Khalid al Hamad= Syria’s “cannibal commander” A militia leader filmed cutting the heart and organs out of a regime soldier’s corpse and putting it in his mouth has defended his actions as legitimate
Added by James Φοίνιξ on May 14, 2013 at 7:19pm

Khalid al Hamad= Syria’s “cannibal commander” A militia leader filmed cutting the heart and organs out of a regime soldier’s corpse and putting it in his mouth has defended his actions as legitimate
.

The actions of Khaled al-Hamad, known by the nom de guerre Abu Sakkar, handed an instant propaganda victory to the Syrian govenrment, which accused the West of ignoring rebel atrocities.

The video purported to show the leader of a breakaway rebel faction cutting the lungs out of a soldier’s corpse before apparently eating a small piece of the organ.

”I swear to God we will eat your hearts, Alawite soldiers of Bashar the dog,” he said, referring to supporters of President Bashar al-Assad from the minority Alawite sect.

Speaking to Time magazine, he said had no regrets about taking revenge – “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” – after finding images of regime abuses on the dead soldier’s mobile phone.

“We opened his cell phone and I found a clip of a woman and her two daughters fully naked, and he was humiliating them,” he said.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10057420/Syrian-rebel-defends-eating-dead-soldiers-organ-as-revenge.html

http://12160.info/photo/khalid-al-hamad-syria-s-cannibal-commander-a-militia-leader-filme

Dear Sir

As you noted in your correspondence of 6th May 2013, I moved a motion of recognition of the Genocides of the indigenous Assyrian and Hellenic peoples of Anatolia, incorporating a re-affirmation of the 1997 recognition of the Genocide of the indigenous Armenian people. The motion was tabled and carried unanimously, in accordance with Parliamentary procedure.

Similar motions of a commemorative nature are moved and carried by members of both Houses of the Parliament of New South Wales on a regular basis on a wide range of issues, particularly related to human rights and current affairs.

My intention in moving this motion was NOT to attack or denigrate the modern State of Turkey which was established by a great Turkish leader, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who I greatly admire.

These Genocides were carried out by the leaders of the Ottoman Empire, not the modern State of Turkey which has wonderful relations with Australia, in spite of the Gallipoli campaign.

In moving this motion, I have drawn on the conclusions reached by the International Association of Genocide Scholars, the Australian Institute for Holocaust and Genocide Scholars, and other national and international scholarly groups. The unanimous opinion is that the Assyrian, Armenian and Hellenic peoples were victims of genocide in the 1910s and 1920s.

As noted by Australian jurist Geoffrey Robertson QC in his 2009 study ‘Was there an Armenian Genocide?” (attached), Winston Churchill declared the events to be ‘an administrative holocaust … there is no reasonable doubt that this crime was planned and executed for political reasons.’

When commemorations and scholarly conferences on the Genocide of the Armenians are regularly held within the Republic of Turkey, and Turkish scholars and writers such as Taner Akcam and Orhan Pamuk call for recognition of the fact of the Genocides, I fail to understand how the NSW Legislative Council resolution constitutes ‘sowing the seeds of hatred’ in Australia? Please visit for recent examples:

The Genocide Recognition motion has a very strong focus on the Genocides as part of the Australian national story. As documented in the Australian War Memorial in Canberra, ANZACs were captured and imprisoned as far south as the Sinai peninsula, as far east as Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) as well as across Anatolia. Visit here for more details.

The archives of the Australian War Memorial in Canberra have written and photographic evidence that ANZACs rescued Armenians and Assyrians in Persia (Iran) and Mesopotamia (Iraq), as well as during the Palestine Campaign. Many of these ANZACs later became involved in an international humanitarian relief effort on behalf of the survivors for over a decade.

The events of the Assyrian, Armenian, and Hellenic Genocides were documented by the Australian media from early 1914 (before World War One began), throughout the war and well into the 1920s (National Library of Australia). I also refer you to a recent study by Dr John Williams of the University of Tasmania, published in the April 2013 issue of Quadrant magazine: The Ethnic Cleansing of Greeks from Gallipoli, April 1915.

As the Armenian National Archives were only formed in 1923, when the Genocides were almost over, a ‘joint commission of history’ between the Republics of Armenia and Turkey would have little to discuss (National Archives of Armenia) The archives relevant to the Genocides of the Armenians, Assyrians and Hellenes are in Ankara, Constantinople (Istanbul) and Moscow.

In conclusion, for the Christian Democratic Party, as for the entire Parliament of New South Wales, recognition of the Genocides of the indigenous Assyrian, Armenian and Hellenic peoples of the Ottoman Empire is not simply a matter of history. As the effects of the Genocides continue to this day, it is an issue of international law and human rights and I will continue to advocate such issues at every opportunity.

“Let justice be done, souls consoled, broken hearts mended, nations reconciled and honour given to all those who perished so needlessly during a dark hour in mankind’s recent history”.

Yours sincerely,
Rev. Hon. Fred Nile

MOSCOW (Reuters) – Chinese President Xi Jinping warned against foreign interference in the affairs of other nations during a speech in Moscow on Saturday, sending a signal to the West and echoing a message often repeated by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Permanent U.N. Security Council members with veto power, Russia and China have frequently teamed up diplomatically to blunt the influence of the United States and its NATO allies and have blocked three draft resolutions on Syria.

“We must respect the right of each country in the world to independently choose its path of development and oppose interference in the internal affairs of other countries,” Xi told students at an international relations school.

He spoke a day after meeting Putin on his first foreign trip since becoming president, a choice both said underscored a “strategic partnership” between Russia and China. In the Kremlin, he told Putin: “you and I are good friends.”

Xi told Russian students on Saturday: “Strong Chinese-Russian relations … not only answer to our interests but also serve as an important, reliable guarantee of an international strategic balance and peace.”

Putin, who began a six-year term last May, has often criticized foreign interference in sovereign states.

Russia and China have resisted Western calls to pressure Syrian President Bashar al-Assad over the two-year-old civil conflict that has killed more than 70,000 people.

They both criticized the NATO bombing that helped rebels overthrow Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 and stood together in the Security Council in votes on the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programs.

Both China and Russia have bristled at U.S. and European criticism of their human rights records.

Putin said in a foreign policy decree issued at the start of his new term that Russia would counter attempts to use human rights as a pretext for interference, and his government has cracked down on foreign-funded non-governmental organizations.

FRIENDSHIP AND FEAR

Xi told Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev his visit had “surpassed my expectations” and said he had chosen Russia as his first foreign destination as president to “show the special importance of our relations.”

Despite the warm words, Moscow is concerned that its far more populous, faster-growing neighbor could pose a threat, something that has not made for easy deals between the world’s biggest energy producer, Russia, and its biggest consumer, China.

Xi’s visit produced an agreement for Russian state giant Rosneft to gradually treble oil supplies to China, but the sides are still short of a deal on the supply of pipeline gas to China, thwarted for years over prices.

Viktor Yaskov, a student who attended Xi’s address, said the Chinese leader made “a good impression”, but expressed fears about the neighbor. “We’re worried about Chinese economic expansion,” he said.

Xi arrived in Moscow with glamorous first lady Peng Liyuan, prompting speculation about whether Putin’s wife Lyudmila – last seen at a state event last May – would make an appearance.

That did not happen, and Peng kept a low profile after her first steps off the airplane caused an Internet sensation in China.

After Russia, Xi will visit Tanzania, the Republic of Congo and South Africa, where he and Putin are expected to meet again at a summit of the BRICS group of emerging economies next week.

(Additional reporting by Megan Davies; Writing by Steve Gutterman; Editing by Robin Pomeroy)

Link

Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) “urgent bulletin” being sent to Embassies around the world today is advising both Russian citizens and companies to begin divesting their assets from Western banking and financial institutions “immediately” as Kremlin fears grow that both the European Union and United States are preparing for the largest theft of private wealth in modern history.

According to this “urgent bulletin,” this warning is being made at the behest of Prime Minister Medvedev who earlier today warned against the Western banking systems actions against EU Member Cyprus by stating:

“All possible mistakes that could be made have been made by them, the measure that was proposed is of a confiscation nature, and unprecedented in its character. I can’t compare it with anything but … decisions made by Soviet authorities … when they didn’t think much about the savings of their population. But we are living in the 21st century, under market economic conditions. Everybody has been insisting that ownership rights should be respected.”

Medvedev’s statements echo those of President Putin who, likewise, warned about the EU’s unprecedented private asset grab in Cyprus calling it “unjust, unprofessional, and dangerous.”

In our 17 March report “Europe Recoils In Shock After Bankster Raid, US Warned Is Next” we noted how Russian entities have €23-31 billion ($ 30-$ 40) in cross-border loans to Cypriot companies tied to Moscow, and €9 billion ($ 12 billion) on deposit with Cypriot banks as compared to the €127 billion (6 billion) being kept in similar circumstances by 60 of the United States largest corporations in offshore accounts to avoid paying American taxes which are in danger of being confiscated by EU banksters.

Unbowed by the misery they have inflicted upon the entire continent, however, and in spite of Russian warnings, European Union officials hardened their stance against Cyprus today by announcing that if the Cypriot government did not allow the raiding of private bank accounts by Monday they would be forced to destroy their banks, which remain closed for the seventh straight day and have no signs of opening soon.

In an editorial agreeing with Russian leaders anger against the EU over Cyprus, Canada’s Globe and Mail News Service further writes:

“The parliament of Cyprus was right this week to reject a proposal to confiscate money from modest-sized bank deposits. The idea was a reductio ad absurdum of the euro zone’s policy on the sovereign debt of some of its member-countries.

It would be better for the government of Cyprus to default outright on some of its obligations rather than to seize part of the savings of the proverbial widows and orphans, as well as retirees or those approaching retirement – while purporting to levy a tax. This is especially true in a country that has deposit insurancefor up to €100,000, in order to protect small savers.Until a few years ago, Cyprus – which is really the ethnically Greek section of Cyprus, the Turkish section being a de facto protectorate of Turkey – had a fiscal surplus, but its close relationship to Greece resulted in a downturn when Greece fell into a severe recession. The government’s debt in itself is still manageable, but Cypriot banks have become shaky because of their loans to Greece.”

In the face of massive popular outrage, however, Cypriot MPs spectacularly voted earlier this week against the EU plan to steal their bank depositors money, thus leaving the Euro Zone reeling, a situation that was, in fact, created by European banksters who had forced Cyprus banks to lend money to nearly bankrupt Greece in the first place.

Even worse may be what is in store for the Americans, who on 31 January lost an unlimited US government guarantee that was granted on over $ 1.5 trillion of their bank deposits during the 2008 financial crisis to assure skittish customers that their cash was safe.

According to Kremlin sources, though, President Obama’s sudden visit to Israel this week, the first he has made since being elected in 2008, was to personally warn top Israelis of his regimes “plan” to begin confiscating his citizen’s bank deposits too.

Interesting to note is that the Obama regimes “master plan” to steal their citizen’s wealth that is no longer protected was detailed by the global management consulting giant, and the world’s leading advisor on business strategy, The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) who in their 2011 September report titled Collateral Damage: Back to Mesopotamia? The Threat of Debt Restructuring warned of the US governments plan confiscate up to 30% of not just the Americans people bank accounts, but also of their other wealth.

The highly respected Zero Hedge financial newsletter in commenting on this dire BCG report grimly stated:

“Denial. Denial is safe. Comforting. Religiously and relentlessly abused by politicians who don’t want nor can face reality. A word synonymous with “muddle through.” Ah yes, that “muddle through” which so many C-grade economists and pundits believe is the long-term status quo for the US and the world just because it worked for Japan for the past three decades, or, said otherwise, “just because.”

Well, too bad. As the following absolutely must read report, which comes not from some traderof dubious credibility interviewed by BBC, nor even from an impassioned executive from a doomed Italian bank, but from consultancy powerhouse Boston Consulting Group confirms, the “muddle through” is dead. And now it is time to face the facts.

What facts? The facts which state that between household, corporate and government debt, the developed world has $ 20 trillion in debt over and above the sustainable threshold by the definition of “stable” debt to GDP of 180%.

The facts according to which all attempts to eliminate the excess debt have failed, and for now even the Fed’s relentless pursuit of inflating our way out this insurmountable debt load have been for nothing.

The facts which state that the only way to resolve the massive debt load is through a global coordinated debt restructuring (which would, among other things, push all global banks into bankruptcy) which, when all is said and done, will have to be funded by the world’s financial asset holders: the middle-and upper-class, which, if BCS is right, have a ~30% one-time tax on all their assets to look forward to as the great mean reversion finally arrives and the world is set back on a viable path.

But not before the biggest episode of “transitory” pain, misery and suffering in the history of mankind. Good luck, politicians and holders of financial assets, you will need it because after Denial comes Anger, and only long after does Acceptance finally arrive.”

To the evidence that the masses of Americans or Europeans average citizens will begin protecting themselves against this apocalyptic outcome their remains little evidence as their so-called “mainstream” media continues to cover-up this coming catastrophe. But, and as Russia has now warned, the time for protecting oneself is fast running out, and the only survivors will be those who listened.

Link

It was Chavez not any Arab leader, that was first to denounce Israel’s bombing of Lebanon in 2006 and that he broke all diplomatic ties with Israel
The CIA and Mossad certainly have the capability of poisoning people with cancer-causing agents.

Hugo Chavez dies in Venezuela
http://www.davidduke.com/?p=38712

Dr. Patrick Slattery Mar 06, 2013 |

By Dr. Patrick Slattery – Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has lost his two-year battle with cancer. Often described in the Zio-media as a “sworn enemy of the United States,” under Chavez Venezuela actually donated about 200 million gallons of heating oil to lower income families in 25 states and Washington, D.C., offering 100 gallons per family. Of course Chavez wanted his people to live free of domination from the corrupt goverment in Washington — so do a lot of Americans. So what caused the Zio-media to demonize the popular Venezuelan president for 14 years? Let’s hear from Ben Cohen of the Baltimore Jewish Times:

Chavez became an arch-foe of the State of Israel. In one of the last foreign policy statements he made before returning to hospital in Cuba in December, Chavez denounced what he called the “savage” Israeli attack on Gaza. In 2009, on the previous occasion that Israel responded militarily to Hamas rocket attacks from Gaza, Chavez told the French newspaper Le Figaro that the Israel had launched a “genocide” against the Palestinians. “The question is not whether the Israelis want to exterminate the Palestinians. They’re doing it openly,” he said.

Cohen continues to rail against Chavez for his friendships with anti-Zionist national leaders, especially Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Cohen contends that antisemitism is “the inevitable outcome of Chavez’s alliance with Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.” Chavez first visited Iran in 2001. In 2002 he was ousted from power for three days in a coup widely backed by the Zio-media, both America’s and Venezuela’s. Cohen notes that it was Chavez, not any Arab leader, that was first to denounce Israel’s bombing of Lebanon in 2006 and that he broke all diplomatic ties with Israel over its genocidal pogrom against the Gaza ghetto in 2009, while the supposedly hostile Arab countries that surround Israel — Egypt and Jordan — left their ambassadors in place. Chavez also antagonized the Jewish supremacists by building regional financial institutions as alternatives to the Jewish-run World Bank.

Cohen failed to mention it, but Chavez was roundly slammed by Zionist rags like William Kristol’s Weekly Standard for having said “The world is for all of us, then, but it so happens that a minority, the descendants of the same ones that crucified Christ, the descendants of the same ones that kicked Bolívar out of here and also crucified him in their own way over there in Santa Marta, in Colombia. A minority has taken possession all of the wealth of the world.”

As conclusive evidence of Chavez’s “antisemitism,” Cohen tells us that of the 30,000 Jews that lived in Venezuela when Chavez was first elected president in 1999, all but 9000 have left the country. One of these 9000, he tells us, is “Henrique Capriles. While Capriles is a practicing Catholic, his mother’s family, the Radonskis, arrived in Venezuela after surviving the Holocaust in Poland. Other members of the family perished in the Nazi concentration camps.” (It should also be noted that Capriles is of Sephardic Jewish ancestry on his father’s side.) Capriles was Chavez’s opponent in last October and is expected to run again in Presidential elections that should be held within 30 days. In his failed election bid last October he said he would move the country away from Iran and would implement more “market-friendly” (read bankster-friendly) economic policies. In a country of 30 million where Jews make up 0.03% of the population, why shouldn’t one expect a member of the tribe to be “chosen” as President?

Chavez’s interim successor, Vice-President Nicolas Maduro, will likely face Capriles in the elections. Maduro has indicated that Chavez’s cancer was caused by ”outside forces.” While there is nothing particularly unusual about a 58-year-old man to dying from cancer, the CIA and Mossad certainly have the capability of poisoning people with cancer-causing agents. An autopsy may shine light on what actually happened. In the meantime, expect the Zio-media to try to build Capriles into some sort of savior for Venezuela while Zio-bucks flood into his campaign coffers.

It was Chavez not any Arab leader, that was first to denounce Israel’s bombing of Lebanon in 2006 and that he broke all diplomatic ties with Israel
The CIA and Mossad certainly have the capability of poisoning people with cancer-causing agents.

Hugo Chavez dies in Venezuela
http://www.davidduke.com/?p=38712

Dr. Patrick Slattery Mar 06, 2013 |

By Dr. Patrick Slattery – Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has lost his two-year battle with cancer. Often described in the Zio-media as a “sworn enemy of the United States,” under Chavez Venezuela actually donated about 200 million gallons of heating oil to lower income families in 25 states and Washington, D.C., offering 100 gallons per family. Of course Chavez wanted his people to live free of domination from the corrupt goverment in Washington — so do a lot of Americans. So what caused the Zio-media to demonize the popular Venezuelan president for 14 years? Let’s hear from Ben Cohen of the Baltimore Jewish Times:

Chavez became an arch-foe of the State of Israel. In one of the last foreign policy statements he made before returning to hospital in Cuba in December, Chavez denounced what he called the “savage” Israeli attack on Gaza. In 2009, on the previous occasion that Israel responded militarily to Hamas rocket attacks from Gaza, Chavez told the French newspaper Le Figaro that the Israel had launched a “genocide” against the Palestinians. “The question is not whether the Israelis want to exterminate the Palestinians. They’re doing it openly,” he said.

Cohen continues to rail against Chavez for his friendships with anti-Zionist national leaders, especially Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Cohen contends that antisemitism is “the inevitable outcome of Chavez’s alliance with Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.” Chavez first visited Iran in 2001. In 2002 he was ousted from power for three days in a coup widely backed by the Zio-media, both America’s and Venezuela’s. Cohen notes that it was Chavez, not any Arab leader, that was first to denounce Israel’s bombing of Lebanon in 2006 and that he broke all diplomatic ties with Israel over its genocidal pogrom against the Gaza ghetto in 2009, while the supposedly hostile Arab countries that surround Israel — Egypt and Jordan — left their ambassadors in place. Chavez also antagonized the Jewish supremacists by building regional financial institutions as alternatives to the Jewish-run World Bank.

Cohen failed to mention it, but Chavez was roundly slammed by Zionist rags like William Kristol’s Weekly Standard for having said “The world is for all of us, then, but it so happens that a minority, the descendants of the same ones that crucified Christ, the descendants of the same ones that kicked Bolívar out of here and also crucified him in their own way over there in Santa Marta, in Colombia. A minority has taken possession all of the wealth of the world.”

As conclusive evidence of Chavez’s “antisemitism,” Cohen tells us that of the 30,000 Jews that lived in Venezuela when Chavez was first elected president in 1999, all but 9000 have left the country. One of these 9000, he tells us, is “Henrique Capriles. While Capriles is a practicing Catholic, his mother’s family, the Radonskis, arrived in Venezuela after surviving the Holocaust in Poland. Other members of the family perished in the Nazi concentration camps.” (It should also be noted that Capriles is of Sephardic Jewish ancestry on his father’s side.) Capriles was Chavez’s opponent in last October and is expected to run again in Presidential elections that should be held within 30 days. In his failed election bid last October he said he would move the country away from Iran and would implement more “market-friendly” (read bankster-friendly) economic policies. In a country of 30 million where Jews make up 0.03% of the population, why shouldn’t one expect a member of the tribe to be “chosen” as President?

Chavez’s interim successor, Vice-President Nicolas Maduro, will likely face Capriles in the elections. Maduro has indicated that Chavez’s cancer was caused by ”outside forces.” While there is nothing particularly unusual about a 58-year-old man to dying from cancer, the CIA and Mossad certainly have the capability of poisoning people with cancer-causing agents. An autopsy may shine light on what actually happened. In the meantime, expect the Zio-media to try to build Capriles into some sort of savior for Venezuela while Zio-bucks flood into his campaign coffers.