Wednesday, August 31, 2016

72 Mass Graves Unearthed in Iraq and Syria !

Just the tip of iceberg...More to come...stay tuned...

Crimes against Humanity: Seventy-two Daesh-ISIS Mass Graves Containing Up to 15,000 Discovered in Iraq and Syria. Who are the State Sponsors of ISIS? Who is Training, Who is Financing Them?



As Islamic State retreats the true scale of its atrocities is becoming apparent. Associated Press collated existing documents and testimonies to produce the fullest picture yet – but activists say that thousands more victims buried in shallow mass graves are yet to be discovered.
The agency says it has pinpointed the exact location of 72 Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) mass graves – 17 of those in Syria, the rest in Iraq – which contain anything from at least 5,200 to over 15,000 victims.
The information came from AllSource, a satellite intelligence firm that has matched photos from space with eyewitness accounts, aid groups such as Yazda, which are recording the systematic slaughter, and often IS itself, which has boasted about killing hundreds of ‘infidels’ and ‘traitors’ in its own regularly-broadcast videos.
“They are beheading them, shooting them, running them over in cars, all kinds of killing techniques, and they don’t even try to hide it,” said Sirwan Jalal, who has been appointed by Iraqi Kurds to investigate the mass burials.
The biggest documented massacre was committed in Camp Speicher in Tikrit in June 2014, when Islamic State gunned down between 1,000 and 1,700 unarmed Shiite Iraqi Air Force recruits, forcing them to shout slogans as they lay down, waiting to be executed.
Thirty-six of the perpetrators were hanged for the war crime earlier this month.
But while that location was well known, another massacre happened near Ramadi just two days earlier. AllSource looked for images of disturbed earth in the city in the northwest of Iraq – big enough to be noticeable from a satellite image – that tallied with accounts given by survivors to Human Rights Watch.
This was a testimony by a man only known as A.S., who was singled out for being a Shiite and put in a line in which each man had to shout out his number: ”I was number 43. I heard them say ’615,’ and then one ISIS guy said, ‘We’re going to eat well tonight.’ A man behind us asked, ‘Are you ready?’ Another person answered ‘Yes,’ and began shooting at us with a machine-gun.”
A.S. told HRW that he escaped by playing dead and then sneaking out at night, among about 15 others, a common tactic among the few survivors of such large-scale massacres.
With war still ongoing, in places such as Hardan, a Kurdish area, the authorities have merely roped off the mass graves, and say there are currently no resources to excavate and document the dead.
As the bodies continue to decay, and the wind blows away the earth, revealing the still-clothed bones, locals are served a daily reminder of the horrors.
“I have lots of people I know there. Mostly friends and neighbors,”Arkan Qassem, who lives in a village outside Hardan, told AP. ”It’s very difficult to look at them every day.”
With IS counting different sects – such as Shias and Yazidis – different ethnicities – such as Kurds – and even Sunni tribes as their enemies, there are estimated to be “hundreds” of mass graves that will take years to be fully mapped, and their victims to be given a proper burial.
“This is a drop in an ocean of mass graves expected to be discovered in the future in Syria,” said Ziad Awad, from The Eye of the City, a publication in Syria’s Deir ez-Zor, which is cataloguing the IS massacres.

Sunday, August 28, 2016

Follow the money trail for source of 'Russian / Putin threat' paranoia

MSM working overtime to churn out barrage of propaganda to benefit their paymasters...

Follow the money trail for source of 'Russian threat' paranoia
Neil Clark
RT, 22 Aug, 2016


You’d have to have been locked in a wardrobe if you live in the West not to have heard ominous phrases like ‘The Russian threat’, ‘Russian aggression in Europe’ and ‘Russia set to invade Poland/Estonia/ Ukraine/Finland’.

Certain people are trying to scare us witless about Russia and the ‘threat’ the country apparently poses. The hysteria reminds one to the build up to the Iraq war, when we were warned every day about the ‘threat’ of Saddam’s deadly WMDs, which - surprise, surprise - turned out not to exist.

Now, we can talk for hours about grand, highfalutin theories in the field of geopolitics and international relations in attempts to explain why this is happening.

But ‘follow the money’ trail is all we really have to do. Ask yourself who benefits financially from all this scaremongering and then you’ll understand it.

This week, The Intercept revealed how US defense contractors have been telling investors that the so-called ’Russian threat’ was good for business.

Retired Army general Richard Cody, vice-President of the US’s seventh largest defense contractor, L-3 communications, bemoaned the fact that "when the old Cold War ended’ defense budgets went south". Now though a ’resurgent Russia’ meant an "uptick was coming".

There was a similarly upbeat message from Stuart Bradie, chief executive of CBR, who talked of the "opportunities" the current situation presents.

The case for higher defense spending to counter the ‘Russian threat’ has been made by a series of think-tanks. And guess what? The most hawkish of these lobbyists - sorry, ‘think tanks’ - receive sizable funding from US defense contractors!

The Intercept cites the examples of the Lexington Institute and the Atlantic Council.

But there’s plenty others too. Back in February, I wrote about a ‘non-partisan’ US policy institute called the Center for European Policy Analysis. The CEPA issued a paper attacking Russian media outlet Sputnik for giving a voice to "anti-establishment protest politicians" who were critical of NATO.

And who funds the ‘non-partisan’ CEPA? Recent donors include the US Department of Defense, Boeing, Raytheon Company, Textron Systems, Sikorsky Aircraft, Bell Helicopter and the Lockheed Martin Corporation.



What’s happening in Europe today is the same that’s been happening in the Middle East for years.

The US creates chaos, then goes in to sell countries in the region the latest military hardware to ‘protect’ them from the chaos. It’s quite a racket and clearly modeled on the extortion schemes of the Mafia. Countries that don’t want to pay up, like Yugoslavia in 1990s, are likely to get bombed.

Consider how the crisis in Ukraine started. The US spent billions of dollars in a ‘regime change’ op
to topple the democratically elected government of Viktor Yanukovych and replace it with a pro-US puppet administration. We even heard the State Department’s Victoria Nuland - after she had handed out cookies to anti-government protestors in the Maidan - discussing who should and shouldn’t be in the new ‘democratic’ Ukrainian government, with US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt.

When the people of Crimea predictably said ‘Nyet’ to the State Department’s operation, and voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia in a referendum, Russia was cast as the ‘aggressor’ who had ‘invaded’ the Ukraine. The US would have known that its regime change op in Ukraine would cause chaos and increase tensions with Russia. And that’s exactly why they did it!

To counter the new Russian ‘threat’ not just to ‘democratic’ Ukraine, but to other countries in eastern Europe, we’re told we need a big increase in NATO ‘defense’ spending. And who does that benefit? Why, US defense contractors!

Last year, as I reported here, Poland picked US-made Patriot Missiles - manufactured by Raytheon and Airbus military helicopters for a $5.53bn military upgrade.

In November 2014, ‘threatened’ Estonia purchased 80 Javelin missiles from the US at a cost of 40m Euros. In February, we heard that the country would be spending 818m euro on new weapons and equipment by 2020.

As Charlie Chaplin commented in his classic 1947 black comedy Monsieur Verdoux, "Wars, conflicts, it’s all business!"

By any objective assessment it's NATO - not Russia - with its build up of arms and soldiers on the borders of Russia, which threatens the peace of Europe. But anyone who points this out, and mentions the military alliance’s relentless Drang nach Osten, threatens the profits of US defense companies and is attacked as an ‘appeaser' or ‘Kremlin stooge’ by those with a vested financial interest in keeping tensions high.

Consider the hysterical attacks on British Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn for his recent, very sensible comments on NATO and Russia. Corbyn was asked in a leadership television debate: "How would you as Prime Minister react to a violation by Vladimir Putin of the sovereignty of a fellow NATO state?"

He replied: "You’d obviously try to avoid that happening in the first place. You would build up a good dialogue with Russia to ask them, support them in respecting borders. We would try to introduce a demilitarization between Russia and Ukraine, and all the other countries down on the border between Russia and Eastern Europe. What we cannot allow is a series of continuous build-ups of troops on both sides which can only lead to great danger in the future. It’s beginning to look awfully like Cold War politics at the present time. We’ve got to engage with Russia, engage with demilitarization in that area, in order to try and avoid that danger happening… I don’t wish to go to war, what I want to do is achieve a world where we don’t need to go to war, where there is no need for it. That can be done".

As Carlyn Harvey, writing in The Canary, points out: "For millions of citizens around the world, this (Corbyn’s anti-war stance), is great news. But for those intent on maintaining the politics of power and the lucrative industries that support that, Corbyn’s vision is nothing short of a disaster".

Corbyn is portrayed by the endless war lobby as a ‘dangerous extremist’ because if other western politicians followed suit, and promoted disarmament and dialogue, instead of confrontation and war, defense profits would take a big hit.



It was a US President, Dwight D Eisenhower, who first warned us about the US military-industrial complex, back in 1961: “We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex”, he said.

No one could accuse Ike, the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe in World War Two, of being a ‘pinko’ or a ‘Kremlin stooge’. But the situation is much worse today than it was back in Eisenhower’s day.

Neocons have embedded themselves in the corridors of power. They claim to be interested in spreading ‘democracy’, but the reality is that the neocon movement is all about money and profits. Henry ‘Scoop’ Jackson, the US politician who railed against détente with the Soviet Union in the 70s, was, with very good reason, nicknamed the ’Senator for Boeing’.

Thirty years later, the first post-launch meeting of the Henry Jackson Society discussed how to get smears about the anti-war academic Noam Chomsky being a ‘denier’ of the Srebrenica massacre into circulation.

For some people it seems, the old Cold War never ended.

How much longer will the citizens of the world put up with a situation in which warmongers with ties to the military-industrial complex are allowed to stoke up international tensions? The next time you read or hear someone issue stark warnings about the ‘Russian threat’ - and why NATO needs to hike its spending to deal with it - just follow the money trail.

It’s likely to be revealing.



Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. He has written for many newspapers and magazines in the UK and other countries including The Guardian, Morning Star, Daily and Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, New Statesman, The Spectator, The Week, and The American Conservative. He is a regular pundit on RT and has also appeared on BBC TV and radio, Sky News, Press TV and the Voice of Russia. He is the co-founder of the Campaign For Public Ownership @PublicOwnership. His award winning blog can be found at www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs @NeilClark66

Selected readers' comments:

# Those Neocons and the military–industrial complex are the real threat to society and the world. Their extremist religion is money and power and they wil stop at nothing to get what they want at the expense of life as we know it.

# A lot of folks in western country are awake, we know this is in the works. Putin is doing what he can to defend his country against a ruthless opponent, and they are bigger than the US. We're being sold down the river and Putin doesn't want to play. We're with you Vlad.

# The fact that a lot of people will get killed in these "sales support" wars is just the cost of doing business.
Here is the problem. Our economy cannot support any additional military spending. This new cold war followed by massive defense contracts could collapse the US economy completely. Russia isn't the existential threat, the military-industrial complex is!

# "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron." -- Dwight D. Eisenhower

# Funny how the world's exceptional people have the biggest military in the world, yet, since the Red Army made it possible for the Allies to win in 1945, have not won a single one of their many illegal wars. Lost every one.. yes, you destroyed some hospitals and homes and millions of people but you have only ever won a few battles... and lost the wars. All amerika has done now is put Russia on high alert, and they will surprise you as they always do with another "Sputnik" that you will never expect...again.

# There's an old saying: 'Every now and then you need to show the dog the stick in order for it to know who's boss.'

Ten Things About Gaddafi They Don’t Want You to Know

Remember the Western MSM propaganda line, 'See to evil, hear no evil'?

Libya: Ten Things About Gaddafi They Don’t Want You to Know


Today Libya as a Nation State has been destroyed by US-NATO.
What do you think of when you hear the name Colonel Gaddafi? Tyrant? Dictator? Terrorist? Well, a national citizen of Libya may disagree but we want you to decide.
For 41 years until his demise in October 2011, Muammar Gaddafi did some truly amazing things for his country and repeatedly tried to unite and empower the whole of Africa.
So despite what you’ve heard on the radio, seen in the media or on the TV, Gaddafi did some powerful things that are not characteristic of a “vicious dictator” as portrayed by the western media.

Here are ten things Gaddafi did for Libya that you may not know about…

1. In Libya a home is considered a natural human right

In Gaddafi’s Green Book it states: ”The house is a basic need of both the individual and the family, therefore it should not be owned by others”. Gaddafi’s Green Book is the formal leader’s political philosophy, it was first published in 1975 and was intended reading for all Libyans even being included in the national curriculum.

2. Education and medical treatment were all free

Under Gaddafi, Libya could boast one of the best healthcare services in the Middle East and Africa.  Also if a Libyan citizen could not access the desired educational course or correct medical treatment in Libya they were funded to go abroad.

3. Gaddafi carried out the world’s largest irrigation project

The largest irrigation system in the world also known as the great manmade river was designed to make water readily available to all Libyan’s across the entire country. It was funded by the Gaddafi government and it said that Gaddafi himself called it ”the eighth wonder of the world”.

4. It was free to start a farming business

If any Libyan wanted to start a farm they were given a house, farm land and live stock and seeds all free of charge.

5. A bursary was given to mothers with newborn babies

When a Libyan woman gave birth she was given 5000 (US dollars) for herself and the child.

6. Electricity was free

Electricity was free in Libya meaning absolutely no electric bills!

7.  Cheap petrol

During Gaddafi’s reign the price of petrol in Libya was as low as 0.14 (US dollars) per litre.

8. Gaddafi raised the level of education

Before Gaddafi only 25% of Libyans were literate. This figure was brought up to 87% with 25% earning university degrees.

9. Libya had It’s own state bank

Libya had its own State bank, which provided loans to citizens at zero percent interest by law and they had no external debt.

10. The gold dinar

Before the fall of Tripoli and his untimely demise, Gaddafi was trying to introduce a single African currency linked to gold. Following in the foot steps of the late great pioneer Marcus Garvey who first coined the term ”United States of Africa”. Gaddafi wanted to introduce and only trade in the African gold Dinar  – a move which would have thrown the world economy into chaos.
The Dinar was widely opposed by the ‘elite’ of today’s society and who could blame them. African nations would have finally had the power to bring itself out of debt and poverty and only trade in this precious commodity. They would have been able to finally say ‘no’ to external exploitation and charge whatever they felt suitable for precious resources. It has been said that the gold Dinar was the real reason for the NATO led rebellion, in a bid to oust the outspoken leader.

So, was Muammar Gaddafi a Terrorist?

Few can answer this question fairly, but if anyone can, it’s a Libyan citizen who has lived under his reign? Whatever the case, it seems rather apparent that he did some positive things for his country despite the infamous notoriety surrounding his name. And that’s something you should try to remember when judging in future.

Friday, August 19, 2016

Yes, Obama and Clinton Created ISIS...

The advent of ISIS was deliberate and calculated...

Yes, Obama and Clinton Created ISIS – Too Bad Trump Can’t Explain How It Happened


U.S. imperial policy in the Muslim world, since the last days of 1979, when Zbigniew Brzezinski convinced President Jimmy Carter to set the jihadist dogs loose in Afghanistan [needs to be understood to comprehend the sorry state of affairs in the mideast].
As stated in his memoir From the Shadow, Brzezinski advised Carter to aid the right-wing Muslim resistance to the leftist, secular government in Afghanistan in order to “induce a Soviet military intervention” and thus embroil the USSR in a Vietnam-like quagmire. Brzezinski viewed the so-called Mujahadeen as potential foot soldiers of U.S. global policy. “What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?” Brzezinski asked, rhetorically, decades later.
Having acted in accordance with Brzezinski’s counsel, President Carter can accurately be described as a founding “creator” of al Qaida, along with fellow “most valuable player” Ronald Reagan, whose CIA partnered with Saudi Arabia to spend billions drawing Muslims from around the globe into the war in Afghanistan. Together, the U.S. and the Saudis gave birth to the international Islamic jihadist movement – a phenomenon that had not previously existed in world history. The jihadists would become an essential weapon in the U.S. imperial armory, a ghastly tool for regime change in the Muslim world which also doubled as justification for the never ending American quest for planetary dominance, now that the Soviet boogeyman was gone.

“In 2011, Obama launched the Mother of All Proxy Wars.”

Brzezinski became Barack Obama’s foreign policy guru, with consequences that should have been predictable for U.S. Middle East policy but were largely ignored by liberals and so-called progressives in their euphoria at the exit of George W. Bush.
Clearly, the U.S. public would not tolerate another episode of massive, direct U.S. troop involvement in the region; that was no longer an option. But what force, then, was available to execute Washington’s unfinished agenda for conquest in this part of the world? In 2011, Obama launched the Mother of All Proxy Wars, first against Muammar Gaddafi’s government in Libya, then swiftly mobilizing the totality of the international jihadist network that had been created out of whole cloth under Carter and Reagan nearly 30 years before. Washington and its NATO partners in the Libya aggression, in close concert with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, turned Syria into a cauldron of death, funneling billions of dollars in weapons to literally hundreds of Salafist and outright mercenary militias, with Al Qaida’s regional affiliate, al Nusra, at the core. This was Obama’s idea of a “smart” war: a frenzied terror offensive cloaked in lies and deception.
The criminal foreign policy pursued by Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is rooted in the same worldview arrogantly articulated by Brzezinski when he derided those who fretted over the blowback that might result from deploying “some stirred-up Moslems” as foot soldiers of imperialism. As the U.S. and its allies literally competed with each other to flood Syria with the weapons, funds, intelligence resources and diplomatic and media cover to bring down the government in Damascus, they collectively created both the material basis and political space for the jihadists to pursue their own ideological objectives. ISIS emerged, to establish a caliphate of its own in Syria and Iraq. No one should have expected otherwise.

“This was Obama’s idea of a ‘smart”’war: a frenzied terror offensive cloaked in lies and deception.”

Back in July of 2014, we at Black Agenda Report described the rise of ISIS as signaling “the final collapse of U.S. imperial strategy in the Muslim world — certainly, in the Arab regions of Islam.” We wrote:
“Think of it as a Salafist declaration of independence…from the Arab monarchies and western intelligence agencies that have nurtured the international jihadist network for almost two generations. The Caliphate threatens, not only its immediate adversaries in the Shiite-dominated governments of Syria and Iraq, but the potentates of the Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and the Mother of All Monarchist Corruption in the Arab Sunni heartland, the Saudi royal family. The threat is not inferential, but literal, against ‘all emirates, groups, states and organizations’ that do not recognize that ISIS in its new incarnation is the embodiment of Islam at war.’”
ISIS did not exist when President Obama took office and put Hillary Clinton in charge at Foggy Bottom. His (and her) regime change in Libya and massive, terroristic pivot to Syria “created” ISIS. And, let’s get the history right, on this score: the U.S. did not reject the jihadist death cult that became ISIS; rather, the Islamic State divorced itself from the U.S. and its European and royal allies. Yet, it still took the Russian intervention in Syria in September of last year to push Washington to mount more than token air assaults against ISIS. Apparently, the U.S. wants to avoid killing too many Islamic State fighters, in hopes that there will be lots of them left to join U.S.-sanctioned jihadist outfits when it gets too hot for ISIS. (Al Nusra has changed its name and resigned from al Qaida — with the blessing of al Qaida’s leadership in Pakistan — so as to better blend in with the other jihadist outfits on western payrolls.)

“U.S. military intelligence saw clearly the imminent rise of ISIS.”

You don’t need to take Donald Trump’s word for it, that Obama and Clinton have been “most valuable players” for ISIS. The U.S. military’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) came to much the same conclusion, back in 2012. The military spooks’ reports, declassified last year, showed the DIA had warned that “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey [which] support the [Syrian] opposition” believe “there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime.”
The DIA was alarmed that
“…the deterioration of the situation has dire consequences on the Iraqi situation and are as follows:
“This creates the ideal situation for AQI [al Qaida in Iraq, which became ISIS] to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi, and will provide a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it considers one enemy, the dissenters [meaning, Shia Muslims]. ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of its territory.”
Thus, a year after Obama and his European and Arab friends brought down Libya’s Gaddafi and shifted their proxy war of regime change to Syria, U.S. military intelligence saw clearly the imminent rise of ISIS — and that “this is exactly” what “the West, Gulf countries and Turkey…want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime.”
Yes, Obama created ISIS, with the enthusiastic assistance of Hillary Clinton, and he is still nurturing al Nusra, the erstwhile affiliate of al Qaida, which was mid-wifed into existence by Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski. In the intervening years, the jihadists have become indispensable to U.S. imperial policy, but especially so since George W. Bush’s defeat in Iraq, which soured the American public on “dumb” wars – meaning, in Obama-Speak, wars in which large numbers of Americans die. Proxy wars are ideal — “smart,” because only Arabs and Africans and people that Americans have never heard of, die. Libya wasn’t even a war, according to Obama, since no U.S. personnel perished.

“The jihadists have become indispensable to U.S. imperial policy.”

The truth about ISIS and the Obama administration is so obvious that even Donald Trump has a hazy idea of what happened in Syria and Libya. However, the spoiled man-brat white nationalist billionaire from Queens is incapable of putting the Obama/Clinton/ISIS connection in the historical context of U.S. imperial policy. Sadly, most “liberals” and far too many “progressives” (including Black ones) are afflicted with the same disease as Trump: extreme imperial chauvinism — which is practically inseparable from white supremacism.  Extreme imperial chauvinism allows Americans to send to the White House people that should, instead, be sent to the gallows or a firing squad (after a trial, of course). It allows Americans that claim to be on the “left’ side of the spectrum to recoil in horror at Donald Trump (who hasn’t killed anybody that we know of, and who says he will not engage in regime change as president), yet will vote for a woman whose career is soaked in the blood of hundreds of thousands in the Middle East and the northern tier of Africa, and whose husband set in motion a genocide that has killed six million people in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
One candidate, Trump, most resembles the late Alabama governor George Wallace with a “let’s make a deal” foreign policy. The other, Clinton, is a genocidal maniac, whose crimes as president will be Hitlerian in scale.
What is scarier than Clinton or Trump, is that Americans seem to have no visceral aversion to genocide (of non-white peoples). But, unless you’re a Green or some shade of Red, genocide isn’t even an election issue.

(slightly modified by me)

BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com

How the War Broke Out in Syria

An excellent eye-opener (i.e. if you possess an inner eye)...

The Day Before Deraa: How the War Broke Out in Syria


The day before September 11, 2001 was like any normal day in New York City.  September 10, 2001 was unaware of the earthshaking events which would happen the next day.
Similarly, one might think the day before the violence broke out in Deraa, Syria in March 2011 would have been an uneventful day, unaware of the uprising about to begin.
But, that was not the case.  Deraa was teaming with activity and foreign visitors to Syria well before the staged uprising began its opening act.
The Omari Mosque was the scene of backstage preparations, costume changes and rehearsals.  The Libyan terrorists, fresh from the battlefield of the US-NATO   regime change  attack on Libya, were in Deraa well ahead of the March 2011 uprising violence.  The cleric of the Omari Mosque was Sheikh Ahmad al Sayasneh . He was an older man with a severe eye problem, which caused him to wear special dark glasses, and severely hampered his vision.  He was not only visually impaired, but light sensitive as well, which caused him to be indoors as much as possible and often isolated.  He was accustomed to judging the people he talked with by their accent and voice. The Deraa accent is distinctive.
All of the men attending the Omari Mosque were local men, all with the common Deraa accent.  However, the visitors from Libya did not make themselves known to the cleric, as that would blow their cover.  Instead, they worked with local men; a few key players who they worked to make their partners and confidants. The participation of local Muslim Brotherhood followers, who would assist the foreign Libyan mercenaries/ terrorists, was an essential part of the CIA plan, which was well scripted and directed from Jordan.
Enlisting the aid and cooperation of local followers of Salafism allowed the Libyans to move in Deraa without attracting any suspicion.   The local men were the ‘front’ for the operation.
The CIA agents running the Deraa operation from their office in Jordan had already provided the weapons and cash needed to fuel the flames of revolution in Syria.   With enough money and weapons, you can start a revolution anywhere in the world.
In reality, the uprising in Deraa in March 2011 was not fueled by graffiti written by teenagers, and there were no disgruntled parents demanding their children to be freed.    This was part of the Hollywood style script written by skilled CIA agents, who had been given a mission: to destroy Syria for the purpose of regime change.  Deraa was only Act 1: Scene 1.
The fact that those so-called teenaged graffiti artists and their parents have never been found, never named, and never pictured is the first clue that their identity is cloaked in darkness.
In any uprising there needs to be grassroots support. Usually, there is a situation which arises, and protesters take to the streets.  The security teams step in to keep the peace and clear the streets and if there is a ‘brutal crackdown’ the otherwise ‘peaceful protesters’ will react with indignation, and feeling oppressed and wronged, the numbers in the streets will swell.   This is the point where the street protests can take two directions: the protesters will back down and go home, or the protesters can react with violence, which then will be met with violence from the security teams, and this sets the stage for a full blown uprising.
The staged uprising in Deraa had some locals in the street who were unaware of their participation in a CIA-Hollywood production.  They were the unpaid extras in the scene about to be shot.  These unaware extras had grievances, perhaps  lasting a generation or more, and perhaps rooted in Wahhabism, which is a political ideology exported globally by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Royal family and their paid officials.
The Libyans stockpiled weapons at the Omari Mosque well before any rumor spread about teenagers arrested for graffiti.  The cleric, visually impaired and elderly, was unaware of the situation inside his Mosque, or of the foreign infiltrators in his midst.
The weapons came into Deraa from the CIA office in Jordan.  The US government has close ties to the King of Jordan.   Jordan is 98% Palestinian, and yet has a long lasting peace treaty with Israel, despite the fact that 5 million of the Jordanian citizen’s relatives next door in Occupied Palestine are denied any form of human rights.   The King of Jordan has to do a daily high-wire balancing act between his citizens, the peace and safety in his country and America’s interests and projects in the Middle East.   King Abdullah is not only a tight-rope walker, but a juggler at the same time, and all of this pressure on him must be enormous for him, and Queen Rania, who is herself Palestinian.  These facts must be viewed in the forefront of the background painted scenery of The Syrian Arab Republic, which has for the last 40 years had a cornerstone of domestic and foreign policy carved and set in the principle of Palestinian human rights and Palestinian freedom and justice.
The US policy to attack Syria for the purpose of regime change was not just about the gas lines, the oil wells, the strategic location and the gold: but it was about crushing that cornerstone of Palestinian rights into dust.  To get rid of President Bashar al Assad was to get rid of one of the few Arab leaders who are an unwavering voice of Palestinian rights.
Deraa’s location directly on the Jordanian border is the sole reason it was picked for the location-shoot of the opening act of the Syrian uprising.    If you were to ask most Syrians, if they had ever been to Derra, or ever plan to go, they will answer, “No.”  It is a small and insignificant agricultural town.  It is a very unlikely place to begin a nationwide revolution.  Deraa has a historical importance because of archeological ruins, but that is lost on anyone other than history professors or archeologists.    The access to the weapons from Jordan made Deraa the perfect place to stage the uprising which has turned into an international war.  Any person with common sense would assume an uprising or revolution in Syria would begin in Damascus or Aleppo, the two biggest cities. Even after 2 ½ years of violence around the country, Aleppo’s population never participated in the uprising, or call for regime change.   Aleppo: the large industrial powerhouse of Syria wanted nothing to do with the CIA mission, and felt that by staying clear of any participation they could be spared and eventually the violence would die out, a natural death due to lack of participation of the civilians.
However, this was not to play out for Aleppo.  Instead, the US supported Free Syrian Army, who were mainly from Idlib and the surrounding areas, invited in their foreign partners, and they came pouring into Aleppo from Turkey, where they had taken Turkish Airlines flights from Afghanistan, Europe, Australia and North Africa landing in Istanbul, and then transported by buses owned by the Turkish government to the Turkey-Aleppo border.  The airline tickets, buses, paychecks, supplies, food, and medical needs were all supplied in Turkey by an official from Saudi Arabia.  The weapons were all supplied by the United States of America, from their warehouse at the dock of Benghazi, Libya.  The US-NATO regime change mission had ended in success in Libya, with America having taken possession of all the weapons and stockpiles formerly the property of the Libyan government, including tons of gold bullion taken by the US government from the Central Bank of Libya.
Enter the Libyans stage right. Mehdi al Harati, the Libyan with an Irish passport, was put in charge of a Brigade of terrorists working under the pay and direction of the CIA in Libya.  Once his fighting subsided there, he was moved to Northern Syria, in the Idlib area, which was the base of operation for the American backed Free Syrian Army, who Republican Senator John McCain lobbied for in the US Congress, and personally visited, illegally entering Syria without any passport or border controls.  In Arizona, Sen. McCain is in favor of deporting any illegal alien entering USA, but he himself broke international law by entering Syria as an illegal and undocumented alien.  However, he was in the company of trusted friends and associates, the Free Syrian Army: the same men who beheaded Christians and Muslims, raped females and children of both sexes, sold girls as sex slaves in Turkey, and ate the raw liver of a man, which they  proudly videoed and uploaded.
Previously, Syria did not have any Al Qaeda terrorists, and had passed through the war in neighboring Iraq none the worse for wear, except having accepted 2 million Iraqis as refugee guests. Shortly before the Deraa staged uprising began, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie were in Damascus and being driven around by the President and First Lady. Pitt and Jolie had come to visit and support the Iraqi war refugees in Damascus.  Brad Pitt was amazed that the Syrian President would drive him around personally, and without any body guards or security detail.  Pitt and Jolie were used to their own heavy security team in USA.  Pres. Assad explained that he and his wife were comfortable in Damascus, knowing that it was a safe place.  Indeed, the association of French travel agents had deemed Syria as the safest tourist destination in the entire Mediterranean region, meaning even safer than France itself.
However, the US strategy was to create a “New Middle East”, which would do away with safety in Syria; through the ensuing tornado, aka ‘winds of change’.
Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and then Syria were the stepping stones in the garden of the “Arab Spring”.  But, the scenario in the Syrian mission did not stay on script.   It went over deadline and over budget.  The final credits have yet to be rolled, and the curtain has yet to fall on the stage.
We can’t under estimate the role that mainstream media had to play in the destruction of Syria.  For example, Al Jazeera’s Rula Amin was in Deraa and personally interviewed the cleric Sayasneh at the Omari Mosque.   Al Jazeera is the state owned and operated media for the Prince of Qatar.  The Prince of Qatar was one of the key funders of the terrorists attacking Syria.  The USA was sending the weapons, supplies and providing military satellite imagery, however the cash to make payroll, to pay out bribes in Turkey, and all other expenses which needed cold cash in hand was being paid out by the Prince of Qatar and the King of Saudi Arabia, who were playing their roles as closest Middle East allies of the United States of America.  This was a production team between USA, EU, NATO, Turkey, Jordan, Israel and the Persian Gulf Arab monarchies of Saudi Arabia and Qatar primarily.  The CIA has no problem with covert operations in foreign countries, and even full scale attacks, but the matter of funding needs to come from a foreign country, because the American voters don’t care about killing people in Syria, but they would never agree to pay for it.  As long as the Arabs were paying for the project, that was OK by Mr. John Q. Public, who probably was not able to find Syria on a map anyway.
Rula Amin and others of the Al Jazeera staff, and including the American CNN, the British BBC and the French France24 all began deliberate political propaganda campaign against the Syrian government and the Syrian people who were suffering from the death and destruction brought on by the terrorists who were pretending to be players in a local uprising.   Some days, the scripts were so similar that you would have guessed they were all written in the same hotel room in Beirut.  Onto the stage stepped the online media personalities of Robert Fisk, from his vantage point in Beirut and Joshua Landis from his perch in Oklahoma.  These 2 men, sitting so far removed from the actual events, pretended to know everything going on in Syria.  British and American readers were swayed by their deliberate one-sided explanations, while the actual Syrians living inside Syria, who read in English online, were baffled.  Syrians were wondering how Western writers could take the side of the terrorists who were foreigners, following Radical Islam and attacking any unarmed civilian who tried to defend their home and family. The media was portraying the terrorists as freedom fighters and heroes of democracy, while they were raping, looting, maiming, kidnapping for ransom and murdering unarmed civilians who had not read the script before the shooting began in Deraa.  There was one global movie trailer, and it was a low budget cell phone video which went viral around the world, and it sold the viewers on the idea of Syria being in the beginning of a dramatic fight for freedom, justice and the American way.   From the very beginning, Al Jazeera and all the rest of the media were paying $100.00 to any amateur video shot in Syria.  A whole new cottage industry sprang up in Syria, with directors and actors all hungry for the spotlight and fame.  Authenticity was not questioned; the media just wanted content which supported their propaganda campaign in Syria.
Deraa was the opening act of tragic epic which has yet to conclude.  The cleric who was a key character in the beginning scenes, Sheikh Sayasneh, was first put under house arrest, and then he was smuggled out to Amman, Jordan in January 2012.  He now gives lectures in America near Washington, DC. Just like aspiring actors usually find their way to Hollywood, which is the Mecca of the film industry, Sheikh Sayasneh found his way to the Mecca of all regime change projects.

America "unhappy" over Russia using Iran's Hamedan airport !

The reason is quite understandable given the fact that the West & NATO allies, with support from Israel & gulf monarchy, propped up IS and continue to fund, arm and provide logistical support to oust Bashar Al Assad...

Russia’s Middle East breakthrough… no wonder Washington’s grouchy

RT, 19 Aug, 2016

Russia’s air raids in Syria, launched from Iranian territory this week, were received by Washington with a mixture of consternation and disappointment. Understandably, too. It marks a breakthrough in Russia’s standing in the Middle East.
Russia is working closely in a quartet that includes Iran, Iraq and Syria. We can add Lebanon because of the cooperation on the ground in Syria with Hezbollah, which is one of the governing coalition partners in Beirut. 
Even Middle East countries, thought of as Washington’s partners, are showing a newfound appreciation of Russia and the leadership provided by President Vladimir Putin. The notably conciliatory relations between Turkey and Russia – in the wake of a failed coup that Ankara implicates a cleric who lives in the US in – speaks of a tectonic shift in regional geopolitics.
Despite deep differences over Syria, Russia has managed to retain cordial relations with other states normally considered American proteges and enemies of Moscow’s ally in Syria. Putin has over the past year warmly received Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while also respectfully hosting Saudi leaders in Moscow. Russia’s foreign minister Sergey Lavrov was recently welcomed in the Persian Gulf’s Qatari capital, Doha, for high-level talks on Middle East conflict resolution. 
Contrast this all-round respect for Russia with America’s increasingly dismal reputation. Decades of US-led destructive wars, failed nation-building schemes and regime-change machinations have diminished Washington’s standing in the region, even among its supposed partners. Privately and publicly, the Israelis, Turks and Saudis seem to harbor contempt towards their American patron in spite of official designation as allies. 
When Russian long-range Tu-22M3 bombers took off from western Iran this week to conduct missions in Syria it signaled that Moscow is the emerging dominant player in the region after decades of presumed American hegemony. 
The very fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran for the first time since the 1979 revolution made the unprecedented provision to its constitution to allow a foreign power to use its territory for military purpose is testimony to Russia’s sway in the sensitive region.
Even official enemies of Iran – Israel and Saudi Arabia – cannot but acknowledge the significance. Iran, which has defied decades of Western-imposed sanctions out of principle for its sovereign rights, is willing to trust Russia’s military with territorial access. 
This must be seen as a measure of Russia’s integrity in conducting international relations. Unlike Washington which is mired in double dealing and treachery as even its supposed closest allies all too well know. In short, Washington has a trust deficit. 
Whereas Russia – whatever some states may feel about its allies in Syria and Iran – can nevertheless be seen for genuinely sticking by its commitments.
Before Vladimir Putin ordered Russian military intervention in Syria at the end of last September, the government of President Bashar Assad was on the ropes. Rebels and foreign-backed militants were threatening to topple Assad in accordance with the objective of regime change supported by Washington and its NATO allies, Britain and France, and partners across the region – Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel.
Putin’s bold intervention in defense of Russia’s longtime ally in Damascus completely reversed the tide of war. In less than a year, the Syrian state has recovered much of its territory, and it is the foreign-backed militants who are now facing defeat. 
The recent about-turn by Turkey – once a gung-ho backer of the militants in Syria – to call for closer cooperation with Russia and Iran in settling the Syrian conflict is tacit admission that the covert war for regime change is all but over. And it is Russia’s power that achieved the outcome. 
A New York Times report earlier this month was candid in its assessment of Russia’s strategic success in Syria. 
Alluding the wider geopolitical ramifications, the newspaper editorializes: “For the first time since Afghanistan in the 1980s, the Russian military for the past year has been in direct combat with rebel forces trained and supplied by the CIA. The American-supplied Afghan fighters prevailed during that Cold War conflict. But this time the outcome – thus far – has been different.
The NY Times added: “Russia’s battlefield successes in Syria have given Moscow, isolated by the West after its annexation [sic] of Crimea and other incursions into Ukraine, new leverage in decisions about the future of the Middle East.
This is why Washington’s reaction to Russia’s breakthrough military cooperation with Iran in the Syrian war was weirdly downcast.
The US State Department described the more effective deployment of Russian air power in Syria as “unfortunate”. And it decried the closer liaison between Russia, Iran, Iraq and Syria as “doubling down” to prop up the Assad “regime”.
Russia had notified the US of its overflights from Iran through Iraq to Syria in accordance with their “deconfliction procedure”. But it was evident that Russia was not seeking consultation from Washington. Moscow had determined the plan and was going ahead with it regardless of Washington’s misgivings.
American disquiet over the Russian-Iranian move was revealing. At first, Washington tried to quibble about legalities, claiming that the Russian military flights contravened a UN Security Council resolution barring “supply, sale or transfer of combat aircraft to Iran”. 
But as Russia’s Sergey Lavrov pointed out the arrangement involved none of these. 
These military aircraft are used by air forces after Iran’s authorization for taking part in the anti-terrorist operation in Syria after a legitimate request from its government,” he said on Wednesday.
Then Washington objected with the threadbare trope that the Russian air raids on Deir ez-Zor, Aleppo and Idlib were striking “moderate rebels”. State Department spokesman Mark Toner assured reporters that the Russian targets were not extremists belonging to Islamic State or Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (rebranded from Al-Nusra), but rather were “predominantly moderate” rebels supported by the United States. 
Strangely though in his press conference response to the Russian operations, US military spokesman for Syria and Iraq, Colonel Chris Carver said that he did not know where the proscribed terror groups were located in the targeted areas.
So how come the State Department knows it was “moderates” that the Russians were hitting but the Pentagon can’t say where the “terrorists” are?
While Russia is winning the war in Syria on behalf of the sovereign authorities with the majority support of the Syrian people, Washington is seen doubling down on double talk and double think in its collusion with terrorist proxies.
Washington is losing all credibility in the strategically pivotal region because it has for too long pivoted between criminal schemes and duplicity. Even traditional partners and clients can see this unedifying spectacle of sordid US conduct. Feckless, unreliable American power is something to disdain, if not dread. 
Russia has stood firm with its allies, and, as Syria attests, has carried out the mission it said it would, without mendacity or intrigue. That integrity is surely worthy of respect among allies, non-aligned states and foes alike. 
For too long Russia witnessed the Americans carve up and mutilate the Middle East with wars and subversions, from Afghanistan to Iraq, Libya and Syria. Syria has marked a historic turning point in Washington’s depredations in the Middle East.
And Russia has emerged as a serious countervailing force to be reckoned with. Fortunately.

Sunday, August 14, 2016

Thailand finally mulls to reign in illegal prostitution...

This initiative should have been taken long time ago...

Sex tourism crackdown targets brothels and underage prostitutes
Kirrily Schwarz
August 4, 2016

SEX TOURISM is more prolific than you think.

And although prostitution is technically illegal in Thailand, the nation has more than 123,000 sex workers, who contribute up to 10 per cent of the country’s GDP.

Hundreds of thousands of Australians crowd into the steamy streets each year, and while some prefer the beach or the buzzing nightclubs, others make a beeline for Thailand’s dark underbelly. They seek out the neighbourhoods where women are bought and sold like meat, where even their most sordid sexual desires can be satisfied if the price is right.

However, that could all be about to change.

‘SEX CAPITAL OF THE WORLD’

Damien May has been living in Thailand for five years. Originally a plumber from central Queensland, he now spends his days rescuing underage sex workers.

“There’s no text book for a rescue, and a lot of it’s trial and error,” he said. “We found posing as a customer, as a paedophile, was the best way to get in and start building a relationship with the girls.”

He says it’s critical to earn their trust before offering them a way out.

He works as the International Rescue Manager at Destiny Rescue, an Australian charity that specialises in saving children from human trafficking and sexual exploitation. It operates in five countries across Asia, and has rescued an estimated 1400 children since 2011.

Based in Chiang Mai, most of his work is done in southeast Asia’s Golden Triangle.

“A lot of the kids come from hill tribes,” he said. “Most of them have no identification. They’re stateless. They have no way of making an income.”

He says a lot of them go to cities looking for work, and have no idea what they’re getting into.

“They’re told they’ll work at a restaurant, and serve drinks, but a lot of them get raped,” he said, adding that most feel compelled to stay so they can send money home.

“They take a bullet, so to speak, for the family.”

Once Damien and his team establish a connection, they offer a rehabilitation program — teaching children skills, and helping them find legitimate jobs. They also work with a range of authorities, including the Australian Federal Police, to help put the paedophiles behind bars.

“We’ve done a lot in five years,” he said.

Destiny Rescue is also making progress in other parts of the country.

“Pattaya is the sex capital of the world,” he said. “But we’re seeing a huge drop in underage workers because of what we do. People don’t want to hire them, and we actually struggle to find them now, in Bangkok and Pattaya. That’s good, that’s really good.”

‘WE WANT THE SEX INDUSTRY GONE’

It’s not just underage workers who are being removed. A recent government crackdown, led by Thailand’s first female tourism minister, has seen late-night raids and mass arrests across a large number of brothels and clubs in the resort city of Pattaya — and she’s not stopping there. She wants to shut it down all together, meaning ladyboys, go-go dancers and Thailand’s infamous ping-pong shows could become relics of the past.

“We want Thailand to be about quality tourism,” she said recently. “We want the sex industry gone.”

Kobkarn Wattanavrangkul was educated in the United States, and she’s a successful businesswoman in her own right. She wants rich holiday-makers to visit Thailand for its culture and beauty, not its seedy red light districts.

With that in mind, she declared August to be “women traveller’s month”. Ostensibly, it’s about splashing the airports in pink, adding female-only immigration queues and parking spaces. Realistically, it’s about diversifying the pool of tourists, and attracting travellers more likely to hit the beach or sample the local food than indulge in sex tourism.

‘THE MILITARY SEXUAL COMPLEX’

However, a clampdown could devastate the economy, which is still reeling from a massive recession in 2014. Some prostitutes make 5000 Baht (A$189) in a single night, which is sixteen times the minimum wage, and many send their income to relatives in rural parts of the country. If the industry is dissolved, thousands could find themselves out of work.

However, some researchers suggest sex tourism is an entrenched part of Thai society, and that it links all the way back to the Korean and Vietnam wars. Manpavan Kaur, a research analyst at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, calls it the “military sexual complex”.

“Military personnel stationed in Korea and Vietnam frequented the cities of the Philippines and Thailand,” she wrote for the charity Safe World For Women. “Impoverished local women migrated to these cities to offer sexual services to these servicemen.”

She said although military presence decreased with the end of the wars, sex businesses continued to grow. They capitalised on the tourist boom of the 1970s, which continues today.

Therefore, try as it might to shut down brothels, end ping-pong shows and lock up ladyboys, Thailand’s government could be fighting an impossible battle.

“The sex industry will always be there, it will just go further underground,” said Damien. “But the laws are there. It’s just a matter of getting the right people to uphold them.”

Fidel Castro turns 90 and counting...

A resolute man who defied numerous CIA/MSM coup & assassination attempts...

Many Happy Returns Fidel. Long Live Fidel Castro


Fidel Castro, the revolutionary icon of the latter 20th century, is 90 today. Steven Walker looks back over his momentous life
Fidel Castro is 90 years old today, and unlike other 90-year-olds, this former Head of State will not receive much acknowledgement in the mainstream media this year but his achievements cannot be overstated.
The fact he is alive at all is testimony to his resilience and fortitude and the failed attempts by the CIA to assassinate him.
He is probably the most iconic revolutionary figure of the 20th Century and the story of his fight to liberate Cuba from external control and American mafia influence in the 1950’s is a shining example of resistance and determination.
Castro decided to fight for the overthrow of Fulgencio Batista’s military junta by founding a paramilitary organisation known as The Movement.
In July 1953, they launched a failed attack on the Moncado Barracks during which many militants were killed and Castro was arrested.
Placed on trial, he defended his actions and provided his famous “History Will Absolve Me” speech, before being sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment.
Renaming his group the 26th July Movement (MR-26-7), Castro was pardoned by Batista’s government in May 1955, who no longer considered him a political threat.
Restructuring the MR-26-7, he fled to Mexico with his brother Raul, where he met with Argentine Che Guevara, and together they set up a small revolutionary force intent on overthrowing Batista.
In November 1956, Castro and 81 revolutionaries sailed from Mexico aboard the Granma and crash-landed near to Los Cayuelos. Attacked by Batista’s forces, they fled to the Sierra Maestra mountain range, where the 19 survivors set up an encampment from which they waged guerrilla war against the army. Boosted by new recruits that increased the guerilla army’s numbers to 200, they co-ordinated their attacks with the actions of other revolutionaries across Cuba.
The Cuban revolution was completed in January 1959 following the final victory led by Che Guevara over government troops in Santa Clara.
Fidel Castro’s 90th birthday offers a chance to consider where he drew inspiration from and the ideas which prompted his band of guerillas to mount a campaign against overwhelming odds.
On the advice of those who noted his passion for argument, Fidel enrolled at the University of Havana in 1945 to study law. A world divided ideologically between Capitalism and Communism stimulated a febrile political atmosphere in university. Two of his earliest university friends belonged to the Communist Youth and he made his first overtly political speech in 1946, criticising the dictatorship of Gerardo Machado, Batista’s predecessor.
Fidel was aligned with two main political groupings at university – the Movimiento Socialista Revolucionario (MSR) led by Rolando Masferrer and the Union Insurreccional Revolucionaria (UIR) led by Emilio Trio.
This was where his revolutionary apprenticeship was refined, where he learned much about the nature of Cuban institutions and how steeped in corruption and violence they were.
The two groups jostled for prominence on campus, while outside the corrupt President Ramon Grau San Martin — installed as an American puppet in 1944 — was running Cuba.
Two of the key historical and political events dominating students at Havana University and influencing their beliefs, ideas and perceptions of Cuba’s past and future were the independence struggles of 1868 to 1898 led by Jose Marti, and the revolutionary movement of 1927 to 1933 involving former army officers, students and government officials that had led to the overthrow of President Machado in 1933.
But Fidel recognised that these were incomplete shifts in fundamental power — simply replacing varieties of colonial rulers and corrupt American puppet dictators.
Fidel vowed to succeed in creating a truly independent Cuba, a proper self-determining country led by those on the side of the many rather than the few.
In early 1947 Fidel became increasingly politically active, openly criticising President Grau and Batista for their failed leadership and corruption. His political profile was growing and he was seen prominently as a leading mourner at the funeral of the much-respected communist labour leader Jesus Menendez, who had been shot dead by an army captain in Manzanillo.
In 1948 the Cuban presidency passed to Carlos Prio, who with the influential army officer Batista, gave unparalleled freedom to the American Mafia who accelerated the degeneration of Cuba into what became widely renowned as America’s brothel, where casinos, gambling and gangsterism flourished and the proceeds of organised crime were stashed away from mainland American tax authorities.
The pattern of Fidel’s journey to later succeed in overthrowing the Batista dictatorship in 1959 was being hardened.
What seems to have been of much more significance was to identify with those fellow students and historical Cuban heroes, such as Jose Marti, and satiate his appetite for revolution and insurrection.
Fidel was by now immersing himself in student politics and actively supporting the fight for independence in Puerto Rico and demonstrating solidarity with other student movements in Argentina, Venezuela, Colombia and Panama, which were demanding an end to American colonial rule via financed puppet dictatorships.
Eduardo Chibas left the Autentico, the Authentic Revolutionary Party of Cuba, and in 1947 founded the Partido Popular Cubano (PPC- Cuban People’s Party) quickly becoming better known as the Ortodoxo party. Fidel joined immediately, finding in Chibas yet another hero, who he followed with great enthusiasm, regarding him as a man of the future destined to pave the way to Cuba’s independence.
The Ortodoxo party soon established itself as the first serious opposition to the government, fully adopting the principles and values of the revered nationalist martyr Jose Marti for anti-imperialism, socialism, economic independence, political liberty and social justice.
Although the attack on the Moncado barracks in 1953 failed, the trial in the Santiago de Cuba Palace of Justice began on September 21 1953 and ended on October 6 1953, after eleven sessions.
The Cuban civil code of justice, based on the Napoleonic code practiced in Europe and Latin America, had the verdict determined by a panel of three judges rather than by a jury of peers as under common law in the U.S. and Great Britain.
After the accused heard the charges against them, they were called to testify on their own behalf. The defendants were represented by 24 attorneys but Castro, a trained lawyer, assumed his own defence and lied under oath to avoid implicating rebels on trial.
In May 1955 Fidel was released after pressure from his supporters.
Four years later he was in power and now, nearly six decades on, we can raise a glass to him on his 90th despite all the efforts of the CIA.

Steven Walker is the author of Fidel Castro: From Infant to Icon ebook: www.amazon.co.uk/Fidel-Castro-Infant-Steven-Walker-ebook/dp/B00QM7GH4S