innocuous bunch of freedom loving non-state actors has been so undermined that Sec. of State Hillary Clinton revealed the true mastermind behind the Houla massacre claiming in Copenhagen that Quds “are coaching the Syrian military … helping them set up these sectarian militias.” She effectively, in one line, used up her lifetime supply of irony.

It is evident, according to defectors, the Quds Force was needed because Syria’s Army wasn’t up to task in crucial engagements with the foreign backed FSA and its fundamentalist friends.  Hm, odd.  In the end, the Syrian government (backed by Iran, Russia and China) faces a foreign backed insurgency (under the aegis of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Libya, Turkey, NATO). We are in effect seeing World War III in a fishbowl, perhaps a peak into the future and its only going to get uglier from here.

PAKISTAN UNDER ATTACK, CHINA COULD STEP IN

Topher Morrison
PurpleSerf.com
5/22/11

"Militants" have just attacked a Pakistani naval air base in what the military and government call a "terrorist attack."  PNS Mehran is in the middle of Karachi, Pakistan's largest city and financial capital.  Apparently a group of 10 launched a surprise attack from 3 sides of the base with "small bombs" and "sophisticated weapons" successfully destroying a PC-3 maritime long range patrol craft recently delivered by the US government and killing two members of the Pakistani military.  


Story developing...


Pakistan has suffered 4,350 deaths over the past four years ostensibly due to Taliban attacks, however, threats have increased substantially since Operation Neptune's Spear (code name for the Osama Bin Laden raid) allegedly claimed the life of the Trillion Dollar Man, Osama Bin Laden.


Neptune's Spear has come under intense criticism on multiple fronts including the days of contradictory information following the raid, the violation of Pakistani sovereignty, the summary execution of the most important intelligence asset in the War on Terror, the quick disposal of OBL's body, the convenient treasure trove of incriminating and embarrassing information, but most importantly the timing and nature of the raid itself has raised questions of the US' real intentions. 


Today's attack would be of relatively little import given the history of attacks on Pakistan's government and military had the Sunday Express not reported Obama's defensive/antagonistic posture on May 15th:

“US troops will be deployed in Pakistan if the nation’s nuclear installations come under threat from terrorists out to avenge the killing of Osama Bin Laden… The plan, which would be activated without President Zardari’s consent, provoked an angry reaction from Pakistan officials… Barack Obama would order troops to parachute in to protect key nuclear missile sites. These include the air force’s central Sargodha HQ, home base for nuclear-capable F-16 combat aircraft and at least 80 ballistic missiles.”


While thousands of Pakistanis have protested the US-Pakistan War on Terror the US nonetheless maintains its "right" to defend itself against potential aggressors.  More specifically the protests emphasize the scores of attacks from unmanned drone aircraft and fluctuating support from the Pakistani military resulting in countless civilian deaths and exacerbation of the atrocious failed/police state that is Pakistan.  


Under what circumstances Obama is willing to deploy troops in order secure Pakistan's weapons of mass destruction remains to be seen, however, what we do know has been revealed in the recent Neptune's Spear operation.  The means is there, the will has been articulated, all that is left is the right opportunity - contrived or otherwise.


The stealth helicopter "ditched" in Abottobad during the raid has been vetted by expert aviation blogs all over the internet and its technologies have been corroborated to be at least more than possible given evidence from around the world.  The US has the now proven its stealthy ability to pierce far into Pakistani territory and execute major operations.  This operation outside of its official objective of killing OBL has effectively embarrassed the intelligence services of Pakistan as either complicit or negligent in allowing OBL to live right under their military's nose.  The mission resulted in top level resignations and if what I describe next is true Operation Neptune's Spear was alternatively about sending a signal to Pakistan that it was still under US supervision.  


The alternative narrative to what has been proffered by the Obama administration and the mainstream media begins with Prince Bandar's (remember "Bandar Bush") visit to Pakistan in March.  According to geopolitical experts and The Envoy the Saudi national security chief visited Pakistan in a possible effort to establish new alternative security arrangements given the lack of support the US offered Egypt in the ousting of Mubarak, in other words, bring Saudi Arabia under the Pakistani nuclear umbrella or acquire the nukes which the Saudi regime essentially underwrote.  This is very different than what was publicly speculated; that Saudi Arabia wanted Pakistani military support not only for Riyadh, but for other Sunni Gulf allies such as Bahrain.  


While both could be true the former is of prime interest here especially given the recent warnings by China 3 days ago that "warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China." 


Will the Obama administration or NATO for that matter continue their bellicosity in the face of Chinese intervention?  This recent attack is exactly what the Obama administration purports to fear - militants successfully commandeering a Pakistani military establishment and either launching or stealing nuclear material.  Will Obama test China's new emboldened position?  Does the support of China now flow through to Saudi Arabia via Pakistan?  What does this mean geopolitically?  


More of the same - global realignment.


UPDATE: 5/26/11


China asked to build naval base at Gwadar, Pakistan thereby extending the "String of Pearls."

From the Alex Jones show 5/24/11 with Dr. Webster Griffen Tarpley.

Video Reporting Possible CIA/Saudi Snipers in Syria

Land Destroyer Report
Tony  Cartalucci
April 23rd, 2011


NOTE: This post is developing as readers send in information and will be updated and expanded as new information comes in. We need some translations and info on this video, and second opinions from Arab speakers familiar with this network's credibility. 

Last Updated April 25, 2011 - No sooner was "Color Revolution's Mystery Gunmen" posted covering the use of provocateurs to escalate foreign-funded color revolutons, when a reader sent in a news clip from Iran's Al-Alam News Network reportedly indicating Saudi/CIA snipers are in Syria taking out protesters. Al-Alam broadcasts throughout the region, in Arabic.

The clip features English text along the bottom stating that Saudi/CIA snipers are operating in Syria, purposefully gunning down protesters in order to expand unrest. It describes a motorcycle driver delivering a sniper to a building before speeding off. Once in position, the sniper fires on protesters. Syrian security forces surround the building and a shootout allegedly takes place. The text concludes stating that the sniper is injured and taken to a hospital.

Another video sent in by a reader shows further evidence that snipers are intentionally shooting protesters, one man caught appears not to be even Arabic at all let alone Syrian. The corporate owned media, meanwhile, continues relying on activist "witness reports."

This report and footage would corroborate both government and eye-witness accounts cited by international media stating that "snipers on rooftops" were shooting at protesters. While "rights activists" assume the snipers are security forces, the government maintains that gunmen have opened fire on protesters and security forces alike. A CNN report from April 5, 2011 cited a Syrian official who stated that "an unknown "armed group" on rooftops shot at protesters and security forces." Activists said they believe the people on the rooftops were snipers from security forces but have put forth no evidence beyond "witness accounts."


Read more of this amazing article at Land Destroyer Report.