HENRIQUE CAPRILES RADONSKI: ISRAEL’S MAN IN VENEZUELA

Capriles Radonski, Jew no matter what he calls himself, lost the January 2012 election opportunity to rape and plunder Venezuela despite being heavily financed by Jew bankers and vulture Jew capitalists

 

By Martin Iqbal.

Empirestrikesblack

January 25, 2013

Henrique Capriles Radonski ~ leader of the Venezuelan opposition ~ vows to downgrade ties with Iran and cut subsidized oil to Cuba and Nicaragua, should he get into power. What is more, his coalition has links to Israel, and both of his parents are Jewish, though he claims to be a ‘fervent Catholic’.

At a rally in June 2010, much to the disdain of the American Jewish Committee which dismissed the accusations as ‘baseless’,⁽¹⁾ Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez publicly stated that Israel is funding the Venezuelan opposition:

An inspection of the profile of Henrique Capriles Radonski ~ leader of the Venezuelan opposition ~ not only elicits deep suspicion, but in fact completely validates the claims made by Chavez.

Firstly, Radonski is the youngest Venezuelan MP ever elected ~ being elected as an MP at age 26. After entering politics at the age of 25, he became Venezuela’s youngest ever deputy in Congress, and was subsequently chosen to be Vice President of the House. Secondly, he has enjoyed a ‘meteoric rise through the political ranks‘, in the BBC’s wording,⁽²⁾ insofar as he has held a number of posts, and has not lost a single election.

RADONSKI’S ANTI-IRAN STANCE

In September 2012 the UK Telegraph accompanied Radonski on the campaign trail, wherein he stated⁽³⁾ what he would do on his ‘first day in office‘. Not only does he signify his intention to downgrade Venezuela’s diplomatic relations with Iran, but he also intends to end subsidized oil to Cuba and Nicaragua ~ something which would please the United States Government to no end.

“On his first day in office, he said, he would halt the “gifts” of free or heavily-subsidized oil to Mr. Chavez’s left-wing ideological allies in Cuba and Nicaragua.”

Radonski informed the Telegraph that:

The “cosy relationship with Iran would end“, because “Venezuela needs good relations with countries that have democracy and respect human rights“.

Contrary to Chavez’s economically nationalistic policies, Radonski makes clear his neoliberalist stance and his alliance with big business as he decries Chavez’s land reform programme which redistributed Venezuelan land from wealthy foreign owners to poor Venezuelan farmers:

“The expropriations were a big mistake, the whole policy has been a fiasco,”…”Nothing works now. Venezuela has 30 million hectares of fertile land but we only use less than 10 per cent of it and we now import 80 per cent of our food, including rice from the so-called US ‘imperialists’.”

He promised to review each such case of land redistribution with a view to returning the land to its former wealthy foreign owners. This includes Chavez’s seizure of estates from the Vestey Group, which is a ranching and sugar cane company headed by Lord Vestey, one of Britain’s richest men.

GERMANY URGES EU COUNTRIES TO STEP UP SUPPORT OF VENEZUELAN OPPOSITION

In the May 18th 2012 edition of Venezuelan paper ‘Correo Del Orinoco‘ it was reported⁽⁴⁾ that, at a EU meeting on Latin American affairs, the German government asked EU countries to step up their support of the MUD (‘Democratic Unity Roundtable’) coalition (the Venezuelan opposition coalition now headed by Henrique Capriles Radonski).

While German government representatives called for such support not to be hidden from the public, Portugal and France called for a more secretive approach. In addition, the report mentions the direct financial support that the Venezuelan opposition enjoys from not only USAID, but also the Zionist and anti-democratic ‘National Endowment for Democracy’.

 

VENEZUELAN OPPOSITION MADE SECRET VISIT TO ISRAEL

Even more revealing is the fact that, on the weekend prior to the 18th May 2012 publication, Venezuelan opposition lawyer and politician Antonio Ledezma secretly flew to Israel ~ a country which Venezuela has severed diplomatic ties with ~ on Venezuelan taxpayer money, to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman on a three-day visit.

During Ledezma’s private, unannounced trip to Israel paid for with public Venezuelan money, he promised to re-establish ties with the usurping Zionist entity if the Jewish settler state would fund and back Henrique Capriles Radonski. Ledezma told reporters that he spoke to Netanyahu and Lieberman about,

“our (the opposition) disposition to reestablish relations with the State of Israel under a new government presided by Henrique Capriles Radonski”…“In contrast to the current political policy in Venezuela, Capriles will re-establish our historical ties”

Speaking of Ledezma’s meeting with Netanyahu and Lieberman, Venezuelan journalist Miguel Angel Perez Pirela reported that Ledezma had promised Israel

“access to [Venezuela's] resources” should Rodonski take the presidential election.

Radonski, a man who feels Venezuela must only have relations with “countries that have democracy and respect human rights“, shows his duplicity as he reaches out to the Zionist entity ~ a routine human rights abuser which constitutes a Jewish ethnocracy on stolen Palestinian land.

RADONSKI: ‘FERVENT CATHOLIC’ WITH JEWISH PARENTS

The aforementioned BBC article deceptively refers to Radonski merely as ‘Henrique Capriles’ ~ choosing to omit his blatantly Jewish surname. Later in the article there is an allusion to his Jewish background; the BBC report casually states that,

‘His maternal grandparents were Jews‘.

Well, as far as ‘Israel’ is concerned, that would make his mother a Jew, which makes him a Jew.

Interestingly, what the BBC article fails to mention is that in fact, not only are his mother’s parents Jewish, but his father is also of Jewish ancestry. While Radonski’s mother is a purebred Ashkenazi Jew, his father is of Sephardi Jewish ancestry.⁽⁵⁾

Though Radonski is ostensibly a ‘fervent Catholic’,⁽⁵⁾ both of his parents are of Jewish descent. Make of that what you will, but considering his stated willingness to isolate Iran and his opposition coalition’s established relationship with the Zionist entity, this is perhaps a fact worth bearing in mind.

Venezuela enjoys excellent relations with Iran. Furthermore, Hugo Chavez severed ties with Israel after the Zionist state’s murderous assault on Gaza in 2008-2009. At the time, the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry stated,

“Israel has repeatedly ignored the calls of the United Nations, consistently and shamelessly violating the resolutions approved by overwhelming majorities of member countries, increasingly placing itself on the margin of international law…Israel’s state terrorism has cost the lives of the most vulnerable and innocent: children, women, and the elderly“.

If Radonski – Israel’s man in Venezuela ~ takes the next election, that is all bound to change. Thankfully, with pro-Bolivarian million man marches⁽⁶⁾ taking place in the streets in the wake of Hugo Chavez’s absence, along with Chavez’s party crushing the opposition in the recent gubernatorial elections,⁽⁷⁾ such a scenario is highly unlikely.

NOTES

(1) ‘AJC Urges OAS Condemnation of Venezuelan President’s Threats to Israel’ ~ American Jewish Committee, 4 June 2010.

(2) ‘Profile: Henrique Capriles’ ~ BBC News, 3 October 2012.

(3) ‘Venezuela’s marathon man looks to run down Chavez’ ~ The Telegraph, 29 September 2012.

(4) ‘Correo Del Orinoco’, English edition ~ 18 May 2012.

(5) ‘Campaign turns deadly as huge crowds rally for opposition candidate in Venezuela’ ~ The Times of Israel, 1 October 2012.

(6) ‘Huge March Defends Venezuela’s Democracy and Revolution’ ~ VenezuelaAnalysis.com, 23 January 2013.

(7) ‘Chavez Allies Dominate Venezuela Governor Elections’ ~ ABC News, 17 December 2012.

ISRAEL ATTACKS SYRIA ARMS CONVOY'

Media reports say Israel hit a convoy transporting weapons inside Syria near the Lebanese border.

Al Jazeera
January 30, 2013 ""

 Israel has conducted an airstrike inside Syria near the border with Lebanon, hitting a convoy of trucks, US and regional officials say.

"The target was a truck loaded with weapons, heading from Syria to Lebanon," said one Western diplomat on Wednesday.   

A source among rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said an air strike around dawn (0430 GMT) on Wednesday blasted a convoy on a mountain track about 5 kilometres south of where the main Damascus-Beirut highway crosses the border.

The regional officials said Israel had been planning in the days leading up to the airstrike to hit a shipment of weapons bound for Hezbollah in Lebanon.

They said the shipment included sophisticated, Russian-made SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles, which would be strategically "game-changing" in the hands of Hezbollah.

A US official confirmed the overnight strike hitting a convoy of trucks.

All the officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the strike.

NO COMMENTS

The Israeli military declined to comment, and Syrian officials and state media were silent on the issue.

Al Jazeera's Rula Amin, reporting from Beirut, said that there has yet to be any word from the Syrian government, despite the press reports circulating.

"It also shows the Israelis are very concerned that Syria's weapons could fall into the hands of either Hezbollah, or groups like Al Qaeda," she said.

US officials say they are tracking Syria's chemical weapons and that they still appear to be solidly under regime control.

Among Israeli security officials' chief fears is that Hezbollah could get its hands on Syrian chemical arms and SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles.

If that were to happen, it would change the balance of power in the region and greatly hinder Israel's ability to conduct air violations in Lebanon.

Earlier this week, Israel moved a battery of its new "Iron Dome" rocket defense system to the northern city of Haifa, which was battered by Hezbollah rocket fire in the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war.

The Israeli army called that move "routine."

AIRSPACE VIOLATION

The military in Lebanon, which shares borders with both Israel and Syria, said on Wednesday that Israeli warplanes have sharply increased their activity over Lebanon in the past week, including at least 12 sorties in less than 24 hours in the country's south.

A senior Lebanese security official said there were no Israeli airstrikes inside Lebanese territory. Asked whether it could have been along the border on the Syrian side, he said that that could not be confirmed as it was out of his area of operations. 

He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

A Lebanese army statement said the last of the airspace violations took place at 2 am local time on Wednesday. It said four warplanes which flew in over the southernmost coastal town of Naqoura hovered for several hours over villages in southern Lebanon before leaving Lebanese airspace.

It said similar flights by eight other warplanes were conducted on Tuesday.

A Lebanese security official said the flights were part of "increased activity" in the past week but did not elaborate. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to brief the media.

The area of Lebanon where the flights took place borders southern Syria. 

Israeli violations of Lebanese airspace occur on a daily basis and Lebanese authorities routinely lodge complaints at the UN against the flights.

SYRIA CONFIRMS ISRAELI AIRSTRIKE

The Syrian army said an Israeli airstrike targeted a military research center near Damascus.

By Al Jazeera"  

January 30, 2013

The Syrian army said that an Israeli air strike at dawn targeted a military research centre in Jamraya, near Damascus.

"Israeli fighter jets violated our air space at dawn today and carried out a direct strike on a scientific research centre in charge of raising our level of resistance and self-defence," the army's general command said in a statement carried by state news agency SANA.

Earlier on Wednesday, reports emerged that Israel had conducted an airstrike inside Syria near the border with Lebanon, hitting a convoy of trucks, US and regional officials said.

"The target was a truck loaded with weapons, heading from Syria to Lebanon," said one Western diplomat on Wednesday.

A source among rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said an air strike around dawn (0430 GMT) on Wednesday blasted a convoy on a mountain track about 5 kilometres south of where the main Damascus-Beirut highway crosses the border.

The regional officials said Israel had been planning in the days leading up to the airstrike to hit a shipment of weapons bound for Hezbollah in Lebanon.

They said the shipment included sophisticated, Russian-made SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles, which would be strategically "game-changing" in the hands of Hezbollah.

A US official confirmed the overnight strike hitting a convoy of trucks.

All the officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to discuss the strike.

NO COMMENTS

The Israeli military declined to comment, and Syrian officials and state media were silent on the issue.

Al Jazeera's Rula Amin, reporting from Beirut, said that there has yet to be any word from the Syrian government, despite the press reports circulating.

"It also shows the Israelis are very concerned that Syria's weapons could fall into the hands of either Hezbollah, or groups like Al Qaeda," she said.

US officials say they are tracking Syria's chemical weapons and that they still appear to be solidly under regime control.

Among Israeli security officials' chief fears is that Hezbollah could get its hands on Syrian chemical arms and SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles.

If that were to happen, it would change the balance of power in the region and greatly hinder Israel's ability to conduct air violations in Lebanon.

Earlier this week, Israel moved a battery of its new "Iron Dome" rocket defense system to the northern city of Haifa, which was battered by Hezbollah rocket fire in the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war.

The Israeli army called that move "routine."

AIRSPACE VIOLATION

The military in Lebanon, which shares borders with both Israel and Syria, said on Wednesday that Israeli warplanes have sharply increased their activity over Lebanon in the past week, including at least 12 sorties in less than 24 hours in the country's south.

A senior Lebanese security official said there were no Israeli airstrikes inside Lebanese territory. Asked whether it could have been along the border on the Syrian side, he said that that could not be confirmed as it was out of his area of operations.

He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

A Lebanese army statement said the last of the airspace violations took place at 2 am local time on Wednesday. It said four warplanes which flew in over the southernmost coastal town of Naqoura hovered for several hours over villages in southern Lebanon before leaving Lebanese airspace.

It said similar flights by eight other warplanes were conducted on Tuesday.

A Lebanese security official said the flights were part of "increased activity" in the past week but did not elaborate. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to brief the media.

The area of Lebanon where the flights took place borders southern Syria.

Israeli violations of Lebanese airspace occur on a daily basis and Lebanese authorities routinely lodge complaints at the UN against the flights.

SIX LESSONS FROM DEATH IN BELGIUM

The world was shocked when Belgian doctors euthanized two useless eaters deaf twins who could not bear to be separated.

By Michael Cook

January 26, 2013

They look at you with mild detachment. Not aggressive. Not friendly. Not happy. Not sad. Just detached. Two balding middle-aged Belgians with shaved heads, scruffy growth, and dark-rimmed oval glasses. The left ear of the man on the right juts out at a sharper angle. But otherwise the two faces are one face. They were the face of 45-year-old identical twins Marc and Eddy Verbessem.

Two weeks before Christmas, a doctor euthanized them at Brussels University Hospital. It was a perfectly legal procedure. All the boxes had been ticked and all the documents signed. The two men were deaf and slowly going blind as well. They had nothing to live for. They qualified. 

But nearly everyone felt that there was something inhumanly cold about a society which failed these simple men when they could see and killed them when they couldn’t.

As a paradigm case of Belgian euthanasia, it pays to examine how it unfolded and what it reveals about a legalized right to die. 

Marc and Eddy Verbessem were born deaf. They never married and they lived together, working as cobblers. When they discovered that they had another congenital disorder, a form of glaucoma, they asked for euthanasia. They could not bear the thought of never seeing each other again.

According to their local doctor, David Dufour, they had other medical problems as well, including debilitating back pain. "All that together made life unbearable,” he told the London Telegraph.

Their family opposed their decision. So did the local hospital. It took them nearly two years to find a doctor who was willing to administer a lethal injection under Belgium’s euthanasia law. This was Professor Wim Distelmans, a well-known euthanasia activist. He seems proud to have played a key role in "the first time in the world that a 'double euthanasia' has been performed on brothers”.

On December 14, dressed in new suits and shoes, reluctantly accompanied by their brother and their parents, they arrived for their appointment with Professor Distelmans. Dr Dufour described their final moments to the media:

“They were very happy. It was a relief to see the end of their suffering. They had a cup of coffee in the hall, it went well and [they had] a rich conversation. The separation from their parents and brother was very serene and beautiful. At the last there was a little wave of their hands and then they were gone.”

But a fig leaf of smarmy words cannot hide the fact that the twins were killed by their own doctor. Even supporters of euthanasia felt uneasy. 

LESSON ONE: THE EXPANDING CIRCLE.

Under Belgian law euthanasia is allowed if “the patient is in a medically futile condition of constant and unbearable physical or mental suffering that cannot be alleviated, resulting from a serious and incurable disorder caused by illness or accident”.

But the Verbessem brothers were not terminally ill. A doctor at their local hospital said, “I do not think this was what the legislation meant by 'unbearable suffering’". Professor Distelmans was nonchalant: “One doctor will evaluate differently than the other."

In an email interview, Jacqueline Herremans, president of Belgium's Association for the Right to Die with Dignity, told me that euthanasia should be made available to many more people:

“When we opened the debate almost 15 years ago, the first thought was for people suffering from incurable cancers. And it is still cancer which is the origin of almost 80% of the cases of euthanasia.

But we must admit that suffering may exist in other circumstances. MS, ALS, Parkinson’s are obvious. 

But what about psychiatric disorders without any possibility of cure?

What about ageing persons with several medical affections losing their autonomy and seeing no more sense to their life, knowing that tomorrow is going to be worse than today?

What about Alzheimer’s patients?”

LESSON TWO: EUTHANASIA-MINDED DOCTORS PREFER EASY DEATHS TO COMPLICATED SOCIAL WORK.

Marc and Eddy Verbessem’s problems were complex. They were shy and withdrawn. Soon they would be not only deaf but deaf and blind. It was difficult for doctors to communicate with them. The easiest way to unravel their social problems was to end them forever.

However, as deaf communities pointed out, being deaf and blind is not a death sentence. After all, America’s best-known deaf/blind person, Helen Keller, travelled the world, wrote books and became an ardent propagandist for socialism.  

In fact, a Canadian deaf/blind activist was dumbfounded. “I wonder if the deaf/blind Verbessem twins know…  the education that was available, the Deafblind community in Belgium around them, the tools that were out there for them to keenly acquire so that their fears of going blind would be soothed with their own amazement and comfort?” Coco Roschaert wrote on her blog.

More to the point: did the doctors who euthanized them know? Did they care?

LESSON THREE: SAFEGUARDS ARE MEANT TO BE HURDLED.

Supporters of legalized euthanasia insist that safeguards in the legislation restrict euthanasia to the most difficult cases. In fact, it is becoming easier and easier to be euthanized in Belgium. A report published late last year by the Brussels-based European Institute of Bioethics has claimed that euthanasia is being “trivialized” and that the law is being monitored by a toothless watchdog. After 10 years of legalized euthanasia and about 5,500 cases, not one case had ever been referred to the police.

The case of the Verbessem twins also shows that procedure is far from transparent. If a prisoner dies in jail, all the facts are made available to the public. If a patient is euthanized, the public may never even find out that it happened. For example, little is known about the health of the twins, how they communicated with the doctors who killed them, whether their social support was adequate, why another hospital had turned down their request, how much counseling they had received.

Doctors naively ~ or is it arrogantly? ~ want the public to know as little as possible. “I have been very surprised [that] there is so much interest and debate about this,” Dr Dufour said.

LESSON FOUR: IF YOU’RE DISABLED, YOU’RE IN TROUBLE.

Professor Chris Gastmans, of the Catholic University of Leuven, criticized the deaths as an impoverished response to disability.

"Is this the only humane response that we can offer in such situations? I feel uncomfortable here as ethicist. Today it seems that euthanasia is the only right way to end life. And I think that's not a good thing. In a society as wealthy as ours, we must find another, caring way to deal with human frailty."

LESSON FIVE: COMPASSIONATE EUTHANASIA HAS A PRICE TAG.

Both Eddy and Marc were charged 180 Euros each for transporting their bodies back home. This macabre detail shouldn’t surprise us. China also charges the families of the people it executes. It's called a bullet fee.

LESSON SIX: NOT ENOUGH BELGIANS ARE BEING EUTHANIZED BUT THE GOVERNMENT HAS A PLAN.

In 2011, the last year for which official figures are available, 1133 people were euthanized in Belgium. A few days after the Verbessem brothers died, the government announced that it would amend the law to allow minors and people with dementia to be euthanized as well.

FEROCIOUS, WEAK AND CRAZY

A traffic warden is seen from the window of a bus as he stands on an empty street before the unfinished Ryugyong Hotel in Pyongyang on April 12, 2012. The building remains unfinished more than 20 years after construction began.

ED Noor: When comparing Iran to North Korea, the author neglects to mention that the positions of these two nations on the world stage are quite opposite in nature. Iran comes from a position of respect among many nations and stands up to its enemies, baring their ugly truths for the world to see. Iran's strong leadership and moral element threaten the JWO/NWO because within it lies the potential to unite the Muslim world. I do not believe too many look to North Korea for such inspiration.

If diplomacy is the art of winning without warring, North Korea is in a class of its own. 

By George Friedman

MercatorNet

January 30, 2013

North Korea's state-run media reported Sunday that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has ordered the country's top security officials to take "substantial and high-profile important state measures," which has been widely interpreted to mean that North Korea is planning its third nuclear test. Kim said the orders were retaliation for the U.S.-led push to tighten U.N. sanctions on Pyongyang following North Korea's missile test in October. A few days before Kim's statement emerged, the North Koreans said future tests would target the United States, which North Korea regards as its key adversary along with Washington's tool, South Korea.

North Korea has been using the threat of tests and the tests themselves as weapons against its neighbors and the United States for years. On the surface, threatening to test weapons does not appear particularly sensible. If the test fails, you look weak. If it succeeds, you look dangerous without actually having a deliverable weapon. And the closer you come to having a weapon, the more likely someone is to attack you so you don't succeed in actually getting one. Developing a weapon in absolute secret would seem to make more sense. When the weapon is ready, you display it, and you have something solid to threaten enemies with.

North Korea, of course, has been doing this for years and doing it successfully, so what appears absurd on the surface quite obviously isn't. On the contrary, it has proved to be a very effective maneuver.

North Korea is estimated to have a gross domestic product of about $28 billion, about the same as Latvia or Turkmenistan. Yet it has maneuvered itself into a situation where the United States, Japan, China, Russia and South Korea have sat down with it at the negotiating table in a bid to persuade it not to build weapons.

Sometimes, the great powers give North Korea money and food to persuade it not to develop weapons. It sometimes agrees to a halt, but then resumes its nuclear activities. It never completes a weapon, but it frequently threatens to test one. And when it carries out such tests, it claims its tests are directed at the United States and South Korea, as if the test itself were a threat.

There is brilliance in North Korea's strategy. When the Soviet Union collapsed, North Korea was left in dire economic straits. There were reasonable expectations that its government would soon collapse, leading to the unification of the Korean Peninsula.

Naturally, the goal of the North Korean government was regime survival, so it was terrified that outside powers would invade or support an uprising against it. It needed a strategy that would dissuade anyone from trying that. Being weak in every sense, this wasn't going to be easy, but the North Koreans developed a strategy that we described more than 10 years ago as ferocious, weak and crazy. North Korea has pursued this course since the 1990s, and the latest manifestation of this strategy was on display last week. The strategy has worked marvelously and is still working.

 

A THREE-PART STRATEGY

First, the North Koreans positioned themselves as ferocious by appearing to have, or to be on the verge of having, devastating power.

Second, they positioned themselves as being weak such that no matter how ferocious they are, there would be no point in pushing them because they are going to collapse anyway.

And third, they positioned themselves as crazy, meaning pushing them would be dangerous since they were liable to engage in the greatest risks imaginable at the slightest provocation.

In the beginning, Pyongyang's ability to appear ferocious was limited to the North Korean army's power to shell Seoul. It had massed artillery along the border and could theoretically devastate the southern capital, assuming the North had enough ammunition, its artillery worked and air power didn't lay waste to its massed artillery.

The point was not that it was going to level Seoul

but that it had the ability to do so.

There were benefits to outsiders in destabilizing the northern regime, but Pyongyang's ferocity ~ uncertain though its capabilities were ~ was enough to dissuade South Korea and its allies from trying to undermine the regime. Its later move to develop missiles and nuclear weapons followed from the strategy of ferocity ~ since nothing was worth a nuclear war, enraging the regime by trying to undermine it wasn't worth the risk.

Many nations have tried to play the ferocity game, but the North Koreans added a brilliant and subtle twist to it: being weak. The North Koreans advertised the weakness of their economy, particularly its food insecurity, by various means. This was not done overtly, but by allowing glimpses of its weakness. Given the weakness of its economy and the difficulty of life in North Korea, there was no need to risk trying to undermine the North. It would collapse from its own defects.

This was a double inoculation. The North Koreans' ferocity with weapons whose effectiveness might be questionable, but still pose an unquantifiable threat, caused its enemies to tread carefully. Why risk unleashing its ferocity when its weakness would bring it down? Indeed, a constant debate among Western analysts over the North's power versus its weakness combines to paralyze policymakers.

The North Koreans added a third layer to perfect all of this. They portrayed themselves as crazy, working to appear unpredictable, given to extravagant threats and seeming to welcome a war. Sometimes, they reaffirmed they were crazy via steps like sinking South Korean ships for no apparent reason.

As in poker, so with the North: You can play against many sorts of players, from those who truly understand the odds to those who are just playing for fun, but never, ever play poker against a nut. He is totally unpredictable, can't be gamed, and if you play with his head you don't know what will happen.  

So long as the North Koreans remained ferocious, weak and crazy, the best thing to do was not irritate them too much and not to worry what kind of government they had. But being weak and crazy was the easy part for the North; maintaining its appearance of ferocity was more challenging. Not only did the North Koreans have to keep increasing their ferocity, they had to avoid increasing it so much that it overpowered the deterrent effect of their weakness and craziness.  

A CAUTIOUS NUCLEAR PROGRAM

Hence, we have North Korea's eternal nuclear program. It never quite produces a weapon, but no one can be sure whether a weapon might be produced. Due to widespread perceptions that the North Koreans are crazy, it is widely believed they might rush to complete their weapon and go to war at the slightest provocation. The result is the United States, Russia, China, Japan and South Korea holding meetings with North Korea to try to persuade it not to do something crazy.

Interestingly, North Korea never does anything significant and dangerous, or at least not dangerous enough to break the pattern. Since the Korean War, North Korea has carefully calculated its actions, timing them to avoid any move that could force a major reaction. We see this caution built into its nuclear program. After more than a decade of very public ferocity, the North Koreans have not come close to a deliverable weapon. But since if you upset them, they just might, the best bet has been to tread lightly and see if you can gently persuade them not to do something insane.

The North's positioning is superb: Minimal risky action sufficient to lend credibility to its ferocity and craziness plus endless rhetorical threats maneuvers North Korea into being a major global threat in the eyes of the great powers. Having won themselves this position, the North Koreans are not about to risk it, even if a 20-something leader is hurling threats.

 

THE CHINA ANGLE AND THE IRANIAN PUPIL

There is, however, a somewhat more interesting dimension emerging. Over the years, the United States, Japan and South Korea have looked to the Chinese to intercede and persuade the North Koreans not to do anything rash. This diplomatic pattern has established itself so firmly that we wonder what the actual Chinese role is in all this.

China is currently engaged in territorial disputes with U.S. allies in the South and East China seas. Whether anyone would or could go to war over islands in these waters is dubious, but the situation is still worth noting.

The Chinese and the Japanese have been particularly hostile toward one another in recent weeks in terms of rhetoric and moving their ships around. A crisis in North Korea, particularly one in which the North tested a nuclear weapon, would inevitably initiate the diplomatic dance whereby the Americans and Japanese ask the Chinese to intercede with the North Koreans.

The Chinese would oblige. This is not a great effort for them, since having detonated a nuclear device, the North isn't interested in doing much more. In fact, Pyongyang will be drawing on the test's proverbial fallout for some time. The Chinese are calling in no chits with the North Koreans, and the Americans and Japanese ~ terribly afraid of what the ferocious, weak, crazy North Koreans will do next ~ will be grateful to China for defusing the "crisis." And who could be so churlish as to raise issues on trade or minor islands when China has used its power to force North Korea to step down?

It is impossible for us to know what the Chinese are thinking, and we have no overt basis for assuming the Chinese and North Koreans are collaborating, but we do note that China has taken an increasing interest in stabilizing North Korea. For its part, North Korea has tended to stage these crises ~ and their subsequent Chinese interventions ~ at quite useful times for Beijing.

It should also be noted that other countries have learned the ferocious, weak, crazy maneuver from North Korea. Iran is the best pupil. It has convincingly portrayed itself as ferocious via its nuclear program, endlessly and quite publicly pursuing its program without ever quite succeeding. It is also persistently seen as weak, perpetually facing economic crises and wrathful mobs of iPod-wielding youths. Whether Iran can play the weakness card as skillfully as North Korea remains unclear ~ Iran just doesn't have the famines North Korea has.

Additionally, Iran's rhetoric at times can certainly be considered crazy: Tehran has carefully cultivated perceptions that it would wage nuclear war even if this meant the death of all Iranians. Like North Korea, Iran also has managed to retain its form of government and its national sovereignty. Endless predictions of the fall of the Islamic republic to a rising generation have proved false.

I do not mean to appear to be criticizing the "ferocious, weak and crazy" strategy. When you are playing a weak hand, such a strategy can yield demonstrable benefits. It preserves regimes, centers one as a major international player and can wring concessions out of major powers. It can be pushed too far, however, when the fear of ferocity and craziness undermines the solace your opponents find in your weakness.

Diplomacy is the art of nations achieving their ends without resorting to war. It is particularly important for small, isolated nations to survive without going to war. As in many things, the paradox of appearing willing to go to war in spite of all rational calculations can be the foundation for avoiding war. It is a sound strategy, and for North Korea and Iran, for the time being at least, it has worked.

IS UK DEFENSE CONTRACTOR PLANNING SYRIAN WMD FALSE FLAG?

Unconfirmed "leaked" documents indicate Washington-approved, Qatari-funded false flag attack using Libyan chemical weapons in Homs, Syria. 

By Tony Cartalucci
Land Destroyer Report
January 28, 2013

Documents allegedly "hacked" belonging to UK-based defense contractor Britam (official website here) appear to show the company considering an offer from Qatar to use Libyan chemical weapons in Homs, Syria in order to frame both the Syrian and Russian governments. The plan involves using Britam's Ukrainian mercenaries and Soviet-era chemical weapon shells brought in from Libya's large, Al Qaeda-linked, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) controlled arsenals.

Please enlarge.

The e-mail reads:Phil

We've got a new offer. It's about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.

We'll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.

Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?

Kind regards

David

It should be remembered that this is not confirmed - and there is most likely no way that it can ever be confirmed. However, in light of recent, and continuous attempts by the Israelis and NATO to justify a military intervention in Syria based on fears of "chemical weapons," and considering how a nearly decade-long war and occupation was fought in neighboring Iraq under similar and patently false pretenses, every potential piece of evidence should be taken seriously.

It should also be remembered that during the Iraq War, British special forces were caught carrying out false flag attacks, dressed as sectarian extremists in Basra, Iraq, and shooting at Iraqi policemen. After the British soldiers were arrested, the British army attacked the police station they were being held at to free them. The precedence of Western nations using false flag operations, including terrorism, to achieve geopolitical objectives beyond their borders most certainly exists.

THE LIBYAN CONNECTION

Mention of acquiring chemical weapons from Libya is particularly troubling. Libya's arsenal had fallen into the hands of sectarian extremists with NATO assistance in 2011 in the culmination of efforts to overthrow the North African nation. Since then, Libya's militants led by commanders of Al Qaeda's Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) have armed sectarian extremists across the Arab World, from as far West as Mali, to as far East as Syria.

In addition to small arms, heavier weapons are also making their way through this extensive network. The Washington Post in their article, "Libyan missiles on the loose," reported:

"Two former CIA counter-terrorism officers told me last week that technicians recently refurbished 800 of these man-portable air-defense systems (known as MANPADS) ~ some for an African jihadist group called Boko Haram that is often seen as an ally of al-Qaeda ~ for possible use against commercial jets flying into Niger, Chad and perhaps Nigeria."

While undoubtedly these weapons are also headed to Niger, Chad, and perhaps Nigeria, they are veritably headed to Syria. Libyan LIFG terrorists are confirmed to be flooding into Syria from Libya. In November 2011, the Telegraph in their article, "Leading Libyan Islamist met Free Syrian Army opposition group," would report:

Abdulhakim Belhadj, head of the Tripoli Military Council and the former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, "met with Free Syrian Army leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey," said a military official working with Mr Belhadj. "Mustafa Abdul Jalil (the interim Libyan president) sent him there."

Another Telegraph article, "Libya’s new rulers offer weapons to Syrian rebels," would admit Syrian rebels held secret talks with Libya's new authorities on Friday, aiming to secure weapons and money for their insurgency against President Bashar al-Assad's regime, The Daily Telegraph has learned.

At the meeting, which was held in Istanbul and included Turkish officials, the Syrians requested "assistance" from the Libyan representatives and were offered arms, and potentially volunteers.

"There is something being planned to send weapons and even Libyan fighters to Syria," said a Libyan source, speaking on condition of anonymity. "There is a military intervention on the way. Within a few weeks you will see."

Later that month, some 600 Libyan terrorists would be reported to have entered Syria to begin combat operations and have been flooding into the country ever since.

Image: Libyan Mahdi al-Harati of the US State Department, United Nations, and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf) ~ listed terrorist organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), addressing fellow terrorists in Syria. Harati is now commanding a Libyan brigade operating inside of Syria attempting to destroy the Syrian government and subjugate the Syrian population. Traditionally, this is known as "foreign invasion." 

Washington Post's reported "loose missiles" in Libya are now turning up on the battlefield in Syria. While outfits like the Guardian, in their article "Arms and the Manpads: Syrian rebels get anti-aircraft missiles," are reporting the missiles as being deployed across Syria, they have attempted to downplay any connection to Libya's looted arsenal and the Al Qaeda terrorists that have imported them. In contrast, Times has published open admissions from terrorists themselves admitting they are receiving heavy weapons including surface-to-air missiles from Libya.

In Time's article, "Libya’s Fighters Export Their Revolution to Syria," it is reported: 

Some Syrians are more frank about the assistance the Libyans are providing. “They have heavier weapons than we do,” notes Firas Tamim, who has traveled in rebel-controlled areas to keep tabs on foreign fighters. “They brought these weapons to Syria, and they are being used on the front lines.” Among the arms Tamim has seen are Russian-made surface-to-air missiles, known as the SAM 7.

Libyan fighters largely brush off questions about weapon transfers, but in December they claimed they were doing just that. “We are in the process of collecting arms in Libya,” a Libyan fighter in Syria told the French daily Le Figaro. “Once this is done, we will have to find a way to bring them here.”

Clearly NATO intervention in Libya has left a vast, devastating arsenal in the hands of sectarian extremists, led by US State Department, United Nations, and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf) ~ listed terrorist organization LIFG, that is now exporting these weapons and militants to NATO's other front in Syria. It is confirmed that both Libyan terrorists and weapons are crossing the Turkish-Syrian border, with NATO assistance, and it is now clear that heavy weapons, including anti-aircraft weapons have crossed the border too.

The Guardian reported in their November 2011 article, "Libyan chemical weapons stockpiles intact, say inspectors," that:

Libya's stockpiles of mustard gas and chemicals used to make weapons are intact and were not stolen during the uprising that toppled Muammar Gaddafi, weapons inspectors have said.

But also reported that:

The abandonment or disappearance of some Gaddafi-era weapons has prompted concerns that such firepower could erode regional security if it falls into the hands of Islamist militants or rebels active in North Africa. Some fear they could be used by Gaddafi loyalists to spread instability in Libya.

Last month Human Rights Watch urged Libya's ruling national transitional council to take action over large numbers of heavy weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, it said were lying unguarded more than two months after Gaddafi was overthrown.

On Wednesday the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, said the UN would send experts to Libya to help ensure nuclear material and chemical weapons did not fall into the wrong hands.

And while inspectors claim that Libya's chemical weapons are in the "government's" hands and not "extremists'," it is clear by the Libyan government's own admission, that they themselves are involved in sending fighters and weapons into Syria.

BOTTOM LINE

It cannot be said for certain whether the e-mail allegedly sent by Britam is genuine, but the West is openly subverting Syria through the funding and arming of terrorists from across the Arab World. Terrorists are confirmed to be moving through NATO-member Turkey, with the Turkish government's explicit assistance. Heavy weapons are both being supplied and paid for by the West, and likewise brought across Syria's borders through NATO-member Turkey.

Despite this, the momentum of NATO's armed, proxy-aggression toward Syria has been broken multiple times. Threats of a no-fly zone are waning as NATO's proxies are neutralized with little left to establish a no-fly zone over.

The fear now for NATO and its various partners across the region, from Israel to Erdogan in Turkey, to Qatar and Saudi Arabia, is that there will be nothing left of the so-called "Free Syrian Army" (FSA) to intervene on behalf of.

With time running out and the Syrian people still stalwartly defending their nation, it is possible that the desperate measures described in the alleged e-mail from Britam have been considered ~ as the rhetorical groundwork to accommodate such measures has already been long-ago laid out by the complicit Western media. 

The purpose of exposing this alleged e-mail is not necessarily to accuse Britam, but to remind readers to be vigilant. And should "chemical weapons" be used in Syria in an apparent joint Syrian-Russian operation, Britam, the United Kingdom, and Qatar should be the first suspects that come to mind.