Israeli Attack: Desperate Bid to Save Failed Syrian Campaign

January 31, 2013 (LD) - Israel has conducted airstrikes in Syria based on "suspicions" of chemical weapon transfers, in a flagrant violation of the UN Charter, international law, and in direct violation of Syria's sovereignty. The Guardian in its report titled, "Israel carries out air strike on Syria," claims:

"Israeli warplanes have attacked a target close to the Syrian-Lebanese border following several days of heightened warnings from government officials over Syria's stockpiles of weapons."

It also stated:

"Israel has publicly warned that it would take military action to prevent the Syrian regime's chemical weapons falling into the hands of Hezbollah in Lebanon or "global jihadists" fighting inside Syria. Israeli military intelligence is said to be monitoring the area round the clock via satellite for possible convoys carrying weapons."

In reality, these "global jihaidists" are in fact armed and funded by the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel since at least as early as 2007. They are also in fact the direct beneficiaries of Israel's recent aggression. The Israeli "suspicions" of "weapon transfers" of course, remain unconfirmed, because the purpose of the attack was not to prevent the transfer of "chemical weapons" to Hezbollah in Lebanon, but to provoke a wider conflict aimed not at Israel's defense, but at salvaging the West's floundering proxy terrorist forces inside Syria attempting to subvert and overthrow the Syrian nation.

The silence from the United Nations is deafening. While Turkey openly harbors foreign terrorists, arming and funding them with Western, Saudi, and Qatari cash as they conduct raids on neighboring Syria, any Syrian attack on Turkish territory would immediately result in the United Nations mobilizing. Conversely, Turkey is allowed, for years, to conduct air strikes and even partial ground invasions of neighboring Iraq to attack Kurdish groups accused of undermining Turkish security. It is clear the same double standard has long applied to Israel.



Israel, along with the US & Saudi Arabia, are Al Qaeda's chief sponsors. 

It must be remembered that as far back as 2007, it was admitted by US, Saudi and Lebanese officials that the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia were intentionally arming, funding, and organizing these "global jihadists" with direct ties to Al Qaeda for the explicit purpose of overthrowing the governments of Syria and Iran.

Reported by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his New Yorker article, "The Redirection," it was stated (emphasis added):

"To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda."

Of Israel it specifically stated: 

"The policy shift has brought Saudi Arabia and Israel into a new strategic embrace, largely because both countries see Iran as an existential threat. They have been involved in direct talks, and the Saudis, who believe that greater stability in Israel and Palestine will give Iran less leverage in the region, have become more involved in Arab-Israeli negotiations."

Additionally, Saudi Arabian officials mentioned the careful balancing act their nation must play in order to conceal its role in supporting US-Israeli ambitions across the region:

"The Saudi said that, in his country’s view, it was taking a political risk by joining the U.S. in challenging Iran: Bandar is already seen in the Arab world as being too close to the Bush Administration. “We have two nightmares,” the former diplomat told me. “For Iran to acquire the bomb and for the United States to attack Iran. I’d rather the Israelis bomb the Iranians, so we can blame them. If America does it, we will be blamed.”"

It may interest readers to know that while France invades and occupies large swaths of Mali in Africa, accusing the Qataris of funding and arming Al Qaeda-linked terrorist groups in the region, France, the US, and Israel are working in tandem with the Qataris to fund and arm these very same groups in Syria.

In fact, the US-based think-tank, the Brookings Institution literally has a "Doha Center" based in Qatar while US-Israeli citizen Haim Saban's Brookings "Saban Center" conducts meetings and has many of its board of directors based likewise in Doha, Qatar. Doha also served as the venue for the creation of the West's most recent "Syrian Coalition," headed by an unabashed supporter of Al Qaeda, Moaz al-Khatib.

 These are part of the brick and mortar manifestation of the conspiracy documented by Seymour Hersh in 2007.

The Wall Street Journal, also in 2007, reported on the US Bush Administration's plans of creating a partnership with Syria's Muslim Brotherhood, noting the group is the ideological inspiration for linked terror organizations including Al Qaeda itself. In the article titled, ""To Check Syria, U.S. Explores Bond With Muslim Brothers," it states:

"On a humid afternoon in late May, about 100 supporters of Syria's largest exile opposition group, the National Salvation Front, gathered outside Damascus's embassy here to protest Syrian President Bashar Assad's rule. The participants shouted anti-Assad slogans and raised banners proclaiming: "Change the Regime Now."

The NSF unites liberal democrats, Kurds, Marxists and former Syrian officials in an effort to transform President Assad's despotic regime. But the Washington protest also connected a pair of more unlikely players -- the U.S. government and the Muslim Brotherhood."

 The article would also report: 

"U.S. diplomats and politicians have also met with legislators from parties connected to the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, Egypt and Iraq in recent months to hear their views on democratic reforms in the Middle East, U.S. officials say. Last month, the State Department's intelligence unit organized a conference of Middle East experts to examine the merits of engagement with the Brotherhood, particularly in Egypt and Syria."

It describes the ideological and operational links between the Brotherhood and Al Qaeda: 

"Today, the Brotherhood's relationship to Islamist militancy, and al Qaeda in particular, is the source of much debate. Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders cite the works of the Brotherhood's late intellectual, Sayyid Qutb, as an inspiration for their crusade against the West and Arab dictators. Members of Egyptian and Syrian Brotherhood arms have also gone on to take senior roles in Mr. bin Laden's movement."

Yet despite all of this, the US, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, along with Israel and Turkey are openly conspiring with them, and have now for years been arming and funding these very sectarian extremist, terrorist groups across the Arab World, from Libya to Egypt, and now in and around Syria.

Israel's fears of these terrorists acquiring "chemical weapons" is absurd. They have already acquired them with US, NATO, British, Saudi, Qatari and even Israeli help in Libya in 2011. In fact, these very Libyan terrorists are spearheading the foreign militant groups flooding into Syria through the Turkish-Syrian border.

What Israel's strike may really mean.

Indeed, Israel's explanation as to why it struck neighboring Syria is tenuous at best considering its long, documented relationship with actually funding and arming the very "global jihaidists" it fears weapons may fall into the hands of. Its fears of Hezbollah are likewise unfounded - Hezbollah, had it, the Syrians, or the Iranians been interested in placing chemical weapons in Lebanon, would have done so already, and most certainly would do so with means other than conspicuous convoys simply "crossing the border." Hezbollah has already proven itself capable of defeating Israeli aggression with conventional arms, as demonstrated during the summer of 2006. 

In reality, the pressure placed on Syria's borders by both Israel and its partner, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's Turkey in the north, is part of a documented plan to relieve pressure on the Western, Israeli, Saudi-Qatari armed and funded militants operating inside Syria.

The above mentioned, Fortune 500-funded (page 19), US foreign-policy think-tank, Brookings Institution - which has blueprinted designs for regime change in Libya as well as both Syria and Iran - stated this specifically in their report titled, "Assessing Options for Regime Change."

Image: The Brookings Institution, Middle East Memo #21 "Assessing Options for Regime Change (.pdf)," makes no secret that the humanitarian "responsibility to protect" is but a pretext for long-planned regime change.

....

Brookings describes how Israeli efforts in the south of Syria, combined with Turkey's aligning of vast amounts of weapons and troops along its border to the north, could help effect violent regime change in Syria: 

"In addition, Israel’s intelligence services have a strong knowledge of Syria, as well as assets within the Syrian regime that could be used to subvert the regime’s power base and press for Asad’s removal. Israel could posture forces on or near the Golan Heights and, in so doing, might divert regime forces from suppressing the opposition. This posture may conjure fears in the Asad regime of a multi-front war, particularly if Turkey is willing to do the same on its border and if the Syrian opposition is being fed a steady diet of arms and training. Such a mobilization could perhaps persuade Syria’s military leadership to oust Asad in order to preserve itself. Advocates argue this additional pressure could tip the balance against Asad inside Syria, if other forces were aligned properly." -page 6, Assessing Options for Regime Change, Brookings Institution.

Of course, airstrikes inside Syria go beyond "posturing," and indicate perhaps a level of desperation in the West who appear to have elected their chief villain, Israel, to incrementally "intervene" just as they had planned in regards to attacking Iran - also documented by Brookings in a report titled, "Which Path to Persia?"

 In regards to Iran, in Brookings' "Which Path to Persia?" report, it states specifically (emphasis added):

"Israel appears to have done extensive planning and practice for such a strike already, and its aircraft are probably already based as close to Iran as possible. as such, Israel might be able to launch the strike in a matter of weeks or even days, depending on what weather and intelligence conditions it felt it needed.  Moreover, since Israel would have much less of a need (or even interest)  in securing regional support for the operation, Jerusalem probably would feel less motivated to wait for an Iranian provocation before attacking. In short, Israel could move very fast to implement this option if both Israeli and American leaders wanted it to happen.

However, as noted in the previous chapter, the airstrikes themselves are really just the start of this policy. Again, the Iranians would doubtless rebuild their nuclear sites. They would probably retaliate against Israel, and they might retaliate against the United States, too (which might create a pretext for American airstrikes or even an invasion)." -page 91, Which Path to Perisa?, Brookings Institution.

And in this statement we can gather insight behind both Israel's otherwise irrational belligerent posture throughout its brief history, as well as its most recent act of unprovoked aggression against Syria. Israel's role is to play the "bad guy." As a regional beachhead for Western corporate-financier interests, it provides a "foot in the door" to any of the West's many desired conflicts. By bombing Syria, it hopes to provoke a wider conflict - an intervention the West has desired and planned for since it tipped off Syria's violent conflict in 2011.

For Syria and its allies - the goal now must be to deter further Israeli aggression and avoid wider conflict at all costs. If NATO's proxy terrorist forces are as weak as they appear - incapable of tactical or strategic gains, and tapering off into desperate terrorist attacks, it is only a matter of time before NATO's campaign grinds to a halt. As mentioned before, such a failure on NATO's part will be the beginning of the end for it, and the Western interests that have been using it as a tool to achieve geopolitical hegemony. 

Israel should be expected to commit to increasingly desperate acts to provoke Syria and Iran - as its leadership represent directly corporate-financier interests abroad, not the Israeli people, or their best interests (including peace and even survival). For the people of Israel, they must realize that their leadership indeed does not represent them or their best interests and is able, willing, and even eager to spend their lives and fortunes in the service of foreign, corporate-financier interests and global hegemony.

Read More

Is UK Defense Contractor Planning Syrian WMD False Flag?

Unconfirmed "leaked" documents indicate Washington-approved, Qatari-funded false flag attack using Libyan chemical weapons in Homs, Syria. 

January 28, 2013 (LD) - Documents allegedly "hacked" belonging to UK-based defense contractor Britam (official website here) appear to show the company considering an offer from Qatar to use Libyan chemical weapons in Homs, Syria in order to frame both the Syrian and Russian governments. The plan involves using Britam's Ukrainian mercenaries and Soviet-era chemical weapon shells brought in from Libya's large, Al Qaeda-linked, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) controlled arsenals.

The e-mail reads:

Phil

We've got a new offer. It's about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington. 

We'll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.

Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?

Kind regards

David

It should be remembered that this is not confirmed - and there is most likely no way that it can ever be confirmed. However, in light of recent, and continuous attempts by the Israelis and NATO to justify a military intervention in Syria based on fears of "chemical weapons," and considering how a nearly decade-long war and occupation was fought in neighboring Iraq under similar and patently false pretenses, every potential piece of evidence should be taken seriously.

It should also be remembered that during the Iraq War, British special forces were caught carrying out false flag attacks, dressed as sectarian extremists in Basra, Iraq, and shooting at Iraqi policemen. After the British soldiers were arrested, the British army attacked the police station they were being held at to free them. The precedence of Western nations using false flag operations, including terrorism, to achieve geopolitical objectives beyond their borders most certainly exists.

The Libyan Connection

Mention of acquiring chemical weapons from Libya is particularly troubling. Libya's arsenal had fallen into the hands of sectarian extremists with NATO assistance in 2011 in the culmination of efforts to overthrow the North African nation . Since then, Libya's militants led by commanders of Al Qaeda's Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) have armed sectarian extremists across the Arab World, from as far West as Mali, to as far East as Syria.

In addition to small arms, heavier weapons are also making their way through this extensive network. The Washington Post in their article, "Libyan missiles on the loose," reported:

"Two former CIA counterterrorism officers told me last week that technicians recently refurbished 800 of these man-portable air-defense systems (known as MANPADS) — some for an African jihadist group called Boko Haram that is often seen as an ally of al-Qaeda — for possible use against commercial jets flying into Niger, Chad and perhaps Nigeria."

While undoubtedly these weapons are also headed to Niger, Chad, and perhaps Nigeria, they are veritably headed to Syria. Libyan LIFG terrorists are confirmed to be flooding into Syria from Libya. In November 2011, the Telegraph in their article, "Leading Libyan Islamist met Free Syrian Army opposition group," would report:

Abdulhakim Belhadj, head of the Tripoli Military Council and the former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, "met with Free Syrian Army leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey," said a military official working with Mr Belhadj. "Mustafa Abdul Jalil (the interim Libyan president) sent him there."

Another Telegraph article, "Libya’s new rulers offer weapons to Syrian rebels," would admit

Syrian rebels held secret talks with Libya's new authorities on Friday, aiming to secure weapons and money for their insurgency against President Bashar al-Assad's regime, The Daily Telegraph has learned.

At the meeting, which was held in Istanbul and included Turkish officials, the Syrians requested "assistance" from the Libyan representatives and were offered arms, and potentially volunteers.

"There is something being planned to send weapons and even Libyan fighters to Syria," said a Libyan source, speaking on condition of anonymity. "There is a military intervention on the way. Within a few weeks you will see."

Later that month, some 600 Libyan terrorists would be reported to have entered Syria to begin combat operations and have been flooding into the country ever since.

Image: Libyan Mahdi al-Harati of the US State Department, United Nations, and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf)-listed terrorist organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), addressing fellow terrorists in Syria. Harati is now commanding a Libyan brigade operating inside of Syria attempting to destroy the Syrian government and subjugate the Syrian population. Traditionally, this is known as "foreign invasion." 

....

Washington Post's reported "loose missiles" in Libya are now turning up on the battlefield in Syria. While outfits like the Guardian, in their article "Arms and the Manpads: Syrian rebels get anti-aircraft missiles," are reporting the missiles as being deployed across Syria, they have attempted to downplay any connection to Libya's looted arsenal and the Al Qaeda terrorists that have imported them. In contrast, Times has published open admissions from terrorists themselves admitting they are receiving heavy weapons including surface-to-air missiles from Libya.

In Time's article, "Libya’s Fighters Export Their Revolution to Syria," it is reported: 

Some Syrians are more frank about the assistance the Libyans are providing. “They have heavier weapons than we do,” notes Firas Tamim, who has traveled in rebel-controlled areas to keep tabs on foreign fighters. “They brought these weapons to Syria, and they are being used on the front lines.” Among the arms Tamim has seen are Russian-made surface-to-air missiles, known as the SAM 7.

Libyan fighters largely brush off questions about weapon transfers, but in December they claimed they were doing just that. “We are in the process of collecting arms in Libya,” a Libyan fighter in Syria told the French daily Le Figaro. “Once this is done, we will have to find a way to bring them here.”

Clearly NATO intervention in Libya has left a vast, devastating arsenal in the hands of sectarian extremists, led by US State Department, United Nations, and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf)-listed terrorist organization LIFG, that is now exporting these weapons and militants to NATO's other front in Syria. It is confirmed that both Libyan terrorists and weapons are crossing the Turkish-Syrian border, with NATO assistance, and it is now clear that heavy weapons, including anti-aircraft weapons have crossed the border too.

 

The Guardian reported in their November 2011 article, "Libyan chemical weapons stockpiles intact, say inspectors," that:

Libya's stockpiles of mustard gas and chemicals used to make weapons are intact and were not stolen during the uprising that toppled Muammar Gaddafi, weapons inspectors have said.

But also reported that:

The abandonment or disappearance of some Gaddafi-era weapons has prompted concerns that such firepower could erode regional security if it falls into the hands of Islamist militants or rebels active in north Africa. Some fear they could be used by Gaddafi loyalists to spread instability in Libya.

Last month Human Rights Watch urged Libya's ruling national transitional council to take action over large numbers of heavy weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, it said were lying unguarded more than two months after Gaddafi was overthrown.

On Wednesday the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, said the UN would send experts to Libya to help ensure nuclear material and chemical weapons did not fall into the wrong hands.

And while inspectors claim that Libya's chemical weapons are in the "government's" hands and not "extremists'," it is clear by the Libyan government's own admission, that they themselves are involved in sending fighters and weapons into Syria.

Bottom Line

It cannot be said for certain whether the e-mail allegedly sent by Britam is genuine, but the West is openly subverting Syria through the funding and arming of terrorists from across the Arab World. Terrorists are confirmed to be moving through NATO-member Turkey, with the Turkish government's explicit assistance. Heavy weapons are both being supplied and paid for by the West, and likewise brought across Syria's borders through NATO-member Turkey.

Despite this, the momentum of NATO's armed, proxy-aggression toward Syria has been broken multiple times. Threats of a no-fly zone are waning as NATO's proxies are neutralized with little left to establish a no-fly zone over. The fear now for NATO and its various partners across the region, from Israel to Erdogan in Turkey, to Qatar and Saudi Arabia, is that there will be nothing left of the so-called "Free Syrian Army" (FSA) to intervene on behalf of.

With time running out and the Syrian people still stalwartly defending their nation, it is possible that the desperate measures described in the alleged e-mail from Britam have been considered - as the rhetorical groundwork to accommodate such measures has already been long-ago laid out by the complicit Western media.  The purpose of exposing this alleged e-mail is not necessarily to accuse Britam, but to remind readers to be vigilant. And should "chemical weapons" be used in Syria in an apparent joint Syrian-Russian operation, Britam, the United Kingdom, and Qatar should be the first suspects that come to mind.

Read More

NATO Terrorists in Syria Attack Kurdish Minority

January 27, 2013 (LD) - The Western media and Western government representatives from the United States and across the European Union, still insist that the sectarian bloodbath unfolding in Syria, fueled by US, British and EU weapons and cash, is a so-called "pro-democracy" uprising. Why then, one might ask, are these so-called "pro-democracy" freedom fighters turning their weapons on Syria's Kurdish minority if the "rebels" are allegedly locked in mortal combat with a "dictatorship" they seek to overthrow for the sake of all Syrians?

The answer of course is that the conflict is most certainly not a "pro-democracy" uprising, but rather Saudi-Qatari inspired sectarian extremists imported and armed by NATO from abroad, to subjugate and conquer the people of Syria - to subjugate and conquer anyone who does not subscribe or submit to Saudi-inspired, NATO underwritten extremism in pursuit of foreign-backed regime change and regional geopolitical reordering.

To explain the recent violence visited upon Kurds in Syria, PressTV interviewed New York City-based geopolitical analyst Eric Draitser of StopImperialism.com:

Read More

Stop Imperialism – Episode 56

Algeria, Mali, Syria, Iran, and more. 

January 25, 2013 (StopImperialism.com) Eric Draitser's Stop Imperialism website has been redone, and all of his work can be found on StopImperialism.com. For listeners that had bookmarked ericdraitser.podbean.com, they should change over to the new url.

In this week's episode:

1. Algeria
	Algeria defends tough response to hostage crisis as toll rises Insight: Mystery Canadian coordinated Algeria gas field attack, premier says Al Qaeda branch’s image soars after hostage drama in Algeria The Algeria powder keg
	Segment Start: 00 h 09 min 48 sec	Segment End: 00 h 39 min 01 sec
2. Mali
	Nationalists or Islamists? Is Qatar fuelling the crisis in north Mali? The war on Mali: What you should know: An El Dorado of Uranium, Gold Petroleum, strategic Minerals
	Segment Start: 00h 40 min 48 sec	Segment End: 01h 05 min 07 sec
3. Syria
	Syria activists: Car bomb toll at least 42 Syrian army pounds militant positions in Damascus province Anti-Patriot protestors gather in front of German embassy in Ankara Moscow sends 2 planes to evacuate Russians from Syria Obama’s failure in Syria
	Segment Start: 01 h 06 min 38sec	Segment End: 01 h 27 min 32 sec
4. Iran
	Iran, Russia to sign security agreements: minister Iran finds oil and gas field shared with Turkmenistan and Iraq Progress on Pak-Iran gas pipeline: FM India hesitant to implement US, EU sanctions on Iran: Report Iran manufacturing hi-tech spacesuits
	Segment Start: 01 h 29 min 19 sec	Segment End: 01 h 43 min 03 sec

Read More

Syria's Muslim Brotherhood Propped Up by US Since 2007 Under Bush

January 24, 2013 (LD - Tony Cartalucci) - In 2007, the Wall Street Journal published an article titled, "To Check Syria, U.S. Explores Bond With Muslim Brothers." And even then, it was noted that the Brotherhood held close links with groups the US recognizes and lists as terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Al Qaeda.

The report gives a disturbing foreshadowing of US support that would eventually see the Muslim Brotherhood rise as both a political and terroristic power across the Arab World, after decades of hard-fought attempts to crush the sectarian extremist organization everywhere from Tunisia to Syria, from Egypt to Libya, to Jordan, and beyond. In fact, the 2007 Wall Street Journal article specifically noted that the US partnership could "destabilize governments in Jordan and Egypt, two US allies where the Brotherhood is a growing opposition force."

Egypt is now run by a sectarian-extremist Muslim Brotherhood dictatorship, after the US incited unrest there in 2011, while Jordan is seeing increasing unrest led by the Jordanian arm of the Brotherhood.

What is also disturbing about the 2007 report, is that it shows how allegedly "Bush-era" policies transcended the 2000-2008 administration and continued in earnest under President Obama.

The report, written by Jay Solomon, echoes similar foreshadowing of the coming violent sectarian bloodbath now engulfing Syria, found in Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh's New Yorker piece titled, "The Redireciton: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?"

Solomon begins by stating: 

On a humid afternoon in late May, about 100 supporters of Syria's largest exile opposition group, the National Salvation Front, gathered outside Damascus's embassy here to protest Syrian President Bashar Assad's rule. The participants shouted anti-Assad slogans and raised banners proclaiming: "Change the Regime Now."

Later in the article, it would be revealed that the National Salvation Front (NSF) was in contact with the US State Department and that a Washington-based consulting firm in fact assisted the NSF in organizing the rally:

In the weeks before the presidential election, the State Department's Middle East Partnership Initiative, which promotes regional democracy, and NSF members met to talk about publicizing Syria's lack of democracy and low voter turnout, participants say. A Washington-based consulting firm, C&O Resources Inc., assisted the NSF in its planning for the May 26 anti-Assad rally at the Syrian embassy, providing media and political contacts. State Department officials stress they provided no financial or technical support to the protestors.

Just like the Arab Spring, what was in fact foreign-backed sedition, was peddled publicly by professional PR firms with the help of a bought-off, complicit corporate media, as a "pro-democracy" uprising. 

And while the Wall Street Journal then, just as the US State Department and the Western media houses are now portraying the Syrian opposition as representing a wide range of interests across Syrian society, it was admitted then, just as it is plainly obvious now, that the sectarian extremist Muslim Brotherhood was in fact at the very center of the "uprising:"

One of the NSF's most influential members is the Syrian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood -- the decades-old political movement active across the Middle East whose leaders have inspired the terrorist groups Hamas and al Qaeda. Its Syrian offshoot says it has renounced armed struggle in favor of democratic reform.

The article would describe a fractured, disorganized opposition, must like the 2011 "National Syrian Council" (NSC) and its more recent US-Qatari contrived reincarnation, the "National Coalition," whose only common denominator and prevailing ideology was and still is the sectarian extremism practiced by the Muslim Brotherhood. Similarly, the current "National Coalition" is headed by Moaz al-Khatib who, on Qatari state-owned Al Jazeera, openly admitted his aspirations of establishing an "Islamic State" in place of Syria's current secular society. Al-Khatib also vigorously protested the US' listing of Al Qaeda terrorist franchisee, Al Nusra, who is openly fighting as part of Al-Khatib's "National Coalition."

These are the "freedom fighters" then and now, that the US has been supporting, funding, and in fact arming. The most recent accusation of the US arming known-terrorists came from retired US Army General and former Special Forces Commander, William G. Boykin, who claimed the US is not only arming terrorists in Syria, but they are doing so by running guns through the terror emirate of Benghazi, Libya.

From the pan-Arab logistical networks NATO is using to flood Syria with weapons and terrorists, to the current leadership of the so-called opposition, and with documented evidence from 2007 of a US conspiracy to prop up the Muslim Brotherhood and other known, violent extremist groups in Syria to overthrow the government, it is clear that every aspect of the US', UK's, NATO's, and even the UN's narrative regarding the conflict in Syria is an intentional fabrication. Furthermore, it indicates a much wider deception - one involving the misconception that presidential elections bring in both new leadership, and new policies. The wars engineered under Bush, are being carried out under Obama, by the same policy makers from the very same corporate-funded think-tanks that handed Bush his agenda years ago.

With French, British, and now US troops becoming increasingly involved in Mali, allegedly fighting terrorists with direct connections to the fighters armed, funded, and given diplomatic recognition by the West in Libya, and with the conflict already spilling over the borders with Algeria, one must recognize that an agenda is being carried out contra to both the will of the people and their best interests. Identifying the corporate-financier interests involved in this agenda, and both boycotting and replacing them with local alternatives is our only recourse. Clearly - as illustrated in the case with the non-transition, continuity of agenda between "right-wing" Republican Bush and "left-wing" Democrat Obama - elections don't count. As proven with the "Arab Spring" and the US underwritten protests of the NSF - protests don't either. 

Read More

The Greatest Way to Dishonor Martin Luther King Jr.

January 21, 2013 (LD) - What's the greatest way to dishonor Martin Luther King Jr.? Compare him with US President Barack Obama - a servant of an engine for the greatest disparity, inequality, and injustice on Earth - driven by the very corporate-financier interests King stood up against, was opposed by throughout his entire life, and most likely was killed by. For Martin Luther King Jr. - whose famous speeches still echo through the halls of time, who spoke a message of peace and of the importance of character over the mere color of one's skin - he is ironically compared to Barack Obama simply because of the color of their skin, despite the fact that these two men possess the opposite in character, and represent infinitely opposing causes. 

Image: A visual representation of the corporate-financier special interests represented by US President Barack Obama's cabinet, past and present. 

....

Indeed, despite the left-leaning facade President Obama displays publicly, his entire cabinet, past and present, is a collection of corporate-financier special interests, warmongers, criminals, and elitists who merely couch a corporate-fascist, self-serving agenda behind well-meaning liberal-esque causes. A look at these characters more closely reveals just this:

Timothy Geithner (Secretary of the Treasury): Group of 30, Council on Foreign Relations, private Federal Reserve
Eric Holder (Attorney General): Covington & Burling lobbying for Merck and representing Chiquita International Brands in lawsuits brought by relatives of people killed by Colombian terrorists.
Eric Shinseki (Secretary of Veteran Affairs): US Army, Council on Foreign Relations, Honeywell director (military contractor), Ducommun director (military contractor).
Rahm Emanuel (former Chief of Staff): Freddie Mac
William Daley (former Chief of Staff): JP Morgan executive committee member
Jacob "Jack" Lew (Chief of Staff) Council on Foreign Relations, Brookings Institution (Hamilton Project)
Susan Rice (UN Ambassador): McKinsey and Company, Brookings Institution, Council on Foreign Relations
Peter Orszag, (former Budget Director): Citi Group, Council on Foreign Relations
Paul Volcker: Council on Foreign Relations, private Federal Reserve, Group of 30
Ronald Kirk (US Trade Representative): lobbyist, part of Goldman Sachs, Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts, and Texas Pacific Group partnership to buyout Energy Future Holdings.
Lawrence Summers (National Economic Council Director): World Bank, Council on Foreign Relations, Brookings Institution (Hamilton Project)

Image: Brookings Institution's corporate backers - clearly nothing to do with left-leaning liberal a

....

Of course, representation of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Brookings Institution (page 19, .pdf) should give any genuine left-leaning liberal pause for thought. These are think-tanks created by and for big business. The Brookings Institution in particular is home of the very architects of "George Bush's" myriad of wars - wars the faux-left in America claim Obama only grudgingly has been stuck with.

In reality, his policy is driven by not only the exact same corporate-financier interests that drove Bush's, but in fact, many of the exact same individuals are writing the policy versus nations like Libya, Syria, and Iran today who were behind "Bush's" Iraq and Afghanistan wars - the consequences of which still are reverberating. This is what is called, "continuity of agenda," with the feigned political proclivities of both Bush and Obama being nothing more than carefully orchestrated theater to divide and distract the public as a singular agenda transcends presidencies and perceived political lines.

And in reality, Martin Luther King Jr., should he still walk this world today, would undoubtedly be taking the podium and speaking out against this outrageous conspiracy against free humanity, and the affront to equality poseurs like President Barack Obama are attempting to foist upon the public and the world at large. He would undoubtedly condemn the global war Obama is waging from Mali to Libya, from Syria to Afghanistan and the borders of Pakistan, from Yemen to Somalia, to Uganda and beyond.

In a speech given on April 4, 1967 in New York City titled, "Beyond Vietnam - A Time to Break Silence," King gives what is perhaps the widest encapsulation of his philosophy and worldview, one that would undoubtedly criticize and clash with the disingenuous US presidents of today, celebrating Martin Luther King Jr. Day. And the beauty of the equality King helped usher in is, the fact that Obama is black should not shield him from the criticism of the very man that helped pave the way for his accession to office.

One section of King's enlightening speech criticizing the Vietnam War states:

"It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments. I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin...we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.

A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life's roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, "This is not just." It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of South America and say, "This is not just." The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.

A true revolution of values will lay hand on the world order and say of war, "This way of settling differences is not just." This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation's homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing except a tragic death wish to prevent us from reordering our priorities so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood.

This kind of positive revolution of values is our best defense against communism. War is not the answer. Communism will never be defeated by the use of atomic bombs or nuclear weapons. Let us not join those who shout war and, through their misguided passions, urge the United States to relinquish its participation in the United Nations. These are days which demand wise restraint and calm reasonableness. We must not engage in a negative anticommunism, but rather in a positive thrust for democracy, realizing that our greatest defense against communism is to take offensive action in behalf of justice. We must with positive action seek to remove those conditions of poverty, insecurity, and injustice, which are the fertile soil in which the seed of communism grows and develops."

It is safe to say that America has not mended its ways and only traveled further down the dark path King warned us of back in 1967. The man "leading" us, or at least the front-man for the corporate-financier interests that drive America's destiny, may honor King with carefully contrived words and well orchestrated public stunts, but in deeds and actions Obama and the corporate-financier elite that hold his leash, defame and dishonor King in every way imaginable.

If you want to honor King and his life's work, honor it by implementing the words he uttered while alive, not by playing along with a system that resisted him until his death, and has since dishonored and exploited his memory with disingenuous praise while maliciously carrying out an agenda contra to everything King ever stood for.

You can read and listen to the whole April 4, 1967 speech, "Beyond Vietnam - A Time to Break Silence" on AmericanRhetoric.com.

Read More

Syria & Russia "Hang Tough" Against NATO Assault

January 21, 2013 (Tarpley.net - PressTV) 

Also read Dr. Webster Tarpley's report, "North Syria learns to hate FSA occupation, NATO errs to add new front."

Read More

The PirateBox & Internet Freedom

January 21, 2013 (LocalOrg) - There has been a big response regarding the PirateBox mentioned in "WiFi + USB Drive = Your Own Mini-Internet (Freedom)" ranging from mostly excitement to some confusion and many questions in between - especially on how to get involved.

The PirateBox is software that can be used to turn your WiFi enabled computer into a local router. It can also be used to make actual "PirateBoxes," which are stand alone devices that likewise create a local network. The advantage of a local network, not connected to the Internet is that you can file share and communicate your way around the draconian restrictions and regulations being increasingly put into place on the Internet.

Q: How is this different than my router-based LAN?

A: PirateBox doesn't require a router. It takes any device with a WiFi modem, and turns it into the router. This includes mobile devices - meaning that unlike your typical router, it can create a network anywhere you can carry your mobile device - from your home or office, to a train, or even on a jetliner.

Additionally, any device wishing to connect to your local network, doesn't need to be configured. The PirateBox network shows up in your WiFi connection list like any WiFi network you would normally encounter (like in a cafe).

You simply connect to that network, open your web browser, and the PirateBox interface shows up as your homepage where you can share files and chat inside the browser - users do not need to install or configure anything at all on their computers - and it works across platforms (Apple, Windows, Linux). If you want to connect to the Internet, you simply open up your WiFi connection list again, and pick the network you usually use for the Internet. Switching back and forth takes seconds.
Q: So what? So you can make a local network - why should I care? I like the Internet better. 

A. The Internet still is and will be a useful tool. But if we have the technology to begin hedging the risk of depending entirely on it, we should do so. That is the idea behind using software like PirateBox and mesh networks as inspiration for building a parallel Internet by and for the people, undermining and circumventing efforts by special interests to curb our liberties and freedom. 

A "collapse" or Orwellian nightmare should not be "prepared for," but instead be prevented by building up a myriad of alternatives that ensure that even in the worst scenario, we have options that avert total disaster. Like segmenting the hull of a ship, by creating alternative communication networks, both centralized and decentralized, we increase our ability to weather a wider range of adversity.  

Q: How do I install/buy/make a PirateBox?

A: Despite the name "PirateBox," the real magic comes from the free software itself. In reality, the most you need is a WiFi capable computer and a USB thumb drive. With this you can download the free software you need and begin using PirateBox today. Actual, physical "PirateBoxes" are standalone devices that take the place of your computer. You can make those too.

To run PirateBox on your existing computer, follow these instructions here.
To make different versions of an actual "PirateBox," follow these instructions here.

David Darts has a website dedicated to PirateBoxes and hosts a long list of FAQ's. See them here. 

Q: I want an instant solution to all my problems. The PirateBox just doesn't deliver on that. 

A: The mess we find ourselves in was not made overnight, and the solutions to these problems will not come in neat, prepackaged consumer goods or services offering instant answers. We will have to incrementally solve our problems through hard work and determination. Something like the PirateBox is not a final solution. It is one of many small steps we must take to move from total dependency on big-business, to total self-reliance on ourselves and our communities.

If hard work and patience is something you are not interested in, then maybe it wasn't freedom you were after in the first place, but rather a more comfortable cage. In that case, investigating the PirateBox, and other means of creating local alternatives for a system that has been co-opted by special interests and turned against us, is not for you.

Q. After you make a small local network, what's next? 

A: Mesh networks, as covered in "Decentralizing Telecom." These operate using similar software that turn each computer on the network into a router. These can cover a much wider area, and usually involve more included software than just a file sharing and chat client.  Something even larger than that depends on people getting organized and building it.

Q. How else can I get involved?

A. The best way to get involved in projects like PirateBox or building mesh networks is to get down to your local hackerspace. If you do not have a local hackerspace, look into starting one. A hackerspace can start with as little as a small group of friends around a single table, working on very simple projects over weekends and evolve from there. Like everything else in life, we cannot be thwarted by the length of our journey by comparing it to the length of our individual strides. Several small steps a day can add up significantly over a year. The alternative is remaining paralyzed in fear or resignation, doing nothing day to day, and at the end of the year, having exactly nothing to show for it.

....

In summation - it is exciting to see so many people interested in a real, pragmatic, tangible solution, no matter how small a solution it may be. It is sincerely hoped that the people who created PirateBox get the recognition they deserve for their clever software and hardware, and get the support from the community to expand on this idea even further.

Read More

Conflict in the Congo: Geopolitics of Plunder

January 20, 2013 (excerpt from Nile Bowie's Congo’s M23 conflict: Rebellion or Resource War?) - It must be recognized that Kagame controls a vastly wealthy and mineral-rich area of eastern Congo – an area that has long been integrated into Rwanda’s economy – with total complicity from the United States. As Washington prepares to escalate its military presence throughout the African continent with AFRICOM, the United States Africa Command, what long-term objectives does Uncle Sam have in the Congo, considered the world’s most resource-rich nation? Washington is crusading against China's export restrictions on minerals that are crucial components in the production of consumer electronics such as flat-screen televisions, smart phones, laptop batteries, and a host of other products. The US sees these Chinese export policies as a means of Beijing attempting to monopolize the mineral and rare earth market.

In a 2010 white paper entitled “Critical Raw Materials for the EU,” the European Commission cites the immediate need for reserve supplies of tantalum, cobalt, niobium, and tungsten among others; the US Department of Energy 2010 white paper “Critical Mineral Strategy” also acknowledged the strategic importance of these key components. In 1980, Pentagon documents acknowledged shortages of cobalt, titanium, chromium, tantalum, beryllium, and nickel. The US Congressional Budget Office’s 1982 report “Cobalt: Policy Options for a Strategic Mineral” notes that cobalt alloys are critical to the aerospace and weapons industries and that 64 per cent of the world’s cobalt reserves lay in the Katanga Copper Belt, running from southeastern Congo into northern Zambia.

Additionally, the sole piece of legislation authored by President Obama during his time as a Senator was SB 2125, the“Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006”. In the legislation, Obama acknowledges Congo as a long-term interest to the United States and further alludes to the threat of Hutu militias as an apparent pretext for continued interference in the region; Section 201(6) of the bill specifically calls for the protection of natural resources in the eastern DRC. The United States does not like the fact that President Kabila in Kinshasa has become very comfortable with Beijing, and worries that Congo will drift into Chinese economic orbit. Under the current regime in Congo, Chinese commercial activities have significantly increased not only in the mining sector, but also considerably in the telecommunications field.

In 2000, the Chinese ZTE Corporation finalized a $12.6 million deal with the Congolese government to establish the first Sino-Congolese telecommunications company; furthermore, the DRC exported $1.4 billion worth of cobalt between 2007 and 2008. The majority of Congolese raw materials like cobalt, copper ore and a variety of hardwoodsare exported to China for further processing and 90 per cent of the processing plants in resource rich southeastern Katanga province are owned by Chinese nationals. In 2008, a consortium of Chinese companies were granted the rights to mining operations in Katanga in exchange for US$6 billion in infrastructure investments, including the construction of two hospitals, four universities and a hydroelectric power project. In 2009, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) demanded renegotiation of the deal, arguing that the agreement between China and the DRC violated the foreign debt relief program for so-called HIPC (Highly Indebted Poor Countries) nations. The IMF successfully blocked the deal in May 2009, calling for a more feasibility study of the DRCs mineral concessions. An article published by Shamus Cooke of Workers Action explains:

“This act instantly transformed Kabila from an unreliable friend to an enemy. The US and China have been madly scrambling for Africa’s immense wealth of raw materials, and Kabila’s new alliance with China was too much for the US to bear. Kabila further inflamed his former allies by demanding that the international corporations exploiting the Congo’s precious metals have their super-profit contracts re-negotiated, so that the country might actually receive some benefit from its riches.”

During a diplomatic tour of Africa in 2011, US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton herself has irresponsibly insinuatedChina’s guilt in perpetuating a creeping “new colonialism.” China annually invests an estimated $5.5 billion in Africa, with only 29 per cent of direct investment in the mining sector in 2009 – while more than half was directed toward domestic manufacturing, finance, and construction industries. China has further committed $10 billion in concessional loans to Africa between 2009 and 2012. As Africa’s largest trading partner, China imports 1.5 million barrels of oil from Africa per day, accounting for approximately 30 per cent of its total imports. Over the past decade, 750,000 Chinese nationals have settled in Africa; China’s deepening economic engagement in Africa and its crucial role in developing the mineral sector, telecommunications industry and much needed infrastructural projects is creating "deep nervousness" in the West, according to David Shinn, the former US ambassador to Burkina Faso and Ethiopia.

....

Read the entire article on Nile Bowie's blog here. 

Read More

WiFi + USB Drive = Your Own Mini-Internet (Freedom)

Editor's Note: There seems to be some confusion over the concept of the PirateBox. The entire point is not to be connected to the controlled, restricted, & monopolized Internet, and begin using local alternatives leveraging technology to go around draconian laws and regulations. 

 

A PirateBox is the smallest, but easiest way to connect with others locally and wirelessly,as well as anonymously, without connecting at all to the Internet. It is the first step to building larger local mesh networks, and eventually a parallel Internet built using mesh architecture designed, maintained, and used by the people, for the people - no government or corporate infrastructure would be required, and the means of monopolizing and controlling a decentralized people's Internet made nearly impossible. 

Think of the PirateBox as a prototype of a building block for something bigger and more significant. In the fight for freedom, we will not find complete solutions, prepackaged and waiting for us on the shelves of WalMart. We will have to research and develop our own solutions, patiently, incrementally, and in collaboration with our friends, family, neighbors and local community. Our problems were not created overnight, neither will the solutions. -Tony Cartalucci.

 

January 19, 2013 (LocalOrg-Tony Cartalucci) - Worried about draconian Internet laws? Creeping surveillance? The inability to share with others without being criminalized? The Internet is still a tool of tremendous power, but a deep rot has set in. We have caught it early and we are fighting to stop this rot, but there are other options we can begin exploring to hedge our bets, enhance our current efforts of fighting against corporate monopolies, and eventually, build an Internet of the people, by the people, for the people - big-telecom monopolies not welcomed.

Image: The PirateBox in use on a handheld device. Once the PirateBox is up and running, either on a standalone device like the one pictured to the right (background), or on your laptop as described here, it will appear as another WiFi network for people in range to connect to. Once connected files can be freely shared, and there is even a chat client users can communicate with. It is just as useful as a file server for a small business, as it is for circumventing the draconian criminalization of Internet file sharing. 

....

In last week's "Fighting Back Against the "Intellectual Property" Racket," the "PirateBox" was introduced. The PirateBox transforms a laptop, router, or single board computer into a mini-Internet hub where files can be freely shared, and even features a chat program so users can communicate. It is a lite version of the mesh networks described in December 2012's "Decentralizing Telecom" where independent mesh networks featured many software alternatives to emulate popular online programs such as Facebook, Twitter, Blogger, and others. The PirateBox is an introductory project anyone with a WiFi adapter and a USB thumbdrive can do on their own with a little motivation and an hour to experiment.

In a busy office, a PirateBox can serve as a simple local wireless file server and chat client. In an apartment complex, it can become the center of a social experiment, an opportunity to reach out to neighbors and organize constructively, or just for fun - building badly needed local communities back up.

Instructions for perhaps the easiest of PirateBox's implementations can be found on blogger, designer, and activist David Darts' website here. The instructions are nearly fool proof, and a lot of the common problems ran into are described and their solutions linked to throughout the explanation.

The PirateBox does not connect to the Internet, nor does it operate from your hard drive. It works entirely on the USB thumbdrive you install it on, simply using your computer's WiFi to network all who are in range.

Ideally you'd want to make a dedicated, standalone PirateBox to serve your space, office, and neighbors. A great place for beginners to embark on this is at your local hackerspace. If you don't have a local hackerspace, look into starting one up.

Protesting is important, but protesting alone will not stem the problem at its source. The rot will continue to spread unless we develop tangible tools to pragmatically excise it and repair the damage it has already done. The problem of corporate monopolies ensnaring and subjugating us through their telecom monopolies can and is being solved by solutions like mesh networks, the PirateBox, and the onward march of open source software and hardware, simply displacing proprietary products and services. The best way to ensure success is to have as many informed and constructive people as possible join in the problem-solving process. 

....

Since posting about the PirateBox, LocalOrg has received several success stories of people who have either already been using it, or have looked into it, prompting this follow up. Continue sharing your success, and if you would like, contact us and have them covered here on LocalOrg.

Read More

3D Printed Guns Render Gun Control Moot

January 17, 2013 (LocalOrg-Tony Cartalucci) - Forbes has recently published an article about New York Congressman Steve Israel's promise to ban 3D printed high capacity ammunition magazines. The congressman's comments come after Defense Distributed, an open source DIY gunsmith group working to manufacture both guns and their accessories using 3D printing technology, successfully printed and tested a 30-round AR-15 magazine.

Congressman Israel stated:

“Background checks and gun regulations will do little good if criminals can print high-capacity magazines at home. 3-D printing is a new technology that shows great promise, but also requires new guidelines. Law enforcement officials should have the power to stop high-capacity magazines from proliferating with a Google search.”

It seems that Congressman Israel doesn't realize that background checks and gun regulations both in the United States and just over America's border with Mexico, already don't work - without advanced manufacturing and open source paradigms even playing a role. Criminals intent on breaking laws have existed since laws themselves. Additionally, technology like 3D printing, as Forbes correctly points out, will pose a serious challenge to gun control advocates in terms of enforcement. Forbes stated specifically: 

"But for either [Congresswoman Diane]  Feinstein or Israel’s bill, the same problem arises: How to enforce that prohibition in every garage and workshop in America that houses a 3D printer?"

Of course, without becoming Nazi Germany or Stalin's Soviet Union, or something far worse, there is no way to enforce these gun regulations. Criminals in particular will continue trumping the law, and because of the government's refusal to actually tackle the socioeconomic factors driving violence and its insistence on instead punishing law abiding citizens, their authority, legitimacy, and ability to enforce even sensible legislation will be compromised.

And 3D manufacturing isn't the only way to build your own gun. As a matter of fact, around the world where criminals are unable to buy guns, they do indeed already make their own - and then, as criminals are wanton to do, commit crimes with them, including, murder.

Image: This homemade handgun was made by an unruly Thai party-goer who claimed the life of a British tourist this New Year's Eve. Despite the ubiquitous nature of guns, both homemade and manufactured in Thailand, and nearly no means of enforcing whatever legislation may or may not be on the books, gun violence (and violence overall) is still less than in the United States.

....

In Thailand, vocational schools are plagued by fierce gang-style rivalries. With standard tools, these students construct homemade guns which they frequently murder each other with. And just this New Year's Eve, a British tourist was killed when a fight broke out at a party, and a homemade gun was fired. The difference between a Thai vocational education, and say a German or Japanese vocational education is one of culture and socioeconomics - not access to tools.

Preventing people from manufacturing guns, or worse yet, from possessing or using tools that can be used to create guns, is both ludicrous and impossible. Like with cars or anything else, laws are there to ensure we don't harm others by abusing any given right or implement - not preventing us from having those rights or implements responsibly in the first place. In the end, one must address the factors in any given society that drive large numbers of people to commit violent crimes in the first place - regardless of their chosen means or method.

In reality, an honest public representative would already be far too busy improving education, infrastructure, and the economic prospects of their people to waste time on banning every conceivable implement that could be used in a crime, directly or indirectly. The goal of Congress members like Feinstein or Israel, is not to prevent violence - but to simply disarm the population as the corporate-financier interests they represent seek to be further unhindered as they loot people and nations both abroad and at home.

The fact that the White House is taking such bold actions against "guns," citing "mass shootings" which account for a fraction of 1% of all homicides, indicates a far more insidious agenda - and one based not on real priorities, but built upon a carefully exploited, emotional campaign to exact an obvious but not forthcoming final goal.

Get Involved.

Defense Distributed has a website - DefCAD.org - and the files for building their various designs available for downloading and use - for free. The files are in .IGS format and require a computer aided design program (CAD) to view them. FreeCAD is an open source, free to download program that works well. This is where, again, a local hackerspace pooling people's resources together would help infinitely, especially when most hackerspaces come equipped with 3D printers and people capable of operating them and more importantly, capable of teaching you how to use them.

Image: Defense Distributed's 30 round magazine opened in FreeCAD.

....

Right now, there seems to be only Defense Distributed pursuing this project in any meaningful manner - which should be a cause of concern for anyone who thinks this is a good idea. One group of people working on this alone is a giant, slow-moving target prone to failure from both within and beyond. Many people working on this in parallel, however, presents the same problem the movie and music industry face with file sharing - impossible victory/inevitable defeat.

Starting your own open source "distributed defense" group would be a good way to hedge the risk of having just one group coordinating efforts toward developing open source firearms accessible to all. DefCAD could be infiltrated, co-opted, or derailed in so many conceivable ways considering the implications the work it is doing have, it would be foolish not to hedge such risk.

The lack of direct participation in preserving our rights, and instead depending on lobbyists and protesters alone to to do it for us is one problem. Another problem is the purposeful polarization of the "gun debate" - of gun advocates and their critics along predictable political lines. The Washington Post, which is ironically run by a right-wing Neo-Con editorial board, recently celebrated President Obama's "clever" use of the Constitution to turn the gun debate on its head. It also noted gleefully that part of the plan was getting the "people" themselves to demand stricter gun control. This will be done by getting half of America (the left) to take the guns away from the other half (the right).

Faux right-wing leaders take particular care in ensuring that to be a "gun rights activist," you must also be a xenophobic crypto-racist, Islamophobic, and a conservative who believes the problem facing the world are closet-Communist liberals. Likewise, the faux left's leadership ensures that their followers believe conservatives, their religion, and their guns are the root of all problems. In reality, the corporate-financiers run both sides of the debate and direct the talking points of prominent personalities on both the faux-left and faux-right.

Obviously, instead of digging in and playing along, our goal should be to reach across the aisle and close this artificial divide - by abandoning the leaders claiming to represent our particular political proclivities and working together to address the true causes of violence - social injustice, socioeconomic decay, and inadequate, impractical education.

Getting involved includes creating local institutions that find common ground and reject this artificial polarization - common ground that includes improving education, health care, and local economic prospects, which in turn reduces violence and leaves only responsible people with firearms (and the means to make them). Local efforts must be apolitical and all-inclusive - because if we are reduced to talking politics, it is because we don't have a pragmatic solution to solve our problems.

DefCAD has a pragmatic solution - leveraging tangible, modern technology to ensure our rights are not trampled upon by insidious politicians. Taking away guns is not an option politically, and soon, not an option practically. All sides who truly seek to reduce the violence in society will be forced to look elsewhere for the solution. Since guns were never the problem to begin with, the advent of 3D printed guns and the insurmountable deterrence they present to "gun control," may be a blessing in disguise for all who seek a more peaceful and just world.

Read More