Ever since 9/11, it has been apparent that the American empire is living on
borrowed time. In more recent years, the inevitable collapse of American world
hegemony and the unipolar world is one that very few informed observers can
continue to ignore.
Riddled with massive unemployment, an overextended military, entrenched police
state, crumbling infrastructure, and the ever-present threat to the US dollar,
it is clear that the United States is merely the shell of its former self.
Indeed, in 2014, the concept of long-term American primacy is only a fantasy
maintained by the mainstream media with its constant repetition of meaningless
and absurd notions of recoveries, humanitarian interventions, and national
More credible researchers, however, are well aware of the fact that the United
States, as an empire as well as a nation, is headed the way of every empire
before it. There is little doubt that the United States will soon run out of
steam in its march across the world and a crackdown at home while reckless
economic policy continues to be dictated from the halls of Wall Street.
Yet the decline of the United States is not simply the result of a few years of
stupid mistakes made by the ruling class. The truth is that the end of America
is nothing more than a waypoint in a script that was written long ago.
Coming just days after an Israeli airstrike against Syrian
military positions under apparently false pretext, US sources claim that Syria
has launched cross border strikes against ISIS positions inside Iraq.
The airstrikes connected with several targets inside Anbar province in Iraq,
which is located on the Iraq/Syria border.
According to the Washington Post, Iraqi sources initially reported that the attacks were carried out
by US drones but the Pentagon has denied any such strikes.
Subsequent reports stated that Syria is responsible for the airstrikes.
The airstrikes are said to have killed 50 people and injured
over 130. Although it is unclear how many ISIS fighters were killed in the
strike, the deaths and injuries are being seized upon by Western governments
and their media mouthpieces who incessantly claim that the dead (or at least
the majority of them) are innocent people.
State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf stated that “it wouldn’t be surprising” if
Assad launched the attacks because he has launched attacks against marketplaces
and civilians many times in the past. Of course, Harf made no mention of US
carnage wreaked by drones, US military aircraft, and American soldiers in a
number of different theatres. Nor did she make any attempt at reporting reality
such as the fact that there has been absolutely no evidence whatsoever that
Assad has launched attacks against civilian targets.
Recently, I wrote an article entitled, “The Clandestine Reasons For ISIS Taking Over Iraq,” where I suggested there were at least two possible reasons out of several for NATO powers to direct ISIS fighters in their rampage across Iraq and subsequent seizure of large swaths of territory in that country.
One of the reasons for directing ISIS’ assault against Iraq is the ability to arm the organization with heavy military equipment to then be funneled across the border into Syria for use in that country. Such equipment as tanks, Humvees, and even helicopters could thus be written off as a mistake and not the backdoor weapons transfer that it was.
Second, and more likely, is the possibility that the United States has allowed ISIS to conquer Iraqi territory so as to justify the eventual invasion of Syria in addition to the reinvasion of Iraq. Indeed, any deployment of American troops, airstrikes, or any other type of US military force, will necessitate a battle against ISIS inside Iraq as well as “cross-border” strikes against the organization in Syria. Such “cross-border” strikes would likely be met with apathetic support from the American people since any restraint regarding borders will be presented and then viewed as placing “handcuffs on the troops.”
Any military action taken across the border inside Syria will not be taken for the purposes of eliminating ISIS. The truth is that such military action will be nothing more than a backdoor attempt at establishing the “buffer zone” that NATO so ardently desired early on in the Syrian conflict. With the establishment of this “buffer zone,” a new staging ground will be opened that allows terrorists such as ISIS and others the ability to conduct attacks even deeper inside Syria.
Recently, I wrote an article entitled, “The
Clandestine Reasons For ISIS Taking Over Iraq,” where I suggested that one
possible reason out of several for NATO powers to direct ISIS fighters in their
rampage across Iraq and subsequent seizure of large swaths of territory in that
country was the ability to set the stage for a NATO bombing campaign in Iraq
that would immediately lead to the same in Syria.
No sooner than this article was published did we see the first rumblings out of
the Western mainstream media and government mouthpieces suggesting that a
bombing campaign in Iraq and, indeed, Syria is an option that should be put on
The general support for the Sunni revolt in northern and
western Iraq will make it very difficult for any counter-offensive, which would
be facing far more opponents than Isis originally fielded. Isis now controls
almost all the Euphrates valley from Fallujah west of Baghdad through western
Iraq and eastern Syria as far as the Turkish border. Any long-term campaign
against Isis by the Iraqi government backed by US air power would require air
strikes in Syria as well as Iraq. The two countries have effectively become a
As ISIS marches across the sands of Iraq, the vast majority of Americans
are no doubt convinced yet again that what amounts to a coordinated
fighting army is merely the product of bearded fanatics hiding in caves
hating America “for its freedoms.”
Although the overwhelming majority of the American public will never
look any closer than a variant of the cleverly crafted description
provided above, those that do pay some modicum of attention to current
events will discover that, according to the mainstream media and Western
governments, the leader of ISIS is none other than Abdullah al-Rashid
al-Baghdadi, the alleged creator of al-Qaeda in Iraq.
However, upon further study, it is revealed that the true leader is not
Baghdadi at all. Indeed, the leader is not even an Iraqi.
The commander of ISIS is none other than Saudi Prince
Abdul Rachman al-Faisal, the brother of Prince Saud al-Faisal and
Prince Turki al-Faisal.
Of course, information regarding Faisal’s control over ISIS has been
known for some time, yet the Western media has conveniently neglected to
report on it.
In a 2007 article published by Reuters entitled “Senior Qaeda Figure In Iraq A Myth: U.S. Military,”
Dean Yates writes that a senior al-Qaeda operative informed U.S.
Military interrogators that the Islamic State of Iraq was nothing more
than a front for another organization and that its leader, Abdullah
al-Rashid al-Baghdadi was himself a fictional person.
of the rapid advance of the Islamic Fundamentalist organization ISIS
across a wide swath of Iraq may indeed have come as a shock to a large
number of Americans. Indeed, to the general public who pay very little
attention to the affairs of other countries or even their own, the fact
that the ISIS now controls a large portion of Iraq as well as a portion
of Syria not only conjures up images of American foreign policy failure
but also of the possibility of re-invading Iraq in order to quell the
The irony, of course, is that “al-Qaeda” and ISIS would never have been
in Iraq to begin with had it not been for the United States nor would it
have been in Syria if it were not for the fact that the United States,
NATO, and the West in general organized, funded, trained, armed, and
Unfortunately, the Orwellian nature of the manner in which the “news” is
presented to the American public almost absolves them of the blame for
being utterly confused at the events transpiring overseas. From the
constant fearmongering and propaganda after 9/11 over the dangers posed
by Islamic terrorists to our “freedoms” to the subsequent open funding
of al-Qaeda in other countries, the American people are constantly
bounced back and forth between fear and support of the terrorist
organization and networks now in control of such large portions of land
in the Middle East.
Thirteen years after 9/11, extremists have gained more power in the
region than they ever had before the “Global War On Terror” began. The
only question is why they were allowed to seize so much territory,
particularly inside a country that was seemingly so important to the
Thirteen years after the tragic events
of September 11, 2001, the facts surrounding those truly responsible
for the death of nearly 2,000 people continue to be ignored by
mainstream media outlets and, as a result, the majority of the general
Unfortunately, as time moves forward, the resolve of activists and those
who question the official story of 9/11 is tested with every passing
year. Indeed, each 9/11 anniversary tends to see less and less street
action, protests, and attempts at public education regarding the facts
surrounding the event.
It is a sad reality that, in 2014, 9/11 is in danger of becoming another generation's JFK assassination
– a “conspiracy theory” discussed by older people but dismissed by the
majority of the public in favor of the entirely implausible official
This, however, is precisely what the Ground Zero 911 coalition is determined to prevent.
The Ground Zero 911 organization is a loose coalition
of a number of individuals, activists, organizations, and alternative
media outlets determined to make 2014 the year that 9/11 truth reasserts
itself into the political dialogue.
The coalition is attempting to achieve this goal by organizing two days
of street action in New York City on September 11 and 12, 2014 as well
as a third day of speakers and music on September 13.
As the Ground Zero 911 website states, “This movement was started by the
victims' family members who had questions. Their loved ones were murdered and they've never been given answers. It's time to demand those answers, to unite together to demand justice.”
There is a new Republican rock star arising from the fields
of Nebraska and his name is Ben Sasse. Unsurprisingly, however, this rising
Republican star comes more from the halls of Ivy League universities and
government than any corn field remotely near the state of Nebraska.
Currently, Sasse is the Republican candidate seeking to gain
the US Senate seat that was vacated by former Republican incumbent Mike
Johanns. His opponents are Democrat David Domina and Tax Wall Street Party candidate Dan Buhrdorf.
Considering the massive amounts of money and support from
establishment Republicans and Neo-Con/Reactionary organizations, it is quite
likely that Sasse will be able to pull out an easy victory in Nebraska,
especially since money almost always equals success in American politics.
However, there is much more to Ben Sasse than meets the eye,
especially in terms of how he is portrayed by the mainstream media. Indeed,
both his private as well as his government jobs should raise the eyebrows of
any potential supporter.
For instance, in the private sector, Sasse was formerly
employed by McKinsey and Company, a
global management consulting firm that once employed Chelsea Clinton. The firm
serves as an adviser to both governments and private businesses and has
CEOs than any other company.
In what should surprise no one who is familiar with the Syrian political situation, President Bashar Al-Assad has been re-elected in a landslide victory on Wednesday, June 4th, 2014.
Assad won with 88.7% of the vote, securing a third term in office and seven more years as president of Syria.
Jihad Lahan, Speaker of the Syrian Parliament, announced the results earlier, also stating that Hassan Al-Nouri won 4.3% and Maher Hajjar took 3.2% of the vote.
Syria's Supreme Constitutional Court deemed the voter turnout to be 73.42 percent.
After the announcement of the election results, Damascus erupted with joy and celebration as well as pro-Assad chants. Meanwhile, in Beruit, U.S. Secretary of State and Skull and Bones memberJohn Kerry, erupted in fits of rage and tired propaganda talking points.
Kerry stated, "Nothing has changed from the day before the election and the day after. Nothing. The conflict is the same, the terror is the same, the killing is the same."
Kerry made no mention of the fact, of course, that the conflict, terror, and killing was organized,funded and directed by the United States and the Anglo-Europeans. Indeed, it is clear that John Kerry himself is responsible for more dead Syrians than Bashar Assad could ever dream to be.
Kerry also stated that the Syrian election cannot be considered fair, "because you can't have an election where millions of your people don't even have an ability to vote."
Although Western media outlets are predictably attempting to portray the
Syrian elections as “sham elections” or merely the beginning of a
corrupted process, the evidence coming out of the country paints quite a different picture.
Despite the propaganda coming out of establishment media outlets like NPR
claiming that the almost assured election of Bashar Al-Assad is
tantamount to a rigged election, the truth is that the Assad government
is widely popular in Syria, a notable consequence of the
Anglo-American/Anglo-European destabilization effort.
Assad is one of three candidates running for President of Syria, the
other candidates being Maher al-Hajjad and Hassan al-Nuri. Assad is
expected to win in a landslide both due to popular support before the
destabilization when he was viewed by ordinary Syrians as a reformer of
the heavy-handed policies of his father Hafez as well as the even larger
amount of support he has garnered as a result of his resilience in the
face of the Western onslaught.
It is also important to note that Hajjad and Nuri focused their
campaigns mainly on issues such as corruption and basic economic policy,
putting them out of touch politically with the average Syrian citizen.
Nevertheless, after three years of war, Syrians are ecstatic to finally
be able to cast their ballots in the first presidential election in Syria in nearly fifty years.
For instance, in a recent article from the Associated Press,
reports of Syrian refugees in Lebanon wishing to vote (mostly for
Assad) were so ready to enter the polling booth in the Syrian embassy in
Lebanon, that a virtual riot ensued, resulting in Lebanese security
beating the voters with batons and sticks.