|Anthony Freda Art
February 14, 2015
With the recent victories by the Syrian Army on the battlefield, the open response to Israel by Hezbollah, the success of the anti-Austerity SYRIZA party in Greece, and the Russian-brokered ceasefire in Ukraine, the Anglo-American establishment is obviously unhappy. However, the Atlanticists are clearly not going to sit idly by while their best laid plans are put awry.
Indeed, NATO military and political forces already seem to be preparing to douse even the mere spark of a multi-polar world that rejects the policies dictated from international bankers and the NATO headquarters.
Hezbollah Challenge to Israeli Lawlessness
Although part of a much larger resilience of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad to the destabilization campaign and foreign invasion of Western-backed terrorists, Hezbollah’s recent response to Israeli aggression in Syria – against Syria, Hezbollah, and Iran – was the first publicly visible and physical counterattack against NATO and the “new Ulster” settler state of Israel since the Syrian crisis began.
The Hezbollah response came after an Israeli airstrike in Syria that killed a number of Hezbollah fighters and a top commander as well as a top Iranian commander. The attack also claimed the life of Jihad Mughniyeh. Mughniyeh was the son of top Hezbollah military commander, Imad Mughniyeh, who was himself assassinated in Damascus in 2008, an incident that is widely attributed to Israel.
As a response, it was reported by the Syrian Perspective website, which maintains close contacts with the Syrian military, that Hezbollah struck an Israeli military convoy traveling along the Lebanese/Israeli border. It was reported by Mehr News that 17 Israeli soldiers were killed and that 1 Israeli soldier was taken prisoner. The event was reported virtually nowhere else.
Western media, of course, reported that only two Israeli soldiers were killed in the clash as a result of anti-tank weaponry. The fighting took place in the Shee’bah Farms area.
The killing of the Israeli soldiers was an important and bold statement for Hezbollah since it was a clear message to Israel that, while it may seek to act with impunity in foreign countries like war-stricken Syria, it would not be allowed to do so to Hezbollah. The lack of an Israeli response to Hezbollah’s own retaliation was telling as was the apparent downplaying of the event on the part of the Western media.
The Syrian resilience to the Anglo-American onslaught has been quite remarkable in its own right. Yet it has engendered an uncontrollable hatred for Assad and the Syrian people on behalf of the world oligarchy inasmuch as NATO has been forced to resort to an array of dirty political and propaganda-based tricks, albeit more desperate ones as time progresses.
It was soon after the Syrian Army was able to adjust to fighting an insurgency as opposed to a direct military assault that Assad’s forces began to turn the tide against the death squads backed by NATO. Ever since then, the fight has been a back and forth with the Syrian military slowly gaining ground across the country. Recently, however, the SAA has made some very sizeable gains in terms of territory and strategic victories. The essential recapture of Deir el-Zour, the liberation of Homs, the encirclement of Aleppo, and the elimination of terrorist supply routes in Damascus, Qunaytra, and Der’ah over the past several months to recent days have begun to accelerate the speed in which the SAA is wiping Syria clean of foreign-backed jihadists.
Most notably, it appears that NATO, in coordination with Israel, was attempting to direct their terrorist proxies from the Occupied Golan Heights area where they are in constant contact and tutelage of the Israeli intelligence services, on a charge towards Damascus. The plan was apparently to overwhelm Assad’s physical seat of power and thus threaten the elected government as well as provide the perception of inevitability of the downfall of Assad. The SAA thwarted that plan, however, with the closing of the supply routes, the elimination of the intended forward operating bases, and the current advancement toward the border of the occupied Golan.
With the recent victory of Syriza in Greece, opponents of austerity the world over have been rejoicing. The news from a country crushed by austerity policies, the European Central Bank, the IMF, and corrupt oligarchs is now heralding a shift in direction toward a “third way” that does not simply involve trading one austerity oligarch and his party for another.
For many in Greece, the signal is clear – help seems to be on the way.
For those watching the developments from afar, the hope is that the spark in Greece will light the brushfire across Europe and the rest of the world that says “No!” to austerity and banker domination of national economies.
SYRIZA’s steadfast refusal to engage in the further emiseration of Greek living standards, firing of workers, and cutting of social safety net programs as well as refusing to knuckle under to the dictates of Germany, the IMF, European Union, or the European Central Bank is indeed a breath of fresh air. Add to this the possibility that Greece is now standing in opposition to NATO provocations against Russia and the recent SYRIZA victory seems a relatively large fly in the Anglo-American ointment.
In truth, while there are problems with the SYRIZA platform, there are undoubtedly direct contradictions to the NATO, IMF, and Anglo-American agenda. It should thus be remembered that an individual leader or a group of individuals (party, activist organization, etc.) need not oppose each and every aspect of the Atlanticist plan, but merely enough of that plan to cause himself or themselves to be a stumbling block to the implementation of that agenda.
One need only read the original SYRIZA 40 point plan to see that there are a numerous areas in which the NATO agenda is directly contradicted.
- Audit of the public debt and renegotiation of interest due and suspension of payments until the economy has revived and growth and employment return.
- Demand the European Union to change the role of the European Central Bank so that it finances States and programs of public investment.
- Raise income tax to 75% for all incomes over 500,000 euros.
- Change the election laws to a proportional system.
- Increase taxes on big companies to that of the European average.
- Adoption of a tax on financial transactions and a special tax on luxury goods.
- Prohibition of speculative financial derivatives.
- Abolition of financial privileges for the Church and shipbuilding industry.
- Combat the banks’ secret [measures] and the flight of capital abroad.
- Cut drastically military expenditures.
- Raise minimum salary to the pre-cut level, 750 euros per month.
- Use buildings of the government, banks and the Church for the homeless
- Open dining rooms in public schools to offer free breakfast and lunch to children.
- Free health benefits to the unemployed, homeless and those with low salaries.
- Subvention up to 30% of mortgage payments for poor families who cannot meet payments.
- Increase of subsidies for the unemployed. Increase social protection for one-parent families, the aged, disabled, and families with no income.
- Fiscal reductions for goods of primary necessity.
- Nationalization of banks.
- Nationalization of ex-public (service & utilities) companies in strategic sectors for the growth of the country (railroads, airports, mail, water).
- Preference for renewable energy and defence of the environment.
- Equal salaries for men and women.
- Limitation of precarious hiring and support for contracts for indeterminate time.
- Extension of the protection of labor and salaries of part-time workers.
- Recovery of collective (labor) contracts.
- Increase inspections of labor and requirements for companies making bids for public contracts.
- Constitutional reforms to guarantee separation of Church and State and protection of the right to education, health care and the environment.
- Referendums on treaties and other accords with Europe.
- Abolition of privileges for parliamentary deputies. Removal of special juridical protection for ministers and permission for the courts to proceed against members of the government.
- Demilitarization of the Coast Guard and anti-insurrectional special troops. Prohibition for police to wear masks or use fire arms during demonstrations. Change training courses for police so as to underline social themes such as immigration, drugs and social factors.
- Guarantee human rights in immigrant detention centers.
- Facilitate the reunion of immigrant families.
- Depenalization of consumption of drugs in favor of battle against drug traffic.
- Increase funding for drug rehab centers.
- Regulate the right of conscientious objection in draft laws.
- Increase funding for public health up to the average European level.(The European average is 6% of GDP; in Greece 3%.)
- Elimination of payments by citizens for national health services.
- Nationalization of private hospitals. Elimination of private participation in the national health system.
- Withdrawal of Greek troops from Afghanistan and the Balkans. No Greek soldiers beyond our own borders.
- Abolition of military cooperation with Israel. Support for creation of a Palestinian State within the 1967 borders.
- Negotiation of a stable accord with Turkey.
- Closure of all foreign bases in Greece and withdrawal from NATO.
Having only been in office a number of days, Syriza has already made a few populist moves – firing a number of highly paid parasites operating under the guise of being “consultants” from the IMF and European Central Bank in order to re-hire a number of previously fired government cleaning staff, for instance. Syriza has already taken a firm and public stance against austerity measures suggesting that the holders of Greek bonds should take a 50% haircut, Greek debt should be reduced by half, and that Greece is categorically finished with the implementation of austerity measures and the slicing of its living standards. Tsipras’ Finance Ministry has also essentially stated through its rhetoric that Germany will not dictate Greek economic policy.
In addition, Syriza has invited and welcomed the Russian Foreign Ministry as its first foreign diplomatic guest and has expressed great aversion to the idea of supporting any further sanctions on Russia. The concept of greater economic cooperation between the two countries has likewise been entertained much to the chagrin of the United States and a large portion of the EU.
Russia- Ukraine Ceasefire
The recent Russian-brokered peace deal between Eastern separatists and Western-backed Kiev fascists is yet another blow to Anglo-American plans. As the United States “mulled” the possibility of providing “lethal weapons” and assistance to the Kiev fascists, the Russians once again stepped in and used the rabid warmongering rhetoric of Washington against the U.S. by brokering a peace deal with the help of France and Germany. If the ceasefire deal stands, the U.S. would find it difficult (but not impossible) to publicly provide lethal arms for a conflict that is currently diffused.
The plan involves the following platforms:
- Ceasefire to begin at 00:01 local time on 15 February
- Heavy weapons to be withdrawn, beginning on 16 February and completed in two weeks
- All prisoners to be released; amnesty for those involved in fighting
- Withdrawal of all foreign troops and weapons from Ukrainian territory. Disarmament of all illegal groups
- Ukraine to allow resumption of normal life in rebel areas, by lifting restrictions
- Constitutional reform to enable decentralisation for rebel regions by the end of 2015
- Ukraine to control border with Russia if conditions met by the end of 2015
While there are unresolved issues surrounding Debaltseve, a town “held” by government troops but surrounded by separatists, and the question of self-rule for Donetsk or Lugansk, the ceasefire deal is an example of last minute diplomacy designed to jerk the rug out from under the feet of the Americans’ ability to justify public war policies in Ukraine as well as to provide some modicum of stability on Russia’s borders.
The string of victories by the SAA, without a doubt, has drawn the ire of the Anglo-Americans. Indeed, there is every reason to expect a renewed and hurried effort – complete with all the bells and whistles – to directly involve NATO, particularly the United States, militarily in Syria. Already, mainstream news headlines read as if the SAA’s assault on terrorist havens inside its own territory is an advance on Israel. One need only read the headlines like Yahoo! News’ “Fresh Offensive, Hezbollah Troops Fast Approaching Israeli Border From Syrian Side,” Jerusalem Posts’ “Hezbollah, Syrian Forces, and Iranian Officers Approach Israeli Border In Fight Against Rebels,” YNetNews’ “Syrian, Hezbollah Troops Advancing Toward Israeli Golan,” to see that the reports are being skewed as to suggest an impending Iranian, Syrian, and Hezbollah invasion of Israel. If the reports continue to be presented in this manner, it will surely be enough to goad the sizeable portion of American Zionists into supporting a war to “protect” Israel.
In addition, US President Barack Obama has asked Congress for the Authorization To Use Military Force to “combat ISIL” that includes no geographic limit in its proposal. Although Obama claims that the AUMF will limit the number of ground troops that will be able to be dedicated to these combat operations, it is also clear that Obama is submitting the request for approval of the AUMF with limits in an effort to hold a bargaining chip for the Republican Congress. Already, Republicans like John Boehner and John McCain – engaged in a perpetual war froth – are claiming that the limits on ground troops are tying the hands of military commanders and that the limits are “unconstitutional.”
Notably, the resolution proposed by Obama already contains “blank check” language in that it allows the president "to use the armed forces of the United States as the president determines to be necessary and appropriate against [the Islamic State] or associated persons or forces."
Still, Obama claims that he will propose language that would limit the number of troops to be used in these combat operations. While Obama’s claims themselves are suspect, it is clear that the Republican controlled Congress will argue for the removal of these limitations. Thus, it is likely that we will witness some brief Washington theatre involving a faux debate between Republicans, Democrats, and the White House regarding the limitations on troops in any future operations under this AUMF, if it passes.
Obama is clearly willing to sacrifice the lives of countless American soldiers and civilians for his own narcissistic purposes and, more importantly, the wishes of the oligarchical elite that control him. However, it is also clear that Obama is occasionally concerned for his own political life. For that reason, one would be justified in wondering whether or not the AUMF and the invasion of Iraq (again) and Syria is already a done deal, providing that the Republicans are willing to take the lead in pushing for unlimited troop deployment and the quagmire that will result from it.
In other words, if the Republicans will sign their names to it along with the President, the mission is a go.
While the signs coming out of Greece may seem positive at first, there is an ominous cloud approaching – the cloud of George Soros and his color revolution apparatus.
If Syriza is truly as anti-austerity, anti-banker, and anti-troika as its rhetoric and even its first actions seem to indicate, then the Greek oligarchs, international bankers, corporate boards, and secret societies will undoubtedly respond as soon as they are able to mount a calculated strategy.
George Soros and his color revolution networks may just be the response these oligarchs are ready to mount.
Indeed, Soros has been founding and opening his infamous “Solidarity Centres” in Greece since January, 2014 using philanthropy and economic relief as justification for the opening of the centers. Because of Soros’ track record, one would be justified in wondering whether or not Soros’ Solidarity Centres’ grand openings were for the purposes of misdirecting the growing Greek discontent with austerity policies or if it was more in anticipation of a Syriza victory in the coming elections.
Regardless, the places are already being set. Alexis Tsipras had better start watching his back.
Indeed, the knives are already being sharpened by the color revolution apparatus and history has clearly shown that those who control it are willing to stab their target in the front as well as the back.
As The Guardian reported in January, 2014
George Soros has extended his financial support for Greece by establishing the first in a series of "solidarity centres" for those worst-hit by the country's economic crisis.
The opening of the centre in the northern city of Thessaloniki comes as ever more Greeks are forced to turn to charities for help.
"Greece, to a great degree, has become a failed state," said Aliki Mouriki, a sociologist at the National Centre for Social Research. "It is unable to provide basic facilities for its citizens because of budget cuts.
"In the absence of public welfare, and with around one and a half million officially unemployed, growing numbers are looking for substitutes elsewhere."
The centre – a hub for NGOs offering health care and legal counsel – has been deluged with requests only days after opening its doors.
Soros committed $1m for heating oil last year after local mayors, unable to heat schools, appealed for help. Among them was Tassos Karabatos, mayor of Naoussa, also in northern Greece, who turned to the US investor after taking the unprecedented step of shutting down all 54 schools in his municipality when he saw that oil tanks were running dry.
While Soros’ donations may seem at first to be an act of incredible generosity, it would take gross naivete and ignorance of the billionaire’s history across the world to believe that he has anything remotely resembling good intentions for Greece.
Notice that, while Soros has bought some watery-eyed loyalty with his donations, it is also true that his “Solidarity Centres” are also “a hub for NGOs,” a necessary part of any color revolution. In fact, the currency speculator Soros has funded a number of color revolutions through his “democracy” and “civil society” NGOs in Europe and even the United States.
Of course, some Greeks were not as foolish as to look toward the Soros machine for help. A number of school parents’ associations refused to endorse any of the Soros funds. The presence of mind of the Greek people earned them condemnation from many of their local leaders, however.
Indeed, Soros is most well-known for playing a major role in the funding and facilitating of the "Bulldozer Revolution" in Serbia that overthrew Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, Georgia’s "Rose Revolution" of 2003, the 2006 push to move Turkey toward a more Islamist governing structure, and even the Occupy movement in the United States among a great many others.
Already the NATO powers are working overdrive in order to further exacerbate the crisis in Ukraine, despite and because of the Russian brokered ceasefire. Again, from reading the headlines floating around in the mainstream media, one can see the idea that the Russian-brokered ceasefire is “useless” is a foregone conclusion and one that is being pushed heavily.
In addition, ever since the deadline was set for a ceasefire to take place on February 15, fighting has raged across Ukraine in an effort to gain as much territory and victories as possible before the ceasefire terms come into effect. It is also possible that Kiev forces are intentionally trying to wreck any potential success of the ceasefire agreement before it ever begins. Indeed, there is little doubt that Kiev forces are working on the orders of NATO (see here, here, here, and here) and CIA commanders (see here and here) .
Parties to the ceasefire agreement, particularly the separatists, are already becoming tired of ceasefire agreements that are repeatedly violated by Kiev forces conveniently at times where separatists are close to making significant gains on the ground. If Washington decides to go ahead openly with its plan to arm Kiev with “lethal” weapons, the position of the West will be clear to all – war with Russia is not only possible, it is desired.
While much of what is considered “world affairs” is nothing more than well-scripted theatre, it is also true that there are often events beyond the control of the world oligarchy as well as individuals that occasionally slip out of their complete control. It is also true that there are those individuals who willing refuse to accept the dictates of the oligarchy.
Whether the oligarchs are able to regain control through usurpation, bribery, or deceit or whether they are forced to act forcibly in an open and physical manner all depends upon the acts and the individuals involved. The resistance need not be devoid of flaws to be the resistance. It need only stand in the way of the will of the world oligarchy to find itself in its crosshairs.
With that in mind, however, it must be the goal of us all to resist and obstruct the will of the oligarchy. Regardless of the details of our preferences, we must never let an oligarch attack us on his own terms. Resistance may not necessarily equal victory but it is certainly not futile.
This oligarchy is clearly preparing to respond on a number of fronts. We must be prepared to resist it every step of the way.