911 Traitor John Kerry Asks Syria(Russia)To Cease Attacks On His Islamo Terrorists
Guess John Kerry who was Massachussets Senatorcan't blame Putin for being a puppet for the UK Rothschild financial military industrial complex when he is one himself......
WTC,9/11,Logan Airport, Boston:Israeli ICTS 'Security ...
neworleans.indymedia.org/news/2007/07/10601.php
Jul 18, 2007 - WTC,9/11,Boston Logan Trial:Israeli ICTS 'Security';Frank,Kennedy,Kerry ..... So where is Barney Frank(and Ted Kennedy and John Kerry and Hillary ... Menachem Atzmon of ICTS International has had direct familiar and ...wolfblitzzer0: 9/11,WTC,ICTS International,Israel,Logan ...
wolfblitzzer0.blogspot.com/.../syria911wtcicts-internationalisraelloga.html
Aug 30, 2013 - However as Israeli agent Menahem Atzmon and other Shin Bet - Mossad ... Syria,9/11,Boston Marathon:FBI,CIA Protect and Collude With ...
www.bankinginvestment.net/.../9-11-boston-marathon-fbi-cia-protect-an...
9/11,Boston Marathon:FBI,CIA Protect and Collude With Americans' ... Atzmon andICTS International of Israel who 'guarded' and controlled Logan ... trtaitors Barney Frank and present Secretary of State John Kerry covering up for ... China, Syria, Egypt and any other country that might oppose US domination of the world.http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/12/06/john-kerry-unintentionally-exposes-the-new-world-order-in-syria/
Just a few days ago, Kerry indirectly and unintentionally exposed the worldview that makes up the New World Order in Syria when he said that the United States can defeat ISIS within months if Assad is out.[2] State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf repeated the same thing last September. In fact, Harf insisted then that Assad must go.[3]Obama again proposed something similar last year.[4]
Kerry and other NWO certainly are caught with their pants down here. If the United States can defeat ISIS within months after Assad is gone, and if ISIS is currently fighting Assad, wouldn’t it be safe to say that the United States enjoys the current situation in Syria? Could it be that the United States has never been really interested in defeating ISIS?
From an objective point of view, it seems to be the case. If NWO agents were really interested in defeating the terrorist group, they would have made an alliance with Russia months ago. After all, don’t NWO agents tell us ad nauseam that a deal with Joseph Stalin was legitimate? If even we grant them the silly idea that Putin is a bad guy and therefore we cannot make a deal with them, then they must explain to us why they made a diabolical deal with Stalin, who ended up liquidating more than forty million lives.............
Kerry warns about Syria's continued airstrikes
CBS News-2 hours ago
GENEVA -- U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement released late Wednesday that attacks by Syrian forces supported by Russian ...
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/9/11/chomsky_on_9_11_syrias_bloody
That brings us to Israel-Palestine. Just a couple of days ago, Secretary Kerry, Secretary of State Kerry, appealed to the European Union to continue to support illegal, criminal Israeli settlement projects in the West Bank—wasn’t put in those words, but the way it was put is that Europe had taken the quite appropriate step of trying to draw back from support for Israeli operations in the illegal settlements—incidentally, that the settlements are illegal is not even in question. That’s been determined by the highest authorities—the Security Council of the United Nations, the International Court of Justice. In fact, up until the Reagan administration, the U.S. also called them illegal. Reagan changed that to "an obstacle to peace," and Obama has weakened it still further to "not helpful to peace." But the U.S. is virtually alone in this. The rest of the world accepts the judgment of the Security Council, the International Court of Justice, that the settlements are illegal, not just the expansion of the settlements but the settlements themselves. And Europe had pulled back from support for the settlements, and Kerry called on Europe not to do that, because the pretext was that this would interfere with the so-called peace negotiations that he’s set up, which are a total farce. I mean, the peace negotiations are carried out under preconditions, U.S.-imposed preconditions, which virtually guarantee failure.
There are two basic preconditions..........................
AMY GOODMAN: Our guest for the hour is Professor Noam Chomsky. In 2007, Noam, Democracy Now! interviewed General Wesley Clark, the retired four-star general who was the supreme allied commander of NATO during the Kosovo War. General Clark described how an unnamed Pentagon official, just after the September 11th attacks, talked about a memo that said the U.S. planned to take out seven countries in five years, including Syria.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: About 10 days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon, and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the joint staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, "Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second." I said, "Well, you’re too busy." He said, "No, no." He says, "We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq." This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, "We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?" He said, "I don’t know." He said, "I guess they don’t know what else to do." So I said, "Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?" He said, "No, no." He says, "There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq." He said, "I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments." And he said, "I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail."
So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, "Are we still going to war with Iraq?" And he said, "Oh, it’s worse than that." He said—he reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper, and he said, "I just got this down from upstairs," meaning the secretary of defense’s office, "today." And he said, "This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran." I said, "Is it classified?" He said, "Yes, sir." I said, "Well, don’t show it to me." And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, "You remember that?" He said, "Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!"
AMY GOODMAN: That was General Wesley Clark. I was interviewing him at the 92nd Street Y here in New York in 2007. Professor Noam Chomsky, if you could respond?
NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, I think that’s—it’s quite plausible. The Bush administration veered slightly, not far, but slightly, from the general pattern. Actually, the goal of U.S. policy for decades has been to control and dominate those countries. But the Bush administration was more extreme. They thought they could actually just, as they put it, "take ’em out" and forcefully impose our own regimes—not that that would be anything new. There’s a long list of similar cases, going back to Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954. There was an assault against—major assault against Indonesia in 1958, an effort to strip away the outer islands where the resources are, and—because they were concerned about too much independence in Indonesia. That failed. Invasion of Cuba failed. The murder of Lumumba, in which the U.S. was involved, in the Congo destroyed Africa’s major hope for development. Congo is now total horror story, for years. The U.S. supported the Mobutu dictatorship. Now it’s maybe the worst place in the world. And on right through, case after case. This is standard U.S. policy. The Bush administration went beyond. They were more extreme in their goals and their actions. And they had to pull back, because that was just beyond U.S. capacity.
Iraq—the Iraq War was a very serious defeat for the United States, unlike the Vietnam War. In the case of Indochina, it’s called defeat, but that only means that the U.S. did not achieve its maximal objectives. It did achieve its major objectives, as McGeorge Bundy well understood. It had prevented a Vietnam from moving on a path of independent development, which might have had this contagious effect that Kissinger was concerned with. As it was put at the time, one rotten apple may spoil the barrel, meaning just what Arthur Schlesinger and others said. If you allow independent taking matters into your own hand in one place and it works, others will try to emulate it, system will erode—a standard principle for systems of power. The godfather of the Mafia understands it perfectly well. In the Mafia system, if some small storekeeper decides not to pay protection money, the money may not mean anything to the godfather, but he’s not going to let him get away with it. And, in fact, he’s not just going to go in and send his goons to get the money; he’s also going to beat him to a pulp, because others have to understand that disobedience is not tolerated. In international affairs, that’s called "credibility." The bombing of Kosovo, Wesley Clark’s bombing of Kosovo, was the same. After other—there were pretexts, but they collapsed, and the final one, as Tony Blair and George Bush said, was we have to maintain the credibility of NATO. NATO had issued edicts, and we must ensure that they’re obeyed. And NATO, of course, does not mean Norway; it means the United States....
No comments:
Post a Comment