The Nuremburg Show Trials

The Nuremburg Show Trials


Nothing demonstrates the essentially Communist (Masonic Jewish)
character of the Allied war effort than the Soviet-style
Show Trial that took place afterward. Never before – or since –
has a defeated enemy in any conflict been convicted
of so-called ‘war crimes.’

“If the standards of Nuremberg had been applied impartially, most other Allied military and political leaders would also have been hanged.”

by John Hamer


Robert Jackson, the chief US prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunal of 1945-46, privately acknowledged in a letter to President Truman, that the Allies “…have done or are doing some of the very things we are prosecuting the Germans for. The French are so violating the Geneva Convention in the treatment of German prisoners of war that our command is taking back prisoners sent to them for forced labour in France. We are prosecuting plunder and our Allies are practicing it. We say aggressive war is a crime and one of our allies asserts sovereignty over the Baltic States based on no title except conquest.”

Germans were executed or imprisoned for policies that the Allies themselves had implemented, sometimes on a far greater scale. German military and political leaders were executed based on a hypocritical double standard, which meant that these executions were essentially acts of judicial murder. As Mark Weber wrote, “If the standards of Nuremberg had been applied impartially, most other Allied military and political leaders would also have been hanged.”

Oswald Spengler, the German historian and philosopher, once observed that people learn history through ‘political education.’ In every society, history is determined by those who control political and cultural life, including the educational system and the mass media. This is why, in today’s society, all the death and suffering during and after WWII of non-Jews, Poles, Russians and others, and especially Germans is all but ignored and why, instead, more than seven decades after the end of the war, Jewish death and suffering and above all, what is popularly known as the ‘Holocaust™’ is given such prominent attention in our classrooms, documentaries and movies and by our manipulated and controlled political leaders.


The Nuremberg Trials were instigated in order to eliminate anyone in authority that was aware of the pact signed between the Zionists and Hitler in 1933 – but primarily to widely publicize and promote the Holocaust™ myths and legends by eliciting widespread sympathy for Jews and with a view to expediting the imminent foundation of the ‘illegal’ state of Israel.

When the trials began at Nuremberg, there were many ‘irregularities.’ For example, the accusers (including Soviet judges with long experience in Stalinist methods of the dispensation of ‘justice’) doubled as jurors and the court was as a result, never impartial from the outset. The accused were in fact deemed guilty before the proceedings began and the evidence presented was solely to provide ‘proof’ of guilt. The rules of evidence stated that the defence was not permitted to argue that the Allies had committed the same acts of which they were being accused.

Even so, the Germans were never tried for the indiscriminate bombing of civilians, because the Allies did not want to draw attention to the fact that they had themselves instigated this particular ‘crime against humanity.’ And the highly creative charge of ‘waging a war of aggression’ was never defined, because no definition would cover the German invasion of Poland and France without also covering the Allied invasions of Poland, Scandinavia and several other countries also.

By arbitrarily declaring the captured German military officers to be civilians, the Allies made them eligible for trial as “criminals.” The purpose of the trials was not to see justice done or to determine guilt but to give the Allies a propaganda victory.

In essence, the Germans were convicted of losing the war. The only real ‘war crime,’ was being defeated. Admiral Erich Raeder, for example, was convicted for invading Norway, though he had simply arrived slightly in advance of the British, on the eve of their own planned invasion.

The whole thing was a shameful, contrived farce which set a precedent for the decades-long pursuit of ‘war criminals’ that has continued until the present.

Allied crimes have never been acknowledged, except maybe as wartime necessities justified by noble ends. Instead, Allied war criminals are still honoured as the ‘heroes’ of the twentieth century. Even the memory of the odious ‘Bomber’ Harris, an embarrassment for his unseemly enthusiasm for killing civilians, was honoured by the erection of a statue in London.

battle.jpg English historian, David Irving in his book, ‘Nuremberg: The Last Battle’ described Jackson’s frustration with the lack of evidence:

“Garnering usable documentary evidence became a mounting nightmare for Jackson [the chief prosecuting attorney.] He had become disenchanted with the productivity and intelligence of General Donovan’s OSS. They had promised much but delivered little. What Donovan regarded as evidence, he certainly would not. ‘I never had any feeling that anybody had trapped me into the thing,’ Jackson commented later. ‘But I was in the trap!'”


It soon became clear that the OSS (CIA) intended to stage-manage the whole process along the lines of a Soviet-style show-trial, with Jackson engaged as the actor-in-chief. They proposed to run a pre-trial propaganda campaign in the United States with ‘increasing emphasis on the publication of atrocity stories to keep the public in the proper frame of mind.’

To this end the OSS devised and scripted for the ‘education’ of the masses, a two-reel film on ‘war crimes,’ called ‘Crime and Punishment,’ designed to demonize the leading Nazis. However, Jackson refused to read to the cameras the speech that the OSS had scripted for him. “As you know…” he wrote to the OSS officer concerned, “…the British are particularly sensitive about lawyers trying their cases in the newspapers and other vehicles of communication.”

170px-Rudolf_Höß.jpgThe unsavoury methods of the OSS are evident among the earlier Nuremberg records. For instance, at the pre-trial interrogations the defendants were not represented by lawyers and were frequently persuaded by trickery or intimidation to incriminate others. The files are full of obvious chicanery of various kinds, for example anonymous, typed extracts of documents instead of the originals and sworn statements by witnesses like Höss, commandant of Auschwitz, left, in which witnesses to his signature have signed, but clearly not Höss himself. Indeed, it is well known that Höss’s confessions were all obtained by torture, specifically the agonizing crushing of his testicles – at which point he agreed to say whatever they wanted, just so long as they would stop inflicting the excruciating pain upon him.

This is all of course only a very brief overview of the innumerable deficiencies of the ‘evidence’ presented at Nuremberg. The overwhelming Zionist-Jewish presence behind the scenes as prosecutors, judges, interrogators, jailers and torturers is fully documented and the examination of techniques employed, is more than sufficient to demonstrate that truth and justice were the very last objectives of the orchestrators of the trial.

The key point in evaluating Nuremberg is that all the evidence, real and faked at the trial, was in pursuit of a pre-determined verdict. It was regarded as desirable to demonstrate that the Germans were uniquely evil; that the Germans alone had waged aggressive, illegal war; that the Germans had committed vile ‘crimes against humanity’ and that the greatest of all their crimes was the alleged, yet still unproven, systematic extermination of six million Jews.

To reach these pre-determined verdicts, the court manipulated and distorted evidence on a massive scale and therefore, any honest assessment of WWII based on conclusions from Nuremberg is inherently flawed. It is but another supreme example of the art of the re-writing of history by the victor.

Hamer.jpgJohn Hamer is a former IT professional based in the UK but has been involved in full-time geo-political research for almost 20 years.

He is the author of several best-selling books, including ‘The Falsification of History,’ ‘RMS Olympic,’ (the truth about the Titanic disaster) ‘Titanic’s Last Secret’ (a novel based on the real events of 1908-12) and his latest work, an exposé of the utterly fraudulent worldwide, banking system and the psychopaths who control it, ‘Behind the Curtain.’

Twitter: @johnhamerauthor,p_82:B00B8X4CB6&sort=author-pages-popularity-rank

Don’t believe everything you think! Vaisesika das: During…

Don’t believe everything you think! Vaisesika das: During…
Dandavats /


Don’t believe everything you think!
Vaisesika das: During the summer months, thousands of people visit scenic Pacific Beach in San Diego, California, some of them staying for a week or longer in the pricey rental apartments that line the shoreline.
As I took my daily walk along Pacific Beach this morning, I observed how vacationers there were doing their best to relish the ocean-side environment. Some lay out in the morning sun on the sandy beach, others jogged or rode bikes, while others sat at trendy sidewalk cafes, picking at their breakfasts while talking to friends and family.

My overall sense however, was that these vacationers had simply changed their location, but were going on with the same unfulfilling activities that they perform at home or anywhere else: eating, sleeping and mating. “Old wine in a new bottle.”

Many centuries ago, the great boy-saint Prahlada asked: “Where is the happiness everyone talks about? Who has actually attained it?”

Walking further along Pacific Beach, I particularly remembered Prahlada’s words upon seeing a man leaning on the railing of the balcony surrounding his rental apartment, sipping from a bottle of beer (at 10am in the morning!).

Although he was on vacation and free to do as he wished, I sensed sadness in this man’s face and demeanor.

When a soul – whose eternal home is in the spiritual world – mixes with the low modes of nature, his natural spiritual brightness is covered and his inherent freedom restricted. Without contacting specific and accurate information about how to attain spiritual elevation – and acting on that information – there’s no chance for souls in the material world to experience unfettered happiness.

Recently, I saw a bumper sticker that said: “Don’t believe everything your mind tells you.”

The conditioned mind tosses up many suggestions for our happiness. However, we needn’t (and shouldn’t) believe everything the mind tells us.

Rather, we should take the advice of Krishna, who knows better than we, or our minds, how we can become happy.

In Gita Krishna recommends: “One should therefore understand what is duty and what is not duty by the regulations of the scriptures. Knowing such rules and regulations, one should act so that he may gradually be elevated.” (Bg. 16.24)

Regulate the mind by consulting and following guru, sadhu and scripture. Such conscious regulation leads to unrestricted happiness.

Read More…

Original Article:


Syrian Perspective / Ziad Fadel


Vanessa Beeley sent us this one challenging Wog-of-the-Year Amanpour to talk to the boy, ‘Umraan Daqneesh:

And Brandon now throws a few punches:

New Video Destroys “Little Omran” White Helmets Story – Proves WH, Terrorists Used Boy As Propaganda

TOPICS:Brandon TurbevilleHuman RightsPropagandaSyria

June 6, 2017

By Brandon Turbeville

Nearly a year ago, Western corporate media outlets paraded video of a young Syrian boy, injured in a blast and allegedly being saved by the White Helmets. That video was presented as evidence of “Assad’s cruelty” and his “indiscriminate bombing of civilians” as well as the heroism of the White Helmets.

The picture of the boy, seemingly injured in some type of bombing incident, sitting alone in an orange chair in the back of an ambulance, blood stains on his face and covered in dust from cracked concrete also comes in video form, footage that lasts for about two minutes, showing the boy being carried to a well-equipped ambulance (with English writing on some of the equipment). The boy’s story was also accompanied by “heart wrenching” stories from “activists” in east Aleppo alleging the crimes of the Syrian government and the horrific situation in the area.

It was rather clear that the child was being used as a stage prop. After being passed to the medical “attendants,” little Omran was placed in an orange chair facing the camera and immediately left alone. He was not treated, no one else was lifted into the ambulance, and no one was even in the vehicle with him. Instead, he was left to face the “activists” outside the vehicle and their cameras for what seems like too long a time to be anything other than a photo op for the “activists” videotaping him.

While the Western public was whipped into a fury of concern for one child, largely uninjured, they were able to completely ignore the thousands upon thousands of children murdered by the United States, NATO, and their proxies in the same country. Still, little Omran was paraded in front of Western audiences as an unfortunate little propaganda tool, part of a play where the other actors were the same people who behead children on camera and hang them from doorposts.

However, after almost a year has passed, little Omran is fine, living with his parents in Aleppo and his life has returned to relative normalcy. However, his parents are now speaking out about what happened to their child and how he was used by terrorists as a stage prop for their propaganda.

A recently released short video, apparently showing both Omran and his father, Abu Ali, reveals that not only was Omran used as a stage prop by terrorists but that he himself was offered money to continue to use the boy for propaganda purposes. Abu Ali refused to take the money offered to him and instead did everything he could to shelter Omran from being used by the terrorists any further.

Below are both the video and the transcript of the interview. While the interview destroys the narrative peddled by Western corporate media, we won’t be holding our breath waiting on any mainstream outlet to cover Omran’s re-emergence or the fact that the precious White Helmets used him as a stage prop and offered his father money to continue using him. Instead, we expect silence until the next terrified and injured child can be exploited for propaganda purposes.

Family Survival System – Free Book (Ad)

Father: What’s your name? [to boy]

Boy: Omran Daqneesh

Father: [to other child] And what’s your name?

Second child: [inaudible]

Father: Omran, come to me. . . . Thank God we have returned to our home and our home is not damaged. And we are now living in our home and I go to work and come back every day. Everything is fine and our life is very normal.

Interviewer: Abu Ali, in short, tell us what happened when you were in the rebel controlled area and how they exploited Omran’s photo to demonize the Syrian army.

Father: The story is well known. They took his pictures and posted them and started trading with his blood. I cut his hair and changed his name so they wouldn’t be able to continue with their charade and in spite of this they continued with the charade and still posted photos. Thank God we are here and we have no problems.

Interviewer: Who are the parties who tried to entice you so you can do interviews and attack the Syrian government and what did they offer you?

Father: I was offered big amounts of money by several parties. Some in the form of aid. Some in the form of donations. And from Mousa al-Omar with the rebel reporter Abu al-Sheikh. He was the intermediary but I refused to take any money from them.

Brandon Turbeville – article archive here – is the author of seven books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria, The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President, and Resisting The Empire: The Plan To Destroy Syria And How The Future Of The World Depends On The Outcome. Turbeville has published over 1000 articles on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s radio show Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. His website is He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at)

This article may be freely shared in part or in full with author attribution and source link.

Tired of left-right politics? Want real change? Achieve more freedom and independence with Counter Markets newsletter. Enter your email for a free issue.

How Britain Helped Create ISIS

How Britain Helped Create ISIS
New Eastern Outlook / Стив МакМиллан


4523423423Britain is gripped by fear, panic and anger, after being struck by three terror attacks in the space of three months. Innocent men, women and children have been killed in the terror rampage, filling many homes with tragedy and despair. Martial law has practically been declared in many regions of the country, with troops now being a common site on the streets of Royal Britannia. Many are looking for someone or something to blame, as rage is increasingly triumphing over reason.

Lost in all this hysteria however, there sits a glaring connection that needs to be illuminated: the connection between these terror attacks and British foreign policy in Syria. Although Jeremy Corbyn has correctly highlighted the link between British wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, and the growth of terrorism at home, there is a still a conflict – arguably the most important in the rise of terrorism – that no one dares speak about; namely, the war in Syria.

Sadly, most people in Britain are still completely ignorant of the real truth of the Syrian war, and the role that the British establishment has played in supporting an array of terrorist groups, including ISIS. Even if we accept for a moment that all the official stories of the last three terror attacks are 100% true (something I don’t believe, see here for instance), a significant portion of the blame should still be directed towards the British establishment for the policies it has pursued overseas.

The Syrian proxy war has provided fertile ground for the rise of ISIS and other extremist groups, with ISIS claiming responsibility for the last three terror attacks in Britain; namely, the London Bridge attack, the


“They are not only the progeny, they are the fully grown-up, manic, adolescent creature belonging to Paris, London and the United States. Without the support of these three countries, without the arms that have been given to ISIS – either they have been given directly to Jabhat al-Nusra and have gone to ISIS; or they have gone the other way; or they have gone to the Wahhabists in Saudi Arabia or in Qatar- but the French, the British, the Americans and the Turks have all supplied those that have kept ISIS going. You know, if David Cameron had won his Commons vote a couple of years ago, ISIS would now be in charge in Syria… The Middle East’s most multi-ethnic, multi-cultural state, would be finished, and these fanatics would be in charge, and that would-be thanks entirely to Western actions.”

For years, the UK has been pouring millions into the Syrian opposition. In 2012, the British Foreign Secretary at the time, William Hague, admitted that Britain had been helping the Syrian rebels in a “practical and non-lethal way,” and vowed to increase British assistance. As the Independent noted, this non-lethal aid consisted of Britain sending the Syrian opposition £8m-worth of body armour, vehicles with ballistic protection, trucks, forklift trucks, communications equipment, laptops, water purification kits and other equipment needed to fight a war. In 2013, a report claimed that Britain was involved in an operation with other European states and the US to send the Syrian rebels 3,000 tons of weapons, sent in 75 planeloads, from Zagreb to the rebels.

ISIS Has Always Been a Major Part of the Syrian Opposition

But who exactly are these Syrian rebels? According to a declassified US military intelligence report – by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) – from August 2012, the opposition largely consisted of terrorists and extremists, including ISIS (emphasis added):

“The Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood and AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq], are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria.” The report added that “AQI supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning, both ideologically and through the media,” and that “events are taking a clear sectarian direction.”

Al-Qaeda in Iraq was the main precursor to ISIS, as a summary from Stanford University explains (emphasis added):

“The Islamic State (IS), also known as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS or ISIL), is a Salafi-Jihadist militant organization in Syria and Iraq… The group has its origins in the early 2000s, when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi began training extremist militants. The group was a major participant in the Iraqi insurgency during the American occupation, first under the name Jama’at al-Tawhid wa’al-Jihad and then, after swearing fealty to Al Qaeda, as Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Facing backlash from the community and increased pressure from U.S. and Iraqi forces, the group declined until 2011, when it began to grow through its involvement in the Syrian Civil War. In 2013, it changed its name to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Over the course of 2013 and 2014, ISIS quickly took over territory in Syria and Iraq… On the ground, ISIS fought the Assad Regime and allied Shiite forces, Syrian opposition groups, the Iraqi military and militias, and the Kurdish peshmerga.”

So, according to US military intelligence in August 2012, AQI – later to be known as ISIS – was a major part of the Syrian opposition, and Britain was officially supporting the Syrian opposition by means of non-lethal aid. According to some reports, Britain was also directly arming the opposition, but we know for sure that Britain’s partners in crime – France and the US – were certainly arming the opposition directly, not to mention British allies in the Middle East. Britain was also involved in training the Syrian rebels in Jordan, with British intelligence teams on the ground, according to the Guardian. If this is just what is admitted, imagine how many clandestine operations Britain has been involved in but never have been officially recognised.

It isn’t just US military intelligence that has acknowledged that a large percentage of the Syrian rebels are terrorists. Even the former Prime Minister of Britain, David Cameron, who was always a strong proponent of forcing regime change in Syria, admitted in early 2016 that many of the ‘moderate’ rebels actually belonged to “relatively hardline Islamist groups” (i.e. terrorist groups):

“But if you’re arguing: are all these people impeccable democrats, who would share the view of democracy that you and I have: [then] no. Some of them do belong to Islamist groups, and some of them belong to relatively hardline Islamist groups.”

Britain’s collusion with terrorist forces in Syria was further highlighted during a court case at the Old Bailey in 2015. Bherlin Gildo, a Swedish national, was accused of fighting for Syrian militant groups – including Jabhat al-Nusra (or al-Qaeda in Syria), who have now changed their name multiple times – but the case was quickly dropped after his lawyer’s argued that British intelligence was involved in arming and providing non-lethal aid to the very same terrorist groups he was allegedly fighting for.

Britain’s Long-held Desire to Force Regime Change in Syria

Britain has a long history of wanting to force regime change in Syria, and install a regime that would be subservient to the Anglo-American (and by extension, Israeli) establishment. In 1957, the British Prime Minister at the time, Harold MacMillan (no relation by the way), approved a joint CIA-MI6 plan to stage fake border incidents in order to provide a justification for an invasion of Syria, and the assassination of prominent Syrian political figures. Although this plan was never acted upon – mainly due to resistance from Syria’s Arab neighbours – it illustrates how long Britain has had Syria in its sights.

In more modern times, there is strong evidence to support the notion that Britain was one of the main architects of the engineered Syrian ‘civil war’ that began in 2011. In an 2013 interview, the former French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Roland Dumas, stated that he was approached in the UK “two years before the violence” erupted in Syria, to see if he would like to participate in organizing “an invasion of rebels” into the country (emphasis added):

‘’I’m going to tell you something. I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was organizing an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer minister for foreign affairs, if I would like to participate. Naturally, I refused, I said I’m French, that doesn’t interest me…

This operation goes way back. It was prepared, preconceived and planned… In the region, it is important to know that this Syrian regime has a very anti-Israeli stance. Consequently, everything that moves in the region – and I have this from the formerIsraeli prime minister who told me: ‘we’ll try to get on with our neighbours, but those who don’t agree with us, will be destroyed.’”

Interestingly, even the BBC admitted that there was a plan circulating around the British establishment in 2012 to “train and equip a 100,000-strong Syrian rebel army” to fight against Bashar al-Assad. The BBC tried to spin the story by saying the plan was deemed too risky by the Prime Minister and ultimately rejected, but considering that is exactly what happened (was happening, and is happening), albeit in conjunction with the US, France and Britain’s Middle Eastern allies, it hardly seems the plan was rejected.

May Pushes for Internet Regulation

In the wake of the most recent (at the time of writing anyway) terrorist attack at London Bridge – which, as always, was carried out by extremists who were known to the authorities – the British Prime Minister has advocated internet regulation. May said that the internet provides a “safe space” for terrorist ideology to spread, and called for governments to “reach international agreements” to regulate the internet:

“We cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed; yet that is precisely what the internet, and the big companies that provide internet-based services, provide. We need to work with allied democratic governments to reach international agreements that regulate cyberspace, to prevent the spread of extremist and terrorism planning.”

The truth may never come to light regarding these three terror attacks, but we know for sure that the establishment will exploit these atrocities in order to further their agendas. May’s call for internet regulation has been an objective of the British establishmentfor years, with May’s proposal further proving that the elite never let a crisis go to waste.

Steven MacMillan is an independent writer, researcher, geopolitical analyst and editor of The Analyst Report, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Original Article:

How to revive and nourish the soil through efficient waste management

How to revive and nourish the soil through efficient waste management
Dandavats / Administrator

Hare Krishna Cintamani dhama dasi: Radha Krishna das (UK) ACBSP has travelled to many farms since 1995 teaching and setting up what is now known as the Howard-Higgins Horticultural System, including Mayapur, Krsna Valley Radhadesh and Bhaktivedanta Manor to name but a few. It has been cited as ‘a Lost Veda’ Indeed Radha Krsna das believes it is one of the Lost Arts, in connection with cow protection, as mentioned in the tenth Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam. It fits right in with the Varnasrama programme where we hope to train people in what is the ‘noblest profession’ – farming, so that they can make a living in the mode of goodness and train others who will come to this movement through varnasrama preaching.Read More…

Original Article:

NATO has Set itself on a Collision Course with Russia and Iran in Syria

NATO has Set itself on a Collision Course with Russia and Iran in Syria
New Eastern Outlook / Мартин Бергер

674563454354It’s been noted that NATO has officially joined the so-called anti-ISIS coalition, vowing to fight the terror group with resolve in both Iraq and Syria. This move has immediately been labeled by a number of Western media sources as symbolic. Indeed, the move is somewhat redundant, as all 28 NATO allies are already members of the anti-Daesh coalition. Nevertheless, we are being told that NATO’s AWACS planes are going to provide air control support to all of anti-ISIS operations, except for bombing missions. However, as it’s been announced in Brussels, the North Atlantic Treaty warplanes are not going to directly engage the enemy in the foreseeable future, therefore one can describe this decision as a purely diplomatic move.

However, it must pointed out that al-Qaeda under its various disguises, Ahar al-Sham and even ISIS are mostly done. It’s been reported that the latter especially is no longer a capable military force but is reverting to guerilla levels of operation. Its final defeat will take a long time but it must and will be achieved by local forces.

Regardless of this fact, Washington pressed on NATO members to force them into allowing NATO to join its “fight against ISIS”. What this means is that now those states have brought large scale command and control capabilities as well as additional resources under Washington’s control in the Middle East. No wonder analysts have raised the alarm, noting that this addition could lead to a confrontation with Russia in Syria, as the organization has historically shown great hostility toward Moscow.

As it’s been noted by MintPressNews, as a formal part of the anti-ISIS coalition, NATO – as France and Germany once feared – will become more than capable of waging a covert war against the Syrian government and Russians within Syria, all in the name of “fighting terrorism.” As former British Foreign Secretary Lord David Owen warned last year, if NATO becomes “embroiled as an alliance in fighting on the ground in Syria, there is a real danger of a military spillover” into a much larger war, sure to involve Russia. Now that NATO has formally announced its involvement, a wider war seems much more likely – a war that NATO is all too eager to fight.

There’s a long list of facts all pointing to the high probability of such a scenario. NATO’s troop movements in recent years make this clear, as they reveal a tendency on the part of the Western-dominated military organization to pounce on any excuse for further militarizing the border between Europe and Russia.

The prominent alternative source Moon of Alabama urges us to make no mistake in our judgment, as the fight against ISIS is not the real purpose of the move. It would note that the US wants NATO support to invade Syria from the north in Idleb as well as from the south near Deraa and from the south-east starting at the al-Tanf border station to Iraq. Syria and its allies will now be fought under the disguise of “fighting ISIS” which factually can no longer be the purpose.

Thus, NATO together with Wahhabi Gulf forces, will now be engaged in an expanded war not only against the Syria government but especially against its Russian and Iranian allies. Trump’s endorsement of anti-Iranian rhetoric on his visit in Saudi Arabia served the same exact purpose.

Martin Berger is a freelance journalist and geopolitical analyst, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.

Original Article:


The Truth About Lies / Jim Murdoch

“Behind the Wood”

(for J.)

How did love find its way in here?
What’s it doing in a place like this?

It knows it’ll die –
there’s nothing to keep it alive –
and yet it came.

Somehow I knew it would
but I was still unprepared.

How do you prepare to lose something
before you’ve really found it?

10 June 1994

Why do people meet behind the wood and not in the wood? Surely the trees would provide cover? Don’t you have to pass through the wood to get behind it? Maybe that’s the point. Maybe this kind of meeting warrants effort. For months J. and I had kept our distance. The only time I made any effort was once when we ran into each other in the bank and I asked her if she’d like to go for a coffee but she declined and it was probably for the best. What if we’d been seen? People talk even when there’s nothing to talk about and there was nothing to talk about.

My dad asked me if J. and I were in a relationship. It’s an annoying little preposition. It’s not enough for us to love someone, we have to be in love with them. Both J. and I were going through our respective somethings in 1994. We were both very much in our individual woods. So I think I’m being presumptuous here in assuming either one of us had made it to the clearing beyond it. I don’t know. I don’t know what I was thinking.

Why the title’s in quotes I couldn’t tell you. I can find several people who’ve used the expression—Shakespeare, Tennyson, Turgenev—but none of them ring a bell.

Original Article: