Syria: 11.5% have been either killed or injured

11.5 percent of the population have been either killed or injured, 45 percent of the population is displaced and no end in sight.

Syria death toll almost twice as high as previously thought: Report

Over 470,000 Syrians are alleged to have died as a result of the war and collapse of infrastructure

A new report suggests that the death toll in Syria’s long-running civil war may be much higher than previous estimates.

The Syrian Centre for Policy Research (SCPR) reports that around 470,000 people have been killed in the conflict as opposed to the figure of 250,000 cited by the UN. Around 11.5 percent of the population have been either killed or injured, according to the report.

Many of the deaths, previously unreported, are caused by the collapse of infrastructure caused by the devastating conflict.

“We use very rigorous research methods and we are sure of this figure. Indirect deaths will be greater in the future, though most NGOs and the UN ignore them,” the report’s author, Rabie Nasser, told the Guardian.

Forty-five percent of the population is displaced and life expectancy in the country had dropped from 70 in 2010 to 55.4 in 2015, the report said. Nearly 14 million Syrians have lost their source of livelihood.

The report also warned that different armed players in the Syrian war had begun carving the country to suit their proxies.

“During 2015, the Syrian economy became more shattered and fragmented, mainly dominated by the fighting subjugating powers,” the report said.

“Each of these powers is rebuilding its own independent economic entities and foundations in which resources are being reallocated to serving its objectives and creating incentives and drawing loyalty among their narrow group of followers against people’s needs and aspirations.

“The absence of a framework for national dialogue which brings together the Syrian parties, which can represent and unify Syrians to create an inclusive process to overcome the conflict, has aggravated the state of socioeconomic fragmentation and enhanced the conflict economy.”

SCPR’s research was carried out from inside Syria, until recently based in Damascus.

Based on SCPR’s estimates, Syria’s death toll now exceeds the mortality for the US-led war in Iraq, which according to a 2013 study totaled 461,000.

Russian bombers and Iranian troops have helped the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad besiege the key city Aleppo, partially held by rebel forces since 2012, over the past fortnight, derailing peace talks in Geneva and threatening Europe with another huge influx of refugees.

Tens of thousands of Syrians are stranded on the Turkish border north of Aleppo, where observers say 500 fighters and civilians have been killed since the bombing started on 1 February.

In Munich on Thursday, US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov will host foreign ministers from the 17-nation Syria contact group, in a meeting billed by Kerry as a moment of truth for the floundering peace process.

Washington wants a ceasefire and humanitarian access to besieged rebel cities but has threatened an unspecified “Plan B” if talks fail, as tension mounts with Moscow over its air campaign.

“There is no question… that Russia’s activities in Aleppo and in the region right now are making it much more difficult to be able to come to the table and to be able to have a serious conversation,” Kerry said this week.

America’s special envoy for the fight against the Islamic State group (IS), Brett McGurk, said Russia’s bombing campaign was “directly enabling” the jihadists.

While Moscow has promised to bring “new ideas” for kick-starting the peace process to Munich, Russia and Iran are adamant the rebels in Aleppo are just as much “terrorists” as IS and there can be no settlement until they have been militarily defeated.

The rebels say they will not return to talks in Geneva, pencilled in for 25 February, unless government sieges and air strikes end.

Read more:

Leaders agree to ‘full cessation of hostilities’ in Syria within 1 week: Kerry #SyriaWar

Clapper’s Briefing on Chemical Weapons, History

Mustard gas ‘used in Iraq’ in August

The Hague (AFP) – Mustard gas was used in two attacks in Iraq near the Kurdish capital of Arbil in August last year, sources close to the world’s chemical watchdog said on Monday.

 

“The results of some sampling have confirmed the use of mustard gas,” one source said, asking to remain anonymous.

The news comes amid an investigation by the Iraqi government into the 2015 attacks aided by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), based in The Hague.

It is also only days after US officials said IS jihadist fighters had the capability to make small quantities of chlorine and mustard gas and had used it in war-torn Syria and Iraq.

Iraqi Kurd authorities last year said two attacks were carried out by Islamic State group fighters on August 11 on the frontline towns of Gweyr and Makhmur southwest of Arbil, during which around 50 mortar rounds were launched.

The peshmerga ministry said “37 of the rounds released a white dust and black liquid when they exploded. Thirty-five peshmerga fighters were exposed and some were taken for treatment”.

“The results of the tests on blood samples… reveal traces of mustard gas,” the ministry said at the time, but the origin of the suspected gas was unclear.

OPCW spokesman Malik Ellahi confirmed the watchdog had sent a team of experts to help Iraq in its investigation into possible chemical weapons.

“The team completed its mission and the OPCW has shared the results of its technical work with the government of Iraq,” Ellahi said in a statement.

“The complete findings and conclusions can be expected to be issued by the government of Iraq together with the OPCW inputs,” he said, declining to give further details.

Diplomatic sources told AFP the report was a survey conducted by Baghdad with the OPCW’s help.

“The report is still a work in progress,” the source told AFP, stressing it would be “logical” for the OPCW to publish it — but it may well also be released by Baghdad.

“It is not the OPCW’s role” to point fingers as to which side used the weapon, the source stressed.

US national intelligence director James Clapper last week told a congressional committee that the IS group have used toxic chemicals in Iraq and Syria, including sulphur mustard.

Clapper said it was the first time an extremist group had produced and used a chemical warfare agent in an attack since Japan’s Aum Supreme Truth cult carried out a deadly sarin attack during rush hour in the Tokyo subway in 1995.

– Deadly chemical weapon –

In January the OPCW announced the complete destruction of neighbouring Syria’s declared chemical weapons arsenal.

But the use of chemical weapons in the deadly nearly five-year conflict continues.

In November the OPCW confirmed with “utmost confidence” that mustard gas was used in Syria in August during fighting between rebels and jihadists and “likely” killed a child.

Mustard gas has been dubbed Yperite because it was first used near the Belgian city of Ypres in July 1917 by the German army.

An oily yellow almost liquid-like substance that smells like garlic or mustard, the gas causes the skin to break out in painful blisters, irritates eyes and causes eyelids to swell up, temporarily blinding its victims.

Classified as a Category 1 substance, which means it is seldom used outside of chemical warfare, mustard gas was banned by the UN in 1993.
 Translation in the text below the video.

It is believed however that the regime of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein unleashed mustard gas against the Iraqi Kurds in Halabja attack in 1988.

IS fighters launched a lightning offensive in Iraq in 2014, allowing it to take control of swathes of territory north of Baghdad and in the Kurdistan region.

 

President’s Day, Was George Washington a Spy?

The Spymaster’s Toolkit

CIA: Long before General William Donovan recruited spies to advance the American war efforts during World War II as Director of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), predecessor to the CIA, General George Washington mastered the art of intelligence as Commander of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War.

Washington was a skilled manager of intelligence. He utilized agents behind enemy lines, recruited both Tory and Patriot sources, interrogated travelers for intelligence information, and launched scores of agents on both intelligence and counterintelligence missions. He was adept at deception operations and tradecraft and was a skilled propagandist. He also practiced sound operational security. Washington fully understood the value of accurate intelligence, employing many of the same techniques later used by the OSS and CIA.

As we celebrate the 284th birthday of the first American President, we highlight some of the tradecraft employed to secure our independence from the British and offer insights on its use today. Were it not for the use of secret writing, concealment devises, propaganda, and intercepted communications, there may have been a very different outcome to the War of Independence.

* * * * *

SECRET WRITING

Revolutionary War: American agents serving abroad composed their intelligence reports using invisible ink. George Washington believed this would “not only render his communications less exposed to detection, but relieve the fears of such persons as may be entrusted in its conveyance.”

Communicating via invisible ink required the use of several chemical compositions. One mixture was used to write with disappearing ink, the other mixture was applied to the report to make it legible. Despite their invisible communications, it is estimated that the British intercepted and decrypted over half of America’s secret correspondence during the war.

CIA: The CIA has declassified several documents that provided recipes for making invisible ink. One recipe instructs: “Take a weak solution of starch, tinged with a little tincture of iodine. This bluish writing will soon fade away.” A mixture for exposing secret writing included “iodate of potassium, 5 grams, with 100 grams of water, and 2 grams of tartaric acid added” but warned, “run a hot iron over the surface being careful not to scorch the paper.”

During the Cold War, a major advancement in secret writing technology was the shift from liquid invisible inks to dry systems. The KGB was one of the first foreign intelligence services to employ a dry method. The CIA’s Office of Technical Services in the Directorate of Science and Technology spent considerable time researching Soviet systems and finally succeeded not only in “breaking” them, but in anticipating where its KGB counterpart would go next in the never-ending search for more secure systems. By the end of the Cold War, a kind of tacit convergence had emerged as both sides applied new techniques that used very small, almost undetectable quantities of chemical in secret writing messages. In the words of one CIA chemist, it was like “uniformly spreading a spoonful of sugar over an acre of land.”

CONCEALMENT DEVISES

Revolutionary War: Agents used a variety of modified objects to conceal their secret messages.  One device was a wafer-thin lead container that would sink in water, or melt in fire, thus destroying its contents. The device was small enough that an agent could swallow it if no other means of discarding were available. This was done as a last resort as ingestion was typically followed by a severe bout of lead poisoning. The lead container was eventually replaced by a silver, bullet-shaped container that could be unscrewed to hold a message and which would not poison a courier who might be forced to swallow it.

CIA:  A concealment devise can be any object used to clandestinely hide things. They are typically ordinary, every-day objects that have been hollowed out. The best concealment devises are ones that blend in with their surroundings and call no attention to themselves. They can be used to hide messages, documents, or film. Some examples of concealment devises include hollowed out coins, dead-drop spikes, shaving brushes, and makeup compacts.

PROPAGANDA

Revolutionary War: During the American Revolution, the British had a shortage of soldiers so they hired almost 30,000 German Hessian auxiliary forces to fight against the Americans. The Continental Congress devised a propaganda campaign to encourage the Hessian mercenaries to defect to America. The campaign included offering land grants to those mercenaries fighting for the British on American soil. The offers were written in German on leaflets disguised as tobacco packets. A mock-defector ran through the mercenaries’ camps encouraging others to defect as well. As part of the campaign, Benjamin Franklin forged a letter to the commander of the Hessians, “signed” by a German prince. The letter instructed the commander to let the wounded mercenaries die. This dealt a blow to the morale of the Hessians. Between 5,000 and 6,000 Hessian mercenaries deserted from the British, in part because of American propaganda.

CIA: Propaganda campaigns use communication to alter a population’s beliefs and views thus influencing their behavior. There are three types of propaganda: white, black, and grey. White propaganda openly identifies the source and uses gentle persuasion and public relations techniques to achieve a desired outcome. For example, during the Persian Gulf War, the CIA airdropped leaflets before some Allied bombing runs to allow civilians time to evacuate and encourage military units to surrender. Black propaganda, on the other hand, is misinformation that identifies itself with one side of a conflict, but is truly produced by the opposing side – like Franklin sending the letter “from” a German prince. Grey propaganda is the most mysterious of all because the source of the propaganda is never identified.

INTERCEPTED COMMUNICATIONS

Revolutionary War: The Continental Congress regularly received quantities of intercepted British mail. General Washington proposed to “contrive a means of opening them without breaking the seals, take copies of the contents, and then let them go on. By these means we should become masters of the whole plot.”

CIA: Clandestinely opening, reading and resealing envelopes or packages without the recipient’s knowledge requires practice. ‘Flaps and seals’ opening kits were used in the 1960s. A beginner’s kit offered the basic tools for surreptitious opening of letters and packages. Once mastered, an advanced kit with additional tools was used. Many of the tools were handmade of ivory and housed in a travel roll.

* * * * *

Washington employed the use of many other intelligence gathering techniques still in use today to secure our independence and freedom from Great Britain. Not only is he The Father of His Country, but he is heralded as a great spymaster. Upon the conclusion of the Revolutionary War, a defeated British intelligence officer is quoted as saying, “Washington did not really outfight the British. He simply out-spied us.”

What About Obama and Schumer, the Alito Filibuster?

Obama Filibustered Justice Alito, Voted Against Roberts

Frontpage: Obama and his media allies are now making all the expected noises about the Senate’s obligation to confirm nominees if they’re qualified without partisan interference. That is the exact opposite of what he did to Bush’s Supreme Court nominees.

Let’s start with Justice Roberts.

Obama admitted that Roberts was eminently qualified. He praised him highly.

“There is absolutely no doubt in my mind Judge Roberts is qualified to sit on the highest court in the land. Moreover, he seems to have the comportment and the temperament that makes for a good judge. He is humble, he is personally decent, and he appears to be respectful of different points of view. It is absolutely clear to me that Judge Roberts truly loves the law. He couldn’t have achieved his excellent record as an advocate before the Supreme Court without that passion for the law…”

But, no he wasn’t going to vote for him anyway.

“I ultimately have to give more weight to his deeds and the overarching political philosophy that he appears to have shared with those in power than to the assuring words that he provided me in our meeting. The bottom line is this: I will be voting against John Roberts’ nomination.”

In short, Obama chose to vote against Roberts because of his perceived conservative politics. Nothing else.

When Obama now prattles about the need to get past partisanship, he is preaching what he doesn’t practice, what he has never practiced and what he especially did not practice in that same situation.

However things really got ugly with the nomination of Justice Alito.

 

Obama joined a filibuster when he was a U.S. senator to delay the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito, one of President Bush’s nominees to the Supreme Court.

“I will be supporting the filibuster because I think Judge Alito, in fact, is somebody who is contrary to core American values, not just liberal values,” Obama said in January 2006.

Obama has no idea what American values are. His only values are leftist values. Here’s what he said about Justice Alito.

“While I certainly believe that Judge Samuel Alito has the training and the qualifications necessary to serve as a Supreme Court Justice,after a careful review of his record, I simply cannot vote for his nomination.”

Obama claimed that, “Judge Alito simply does not inspire confidence that he will serve as an independent voice on the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Meanwhile once in the White House, Obama nominated Elena Kagan, his own lawyer for that “independent voice”. So once again, Obama fought against a justice for no other reason than his politics.

Here’s what Senator Obama had to say about the Senate’s role in confirming nominees.

“There are some who believe that the President, having won the election, should have the complete authority to appoint his nominee, and the Senate should only examine whether or not the Justice is intellectually capable and an all-around nice guy. That once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question whether the judge should be confirmed.

I disagree with this view. I believe firmly that the Constitution calls for the Senate to advise and consent. I believe that it calls for meaningful advice and consent that includes an examination of a judge’s philosophy, ideology, and record. And when I examine the philosophy, ideology, and record of Samuel Alito, I’m deeply troubled.

I have no doubt that Judge Alito has the training and qualifications necessary to serve. He’s an intelligent man and an accomplished jurist. And there’s no indication he’s not a man of great character.”

Again, ideology is key. And as Senator, Obama insisted that the Senate should examine a nominee’s ideology and that confirmation should not be expected or anticipated.

****

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

 DailyCaller: During a Sunday morning appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer decried the intent of many Senate Republicans to prevent President Barack Obama from appointing the successor to deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.But less than a decade ago, Schumer advocated doing the same exact thing if any additional Supreme Court vacancies opened under former President George W. Bush.

Almost immediately after Scalia’s death was announced Saturday evening, Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates began arguing the appointment of his successor should be left to the next president. Schumer lamented this outlook as pure obstructionism.

“You know, the kind of obstructionism that [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell ‘s talking about, he’s hearkening back to his old days,” Schumer said, according to The Hill. “In 2010, right after the election or right during the election, he said, ‘My number-one job is to defeat Barack Obama,’ without even knowing what Barack Obama was going to propose. Here, he doesn’t even know who the president’s going to propose and he said, ‘No, we’re not having hearings; we’re not going to go forward to leave the Supreme Court vacant at 300 days in a divided time.’”

****

Don’t leave out Hillary, she got a plan from David Brock to impeach Clarence Thomas:

TWS: Hillary Clinton’s recently released emails includes a memo sent by David Brock titled, “Memo on Impeaching Clarence Thomas.”

The purpose of the document might suggest Clinton, or at least those closest to her and in her circle, are interested in impeaching Justice Thomas.

The document contains information from Brock about his book, The Real Anita Hill, and other similar points on Justice Thomas’s personal life

 

The Next Border Fence

Apparently, they do work and have some significant value, in Europe that is. With the constant flow of migrants, several major problems have literally cracked the security of countries.  Further, there are no signs that migrants flowing into Europe will wane or stop at all, so the true costs in 2016 or beyond. The immigration flood in Europe is a clarion call to the United States as the issues are virtually the same. Not only is the United States taking in Middle Eastern refugees, but we have been taking in Cubans, Mexicans, as well as Central and South Americans. For America is goes much further that a trifecta and costs and security.

Anti-migrant force builds in Europe, hurting Merkel’s quest

WARSAW, Poland (AP) — So where should the next impenetrable razor-wire border fence in Europe be built?

Hungary’s right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban thinks he knows the best place – on Macedonia’s and Bulgaria’s borders with Greece – smack along the main immigration route from the Middle East to Western Europe. He says it’s necessary because “Greece can’t defend Europe from the south” against the large numbers of Muslim refugees pouring in, mainly from Syria and Iraq.

The plan is especially controversial because it effectively means eliminating Greece from the Schengen zone, Europe’s 26-nation passport-free travel region that is considered one of the European Union’s most cherished achievements.

Orban’s plan will feature prominently Monday at a meeting in Prague of leaders from four nations in an informal gathering known as the Visegrad group: Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. The Visegrad group, formed 25 years ago to further the nations’ European integration, is marking that anniversary Monday. Still, it has only recently found a common purpose in its unified opposition to accepting any significant number of migrants.

This determination has emboldened the group, one of the new mini-blocs emerging lately in Europe due to the continent’s chaotic, inadequate response to its largest migration crisis since World War II. The Visegrad group is also becoming a force that threatens the plans of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who wants to resettle newcomers across the continent while also slowing down the influx.

“The plan to build a new “European defense line” along the border of Bulgaria and Macedonia with Greece is a major foreign policy initiative for the Visegrad Four and an attempt to re-establish itself as a notable political force within the EU,” said Vit Dostal, an analyst with the Association for International Affairs, a Prague based think tank.

At Monday’s meeting, leaders from the four nations will be joined by Macedonian President Gjorge Ivanov and Bulgarian Prime Minister Boiko Borisov so they can push for the reinforcements along Greece’s northern border. Macedonia began putting up a first fence in November, and is now constructing a second, parallel, fence.

“If it were up only to us Central Europeans, that region would have been closed off long ago,” Orban said at a press conference recently with Poland’s prime minister. “Not for the first time in history we see that Europe is defenseless from the south … that is where we must ensure the safety of the continent.”

Poland has indicated a willingness to send dozens of police to Macedonia to secure the border, something to be decided at Monday’s meeting.

“If the EU is not active, the Visegrad Four have to be,” Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico said recently. “We have to find effective ways of protecting the border.”

The leaders will try to hash out a unified position ahead of an important EU meeting Thursday and Friday in Brussels that will take up both migration and Britain’s efforts to renegotiate a looser union with the EU. The Visegrad countries have also recently united against British attempts to limit the welfare rights of European workers, something that would affect the hundreds of thousands of their citizens who now live and work in Britain.

The anti-migrant message resonates with the ex-communist EU member states, countries that have benefited greatly from EU subsidies and freedom of movement for their own citizens but which now balk at requests to accept even small numbers of refugees. The Visegrad nations maintain it is impossible to integrate Muslims into their societies, often describing them as security threats. So far the Poles, Czechs and Slovaks have only accepted small numbers, primarily Christians from Syria.

Many officials in the West are frustrated with what they see as xenophobia and hypocrisy, given that huge numbers of Poles, Hungarians and other Eastern Europeans have received refuge and economic opportunity in the West for decades.

Indeed there are plenty of signs that the countries are squandering a lot of the good will that they once enjoyed in the West for their sacrifices in throwing off communism and establishing democracies.

Orban’s ambitions for Europe got a big boost with the rise to power last year in Poland of the right-wing Law and Justice party, which is deeply anti-migrant and sees greater regional cooperation as one of its foreign policy priorities. Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydlo’s government says it wants to do more to help Syrian refugees at camps in Turkey and elsewhere while blocking their entry into Europe.

Although Orban is alienating Greek authorities, who are staggering under the sheer numbers of asylum-seekers crossing the sea from Turkey in smugglers’ boars, he insists he must act as a counterweight to Western leaders, whom he accuses of creating the crisis with their welcoming attitude to refugees.

“The very serious phenomenon endangering the security of everyday life which we call migration did not break into Western Europe violently,” he said. “The doors were opened. And what is more, in certain periods, they deliberately invited and even transported these people into Western Europe without control, filtering or security screening.”

Dariusz Kalan, an analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, said he doesn’t believe that the Visegrad group on its own can destroy European unity but says Orban’s vision is winning adherents across the continent in far-right movements and even among mainstream political parties.

“It’s hard to ignore Orban,” Kalan said. “People in Western Europe are starting to adopt the language of Orban. None are equally tough and yet the language is still quite similar.”