THIS Is What U.S. Foreign Policy Really Looks Like

The mainstream media in the United States did something unusual on Thursday—they look the time to show their viewers what the aftermath of an air strike looks like.

They did this only after pictures and videos went viral on social media showing one survivor of an air strike in Aleppo, Syria, a 5-year-old boy named Omran Daqneesh.

Aleppo is the definition of a war-torn city, and whenever you see the mainstream media talking about this incident, there is a good chance they are also going to be talking about how the Syrian government or Russia is responsible.

While that might be the case in this bombing, the fact they are not mentioning is the U.S. also launches air strikes that lead to civilian causalities. In fact, just last week we were part of the coalition that bombed a school in Yemen were 10 children were killed. But do you see any footage of that on mainstream media television?

President Obama has become known as the “drone king” because he has launched drone strikes in a number of countries—Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, you name it. But the thing is that we don’t usually see the footage of those drone strikes. We don’t see the civilians that are killed, we don’t see the villages wrecked.

We live in a post-9/11 era, and while we all have memories of that tragic day, we also know that we’ve grown up listening to each president talk about how we need to fight this terrorist group or that terrorist group.

We listen to Obama talk about how we need to fight ISIS, and we should be afraid of ISIS, but do we ever stop to think about the fact that there is a new generation of kids being raised in those war-torn countries that have gown up under U.S. invasion?

It is 2016, and in this election year, we need to start asking some serious questions about our country’s foreign policy, such as: why are we invading other countries without addressing the consequences, why are we launching drone strikes and practically justifying civilian casualties, and why are we promoting a political system where our foreign policy can be perfectly summed up by the phrase “endless war”?

Follow Rachel Blevins on Facebook and Twitter.

avatar
Rachel Blevins is a journalist who aspires to break the left/right paradigm in media and politics by pursuing truth and questioning existing narratives. For story tips, contact rachelblevins1@gmail.com.

Syrian Fighters To Be Resettled in The USA

Free Syrian Army fighters hold their weapons during what activists said was a call for leaders of other military groups to start liberating the city of Hama from forces loyal to Syria's President Bashar al-Assad, in northern Hama countryside June 9, 2014. Picture taken June 9, 2014. REUTERS/Badi Khlif (SYRIA - Tags: POLITICS CIVIL UNREST CONFLICT MILITARY)

Free Syrian Army fighters hold their weapons during what activists said was a call for leaders of other military groups to start liberating the city of Hama from forces loyal to Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad, in northern Hama countryside June 9, 2014. Picture taken June 9, 2014. REUTERS/Badi Khlif (SYRIA – Tags: POLITICS CIVIL UNREST CONFLICT MILITARY)

Soon there could be an influx of Syrian refugee families settled in America.  They would be typically settled in a small city, let’s say like Flint, Michigan.  The city authorities would receive help and a few special federal programs to assist in supplying the needs of these newcomers to USA.  They would be given a house or an apartment, which would be subsidized under a county housing program which in turn is paid from federal money.  They would be given free medical coverage under an existing county or state medical program, and they could visit the local medical centers free of charge.  The county medical bills would be sent to a federal source for payment.

These new Syrian refugees are not your typical group, who we have seen on TV, walking through Europe in summer 2015.  These newcomers to America are not from the refugee camps in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan which the media has followed for years.

This is a special group with direct ties to the federal government of America.  These are the fighters of the Free Syrian Army and their wives and children.  To the Americans welcoming them into their communities, they would appear to be Syrian families who have suffered over 5 years of war and untold stories of loss and hardship.  But, in reality these were the fighting men, the mercenaries of the US CIA program in Turkey and Syria. Some people labeled them “The John McCain’s Army”, in honor of the Republican Senator of Arizona, who was the FSA’s main supporter in Congress.  Sen. McCain gave such passionate speeches in Congress; he was able to convince his fellow Senators of the need to send American military weapons, satellite imagery and technical training to these fighters.  These men were paid large monthly paychecks, much more that the average income of uneducated laborers in Syria.  In 2011 their monthly pay was $1,000.  As the years went by, their salary was increased.  The payroll was managed by an official of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, who was playing a key role in the regime change program in Syria.  The paychecks were issued in Turkey, payable in US dollars.

USA, UK, NATO, EU, Australia, Canada, Jordan, Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia each had instrumental roles in the international attack on Syria for the purpose of regime change.  People questioned: how could democratic countries promote armed terrorism for the purpose of bringing democracy to Syria?  Experts pondered how democracy could be achieved from the barrel of a gun.  The Americans never wondered how monarchies like Saudi Arabia and Qatar could bring democracy to Syria, when there has never been any freedom or democracy in either country.

In the Vietnam War, the American government used a local tribe to fight for USA.  They were a close-knit mountain tribe called Hmong.  They were trained and given weapons.  They were sent on specific missions to kill both North Vietnamese troops, and also others.  It was a highly secret covert program.  Those Hmongs fighting had made a specific deal with the US federal government.  That in the event of failure on the US side in the war, they would be evacuated to USA and would be safely placed into new lives with full benefits to care for them.  I am sure there were sleepless nights among them, wondering who will win the war, and would the Americans fulfill their promises to them.  In the end, the US government stood by their word and evacuated the Hmong people, in the thousands, to Fresno, California.  There, they were put into free houses and apartments; all paid by the Fresno county Section 8 program.  Section 8 was a program designed to help the poorest people, typically with young children.  Fresno county government offices then billed the US federal government offices to cover the free housing for the Hmong ‘refugees’.   They were given free medical coverage at Valley Medical Center, which is the Fresno county funded hospital.  Each was given a Medi-Cal card, which entitled them to free medical.  The Medi-Cal program was a California State funded program to cover the poorest Californians.

 They were given coverage on the Food Stamp program, which gave free foods to the Hmongs, through the existing welfare program.

History is about to repeat itself, as the Syrian Arab Army with their allies inside Syria have taken strategic areas in Damascus, Aleppo, Latakia, Palmyra, Homs, Deir Ez Zor and many other locations, and the US sponsored ‘rebels’ appear to be facing defeat on the battlefields.  The FSA spokesman has already predicted defeat.

When and if this happens in the coming days or weeks, the FSA will pull back into Turkey and the US agents, who are headquartered in Adana, will coordinate the safe and swift removal of the FSA and their wives and children.  They will be put on chartered planes from the Adana airport to arrive finally at their new home, which could be Flint, Michigan.

Flint is a troubled community.  It has severe water problems as well as economic problems.  The Flint city and county officials could be more than happy to have special federal money coming their way, which would be tied to the “Syrian Refugee” settlement.  The local churches, mosques and various charities would all rally around their newcomers.  The American people are well known for their generous and welcoming nature.  Everyone in USA can trace their ancestry back to newcomers at some point in time.  America is a melting-pot and they are proud of that heritage.

At first glance, these Syrian refugees may appear to be war-weary and looking for a new life of security and peace.  It might take years for some incident to happen, where their military training and terrorist background could re-surface.   Their American neighbors will not be aware that the Free Syrian Army was founded on the principals of Radical Wahhabism.  The founders of the FSA were all fighting for the purpose of regime change in Syria, in order to establish Sharia law, and to transform the secular government of Syrian into an ISIS.

The American CIA plan of attack on Syria was formulated in 2006, and the wheels put into motion.  The Wahhabism ideology was keeping pace with the CIA regime change plan.  The Muslim Brotherhood had infiltrated every major city in USA and UK, and had portrayed themselves as legitimate political persons, who just happened to be Muslims.  Knowing that the US and UK protect religious rights; they found safe haven and grew stronger and stronger.  The CIA decided to formulate the FSA, and describe it as “Freedom Fighters” to the western audiences, through the network of mainstream media.  Political propaganda machines went to work through CNN, BBC, France24 and Al Jazeera as they cranked out story after story of Syrian ‘regime’ atrocities, while never mentioning the FSA war crimes and atrocities.  Knowing that most Americans never check the details of news report independently, they could fabricate stories and use fabricated videos to change the hearts and minds of western viewers into believing that the “John McCain’s Army” were freedom fighters, akin to the founding fathers of America.

There are already hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees in Germany, and scattered through various European countries.  The Europeans are fearful that terrorists could be hiding among the mainly normal refugees.  They are fearful of future terrorist attacks which could be committed by the very refugees they welcomed in and housed, clothed and fed.

Welcoming in hundreds of past terrorists, such as the FSA, could have disastrous results in USA.  When you ask the people of Aleppo: “Who made you leave your homes?” they answered, “The FSA.” When you ask the Christians in Homs: “Who destroyed your churches and killed the Priests?” they answered, “The FSA.”  When you ask the 16 year old Christian girl near Homs: “Who captured you and gang raped you for 6 months in 2012?” she answered, “The FSA.”

Given the facts and past history of the Free Syrian Army, would you want them living next door to your family?

Source — http://ahtribune.com/history/1092-syrian-fighters.html

Follow WE ARE CHANGE on SOCIAL MEDIA


Sign up become a patron and Show your support for alternative news

for Just 1$ a month you can help Grow We are change
patreon
We use Bitcoin Too !  
12HdLgeeuA87t2JU8m4tbRo247Yj5u2TVP
Join and Up Vote Our STEEMIT 
avatar
Danny F. Quest, is an artist, blogger, journalist, and media personality. Co. Founder of TheTruther.us and author of “120 characters or less’ the guide to winning a debate in the digital age”. Danny now works as a Freelance journalist and graphic designer for WeAreChange.org. Danny’s next big project is “30 days in Gaza” a documentary bringing light to the current conditions of the Palestinian people living under Israeli occupation.

U.S.-Backed Saudi Coalition Bombs School, Hospital In Yemen

After bombing a school and killing ten children on Saturday, the U.S.-backed Saudi coalition launched airstrikes in Yemen, resulting in yet another bombing of a Doctors Without Borders hospital on Monday. This report is following several previous attacks on these hospitals by the US and Israel over the past 5 years.

Initial reports claimed that seven people were killed and 13 wounded. However, a report from Reuters cited a witness who said that the total number of causalities was still unknown, because “medics could not immediately evacuate the wounded,” due to the fact that war planes “continued to fly over the area and first responders feared more bombings.”

Monday’s bombing came just two days after an airstrike hit a school in a neighboring province of northern Yemen, killing ten children on Saturday. t

While UNICEF claimed that the children were studying in their classrooms at the time of the airstrike, the Saudi-led coalition justified the bombing by claiming that it had targeted a camp where Yemen’s Houthi rebels were training child soldiers.

After peace talks broke down last week, the coalition launched 30 airstrikes in one day, in the name of defeating Houthi rebels in Yemen. At least 18 civilians were killed at a market outside of Yemen’s capital.

Not only is the United States a part of the coalition responsible for the bombings, it touts Saudi Arabia as a close ally, despite the country’s long history of human rights violations.

While the U.S. is the largest exporter of weapons in the world, Saudi Arabia is the country responsible for purchasing the most weapons from the U.S., and just last week the Pentagon announced that it plans to sell over $1 billion more in weapons and military advisory to Saudi Arabia.

As Saudi Arabia leads the charge into a bloody battle that has already left at least 35 civilians dead in just one week, it raises several questions: Why isn’t the Pentagon stepping in? Why does the U.S. still consider Saudi Arabia to be such a close ally?  f it were a country like China or Russia launching airstrikes that led to such high civilian casualties, would the U.S. still be willing to fund the cause?

Follow Rachel Blevins on Facebook and Twitter.

avatar
Rachel Blevins is a journalist who aspires to break the left/right paradigm in media and politics by pursuing truth and questioning existing narratives. For story tips, contact rachelblevins1@gmail.com.

WHY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA REFUSES TO TALK ABOUT THE TPP

TPP MEDIA preff claire

 

(UR) United States — After two years with nary a mention from the mainstream press, the corporate windfall otherwise known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) finally earned some, albeit still inadequate, attention.

Considering a New York Times poll from June 2015, which found an alarming 78 percent of respondents had no substantial knowledge of the looming agreement — 30 percent said they hadn’t heard or read much about it, while 48 percent had zero knowledge of it whatsoever — the dearth in coverage by mainstream media allowed the TPP to go virtually unnoticed by the public it directly affects.

From August 1, 2013 through January 31, 2015, Media Matters for America tracked how often the TPP earned a mention from the Big Three major cable news outlets: CNN, Fox, and MSNBC. During that lengthy period, CNN and Fox acknowledged the TPP just one time each — and while MSNBC appeared more on the ball, with 73 mentions, the now-canceled The Ed Show was responsible for 71 of those.

While it might seem remiss, if not wholly irresponsible, for such an expansive international trade agreement to escape the mainstream media’s attention, the omission wasn’t unintentional.

As Zaid Jilani explained in the Intercept:

“MSNBC’s owner, Comcast, has lobbied for the TPP. Last year, it fired host Ed Schultz, an outspoken opponent of the agreement.

“Time Warner, the parent company of CNN owner Turner Broadcasting, also lobbied for the TPP. 21st Century Fox — the legal successor to News Corporation, which operates Fox News — lobbied for passage as well.

“But using the television transcription service TV Eyes, The Intercept found that during the month of July 2016 alone, the TPP was mentioned 455 times by CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC — about six times as often as during the entire 18-month period studied by Media Matters.”

Those mentions, most assuredly, demonstrate progress in bringing light to the shady deal; but, with the exceptions of The Ed Show and Bernie Sanders and his supporters, the content has been generalized, rather than substantive, as a component of the presidential election. Donald Trump frequently decries the TPP as unacceptable and undesirable, though — in typical form — his tirades lack a depth of explanation.

As revealed in documents obtained by Wikileaks and reported by independent media, the TPP is nothing short of a grand corporate coup — some have even termed the measure ‘NAFTA on steroids,’ for its resemblance, exponentially, to the North American Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA notoriously facilitated the ability for manufacturers to seek lower-wage workers outside the United States with little restriction — leaving at leastone million skilled workers without employment, while lining the pockets of countless big businesses.

Now, the TPP promises to do more of the same — with countless nefarious additional provisions that go far beyond the manufacturing sector to directly impact the lives of every person in the U.S. And that, in itself, summarizes precisely why the pending trade agreement has been negotiated covertly, with secrecy normally provided only to matters of utmost national security.

But perhaps even the shallow attention brought to the TPP by the presidential election has sparked curiosity sufficient enough for the public to begin to question its efficacy.

tpp art

As David Dayen wrote in Salon:

“Here’s one of the best indicators that Congress won’t approve the Trans-Pacific Partnership: business groups are running a public campaign in support of it. I know that sounds like a paradox, but if the image of the TPP weren’t so tattered, there would be no need for such an overt PR campaign.”

Image credit: Flickr/DonkeyHotey

Image credit: Flickr/DonkeyHotey

AUTHOR –>  CLAIRE BERNISH


This article (Why the Mainstream Media Refuses to Talk About the TPP) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish andUndergroundReporter.org. If you spot a typo, please email the error and the name of the article toundergroundreporter2016@gmail.com.

avatar
Danny F. Quest, is an artist, blogger, journalist, and media personality. Co. Founder of TheTruther.us and author of “120 characters or less’ the guide to winning a debate in the digital age”. Danny now works as a Freelance journalist and graphic designer for WeAreChange.org. Danny’s next big project is “30 days in Gaza” a documentary bringing light to the current conditions of the Palestinian people living under Israeli occupation.

Calls to Leave United Nations Get Louder in the USA

Calls to Leave United Nations Get Louder in the USA

Via. ALEX GORKA |www.strategic-culture.org

 

In the immediate aftermath of Brexit, the issue of its relationship with the UN has come to the fore in the United States.

Sarah Palin, once the governor of Alaska and vice presidential candidate, suggested that the United States take similar steps to leave the United Nations. «May UN shackles be next on the chopping block», she said.

Palin demanded the United States extricate itself from the UN, which «dissolves a nation’s self-determination and sovereignty». The first Republican woman nominated for the vice presidency is an influential figure. She is one of the Tea Party leaders. Her book Going Rogue has sold more than two million copies.

In 2014, Palin launched an online news network, the Sarah Palin Channel.

She has the means to influence the US public opinion.

Now the issue will hit public discourse as the pro-nationalist, anti-globalist sentiment is spreading in the wake of the British «leave» vote.

Actually Sarah Palin’s statement is just part of the story and she is not the only public figure and politician to raise it. Alabama congressman Mike Rogers wants the United States to exit the United Nations. Rep. Mike Rogers

(R-AL3) has long been one of the most vocal opponents of the UN and recently laid out his major issues with the multi-national organization in a statement.

He believes the United States’ participation with the United Nations should end immediately. According to Rogers, the UN continues to prove it’s an inefficient bureaucracy and a complete waste of American tax dollars. «Why should the American taxpayer bankroll an international organization that works against America’s interests around the world?» Rogers asked rhetorically. «The time is now to restore and protect American sovereignty and get out of the United Nations».

Congressman Rogers’ frustrations with the UN led him to introduce H.R. 1205, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2015, which he said would «end country’s participation in the UN and any organizations affiliated with them».

Several other liberty-minded congressmen have also sponsored the legislation.

If approved, the legislation would repeal the UN Participation Act of 1945 and shutter the US government’s mission to the outfit. It would also «terminate all membership by the United States in the United Nations, and in any organ, specialized agency, commission, or other formally affiliated body of the United Nations». That specifically includes UNESCO along with the World Health Organization, the UN Environment Program (UNEP), and more. It would end all US involvement in all UN conventions and agreements, too.

The proposed law, introduced in numerous legislative session of Congress in recent decades, would also end all funding to the UN and all of its agencies. The legislation also aims to end all US military involvement in UN military «peacekeeping» schemes and ban United States troops from serving under UN command. Finally, the bill would seek to evict the UN from US soil. It would also ban any use of American government facilities by the global outfit, while stripping UN officials and dignitaries of diplomatic immunity.

In the US Senate, pro-sovereignty sentiment is going strong. Last year, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a former contender for the 2016 nomination which he lost to Donald Trump, blasted the UN and suggested it should be dismantled.

The 2014 Gallup poll showed that a staggering 57 percent of Americans believed the UN was doing a «bad job», versus 37 percent who thought it was doing a «good job».

More than two thirds of Americans were upset with the UN, and independents were also overwhelmingly opposed. But even among Democrats, half thought the UN was doing a bad job.

Indeed, especially in recent years, the UN has become increasingly vocal in attacking the US for violations of human rights and international laws. In 2014 The United Nations Committee Against Torture released a report that deeply criticized the US for racial discrimination and other Civil Rights issues, including electronic surveillance, CIA interrogations, immigrant detentions, the failure to shut down the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay etc.

The report’s findings are the «concluding observations» of hearings during the «Convention against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment», which took place in Geneva.

A new UN report in 2015 criticized the United States for being the only country in the world that imprisons children for life without parole.

The same year the United States was sharply criticized over its human rights record by numerous countries at the United Nations Office at Geneva.

Member nations blasted the US at the United Nations’ Human Rights Council, rebuking the country over its human rights record. During the second Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the US, country after country urged the US to strengthen legislation and expand training to eliminate racism and excessive use of force by law enforcement officers.

The legality of using drones by the US has been questioned many times by the international community.

In 2003 the US attacked Iraq without the approval of the UN Security Council, in 2011 as a member of NATO alliance it went beyond the UN resolution on Libya.

The list can go on. There is a plethora of examples to prove that the US is a country in serious trouble with the international law.

The UN may be imperfect but at a time when the global security is under threat, let it be terrorists, rogue states of climate change, the Organization remains a vital instrument of international governance in the interdependent world. Engagement and cooperation, not isolation or unilateralism, are the keys to security. After WWII, the world would have been a much worse place without the UN. This international body has managed many conflicts. The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the International Atomic Energy Agency have greatly contributed into preventing a nuclear war. A half dozen core human rights treaties and the creation of a Human Rights High Commissioner to monitor them have changed the world for the better. An extensive international criminal justice system has been developed under UN auspices. More broadly, the UN has addressed social problems to feed the hungry and shelter the dispossessed. It has helped to provide education to millions of children. A world without the United Nations would have thrown us back to the Stone Age. With the UN jettisoned, the US would return to pre-Second World War isolationism in the age of the computer, the Internet, and the high-speed airplane.

The global law and order are threatened by irresponsible US politicians willing to free the country from the burden of international law and global commitments. The decision will undermine every foundation the contemporary world is based on. It’s time to ring alarm bells.

Source: www.strategic-culture.org

Follow WE ARE CHANGE on SOCIAL MEDIA


Sign up become a patron and Show your support for alternative news

for Just 1$ a month you can help Grow We are change
patreon
We use Bitcoin Too !  
12HdLgeeuA87t2JU8m4tbRo247Yj5u2TVP
Wearechange.org/donate

Visit The Gear Store Wearechange.org/gear

avatar
Danny F. Quest, is an artist, blogger, journalist, and media personality. Co. Founder of TheTruther.us and author of “120 characters or less’ the guide to winning a debate in the digital age”. Danny now works as a Freelance journalist and graphic designer for WeAreChange.org. Danny’s next big project is “30 days in Gaza” a documentary bringing light to the current conditions of the Palestinian people living under Israeli occupation.

Pin It on Pinterest