Ohio Attacker: What They Really Mean by "Influenced by Islam"

November 29, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - Somali immigrant Abdul Razak Ali Artan is alleged to have carried out an attack, injuring 11 until he was eventually shot dead by police.

Alleged alternative media platform, Breitbart News, immediately set to work to link the attack to "Islam" and "refugees" in articles like, "Ohio State Attacker Posted Anti-US Screed to Facebook Movements Before Attack."

It mirrors similar, cherry-picked journalism Breitbart used to cover another attack carried out by a Somali-American in Minnesota earlier this year, in a wider campaign both Breitbart, and a larger segment of the establishment's right cover are engaged in to reintroduce the Bush-era "clash of civilizations" narrative into the alternative media.

Yet neither Abdul Razak Ali Artan's status as an alleged "Muslim" nor his being a Somali refugee had anything to do with his alleged radicalization.

The US and its Allies Radicalized Abdul Razak Ali Artan 

"Radical Islam" is a synonym for the legions of armed terrorists and ideological extremists cultivated by the United States and its Saudi and Qatari allies since the 1980s. Forming up organizations including Al Qaeda itself and its offshoots including Jabhat Al Nusra in Syria and the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" (ISIS), these terrorists and ideological extremists have fought the proxy wars of the West and their allies from the mountains of Afghanistan to the shores of Libya, and everywhere in between.

These legions of terrorists and ideological extremists have also played an integral part in justifying the construction of an unprecedented, Western-wide domestic police state that , while predicated on "fighting terrorism," has been utilized to wage war on all enemies, foreign and domestic, of Western special interests.


Regarding domestic terrorism in particular, it has been revealed that many "foiled" terrorist attacks have simply been Western security services entrapping and leading along suspects toward the execution of terrorist attacks. Often, at the last minute, firing pins are removed from weapons, and inert substances swapped with real explosives to avert successful attacks before dramatically arresting the suspects.

In other incidents, successful attacks are carried out by suspects long-known to security agencies, some of whom have known ties to terrorist organizations and are known to be involved in terrorist activity, but are otherwise inexplicably allowed to operate freely until carrying out their attacks.

Whether a "foiled" attack or a successful bloodbath, increased powers are transferred to Western governments while populations are further distracted and divided along religion, race, and politics, and indifference toward wars fought abroad grows.

The US Sought the Rise of ISIS 

And while Breitbart attempts to insinuate ISIS may have influenced Abdul Razak Ali Artan, it should be remembered who cultivated and ultimately created ISIS as a strategic asset in the first place.

 A Department of Intelligence Agency (DIA) memo first published in 2012 (PDF) admitted:

If the situation unravels 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, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran). 

The DIA memo then explains exactly who this "Salafist principality's" supporters are (and who its true enemies are):

The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition; while Russia, China, and Iran support the regime.

It has been through a torrent of billions of dollars worth of weapons, supplies, and US-NATO trained terrorists that have sustained ISIS' fighting capacity over the last several years. When a Syrian-Russian-Iranian coalition began shutting down the Turkish-Syrian border over which the summation of ISIS' supplies crossed, Turkey organized and implemented a US-backed invasion of a "buffer zone" within Syrian territory to ensure the last supply corridor remained opened.

Image: ISIS terrorist wielding a US-made TOW anti-tank missile near Palmyra, eastern Syria.

Saudi Arabia and neighboring Qatar's state sponsorship of not only armed terrorist organizations, but also indoctrination centers established around the world is the other variable unmentioned by the likes of Breitbart in the "radicalization" equation.

These centers, which could easily be differentiated from legitimate mosques by honest journalism and investigations by local law enforcement, their funding traced, and their facilities closed down, are instead used as recruiting centers - often right in the center of Western nations - to fill the ranks of Al Qaeda and ISIS, as well as manage and exploit extremists when they eventually return home. In addition to operating physical centers, they also produce an immense amount of propaganda used online, over radio waves, and on TV to attract and "radicalize" recruits.

If Abdul Razak Ali Artan was influenced by ISIS and Saudi-Qatari propaganda, or inspired by the deadly exploits of terrorists waging war abroad, who is to blame but the state sponsors of ISIS and those nations who prop up the Saudi-Qatari regimes - a terrorist organization and two nations that would not even exist without the immense and constant supply of political support, cash, and weaponry provided to them both from abroad?

Image: Shoulder-to-shoulder, literally, with Saudi state sponsors of terrorism, America's "right" attend a rally in support of armed terrorist front, Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) which kidnapped and killed US military officers, US civilian contractors, and hundreds of Iranian civilians. Many of these characters are regularly interviewed and their views promoted by Breitbart.

It is not "Islam" or "being Somali," that allegedly incited Abdul Razak Ali Artan - if "ISIS" played a role in his "radicalization" - it was a toxic, geopolitically-motivated ideology created for the sole purpose of filling the ranks of a global mercenary force - not to achieve "Islamic hegemony," but to augment America's existing hegemony and threaten the influence, even the existence of America's global competitors.

Perhaps the most tragic irony of the establishment's attempt to retrench its talking points within the alternative media through cognitive infiltrators like Breitbart is that the majority of the Islamic World is victim to, not benefiting from such extremism. It is the sons and daughters of  Muslims serving on the front lines fighting extremists in cities like Aleppo, the edge of Damascus, and across Libya and Iraq.

Meanwhile, Breitbart's editors sit comfortably at home, fulfilling US communication strategist Cass Sunstein's dream of infiltrating and disrupting the alternative media - diverting attention away from the real money and power driving terrorism, and instead implicating Islam - as if US-made TOW anti-tank missiles were summoned from the pages of the Qu'ran, and not delivered from an armory in Saudi Arabia, stocked by their American allies - including those Americans who regularly appear in Breitbart interviews.

The West's War on Thailand's Next King

November 29, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The first fatal mistake Western observers make when attempting to describe Thailand's monarchy is comparing it to European, or worse yet, Arabian institutions. It is neither.

With the passing of the universally revered King Bhumibol Adulyadej and the upcoming coronation of his successor, Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn, Western observers are indulging deeply in this mistake once again - many doing so intentionally for politically-motivated reasons.

Thailand, a nation of nearly 70 million people, and a significant political, military, and economic power in Southeast Asia, remains the only nation in the region to avoid colonization by European powers. It managed this through the leadership of its monarchs and the unity they have historically fostered throughout Thai history.

For nations seeking to subjugate Thailand as a nation and Asia as a region, Thailand's monarchy poses a significant and formidable obstacle to their ambitions - and an obstacle they have worked for decades to eliminate through every means from propaganda to terrorism.

For nations wishing to create stronger ties with Thailand, understanding the importance of this institution, rather than attempting to judge the nation by Western standards, is key.

During this crucial transitional period, it is important for nations seeking closer relations with Thailand to avoid repeating the torrent of disinformation intentionally put out by the Western media as part of its calculated "pivot to Asia" in which it seeks to undermine regional strength and reassert Western domination by tearing down political leaders and institutions that stand in its way.

The Thai Monarchy 

Thailand's monarchy - officially a constitutional monarchy - stretches back seven centuries, with the current dynasty reigning for over 230 years. It has developed and currently rules as a uniquely Thai institution with its own history and its own social contract with the Thai people. Contrary to disinformation spread by the increasingly discredited Western media and the circles of lobbyists that have infiltrated and tainted their ranks, the reverence, loyalty, and respect Thai people view this institution with is real.


The most accurate comparison to make between Thailand's monarchy and any given Western equivalent, would not be with a European monarchy, but with Western "founding fathers." Thailand's monarchy over the centuries, made critical reforms to improve life within Thailand, and bolster the nation's competitive edge regionally and internationally. It was the Thai monarchy under the reign King Rama V (1868-1910) that ultimately abolished slavery - without the necessity of a civil war as seen in the US. It was also King Rama V who ushered in modern technology and administrative reforms.

The late King Bhumibol Adulyadej spent his seventy years as Thailand's head of state fostering national unity amid a region immersed in divisive war. He also worked for decades to create socioeconomic and political self-sufficiency, recognizing the predatory nature of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the dangers of becoming economically dependent on foreign institutions.

He was also a champion of localization, organic farming, and self-reliance as well as economic diversification for farmers as a means of weathering fluctuating market prices both within Thailand's borders and beyond them.

Considering this, and the fact that the West's "international order" is predicated on corporate-financier monopolies and centralized "globalization" - the antithesis of what Thailand's head of state promoted for decades - it is no wonder the West's various institutions and media fronts attempted to undermine and overthrow the monarchy.

With King Bhumibol Adulyadej's passing, he leaves behind him a myriad of official and unofficial institutions, organizations, and national networks dedicated to carrying on his work. He also leaves his successor, Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn - the new target of Western subversion.

The Next King of Thailand 

Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn, 64 years old, is a trained jet fighter and jet liner pilot who served in Thailand's armed forces, taking part in both air and ground combat operations along Thailand's borders. He has since carried out public duties including presiding over opening ceremonies, university graduations, and other public functions as is expected of the institution.



Because his public service to Thailand is impeccable, Western interests seeking to undermine and overthrow the vital institution he represents have resorted to personal attacks - as they have done with all national leaders and prominent figures impeding Western interests, worldwide.

Despite this superficial attack focused on the Prince himself, Thailand's monarchy represents more than an individual. It represents a circle of experienced, skilled advisers, and overall, a wider institution with centuries of history, culture, and the unity of the Thai people behind it.

It would be an egregious miscalculation to indulge in Western propaganda rather than rationally map out the current and likely future political landscape of Thailand, one that will be dominated by figures close to the life's work of Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn's father, as well as figures pragmatic and in tune with the regional shift away from American hegemony, toward a more independent Asia.

For Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn himself, he need only maintain the dignity of the position he will soon occupy - something he has already spent a lifetime doing by performing his public duties. Time will tell whether he takes on a more active role in Thai society as his father once did, but even if he remains a relatively neutral figure, he will be respected by and inspire unity among the Thai people. It must ultimately be remembered that it will be the Thai people, not Western lobbyists and propagandists, who determine the success and impact of the next king's reign.

For Western propagandists who insist the Prince is "unpopular" and will bring to an end Thailand's seven century-old institution, it should be remembered that their "predictions" are part of a wider lobbying campaign, not legitimate, fact-based analysis. These same media organizations and "experts" predicted a "civil war" erupting in Thailand in 2013-2014, and even suggested that the capital of the nation would shift from Bangkok to the northern city of Chiang Mai 680 km away - absurd predictions that never even remotely materialized and upon closer analysis, never could have.
The West is retreating from its position as global hegemon specifically because of a crisis of credibility and the way it deals with developing nations and emerging centers of global power. For nations seeking to establish a new, multipolar world order built upon something more sustainable and equitable, avoiding - even opposing Western narratives aimed at destabilizing and undermining specific nations would be a step in the right direction.

Thailand specifically, as it makes this sensitive transition, will remember the nations who offered them respect and support and those who maliciously took advantage of a perceived moment of weakness.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine �New Eastern Outlook.� 

Fake News Alert: CNN Finally Admits White Helmets Staged Fake Video

November 27, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - CNN, among many other establishment media platforms, has long promoted the US-European funded "Syrian Civil Defence" also known as the "White Helmets."

Yet on November 25, they published an article titled, "Syria's White Helmets apologize for Mannequin Challenge video," in which they admit:

It's a familiar scene: Syria Civil Defence, also known as the "White Helmets," rushing to rescue a man covered in rubble, but unlike thousands of other videos from Aleppo, this one is staged.

CNN would continue by claiming:

The nearly one-minute long video has been the subject of criticism on social media. On Wednesday Syria Civil Defence released a statement calling it an "error of judgment".

"This video and the related posts were recorded by RFS media with Syria Civil Defence volunteers, who hoped to create a connection between the horror of Syria and the outside world using the viral 'Mannequin challenge.' This was an error of judgment, and we apologize on behalf of the volunteers involved," the statement read.

Ignored by both the "White Helmets'" and RFS' as well as CNN's explanation of the video is the fact that the now admittedly staged video - besides the "mannequin challenge" style - is virtually indistinguishable from the "thousands of other videos from Aleppo" cited by CNN.

Just like "thousands of other videos from Aleppo" cited by CNN, the "victim" being "rescued" by the "White Helmets" is covered in dust and what appears to be blood, but otherwise uninjured. Unlike in a real bombing, those "rescued" by the "White Helmet" have their limbs intact, no deep, visible wounds, and lack any of the burns or trauma associated with weaponry used in modern combat.


It is unlikely that out of  the "thousands of other videos from Aleppo" cited by CNN, none of them would feature actual trauma, and instead feature only the dust and fake "blood" covered "victims" as seen in the recent, admittedly staged video, as well as during recently staged protests in Europe.

Would CNN Have Covered "White Helmet" Deceit Without Alternative Media's Coverage? 

Of course, the alternative media has been exposing the "White Helmets" for years as perhaps one of the largest, most complex war propaganda operations conceived thus far by Western powers in their bid to sway public opinion amid regime change efforts in Syria.

Image: RSF's "apology" lacks conviction, but is full of excuses and blame.

When the recent "mannequin challenge" video was uploaded, it was the alternative media that caught it, reported on it, and brought viral attention to it. It was the alternative media that exposed the fact that a supposed "rescue organization" was staging fake videos for war propaganda value - in possible violation of the Geneva Convention, and certainly in violation of basic ethical concerns.

It was only after the alternative media raised these concerns and cornered RFS and the "White Helmets" that establishment media platforms like CNN finally reacted to a story it likely would have otherwise ignored.

It is no wonder then, why establishment media platforms like CNN, the Washington Post, and others are so passionately opposed to the alternative media - they are no longer setting the agenda, and are instead forced to react. Real journalism equates to reporting and honestly analyzing world events rather than contriving and spinning them - for CNN and others, they no longer possess the freedom to do the latter without consequence.

For the alternative media, successes like this, and the fact that establishment Western media has all but declared war on the alternative media should highlight the value of honest journalism and analysis. It should also be a constant reminder that fact-driven media will always win out over agenda-driven media. For the alternative media to continue to grow and be successful, it must reaffirm its dedication to fact-driven media no matter how tempting it is to do otherwise.

US Still Seeks Regime Change Across Asia

November 26, 2016 (Ulson Gunnar - NEO) - While the US could accurately be described as a global power in decline, the ambitions of prominent special interests at the center of its economic and political power still pose a potent threat to global stability and national sovereignty worldwide. In Asia particularly, despite a clear shift in a regional balance of power that has persisted for nearly a century, the US is still actively involved in attempting to dictate which governments come to power in respective nation-states and how they rule and all in an attempt to create a balance of power in Asia that serves US interests.

From Myanmar to Vietnam, US Ambitions Still a Clear and Present Danger 

US ambition to transform Asia manifests itself in a number of ways. In Malaysia, it has been fueling for years the so-called Bersih movement and its campaign for "clean and fair elections." While the movement attempted to appear spontaneous and independent of any political party, it was quickly revealed that its core leadership was funded by the US State Department via the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and Open Society. It was also revealed that Bersih was in fact an auxiliary front of a political coalition headed by US-backed opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim who quite literally led the protests in the streets himself.

Extensive US support has been provided to the now ruling government of Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar, including the creation of Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy's (NLD) entire media capabilities. Pro-NLD media platforms created and funded annually by the US government include the New Era Journal, the Irrawaddy, and the Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB). It was also revealed that Suu Kyi's Minister of Information, Pe Myint, was quite literally trained in Bangkok by the US government-funded Indochina Media Memorial Foundation, which now co-occupies the Western media's Foreign Correspondents Club (FCCT) office in Bangkok.

In Thailand, in addition to the substantial lobbying support the above mentioned FCCT provides ousted US-backed regime of Thaksin Shinawatra and his also-ousted sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, the US government funds a large number of supposed "nongovernmental organizations" (NGOs) in a bid to create the illusion of a legitimate, pro-democracy opposition. The Shinawatra family also enjoys continued lobbying support from Washington, with influential firms having registered on their behalf every year since at least as early as 2006.

Currently, US lobbyists are still active in supporting the Shinawatra regime and their political supporters within Thailand. The Shinawatra's themselves are still positioning themselves to retake power, and the US media is still turning out a large amount of content aimed at setting the stage for continued political conflict within the country.

In Cambodia, opposition leader Sam Rainsy has received years of support from the US government and America's European allies, including regular political and media support from the US State Department's Voice of America (VOA) network.

Indonesia strains under pressure put on the government and society by US and Saudi-backed groups capable of mobilizing large numbers of protesters both to augment their own political power and to put pressure on the current ruling government in a bid to role back growing ties between Jakarta and Beijing.

And while Vietnam lacks any clearly visible, central opposition figure, the US has steadfastly built up an opposition movement with which to pressure the Vietnamese government.

Cultural Colonization via YSEALI 

Collectively, across the entire Southeast Asian region, the US is engaged in what some analysts have called "cultural colonization," particularly with a program it calls Young Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative (YSEALI) in which the US State Department actively recruits, indoctrinates and directs young Asian students and professionals toward building a pro-Western opposition front. This includes a program called "Generation: Go NGO!" in which the US creates and directs a growing network of US government funded fronts posing as "nongovernmental organizations."

 
Mirroring a modern day version of the very sort of imperial networks constructed by the British Empire across Asia, America's reach into Asia seeks to reinvent and reassert Western domination across Asia Pacific. Not only does it seek to dominate the respective people, resources, economies and politics of nations in Southeast Asia, but it also seeks the creation of a united front with which to encircle, contain and eventually displace Beijing's growing influence in the region.

Asserting Economic Hegemony via the TPP

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a decidedly US dominated project, sought to string Asian states together in an economic alliance opposed to China's rising regional and global influence. The deal's details were introduced and brokered in secret, contravening any sense of self-determination for those nations and people subjected to it. Ultimately, the inequitable conditions of the deal required coercion and bribery to move forward, and despite great efforts, it appears that it will not likely succeed.

Nations like Thailand have categorically refused to sign the deal thus far, and nations like Vietnam who had initially promised to sign it, have wavered. The US' desperation in moving through deals like the TPP may also explain the expansive networks it has constructed and continues to construct to apply pressure on both Asia as a region, and each nation individually.

Combating US Primacy 

Such aspirations are more than mere speculation, and are instead derived from the writings of prominent US policymakers, including Robert Blackwill who in 2015 penned an entire paper about reasserting US "primacy" over Asia. Blackwill, it should be noted, served as a lobbyist for the above mentioned US proxy Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand.

For Asia collectively, and for each nation respectively, the need for an international voice as Russia's RT or China's CCTV has granted Moscow and Beijing , is essential for challenging and overcoming divisive and destructive narratives perpetuated by the Western media. It is also an important factor in exposing and diminishing the influence of US-backed political opposition parties and the army of US-funded fronts posing as "NGOs."

And while instinctively, building closer ties with China may seem to be a viable formula to balancing a US that seeks to reassert itself, such ties must be done within a larger regional framework to build a sustainable balance of power. Simply trading US hegemony in for Chinese hegemony, would fail to serve the rest of Asia's interests well. For each respective Asian state, strong domestic institutions, economies, education systems and military institutions ensures not only America's inability of asserting its interests over those of each nation's, but also heads of China from filling in and exploiting the void left by a retreating United States.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine �New Eastern Outlook�.

AI & Biotech: Striking a Technological Balance of Power

November 26, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - LocalOrg) - During World War 2, nations desperately raced to harness the atom. The United State ultimately won that race, and during their victory lap - being the sole nation to possess nuclear weapons - used them against their enemy Japan - twice.

Tens of thousands of lives were extinguished in the blink of an eye and Japan, already a defeated nation, submitted absolutely to US hegemony which would prevail both over Japan and most of Asia for nearly a century onward.

Images: The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is what uncontested military superiority - or an imbalance of technological and military power - looks like. What will similar disparity in artificial intelligence or biotechnology lead to? 

Since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the US has used its immense economic disparity over the last seven decades to build a conventional army and employ various methods of overtly and covertly attacking, undermining, and even overthrowing the political and socioeconomic orders of targeted nations worldwide in its bid to take, hold, and expand global hegemony.

It has used its domination of the media to sell wars, manipulate public perception, and project its socioeconomic, cultural, and military will to the far reaches of the planet.

With the advent of the Internet and social media, its domination over both allowed it to plunge the entire Middle East and North Africa (MENA) into chaos and eventually war in 2011 during the so-called "Arab Spring," a fact the New York Times in an article titled, "U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings," would later admit.

Balancing Power 

With each form of tactical and technological disparity manifesting itself in military aggression, subjugation, exploitation, and immeasurable injustice, attempts to diminish that disparity have helped strike a balance of power.

Image: Russian mobile nuclear missiles and the reason why the United States never used nuclear weapons again.

The development of nuclear weapons by the Soviets, then later China, India, and Pakistan as well as several European powers, helped strike a balance of power within which no nation dared strike another with such weapons again.

Asymmetrical warfare and increasingly sophisticated and prolific anti-tank and anti-air weaponry have allowed nations to raise the cost of US military adventures abroad to the point where direct military intervention has become all but impossible for the US (and other nations as well).

The alternative media has brought to an end what was almost total domination by the Western media over global public perception - and it has done so not only with the emergence of effective state-run media beyond the West, but also through the efforts of thousands of individuals and independent networks worldwide.

In other words, novelty provides those who pioneer and monopolize any given tactic or technology with an initial and significant advantage, but the democratization (widespread distribution) of these tactics and technologies minimizes this disparity and creates a balance of power that makes it difficult for any one party to take advantage of or dominate another.


Preventing Future Imbalances: Biotechnology 

Perhaps the most  frightening impending disparities humanity now faces are those in the fields of biotechnology and artificial intelligence.

Image: South Africa's Rodeplaat Research Laboratories, where genocidal scientists under Project Coast sought to weaponize vaccines to sterilize, even eradicate the nation's black population. 

The sequencing of the human genome has given rise to the practice of "gene therapy" - the ability to overwrite parts of an individual's genetic code. In other words, genetic code can now be introduced into living patients that show cells in the body how to find and eradicate cancer, how to rebuild heart muscles, or how to properly produce insulin in the case of patients suffering from diabetes.

But if code can be introduced so precisely to do great good, it can also be introduced to do great harm. Vaccines laced with vectors delivering the genetic equivalent of malware could potentially, and very subtly, reduce fertility, diminish intelligence, and even manipulate gene expression associated with human behavior.

The prospect of using the concepts behind gene therapy for biological weapons was mentioned in the Neo-Conservative Project for a New American Century's (PNAC) 2000 report titled, "Rebuilding America's Defenses" (.pdf). The chilling report stated (emphasis added):

The proliferation of ballistic and cruise missiles and long-range unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) will make it much easier to project military power around the globe. Munitions themselves will become increasingly accurate, while new methods of attack � electronic, �non-lethal,� biological � will be more widely available. (p.71 of .pdf) 

It also stated:

Although it may take several decade for the process of transformation to unfold, in time, the art of warfare on air, land, and sea will be vastly different than it is today, and �combat� likely will take place in new dimensions: in space, �cyber-space,� and perhaps the world of microbes. (p.72 of .pdf)

And finally:

And advanced forms of biological warfare that can �target� specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool. (p.72 of .pdf)

By democratizing this technology, we ensure that the tools used to create and defend against "biological warfare that can "target" specific geneotypes" are in the hands of not only people who seek to do so already, but also in vastly more hands that seek to detect, prevent, or counter such abuses. Democratizing this technology also ensures that the people who need it most get it, rather than remain subjected to the whims and interests of a handful of corporations who seek profits over people and purpose.  

Work toward democratizing biotechnology is being undertaken by both institutions and individuals alike, around the world through opensource biotech tools, and community "DIYbio" labs. Nations are also working to build up their biotech infrastructure, both as a component to their healthcare systems and economy, and as a component of national security. 

Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence, long before we must worry about sentient machines and what they may or may not decide to do with a vastly inferior humanity, is already being used in highly specialized applications ranging from automatically extracting intelligence from the millions of photos uploaded to Facebook daily, to gaming the stock market, to managing the UK's National Health Service (NHS), to automatically managing utility grids. 

While many uses of AI are benign, the fact that so few institutions are engaged in high-level AI research and applications invites immense disparity and abuse. While AI applications today do not constitute a sentient being superior to humans in every conceivable way, they do constitute very focused algorithms that are vastly superior to any human performing the same specific task. 

Google's DeepMind subsidiary, and their AI AlphaGo was able to learn and then outplay the world's best Go player. Other developers are creating AI platforms that can learn through trial and error how to play various video games before eventually mastering them with super-human reflexes and strategies. 

Applied to games, they are quaint. Applied to warfare and they are terrifying. The high-speed, ultra-deadly nature of the first Gulf War in which the technological disparity between the US and Iraqi forces left the fourth largest military on Earth in ruination and retreat will be tame in comparison if and when machine learning is applied to real-world military operations. 

The increasing use of drones and automation, and the eventual combination of the two, will create a network an AI simply needs to plug into and direct, either entirely or temporarily, to grant its operators a super-human advantage over their unprepared opponents. 

And such contests need not be waged on conventional battlefields. Cyber and information warfare may also present a tempting battlefield upon which to deploy AI. Targeting the IT infrastructure of an opposing nation, or mass manipulating public perception with increasingly convincing AI 'bots" working ceaselessly to create the illusion of persuasive consensus, could overwhelm unprepared opponents. 

Just like DeepMind's AlphaGo left its human opponent utterly, hopelessly defeated, so too would any military wielding a militarized AI algorithm. However, the ability to multiply force through the use of artificial intelligence is only an advantage if those it is being used against lack similar capabilities. 

Artificial intelligence is not just a component of Facebook or Google's business strategy - US policymakers admit that AI, as well as companies like Facebook and Google themselves, constitute an integral part of creating, maintaining, and projecting American power globally. Nations must not look upon AI as a novelty or an economic asset, but also as a central component to national security. Nations depending on Facebook and Google to prop up their IT infrastructure rather than brewing their own national alternatives are akin to nations during the age of empires inviting British gunboats into their harbors.

Artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and other forms of emerging technology must be viewed by each nation, state, community, and individual not as a mere novelty or potential industry, but also as a potential means to grant those who develop and monopolize it economic, political, and even military superiority history has taught us they most certainly will abuse. 

Just like the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki could never have fathomed the destructive power of the atomic weapons used against them, let alone anticipate they personally would fall victims to such weapons, we too allow ourselves to tempt fate by waiting for the first biological or AI strike before establishing a deterrence through a balance of power. 

We are increasingly connected and empowered by the Internet and other forms of technology already being democratized. We know about emerging technology and we can easily find ways to either raise awareness regarding these issues or directly involve ourselves in the actual process of democratizing this technology. We can and we must, lest we languish under the mushroom clouds and in all-consuming fire ignorance, unpreparedness, and technological disparity invites. 

LocalOrg seeks to explore local solutions to global problems by empowering people locally with education and technology to not only survive, but to thrive.

US Regime Change in Malaysia: Bersih 5

November 24, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Malaysia finds itself weathering yet another foreign-backed color revolution, with the color of choice being the "yellow shirts" of Bersih supporters.

Bersih was created by the United States government and the political alliance of convicted and currently jailed Malaysian politician Anwar Ibrahim. The front organized its first rally in 2007, and has since then organized four more with the most recent taking place this month.

Over the years, Bersih has morphed, being  co-opted both by elements of the very government it is attempting to overthrow, and by legitimate opposition fronts who either are cynically exploiting the movement's size and foreign funding, or who genuinely are unaware that Bersih's core leadership is composed of US-funded agitators seeking to divide and destroy both Malaysia and ASEAN, as a means of reasserting US primacy in the region vis-a-vis China.

Bersih's Core Leadership is US Funded 

The Malaysian Insider reported on June 27, 2011 that Bersih leader Ambiga Sreenevassan:

admitted to Bersih receiving some money from two US organisations � the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and Open Society Institute (OSI) � for other projects, which she stressed were unrelated to the July 9 [2011] march. 

A visit to the NDI website revealed indeed that funding and training had been provided by the US organization - before NDI took down the information and replaced it with a more benign version purged entirely of any mention of Bersih. For funding Sreenevassan claims is innocuous, the NDI's rushed obfuscation of any ties to her organization suggests otherwise.

Sreenevassan is now not only a senior Bersih leader, but also heads or is associated with a number of "nongovernmental organizations" (NGOs) allegedly supporting Bersih, including  HAKAM (National Human Rights Society). Despite claiming to be a "human rights" organization, HAKAM's content is entirely focused on exclusively promoting and defending Bersih and its membership under the guise of human rights advocacy - a tactic used by US-funded opposition fronts worldwide. 

Image: Ambiga Sreenevassan marches shoulder-to-shoulder with Anwar Ibrahim during Bersih 2.0. 

Other NGOs listed by Bersih as supporters include Lawyers for Liberty and the Islamic Renaissance Front, both funded by the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Additionally, there is  Pacos Trust which is partnered with the US State Department, USAID, EU, and Wall Street-funded Asia Foundation. 

Various members of the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) which is funded by US and European corporate foundations are also listed as endorsing Bersih. So too is Institut Rakyat which is openly partnered with HAKAM and the above mentioned Lawyers for Liberty as well as compromised Western human rights advocates like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.

Other organizations listed by Bersih as "endorsing NGOs" have websites that either do not disclose their sources of funding or affiliations, or appear to be linked to various opposition political fronts or organizations that have fallen for Bersih's superficial rhetoric. 

In other words, Bersih represents the same organizations or approximations of other US-backed regime change operations unfolding worldwide. And while Bersih claims to be fighting for "Clean and Fair Elections," it is and has been for several years now, openly calling for regime change via the resignation of the current Malaysian government. 

Why Does the US Want to Overthrow the Government of Malaysia? 

The corporate-financier funded and directed policy think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) published a 2015 paper titled, "Revising U.S. Grand Strategy Toward China," penned by Robert Blackwill - a Bush-era administrator and lobbyist who has directly participated in Washington's attempts to maintain hegemony over Asia.

Blackwill's paper states clearly what interests the US has in Asia (emphasis added):

Because the American effort to 'integrate' China into the liberal international order has now generated new threats to U.S. primacy in Asia�and could result in a consequential challenge to American power globally�Washington needs a new grand strategy toward China that centers on balancing the rise of Chinese power rather than continuing to assist its ascendancy.

The CFR paper constitutes a US policymaker openly admitting that the US perceives itself as possessing and seeking to maintain "primacy in Asia," primacy being defined by Merriam-Webster as, "the state of being most important or strongest."

Malaysia's current government, like many across Asia-Pacific, is uninterested in America's attempts to reassert itself geopolitically in the region. Attempts to draw Malaysia into the US-manufactured South China Sea confrontation with Beijing have all but failed.

Malaysia also represents a particularly independent nation, with developed infrastructure, domestic industry including its own auto company, and military ties with Russia and China. 

Headlines like Reuters' "Malaysia to buy navy vessels from China in blow to U.S.," CNN's "Malaysia reaches 'significant' defense deal with China, takes shot at West," and the New York Times' "Leader of Malaysia, Miffed at U.S., Visits China With a Deal in Mind," all from this year, represent Malaysia's disinterest in dealing with Washington and its efforts to contribute to an Asia where American "primacy" does not rule. 

Bersih is Not a Path to Reform or Revolution 

In order to reverse this trend, the US has attempted to place pressure on not only Malaysia, but respective governments throughout Asia resisting its attempts to reassert itself. 

While the US backs Bersih in Malaysia, it has sponsored the opposition government in Thailand headed by exiled ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and a myriad of US-funded faux-NGOs. The opposition headed by Sam Rainsy in Cambodia as well as political agitators in Vietnam are also openly US-backed.

The US-backed government of Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar, which despite running on a platform of "human rights" and "democracy," has begun brutally repressing Myanmar's Rohingya minority and locking up dissidents and members of the media in an ironic twist of hypocrisy. 

While Malaysia's government has provoked legitimate concerns among many groups in Malaysia, working with the  government to resolve them and challenging the government during elections is the obvious solution. Street mobs openly funded by foreign interests - particularly the United States - is an effort to reform and improve the nation in name only. 

Like Myanmar, or victims of US-backed regime change across North Africa and the Middle East, regime change in Malaysia facilitated by US-backed fronts will only invite in a regime that is not only as bad if not worse than the current government, but invite in a government beholden to American special interests, not the interests of the Malaysian people - not even its ruling elite. 

Bersih represents a political tool wielded by Washington, not a genuine manifestation of the Malaysian people's will to improve their own nation - even if Malaysians legitimately interested in improving their nation have been drawn into the protests. While many genuine people have joined Bersih's ranks, they have only done so because they have been lied to and have failed categorically to scrutinize the opposition front's leadership as carefully as Bersih demands the current government be scrutinized. 

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine �New Eastern Outlook.� 

US Media Weaponizes "Economic Outlooks"

November 22, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Thailand is currently undergoing a sensitive period with the passing of the nation's long-lived, revered head of state, King Bhumibol Adulyadej. Indeed, the mood across the country is somber, however, the actual business of the nation continues on with many Thais realizing that moving forward is the best way to honor their late king.

And despite Thais continuing to work, factories continuing to produce, agricultural goods continuing to be cultivated, processed, and shipped domestically, regionally, and internationally, the Western media - driven by corporate-financier and political special interests - has attempted to upend confidence in the Thai economy by suggesting that somehow toned-down entertainment venues will overturn the entire economy.

And some in the Western media have attempted to claim the one year of official mourning in Thailand could even affect the rest of Asia.

But back in reality, sound economic fundamentals and actual political stability determine a nation's positive economic outlook - and Thailand possesses both.

The Financial Times in an article titled, "Can Thailand�s economy handle a year of mourning?," claims that:

Many Thais are putting off weddings, vacations and other �joyful events� as the country begins a one-year period of mourning. This is in addition to a 30-day ban on �entertainment� that has forced infamous bar districts, like Bangkok�s Soi Cowboy, to pull down their shutters out of respect for the late king. Although some bars have resumed operations with workers dressed all in black, the nighttime landscape of the capital remains dramatically quiet. 

Even after the entertainment ban is lifted, it is hard to say how quickly the nation�s mood will bounce back.

While Thailand is noted for its tourist and entertainment venues, they contribute a relatively small percentage (9-16% of GDP) to Thailand's overall economic activity. Most tourist destinations in Thailand continue to operate as normal. And while the nation's more infamous entertainment industry is indeed expected to see a downturn, the total number of people employed by it represents at most, only 0.5% of the nation's total workforce.

Attempts to claim that the year of mourning may lead to political instability are also questionable. The king's heir and his decision to postpone ascending to the throne until the end of the mourning period next year is in fact a sign of confidence that the nation can safely mourn, without rushing the succession process.

If political stability in Thailand is compromised, it will be because of external forces.  The nation's political opposition are a spent force, and US attempts to stir up division and chaos by intensifying violence in the nation's deep south have so far been unsuccessful. Both the opposition and prospects of violence in the south expanding depend entirely on the US' ability to support them both - and both Thais and foreign observers alike have become increasingly adept at exposing this foreign support.

Weaponizing Economic Outlooks  

The Financial Times is not the only Western media source attempting to portray Thailand as looking into an economic abyss. The entirety of the Western media has also attempted to perpetuate this narrative, not because careful analysis has helped them arrive at this conclusion, but because of a concerted effort to use Thailand's moment of perceived sociopolitical weakness to undermine the current political order and help return to power Western-backed political parties - more specifically - those allied to ousted ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

The "weaponizing" of economic outlooks has long been employed by the Western media. Portraying a nation's economy as faltering helps spread panic across fickle investors, encouraging them to invest elsewhere and drawing away much needed capital to sustain economic growth.

However, despite this, Asia finds itself in a position where the majority of its economic activity is done regionally. What Western papers and news channels say is increasingly irrelevant to the plans and ambitions of these regional players.

As for Thailand's economy in particular, the current government is on track, repairing the agricultural industry after gross mismanagement by Shinawatra's administration, including a devastated rice industry. It is also investing in the increased use of technology and innovation across all sectors of the economy. Beyond that, Thailand still serves as an attractive nation for companies to build and operate factories, and Thailand itself sees its own domestic industry maturing and increasingly exporting goods of their own abroad.

Agriculture, industry, energy, education, and service industries - which employ the vast majority of Thais - have basic fundamentals that will remain unaffected by the nation's year of mourning. The superficial examples the Western media cites are cited specifically to prey on the ignorance and misconceptions their ill-informed audiences have regarding Thailand and its economy.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine�New Eastern Outlook�. 

Syria: White Helmets Caught in Mannequin Challenge-Mess Up

November 22, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - The US-European funded "Syrian Civil Defence" also known as the "White Helmets," have been incrementally exposed as perhaps one of the most extensive and elaborate deceptions in modern war propaganda. Posing as both "rescuers" of civilians trapped in alleged Syrian and Russian airstrikes, and "monitors" reporting alleged "atrocities" carried out against armed militants fighting the Syrian government, evidence has mounted that they are in fact accomplices with militant groups including listed terrorist organizations, as well as propagandists.

In early October of this year, protesters in Europe easily recreated virtually every "rescue" scene portrayed by "White Helmets" simply by applying flour and red paint to their faces and lying in the streets of European cities. As part of the "Save Aleppo" campaign, the protesters likely sought to bring the "reality" of the "White Helmets'" work to Western audiences, but maybe did so a little too literally - revealing that many of the scenes portrayed by "White Helmet" camera crews in Syria were likely staged in a very similar, theatrical manner.

In real warfare, bombardments generally leave behind unspeakable carnage, including bodies burned beyond recognition, dangling limbs, gushing wounds, and piles of tangled gore. The "White Helmets'" videos are suspiciously absent of these realities, and instead feature almost exclusively the flour and red paint extras seen protesting in Europe's streets last October.

It was noted last October that the only feature missing from the "White Helmets"-inspired protests in Europe was the backdrop of a ruined city and rubble to "bury" actors in.

But a recent video shared on Facebook by Syrian activist Mimi Al Laham, exposes this charade with this final feature included.

What appears to be a "White Helmet" video shot in a style known as the "mannequin challenge" - in which actors remain still as a camera moves around them similar to a technique employed in Hollywood movies for dramatic effect - has surfaced on YouTube.

It begins with three men attempting to remain still as a camera moves around them. The men are posing in the rubble of a collapsed building. Two men are dressed as "White Helmet" volunteers, and the third man is laying down with his legs partially buried beneath rubble. An audible sound effect is added to the soundtrack - similar to that heard in a war movie when a character is dazed and his ears are ringing - before suddenly the characters begin moving and shouting - the volunteers begin "unburying" the trapped man who feigns screams of pain.

Aside from the "mannequin challenge" stylization, the video is utterly indistinguishable from the full summation of the "White Helmets'" previous "filmography." Like all of the "victims" the "White Helmets" have "saved," the man in this video is clearly not physically injured and is simply covered in dust just as protesters in Europe were, and just as all of the alleged "victims" the "White Helmets" have claimed to save in Syria have been in the wake of alleged airstrikes.

Serious Ethical Questions Raised 

In this video, the three men are undoubtedly actors. The "victim" was undoubtedly, intentionally buried in preexisting rubble, not trapped in it from an airstrike. The fact that two of the actors are fully dressed in "White Helmet" uniforms acquired through the tens of millions of dollars provided to the organization by Western governments, reveals a potentially serious breach in ethical behavior - similar to ethical violations committed by legitimate medical and rescue workers who use their resources and protected status for political or military purposes, rather than missions of mercy.

The "White Helmets" are perhaps the perfect embodiment of the entire Syrian "opposition." A facade created by foreign interests to divide and destroy an entire nation, unhinge an entire region, all while posing as heroes of "freedom," "democracy," and "humanitarianism." For other supposed nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) worldwide receiving funding from the US and EU, they should seriously consider the company they find themselves among - terrorists, liars, and actors preying on people's good intentions while exploiting misery they themselves are directly involved in creating. 

Incoming US National Security Adviser to Fuel, not Fight Terrorism

November 21, 2016 (Ulson Gunnar - NEO) - The incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump already includes a long and growing list of controversial characters, controversial not because they represent a major departure from the policies of US President Barack Obama, but precisely because they represent uninterrupted continuity of agenda instead.

Other reports have mentioned the inclusion of highly problematic figures from among Washington's Neo-Conservative establishment, but President-elect Trump's national security adviser, retired US Army general, Michael Flynn is perhaps the most symbolic of all in signaling a continuity of agenda regarding US foreign policy.

Flynn was appointed in April of 2012 by US President Barack Obama as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). It was during this time the US was already deeply involved in semi-covert intervention in the Syrian conflict, after having decimated Libya in 2011 with direct US military intervention.

It was also during Flynn's time at the DIA, August 2012 in fact, that a now notorious memo was circulated (PDF) regarding the anticipated rise of what it called a "Salafist principality" in eastern Syria, and how it could be used as a strategic asset against what it called the "Syrian regime."  The DIA's anticipated "Salafist principality" would later be named the "Islamic State" (IS) and did indeed seize territory in eastern Syria where it remains dug-in to this day.

Flynn's Plan on Terror Resembles the Perpetual War Bush and Obama Fought 

It is indeed troubling that incoming President-elect Trump has chosen an Obama-era DIA director to serve in a more senior position still, and that this DIA director presided over the organization when it not only knew of IS' impending arrival on the geopolitical stage, but sought to encourage its arrival and use it as a strategic asset with which to fight the secular government in Damascus.

Flynn either didn't know just how literal US policymakers were in using IS as a strategic asset, or was complicit in the US' doing so.

What's perhaps more troubling is Flynn's alleged plans to fight and defeat terrorism.

In a recent Business Insider article titled, "Trump's new national security adviser outlines his controversial plan to defeat terrorism," it states:

President-elect Donald Trump's newly appointed national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, has outlined his plan to defeat terrorism extensively in recent months.

Business Insider continues, reporting:

"If we cannot criticize the radical Muslims in our own country, we cannot fight them either in America or overseas," Flynn wrote in the book's conclusion. "Unless we can wage an effective ideological campaign in the United States, we will not be able to defeat the jihadis on foreign battlefields, because we will not understand the true nature of our enemy."

The article also reports:

Flynn has also emphasized the need for looser rules of engagement for US soldiers in the Middle East and for a new intelligence-driven strategy. He wrote about "attacking the enemy alliance" � Russia and Iran � and strengthening the US' own alliances.

Flynn fails to make any mention of state sponsors of terrorism, namely Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, which might in fact fall under Flynn's plans for "strengthening the US' own alliances." Indeed, Flynn's new plan to defeat terrorism, is neither new, nor an actual plan to defeat terrorism.

Instead, it is a plan to further perpetuate an artificial clash of civilizations between the West and what is called "radical Islam," but which is actually ideological indoctrination sponsored by America's closet Persian Gulf allies as a means of building an almost inexhaustible army of militants deployed against governments the US itself seeks to overthrow and replace.

Perhaps the only thing that will change with President-elect Trump's arrival in the White House is the narrative used to explain why the United States continues to ignore Saudi Arabia and Qatar's role in perpetuating terrorism, completely side-step the role the US plays in exploiting militant organizations as strategic assets and why the Trump administration fully plans to continue wars designed and initiated under both Bush and Obama's administrations.

With Flynn's inclusion in a suspiciously familiar-looking administration congealing around Trump, it appears that the American people didn't truly vote for a new executive in the White House, but rather a new narrative used to sell the same old policy as before, a policy merely emanating from the White House but clearly devised and dictated from well beyond it.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine �New Eastern Outlook�.

For Washington, Destroying Syria is a Bipartisan Agenda

November 19, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - With a new president coming into office, hopes for a break in the Syrian conflict are abound. However, these hopes are likely misplaced. Recent US designs for the destruction of Syria began unfolding, not during the administration of US President Barack Obama, but in fact during the presidency of George Bush, and were merely continued, and clearly expanded upon under President Obama.

Pundits and policymakers on both the "left" and "right" of the Western political spectrum have made arguments for continued, even expanded US war with Syria, simply behind the smokescreen of varying partisan narratives. In the end, however, the Middle Eastern nation's overthrow - and failing that - its incremental and systematic division and destruction, remains Washington's ultimate endgame.

President-Elect Trump's Surrounded by Eager Warmongers  

President-elect Donald Trump's campaign for the past 2 years or so has been openly guided by elements of Washington's political establishment often referred to as Neo-Conservatives. This includes former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director during the Bill Clinton administration, James Woolsey, an avid supporter of US war with Iran who served as Trump's adviser on national security, defense and intelligence, Politico would report.

Together with Woolsey, Trump has either invited in or courted other members of the so-called Neo-Conservative establishment including former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani, and former Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich.

Joining them is media personality Steven Bannon of Breitbart News, the establishment's "right cover" retrenched within what is otherwise the independent and increasingly influential alternative media.

Woolsey, Bolton, Giuliani, and Gingrich have all lobbied for years as advocates for war with Iran, including lobbying directly for US State Department-listed foreign terrorist organization, Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) as a means of propping up a capable, armed, and fanatical proxy with which to indirectly wage war on Iran, much as the US is currently using Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and proxy groups like Jabhat Al Nusra and the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" (ISIS) to wage proxy war on Syria.

Syria's Destruction Plotted Under Bush, Carried Out Under Obama, a Prerequisite for War with Iran...  

In fact, war with Syria has been long determined by US policymakers as an essential prerequisite before waging war on Iran. Syria's inclusion within the Bush-era "Axis of Evil" was in fact announced by Trump-ally John Bolton under the Bush administration in 2002.


The BBC in a 2002 article titled, "US Expands 'Axis of Evil,'" would report that:

The United States has added Cuba, Libya and Syria to the nations it claims are deliberately seeking to obtain chemical or biological weapons.

In a speech entitled "Beyond the Axis of Evil", US Under Secretary of State, John Bolton said that the three nations could be grouped with other so-called "rogue states" - Iraq, Iran and North Korea - in actively attempting to develop weapons of mass destruction. 

He also warned that the US would take action.

And the US would indeed take action, utterly destroying Libya and setting itself upon Syria, only not during Bush's eight-year term in office, but under his successor's administration, beginning in 2011.

And while the US proxy war with Syria began in 2011 under Obama, the stage was already being set as early as 2007 under Bush. In Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh's 2007 article, "The Redirection: Is the Administration�s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?," it would be explicitly stated that (emphasis added):

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

Hersh, in his 9-page report, would enumerate how financial, political, and material support was already benefiting extremist organizations associated with this expanding conspiracy, organizations that would soon be directly involved in the 2011 Syrian conflict including the Muslim Brotherhood and armed militant groups aligned with Al Qaeda.

US corporate-financier funded policy think tanks including the Brookings Institution as early as 2009 would also reveal that either the coercion or overthrow of the Syrian government, as well as the neutralization of Hezbollah would be essential prerequisites to the eventual attack on and overthrow of the Iranian government, as stated in their extensively detailed report, "Which Path to Persia?: Options for a New American Strategy Toward Iran."

Trump's Transition Includes Reboot of Syrian-Iranian "Axis of Evil" Narrative 

It should be noted that Trump's political allies among Washington's Neo-Conservative clique, have been lobbying for MEK terrorists as recently as July of this year. In Paris, France, Bolton, Gingrich, and Giuliani were shoulder-to-shoulder with the Saudi Royal Family calling for "regime change" in Tehran.



Noting that the elimination of Syria and Hezbollah are essential prerequisites for this "regime change," should pique concern regarding the incoming administration of President-elect Trump. With Russia's steadfast intervention in Syria upon Damascus' request, and with the positive outcome of the Syrian conflict for Moscow key to Russian national security, it is unlikely that genuine rapprochement between the US and Russia can actually be made.

The hope of Trump allying the United States with Russia should be interpreted as a political ploy not unlike the now obviously disingenuous "reset" Hillary Clinton herself presided over as US Secretary of State in 2009. As Secretary Clinton posed for pictures with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov holding an emergency stop button with "reset" written on it, US policymakers were already deeply involved in the planning of not only political unrest within Russia itself through the use of US-funded opposition groups, but planning fully on the liquidation of Russia's traditional allies throughout the Middle East and North Africa region (MENA), Eastern Europe, and Central Asia via the upcoming "Arab Spring" conflagration.

With Trump now incoming as US president, the Western media is attempting to capitalize on campaign promises made by Trump himself regarding "safe zones" in Syria and the exploitation of the refugee crisis triggered by US interventions across the MENA region.

A CNN article written by conservative media personality Sarah "SE" Cupp titled, "Syria: The issue we can't ignore anymore," repackages Obama-era talking points to dovetail with Trump's campaign promises. Tellingly, the op-ed states (emphasis added):

Trump has made clear during the course of the election that he would not take in any Syrian refugees. While that's not the position I wish he would take, I can live with this, because keeping refugees out matters to him, and presumably his many supporters. And ultimately, the humane and practical solution is to secure a safe zone within Syria so that other countries, including ours, do not have a refugee crisis in the first place. Indeed, one of the most straightforward things we can do -- and the most significant -- is to give Syrians a safe way to return home. It's also something Trump and a Republican-led Congress could agree on.

However, "safe zones" are not a new idea. They also have nothing to do with addressing the humanitarian disaster unfolding in Syria. They were introduced by the very engineers of the Syrian conflict among US foreign policy circles, and were designed not to help end the war or protect refugees, but to "bleed Syria" to death as a functioning nation state by intentionally protracting fighting for as long as possible.

As early as 2012, the Brookings Institution in a document titled, "Middle East Memo #21: Saving Syria: Assessing Options for Regime Change," US policymakers would openly declare their intentions to create such "safe zones" stating:

An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under Annan�s leadership. This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power. This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts.

The document would then openly admit that - failing to overthrow the Syrian government - bleeding the nation would be an acceptable alternative, claiming (emphasis added):

The United States might still arm the opposition even knowing they will probably never have sufficient power, on their own, to dislodge the Asad network. Washington might choose to do so simply in the belief that at least providing an oppressed people with some ability to resist their oppressors is better than doing nothing at all, even if the support provided has little chance of turning defeat into victory. Alternatively, the United States might calculate that it is still worthwhile to pin down the Asad regime and bleed it, keeping a regional adversary weak, while avoiding the costs of direct intervention.

If it seems that Trump's campaign speeches, his campaign and transition team, as well as his prospective presidential administration seem fully arrayed to preserve a continuity of agenda that has so far, clearly transcended both the 8 year term of Bush and Obama's subsequent 8 years in office, that's because it is.

Russian "optimism" regarding America's incoming president is likely nothing more than a diplomatic gesture of goodwill. And just as Foreign Minister Lavrov humored Secretary Clinton's "reset" charade, fully anticipating treachery, Russia and its Syrian allies must prepare fully for American treachery once again - from an administration carrying the distinct DNA of the very policy circles that added Syria to the "Axis of Evil" in the first place, and has since then worked ceaselessly to undermine it and its allies for well over a decade.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine �New Eastern Outlook.�