US "Pivot" Stumbles in Thailand

August 19, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Months after the May 22, 2014 military coup that ousted the regime of Thaksin Shinawatra, the military-led government has been working in earnest to uproot the Shinawatra political machine as well as realign the Kingdom's foreign policy to represent a better balance between China's rising power and the West's waning but meddlesome influence. 

Uprooting the West's Unwarranted Influence 

The regime of Thaksin Shinawatra, led by nepotist proxy via his own sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, represented an inequity between this balance. Shinawatra has been a long-time family friend of the Bush political dynasty, was a member of the Carlyle Group, and since being ousted from power himself in a similar military coup in 2006, has been openly represented by some of the largest corporate lobbying firms on Earth, including, Kenneth Adelman of the Edelman PR firm (Freedom HouseInternational Crisis Group,PNAC), James Baker of Baker Botts (CFR, Carlyle Group), Robert Blackwill (CFR) of Barbour Griffith & Rogers (BGR)Kobre & KimBell Pottinger (and here) and currently Robert Amsterdam of Amsterdam & Partners (Chatham House).

While in office Shinawatra took up a decided pro-West stance, economically and geopolitically. To the protest of the Royal Thai Army and the Thai people themselves, Shinawatra sent Thai troops to aid in the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. He also authorized the US CIA to use Thai territory to carry out their abhorrent "rendition" program. Shinawatra also attempted to ram-rod through an unpopular and quite illegal free trade agreement with America's Fortune 500


Ebola and the Absent “Humanitarians”

August 18, 2014 (Ulson Gunnar - NEO) - The US spent over two billion dollars during NATO’s armed assault on Libya both in ordnance used during months of aerial bombardment and in covert support for terrorists used as proxy ground forces in the overthrow of the Libyan government. The United Kingdom is estimated to have spent even more. Hundreds of millions were spent by other NATO members throughout the duration of the assault. The “protection of civilians” was repeatedly cited as the altruistic justification for such an expenditure in manpower and financial resources.



In the wake of the conflict, it was revealed that NATO’s “humanitarian intervention” left entire cities filled with unarmed civilians encircled by Al Qaeda-linked militants and relentlessly bombarded by NATO sorties while food, water, gas, and power were intentionally cut off to “starve” the inhabitants into submission. It was also revealed that the threat to civilians cited by NATO members was fabricated by those NATO chose to replace the targeted Libyan government with.

Similar scenarios have played out in Syria, Ukraine, and even North and West Africa. At the cost of hundreds of millions, French troops have invaded and occupied several African nations over the course of the past 3 years, including five of their former colonies, namely Mali, Mauritania, Burkina Faso, Niger and Chad. And while the French government claims their justification is fighting terrorism and improving security (hundreds of miles from their own shores) much of the terrorism is a direct result of NATO’s intervention in Libya and the intentional arming of immense terrorist networks in the process that have proliferated money, arms and all the strife that follows, across the region.

Enter Ebola 

Doubts rightfully linger over the intentions of the West and its “humanitarian interventions.” But surely when the opportunity arose to execute an unquestionable act of altruism, the West would rise to the challenge. Surely when civilian lives and security really demanded international intervention the US, British, and French would be there with their apparently limitless resources, tens of thousands of eager helping-hands, and equipment to meet the challenge. But instead they are absent.

'ISIS a pretext for US-sponsored regime change in Iraq'

August 18, 2014 (Eric Draitser - RT) - The ousting of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is part of a broader US plan for Iraq and the Middle East as a whole.



Against the backdrop of the war against the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL), Washington has managed to kill two birds with one stone, as the saying goes. Not only has the US removed a political leader who had proven to be problematic due to his opposition to US military presence in Iraq, as well as his staunch support for Syria and President Assad, they have also created the conditions for the dismemberment of the Iraqi state. The US and its allies are supporting de facto ‘independence’ for the Kurdish region in the north of the country, using the IS as a convenient pretext for openly arming and supporting Kurdish forces. Naturally, one should not look for altruism in Washington’s motives. Rather, this strategy is to benefit western oil companies with dollar signs in their eyes, licking their lips in anticipation of being able to deal directly with Kurdish President Barzani.

Additionally, Maliki’s ouster deprives Syrian President Assad of a key ally, thereby emboldening the IS and the other militants waging war against Syria. It provides further evidence, as if more were needed, that the political future is bleak for any Iraqi leader who dares to break from the script written for him by Washington. Perhaps most importantly, it allows the US and its allies to be the leading force politically in the war against the IS, an organization created by US policy and covert operations in the region.

In the sales and marketing industry, there is a term known as ‘solution selling’ whereby the salesperson either creates or exaggerates a problem, then presents his or her product as the invaluable solution. Indeed, this sort of sales strategy is precisely the approach Washington has taken in the region, and specifically in Iraq.

The IS Disease 

The IS has only very recently become an internationally recognized epidemic of militant Islamist extremism that must be eradicated at all costs. That international recognition came only when the organization began taking control of territory in Iraq, threatening Western oil and gas interests. While the IS was waging its brutal and vicious war against the Syrian people and government however, the IS was merely an afterthought, simply a group of extremists fighting the ‘brutal dictator’ Assad.

It seems then that the danger of ISIS and the necessity to eradicate it is directly correlative to US interests. Put another way, the IS is a useful tool in Syria and southern Lebanon where it creates chaos to the detriment of Assad and Hezbollah respectively, while in Iraq, the IS is dangerous where it threatens the US client regime in Kurdistan and Western oil interests. But of course, the detail consistently left out of most analysis of the IS problem is the simple fact that it is a creation of US intelligence and its covert war on Syria.

Continue reading at RT.com... 

Russian Tanks in Ukraine? Consider the Source

Image: British propagandists took this picture inside Russia. No evidence
whatsoever suggests the armor crossed the border with Ukraine, leaving
only the Guardian's "word" to depend on. The Guardian's word, however,
is of little worth.
 
August 15, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Denying civilians admittedly needed aid constitutes, in the West's own terms, a crime against humanity. While in Syria attempts by the West to openly arm and equip known terrorist organizations within Syrian territory included a mandate from the UN that allowed supplies to flow without the approval of the Syrian government. Those "aided," are now clearly the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq (ISIS) running rampant on both sides of the Syrian-Iraqi border.

In Ukraine, precisely the opposite is happening. The regime in Kiev is openly raising armies of Nazi militants to go east and mass murder Ukrainians. Referring to Russian-speaking Ukrainians as "subhumans," the NATO-backed regime is clearly attempting region-wide genocide. Humanitarian aid from Russia, opened for inspection and coordinated with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), has been blatantly denied  entry into eastern Ukraine after baseless accusations have been made by both Kiev and their NATO backers that it constituted a "Trojan horse." 

To further poison attempts to relieve desperate civilian populations surrounded by literal Nazis in eastern Ukraine, British propaganda outlets from the BBC, to the Guardian and Telegraph are claiming columns of Russian armor have been seen moving into Ukraine. Of course, their articles only provide photographic evidence of the armor inside of Russia, but none proving it crossed the border.

When considering the constant deluge of anti-Russian propaganda in support of literal, flag-waving Nazis and fascists occupying Kiev and mass murdering populations in eastern Ukraine, one must consider the source.

Pedophiles, Pages for Hire, and Outright Lies 

British propaganda, like its newer but equally deceitful American counterparts, has exhausted its legitimacy and panders to shrinking audiences. Desperately trying to maintain control over the global narrative, everything from cognitive infiltration of newer forms of alternative media, to fabricating entire audiences to manufacture popularity has been used to propagate the agenda of special interests occupying Wall Street and the City of London.

Ukraine: This Time, West Sides With Nazis

August 13, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - A Russian aid convoy consisting of nearly 300 white trailer trucks carrying 2,000 tons of supplies for besieged Ukrainians in the eastern province of Luhansk is being blocked by the regime in Kiev. The Guardian in its article, "Russian aid convoy 'will not be admitted into Ukraine'," stated:
A Ukrainian security spokesman has said that a humanitarian convoy Russia has dispatched to eastern Ukraine will not be admitted into the country.
The Guardian would also admit:
Thousands of people are said to be short of water, electricity and medical aid because of the fighting. The US president, Barack Obama, has said any Russian intervention without Kiev's consent would be unacceptable and violate international law.
Despite both the regime in Kiev and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) already having agreed in principle to the aid mission, current dithering now seeks to delay the supplies from reaching desperate civilian populations encircled and bombarded by regime forces. Absent is the howling indignation that was voiced in Syria when Damascus leveled similar restrictions to international aid sent to terrorists now revealed to be Al Qaeda's Al Nusra franchise and its founding organization, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) currently ravaging both sides of the Syrian-Iraqi border in a rampage of unprecedented brutality and scale.

Demanding Aid in Syria, Blocking Aid in Ukraine 

The West struck a much different tone when Damascus, not Kiev, was blocking aid being sent across its borders. In the Associated Press article, "Syrian Government 'Punishing' Civilians By Blocking Aid: Human Rights Watch," it stated:
An international rights group said Friday that Syria's government was obstructing aid to war-torn areas by denying aid agencies permission to use rebel-held border crossings, affecting the lives of some 3 million Syrians living in tough-to-reach places.  
Human Rights Watch said Syria only allowed aid organizations to use the one border crossing with Turkey that remains in government hands near the far northern city of Qamishli. The crossing was opened to aid supplies earlier this month.
Kiev has likewise demanded that aid crosses only through regime held border checkpoints. The BBC would report in its article, "Ukraine may block Russian humanitarian aid convoy," that:
Ukrainian officials have set conditions for receiving Russian aid in the east, after a huge convoy of food and medicine set off from outside Moscow.

Security council spokesman Andriy Lysenko said aid should pass through a government-controlled border post and be accompanied by Red Cross officials.
And while US President Obama claims, "any Russian intervention without Kiev's consent would be unacceptable and violate international law," it should be noted that NATO and several Persian Gulf regimes did the "unacceptable," in violation of "international law," and sent supplies to terrorist-held territory in Syria without Damascus' approval.