AL-SAUD'S ONLY GAMBLE OPTION By Ghassan Kadi 22 May 2017

 Al-Saud’s Only Gamble Option

By Ghassan Kadi
22 May 2017

http://thesaker.is/al-sauds-only-gamble-option/

Al-Saud’s Only Gamble Option

27083 ViewsMay 22, 2017 32 Comments

by Ghassan Kadi

A lot has been said and speculated on about the “real” objectives of Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia. Seasoned veteran British journalist/analyst and Middle East expert Robert Fisk sees it as an attempt to create a Sunni-style NATO to curb the Iranian expansion, and his speculation is on the money, but in realistic terms, what can this visit and its “aftermath” achieve?

Despite the slump on crude oil prices over the last 2-3 years, the Saudis are not short on cash, despite the huge and growing deficit they are running. Their reserve cash is estimated to be a whopping three quarters of a trillion American dollars, and the unit “trillion” has been chosen here because it is the millions of the 21st Century and billions have become too small to consider.

That said, the Saudis have recently pledged nearly a third of their stash on “investments” with the USA. The first allotment came in the form of an undertaking to invest over 100 billion dollars in the American housing sector less than a fortnight ago, and upon Trump’s historic Riyadh visit, the Saudis signed an excess of 100 billion dollar arms deal contract. This is a total of an excess of 200 billion American dollars to be injected into the American economy. But on the scale of trillions again, this huge figure amounts to only a mere 1% of America’s staggering official 20 trillion dollar debt.

A drop in the ocean perhaps if taken into the context of the American economy and debt, but there is little doubt that this Saudi money will create jobs in the USA, and if President Trump is still sticking by the promise of creating jobs, he’s on the money with this one too.

Thus far, and nearly four months after his inauguration, it can safely be said that the most predictable thing about President Trump thus far has been his unpredictability. But with all of his eccentricities and swings, what was it that made him swing in favour of Al-Saud? It may not be very difficult to solve this puzzle if we look at the chain of events.

Surely, the USA has a lot of strategic interests in the area, and these interests are multi-faceted. Among other things, the USA wants to protect the long-term wellbeing of Israel, curb the influence of Russia and Iran in the region, have a share in the decision making of the “War on Syria”, and last be not least, keep a tight control on Saudi oil and cash wealth.

One of Trump’s election promises was to get America’s allies to pay their way, and he was very vocal about the Saudis saying on a number of occasions that protecting Saudi Arabia was costing the USA more than it should be paying for. Those subtle “threats” sent a wave of shivers down the spines of Saudi royals, especially that they were already in deep trouble financially and also bogged down in a protracted and highly expensive war in Yemen that seems unwinnable.

Given that the Saudis believed that former President Obama has let them down and did not invade Syria after the alleged East Ghouta chemical attack of August 2013, the unknown and rather unstable Trump looked like a wild card and they braced for the worst.

Knowing that they are in deep trouble and need America more than ever, feeling extremely nervous about the Iran nuclear deal, the Saudis realized that the only option they have with Trump was to appease him; “but how?”, they wondered. But when they put two and two together, and listened to Trump’s statements about Saudi Arabia, the Saudis realized that they can and will appease him with money; a quarter of a trillion dollars and counting.

Taking the big fat cheque book out is not a modus operandi that is alien to the Saudi psyche, because the Saudis have learned to solve their problems with money. And now, they believe that they are forging a new era of military and strategic alliance with the United States, and paying for this privilege with hard cash.

What they do not know is that whilst they were dreaming big, thinking that they are on the verge of becoming a regional superpower to be reckoned with signing an alliance with America, Donald Trump was signing a business deal, a sales contract; nothing more and nothing less.

The way Trump sees this is a win-win situation. If the Saudis do manage to get the upper military hand and curb the Iranians, he would have reached this zenith not only without having to fight Iran, but also whilst being paid for it. On the other hand, if the Saudis take a gamble to go to war with Iran and lose, he would have received his quarter trillion in advance. So for Saudi Arabia to win or lose, the deal makes America a quarter of a trillion dollar richer; or rather a quarter of a trillion less in debt.

In reality however, what are the odds of Saudi Arabia winning an open war with Iran? Or will this war eventuate in the first place? Back to this question later on.

In a part of the world that is highly volatile, supplying a huge arsenal of highly lethal weapons to a regime that is known for its atrocities, war crimes, inciting regional tension and creating conflict is pouring oil on an already raging fire. Trump’s arms deal with the Saudis probably marks one of the lowest points in America’s history. If anything, after the historic American-Iranian nuclear deal, America was in a position to play the role of an arbitrator and try to get the Saudis and the Iranians to reconcile; coerce them if needed. Instead, Trump turned his attack on Jihadi terrorism by supplying more support to the core and centre of terrorism (Saudi Arabia) and signed a huge arms deal that will only lead to further and much deadlier escalations.

With seemingly very powerful Sunni/Shiite animosities resurfacing after many centuries of dormancy, the pro-American axis happens to be predominantly Sunni and the pro-Russian resistance axis is seen to be Shiite; though it is not as such in reality. That said, the strongest Sunni army in the region is undoubtedly Turkey’s, and Turkey could potentially play a key role in bolstering Fisk’s Sunni-”NATO”. However, the Kurdish issue is a bigger threat to Turkey than Iran has ever been, and Turkey will walk away from its Sunni brothers and “NATO” allies if they were to support Kurdish separatists and arm them; and the irony is that they are.

Without Turkey, a Sunni-”NATO” will be a toothless tiger, unless perhaps it receives enough support from Israel; a support America will not be prepared to offer. But apart from some possible airstrikes and intelligence sharing, how much support will Israel give if any at all? And how much will Putin will be able to weigh in with his clout to keep Netanyahu’s nose out of it? Last but not least, how will the leaders of a so-called Sunni-”NATO” be able to “sell” the idea of getting into an alliance with Israel with its Sunni populace base?

There is little doubt that the Saudis now feel that Trump has given them a carte blanche to attack Iran, and if they swallow the bait fully, they may be foolish enough to take the gamble. But first, they have to finish off Yemen, and then look back and think how they miscalculated when they planned the so-called “Operation Decisive Storm”, and which was meant to be a swift and successful operation. More than two years later, victory seems further than ever predicted all the while the Yemenis have been improving their missile manufacturing capabilities and have been able to hit targets in the capital Riyadh.

Whilst the Saudis were begging the Americans to sell them more advanced weapons to win the war in Yemen, the Yemenis were developing their own. But given that Saudis believe that all problems can be solved provided one is prepared to spend as much as needed, the bottom line for them will always be, “how much?”

The Saudis will not only have to re-evaluate the short-sighted military gamble they took in Yemen, but also the financial one. No one knows for certain what has thus far been the dollar cost that the Saudis had to cough up, but it is in the tens of billions of dollars. With a country that is currently running a near 90 billion dollar budget deficit and diminishing returns, to gamble one third of the national savings on a new war aimed at Iran is tantamount to both, military and financial suicide.

If a war against Iran is at all winnable by the Saudis, what will be the dollar cost?

If the budget ceiling was broken, just like that of Operation Decisive Storm, and if the Saudis realize that the over 100 billion odd dollars they “invested” to buy state-of-the-art weaponry from the USA was not enough, by how much will they be prepared to lift the cost ceiling? They will only need to break the ceiling 3-4 fold before they actually run out of cash reserves. Such a budget overblow is not unusual in wars, and Yemen and Syria are living proof for the Saudis to learn from; if they are capable of learning.

A war against Iran will perhaps be Al-Saud’s final gamble option, but unless the Saudi royals change their rhetoric and seek reconciliation with their Shiite neighbours, this war could well be Al-Saud’s only gamble option.

But the bottom line to any military action is military pragmatism. How can the Saudis think that they can invade and subdue Iran when they haven’t been able to subdue a starved and besieged Yemen? In the unlikely event that they will be able to serve Iran with a swift “shock-and-awe” strike and achieve prompt victory, what will add to their woes is Iran’s ability to close the Strait of Hormuz and to also hit oil production areas and ports. In simple terms, the Saudi war on Yemen is expensive enough, but a war with Iran will be much more expensive, and one that will cut off Saudi life-line; its income.

Do the Saudis believe that expensive imported hardware is going to give the military edge they need? “Knowing” Trump, he will likely wait till the Saudis are down on their knees begging and then extort them by hiking the price of an elusive “super weapon”, perhaps even an A-Bomb, that will tip the war in Saudi favour. But “knowing” the Saudis and Iranians, if the Saudis attack and start an all-out war on Iran, then this may indeed earn the name of decisive storm, but not on Saudi terms. Will Iran virtually walk into Saudi Arabia? Such a scenario cannot be overruled. More than likely however, America will continue to feed the fire for as long as the Saudi cow (female camel in this instance) can be milked and for as long as there is money to be had. For as long as the infamous Al-Saud are on the throne, the kingdom will continue to be run by the same old rules of arrogance that will not stop until that evil legacy is down and vanquished.

MAKING AMERICA GREAT...AGAIN? By Ghassan Kadi 16 May 2017

 Making America great… again? By Ghassan Kadi 16 May 2017
http://thesaker.is/making-america-great-again/

Making America great… again?

29709 ViewsMay 16, 2017 41 Comments

by Ghassan Kadi

The more pre-election, post-election and even post-inauguration promises that President Trump breaks, the harder he makes it for himself to “Make America Great again”. But this narrative herein is not based on the political rhetoric and broken promises, rather, it is about a hypothetical scenario that questions if America is realistically able to bring Trump’s slogan to fruition.

“Make America Great Again” is a catch phrase that implies a restoration process of a bygone station of greatness. So before one explores the chances of success of such an ambition, one ought to go back to the basics of how and when America was great in the first place.

Admittedly, America has historically been a country of dreams for many. The pop culture of the 1960’s has even had songs about wanting to live in America and surfing USA. The dream has been realistic and fathomable, especially for Europeans who wanted to seek a better life, and thus the flow of migration began as soon as settlement began, and that flow was later on mirrored by the rest of the world, and it did not stop as yet.

But historically also, America was never a dream for its native people; quite the contrary. The influx of white migrants into America has resulted in one of the greatest, bloodiest and definitely the longest lasting genocides that spanned for over four whole centuries.

As for the young African men and women, even boys and girls, who were raided and stolen from their tribes and villages, taken away from their parents, loved ones and friends, to be sold and traded as slaves, put to hard labour, raped and killed, there was nothing for them to dream for at all in regard to America.

A dream for some and a nightmare for others, it would be hard to say that defining America as a dream has ever been a description that has been ubiquitously endorsed during its early-mid stages of nation-building. Did the global consensus change later on?

As the new nation that became known as the United States of America became independent in the late eighteenth century, another century later, it suffered from a brutal civil war and the new nation was not really able to stand on its feet and have its place on the global scene until the union was saved and Lincoln managed to pass his 13th amendment.

As a result, America prospered, and later on, late in the nineteenth century, America became the biggest global economy, and in hindsight, the few decades that followed up until WWI, America came the closest ever to being great at different levels. President Woodrow Wilson made it clear that the USA did not join the war for any gain of territory or to build an empire. He was instrumental in setting up the “League of Nations”, the predecessor of the UN.

All the while ignoring that the 13th amendment did not stop racial segregation and we shouldn’t, ignoring that racial inequality persisted and we also shouldn’t, was this short period, the few decades spanned in between the presidencies of Lincoln and Truman enough to classify America as a great nation?

To answer this properly, we must define greatness from a humane perspective. After all, if we allow ourselves to base greatness on wealth, we will have to accept that the Rothschilds, the Soroses and the Rockefellers are the greatest people on earth, but are they? Who is a greater person George Soros or Jonas Salk who invented the anti-polio Salk vaccine and donated it to the world and refused to take any royalties?

The real greatness of people and nations ought to be gauged by their contribution to humanity, easing its pain, spreading knowledge, spearheading liberation and enlightenment, and not by their wealth.

Or is greatness a subject of might? The post-WWII era in which America was elevated to the level of the world’s first nuclear power and most powerful nation, has left behind a legacy of wars that began in Korea and went on unstopped to Syria and counting, and has left a trail of destruction, tens of millions of civilians killed, mostly from impoverished developing countries. Economies were destroyed, infrastructures decimated, which again begs the question, how and when exactly was America ever great?

Whilst America did offer great opportunity for a great number of select people for a great number of years, based on the proper and relevant criteria of greatness, it can be fair to say that America was never really great.

Surely, many people were attracted to America to go and live there and partake in the big “American Dream”, be able to buy a Chevy, buy a house in the suburbs and send their kids to the best schools and universities in the world, all the while have the best doctors and hospitals at their beck and call. But in reality, what is the percentage of Americans who were able to afford those luxuries even during the years of economic boom?

Whilst it might be true to say that in the 1950’s – 1970’s or so, America might have had a living standard that was higher than most other nations, the standard is shrinking at an alarming rate. With nearly 50 million Americans currently on food stamps, it becomes imperative to realize that today’s USA is a country that is wrought with poverty.

But poverty is not America’s only current problem, and when Trump claims that he wants to” Make America Great Again”, assuming he means it, one wonders if he is simply talking about rebuilding America’s financial prowess.

So if Trump’s take on greatness stops with money, how far can the best ever financial reform process go? Not that there is any sign of it coming from the Trump administration, not that we can see that he is keeping his word by putting America first and stopping all wars, but we must remember that we are looking at a hypothetical situation here, one that has nothing to do with Trump.

In other words, is America able to become great again if Trump was indeed serious about his promise?

The formal and declared American debt stands at nearly $20 trillion dollars, and if calculated on a per capita basis, the figure amounts to $60,000 per every man, woman, and child. But this debt is the tip of the iceberg. With collapsing infrastructure like roads, dams, river levees, schools, airports etc, the restoration of those public facilities constitutes overhead costs that are not budgeted for. They are simply ignored and allowed to decay and rot. These are referred to as “unfunded liabilities”.

It is hard to put an accurate figure on the value of those unfunded liabilities and the estimates vary greatly from a low of $150 trillion to a high of $350 trillion. At the higher estimate figure, the individual debt balloons to nearly $9 million, again, for every man, woman and child. But even at the lower end, the per capita figure is shyly short of $4 million.

When we make balance sheets we have to look not only at liabilities, but also at assets. The estimate of America’s total assets is another elastic figure that also varies from $300 to $550 trillion. That said, if the liabilities figure is indeed in the vicinity of the high $350 trillion figure and that of assets is in the vicinity of the low $300 trillion, then America could well and truly be literally insolvent.

We must remember here that even if the high $550 trillion figure is the correct figure of assets, it does not truly mean much because much of the sub-estimates are based on untapped natural and human resources and are based on today’s value of commodities that can easily crash.

Apart from material assets, there was a time when people around the world talked about “the latest thing from America”. America was the world centre of research and development and innovation in all fields of science and technology, but today’s America does not produce enough engineers, doctors and scientists who can bear the load of a techno-financial revolution that can take America out of the trouble it is facing. When we look today at developments such as China’s massive ultra-fast railway, we can foresee that we are not far from talking about “the latest thing from China”.

On the other hand, the slick, “low budget”, and highly advanced Russian military technology has given America a run for its money. The Russians have been playing their game very smartly, exposing the Americans to a taste of what’s up their sleeve, and –God forbid- in the event of a major escalation between the two super powers, America may find itself with bases and fleets exposed as sitting ducks facing an invisible enemy. It is highly likely that the Russians are not trying to “show off”; as it were, but they are sending strong and clear messages of deterrence to their “American partners”.

Back to economy, it seems likely, as a matter of fact we can safely say that it is highly probable that the demise of the American economy has gone too far and beyond repair. It is also possible that Trump has come to this realization after his inauguration, and that after reaching this realization, he made his U-turn on his promises on the basis that all he has left up his sleeve is a stash of nukes and a mighty war machine.

To reconsider the definition of greatness, does President Trump believe that might alone brings greatness and that by escalating the global bullying role of the United States of America he is going to “Make America Great Again”?

America is certainly a nation that has the highest military budget, largest navy and more off-shore military basis than the rest of the world combined, it has had the world’s biggest economy for many decades and continues to enjoy this status, but has never been a great nation that has spread knowledge and wisdom to the rest of the world. It has used its military might in the past to pillage poor countries and its current financial woes are literally impossible to resolve.

But when it comes to military matters, what is pertinent is that most, if not all, American military ventures have failed to achieve their objectives. After reaching a stale-mate in Korea, a total defeat in Vietnam, after two decades into the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, America is still incapable of gaining the upper hand on the ground.

So if the military is the only trump card left up Trump’s sleeve in order to “Make America Great Again”, on what grounds is he basing his assumption that he can confront and subdue Russia and China combined given that the 125,000 strong American army that invaded Iraq in 2003 was not even able to control the streets of Baghdad?

Ironically, Obama and Trump have both won their campaigns using slogans that are based on desperation; from “Yes We Can” to “Make America Great Again”, the slogans were effectively used to lure in voters who cognize that America is in deep trouble and needs a saviour. Obama has failed and left America with twice the official debt that he inherited on his inauguration day, and Trump will not be able to do much, because like a rusty old car, America is too far gone, and I feel sorry for the good people of America, and there are many of them, including some very good and dear personal friends.

FRENCH REVOLUTION, TAKE II: 'APRES SOI, LE DELUGE'. By Ghassan Kadi. 11 May 2017

French Revolution, Take II: “Après Soi, Le Déluge”

By Ghassan Kadi
11 May 2017

http://thesaker.is/french-revolution-take-ii-apres-soi-le-deluge/

French Revolution, Take II: “Après Soi, Le Déluge”

15193 ViewsMay 11, 2017 23 Comments

by Ghassan Kadi

The weak and selfish French monarch Louis the XV is perhaps best known for his famous/infamous quote; “Après moi, le déluge” (after me, the flood).

The weak and selfish monarch was at least wise enough to realize that during the time of his reign, the people of France had had enough of the ruthless yoke of absolute monarchy that his predecessor, Louis the XIV, epitomized in the worst manner possible.

Louis did not only have a premonition about a cataclysmic event that was about to hit France, but he also knew that there was precious little that he could do in an attempt to avert it, so he decided to savour his privileges whilst he could, because his premonition also told him that he could, and that it was his successor who had to bear the brunt.

The rest is history.

The French Revolution that took about a hundred years to finally manage to create the changes it was intended to implement has faced a number of challenges, and the French people have successfully managed to keep France’s nose above the water, and emerge after WWII as a victorious nation and an eventual permanent member of the UNSC, even though technically-speaking, the formal French Government, represented by Vichy, had actually lost the war.

Had it not been for the genius of General Charles De Gaulle and his Free France movement, France might have been reduced to the level of other European nations like Italy or Spain, even Austria.

But the French are resilient people and always managed to reinvent themselves and move with the times. The reforms that De Gaulle introduced with his Fifth Republic are perhaps the biggest recent success.

A few decades later, The dream that French President Mitterand and German Chancellor Kohl in creating the Euro-Zone does not seem to be working to the expectations. One does not need to take the stand of Marine Le Pen to cognize this.

But today’s problems of France do not start and end with the EU and the Euro. The French society is fragmented, terrorized, and a significant fraction of it is claiming that France is losing its identity.

We can learn from history as much as we can, but what gleans from pre-French Revolution France, does not necessarily reveal that France had bigger problems during the reign of Louis the XV as much as it has had during the reign of Hollande. Without being able to take a trip in time and live the events of the days of Louis the XV and later on the XVI, we can only get information from reading books that were written before cameras, voice and video recorders, and the Internet were invented.

In retrospect, it would be hard to imagine that a bigger proportion of the French population in pre-French Revolution France knew and was concerned about what was happening behind closed doors within the Élysée. It would be hard to imagine that Louis the XV and the XVI had a lower popularity than Hollande’s infamous 4% popularity rate.

So what is really stopping the French people from the French Revolution take II?

To qualify this statement properly and put it in context of 21st Century democracy, French people neither need or are expected to storm a new-found Bastille again. In today’s time and age, they can revolt at the ballot box, but they seem reluctant to do so.

The reason behind their reluctance is not exactly known and identified, but we all have the right to analyze and speculate.

The reluctance of French people to seek change is not because they do not realize that France is in trouble, but because they do not know the actual nature of that trouble, they don’t know how to deal with it, and they are fearful of the policies for change strewn at them.

In reality, they saw Macron as the devil they know something about. They expect him to make “some” change. They know that his centrist party is a remodeled version of the Socialist Party that Hollande managed to destroy, and is much as they disliked Hollande, the hope that Macron, by taking a centrist tact, will create some favourable change.

On the other hand, they saw in Marie Le Pen the unknown ultra-right loose cannon. They saw in her a divisive leader despite her attempts to unify French people; attempts that in hindsight came in the too little too late category. It is not surprising that French people decided to stick with what they know; painful as it may be.

Whether Marie Le Pen reinvents herself or passes on the reigns to her niece Marine as some are speculating, little will change unless the French people reach a level of conviction that they have a leadership they can trust to take them forward into a very challenging future.

Either way, Macron does not have the hallmarks of the leader who is able to save France from a seemingly impending tsunami.

With his little experience, ill-defined policies, and little or no political support base that will enable him to form a stable and efficient government, the best that Macron can do is to maintain France’s status quo.

Either way again, France is in deep trouble. France has financial, political, ethnic and religious problems, and her biggest problem is in the lack of proper and unifying leadership; a situation that is historically akin to the days of the infamous Louis the XV and his perhaps only documented quote of turning the blind eye to the flood that was coming after his days.

Given all the damage and carnage that Hollande has generated for France and the French people, given how he kowtowed to Obama and Merkel, given how he played a big role in destabilizing Europe with his stands on Ukraine and Russia, given his position on the “War on Syria” and the eventual export of the rise in terrorism in Syria to the EU, given his inability to deal with rising terrorism that devastated France and divided her people, and finally, given his acceptance that he was not prepared to face the voters for another tenure at the Élysée, is he the one who is inadvertently saying after me the flood or is he passing on the baton to his protégé Macron?

France sadly seems to be set on course for major upheaval and the recent electoral decision French people made has only succeeded in delaying having to deal with the problem.

How will France move on from here will depend on how long will Macron last, how long will he need to bring France down to her knees or anarchy, and how long will it take before he incarnates either Louis, the XV or the XVI.

The short-term future of France seems to question of “après moi, le deluge” (after me, the flood), or après soi, le déluge (after him, the flood). This is how history is likely to read Hollande’s mind as he hands over the keys of the Élysée to the young Macron.

On the positive flip-side, what is of significant interest here is that France is leading a trend in Europe, a way in the West that seems unnoticed. Just like the French Revolution has led the way for liberation and inspired many generations globally, for better or for worse, the rise of Macron to power has broken the traditional Western two party monopoly, and that’s already something, or as the French put it, c’est déjà quelque chose.

WHEN THE FAKES FLAKE By The Kadis 5 May 2017

WHEN THE FAKES FLAKE
(By “The Kadis”)
5 May 2017

There has been a lot of discussion about who is and who is not Syrian. For some claiming to support Syria, it is totally contradictory to what Syria is about when they campaign against those who have exposed or objected to the Christian Zionist incursion into Syria. Tellingly, these characters accuse patriotic Syrians, Lebanese-Syrians or other Levantines of going on a “Jihad” against Christian Zionists. When this happened it was totally justifiable and warranted. Hence we can forever turn the table around on these apologists for Christian Zionism and employ the term they used, “Jihad”, to describe their activities against the Syrian patriots and their family members.

These “Jihadists” are in a constant state of frenzy to support a Christian Zionist on a mission to Syria. They went into a meltdown when serious questions were asked as to why staunch Palestinian solidarity activists associated closely with and defended the Christian Zionists.

Curiously, this group have a worrying obsession with insisting that the Sykes-Picot boundaries are strictly adhered to in line with the wishes of the powers victorious in World War One. That agreement split a region known for most of recorded history as “Greater Syria”, Just about everyone has relatives spanning from Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

Some of these characters feel compelled to tell some of the people of the region what their identity is and, in their ignorant and twisted existence, pronounce who is a “real” Syrian and who is a “fake” Syrian.

Why would a group of supporters of Syria be obsessed with who is Syrian and who is not when they themselves are not Syrian? What we are beginning to see now is the result of a break down in the alleged on-line Syria support groups.

It all started to fall apart when certain key people leading the larger Syrian groups put their egos before the cause and, as a result, were unable to see the forest from the trees and, in their attempt to save their egos, they opened up the doors for whatever support from anyone regardless. Just like corruption leading up to the War on Syria gained momentum, and thereby allowed armies to cross the borders into Syria unchecked, those corrupt egos opened up the doors for a horde of different armies.

First came the army of 5th Columnists who were trying to dig a wedge between Syria and her international allies. Then came the army of scavengers who, upon realising that Syria was gaining the upper hand, they too wanted a bite of the cherry. From people who didn’t know where Syria was on the map, or even worse, supported her nemesis i.e., Israel, they overnight turned into staunch supporters of Syria and dared to call her their second home.

The scavengers came in different colours and flavours, but the most dangerous of these were and continue to be the Christian Zionists.

Around the same time, another group was formed, the group of dubious characters who can best be described as “hired pens”. But those hired pens needed to have their own little armies to prop them up and keep them up high with the best. They therefore hired noisy thugs within Syria and outside her.

Lying and fabricating stories, especially those meant to defame and discredit genuine Syrian activists, was part and parcel of the daily chores of those thugs.

So there you go, from corrupt egos who employed and relied on 5th columnists, thereby leading to the creation of scavengers, hired pens and thugs, the picture was complete and all they needed was to repeat the lies over and over and over again until simple minded people too lazy to do their own investigation, believed the lies.

But, it was only a question of time before those different groups fought among themselves and within each other, and what we are seeing today is just the beginning. Just like the former anti-Syrian cocktail has broken up, resulting in each element of it scurrying and trying to establish its own gain or instead find an escape route, those supposed non-Syrian pro-Syria activists who ironically claim to love Syria but hate Syrians, will soon be snarling at each other in more ways than anyone could imagine. Just wait and see.

To an outside observer, this may sound like the pro-Syria support movement is falling apart. This could not be further from the truth, because, those implants were never at any stage a part of the movement. They are imposters, and the war they fought was not very different in essence from that of any of the various terrorist military groups. They all fought in different ways and they will all be defeated, each in their own way, because, at the end of the day, Syria is for Syrians, and non-Syrians who are genuine in their support for Syria, and thankfully there are many of them whom Syrians greatly appreciate, they understand that their role is in lending a hand, not in taking lead. They understand the meaning of support and the difference between this great human passion and that of orientalism and exceptionalism.

THEY COME AS FRIENDS AND AT THE APPOINTED HOUR STRIKE! By Intibah Kadi. 30 April 2017

THEY COME AS FRIENDS AND AT THE APPOINTED HOUR STRIKE!
By Intibah Kadi. 30 April 2017

Over the past few years Joshua Tartakovsky gained the trust of many in our movement, including quite prominent members who made videos and wrote articles with him or for him. This is no judgement on our comrades as these type of operatives are professional. On exactly what date Joshua suddenly morphed back into his original form, I am unsure, but his recent article about Syria shows his vicious, Israeli attitude to his enemy Syria.

Dear Comrades, this is a warning to you. We have experienced countless such agents from many different but probably related entities including the huge Christian Zionist movement that Zionism relies on for its existence, some strange fascist and fake Left groups from a few corners of the world, the Unification Church (the “Moonies”) and so on. I have no idea about the budget in Israel, but in the USA the budget for creating fake videos about Syria and for paying operatives to infiltrate our movement on the social media is enormous. The figures are mind boggling.

We actually had our first serious experience of this strategy in the Syria online defence movement in the first half of the War on Syria when agents attempted to sway us all away from respecting and supporting the allies of Syria. The operatives still remain among us and are protected unfortunately. That’s when a few of us began to come under serious fire as we exposed their plans.

Having respect for a Professor who avidly read anything new Ghassan wrote in order to speed up his big learning curve about Syria in those early days, I asked him why some of our new rising stars from the West support or even work with an agent from this duo whose Syrian partner’s fingerprints, according to several highly informed Syrians, only fit that of Rifa’at al Assad. The opinion offered was that as long as the agents or suspects make the right noises about Syria, bar the condemnation of Syria’s allies, then they have free game to roam around our community. In my opinion that is, at the very least, poor leadership coming from the Western supporters pro-Syria camp.

Back to Tartakovsky. Like a true operative, he created a story of redemption about himself. That was in late 2014. He rapidly gained the trust of so many. Joshua is a graduate from the London School of Economics and another one of these who applied to Stratfor for employment and hence, courtesy of Wikileaks dump on Stratfor, we got access to his CV.

Joshua appears to not be formally employed, doesn’t get paid for media appearances, travels incessantly, runs an add free website from a stand-alone server, and had oodles of cash to pay contributors to his, “gianalytics” website (seems to be gone now with another one getting established). He paid much more than anyone else apparently and hinted at wanting exclusivity. We know the payment scale as Joshua tried to recruit Ghassan Kadi after one of his employees recommended Kadi. Fortunately, already I had worked out that something wasn’t right with Joshua and Ghassan politely declined. On offer back then was 150 Euros for “6k or more characters without spaces, or 100Euros for 2.5kor more characters without spaces”.

So, Joshua launched himself into our movement in late 2014 and, by 2015, with his seemingly endless resources, travelled to many hot spots in the world and set himself up in Greece. Just from his FB posts, and who knows how many other travels went unannounced, he travelled to these places in that year; January he was in Hungary and Ukraine, February around Greece, April in Poland and Russia (Moscow) and then Donetsk, in May he was again in Moscow, then July in New York, and zipped back to Donetsk a few days later, then back to Moscow in October and again to Donetsk and then on to Cuba and so on. Apparently he was desperate to get into Syria.
I believe I am quite diligent with my investigations into matters that I think threaten the State of Syria but more so inside the FB Syria Defence community as that is my main forum for defending Syria. I don’t do things out of vindictiveness. I inquire and act on things based on facts. So at the end of January 2016, I respectfully approached a Professor, knowing he is close to some of Joshua’s employees. I gave the evidence and he agreed that definitely this Joshua was “almost certainly an Israeli agent” and that maybe we should have a FB page to share information on “these types”. He told me that he informed a close friend who is a “gianalytics” employee and that indeed he was employed to write “pro-Syria and pro-Iran” stuff. So that was good.
And here is the wash that became so typical in our online movement.
Evidence is shown, the facts are glaring at members of our community, but, they go into denial. The irony is that when it suits their comfort zone, many are adept at research and exposing issues that the main stream media lies about, but engage in “suspension of disbelief” when an inconvenient “conspiracy” is staring at them or has actually engulfed them.
I thought the evidence I had provided and the endorsement of the Professor would alert all to quit their jobs at “gianalytics” but alas, it didn't happen and even worse, shortly after one of our Syrian icons made a video with Joshua. I am sure, had she been given the evidence I provided, she would have steered clear from this Joshua.
(1)What is the lesson here?
(2)What was the ultimate aim of Tartakovsky when he re-modelled himself late 2014 to become “one of us” and then pushed the “eject” button later on?
(3)Why did he go about with all his cash and resources to collect all the well-known writers and analysts in our community, allowing them the freedom to write their stuff on his website?
(4)Was it all some very elaborate information collecting project?
(5)Did he develop close relationships with those he paid to publish and did he learn a lot from them that was of intelligence use?
(6)How do we apply these learnings in this case in order to be more aware of other threats around us?
I welcome discussion on this.

The link to the latest and most damning article of Tartakovsky concerning Syria is attached below
http://joshuatartakovsky.com/why-does-israel-supports-rebels-in-syria/

THE REAL MUSLIMS By Ghassan Kadi. Re-published from early 2016

Katehon had published this over a year ago but decided to re-publish it

http://katehon.com/article/real-muslims

THE DOUBLE-TRIPLE-QUADRUPLE-CROSSING TRUMP By Ghassan Kadi 18 April 2017

 THE DOUBLE-TRIPLE-QUADRUPLE-CROSSING TRUMP.
Ghassan Kadi
18 April 2017

In his latest article about Trump's U-Turn, Ghassan Kadi is combining Trump's behaviour in Syria and Korea, and with Russia and China, and analysing the situation from a different take.

http://thesaker.is/the-double-triple-quadruple-crossing-trump/

also in http://www.greanvillepost.com/2017/04/18/the-double-triple-quadruple-crossing-trump/

The Double-Triple-Quadruple-Crossing Trump:

40677 ViewsApril 18, 2017 59 Comments

by Ghassan Kadi

Trumps recent and sudden 180 degree turn on a number of international issues is mind-boggling, to say the least. But, if we connect the dots it becomes easier to get into the mind of the pragmatic billionaire-turned-President.

First and foremost, we must thank Obama for the “if” state of mind he gave us about Trump. Many analysts, including myself, felt hopeful when Clinton was defeated and Trump won. Given the Obama disappointment, we all learnt to reserve our enthusiasm and make optimistic statements on the condition of “if” Trump kept his promises; which we now know he obviously did not. Whether he did not, could not or did not want to in the first place, makes no difference at all because, at the end of the day, he did not keep his promises of reducing world tension and conflict.

When analysts sit and try to explain why was it that the Trump administration suddenly decided to bomb Syria, with the “chemical attack” as aside, they have been forgetting that, out of the blue, and for no reason at all, and just a few days before this incident, the Trump administration made very strong pro-Assad statements.

That was a prelude for the upcoming Xi Jinping visit. Trump wanted to present to the rest of the world that he was working against ISIS primarily, with Russia and even with Assad.

That was all meant to change the moment the Chinese Tiger laid foot on American soil.

The scenario that I am speculating on involves a direct American role in the Chemical attack, otherwise the timing would have been an almost impossible feat.

Let’s wind back the clock a bit. Soon after his inauguration, Trump told the Russians to tell the Syrians that he was prepared to stop total support for ISIS and have it eradicated on condition that Syria and Russia guarantee that they will reciprocate by kicking Iran and Hezbollah off Syrian soil. I have written a whole article about this called “The Race for Raqqa”.

The Russians and the Syrians were not either prepared to back-stab their allies or prepared to give America a central and pivotal role in the Levant. In other words, Trump’s outcries fell on deaf ears to his sheer dismay, the accomplished business man, who is not used to taking “no” for an answer. That “no” that Trump received from Russia marked a pivotal point in as far as his future relationship with Russia is concerned. For a simple minded person who judges complex international events and diplomats as being “bad”, “good” and “tough” amongst other school playground expressions, he had to make a stand to prove that he was “tough”.

Trump’s message to Xi Jinping was clear, stop supporting Russia and the USA will give you a “better deal”. The Chinese leader’s response was even clearer; don’t blame America’s problems on China and don’t interfere with our international diplomacy.

In the middle of the negotiations between the two leaders, Trump wanted to give his Chinese counterpart a clear preparedness on his part to dump Russia and any future collaboration with Russia as a prelude for closer and better relationships with China. What better way did he have than do a 180 degree turn and attack Syria, with Russian troops on the ground, and only a few days after endorsing Assad’s Presidency and fate?

The Tomahawks that hit Syria were not launched to inflict major damage because Trump clearly cannot afford to escalate the situation there between America and Russia to the point of no return. Trump’s attack on Syria was simply a message for China, telling China “for me to gain your support I am prepared to do crazy things, including dumping Russia”.

When Tillerson went to Moscow a few days after the attack on a pre-scheduled visit, he had nothing to say in defense of that attack and left Moscow “agreeing” that this should not happen again in a manner as if he was saying it shouldn’t have happened in the first place.

The big fish that Trump wants to fry is not Syria. Even though in his stumbling, awkward arrogance, he may attack Syria again if he feels he needs to.

It is as if Trump is courting two potential partners; Russia and China. He tried to strike a military deal with Russia on Syria but he failed. But he also tried to strike a much more complex deal with China but this is also failing.

Ideally, Trump wants China to let go of its Island development program in the South China Sea and abandon its BRICS based economic and other strategic alliances with Russia. China is not biting.

Comes the MOAB.

There was no strategic or logical explanation or gain behind Trump’s orders to drop a MOAB on Afghanistan. It was a simple show of force and determined mentality of aggression at any cost.

Trump now wants to bring the war closer to China’s borders. He wants to turn Korea into Obama’s Ukraine. The stalemate in Ukraine will eventually give way. If NATO was going to do something against Russia it would have done it already. The new hotspot is Korea.

What Trump hopes for is a that a war against North Korea will give him enough justification to blockade China’s sea trade routes all the way down to the South China Sea under the guise of military necessity.

Trump seems confident that he can blow a devastating strike on North Korea and then follow this up with a blockade that covers the entire China Sea, north, middle and south. In his short-sightedness and arrogance, he thinks that nuclear North Korea is not going to be able to retaliate and that China will sit idle.

What is to happen in the next few days, weeks or months is going to be pivotal in deciding the short term future of humanity on this planet.

At best, the bottom line behind Trump’s new moves, if he is truly continuing to uphold the slogan of “make America great again”, is that he realized now that the American economy has been destroyed beyond repair and that he needs drastic measures, including limited nuclear wars, to restore America’s dominion. By the same token, by now, Trump would have realized that it is really the Deep State that is in charge and for him to secure his survival as President, he has to tow the line.

Irrespective of what is driving Trump; the Deep State, financial pragmatism, the shrinking global influence of the United States or any other factor or combination of the above, Trump is playing a very dangerous game which may prove to be a decisive game of Russian Roulette of global reach.

Trump is up against Russia and China, not to forget the smaller powers of North Korea and Iran. In the Levant you can add the Syrian Army and Hezbollah to the equation. Is the ailing USA up to the task? Rational thinking implies the contrary. Irrespective, the consequences of the interaction of all of those powers at play is something that we as citizens of the world have no other option but to sit back and watch.