Saturday, August 31, 2013

Tennessee police to perform "no refusal" blood-draw DUI checkpoints this...


TENNESSEE -- Police to perform "no refusal" blood-draw checkpoints this Labor Day



Fukushima - Raining Death on a State Near You - TEASER with Jim Lee


2 part video coming soon!

RadPanel Nuclear Radiation Monitoring

ClimateViewer 3D


Jim Lee Breaks Down FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), Mind Control and Fukushima.

August 23, 2013 - The Hagmann and Hagmann Report with Jim Lee.


Check us out of Facebook:


Video by Uni Brow Studio Vision

WiFi Radiation - Dangers of WiFi - See It Measured - How To Remediate Wi...


This video provides a simple, yet profound lesson. The radio frequency radiation being transmitted from your wireless router or modem is extremely toxic and detrimental to your health. Notice how high the measurements are on the RF meter! Most of us are living and working in this type of RF radiation exposure every single day and night. The fix, or remediation is simple. Plug your modem or router into your computer using an Ethernet connection (hardwire), and "disable" the wireless function on your modem or router. This is very important for the health and safety of all those in your home or office. If you need to use the wireless function, then turn it on for a short time, do your task or watch your movie, then disable it once again. Never leave your wireless internet on all night as it will cause sleep disturbances which lead to even worse health issues. The fix is simple! Ethernet cord and disable the wireless function. If you want to purchase the Acoustimeter RF Meter as shown in the video here is the link:


The personal is political, the politcal is personal. When you see the big picture, you see how everything is connected.

Guest Post: Where's Congress on Syria? | Zero Hedge

Guest Post: Where's Congress on Syria? | Zero Hedge
Submitted by Robert W. Merry via The National Interest,
Where’s Congress? That’s the question that should haunt the American people in the wake of President Obama’s apparent decision to get their country into another Mideast war. In the long history of the American experience, matters of war and peace have always been hotly debated. And those debates traditionally have been most intense and concentrated in Congress.
Remember Arkansas senator William Fulbright’s famous hearings on the Vietnam War, beginning in 1966. He was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and he shared the Democratic Party label with his president, Lyndon Johnson, who had perpetrated the U.S. war effort in Vietnam. But that shared party label didn’t prevent Fulbright from going after the president with these words at the start of his hearings:
Under our system, Congress, and especially the Senate, shares responsibility with the President for making our Nation’s foreign policy. This war, however, started and continues as a Presidential war in which Congress, since the fraudulent Gulf of Tonkin episode, has not played a significant role. The purpose of these hearings is to develop the best advice and greater public understanding of the policy alternatives available and possible congressional action to end American participation in the war.
Clearly, Fulbright wasn’t messing around as he thrust himself into the war controversy based on his standing in a Congress charged with joint responsibility for America’s wars.
Or recall North Dakota’s Republican senator Gerald Nye from the 1930s, chairman of the Senate Munitions Investigating Subcommittee. A rustic progressive who advocated the nationalization of what he considered troublesome industries, he also was a tireless friend to thousands of German-born Dakota farmers still angry about America’s role in the Great War. Nye wanted the country to avoid any further foreign conflicts, and so he attacked the forces he viewed as promoters of war—the big arms manufacturers, which he called “merchants of death,” and international bankers who financed the purchase of armaments and then, as Nye viewed it, fomented war to ensure a return on their investments.
Nye’s headline-grabbing hearings fostered the Neutrality Act of 1935, which placed America on the sidelines of all international conflicts. The legislation required the president to proclaim the existence of any foreign wars and prohibited American vessels from carrying arms to or for belligerents in such wars. It was popular at the time largely because of widespread lingering feelings among Americans that the World War I adventure had been ill-conceived. Whatever Nye’s contemporaries may have thought of his legislation or the thinking behind it, no one could doubt that this driven politician intended to wield all the power that the Constitution bestowed upon him as a member of the Senate.
Consider also Missouri’s Democratic senator Thomas Hart Benton, who served his state and party from 1821 to 1851—and demonstrated throughout those three decades a fierce independence tied to a zest for political pugilism. Although an early political ally of President James K. Polk, Benton balked when Polk sought from Congress authorization for war with Mexico that could include an invasion of the southern neighbor. He maneuvered cleverly in the Senate in opposition to Polk’s interests and threatened to unleash a full-bore opposition campaign, which could have emboldened the Whig opposition and destroyed the president’s war resolution. In the end he came around, but only after his good friend, Francis Blair, warned that opposition to the war could render him a “ruined man.”
What these men had in common was that they mattered. And they mattered because they were willing to employ as much legislative power as they could muster to influence the big national debate before the country - and thus influence the course of events. Such politicians have nearly always emerged whenever the big guns of the American military began to roar in earnest.
Until recently. Now we have a president who declares in word and deed that war decisions, as artificially defined by him as something short of actual war, are exclusively within his constitutional domain. And we have a Congress that shows no serious inclination to challenge that claim of prerogative and power. This is a very serious - and potentially calamitous - development in American history.
This is not to say that men such as Fulbright, Nye and Benton - and many more who followed their path - were entirely correct in their view of foreign policy and the war decisions of their time. But they served the highly valuable purpose of ensuring that matters of war and peace would get serious attention, generate robust debate, and thus enlighten the American people about the geopolitical stakes involved. That’s what’s missing today.
In fairness, there have been some expressions of discomfort coming from Congress. Washington’s Democratic Rep. Adam Smith, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, said that, while he’s still waiting to see what the administration has to say about a potential strike, he is “concerned” about how effective such an action could be and “worried” that it could draw the United States into a wider Mideast war. And House Speaker John Boehner, the Ohio Republican, sent a letter to Obama that seemed to be designed as a shot across the president’s bow. He asked for a “clear, unambiguous explanation of how military action—which is a means, not a policy—will secure U.S. objectives and how it fits into your overall policy.” Separately, 116 House members—ninety-eight Republicans and eighteen Democrats—sent a letter to Obama saying he shouldn’t attack Syria’s government forces without congressional approval.
But these are largely pro forma expressions and actions, not efforts to force these crucial war-and-peace issues into the cauldron of unavoidable congressional consideration. The Fulbright and Nye hearings forced every member of Congress to take a stand, one way or the other, on the matter at hand. Benton threatened not merely to oppose his president in expression but to muster sufficient opposition to defeat the man in his most frightful hour of need.
If Boehner really wanted to give Obama pause in his push toward another military action in the Middle East, he would foster a resolution declaring a sense of the chamber that the president of the United States must get congressional approval for any such action. He would then bring that resolution to the floor, forcing a real congressional debate (of the kind that that tired institution rarely sees these days) that would rivet the American people and place upon members the onus of actually taking a stand—not just on the matter of presidential prerogative but on the policy itself.
Now that would be an approach worthy of the American political tradition. But no one should bet the 401K fund that that will actually unfold as Washington slouches toward another overseas action that has no real strategic significance, has very little pretense of any strategic significance, and is designed primarily to teach a lesson to a once-proud national leader whose country lies in tatters, whose life is in peril, and whose standing in history has been reduced to that of a monster. History has dealt Bashar al-Assad far more devastating lessons than Barack Obama or his country could ever administer. Meanwhile, the strategic ramifications of U.S. military strikes against Syrian targets cry out for serious deliberation and analysis. Will such deliberation and analysis emerge? Not bloody likely.

Obama decides to strike Syria, seeks congressional approval


President Barack Obama says he has decided the US should take military action against Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack that reportedly took over 1,400 lives. However, he will first seek authorization from Congress.

Follow LIVE UPDATES on Syria 'chemical weapons' crisis:

Obama will seek approval from Congress before any military action against Syria

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Fukushima: Doses up to 1800mSv/hr detected on site

#TEPCO: "It can't be denied" there could be several fresh radioactive water leaks at #Fukushima-1. Doses up to 1800 mSv/hr detected on site.
Kyodo: #TEPCO says very high radiation levels Sat. at #Fukushima-1 NPP tanks & a connecting pipe may indicate fresh radioactive water leak.

The Stampede of Lies That’s Pushing the West Towards War in Syria -

The Stampede of Lies That’s Pushing the West Towards War in Syria
Low-empathy political leaders and media propagandists have abandoned principle in the 21st century.


21st Century Wire
“It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.”
- Smedley Butler, 1933
British Prime Minister David Cameron tried and failed this week, but it looks like US President Barack Obama may get his war on in Syria this weekend. He says it’s because of ‘chemical weapons’.

Even at its lowest ebb, the the run-up to the Iraq War never saw so much desperation, so much spinning and overt lying from the government-media-complex about what ‘intelligence’ they claim to have in order to justify a new and dangerous war in Syria. The political narcissism around this current desire for war, makes Bush and Blair’s moral heist in 2003 look like a polite outing. 
It’s become a stampede of lies regarding Syria, with our political con men producing  every trick in the bag, and yet, none of these PR illusionists dare mention during any of their diatribes on “the moral duty of the international community” – that for the last 2 years the US, UK have given their backing to the armed “Syrian Opposition”, featuring 40,000 of the most vile and violent imported Islamic fundamentalist terrorist brigades the world ever seen, who have infested Syria. Now the US wants to act as al Qaeda’s Airforce in Syria, as it did already in Libya.

In this dirty proxy war, human lives mean very little to puppet masters, as the money flows into the foreign mercenary gangs. Money and arms are being supplied by US and UK allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar, special military (or terrorist?) training by the US, UK and others in Jordan and Turkey. To fill in the gaps, the US and others have been managing Blackwater (Xe) and other private military contractors (mercenaries) operating out of Cyprus and other locations, many of which are active militarily inside of Syria training and commanding ‘the opposition’ in their war to overthrow the Syrian government.

These resources of war continue to fuel the violence in Syria, and political cover is provided by the US, Britain, France, Turkey, Israel and others who seek to benefit from the shattering of the Syrian nation-state, the first of many more nation-states they would like to eliminate through catastrophe, or through wars.

US, UK and French leaders will not talk about the natural gas pipeline they are planning between the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean via Syria, of which Saudi Arabia and Qatar would be heavily invested. A gas pipeline from Arabia to Europe would mitigate the influence of Russian gas to Europe.

The world has slid into a political abyss. David Cameron, Barack Obama, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and William Hague have all took turns running point during this three year destablisation effort in Syria, each repeating each other’s script, peppered with half-cocked truths, and endless banquet of cooked-up ‘intelligence’. Each appears to be completely convinced by his/her own highly subjective and wonderfully deceptive version of reality in the Middle East. They bank on public apathy and the chaos of propaganda, in order to clear their path for more extreme violence, with profits for the top end of the military industrial complex and for the top end of a predatory banking sector which makes all wars possible.

Yes, leaders have all been bought and paid for. Yes, the mainstream media has been bought and paid for. But the public has not been bought and paid for yet. In an incredible turn of events on Thursday, the British public set a rare, but clear example of what a functioning democracy can look like by rejecting military aggression. Washington and London political hacks may be too myopic to realise it, but the rest of the world has taken notice, and this small victory over global tyranny cannot be erased.

In 2003, the government-media-complex was cool, cold and calculated in its deception and drive to war, while the public were emotional, wild and desperate in their frustration to stop the establishment’s drive to war.

In 2013, the tables have turned, as political leaders and their media propagandists have become wildly emotional, highly unstable and completely desperate, in their bid to kick-start their war, while the public have been cool, calm and decisive in their condemnation of the war fraud.

We’ve seen it all this time around: inflated figures, reports with actors and sound stages dressed to look like hospitals, and we have seen heads of state site YouTube videos as evidence – videos they now refer to as “open source reporting”. The desperation to ram home a war in Syria has become an obsessive rush, to the point of being vulgar in itself. TV anchors, radio hosts, and newspaper editors are all shilling for war. Why are the politicians and the media pushing this war so hard, even if the people are not?

Syria is only a stepping stone towards the Washington-London-Israeli alliance’s publicly stated objective of a war with Iran. The next move by this nexus is to break-up Syria and then foment unrest in Lebanon, for the purposes of redrawing the Middle Eastern map in order to break up the Shi’ite “land bridge” which connects Iran to the Mediterranean. From there, a confrontation could be forced – with the US-NATO confab on one side, and Russia and China on the other.

This is a worrying prospect, considering the conduct of our leaders who have been shown to lie on a regular basis to their public. Could we trust our current political class to make the right decisions should a World War 3 situation escalate that far? Can anyone answer ‘yes’ to this, especially after watching the adolescent performances of recent… by men and women who call themselves Prime Ministers, Presidents and Secretaries of State? Can these men be trusted with such overwhelming military fire power? Can they be trusted with their nuclear arsenals? 

Read more:

Dont Attack Syria Demo August 31 London


Some Thousands of people showed up I think .... It was an international day of demonstrations in different countries.

ARD und ZDF Lügen über Syrien ...und wofür zahlen Sie die Rundfunksklave...


...ganz einfach: Zum Beispiel für Tretminen in Afghanistan. Denn ca. 90% aller Steuerabgaben, geleistet von braven, aber leider auch ca. 78% dummen Deutschen, werden für verlogene, zionistische Kriege ausgegeben, in denen es ausschließlich um geostrategische Ziele und die Vormachtstellung der USA(Kriegswerkzeug-Tool der oligarischen Finanzelite) geht.

Wir aber sind das Volk. Vom Volke geht alle Gewalt aus. Wer soll Uns daran hindern, wenn Wir diese Sender stürmen und besetzen? Die Polizei, mit ihren Dienstausweisen(Amtsausweise gibt es nämlich nicht mehr, in der BRiD) und ihren Gesetzen, denen es an jedwedem rechtlichen Geltungsbereich ermangelt?

Friedliche Demos in einem auf Hochdruck besetzen Land, dem Deutschen Reich?

Mit Sicherheit nicht.

Lake Huron To Be Nuclear Waste Dump?


Lake Huron may become a nuclear waste dump, in spite of the fact that it is a huge source of water for the country. We look at the mind-boggling story with Lissette Padilla and Mark Sovel on the Lip News.

SYRIA: UN Inspectors Gone, Obama to Bomb Any Moment, Rebels Admit Guilt ...


The gig is up ....

Russia Says It Is 'Working Hard' to Prevent Strike on Syria - - Sofia News Agency

Russia Says It Is 'Working Hard' to Prevent Strike on Syria - - Sofia News Agency

Bulgaria: Russia Says It Is 'Working Hard' to Prevent Strike on Syria
Russian official Yury Ushakov. Photo by RIA Novosti

A Kremlin official has declared that Russia is focused on preventing any use of force against Syria.
“So far Russia is working hard to avoid any scenario involving the use of force with regard to Syria,” presidential aide Yury Ushakov has told reporters, as cited by RIA Novosti.
Ushakov said the United States has not handed Russia any “surveillance data” suggesting that Damascus has used chemical weapons, adding that Moscow does not believe claims that is had done so.
“They [Americans] are citing the secrecy of some information,” Ushakov said.
The Syria issue is not on the agenda of the G20 summit due to take place on September 5-6 in St. Petersburg but it is bound to be discussed on the sidelines, he said.
On Saturday, UN weapons inspectors crossed into neighbouring Lebanon after four days of inspections in Syria, including investigations of what happened in the Damascus suburbs on August 21.
US President Barack Obama has said he is considering military action against Syria based on intelligence reports.

Syria Suffering: 'No boots on the ground' means 'only Syrians' blood wil...


Having failed to win over most of its international allies, and lawmakers on Capitol Hill - the White House is also struggling to drum up popular support for intervention among the general public in the US.

US Marine Ship Approaches Syria; Russia Blasts Any "Acts Of Aggression" - Full Syrian Update | Zero Hedge

US Marine Ship Approaches Syria; Russia Blasts Any "Acts Of Aggression" - Full Syrian Update | Zero Hedge

While there may have been a verbal attempt by the Obama administration to diffuse Syrian tensions in the aftermath of Thursday's shocker out of the House of Commons, the action on the ground so far is hardly conciliatory. Or rather water, because a sixth US warship has now anchored in proximity to Syria, joining the recently arrived fifth destroyer USS Stout, which joined the warships already "breathing down Assad's neck." From AP: "Five U.S. Navy destroyers - the USS Gravely, USS Mahan, USS Barry, the USS Stout and USS Ramage - are in the eastern Mediterranean Sea waiting for the order to launch. And the USS San Antonio, an amphibious assault ship has now joined them. The USS San Antonio, which is carrying helicopters and can carry up to 800 Marines, has no cruise missiles, so it is not expected to participate in the attack. Instead, the ship's long-planned transit across the Mediterranean was interrupted so that it could remain in the area to help if needed." So in addition to a cruise missile based force, the US is now bringing in the marines? The justification that they are there "just in case" seems a little shallow in context.

Not surprisingly this contradicts what Obama said yesterday, promising there would be no land-based invasion.
Elsewhere, Russia predictable once again warned against a US escalation. Russia Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov met with U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul today, Foreign Ministry says in e-mailed statement. Ryabkov summarized: any use of force by U.S. against Syria without UN sanctions would be an "act of aggression, crude violation of the norms of international law." Whether this means an immediate retaliation by Russia is unknown.
What is known is that the UN inspectors who were supposedly the only gating issue for a full-blown US "surgical strike" have now left the country. Per Reuters, the team of United Nations inspectors that was investigating the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria arrived at Beirut International Airport on Saturday, a Reuters witness said. The team had crossed the land border from Syria into Lebanon earlier in the day after completing its four-day investigation.
However, anyone expecting a quick turnover from the UN force will be disappointed. Accoridng to NBC, the U.N. said Friday that the team had finished collecting samples from the site of the alleged attack but that a complete analysis would take time. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the five permanent Security Council members that it may be two weeks before final results are ready, diplomats said.
In other words, the "surgial strike" options are now fully open and Obama may strike at any minute, and of course reap the consequences.
Those still unclear how a typical strike would look like, here is another completet rundown from the AP:
The order for the strike would come from Obama, delivered to Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. The operation probably would fall under the purview of U.S. Central Command, headed by Army Gen. Lloyd Austin. The more immediate commander probably would be Adm. Bruce Clingan, who heads U.S. naval forces in Europe.
U.S. commanders would communicate and coordinate with military officers from other nations involved in the fight, such as France.
Five U.S. Navy destroyers - the USS Gravely, USS Mahan, USS Barry, the USS Stout and USS Ramage - are in the eastern Mediterranean Sea waiting for the order to launch. And the USS San Antonio, an amphibious assault ship has now joined them. The USS San Antonio, which is carrying helicopters and Marines, has no cruise missiles, so it is not expected to participate in the attack. Instead, the ship's long-planned transit across the Mediterranean was interrupted so that it could remain in the area to help if needed.
The destroyers are armed with dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles, which have a range of about 1,000 nautical miles and are used for deep, precise targeting. Each one is about 20 feet long and less than two feet in diameter and carries a 1,000 pound warhead.
The missiles fly at low altitudes, and their range allows the ships to sit far off the coast, out of range of any potential response by the Syrian government. Some ships have cameras that can provide battle damage assessments.
The Navy also now has two aircraft carriers in the Arabian Sea that are loaded with fighter jets. The USS Truman arrived in the region to take the place of the USS Nimitz, which was supposed to head home. But the Navy ordered the Nimitz to stay for now.
U.S. officials described the decision as prudent planning and said it doesn't suggest the Nimitz would play a role in any possible strikes in Syria.
With Britain on the sidelines, France has said it is preparing for military action against Syria. French President Francois Hollande does not need parliamentary approval to launch a military operation that lasts less than four months.
French military officials confirmed the frigate Chevalier Paul, which specializes in anti-missile capabilities, as well as the hulking transport ship Dixmude, had set off Thursday from the Mediterranean port of Toulon as part of normal training and operational preparations - but denied any link to possible Syria operations.
France also has a dozen cruise missile-capable fighter aircraft at military bases in the United Arab Emirates and the Horn of Africa nation of Djibouti, as well as fighters that could launch from air bases in the French island of Corsica or western France.
Details are unknown about how the mission strikes are being allocated or if the U.S. and France have mapped out separate, agreed upon target lists. But the U.S. routinely conducts exercises with allies, particularly NATO countries such as Britain and France, in which they all practice exactly this type of joint attack mission.
Commanders have a wide variety of ways they can talk to each other, including through integrated communications systems honed over many years of NATO operations ranging from the Afghanistan war to the 2011 attack on Libya and the fighting in Algeria and Mali early this year.
The military officers can speak or email across classified, secure lines and even have systems that allow them to talk in real time in Internet chat rooms. The nations also often have military liaisons embedded with each other to help assist communications.
Because any operation is expected to be limited, there likely won't be more organized, formal war rooms.
Obama has ruled out putting troops on the ground in Syria, and because of Assad's extensive air defense systems, officials believe it is too risky, at least initially, to deploy fighter aircraft or even low-flying drones that could be shot down.
While less likely, the U.S. could deploy fighter jets or bombers as the operation continues, particularly if the Assad regime begins to take retaliatory actions and manned aircraft are needed in order to strike specific, critical targets.
Obama has rejected trying to impose a "no-fly" zone over the country. Military leaders have said that creating one would be risky and expensive.
U.S. officials say any operation must have clear goals that can guide decisions on what the military must strike.
Dempsey has told Congress that lethal force would be used "to strike targets that enable the regime to conduct military operations, proliferate advanced weapons and defend itself."
At a minimum, Western forces are expected to strike targets that symbolize Assad's military and political might: military and national police headquarters, including the Defense Ministry; the Syrian military's general staff; and the four-brigade Republican Guard that is in charge of protecting Damascus, Assad's seat of power. Assad's ruling Baath Party headquarters could be targeted, too.
U.S. officials also are considering attacking military command centers and vital forces, communications hubs and weapons caches, including ballistic missile batteries.
Air defense systems, including Syrian aircraft, interception missiles, radar and other equipment, also could be targets. The majority of those systems - as many as 500 defense positions and 400 operational aircraft - have been positioned along Lebanon's border, in the Syrian-controlled part of the Golan Heights, along the Syrian Mediterranean coast and in and around Damascus.
Helicopter and fixed wing aircraft air bases across the country, including the Mezzeh air base in Damascus, and Nairab, a major military air base in Aleppo, could be targets.
Because any strike would be considered payback for Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons, Western forces could zero in on the headquarters of the Syrian Army's 4th Division, 155th Brigade. That unit is believed to have been responsible for the Aug. 21 attack that U.S. officials say involved chemical weapons. The brigade is headed by Maher Assad, Bashar Assad's younger brother.
The brigade has a missile base across a large terrain in a mountain range west of Damascus, including underground bunkers and tunnels. It is believed to be surrounded by army bases as well as weapons and ammunition storage sites.
Systems for moving Assad's chemical weapons stockpile could be top targets as well. But the stockpile itself probably would not be hit because of risk of accidental release of deadly nerve agents that include mustard gas, tabun, sarin and VX.
It's doubtful the U.S. would directly target Assad. U.S. policy prohibits assassinating foreign leaders unless they have attacked America first.
It's also unclear if Assad's military intelligence headquarters, a symbolic target, might be attacked; it's believed to hold hundreds of prisoners.
The most common answer to this question in recent days has been "soon." But a number of factors could affect the timing.
U.N. inspectors wrapped up their investigation into the suspected chemical attack and left Syria on Saturday. And officials say they are still talking to allies.
There has been a so-far unsuccessful effort to seek U.N. Security Council approval for a strike, but there is also significant pressure on the administration to act quickly and decisively.
Any military operation would probably unfold at night or in the predawn hours in Syria, with an initial assault possibly lasting several hours and involving dozens of missile strikes from several warships.
What could follow is a period in which the U.S. would use satellites and other intelligence capabilities to assess the damage.
Such an assessment could be followed by an additional round or two of missile strikes, if ordered by the president. Officials believe the strikes could be limited to a single operation, but if extended would likely last no more than a few days.
Other U.S. military assets in the region, including an Air Force air wing of F-16 fighter jets located in Aviano, Italy, are available but might not be used, at least right away.
The Assad regime is believed to have about 400 operational aircraft and one of the most robust air defense networks in the region. There are multiple surface-to-air missiles providing overlapping coverage of key areas in combination with thousands of anti-aircraft guns capable of engaging attacking aircraft at lower levels.
Syria also has a mobile, land-based coastal defense system, including Yakhont anti-ship missiles capable of sinking large warships, including aircraft carriers.
Two years ago, the standing army was estimated to be about 250,000, but if reserves are included it could number closer to 700,000. The last two years of civil war, however, have taken a toll on the military, due to defections and the ongoing warfare.
The biggest concern, however, is that any U.S. attack could prompt retaliation by Assad, including the possible use of chemical weapons against Syrian citizens or even attacks on nearby nations.

Finally, from Reuters, here is the full headline summary of all the latest news on Syria:
  • International weapons experts leave Syria, U.S. prepares attack.
  • Putin says it would be "utter nonsense" for Assad to use chemical weapons.
  • Syrian rebels plan raids to exploit western strikes, commander says.
  • U.S. makes clear it will punish Assad for "brutal and flagrant" chemical weapons attack.
  • Obama says U.S. still planning for "limited, narrow" military response that will not involve "boots on the ground" or be open-ended. He sets no timetable for action.
  • U.S. intelligence report says Aug. 21 attack killed 1,429 Syrian civilians, including 426 children.
  • Obama says such attacks threaten U.S. national security interests as well as U.S. allies such as Israel, Turkey and Jordan.
  • U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry speaks to the foreign ministers of Britain, Egypt, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates as well as to the secretary-general of the Arab League.
  • The White House will brief Republican senators on Syria in a conference call on Saturday at the request of Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.
  • Kerry says Syria must not get away with the attack, partly as a sign to those who might consider using chemical weapons.
  • Syrian Foreign Ministry says Kerry's charges a "desperate attempt" to justify a military strike.
  • U.N. experts finish gathering evidence of suspected attack and leave Syria, crossing the land border into Lebanon. Envoys say analyzing the samples may take weeks.
  • France says it still backs military action to punish Assad's government despite British parliamentary vote against a military strike.
  • Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan says any intervention in Syria should be aimed at ending Assad's rule - a goal Obama has ruled out.
  • Latest Reuters/Ipsos poll shows 53 percent of Americans surveyed say the United States should stay out of Syria's civil war, down from 60 percent the previous week.
  • "We cannot accept a world where women and children and innocent civilians are gassed on a terrible scale." - Obama speaking at the White House.
But we can accept a world in which conventional weapons are used against women and children, as has been the US allegation against Assad for over two years?

Unconditional Love (How to Love Unconditionally)


Ask Teal Website -
Love is an identical vibration to appreciation. And appreciation is nothing more than positively focusing towards something. This means that unconditional love is the same as unconditional positive focus. A simpler way of putting this is that unconditional love is positive focus (appreciation) that is not conditional upon how another person acts. Now it is time to get real for a minute. How many of us on this earth are capable of that right now? Not many of us. And this should not make you feel bad about yourself because unconditional love and enlightenment are the exact same state. We know how difficult it is to reach enlightenment. It is a lifelong practice if not a multi lifetime practice for most beings. And we also know that enlightenment is not a goal that we reach. Instead, it is a horizon line that continues to move further into the future with every desire that we have and with every new perspective that we are introduced to. It is the same with unconditional love. Unconditional love is a practice, it is not a state we achieve and are then done practicing. There is no retirement from the practice of unconditional love.
Kuan Yin's Mantra (c) 2002 Lisa Thiel - used by permission

Putin to (Nobel Prize winner) Obama: 'Think about future Syria victims' ...


The Russian president has expressed certainty that the strategy for a military intervention in Syria is a contingency measure from outside and a direct response to the Syrian government's recent combat successes, coupled with the rebels' retreat from long-held positions. READ MORE:

Follow LIVE UPDATES on Syria 'chemical weapons' crisis:

Obama & Biden: What We're About to Do in Syria is Illegal... We Should b...


This 2007 excerpt of an interview with then Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden shows him arguing why he would seek to impeach then President Bush if he were to take military action against Iran without congressional approval. The same goes for Obama, who also made a similar statement back then. Now, they are using the same arguments Bush made to justify any attacks against Iraq and Iran to drop "freedom" bombs on Syria.

Source: Fox News, MSNBC

Victory! Federal Court Recognizes Constitutional Rights of Americans on the No-Fly List | American Civil Liberties Union

Victory! Federal Court Recognizes Constitutional Rights of Americans on the No-Fly List | American Civil Liberties Union
By Nusrat Choudhury, Staff Attorney, ACLU National Security Project at 2:31pm
A federal court took a critically important step late yesterday towards placing a check on the government's secretive No-Fly List. In a 38-page ruling in Latif v. Holder, the ACLU's challenge to the No-Fly List, U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown recognized that the Constitution applies when the government bans Americans from the skies. She also asked for more information about the current process for getting off the list, to inform her decision on whether that procedure violates the Fifth Amendment guarantee of due process.
We represent 13 Americans, including four military veterans, who are blacklisted from flying. At oral argument in June on motions for partial summary judgment, we asked the court to find that the government violated our clients' Fifth Amendment right to due process by barring them from flying over U.S. airspace – and smearing them as suspected terrorists – without giving them any after-the-fact explanation or a hearing at which to clear their names.
The court's opinion recognizes – for the first time – that inclusion on the No-Fly List is a draconian sanction that severely impacts peoples' constitutionally-protected liberties. It rejected the government's argument that No-Fly list placement was merely a restriction on the most "convenient" means of international travel.
Such an argument ignores the numerous reasons an individual may have for wanting or needing to travel overseas quickly such as for the birth of a child, the death of a loved one, a business opportunity, or a religious obligation.
According to the court, placement on the No-Fly List is like the revocation of a passport because both actions severely burden the right to international travel and give rise to a constitutional right to procedural due process:

Read more:

Colombia’s Nationwide Strike Against ‘Free Trade,’ Privatization, Poverty | StratRisks

Colombia’s Nationwide Strike Against ‘Free Trade,’ Privatization, Poverty | StratRisks
Source: Mint Press
Riot police detain protesters in Ubate, north of Bogota, Colombia, Monday, Aug. 26, 2013. Hundreds of protesters clashed with police in support of farmers who have being blockading highways for a week for an assortment of demands that include reduced gasoline prices, increased subsidies and the cancellation of free trade agreements. (AP Photo/Fernando Vergara)
Riot police detain protesters in Ubate, north of Bogota, Colombia, Monday, Aug. 26, 2013.
Hundreds of protesters clashed with police in support of farmers who have being blockading highways for a week for an assortment of demands that include reduced gasoline prices, increased subsidies and the cancellation of free trade agreements.
A nationwide strike in Colombia—which started as a rural peasant uprising and spread to miners, teachers, medical professionals, truckers, and students—reached its 7th day Sunday as at least 200,000 people blocked roads and launched protests against a U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement and devastating policies of poverty and privatization pushed by US-backed right-wing President Juan Manuel Santos.
“[The strike is a condemnation] of the situation in which the Santos administration has put the country, as a consequence of its terrible, anti-union and dissatisfactory policies,” declared the Central Unitaria de Trabajadores (CUT), the country’s largest union, in a statement.
The protests and strikes, largely ignored in the English-language media, have been met with heavy crackdown from Colombia’s feared police, with human rights organization Bayaca reporting shootings, torture, sexual assault, severe tear-gassing, arbitrary arrests, and other abuses on the part of state agents. Colombia’s Defense Minister Juan Carlos Pinzon recently claimed that the striking workers are being controlled by the “terrorist” Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), in a country known for using unverified claims of FARC connections as an excuse to launch severe violence against social movements.
“Violent clashes continue in rural areas where farmers and truck drivers have been setting up roadblocks since Monday, and the Santos administration has deployed 16,000 additional military personnel to ‘control the situation,’” Neil Martin of the Colombia-based labor solidarity organization Paso International told Common Dreams Sunday. “There have not been deaths reported in relation to this violence, but human rights organizations and YouTube videos have documented military personnel beating protestors, stealing supplies, carrying out vandalism unwarranted arrests, and generally inciting violence.”
Protesters are levying a broad range of concerns about public policies that devastate Colombia’s workers, indegenous, and Afro-Colombian communities. The US-Colombia Free Trade Agreement has forced small farmers to compete with subsidized US products, made them more vulnerable to market fluctuations, and eroded their protections and social safety nets through the implementation of neoliberal policies domestically. Farmers are demanding more protections and services in a country beset with severe rural poverty.
Meanwhile, the Colombian government is handing out sweetheart deals to international mining companies while creating bans and roadblocks for Colombian miners. Likewise, the government is giving multinational food corporations access to land earmarked for poor Colombians. Healthcare workers are fighting a broad range of reforms aimed at gutting and privatizing Colombia’s healthcare system. Truckers are demanding an end to low wages and high gas prices.
“This is the third or fourth large-scale non-military rural uprising this year,” Martin told Common Dreams.

Read more:

Israel Lobbyist - We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran!


Patrick Clawson of the influential neo-con Washington Institute for Near East Studies OPENLY suggests that the US should provoke Iran into taking the first shot.Israel Lobbyist suggests False Flag attack to start war with Iran. Just like 911 in New York causing the deaths of American civilians and soldiers, a million dead Iraqis and for what?

VOTE THIS UP!! and stop these criminals!

watch the original full video here WashingtonInstitute(Clawson's traitorous comments start around 1 hour 15min):

Countries attacked by bombing, sabotage or attempted government overthrow since WWII

25 Quotes About The Coming War With Syria That Every American Should See | Zero Hedge

25 Quotes About The Coming War With Syria That Every American Should See | Zero Hedge

Submitted by Michael Snyder of The Economic Collapse blog,
If Barack Obama is going to attack Syria, he is going to do it without the support of the American people, without the approval of Congress, without the approval of the United Nations, and without the help of the British.  Now that the British Parliament has voted against a military strike, the Obama administration is saying that it may take "unilateral action" against Syria. 
But what good would "a shot across Syria's bow" actually do?  A "limited strike" is not going to bring down the Assad regime and it is certainly not going to end the bloody civil war that has been raging inside Syria.  Even if the U.S. eventually removed Assad, the al-Qaeda affiliated rebels that would take power would almost certainly be even worse than Assad. 
Even in the midst of this bloody civil war, the rebels have taken the time and the effort to massacre entire Christian villages Why is Barack Obama so obsessed with helping such monsters?  There is no good outcome in Syria.  The Assad regime is absolutely horrible and the rebels are even worse.  Why would we want the U.S. military to get involved in such a mess?
It isn't as if it is even possible for the U.S. military to resolve the conflict that is going on in that country.  At the core, the Syrian civil war is about Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam.  It is a conflict that goes back well over a thousand years.
Assad is Shiite, but the majority of Syrians are Sunni Muslims.  Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been pouring billions of dollars into the conflict, because they would love to see the Assad regime eliminated and a Sunni government come to power in Syria.  On the other side, Iran is absolutely determined to not allow that to happen.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar have no problem with using Sunni terrorists (al-Qaeda) to achieve their political goals.  And as a very important ally of the Saudis, the U.S. has been spending a lot of money to train and equip the "rebels" in Syria.
But there was a problem.  The Syrian government has actually been defeating the rebels.  So something had to be done.
If it could be made to look like the Assad regime was using chemical weapons, that would give the U.S. government the "moral justification" that it needed to intervene militarily on the side of the rebels.  In essence, it would be a great excuse for the U.S. to be able to go in and do the dirty work of the Saudis for them.
So that is where we are today.  The justification for attacking Syria that the Obama administration is giving us goes something like this...
-Chemical weapons were used in Syria.

-The rebels do not have the ability to use chemical weapons.

-Therefore it must have been the Assad regime that was responsible for using chemical weapons.

-The U.S. military must punish the use of chemical weapons to make sure that it never happens again.
Unfortunately for the Obama administration, the world is not buying it.  In fact, people are seeing right through this charade.
The U.S. government spends $52,000,000,000 a year on "intelligence", but apparently our intelligence community absolutely refuses to see the obvious.  WND has been able to uncover compelling evidence that the rebels in Syria have used chemical weapons repeatedly, and yet government officials continue to insist over and over that no such evidence exists and that we need to strike Syria immediately.
Shouldn't we at least take a little bit of time to figure out who is actually in the wrong before we start letting cruise missiles fly?
Because the potential downside of an attack against Syria is absolutely massive.  As I wrote about the other day, if we attack Syria we have the potential of starting World War 3 in the Middle East.
We could find ourselves immersed in an endless war with Syria, Iran and Hezbollah which would be far more horrible than the Iraq war ever was.  It would essentially be a war with Shia Islam itself, and that would be a total nightmare.
If you are going to pick a fight with those guys, you better pack a lunch.  They fight dirty and they are absolutely relentless.  They will never forget and they will never, ever forgive.
A full-blown war with Syria, Iran and Hezbollah would be a fight to the death, and they would not hesitate to strike soft targets all over the United States.  I don't think that most Americans have any conception of what that could possibly mean.
If the American people are going to stop this war, they need to do it now.  The following are 25 quotes about the coming war with Syria that every American should see...
1. Barack Obama, during an interview with Charlie Savage on December 20, 2007: "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."
2. Joe Biden, during a television interview in 2007: "The president has no constitutional authority ... to take this nation to war ... unless we're attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked.  And if he does, if he does, I would move to impeach him."
3. U.S. Representative Ted Poe: "Mr. President, you must call Congress back from recess immediately to take a vote on a military strike on Syria. Assad may have crossed a red line but that does not give you the authority to redline the Constitution."
4. U.S. Representative Kurt Schrader: "I see no convincing evidence that this is an imminent threat to the United States of America."
5. U.S. Representative Barbara Lee: "While we understand that as commander-in-chief you have a constitutional obligation to protect our national interests from direct attack, Congress has the constitutional obligation and power to approve military force, even if the United States or its direct interests (such as its embassies) have not been attacked or threatened with an attack."
6. The New York Times: "American officials said Wednesday there was no 'smoking gun' that directly links President Bashar al-Assad to the attack, and they tried to lower expectations about the public intelligence presentation."
7. U.S. Senator Rand Paul: "The war in Syria has no clear national security connection to the United States and victory by either side will not necessarily bring in to power people friendly to the United States."
8. U.S. Senator Tim Kaine: "I definitely believe there needs to be a vote."
9. Donald Rumsfeld: "There really hasn’t been any indication from the administration as to what our national interest is with respect to this particular situation."
10. Robert Fisk: "If Barack Obama decides to attack the Syrian regime, he has ensured – for the very first time in history – that the United States will be on the same side as al-Qa’ida."
11. Former congressman Dennis Kucinich: "So what, we’re about to become al-Qaeda’s air force now?"
12. Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem: "We have two options: either to surrender, or to defend ourselves with the means at our disposal. The second choice is the best: we will defend ourselves."
13. A Syrian Army officer: "We have more than 8,000 suicide martyrs within the Syrian army, ready to carry out martyrdom operations at any moment to stop the Americans and the British. I myself am ready to blow myself up against US aircraft carriers to stop them attacking Syria and its people."
14. Khalaf Muftah, a senior Ba'ath Party official: "We have strategic weapons and we’re capable of responding."

Read more:

Jeff Rense & Preston James - The Luciferian ET Connection


Clip from August 23, 2013 - guest Preston James on the Jeff Rense Program. Full program available in Archives at

Black Budget: Snowden reveals US spends $52bn on secret programs


Britain has asked the New York Times to get rid of copies of documents leaked by whistleblower Edward Snowden. That's as another US newspaper revealed from one of the top-secret files, just how much America spends on surveillance . The so called Black Budget has never been shown to the public until now. Meanwhile Snowden's leaks have won him international recognition. He was awarded the 2013 Whistleblower Prize by a coalition of NGO's. And as RT's Peter Oliver in Berlin says, Snowden's name is featuring prominently in Germany's upcoming general election.


Syria’s largest city just dropped off the Internet - washington post

Syria’s largest city just dropped off the Internet
The red line from Aleppo goes to Turk Telekom, whose Syrian service is currently disrupted. (Renesys)
While the U.S. government continues to weigh military intervention in Syria, it appears that Syria’s largest city has gone dark on the Internet. Aleppo, a city in Northern Syria that has been the site of intense fighting between rebel forces and the Assad regime, and the surrounding area appear to have lost connectivity to the Internet as of last night.
The Switch received a tip informing us that Internet was out in parts of Northern Syria. Following up on that lead, we contacted Doug Madory of Internet intelligence company Renesys. In a recent blog post, Madory explained that outages in the Aleppo area are strongly correlated to disruptions in Turk Telekom’s service to the Syrian Telecommunications Establishment. When Turk Telekom service drops out of Syria, Aleppo appears to experience a “last mile” outage, but other areas continue to have Internet access through PCCW and Deutsche Telekom.
According to Madory, Turk Telekom service to Syria dropped out at 17:48:42 UTC on Aug 29. This suggests that Internet service in the Aleppo area has been out since last night.
Aleppo reportedly suffered a similar Internet and mobile outage Aug. 13. At the time, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a group critical of the Assad regime, claimed both mobile telecommunications services and Internet were cut off.
Given the intense fighting in the Aleppo area, it’s possible that the outages are related to local infrastructure damage. However, Internet outages in Syria have a curious history of happening at times convenient for the Assad regime. In November 2012, some 92 percent of national Syrian Internet traffic went offline as the regime was rumored to be mixing chemical weapon components, while 78 percent of traffic went offline in January when Assad gave a rare public address. Some past localized Internet outages have also coincided with government offensives in those areas.
Aleppo has been heavily contested by the Assad regime and Syrian rebels throughout the  bloody two-year civil war. Earlier this week, rebel forces took control of the strategic town of Khanasir between Aleppo and Hama, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, cutting off the only supply route between Aleppo and Assad’s forces.
Last night, the BBC released a graphic video report showing the aftermath of an incendiary bomb dropped by a fighter jet on the playground of a school in the Aleppo area, killing more than 10 and leaving many more with devastating burns.
Andrea Peterson
Andrea Peterson covers technology policy for The Washington Post, with an emphasis on cybersecurity, consumer privacy, transparency, surveillance and open government. She also delves into the societal impacts of technology access and how innovation is intertwined with cultural development.

Washington’s threats to attack Syria unacceptable – Russia — RT News

Washington’s threats to attack Syria unacceptable – Russia — RT News
The headquarters of the Foreign Ministry of Russia in Moscow (Reuters / Maxim Shemetov)
The headquarters of the Foreign Ministry of Russia in Moscow (Reuters / Maxim Shemetov)
Washington’s statements threatening to use military force against Syria unilaterally are unacceptable, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said in a statement.
Given the lack of evidence, any unilateral military action bypassing the UN Security Council – “no matter how limited it is” – would be a direct violation of international law and would undermine the prospects for a political and diplomatic solution to the conflict in Syria and will lead to a new round of confrontation and victims, Lukashevich concludes.
“Instead of executing the decisions of G8’s summit in Lough Erne and subsequent agreements to submit comprehensive report from experts investigating possible cases of use of chemical weapons in Syria to the UN Security Council, in the absence of any evidence, we hear threats of a strike on Syria,” the statement reads.
Lukashevich emphasizes that even “US allies” are calling to wait for the completion of the UN chemical expert group “in order to get an unbiased picture of what really happened and decide on further steps in terms of the Syrian crisis.”
Meanwhile, the United Nations Security Council may have to wait as long as two weeks before reviewing the final results of an analysis of samples taken from where chemical weapons were used in Syria, diplomats told Reuters on Friday. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon told representatives from China, Russia, the United States, Britain, and France, warning them of the time period on the eve of a possible US missile strike on the Syrian regime.
"The samples that have been collected will be taken to be analyzed in designated laboratories, and the intention of course is to expedite the analysis of that sampling that's been taken," said UN spokesman Martin Nesirky. “This is not an electoral process, where you have exit polls and preliminary results." 
“The only result that counts is the result of the analysis in laboratories and the analysis of the evidence that's been collected through witness statements and so on," Nesirky explained, adding that UN inspectors would return later to investigate several other sites of alleged chemical weapon attacks.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon meanwhile briefed representatives from China, Russia, the United States, Britain, and France on the ongoing investigation in Syria. Although the envoys of the Security Council’s permanent members did not comment on the details, two diplomats told Reuters that analysis of the samples could take up to two weeks, according to Ban.

High Probability Of A Major Attack On The Financial System -- Episode 150


**Get economic collapse news throughout the day visit

The Obama administration tried to present evidence that the Syrian government was at fault for the chemical attacks. The problem there was no evidence. Most of the world is not backing the US on this mission of war, so the US is willing to go it alone. This entire war was planned along time ago to cover up the economic collapse. To push this war forward there will be major cyber attacks on the financial system which will in turn bring the economy to a screeching halt. This will be blamed on another country .

New species of "walking" shark found in Indonesia


Conservation International's Mark Erdmann captures this amazing footage of a new species of "walking" shark, which he and a group of scientists discovered in Indonesia.

Soldiers Please Listen

To be confronted with the fact that you are about to be ordered to commit an atrocity must be extremely uncomfortable. But the consequences of avoiding that confrontation are unacceptable.

Colombia: Guy loses teeth and mouth parts after being hit with tear gas gun in the face

Major quake recorded in Alaska's Aleutian Islands - SFGate

Major quake recorded in Alaska's Aleutian Islands - SFGate

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — A magnitude 7.0 earthquake rocked Alaska's Aleutian Islands with a jet-like rumble Friday that shook homes and sent residents scrambling for cover.
"I heard it coming," said Kathleen Nevzoroff, who was sitting at her computer in the tiny Aleutians village of Adak when the major temblor struck at 8:25 a.m. local time, getting stronger and stronger. "I ran to my doors and opened them and my chimes were all ringing."
There are no immediate reports of damage or injuries from the earthquake, which occurred in a seismically active region. It was strongly felt in Atka, an Aleut community of 64 people, and the larger Aleutian town of Adak, where 320 people live. The quake was followed by multiple aftershocks, including one measuring magnitude 4.9.
The earthquake didn't trigger a tsunami warning, but Michael Burgy with the West Coast and Alaska Tsunami Warning Center in Palmer, Alaska, said the center is monitoring for potential tsunamis caused by landslides, either on land or under water.
The Alaska Earthquake Information Center said the primary earthquake was centered 67 miles southwest of Adak, about 1,200 miles southwest of Anchorage. Shaking lasted up to one minute.
The quake occurred offshore in the subduction zone where plates of the Earth's crust grind and dive. By contrast, California's most famous fault line, the San Andreas, is a strike-slip fault. Quakes along strike-slip faults tend to move horizontally.
In Adak, city clerk Debra Sharrah was upstairs in her two-story townhome getting ready for work when she heard a noise.

Read more:

Friday, August 30, 2013

Guess Which "Bearish" Bank Bought A Record Amount Of GLD In Q2 | Zero Hedge

Guess Which "Bearish" Bank Bought A Record Amount Of GLD In Q2 | Zero Hedge
In early April, the status quo was exuberant when none other than Goldman Sachs issued a "sell" on the barbarous relic that has become so indicative of the exuberance of central planning. At the time, we were skeptical (to say the least) and, just for extra Muppetting, the bank also suggested its clients buy Treasuries. Well, now that the full details of holdings changes have been released for Q2, it is perhaps clearer than ever before that as the bank was telling its clients to "sell, sell, sell" it was itself "buy, buy, buy"-ing the Gold ETF (GLD) with both arms and feet. In Q2, Goldman Sachs added a stunning (and record) 3.7 million 'shares' of GLDAs Paulson dumped his GLD, Goldman lapped it up to become the ETF's 7th largest holder.

Goldman was the largest adding holder for GLD...

buying what its clients were selling in size...

This just seemed appropriate..

Thank you Goldman, we can always rely on you...

Charts: Bloomberg
(h/t Dylan Grice)

Did the White House Help Plan the Syrian Chemical Attack? -

Did the White House Help Plan the Syrian Chemical Attack?

There is a growing volume of new evidence from numerous sources in the Middle East — mostly affiliated with the Syrian opposition and its sponsors and supporters — which makes a very strong case, based on solid circumstantial evidence, that the August 21, 2013, chemical strike in the Damascus suburbs was indeed a pre-meditated provocation by the Syrian opposition.
The extent of US foreknowledge of this provocation needs further investigation because available data puts the “horror” of the Barack Obama White House in a different and disturbing light.
On August 13-14, 2013, Western-sponsored opposition forces in Turkey started advance preparations for a major and irregular military surge. Initial meetings between senior opposition military commanders and representatives of Qatari, Turkish, and US Intelligence [“Mukhabarat Amriki”] took place at the converted Turkish military garrison in Antakya, Hatay Province, used as the command center and headquarters of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and their foreign sponsors. Very senior opposition commanders who had arrived from Istanbul briefed the regional commanders of an imminent escalation in the fighting due to “a war-changing development” which would, in turn, lead to a US-led bombing of Syria.

The opposition forces had to quickly prepare their forces for exploiting the US-led bombing in order to march on Damascus and topple the Bashar al-Assad Government, the senior commanders explained. The Qatari and Turkish intelligence officials assured the Syrian regional commanders that they would be provided with plenty of weapons for the coming offensive.
Indeed, unprecedented weapons distribution started in all opposition camps in Hatay Province on August 21-23, 2013. In the Reyhanli area alone, opposition forces received well in excess of 400 tons of weapons, mainly anti-aircraft weaponry from shoulder-fired missiles to ammunition for light-guns and machineguns. The weapons were distributed from store-houses controlled by Qatari and Turkish Intelligence under the tight supervision of US Intelligence.
These weapons were loaded on more than 20 trailer-trucks which crossed into northern Syria and distributed the weapons to several depots. Follow-up weapon shipments, also several hundred tons, took place over the weekend of August 24-25, 2013, and included mainly sophisticated anti-tank guided missiles and rockets. Opposition officials in Hatay said that these weapon shipments were “the biggest” they had received “since the beginning of the turmoil more than two years ago”. The deliveries from Hatay went to all the rebel forces operating in the Idlib-to-Aleppo area, including the al-Qaida affiliated jihadists (who constitute the largest rebel forces in the area).
Several senior officials from both the Syrian opposition and sponsoring Arab states stressed that these weapon deliveries were specifically in anticipation for exploiting the impact of imminent bombing of Syria by the US and the Western allies. The latest strategy formulation and coordination meetings took place on August 26, 2013. The political coordination meeting took place in Istanbul and was attended by US Amb. Robert Ford.
More important were the military and operational coordination meetings at the Antakya garrison. Senior Turkish, Qatari, and US Intelligence officials attended in addition to the Syrian senior (opposition) commanders. The Syrians were informed that bombing would start in a few days.
“The opposition was told in clear terms that action to deter further use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime could come as early as in the next few days,” a Syrian participant in the meeting said. Another Syrian participant said that he was convinced US bombing was scheduled to begin on Thursday, August 29, 2013. Several participants — both Syrian and Arab — stressed that the assurances of forthcoming bombing were most explicit even as formally Obama is still undecided.