US State Department Hands Terror-Cult US Base in Iraq

Source: Land Destroyer Report
Tony Cartalucci

Unimaginable Treason at the Highest Levels of US Governance.

In an unbelievable act of high treason and overt criminality, the US State Department, headed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, has finalized arrangements to move the US State Department-listed foreign terror organization, Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK), into the former US military base "Camp Liberty' in Iraq.

Effectively turning the camp into a living monument of desecration to the memories of 6,000+ US troops killed over the last 10 years of the fraudulent "War on Terror," the US State Department is also appropriating US taxpayers' money to make upgrades to the camp to accommodate the terrorist organization. In Foreign Policy Magazine's article, "Are the MEK’s U.S. friends its worst enemies?," it is indicated that up to 3,000 terrorists are expected to move into the new site with the first two convoys already arriving at the camp over the last month.

Image: Rudy Giuliani consorting with MEK's political wing leader Maryam Rajavi in Paris, France. Giuliani is best known for his role playing a strong supporter for the "War on Terror" and his incessant fear mongering verses "Islamic extremists." In real life, he coddles listed terrorist organizations in direct violation of US law and even lobbies for them.

....

Amazingly, MEK's support base not only includes the US State Department, but also the United Nations, as well as a lobbying front including former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Howard Dean, Tom Ridge, John Lewis, Ed Rendell, former FBI Director Louis Freeh, retired General Wesley Clark, Lee Hamilton who farcically oversaw the 9/11 Commission, former US Marine Corps Commandant General James Jones, and Alan Dershowitz. There are also members of the British Parliament including David Amess of the Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom, speaking on MEK's behalf.

It turns out that MEK's lobbying representatives are at odds with the US State Department and the United Nations, and would like to see MEK maintain their current base of operations at Iraq's Camp Ashraf instead of being moved to Camp Liberty where conditions are alleged to be "substandard." Their lobbying efforts include full page adds in national newspapers including the Washington Post and the New York Times, as well as attending conferences in Paris, France where MEK's political wing is based.

Russian Secret Services: U.S., NATO, GCC Arm Syrian Rebels Through Iraq, Lebanon And Turkey

Source: Itar-Tass

“Huge batches of small arms and munitions for the Syrian Liberation Army’s troops are supplied from Lebanon, Iraq and Turkey, but unofficially, not through these countries’ governments,” the source said. “The supply list includes sub-machine guns, machine guns, sniper rifles and antitank grenade launchers.”

Russia’s military expert, Lieutenant General Leonid Sazhin told Itar-Tass that “the scenario that has already been developed and administered by the United States and their NATO allies, mainly by France, Britain and Turkey, as well as the monarchy regimes from the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf, in particular Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, is being implemented in Syria.”

“This scenario was developed taking into account recent events in Libya, Egypt and other countries of the region with only one reservation – the lack of the UN Security Council resolution needed for the West. In fact, we see an unannounced military interference of some NATO member-states and countries of the region into Syria’s domestic affairs, who side with one of the conflicting parties – the armed opposition,” he said.

Sazhin noted that in addition to the Syrian National Council Syria’s refugees and army deserters in Turkey create a military structure - Supreme Revolutionary Council – led by Syrian army general Mustafa Ahmed al-Sheikh, who deserted to neighbouring Turkey.

The Anti-Empire Report: Please Tell Me Again … What is the War in Afghanistan About?!

Source: Boiling Frogs Post
William Blum

With the US war in Iraq supposedly having reached a good conclusion (or halfway decent … or better than nothing … or let’s get the hell out of here while some of us are still in one piece and there are some Iraqis we haven’t yet killed), the best and the brightest in our government and media turn their thoughts to what to do about Afghanistan. It appears that no one seems to remember, if they ever knew, that Afghanistan was not really about 9-11 or fighting terrorists (except the many the US has created by its invasion and occupation), but was about pipelines. 

President Obama declared in August 2009: “But we must never forget this is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans.” 

Never mind that out of the tens of thousands of people the United States and its NATO front have killed in Afghanistan not one has been identified as having had anything to do with the events of September 11, 2001. 

Never mind that the “plotting to attack America” in 2001 was devised in Germany and Spain and the United States more than in Afghanistan. Why hasn’t the United States bombed those countries?

Indeed, what actually was needed to plot to buy airline tickets and take flying lessons in the United States? A room with some chairs? What does “an even larger safe haven” mean? A larger room with more chairs? Perhaps a blackboard? Terrorists intent upon attacking the United States can meet almost anywhere, with Afghanistan probably being one of the worst places for them, given the American occupation.

The only “necessity” that drew the United States to Afghanistan was the desire to establish a military presence in this land that is next door to the Caspian Sea region of Central Asia — which reportedly contains the second largest proven reserves of petroleum and natural gas in the world — and build oil and gas pipelines from that region running through Afghanistan.

WAR OR NO WAR IN IRAQ? Drones Over Iraq: When is a Pullout not a Pullout?

Source: Global Research
Felicity Arbuthnot

First the world was sold imaginary weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, General Colin Powell, at the United Nations in February 2003, asserting: “My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.”

Now it seems the world is sold a withdrawal from Iraq which was not quite what it seemed, as presented by the Panetta-Obama-fest in the Baghdad, Fort Bragg speeches of just six weeks ago. At Fort Bragg: "The war in Iraq will soon belong to history …” said the President. 

Well, not quite. 

In an interesting sleight of hand, the State Department, rather than the Pentagon, is operating a fleet of surveillance drones over Iraq. 

In: “ … the latest example of the State Department’s efforts to take over the functions in Iraq that the military used to perform.”(i) 

Further, the near Vatican City sized US Embassy in Baghdad is protected by five thousand mercenaries and has a further staff of eleven thousand, a large number, seemingly in a “military advice” capacity, training Iraqi forces – a nation that, ironically, nine years ago the US and UK cited as having a military capability not alone a threat “to the entire region”, but to the West. 

Little noticed has been that the State Department has been operating drones in Iraq since last year. Additionally when “Embassy” staff travel, they are escorted by helicopters, frequently with machine gun toting mercenaries “tethered to the outside.” Another Nisour Square massacre (176h September 2007) waiting to happen. 

The Pentagon-operated drones, it seems, went out by the front door and returned through the State Department back door. 

Yet Again U.S. Department of Defense Can’t Account for Billions in Iraq

Source: End The Lie
Madison Ruppert

Two new audits conducted by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) have discovered that the United States Department of Defense (DOD) cannot account for a whopping $2 billion it was given to fund the reconstruction of Iraq.

To make matters even worse, the DOD is not even providing Iraq with a complete record of the construction projects funded by the United States, making the accounting even more difficult, if not impossible.

Back in 2004, Iraq provided $3 billion to the DOD to fund selected construction projects, but only about one third of those funds have been tracked according to the inspector general’s “January Quarterly Report and Semiannual Report” which was released recently and can be located here (along with other reports released by the inspector general).

The DOD claims that they have “internal processes and controls” in place to track the flow of money, yet they admit the “bulk of the records are missing,” and claim that they are in the process of searching for them.

Claiming you have internal controls while $2 billion is missing is laughable and shows just how ludicrously incompetent our government can be.

However, there is the very real possibility that this has nothing to do with incompetence and instead is yet another example of individuals in government conspiring to cash in.

This very well might be the case given that other documents including monthly reports which document the expenses have mysteriously gone missing as well.

Another indicator that this is something more than mere incompetence is the fact that in June of last year, the New York Federal Reserve refused to disclose details about the billions of dollars the Fed sent to Iraq during the beginning of the invasion.

The inspector general claimed it was not the fault of the New York Fed but instead the Iraqis since “They haven’t been sufficiently responsive.”

Furthermore, earlier that month it was reported that $6.6 billion in fresh $100 bills was sent by plane to Iraq and then could not be accounted for by the DOD.

Western Oil firms Remain as US Exits Iraq

Source: Global Research
Dahr Jamail

Baghdad, Iraq - While the US military has formally ended its occupation of Iraq, some of the largest western oil companies, ExxonMobil, BP and Shell, remain.

On November 27, 38 months after Royal Dutch Shell announced its pursuit of a massive gas deal in southern Iraq, the oil giant had its contract signed for a $17bn flared gas deal.

Three days later, the US-based energy firm Emerson submitted a bid for a contract to operate at Iraq's giant Zubair oil field, which reportedly holds some eight million barrels of oil.

Earlier this year, Emerson was awarded a contract to provide crude oil metering systems and other technology for a new oil terminal in Basra, currently under construction in the Persian Gulf, and the company is installing control systems in the power stations in Hilla and Kerbala.

Iraq's supergiant Rumaila oil field is already being developed by BP, and the other supergiant reserve, Majnoon oil field, is being developed by Royal Dutch Shell. Both fields are in southern Iraq.

According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), Iraq's oil reserves of 112 billion barrels ranks second in the world, only behind Saudi Arabia. The EIA also estimates that up to 90 per cent of the country remains unexplored, due to decades of US-led wars and economic sanctions.

"Prior to the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq, US and other western oil companies were all but completely shut out of Iraq's oil market," oil industry analyst Antonia Juhasz told Al Jazeera. "But thanks to the invasion and occupation, the companies are now back inside Iraq and producing oil there for the first time since being forced out of the country in 1973."

"The last thing the US cares about in the Middle East is democracy. It is about oil, full stop."

Dr Abdulhay Yahya Zalloum  Juhasz, author of the books The Tyranny of Oil and The Bush Agenda, said that while US and other western oil companies have not yet received all they had hoped the US-led invasion of Iraq would bring them, "They've certainly done quite well for themselves, landing production contracts for some of the world's largest remaining oil fields under some of the world's most lucrative terms."

Dr Abdulhay Yahya Zalloum, an international oil consultant and economist who has spent nearly 50 years in the oil business in the US, Europe, Asia and the Middle East, agrees that western oil companies have "obtained concessions in Iraq's major [oil] fields", despite "there being a lack of transparency and clarity of vision regarding the legal issues".

Dr Zalloum added that he believes western oil companies have successfully acquired the lions' share of Iraq's oil, "but they gave a little piece of the cake for China and some of the other countries and companies to keep them silent".

In a speech at Fort Bragg in the wake of the US military withdrawal, US President Barack Obama said the US was leaving behind "a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people".

Of this prospect, Dr Zalloum was blunt.

"The last thing the US cares about in the Middle East is democracy. It is about oil, full stop." A strong partnership?

Faking It: How the Media Manipulates the World into War

Source: GRTV and Corbett Report
James Corbett

TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES:

As the drums of war begin to beat once again in Iran, Syria, the South China Sea, and other potential hotspots and flashpoints around the globe, concerned citizens are asking how a world so sick of bloodshed and a population so tired of conflict could be led to this spot once again.

Korean War, Manning Up, Funding Terror - New World Next Week

Source: Corbett Report and Media Monarchy

Welcome to http://NewWorldNextWeek.com – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:

Iraq Withdrawal is a Smokescreen: Confronting Obama's Hypocricy

Source: StoptheWarCoalition
John Pilger

Announcing the Iraq war was ended, Barack Obama told US troops on 14 December 2011, "The United States military is the finest fighting force in the history of the world."

What he didn't say is that since 1945 the US military has been directly responsible for the deaths of over 10 million people and that America has in that time overthrown 50 governments, including democracies, and intervened in at least 30 more.

John Pilger has something to say about that.

Obama at Fort Bragg: A Hypocritical Embrace of a Criminal War

Source: Global Research
Bill Van Auken

President Barack Obama used his speech to US troops at Fort Bragg, North Carolina Wednesday to embrace the nine-year war in Iraq that he had ostensibly opposed and to declare the destruction of the country a “success.”

Obama exploited a captive audience of 3,000 soldiers assembled at the largest US Army base in the world as part of a cynical attempt to use the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, which is to be completed by the end of this month, to promote his own reelection campaign.

The speech appeared to have been written by someone who threw out Abraham Lincoln’s famous adage and adopted the view that you can “fool all of the people all of the time.”

The Democratic president presented the complete withdrawal of American forces as an “extraordinary achievement” for his administration, while telling the troops that it was necessary to “remember everything that you did to make it possible.”

The reality is that the withdrawal of America’s armed forces from Iraq is not the deliberate outcome of US policy, but rather the unavoidable result of Washington’s failure to negotiate a new Status of Forces agreement to permit the administration’s favored plan, which was to leave behind as many as 20,000 troops.

That failure was based on the refusal of the Iraqi government, and indeed all of the major political forces in the country, to accede to Washington’s demand for blanket immunity for US troops from Iraqi law. Mass popular opposition, based on the bitter experiences of the Iraqi people over nearly nine years of US occupation, with all of its death and brutality, made any such agreement impossible.

Even as Obama used the Fort Bragg speech to wrap himself in the American flag and associate himself with the US military—he referred to himself as “commander-in-chief” three times, while his wife Michelle introduced him to the military audience by that title—he sought to promote the illusion among his liberal Democratic base that the withdrawal represents the fulfillment of a 2008 campaign pledge.

This is a bare-faced lie. Obama won the 2008 election in large measure due to the deep-going hostility among the American electorate to the wars begun under the Bush administration. He pledged to end the war in Iraq within 16 months of coming to office. Once in the White House, however, he retained Bush’s secretary of defense, Robert Gates, and largely ceded policy decisions to the Pentagon brass.

US To Leave Iraq Airspace Clear For Strategic Israeli Route To Iran

Source: Washington Times

Rowan Scarborough

The U.S. military’s fast-approaching Dec. 31 exit from Iraq, which has no way to defend its airspace, puts Israel in a better place strategically to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Iraq has yet to assemble a force of jet fighters, and since the shortest route for Israeli strike fighters to Iran is through Iraqi airspace, observers conclude that the U.S. exit makes the Jewish state’s mission planning a lot easier.

Army Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan, the top U.S. military spokesman in Iraq, said the Iraqi military will maintain radars to monitor the country’s airspace, but it has not taken possession of American F-16s to guard that space.

“The country has a capable and improving capability to see the airspace, a viable system to provide command and control, but no system to defeat incoming air threats until it gets either the F-16s or ground-based systems or, optimally, some of both,” Gen. Buchanan told The Washington Times.

Iraq made the first payment in September for 18 F-16s that will not arrive until next fall at the earliest. This means Israel would have a theoretical window of about 12 months if it wants to fly over Iraq unimpeded by the Iraqi air force.

Retired Air ForceGen. Thomas McInerney, who advocates a U.S. strategic bombing raid to destroy Iran’s nuclear sites, agreed that Iraq’s open airspace would make it easier for an Israeli mission.

“Yes, it will be,” he said. “However, it will be much easier for Iranian forces to get to Israel through Iraq via land and air.”

Gen. McInerney said he thinks there is a good chance that Iran, stretched economically by Western sanctions and fearing threats from Israel, will launch a war against the Jewish state through Iraq.

“Our departing Iraq will be a huge strategic mistake,” he said of the Dec. 31 deadline for all U.S. forces to leave.

Obamessiah Says We Leave Iraq 'With Heads Held High'

Not counting those without heads...

Source: CBS News via Media Monarchy

President Obama marked the end of the United States' almost nine-year war in Iraq on Monday, saying at an appearance with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that the final U.S. troops leave Iraq this year "with their heads held high."

Mr. Obama is taking something of a victory lap this week for fulfilling his campaign promise to end the war, which will effectively end when the several thousand remaining troops exit the country by December 31. On Saturday, he thanked service members at the annual Army-Navy football game; on Wednesday, he and first lady Michele Obama will visit Fort Bragg in North Carolina to speak to troops about the war.

"This is a season of homecomings," Mr. Obama said Monday at the White House, flanked by al-Maliki. "Military families across America are being reunited for the holidays."

Adam Kokesh Hosted by CSU YAL

Source: Adam Kokesh





http://adamvstheman.com
To inquire about booking Adam for an event, please email adam@adamvstheman.com

Next Propoganda Phase: UN Says Syria Tortures Children

Source: Prison Planet
Kurt Nimmo

In order to send in the bombers and introduce the sort of carnage in Syria the US and NATO inflicted on Libya, the propaganda war needs to be dialed up. Allegations of child abuse usually do the trick. Journalists call it “the hook.” 

Prior to the first invasion of Iraq in 1991, the Congressional Human Rights Caucus held a hearing on Capitol Hill showcasing Iraqi human rights abuses. The media event allowed a 15-year old Kuwaiti girl known as Nayirah to claim Saddam’s invaders threw babies out of incubators at the al-Addan hospital in Kuwait City. 

It turns out the girl was a member of the Kuwaiti Royal Family. Her father was Saud Nasir al-Sabah, the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. The testimony was a lie cooked up by Hill & Knowlton, a public relations group. Despite this, the lie was repeated over and over again. Bush Senior told the story. It was recited as fact in congressional testimony, on TV and radio talk shows, and at the UN Security Council. 

On Friday, a United Nations human rights panel “expressed alarm” at reports claiming Syrian security forces are torturing children. 

The Committee Against Torture said it had received “numerous, consistent and substantiated reports” of widespread abuse in the country, MSNBC reports today. The chair of the panel, Claudio Grossman, told reporters in Geneva that the reports referring to the abuse of children were of “particular concern.” 

It was less of a concern when George W. Bush’s legal adviser, John Yoo, argued there is no law that could prevent the president from ordering the torture of a child. 

Syria’s neighbor, Israel, has detained and tortured Palestinian children at the infamous al-Jalame Interrogation and Detention Center near Haifa, but the United Nations is not talking about sanctions against the country. The Arab League is not issuing ultimatums and neocons and presidential candidates are not talking about attacking Israel. 

The United Nations report is a prized piece of propaganda released at precisely the right time. It will be mentioned repeatedly by the establishment media in the weeks ahead as the stage is set for an attack on Syria. Like the Nayirah and baby incubator lie, there will be little effort to find out if Syrian security forces are indeed torturing children.

Bush and Blair Found Guilty of War Crimes

Source: Press TV

A War Crimes Tribunal in Malaysia has found former US President George W. Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair guilty of war crimes for their roles in the Iraq war, Press TV reports. 

 

The five-panel Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal decided that Bush and Blair committed genocide and crimes against humanity by leading the invasion of Iraq in 2003, a Press TV correspondent reported on Tuesday.

In 2003, the US and Britain invaded Iraq in blatant violation of international law and under the pretext of finding weapons of mass destruction allegedly stockpiled by former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

The Malaysian tribunal judges ruled that the decision to wage war against Iraq by the two former heads of government was a flagrant abuse of law and an act of aggression that led to large-scale massacres of the Iraqi people.

Bombings and other forms of violence became commonplace in Iraq shortly after the US-led invasion of the country.

In their ruling, the tribunal judges also stated that the US, under the leadership of Bush, fabricated documents to make it appear that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.

However, the world later learned that the former Iraqi regime did not possess WMDs and that the US and British leaders knew this all along.

Over one million Iraqis were killed during the invasion, according to the California-based investigative organization Project Censored.

The judges also said the court findings should be provided to signatories to the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, and added that the names of Bush and Blair should be listed on a war crimes register.

War Crimes Tribunal Tries Bush and Blair

Source: PressTV

A War Crimes Tribunal in the Malaysian capital has begun its hearing against George W. Bush and Tony Blair, charging the former officials for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, Press TV reports.

The tribunal will determine whether the former US president and British prime minister committed war crimes and violated international law during the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Major Wars and Suppression of American Freedoms Planned BEFORE 9/11

Source: Washington's Blog

Iran War Threats, Militarization of American Police and Spying on Americans All Started BEFORE 9/11.
  

Many things which we’ve been told have only happened recently actually started a long time ago. 

For example, the mainstream media claims that Iran is close to building a nuclear weapon. But the Christian Science Monitor notes that the U.S. has been claiming for more than 30 years that Iran was on the verge of nuclear capability. 

And the decision to threaten to bomb Iran was made before 9/11.

As another example, journalists from across the spectrum have documented the militarization of police forces in the United States, including, CNN, Huffington Post, Forbes, Esquire, The Atlantic, Salon, and the Cato Institute.

Indeed, police shooting peaceful “occupy” protesters with rubber bullets, tear gas and other projectiles and brutally beating them has brought this issue to the attention of the American public. See this, this and this.

But the militarization of police started long before 9/11 … in the 1980s. As Radley Balko testified before the House Subcommittee on Crime:

An Iraq-WMD Replay on Iran?

Source: Global Research.ca
Robert Parry
 

The U.S. press corps and “independent” American weapons experts got almost everything wrong about Iraq’s purported WMD before the U.S. invasion in 2003. Now, much the same cast is returning to interpret dubious intelligence about Iran’s nuclear program, reports Robert Parry.

The American public is about to be inundated with another flood of “expert analysis” about a dangerous Middle Eastern country presumably hiding a secret nuclear weapons program that may require a military strike, although this time it is Iran, not Iraq.

In the near future, you will be seeing more satellite photos of non-descript buildings that experts will say are housing elements of a nuclear bomb factory. There will be more diagrams of supposed nuclear devices. Some of the same talking heads will reappear to interpret this new “evidence.”

You might even recognize some of those familiar faces from the more innocent days of 2002-2003 when they explained, with unnerving confidence, how Iraq’s Saddam Hussein surely had chemical and biological weapons and likely a nuclear weapons program, too.

For instance, back then, former United Nations weapons inspector David Albright was all over the news channels, reinforcing the alarmist claims about Iraq’s WMD that were coming from President George W. Bush and his neocon-dominated administration.

Today, Albright’s Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) is issuing a flurry of alarmist reports about Iran’s nuclear bomb progress, often accompanied by the same kind of satellite photos and diagrams that helped persuade many Americans that Iraq must possess unconventional weapons that turned out to be fictitious.

Drums of War: Is Iran Next?

Source: GRTV

Government and media are experts at manipulating popular opinion, using subversive but often open techniques to deliver their message to the public and further advance their own agendas.

"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind.

And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry.

Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.

How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar."

The drums are beating again for Iran. Who do you trust?

Adam Kokesh: Super Class Elite to "Fade Away" in Time

Source: Infowars
Adam Kokesh
 
Alex talks with Activist and Journalist Adam Kokesh about the feds and their attack on the right of people to produce and consume raw milk. Adam also talks about his mixed feelings toward what really happened on 9/11.