Sunday, February 28, 2016

Possible Cover - Up Of Pentagon “Task Force” Waste In Afghanistan, Special I.G. Warns

Illegal Afghan war began with Bush/Cheney continued by Obama criminals, making warlords and U.S. corporations rich  

By Sam Sacks

A government watchdog that examines nation-building in Afghanistan told senators that the Pentagon may be concealing evidence of rampant Department of Defense waste and fraud in the country.

John Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) on Wednesday alleged that the department has not been forthright with his office about the activities of the now-shuttered Task Force on Business and Stability Operations (TFBSO). “The data provided is substantially inadequate,” he told a Senate Armed Services subcommittee.

“That seems extraordinary for an organization that lasted for 5 years and employed up to 80 people,” he added, when noting he received only 100 Gigabytes worth of data on TFBSO from the Pentagon. “There is obviously a lot of data missing in this hard drive we got.”

Sopko said that he was also concerned about “missing major email files,” and that his office now has “forensic accountants reviewing [the hard drive] to determine if it has been manipulated.”

U.S. government spending on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars (red), the US department of defense budget (green), and the annual increase of this budget (blue) between 2000 and 2011

In several reports on the reconstruction effort, SIGAR has knocked the TFBSO, which Congress ordered to be closed at the end of 2014, for wasteful spending, including a wildly over-budget $43 million compressed natural gas station.

The agency was also criticized for spending $150 million—roughly 20% of its budget in the country—on lavish villas and private security forces for only a handful of TFBSO employees.

Despite the findings, Sopko lamented to lawmakers that the execution of his job is being hindered by Pentagon stonewalling–specifically in response to inquiries about the task force.

“Since December 2014, the Department of Defense has been telling us because of legislation Congress passed, they have no authority, no money, and no bodies to explain this important program to an in Inspector General who is required by statute to investigate allegations of waste, fraud, and abuse,” Sopko said.

“In my twenty something years in Congress, I have never heard of that excuse,” he added, claiming that the agency is suffering from “institutional amnesia.”

Sopko warned that if the obstruction continues, “it will be bad for oversight, bad for criminal investigations that we’re committing, and bad for US taxpayers.”

Beginning in 2009, the TFBSO spent $638 million on business projects in Afghanistan, including efforts to help the Afghan government develop its mineral resources economy, estimated to be worth more than $1 trillion.

SIGAR reported last week that the task force left all but three resource development projects incomplete before winding up its operations.

This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Peace And Stability In Syria Depend On Eliminating U.S. - Supported Terrorism

Obama's overreach in Syria has now led to the almost complete destruction of his CIA/ISIS creation  

By Stephen Lendman

Washington created and supports virtually all well-known terrorist groups and offshoots operating in Syria and elsewhere – used as imperial foot soldiers.

They couldn’t exist without foreign backing, supplying arms, financing, training and other material support.

Hours into Syria’s cessation of hostilities, a car bomb exploded in Salamiya in Hama province, south of Aleppo.

It killed at least four, injured others, and showed the fragility of ceasefire straightaway after its implementation, indicating the illusion of achieving a durable cessation of hostilities and peace – impossible as long as Washington and its rogue allies want war.

Heavy fighting continues. No letup is envisioned. Government forces continue battering ISIS and other terrorist groups, greatly aided by Russian air power – both countries committed to keep combating a universal scourge vital to eliminate.

Citing unnamed Western and Israeli intelligence officials, the NYT expressed concern about cessation of hostilities “hav(ing) the unintended consequence of consolidating (Assad’s) hold on power at least for the next few years.”

Former Obama Middle East advisor Philip Gordon said don’t expect Russia to respect ceasefire. Its forces “can’t (be) trust(ed) (to) limit their military action to specific terrorist groups.”

Obama insists Syria’s future “cannot include Bashar al-Assad.” Fighting won’t stop until he’s “out of power,” indicating US regime change plans remain firm.

It continues supporting ISIS and other terrorist groups. Hostility towards Russia remains intense.

Two US ICBM test launches in the past week signal Washington’s preemptive use of nuclear weapons remains an option, on the phony pretext of defending national security.

Lunatics infesting Obama’s administration and Congress consider Russia America’s top strategic threat. So does NATO commander General Philip Breedlove, calling Moscow an “existential threat” to the West, a reckless, saber-rattling statement.

In Thursday testimony before House Armed Services Committee members, he lied claiming Russia intends “rewrit(ing) the agreed rules of the international order” – choosing to be an anti-Western “adversary.”

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said he questions Moscow’s “commitment to strategic stability,” accusing its military of “brandishing nuclear weapons.”

America “will defend our interests” against a nonexistent Russian threat, he blustered.

He, Obama, Breedlove and other hawkish US officials show desperation in claiming Russia’s effective war on terrorism in Syria made things worse, not better.

It changed things dramatically on the ground for the better, shifted momentum, achieved remarkable results in a short time.

It’s preserving Syrian sovereign independence, at the same time foiling Washington’s regional imperial agenda – US policymakers frantic to find a way to counter its successes strategically.

Russia is a force to be reckoned with. Its commitment to defeat the scourge of terrorism is the only chance for regional peace and stability.

In a show of good faith, its military halted airstrikes against armed groups in areas agreeing to cessation of hostilities.

Expect resumption if violations occur. Given America’s wage for war and regime change, it’s just a matter of time.

This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Going To War Against Iraq, For Oil : The Lies, Fabrications And Forgeries Of The Bush - Cheney Administration

War crimes trials await the Buch/Cheney criminals, along with the "mainstream media" frauds and hacks that lied and shilled America into the bogus "war on terror"

By Prof. Rodrique Tremblay

"We [the United States] spent $2 trillion, thousands of lives. … Obviously, it was a mistake… George W. Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes. But that one was a beauty. We should have never been in Iraq. We have destabilized the Middle East…

—They [President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney] lied… They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none. And they knew there were none. There were no weapons of mass destruction."  - Donald Trump during a CBS News GOP presidential debate, on Saturday, Feb. 13, 2016.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has rendered a great service to the truth and to historians in stating publicly, on Saturday, February 13, 2016, what most people by now know, i.e. that the US-led war of aggression against Iraq, in March 2003, was not only illegal under international law, it was also an exercise in pure deceptive propaganda, and it was promoted thanks to well-documented lies, fabrications and forgeries.

The machinations and deceptions behind the disastrous war against Iraq, which have resulted in literally hundreds of thousands of deaths and created millions of refugees, and which has completely destabilized the entire Middle East, constitute therefore a topic that I have been studying for many years. It is no surprise that I was pleased to hear Mr. Trump forcefully conveying the truth to the American people, even though those who have engaged in war crimes under the Nuremberg Charter and the United Nations Charter have never been indicted for gross negligence and duplicity—if not outright treason—let alone prosecuted. 

Worse still, there has never been a serious public inquiry into this sordid episode at the beginning of the 21st Century and how the Bush-Cheney administration planned a pre-meditated military attack against Iraq in order to bring about a political “regime change” in that country.

Let us summarize the sad series of events that have led to what American General William Odom has dubbed “the greatest strategic disaster in U.S. history”. We may add that this has also led to a great disaster for the Middle East populations, and it could also prove to have been a disaster for Europe and the world as a whole, if the current mess in that part of the world were to lead to World War III.

1. DECEPTION: When George W. Bush took power in January 2001, his Treasury Secretary, Paul H. O’Neill (1935- ), the former CEO of Alcoa, recalls that the goal of removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq was raised by Bush during the very first cabinet meeting of the new administration. In O’Neill’s biography written by journalist Ron Suskind and titled The Price of Loyalty, it is stated that George W. Bush fully intended to invade Iraq and was desperate to find an excuse for pre-emptive war against Saddam Hussein. As Mr. Suskind writes it, there was even a Pentagon document, dated March 5, 2001, and entitled “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield contracts”, which included a map of potential areas in Iraq for oil exploration. Such a detailed plan for a U.S.-led military take-over of Iraq had never been mentioned during the 2000 U.S. presidential election, let alone debated.

However, a pro-Israel neoconservative think-tank, The Project for the New American Century, had drafted a blueprint for regime change in Iraq as early as September 2000. The fundamental goal was to secure access to Iraq’s oil reserves and remove a potential enemy to the state of Israel. This think-tank, founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan, was mainly run by vice-president Dick Cheney; by defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld; by Paul Wolfowitz, (Rumsfeld’s deputy at the Defense Department); by George W. Bush’s younger brother Jeb Bush, then governor of Florida; and by Lewis Libby, Cheney’s deputy.

Their document about Iraq was entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century”. It stated clearly that: “The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein”. It was this plan that the newly elected Bush-Cheney administration obviously intended to implement in secret, eight months before the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

It is also most relevant to mention that the document on Iraq mentioned above was mimicking a previous report written in 1996 for the Benjamin Netanyahu Israeli government and titled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm”. The latter outlined a strategy for the state of Israel in the Middle East in these terms:

Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq –an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right –as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions.

In 2001, the Bush-Cheney administration seemed to have made its own the proposed strategy.

2. POSSIBLE NEGLIGENCE: To what extent was the Bush-Cheney administration negligent in not preventing the 9/11 terrorist attacks? This is a legitimate question, considering that the George W. Bush White House received, on Monday August 6, 2001, 36 days before the terrorist attacks, a confidential report by the CIA entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”. Mr. Bush was then on a month-long vacation at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, and no special security steps seem to have been taken to alert various authorities of the threat.

3. A PARALLEL GOVERNMENT: Early on, the new Bush-Cheney administration established a special bureaucratic agency for intelligence gathering, propaganda and war preparations. 

This was the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plan (OSP) placed under the supervision of Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense. 

It was designed, as reported by renowned journalist Seymour Hersh, to circumvent the CIA and the Pentagon’s own Defense Intelligence Agency, the DIA, and to serve as President Bush’s main source of intelligence regarding Iraq’s possible possession of weapons of mass destruction and its possible connection with al-Qaeda. 

That is also where various fake arguments were invented to steer the United States into a war against Iraq. 

Douglas Feith, a defense undersecretary, ran the shadow agency with the assistance of William Luti, a former navy officer and an ex-aide to Vice President Dick Cheney.

Something that should have been investigated, but has not been, is how some Israeli generals had free access to the OSP, as reported by Karen Kwiatkowski who worked in that agency.

4. WAR PROPAGANDA: After 9/11, few Americans were blaming Iraq for the terrorist attacks, since none of the 19 terrorists involved had any connection with Iraq. In fact, the 19 hijackers in the September 11 attacks of 2001 were affiliated with the Islamist terrorist group al-Qaeda. Fifteen out of 19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia, 2 were from the United Arab Emirates, and the other 2 came from Egypt and Lebanon. None were from Iraq. And their training camps had been in Afghanistan.

Bush with press secretary, fellow war criminal Dana Perino

That is why in polls taken soon after Sept. 11, 2001, only 3 percent of Americans mentioned Iraq or Saddam Hussein as the dark forces behind the attacks. Obviously, such a perception had to be changed if the Bush-Cheney administration were to start a war with Iraq. 

That is when the fear of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the possible links of Saddam Hussein with al-Qaeda were invented, with the active assistance of neocon media. By September 2003, the propaganda had worked so well that, according to a Washington Post poll, 69 percent of Americans had come to believe that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the attacks carried out by al-Qaeda, even though there had been no proof of such a link between the two. Such is the force of government propaganda when the mass media collaborate in the exercise.

This propaganda was instrumental in building a case for a war with Iraq, without regard to factual evidence. History will reckon that the United States did not retaliate against Saudi Arabia, a country that had a lot to do with the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but it did react viciously against Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with the attacks.

All these facts are well documented and corroborated. Future historians will have numerous sources to establish the historical truth.


The fact that presidential candidate Donald Trump has alerted the American people to the treachery used by the Bush-Cheney administration to go to war against Iraq is a welcome development. Undoubtedly, the Iraq War has unleashed untold destruction and misery in Iraq and in the entire Middle East. And the sequels to the initial disaster continue today, thirteen years after the 2003 U.S.-led military invasion of Iraq.

The only recent comparable historical event, when a powerful country invaded militarily another weaker country, was the decision by the German Chancellor Adolf Hitler to invade Poland on September 1, 1939, thus plunging Europe into chaos for many years. Let us hope that the current turmoil in the Middle East, with so many countries conducting military operations in the devastated countries of Iraq and Syria, will not lead to even greater catastrophes.

Economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book “The Code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles."

This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

U.S. Considers "Plan B" To Undermine Syria’s Peace Process

As Putin and the RFAF continue to decimate Obama's CIA/ISIS mercs, Pentagon and DOD maniacs grasp at last straws to retain toehold in Syria while prepping the ground for Libyan retrograde movement and occupation  

By Peter Korzun

The recently concluded Russia and US-brokered peace accord on Syria has many opponents inside Syria and internationally. The Islamic State and Jabhat an-Nusra – the groups not covered by the truce agreement – control more than half of the country’s territory, including Aleppo, oil deposits and pipeline routes.

The Ahrar ash-Sham and Jaish al-Islam groups have refused to support the agreement if Jabhat an-Nusra is not a party to it.

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir told Germany’s Der Spiegel newspaper last week that Syria’s moderate opposition should be provided with anti-aircraft missiles to change the balance of power on the ground."

Turkey expressed caution and pessimism about the implementation of the truce amid continuing violence.

In view of many snags on the way, the US is considering a set of options, including tearing up the just concluded agreement to put in doubt its credibility as a reliable partner. 

Speaking on February 23, US Secretary of State John Kerry warned of the prospect of a more violent Syria if a cease-fire agreed to with Russia fails to lead to a political transition for the war-torn country. 

The Secretary admitted that, that Russia played a key role in the peace plan. 

"Without Russia's cooperation I'm not sure we would have been able to have achieved the agreement we have now, or at least get the humanitarian assistance in," he noted. 

He also spoke of Russia’s broad cooperation in Vienna’s meetings on Syria, which "could not have happened without Russia’s input," as well as Moscow’s teamwork in reaching Iran’s nuclear deal. 

But then the US foreign chief warned the situation in Syria "could get a lot uglier" if the fighting goes on among multiple factions, including government forces and opposition groups. "It may be too late to keep it as a whole Syria if we wait much longer," he said.

Speaking on the options, Kerry referred multiple times to a "Plan B" alternative to diplomacy.

It is the first time Kerry has spoken of partition and the first admission of the fact than Plan B (a far larger military effort – the kind of conflict that the US has been trying to avoid) exists. Many Republicans, including Donald Trump, are calling for a "safe zone" in northern Syria, allegedly, to protect the increasing number of displaced people.

In their recent meetings in the White House, US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine General Joseph Dunford, and Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan have voiced increasingly hawkish views towards Russia, the Wall Street Journal reported on February 23 citing a senior administration official.

Babbling idiot Ashton Carter
Adam Entous, the author of the often cited Wall Street Journal article, writes that US intelligence agencies have warned Obama that if the US leaves so-called "moderate" militants at Russia’s mercy, then the Saudis or some other group could break ranks with America and send portable anti-aircraft weapons to Syria to down Russian warplanes. Aside from expanding the CIA program, other options under discussion include providing intelligence support to moderate rebels to help them better defend themselves against Russian air attacks and to possibly conduct more effective offensive operations, officials said.

On February 24, Secretary Kerry elaborated on the plan. He said it would take 15,000 to 30,000 ground troops to maintain a so called "safe zone" inside northern Syria, citing previously unheard estimates provided by the Pentagon.

"Our Pentagon estimates that to have a true safe zone in the north of the country you may have upwards of fifteen to thirty thousand troops. Now are we ready to authorize that? Are we ready to put them on the ground?" Kerry asked the Senate panel. The Secretary said that creating a safe zone isn't as simple as it sounds. In addition to controlling the airspace, Kerry said, a large troop presence would be required to shield the population from Islamic State attacks on the ground. In late November, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Obama administration was pressing Turkey to send additional troops to seal its border with Syria. Pentagon officials estimated that it could take as many as 30,000 troops to seal the border on the Turkish side to enable a broader humanitarian mission.

In early December, Defense Secretary Ash Carter told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Pentagon estimated that the ground force needed to enforce a safe zone in northern Syria would be "substantial." Two of America’s most seasoned diplomats – Nicholas Burns, a former US undersecretary of state for political affairs, and James Jeffrey, former US ambassador to Iraq and Turkey – argued recently in The Washington Post that Russia should be invited to participate in the coalition that secures the safe zone, but that the United States and its partners should establish one anyway, in the event that Russia refuses.

Moscow is unaware of the availability of US plan B for Syria, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov told a conference of the Valdai discussion club titled "Middle East: From Violence to Safety."

"US statements on the availability of some plan B give rise to concern. We know nothing about it," he said. "We are confident that now we should focus all efforts on implementing the ceasefire agreements that have been reached."

Creating any kind of "safe zone" in Syria without the UN Security Council’s "say so" or the consent of Syrian government is a flagrant violation of international law. 

Inking an agreement on Syria with Russia and, almost simultaneously, discussing with lawmakers a plan B, which envisions the deployment of thousands of troops, is an example of dope-the-rope tactics. It puts into question the reliability of the US as negotiation partner. 

Creating a no-fly zone would most likely mean the US would have to enforce that rule against Russian jets – a potentially dangerous scenario. Aside from the inherent physical and political risks of putting a large number of American troops on the ground inside Syria, the US effort to partition the country will inevitability result in resistance and possible confrontation with Russia. This is a very dangerous development of event to make the entire diplomatic effort go down the drain.

This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.



The real truth on 9/11 slowly continues to bleed out

Technical experts are mounting major challenges to official U.S. government accounts of how three World Trade Center skyscrapers collapsed in near-freefall after the 9/11 attacks 15 years ago.

Many researchers are focusing especially on the little-known collapse of



The Geopolitics Of The United States, Part 1: The Inevitable Empire

The Empire and the inevitable fall of the Obama criminal regime

STRATFOR Editor’s Note: This installment on the United States, presented in two parts, is the 16th in a series of STRATFOR monographs on the geopolitics of countries influential in world affairs.

Like nearly all of the peoples of North and South America, most Americans are not originally from the territory that became the United States.



Geopolitics Of The United States Part 2: American Identity And The Threats of Tomorrow

A look back at 2011 predictions for the future in order to put events of today into perspective

 photo capitalism_zpsah78uy5p.jpg
We have already discussed in the first part of this analysis how the American geography dooms whoever controls the territory to being a global power, but there are a number of other outcomes that shape what that power will be like. The first and most critical is the impact of that geography on the American mindset.



By Robert S. Finnegan

This e-mail outlines and confirms the acts of espionage against Indonesia and Indonesians by Akiko Makino and the others involved both in Kobe University and in AI Lab at University of Airlangga, Surabaya; Bahasa Indonesia original follows English translation...



UPDATED 01/07/2015 : New Analysis Challenges Tamiflu Efficacy; Hong Kong Corona Virus Outbreak


 photo TAMIFLU_small_zpssojx6okt.jpg

Obama criminals now resulting to biowarfare in quest to destroy Chinese and ASEAN economy; "novel virus substrain" points directly to a Kawaoka / Fouchier / Ernala-Ginting Kobe lab virus weaponized and genetically altered to specifically target and infect the Asian population: Ribavirin...



 photo WHO02_zpsplmhtlpr.jpg
The 5th Estate has just purchased a library on H5N1 "Novel" virus pandemics, there are dozens of PDF and Exel documents we feel will assist you in saving lives following intentional releases of the H5N1 and now MERS viruses; we will begin by printing those that appear to be extremely relevant here: H5N1 Kobe-Kawaoka-Ernala series continues soon with more "Smoking Gun" e-mails from Teridah Ernala to The 5th Estate . . .



By Robert S. Finnegan

On October 12, 2002 the Indonesian island of Bali experienced a terrorist attack that rocked the world. It was unquestionably well-coordinated and executed, the largest in the country's history.