Friday, September 11, 2015

Morning Briefing - Friday, September 11, 2015 - Neocons Lose Votes On Iran Deal, ISIS Czar Allen Faking Intel, Neocon Plan To Topple Yatsenyuk In Ukraine, Is Boehner About To Fall? Hillary Falls In Polls

Gen. John R. Allen
Tax Wall Street Party
United Front Against Austerity
September 11, 2015


On Thursday afternoon, the Democratic Senate filibuster proved strong enough to block the attempt of the warmonger Republicans to torpedo the Iran Nuclear Accord by a vote of 42 to 58, short of the 60 needed to get a vote on the resolution condemning the Iran deal. This positive outcome makes it more difficult for the forces of aggression and adventurism to embroil the United States in new catastrophic wars. It is a defeat for the Republican Party, for its billionaire donors, and for an army of Gucci-shod foreign lobbyists. The spiteful Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is threatening to hold new votes next week, but these will only emphasize the impotence of the GOP.

On the House side, the bizarre tactics demanded by the mentally unstable denizens of the lunatic fringe “Freedom Caucus” have translated into a bewildering labyrinth of tantrums disguised as roll call votes, culminating on September 11. The one evident fact is that the House Republicans as of Wednesday morning had completely abandoned any attempt to pass a resolution of condemnation against the Obama-Kerry diplomacy. Their machinations concentrate rather on forcing vulnerable Democratic Congressman to take embarrassing votes so that they will be more vulnerable in 2016, or else on laying the basis for some legal crank lawsuit against Obama for not providing the GOP swamp creatures with information about arrangements between Iran and the IAEA which Obama apparently does not have.

The warmongers’ attention has now shifted toward Syria, and quite possibly towards Ukraine, as they seek to create the atmosphere in which the 2016 presidential contest will proceed.

One top warmonger who is presently in big trouble is ISIS Czar John Allen, who may soon be unmasked as a kingpin of the network which has been falsifying US intelligence reports concerning the Syrian terrorist rebels in general, and the ISIS Caliphate in particular. Most news articles written about this growing scandal quote Allen’s remark in Aspen, Colorado at the end of July that “ISIS is losing.” Last week Allen’s sidekick, Ambassador Brett McGurk, stressed that the conflict will be long and hard. So which is it?

Jake Tapper of CNN, who apparently enjoys the confidence of the ISIS Czar, interviewed the seditious general on Thursday. In this interview, we can see clearly that Allen’s strategy is now to offer blatantly contradictory assessments of what is going on with ISIS, so that he can always evade direct questions and avoid being nailed down to any specific point of view. In this way, Allen can and does claim that ISIS is winning and losing at the same time. Additionally, to make sure that the public is thoroughly confused, Allen also switches back and forth among ISIS, ISIL and Daesh.

“GENERAL ALLEN: We have to start with a couple of reality points, Jake. And that is – the first interview I did in this job was last year for CNN. And I made the point then that this is going to be a long conflict and we need to be prepared.

QUESTION: How long?

GENERAL ALLEN: Well, we think it could be years. There will be aspects of it that will go even beyond that.

QUESTION: Decades?

GENERAL ALLEN: The competition of ideas. That’s right. And we shouldn’t be surprised by that. But if we remember where we were a year ago, roughly at the beginning of the formation of the Coalition: Mosul has fallen, the better part of three to four provinces in western Iraq has fallen, much of the border of Syria and Turkey has been lost to the control of Daesh.

QUESTION: That’s another word for ISIS in terms of --

GENERAL ALLEN: Which is the term we typically use in our interaction with our partners in the coalition. We were uncertain whether Iraq was going to survive this. And when you think back to that moment in history, what was going on then, and you think about what’s happening now, it’s really a dramatic change.”

When asked about the presence of Russian military forces in Syria, Allen says, this is a bad thing and then immediately pulls out the fateful word of “confrontation.” This inveterate intriguer ought to be fired for this verbal provocation alone:

QUESTION: The Russian foreign ministry just finally acknowledged that they do have some personnel in Syria aiding Assad, aiding Bashar al-Assad’s regime in its fight against ISIS. Do you have a problem with Russian forces in Syria on Assad’s side, but fighting ISIS?

GENERAL ALLEN: We’ve been watching this closely over the last several days, watching the buildup to see what it might mean.

QUESTION: So we don’t know whether or not it’s a good thing or a bad thing?

GENERAL ALLEN: Well, I think it’s a bad thing --


GENERAL ALLEN: -- if the Russians use combat forces to prop up the regime of Bashar al-Assad.


GENERAL ALLEN: Bashar al-Assad is singularly responsible for the death of tens of thousands of his people. Much of the instability in the region is a direct result of the actions of Bashar al-Assad, and to prop him up with military force creates an additional crisis in the region, and in fact, could bring Russian forces in confrontation with Coalition forces that are fighting Daesh in Syria.”[i]

This poses the question of why Allen is engaging in such contortions. Allen’s desperation derives from the fact that he is a prime suspect in the huge emerging scandal which revolves around the systematic falsification of US military intelligence reports concerning the Caliphate and related matters. The insubordinate Allen is now literally on the hot seat, with the Daily Beast reporting that no fewer than 50 intelligence experts are complaining that their work has been mangled:

‘More than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military's Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda’s branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials, The Daily Beast has learned….The complaints spurred the Pentagon’s inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence. “The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” one defense official said. Two senior analysts at CENTCOM signed a written complaint sent to the Defense Department inspector general in July alleging that the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration’s public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda’s branch in Syria, the analysts claim. That complaint was supported by 50 other analysts, some of whom have complained about politicizing of intelligence reports for months. That’s according to 11 individuals who are knowledgeable about the details of the report and who spoke to The Daily Beast on condition of anonymity.’[ii]

Allen’s immediate fear is evidently that he will be identified as part of the effort to cook the intelligence reports by mobilizing the Petraeus-Allen networks. Alan must have shuddered when he heard former chief CIA spook Michael Morrell intone that faking the intelligence reports would be enough to land a perpetrator in jail:

‘Former CIA deputy director Michael Morrell explained on "CBS This Morning" how serious these allegations are. "One of the central tenants, one of the key aspects of the policymaking process in the United States is that analysts get to say what they think without any interference, without anybody changing it, so this is a very, very serious charge. I think it needs to be fully investigated," Morrell said. "If there is truth that somebody has been meddling with their analysis, I think somebody needs to lose their job over it, and there needs to be full transparency into this because it is so important that analysts be able to say what they really think."’[iii]

To get some idea of how various warmonger networks inside the CIA might sabotage of the Iran Nuclear Accord, we should look back at the Agreed Framework between the United States of America and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, which was signed on October 21, 1994 between North Korea (DPRK) and the United States. There are several parallels between this negotiation and the current one with Iran. In those days, the Clinton Administration claimed that it was attempting to dissuade North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons through a strategy of offering to deliver petroleum products to the DPRK, while building light water reactors for Pyongyang, and also offering assurances that the United States would not engage in a nuclear attack. The building of light water reactors was a stroke of genius, and could have set the tone for a number of other regional settlements across the world. But warmonger forces inside the US intelligence community decided that the North Korean enemy image could not be dispensed with, and therefore sabotaged this deal over time. Watch for the CIA or some other agency to begin sniping at the Iran Nuclear Accord with fake reports of violations before too many months have gone by.

Here is how the 1994 deal was wrecked:

‘In October 2002, a U.S. delegation led by Assistant Secretary of State James A. Kelly visited North Korea to confront the North Koreans with the U.S. assessment that they had a uranium enrichment program…The … intelligence that James Kelly’s accusation is based on is still controversial: According to the CIA fact sheet to Congress on November 19, 2002, there was "clear evidence indicating the North has begun constructing a centrifuge facility" and this plant could produce annually enough Highly Enriched Uranium for two or more nuclear weapons per year when it is finished. However, some experts assessed that the equipment North Korea imported was insufficient evidence of a production-scale enrichment program…. ’ [iv]


Mikheil Saakashvili

Some observers have concluded from the recent bloody fascist riots in Kiev that the Victoria Nuland/Kagan family neocon machine is softening up Prime Minister Yatsenyuk to be ousted from office. Now, the London Times and other publications are reporting details of a plot to sack “Yatz” and replace him with the Georgian fascist Michael Saakashvili, or else with Chicago gun moll Natalie Jaresko. According to this account:

“One of President Poroshenko of Ukraine’s closest allies has accused the country’s prime minister of abusing his position by furthering the interests of Kiev’s richest oligarchs, in a move interpreted as the start of a plot to oust him. Appearing on a TV channel owned by the president, Mikhail Saakashvili, the governor of Odessa and former president of Georgia, said that Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the Ukrainian prime minister, had tried to help Ihor Kolomoyskyi, a billionaire businessman, to monopolize the country’s aviation industry.”[vi]

In August 2008, Saakashvili proved his insanity by launching his absurd toy army against forces of the Russian Federation. He has been accused of embezzling tax money from the Georgian treasury, and is on the run from an international arrest warrant.


Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC)

With the Republican Party upheaval caused by the Trump candidacy in the background, the bizarre and erratic behavior of the right wing extremists in the House GOP caucus over the Iran issue this week gives reason to believe that a coup designed to oust Speaker Boehner may be imminent. This is the subject of an interview given to The Hill by Congressman Mark Meadows, one of the top honchos of the “Freedom Caucus” of reactionary anarchists:

‘“The Republican lawmaker who introduced a measure to oust Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) as Speaker said Wednesday that the effort to get rid of him depends on his actions this fall….Meadows clarified that it wouldn’t be one particular issue, such as the Tea Party push to defund Planned Parenthood, that could trigger a vote to take down the three-term Speaker. Rather, House conservatives will be closely watching how Boehner handles a number of issues, including Planned Parenthood, the fight to fund the federal government, preserving sequester budget caps, the Iran nuclear deal and a long-term highway bill. “Really there is no line in the sand, no limited time on when or how [a vote to remove Boehner] would be done,” Meadows said in his Capitol Hill office. “Probably the best way to say that is there are three or four [factors], and they are all running on parallel tracks.” Meadows, 56, became a hero to some on the right when, just before the congressional summer recess, he rolled out a resolution ripping Boehner’s leadership and calling for his ouster as Speaker. But because of the way Meadows introduced it, the measure was simply ignored by leaders and never got a vote….But Meadows, a co-founder of a conservative bloc of House Republicans known as the Freedom Caucus, said he’s well aware that any lawmaker has the right to introduce a privileged motion to force a vote on his resolution on the House floor. That means ardent Boehner foes, including Reps. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) or Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), could call for a vote at any time. “It’s just something that all 435 members have available to them,” said Meadows, noting that the last time such a motion occurred was 105 years ago, when then-Speaker Joseph Cannon (R-Ill.) introduced a “motion to vacate” the Speaker’s chair to prove he had the support of his conference.”’[vii]

Meadows was one of the leading provocateurs responsible for the 2013 government shutdown. He appears to regard some federal health care funding going to Planned Parenthood as good cause to pitch this country into chaos and national bankruptcy. Meadows exemplifies the risk of a government shutdown on October 1, followed by a US default as early as October-November.


The latest poll shows Bernie Sanders leading Hillary Clinton by a single percentage point. A national poll gives Hillary a dwindling 10% lead over the Vermont mush-head, indicating her weakness across the board. Nevertheless, so deeply rooted are Hillary’s warmonger instincts that she is responding to the obvious crisis in her faction-riven campaign by moving to the right. According to the Washington Post, Hillary “signaled clear disagreement with her former boss Wednesday in key areas of foreign policy, suggesting in some cases that he has been too hesitant, Again and again, Clinton pointed to instances overseas where she would have taken a tougher stance than Obama, from arming Syrian rebels to confronting an expansionist Russia.”[viii]

This woman must never be president.


[ii] Shane Harris and Nancy A. Youssef, “Exclusive: 50 Spies Say ISIS Intelligence Was Cooked: It’s being called a ‘revolt’ by intelligence pros who are paid to give their honest assessment of the ISIS war—but are instead seeing their reports turned into happy talk,” Daily Beast, September 9, 2015,

[iii] “Former CIA director under Obama: 'Someone needs to lose their job' if reports about ISIS intelligence are true,” Business Insider/Yahoo,



[vi] “Plot to unseat Ukraine’s discredited prime minister,”


[viii] Washington Post, September 10, 2015.