Critique of Proposed VFP Resolution 2015-3 Stop All Foreign Intervention In Syria

This resolution would be laughable if Veterans for Peace policy on Syria wasn't already so at odds with its goals of the organization and the requirements of the Syria people today. The fact is that both the tragedy of more than 200,000 slaughtered and nine million made homeless and rise of Islamic reaction in the form of ISIS are the direct results of the "anti-imperialist" policy advocated by VFP. Unlike in Libya, in Syria the "anti-imperialists" have gotten what they have been demanding, no direct military involvement from NATO and no no-fly zone. Assad has been free to barrel-bomb civilians at will and with the military support he has received from Russian and Iran, he has been able to bomb virtually everyday for years now.

More than 200,000 slaughtered and nine million made homeless and the rise of Islamic reaction in the form of ISIS are the direct results. Now this resolution proposes doubling down on the same failed policies and coming from the same deluded fantasies about the real situation. But then this resolution really isn't about Syria. With all they have gone through, it should be. It really should be. But its not. It lacks any real knowledge or concern about Syrians. It doesn't make a single proposal, like supporting the White Helmets or refugee efforts [MSF], that could make a difference in the terrible situation they find themselves in, but then this resolution really isn't about them, is it? Its about US!

Resolution 2015-3
Stop All Foreign Intervention In Syria

The title is a great one that I can get 100% behind. The fact is that without massive foreign intervention by Russia and Iran, Assad would have been overthrown by the popular uprising years ago. Hundreds of thousand would not be dead, millions would not be homeless and extremist groups like ISIS wouldn't have had a chance to grow in the gaping wound that has become Syria. Deflections weakened the Syrian regime long ago, since 2013 the "Syrian state" has been under Iranian control and run at every level by Iranian officials. It was the massive intervention of Hezbollah that salvaged Assad's military position when he was on the edge of defeat and since then it has been sectarian Iranian, Iraqi and Lebanese militias that have kept him in power. Massive financing and weapons deliveries from Russia that has kept him going as well. Without that foreign intervention, the Assad regime would have been bankrupt years ago and the death toll a fraction of what it is today.

But this resolution doesn't oppose that foreign intervention, does it? It doesn't even get a mention.

Whereas, the U.S. has initiated several unnecessary wars resulting in the futile loss of lives and permanent injuries to innumerable American troops and their families, and

This has nothing to do with Syria. Yes, we know the US are imperialists but this has nothing to do with Syria.

Whereas, the crisis in Syria has entered its fifth year, causing the death and injury of possibly half a million Syrians, and

Whereas, the number of dislocated and refugee Syrians has reached close to a third of its population, and

Whereas, the U.S. and its allies are heavily and publicly involved in funding and supporting extremist and terrorist groups in Syria, and

The first two statements are true. The third simple isn't. The US has very publicly contributed several hundred million dollars in non-lethal aid to some moderate forces, and now has trained a "rebel" force of 60 to fight ISIS exclusively, not Assad. Assad and his supporters have said from the time they started shooting the first peaceful protesters that they have been fighting extremist and terrorist groups funded by the US and its allies. That's where this line comes from.

Whereas, the U.S. Administration’s declared policy of regime change in Syria (“Assad must go”) is in violation of international law and has been facing one failure after another, and

Yes, and the US Administration also has a declared policy of a Palestinian state and the self-determination of nations. Imperialist will generally say they are opposed to fascist dictators (“Assad must go”), even as they cultivate them. The question is: What has Obama's real policy towards Assad been? Hint: It hasn't been one of "regime change." Read Barack Obama's Courtship of Bashar al-Assad. These people opportunistically chose to believe Obama is telling the truth when he says "Assad must go" because it suits them. Since Obama's real play here is to deceived people into thinking he opposes Assad, all the while, working to keep him in power [Playing "Good Cop" to Putin's "Bad Cop"] , in passing this resolution, VFP will actually be giving "Left" cover to Obama's true position, which is to keep Assad in power no matter how many Syrian lives it costs.

Whereas, the active support of the United States and its allies for the armed opposition in Syria has resulted in increasing violence and bloodshed, and in strengthening the hands of extremists and terrorist groups, and

The US has enforced an arms embargo against Assad's opposition in Syria. They can't even buy MANPADS from Libya or China with their own money. That's why Assad can barrel-bomb unopposed. That has greatly increased the bloodshed. The pro-Assad fantasy that the US and it allies have been arming the opposition doesn't explain why they lack effective air defense weapons which could stop Assad from ravaging Syrian cities and bring "Death from Above" year after year.

Whereas, only the sovereign people of Syria have the right to decide on the nature of their government and their political system, free of all forms of foreign intervention.

However, we won't even mention, let alone oppose, the real foreign intervention that has been destroying the beautiful country of Syria for four years, we will only oppose the "US intervention" of our fantasies and act as if the US is responsible for this whole mess, not Assad, not Iran, not Russia, just US.

Therefore, we, Veterans For Peace, hereby resolve:

The U.S. must immediately abandon its policy of regime change in Syria;

Easily done! The US doesn't have a policy of regime change in Syria. Hasn't since Bush left office. Wake up!

The U.S. must immediately cease all its direct and indirect, overt and covert, support, arming, financing and enabling of all militants in Syria, and exert all types of pressure on its allies, especially Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Israel, to do the same;

The US and Israel don't provide support for any militants in Syria,let alone "all militants", Assad regime propaganda to the contrary. As far as VFP demanding that the US, the leading imperialist power, "exert all types of pressure" [does that include military pressure?] on some Arab countries not to support a liberation struggle in another part of the Arab nation? I hope there will be a lot of discussion before adopting such a chauvinist policy.

The U.S. must form a new alliance with countries and forces in the region that are real combatants against terrorism and violent extremism in the region;

I can't wait to hear who those countries are. But they aren't mentioned in the resolution so I guess I will have to wait.

The U.S. must positively press for dialogue and a peaceful solution for the Syrian crisis, a process that is directed and executed fully on the basis of the sovereign and free will of the Syrian people themselves.

Submitted by Faraz Azad
Chair, Iran Working Group

More empty words. The short story is that this resolution carries the same old discredited illusions about the Syrian Revolution against the Assad regime that the "Left" had trumpeted when the death toll was still less than a thousand. They haven't even deepened their analysis, 200.000 deaths later they are content to repeat it. They want to blame the US for everything and the naive reader could be forgiven for thinking the Syria mess has been mainly caused by the US.

This resolution calls for more of the same which means it calls for another 200,000 Syrian lives.

That it will be debated at all at the 2015 Veterans for Peace National Convention is at once a Comedy and a Tragedy.

Click here for a list of my other blogs on Syria

Hillary Clinton's early role in facilitating Bashar al-Assad's crackdown in Syria

Given that Hillary Clinton is the presumptive Democratic nominee for the next president of the United States, and that what began as a crackdown on pro-democracy protesters by the Syrian government four years ago has grown into a conflagration that has consumed close to 300,000 lives and made another nine million homeless, this would seem to be a good time to remember how she gave Bashar al-Assad, the "green-light" to begin that crackdown in earnest when the 15 March Uprising was less than a month old and the number of dead was still in the dozens.

This is a short excerpt from my 17,000 word Barack Obama's Courtship of Bashar al-Assad, written almost three years ago. We pick up the story on 27 March 2011, the democracy protests are in their second week, and Secretary of State Clinton is on Face the Nation and is asked about the US attitude towards Assad's crackdown:

QUESTION: Tens of thousands of people have turned out protesting in Syria, which has been under the iron grip of the Asad for so many years now, one of the most repressive regimes in the world, I suppose. And when the demonstrators turned out, the regime opened fire and killed a number of civilians. Can we expect the United States to enter the conflict in the way we have entered the conflict in Libya? SECRETARY CLINTON: No. Each of these situations is unique, Bob. Certainly, we deplore the violence in Syria. We call, as we have on all of these governments during this period of the Arab Awakening, as some have called it, to be responding to their people's needs, not to engage in violence, permit peaceful protests, and begin a process of economic and political reform. The situation in Libya, which engendered so much concern from around the international community, had a leader who used military force against the protestors from one end of his country to the other.... ... QUESTION: But, I mean, how can that be worse than what has happened in Syria over the years, where Bashar Asad's father killed 25,000 people at a lick? I mean, they open fire with live ammunition on these civilians. Why is that different from Libya? ... SECRETARY CLINTON: ... There's a different leader in Syria now. Many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to Syria in recent months have said they believe he's a reformer. What's been happening there the last few weeks is deeply concerning, but there's a difference between calling out aircraft and indiscriminately strafing and bombing your own cities [how ironic these words sound today!!] and then police actions, which, frankly, have exceeded the use of force that any of us would want to see. The headline that went around the world the next day was that unlike Libya, there would be no military intervention in Syria. This piece in The Peninsula was typical: No attack on Syria: Clinton 28 March 2011 Washington: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton yesterday said that the United States currently has no intention of launching a military intervention in Syria, despite its brutal crackdown that has left dozens of protesters dead. Asked on CBS television's "Face the Nation" programme if Washington is planning military action similar to that launched in Libya, Clinton answered that it is not. "No, each of these situations is unique," she said and added that the "elements" that led to international intervention in Libya were absent in the case of Syria. Just hours before Clinton went on "Face the Nation," Bouthaina Shaaban, an adviser to Assad, announced that one of the key demands of the protesters, the lifting of the emergency law, would be met. Three days after he had been assured that no military intervention was planned, on 30 March 2011, Assad made a speech blaming foreign conspirators for causing the uprising and reversing the promise to lift the emergency law. When people took to the streets to protest the speech in Latakia and Daraa, the police used live ammunition and killed five. Syrians had expected him to announce an end to the emergency law. The next day 25 people were killed by security forces in Latakia. The term "bloodbath" was starting to be used. After Clinton's statement, Assad started to use his army to attack the protesters and the death toll started rising dramatically. The mask of "the reformer" was dropping fast as the bodies piled up now that Assad knew he was not going to get the "Qaddafi treatment." The private spooks at Stratfor thought they had a pretty good idea of what was going on. In a 31 March 2011 Stratfor [1154727] memo obtained by Wikileaks: Since Mubarak has gone and Gaddhafi is under fire, Assad has more than enough reasons to be concerned about Syrian regime's survival. Regardless of what our Syrian contacts tell us about Assad's confidence, we know and Assad knows that he is on the thin ice and needs US/Saudi support for survival. US/Saudi (and by proxy, Qatar) back Assad not because they fear things may get worse in Lebanon. Indeed, they think this is the best time to put pressure on Assad to give concessions in Lebanon due to his current weakness. Don't you really find it a bit unusual that Qatar, Saudi Arabia and United States did not even hesitate throwing their support behind Assad at the very beginning? Washington could have easily sent a warning to Damascus by saying that "Libya-like treatment for Syria is one of the options". France was already willing to get engaged in Syria. But US did the contrary.

The Stratfor people had it right. Hillary Clinton was signalling a US policy of acceptance of Assad's crackdown.

How many time have we heard it from our diplomats and generals "You never take the military option off the table"? Its like a mantra with those guys: "You never take the military option off the table." Ask why they are even threatening war over this or that minor dispute and they are quick to tell you, well "You never take the military option off the table." Its like a dogma to them, you never leave the big stick at home and "You never take the military option off the table."

Except, its not true, is it? There are rare occasions when they do explicitly "take the military option off the table." Those are times when they want to signal that certain behaviour won't evoke a military response from the imperialist "big dog". It's their way of granting something like a Superpower "License of Kill."

I call them "green lights." On the day Obama made his now infamous statement that Assad's use of chemical weapons was a "red-line" that might cause him to take military action, I published Obama "green lights" Assad's slaughter in Syria saying that the real import of that statement was to take the military option off the table in response to the carnage Assad was already causing through the widespread use of long range artillery, tanks, cluster bombs, helicopter gunships and warplanes dropping bombs on civilian houses and apartment buildings. At the time, roughly 25,000 was the frightful death toll. Now we can say only 25,000, ["only 25,000"] had been slaughtered when Obama "took the military option off the table" with regards to Assad's continued carnage by conventional means. Now we can say the even Obama's threat to take military action if Assad used "a whole bunch of chemical weapons" was 100% bluff.

Here we have Hillary Clinton, speaking as the voice of United States foreign policy, and "taking the military option off the table" in the opening act of this tragedy. She is telling the Assad regime, after it has fired only the first shots of a carnage that was to reach 25,000 deaths before Obama "green-lighted" more of the same, that he don't have to worry about a no-fly zone or a NATO action in response to his crackdown.

Click here for a list of my other blogs on Syria

EXPOSED: US had plans to nuke Vietnam near end of war!

Da Lat today

Thanks to the investigative reporting of the NHK Newsroom Toyko, it has recently come to light that not only did the United States operate a secret experimental nuclear reactor in South Vietnam during the war, but that then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger ordered that the radioactive core be blown up as a last-ditch measure to stop it from falling to the communist advance. While this would not have caused a nuclear explosion like an atomic bomb, it would have been the equivalent of dropping a dirty bomb on South Vietnam. It would have likely killed thousands and made the resort and university town of Da Lat as well as the surrounding rich countryside unusable for generations.

Think Fukushima, done on purpose, to an Asian people by a fleeing imperialist power.

Map shows NVA advance toward Da Lat

In 1963, the United States started operating a small Triga-Mark II reactor built by General Atomics in South Vietnam as part of the US Atoms for Peace program. The Da Lat Nuclear Research Institute did its work in secret but by the end of the war, in March 1975, it was using fuel rods of the most advanced US design, much more advanced than anything the Soviet Union, its nuclear rival, had at the time, and the US was willing to go to very extreme measures to keep them from being captured by the rapidly advancing North Vietnamese Army.

It was so important that Secretary of State Henry Kissinger got involved. With the communist advance within days of liberating Da Lat, on 24 March 1975, Kissinger sent a secret telegram to the US Embassy in Saigon. In it he ordered that the fuel rods be removed and flown out, and that if there was no time for that, and if the core couldn't be buried under enough concrete, then the nuclear core, together with the fuel rods, was to be blown up. The concrete cover was not a realistic possibility at the time, according to Wally Hendrikson, who was then a nuclear fuel specialist at the Idaho National Laboratory and a member of the team sent in to carry our Kissinger's orders. In its report, he tells NHK World his understanding of his orders, if they couldn't get the fuel rods out in time:

“We were to dynamite the core.”

Retired Army Colonel Rich Miller told NHK,

"I actually did some calculations on how much TNT it would take, and so on.”

Team member removing fuel rod by hand

That it didn't come to that was due to the heroic efforts of a team of four men, including Wally Hendrikson, and John Horan, a fellow scientist. It is the log book maintained by Horan that detailed events from their landing at Cam Ly Airport on the morning of 30 March, when they were told by Ambassador Graham Martin:

“Blow up the reactor.”

Packing the fuel rods

Until their plane took off with the fuel rods safely aboard on the morning of 31 March, just two days before Da Lat was finally liberated from those ready to visit the region with long lasting death and destruction. The scientists accomplished this feat by disregarding all normal safety procedures and working through the night. They were up against a hard deadline because if they couldn't get the fuel rods out in time to make the scheduled transport flight the next day, the core was to be blown up. In the words of Wally Hendrikson,

“The town was a tourist town. A university was there. It was a great agricultural area. And you don’t do that sort of thing under normal conditions -- you don’t think of that. I can’t justify that. I think it would have been a war crime.”

Hendrickson describes removing the fuel rods

So to avoid any part in another Kissinger war crime, the team exposed themselves to the nuclear risk, worked in shifts, each of the four taking turns, removing the fuel rods by hand, while the other three sheltered behind a makeshift radiation wall, because the normal procedure that uses robots and cranes would have taken too long. They are the unsung heroes of this once secret tale of how the US planned to nuke Vietnam as it was fleeing the country.

Picture of empty core taken by NVA soldier

They could have dynamited the core, as they were told to do, and been safely away, but the explosion would have spread the nuclear material far and wide. This would have created a nuclear disaster of monumental proportions and been a war crime. This was in a South Vietnamese university and resort town that had largely been spared the war's ravages, which is probably why the US chose it as the site for the reactor, not a so-called enemy area, and yet the US considered it an option to murder its inhabitants to protect its secrets.

Da Lat Nuclear Reactor today

After the war, the reactor was reload with fuel rods from the Soviet Union and restarted. Today it is the only research nuclear reactor in Vietnam and has been operating safely for more than 30 years.

That was the 3rd time the US threatened to nuke Vietnam.

While Kissinger's orders to blow up the Da Lat reactor, if carried out, would have been like a dirty bomb, with the surrounding people and area "collateral damage" to a criminal hazardous waste disposal program, there are at least two documented occasions in which US government officials did advocate the use of real nuclear weapons to put down the liberation movement in Vietnam.

The first was in the 1950's when the French were fighting to get back its colony, and losing. On 22 April 1954, just two weeks before the French were to suffer their historic defeat at Dien Bien Phu, US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles asked the French Foreign Minister Georges Bidault, at a meeting in Paris:

"Would you like two atomic bombs?"

It was a serious offer of two tactical nuclear weapons to be used against the Vietnamese. The French showed great wisdom in declining. According to Professor Fred Logevall of Cornell University, Dulles

"at least talked in very general terms about the possibility, what did the French think about potentially using two or three tactical nuclear weapons against these enemy positions." [at Dien Bien Phu]

Bidault declined, he says,

"because he knew… that if this killed a lot of Viet Minh troops then it would also basically destroy the garrison itself"

At the time, the US was still hubristic from its nuclear devastation of Japan and whether it was "Atoms for Peace" or "Atoms for War," the nuclear genie was expected to deliver great blessings to the United States and the American Century to the world. Never mind the devastation left in its wake.

As Vice-President, Richard Nixon was one of the biggest hawks on Vietnam around that time. He was far more hawkish than President Eisenhower and almost certainty played a role in the Dulles offer. As President, he would threaten to 'go nuclear' over Vietnam a second time.

Archive tapes show Nixon wanted to use nuclear bomb in Vietnam

Newly declassified documents, published 29 May 2015, by the National Security Archive disclose top secret discussions by President Nixon and SecState Kissinger of nuclear options against North Vietnam. Roll the audio tape [excerpt]:

Nixon: "I'd rather use the nuclear bomb."
Kissinger: "That, I think, would just be too much."
Nixon: "The nuclear bomb. Does that bother you?"
Kissinger: (bad mumbling audio)
Nixon: "I just want you to think big, for Christ's sake."

This careless banter culminated in the execution of a secret "JCS Readiness Test"—the equivalent of a worldwide nuclear alert in October 1969. According to the National Security Archives:

[I]t involved military operations around the world, the continental United States, Western Europe, the Middle East, the Atlantic, Pacific, and the Sea of Japan. The operations included strategic bombers, tactical air, and a variety of naval operations, from movements of aircraft carriers and ballistic missile submarines to the shadowing of Soviet merchant ships heading toward Haiphong.

Nixon called it his "Madman" strategy, designed to make the North Vietnamese and their Soviet supporters think that Nixon just may be crazy enough to nuke Vietnam. Given that the US was to slaughter millions of Vietnamese with conventional weapons and Nixon had drastically increased the bombing, neither they nor anyone else could be sure that Nixon was just bluffing.

This information on Nixon's 1969 nuclear alert is new and it has yet to receive much exposure in the media. The Da Lat story that was broken by NHK Tokyo Newsroom a week ago is a very important story. It shows us, once again, the callus disregard for human life that characterised the US conduct of the war against Vietnam. It has received no publicity. None! Google "Wally Hendrikson, and John Horan" for the past month and you will get one relevant hit: Vietnam War Nuclear Mission - NEWSROOM TOKYO - TV. Once this blog post is published, you'll find two. That's how well you are served by the American Media!

Also published at Vietnam Full Disclosure

For more on the US War see my Vietnam:American Holocaust

Dylann Roof's racist website - The Last Rhodesian

This is Dylann Roof's website. The URL isn't provided by most media outlets reporting on it, although they assure us that the FBI is investigating. The time for an FBI investigation of this website was before its owner carried out his terror attack. That time has pasted. The URL is http://lastrhodesian.com/. Now you can investigate it for yourself. A brief look should be enough to convince you that these racists murders should be branded as acts of terrorism, a label which most of the media refuse to apply to this racist mass murder carried out in a historic black church, under the guidance of an extremist political philosophy, for the purposes of sparking a race war and terrorizing black people everywhere.

A reveiw of this website may also raise another question that both the media and the authorities are avoiding: Were others involved in this terrorist act? Who did he associate with? What extremist websites was he influenced by? Was he a member of any groups? At a minimum, we need to know if someone else took the pictures of Dylann Roof that appear on his facebook page, and who that person may have been. The media and the officials are treating this as if it is a foregone conclusion that Dylann Roof acted alone, but history has shown that these racist fanatics like to band together.

A few comments on his diatribe seem in order, before I present the ugly unredacted whole:

The event that truly awakened me was the Trayvon Martin case...It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right.

No one should have a shadow of a doubt that the judicial process that allowed Zimmerman to get away with murder has now led to the killing of more black people by other white supremacists. Justice denied means injustice multiplied.

The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens

If lone jihadist killers that learned their craft from the on-line academy are to be branded terrorist, then so should Dylann Roof. And there can be no doubt that his act was one of political terror directed at a specific group of people and supported by an extremist ideology.

The contradiction I feel in applying the terrorist label is similar to the contradiction I felt about the draft during the Vietnam War. I was opposed to the draft even existing, but as long as it did exist, I was in support of it being applied equally. I oppose the "terrorism" bandwagon, but if some domestic political crimes are to be prosecuted as terrorist offences, then this certainly should be one of them.

There is also the question of his connection to the larger white supremacist movement, both online and in the real world. So far most of the media and the official investigation are talking like this isn't an issue but clearly this killer was inspired by what he read on line, the Council of Conservative Citizens was only the first, and what other right-wing extremist were doing worldwide:

I researched deeper and found out what was happening in Europe

He also started taking extreme positions, even among the white supremacists. He felt himself a part of a movement:

Here I would also like to touch on the idea of a Norhtwest Front

However, don't expect any original thoughts in this manifesto. It is the same racist filth that has been floating around electronic media since before Shockley invented the transistor, such as:

Jewish agitation of the black race

There is also a bit that I think links him and others, including the State of South Carolina, who so proudly wave the Confederate flag. It has to do with his view on our commonly understood history of the fight against slavery that gave rise to that battle flag of those that fought to preserve slavery:

it is all based on historical lies, exaggerations and myths.

That this Confederate flag was displayed not only on the front of his car, and in many of his facebook pictures, but also next to the capital building tells us that Dylann Roof could feel support and justification for his act coming not only from the many on-line hate groups but also from the State of South Carolina.

One final notice about the grammar of this racist before I give you the unredacted whole, I notice the habit capitalizing "White" but not "black" and improperly beginning the name of a black person with a lowercase letter. Here it can clearly be seen as just one small aspect of a racist practise that we can now see ranges up to mass murder, and yet I have been subjected to the same sort of abuse on so-called "Left" lists like Change-Links@yahoogroups.com, by some who oppose my support for revolutionaries in Libya and Syria, without the slightest rebuke, or grounds either of improper grammar, or for bringing the not-so-secret language of racists into Left forums.

Since I suspect The Last Rhodesian won't be on-line much longer, I am copying it here:

The Last Rhodesian

I was not raised in a racist home or environment. Living in the South, almost every White person has a small amount of racial awareness, simply beause of the numbers of negroes in this part of the country. But it is a superficial awareness. Growing up, in school, the White and black kids would make racial jokes toward each other, but all they were were jokes. Me and White friends would sometimes would watch things that would make us think that “blacks were the real racists” and other elementary thoughts like this, but there was no real understanding behind it.

The event that truly awakened me was the Trayvon Martin case. I kept hearing and seeing his name, and eventually I decided to look him up. I read the Wikipedia article and right away I was unable to understand what the big deal was. It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right. But more importantly this prompted me to type in the words “black on White crime” into Google, and I have never been the same since that day. The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens. There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on White murders. I was in disbelief. At this moment I realized that something was very wrong. How could the news be blowing up the Trayvon Martin case while hundreds of these black on White murders got ignored?

From this point I researched deeper and found out what was happening in Europe. I saw that the same things were happening in England and France, and in all the other Western European countries. Again I found myself in disbelief. As an American we are taught to accept living in the melting pot, and black and other minorities have just as much right to be here as we do, since we are all immigrants. But Europe is the homeland of White people, and in many ways the situation is even worse there. From here I found out about the Jewish problem and other issues facing our race, and I can say today that I am completely racially aware.

Blacks

I think it is is fitting to start off with the group I have the most real life experience with, and the group that is the biggest problem for Americans.

Niggers are stupid and violent. At the same time they have the capacity to be very slick. Black people view everything through a racial lense. Thats what racial awareness is, its viewing everything that happens through a racial lense. They are always thinking about the fact that they are black. This is part of the reason they get offended so easily, and think that some thing are intended to be racist towards them, even when a White person wouldnt be thinking about race. The other reason is the Jewish agitation of the black race.

Black people are racially aware almost from birth, but White people on average dont think about race in their daily lives. And this is our problem. We need to and have to.

Say you were to witness a dog being beat by a man. You are almost surely going to feel very sorry for that dog. But then say you were to witness a dog biting a man. You will most likely not feel the same pity you felt for the dog for the man. Why? Because dogs are lower than men.

This same analogy applies to black and White relations. Even today, blacks are subconsciously viewed by White people are lower beings. They are held to a lower standard in general. This is why they are able to get away with things like obnoxious behavior in public. Because it is expected of them.

Modern history classes instill a subconscious White superiority complex in Whites and an inferiority complex in blacks. This White superiority complex that comes from learning of how we dominated other peoples is also part of the problem I have just mentioned. But of course I dont deny that we are in fact superior.

I wish with a passion that niggers were treated terribly throughout history by Whites, that every White person had an ancestor who owned slaves, that segregation was an evil an oppressive institution, and so on. Because if it was all it true, it would make it so much easier for me to accept our current situation. But it isnt true. None of it is. We are told to accept what is happening to us because of ancestors wrong doing, but it is all based on historical lies, exaggerations and myths. I have tried endlessly to think of reasons we deserve this, and I have only came back more irritated because there are no reasons.

Only a fourth to a third of people in the South owned even one slave. Yet every White person is treated as if they had a slave owning ancestor. This applies to in the states where slavery never existed, as well as people whose families immigrated after slavery was abolished. I have read hundreds of slaves narratives from my state. And almost all of them were positive. One sticks out in my mind where an old ex-slave recounted how the day his mistress died was one of the saddest days of his life. And in many of these narratives the slaves told of how their masters didnt even allowing whipping on his plantation.

Segregation was not a bad thing. It was a defensive measure. Segregation did not exist to hold back negroes. It existed to protect us from them. And I mean that in multiple ways. Not only did it protect us from having to interact with them, and from being physically harmed by them, but it protected us from being brought down to their level. Integration has done nothing but bring Whites down to level of brute animals. The best example of this is obviously our school system.

Now White parents are forced to move to the suburbs to send their children to “good schools”. But what constitutes a “good school”? The fact is that how good a school is considered directly corresponds to how White it is. I hate with a passion the whole idea of the suburbs. To me it represents nothing but scared White people running. Running because they are too weak, scared, and brainwashed to fight. Why should we have to flee the cities we created for the security of the suburbs? Why are the suburbs secure in the first place? Because they are White. The pathetic part is that these White people dont even admit to themselves why they are moving. They tell themselves it is for better schools or simply to live in a nicer neighborhood. But it is honestly just a way to escape niggers and other minorities.

But what about the White people that are left behind? What about the White children who, because of school zoning laws, are forced to go to a school that is 90 percent black? Do we really think that that White kid will be able to go one day without being picked on for being White, or called a “white boy”? And who is fighting for him? Who is fighting for these White people forced by economic circumstances to live among negroes? No one, but someone has to.

Here I would also like to touch on the idea of a Norhtwest Front. I think this idea is beyond stupid. Why should I for example, give up the beauty and history of my state to go to the Norhthwest? To me the whole idea just parralells the concept of White people running to the suburbs. The whole idea is pathetic and just another way to run from the problem without facing it.

Some people feel as though the South is beyond saving, that we have too many blacks here. To this I say look at history. The South had a higher ratio of blacks when we were holding them as slaves. Look at South Africa, and how such a small minority held the black in apartheid for years and years. Speaking of South Africa, if anyone thinks that think will eventually just change for the better, consider how in South Africa they have affirmative action for the black population that makes up 80 percent of the population.

It is far from being too late for America or Europe. I believe that even if we made up only 30 percent of the population we could take it back completely. But by no means should we wait any longer to take drastic action.

Anyone who thinks that White and black people look as different as we do on the outside, but are somehow magically the same on the inside, is delusional. How could our faces, skin, hair, and body structure all be different, but our brains be exactly the same? This is the nonsense we are led to believe.

Negroes have lower Iqs, lower impulse control, and higher testosterone levels in generals. These three things alone are a recipe for violent behavior. If a scientist publishes a paper on the differences between the races in Western Europe or Americans, he can expect to lose his job. There are personality traits within human families, and within different breeds of cats or dogs, so why not within the races?
From George Zimmerman to Dylann Roof - Justice denied means injustice multiplied! http://
A horse and a donkey can breed and make a mule, but they are still two completely different animals. Just because we can breed with the other races doesnt make us the same.

In a modern history class it is always emphasized that, when talking about “bad” things Whites have done in history, they were White. But when we lern about the numerous, almost countless wonderful things Whites have done, it is never pointed out that these people were White. Yet when we learn about anything important done by a black person in history, it is always pointed out repeatedly that they were black. For example when we learn about how George Washington carver was the first nigger smart enough to open a peanut.

On another subject I want to say this. Many White people feel as though they dont have a unique culture. The reason for this is that White culture is world culture. I dont mean that our culture is made up of other cultures, I mean that our culture has been adopted by everyone in the world. This makes us feel as though our culture isnt special or unique. Say for example that every business man in the world wore a kimono, that every skyscraper was in the shape of a pagoda, that every door was a sliding one, and that everyone ate every meal with chopsticks. This would probably make a Japanese man feel as though he had no unique traditional culture.

I have noticed a great disdain for race mixing White women within the White nationalists community, bordering on insanity it. These women are victims, and they can be saved. Stop.

Jews

Unlike many White naitonalists, I am of the opinion that the majority of American and European jews are White. In my opinion the issues with jews is not their blood, but their identity. I think that if we could somehow destroy the jewish identity, then they wouldnt cause much of a problem. The problem is that Jews look White, and in many cases are White, yet they see themselves as minorities. Just like niggers, most jews are always thinking about the fact that they are jewish. The other issue is that they network. If we could somehow turn every jew blue for 24 hours, I think there would be a mass awakening, because people would be able to see plainly what is going on.

I dont pretend to understand why jews do what they do. They are enigma.

Hispanics

Hispanics are obviously a huge problem for Americans. But there are good hispanics and bad hispanics. I remember while watching hispanic television stations, the shows and even the commercials were more White than our own. They have respect for White beauty, and a good portion of hispanics are White. It is a well known fact that White hispanics make up the elite of most hispanics countries. There is good White blood worht saving in Uruguay, Argentina, Chile and even Brasil.

But they are still our enemies.

East Asians

I have great respent for the East Asian races. Even if we were to go extinct they could carry something on. They are by nature very racist and could be great allies of the White race. I am not opposed at all to allies with the Northeast Asian races.

Patriotism

I hate the sight of the American flag. Modern American patriotism is an absolute joke. People pretending like they have something to be proud while White people are being murdered daily in the streets. Many veterans believe we owe them something for “protecting our way of life” or “protecting our freedom”. But im not sure what way of life they are talking about. How about we protect the White race and stop fighting for the jews. I will say this though, I myself would have rather lived in 1940's American than Nazi Germany, and no this is not ignorance speaking, it is just my opinion. So I dont blame the veterans of any wars up until after Vietnam, because at least they had an American to be proud of and fight for.

An Explanation

To take a saying from a film, “I see all this stuff going on, and I dont see anyone doing anything about it. And it pisses me off.”. To take a saying from my favorite film, “Even if my life is worth less than a speck of dirt, I want to use it for the good of society.”.

I have no choice. I am not in the position to, alone, go into the ghetto and fight. I chose Charleston because it is most historic city in my state, and at one time had the highest ratio of blacks to Whites in the country. We have no skinheads, no real KKK, no one doing anything but talking on the internet. Well someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me.

Unfortunately at the time of writing I am in a great hurry and some of my best thoughts, actually many of them have been to be left out and lost forever. But I believe enough great White minds are out there already.

Please forgive any typos, I didnt have time to check it.

These photos came from Dylann Roof's facebook page, which has been take down. I got them from Radar On-line:


Click here for a list of my other blogs on SyriaClick here for a list of my other blogs on LibyaClick here for a list of my other blogs on Tunisia, Egypt and the Arab SpringClick here for a list of my blogs on Occupy Los Angeles

As Assad loses ground, he gains a new air force

Recently, the tide of war has been turning against the Assad regime as it has lost ground both to the terrorist army ISIS and to a revolutionary coalition of anti-Assad forces. While the loss of Palmyra has gotten a lot of attention, rebel wins, like this one reported Wednesday by Qasioun News, have also been gaining ground:

Opposition troops defeat regime forces in Jobar
26 May 2015
Damascus – Fierce clashes were conducted between Opposition troops and Syrian regime forces around Jobar neighborhood outskirts in Damascus, the clashes focused on Al-Manasher side and Al-Mutahalak side, clashes came after regime forces has bombed one of the building around the neighborhood, in the same time while regime forces shelled with tank missiles over clashes areas.

In the same context, Syrian regime forces shelled with mortars over Douma city in Rif Dimashq, led to injure 15 civilians, among them women and children. More...

While the Assad regime continues to be bank-rolled and supplied with weapons by Russia and Iran, the strength of the official Syrian Arab Army had long ago been sapped by defection and attrition. For the past several years the regime has had to rely on sectarian gangs like the Iranian trained National Defense Force and foreign armies like the Lebanese Hezbollah or Iraqi Shia militias to do its fighting on the ground. Now these forces are beginning to falter and Assad has no reserves to send in, so he is forced to fall back and give up ground.

The one advantage he still has, thanks to the forbearance of the world's great powers, is the ability to cause almost unlimited death and destruction from above. This is euphemistically known in military circles as "air supremacy." Since August of last year, air space over Syria has been shared by US and Syrian war planes - not attacking each other - but co-ordinating their activities so as to jointly maintain air supremacy over Syria.

President Obama said that he was sending US war planes into Syria only to fight ISIS and another unheard of group they said threatened US national security. Although the Obama administration claimed it wasn't there to help Assad, many observers saw that even by just targeting ISIS, Obama was freeing up Syrian air assets to continue barrel bombing schools, hospitals and breadlines.

Now, just as the Assad regime is losing ground to a big new rebel coalition that includes al Nusra, the FSA and other militias in Idlib and northern Hama provinces, the US has stepped up its air campaign against those attempting to overthrow the Assad regime. From recent reports it sounds like Assad has gained a new air force with Obama targeting opposition forces in Idlib and Aleppo as Assad is fighting to preserve positions there. From Reuters we have:

US led air raid kills 15 al Nusra fighters in Syria -monitor
20 May 2015
BEIRUT - An air raid by U.S.-led forces killed at least 15 members of al Qaeda's Syria wing Nusra Front in the northwest of the country on Wednesday, a group monitoring the Syrian civil war said.

The raid hit the headquarters of the group in Tawama village in the western countryside of Aleppo province, said the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which gathers information from a network of sources on the ground.

Most of the fighters killed were Turkish, it said, and there were several also wounded. It was not immediately clear how senior they were.

U.S.-led forces have been striking jihadists in Syria and neighbouring Iraq since mid-2014 and have mainly targeted the militant Islamic State group, but have also killed a smaller number of Nusra Front members in Syria. More...

Also Qasioun News reports:

Coalition targets Al-Nusra in Aleppo
8:59pm 20 May 2015
Aleppo (Qasioun) – US-Led Coalition launched airstrikes over Al-Tawama village in Aleppo western countryside, targeting Al-Nusra front centers in Al-Baladya building, and another building over the village’s outskirts, led to kill 12 fighters from Al-Nusra.

Also destroyed the centers completely, while Civil defense men try to search for survivors and take-out the dead bodies under ruins, among heavy spreading for Al-Nusra front’s fighters.

US-Led coalition drones was watched flying over Al-Tawama village’s airspace in Aleppo countryside.

Some of these recent operations might as well as been joint US-Assad strikes:

Qasioun News reports:

Coalition and regime airstrikes over Idlib countryside
9:16pm 20 May 2015
Idlib (Qasioun) – US-Led coalition warplanes launched airstrikes over the area located between Al-Sahara and Al-Tawama villages, northeast of Sarmada city in Idlib northern countryside, targeting Al-Nusra front centers, without any losses reported till now.

In the same context, Syrian regime warplanes launched airstrikes over Magharet Mirza in Maaret Al-Nouman eastern countryside, led to kill a woman and injure 2 civilians.

Qasioun News reports:

International coalition air forces and regime air force are partners in the Sky10:54am 22 May 2015
Aleppo (Qasioun) regime air forces dropped barrel bombs over Alfardus neighborhood causing material damages only.

Besides two civilian were killed and many were injured including medics due to missiles by regime forces over Abu Jabar village in eastern countryside.

While one civilian was injured in Bustan Alkuser neighborhood due to firing by Regime’s Sniper where he located in Al-Baldi palace, besides regime forces shelled with tank AlShaar neighborhood.

Regime air forces carried out airstrikes over outskirt of Kuwers air force Base in eastern countryside, while International coalition air forces carried out many raids over ISIL’ sites in Sareen town in eastern countryside.

New: #Nusra statement about latest coalition bombing on their bases in #Aleppo & #Idlib. (Arabic) pic.twitter.com/JM60p6wQ4r

— Abu Saeed Al-Halabi (@_saeed_alhalabi) May 21, 2015

Coalition airstrike targetting 'Jabhat al Nusrah HQ' also killed this 9 years old girl! @HadiAlabdallah reports. F*ck the coaliton. #Syria

— Amazighi (@TetoudSyria) May 21, 2015

Also, US-led coalition targeted Jaysh al-Fatah rebels' HQ in Idlib, in Basyoon area between Kafranbel and Kasanfra:

#‎Syria‬ ‪#‎Idlib‬: Jabal AlZawiyah: Dozens of injuries were reported due to the coalition's air combats targeting the Nusra Front locations in Tawama town and Basyoon area between Kafar Nobbol and Kasanfra which led to destroying the quarters entirely LCCSY 25m
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note - No notice from the International Alliance re any Idlib strike

Michael Karadjis has provided English translations for these important communications:

Confirmed by rebels and also Nusra:

US-led coalition bombed Nusra positions in Idlib where 7 Nusra members according to the article above were martyred, in addition to a simultaneous bombing happening in Western Aleppo where 15 Nusra members were also killed at the municipality building in the Tawama village.

إلى المجاهدين و النشطاء وكل محب للمجاهدين قد تداعى إخوانكم من عوام الشام وثوارهم إلى مظاهرات عارمة استنكاراً لقصف الصليبيين للمجاهدين

— د.عبدالله ﷴ المحيسني (@mheisny) May 21, 2015

Shari Muhaisini calls on activists and mujahideen leaders to make large scale protests condemning the recent US strikes

#NEW: Now reported U.S. coalition strikes targeted Kafranbel in Idlib countryside! https://t.co/d773Mc7rlw. #Syria

— Flea1862 (@Flea1337) May 20, 2015

Click here for a list of my other blogs on Syria