Jeffrey Sachs: Clinton Backed “Secret” Saudi/CIA Plans To Destabilize Syria.

By Jerry Alatalo

“The intention makes the crime.”

– ARISTOTLE (384-322 B.C.) Greek philosopher

aaa-13Alphabet During a recent Democracy Now (DN) episode hosted by Amy Goodman featuring Columbia University Professor Jeffrey Sachs and New York Congressman Gregory Meeks, Mr. Sachs said the following about the Clinton-Sanders debate in Milwaukee, Wisconsin:

“…It did clarify many different things. It also confused a few things when Hillary Clinton, for example, said that she negotiated the 2012 (Syria) ceasefire. There was no ceasefire in Syria; she was the reason why the ceasefire never took place then. Because she has backed a CIA-led attempt at regime change that has led to a bloodbath there. That’s what I wrote about a few days ago”.

Further into the segment, Mr. Sachs added: “When we talk about foreign policy, we have a spreading war, and she has been a leading agent of that war, from Iraq to Libya to Syria. This is CIA-led regime change that has led to chaos and we need a different foreign policy. And that’s why it’s extremely important that people understand what the underlying root of the problem is. It is the military-industrial complex, and she has supported it all along. She has supported Wall Street all along”.

After Congressman Meeks praised the Obama Administration and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for “sitting down” with allies in cooperative efforts, Jeffrey Sachs responded:

“I’ll tell you who she sat down with. Go back to the New York Times a couple weeks ago when they unveiled what many of us know, which was the secret deal of Saudi Arabia and the CIA to fund the destabilization of Syria. That’s who Hillary Clinton sat down with… with the CIA and with Saudi Arabia, and the bloodbath that we have underway right now is irresponsible… This (Syria) is a repeated military-industrial complex/CIA-led coup change, and it’s bipartisan”.

Thus far, this Democracy Now segment has received over 8,000 views and elicited over 100 comments at DN’s YouTube channel. Looking at the comments, many were critical of Congressman Meeks, but what was most astounding was the fact that only one contributing comment referred to Professor Sachs’ revelations of the Syrian coup attempt, perhaps still ongoing to this day, involving the U.S. through Hillary Clinton, Saudi Arabia, and implemented by the CIA.

What was similarly worrisome and striking about the DN segment was the complete avoidance and failure by Congressman Meeks to respond, directly and specifically, to Professor Sachs’ – in three separate statements during the course of the segment – clear allegation of a Saudi/CIA covert military operation against the Syrian government while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.

Not being an expert on international law, and perhaps someone reading these words who is can clarify the issue, but isn’t it illegal under international law for nations to overthrow the democratically elected governments of other nations? Is this what the world has come to, that nations can attack other nations illegally, creating, according to respected scholar Jeffrey Sachs – a “bloodbath”, and the response from the United States Congress and many world leaders is silence?

Not being an expert on U.S. law related to covert military actions, and perhaps someone reading these words who is can clarify the issue, but isn’t it illegal under U.S. law to overthrow democratically elected governments of other nations? Has the status/condition of important legal systems in America at a national level and at global institutions, whose mandates include prevention of state against state violations of sovereignty, devolved to the point where what Jeffrey Sachs alleges becomes ignored and nobody finds his allegations reason enough to demand initiation of an investigation?

Unfortunately, examples of noble and moral speaking out against criminal actions leading to horrific consequences experienced by the people of the Middle East and North Africa such as Mr. Sachs are too few. While in full agreement with all Mr. Sachs said during this particular interview, his use of the term “irresponsible” to describe the coup attempt against Syria didn’t convey the full measure of the situation. Any reasonable man or woman on Earth will equate premeditated “bloodbath”, to Mr. Sachs’ appreciable, great credit the precise term – with the most offensive, immoral crimes against humanity ever committed in world history.

(Thank you to Democracy Now at YouTube)

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “Jeffrey Sachs: Clinton Backed “Secret” Saudi/CIA Plans To Destabilize Syria.

  1. Meeks is just politicking. (Not very well. Would make a good filibusterer, though.)

    When Hillary talks about foreign policy she speaks well and sounds so knowledgeable. But I ask myself, how can I evaluate what she is saying? It takes people like Sachs, who have studied the situation, to provide insight. “A leading agent of spreading war.” Wheuu!

    Thanks for your post and sharing this video.

    Like

    1. Hello JoAnn,
      That old saying “First thing we do is kill all the lawyers” pertains to both Clinton and Meeks, along with the majority of Congress who’ve been trained in law. Hard as it is to fathom and accept, there are people who think nothing about taking actions which literally destroy untold numbers of lives. Ruptly TV posted on YT a 6-hour video of a UNSC meeting in the last days, which you might be interested in to hear at the start Venezuelan Foreign Minister Delcy Rodriguez’ spot-on address, in which she points out the urgent need to (re)establish an effective system of international law to keep the peace. UN reform which makes it mandatory for member states to sign on to the Rome Statute, come under the jurisdiction of the ICC, or face expulsion from the UN would provide the deterrence necessary to put a stop to major war crimes, like the covert US/CIA-Saudi-Clinton operation Jeffrey Sachs powerfully revealed. Keep the faith.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. My knowledge of the American constitution is hardly comprehensive, yet as far as I understand it has always been illegal for the U.S. Forces into action overseas without war being officially declared.

    Military action by outside forces designed to overthrow regimes is specifically forbidden by the U.N. Charter.

    A quick check on Wikipedia reveals the U.S. constitution: “… provides that the U.S. President can send U.S. Armed Forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, ‘statutory authorization,’ or in case of ‘a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces’.”

    In my book that means that the U.S. and NATO are in breach of their own laws, as well as intenational law, and have been for some time.

    Like

    1. Bryan,
      Covert wars using hired mercenary armies can be viewed as the same as an individual hiring a hit man to murder. If the individual gets caught they go to jail for life, but if the Secretary of State or King get caught, keeping in mind thousands upon thousands have been murdered, they get away with it. It’s as simple and as disturbing as that. Here we understand why the United States hasn’t signed the Rome Statute to join the International Criminal Court – it puts an end to highest-level officials’ impunity for war crimes. Ruptly TV on YT posted a 6-hour recent UN Security Council meeting on war and peace, the ICC was mentioned a number of times, but none of the state ambassadors suggested reform making it mandatory for member states to join the ICC or face mandatory expulsion, a reform which would certainly end impunity and deter war crimes. Got a hunch such reform is comimg soon, though… Thanks.

      Like

    1. Stuart,
      Yes… Isn’t it astonishing what power does to people. Lying, cheating, killing etc. becomes acceptable, without concern for the severe and saddening consequences for fellow human beings. Something how much damage a three letter word, ego, has done and continues to be the source of until this day. Perhaps Ms. Clinton is now experiencing punishment in the form of karma, an inescapable form of spiritual justice according to those who believe it’s real. Thanks.

      Like

  3. Jerry, this is an excellent post.

    I think we have to face up to the reality that our perceived “world crisis” is not a clash of civilizations but of ontological paradigms.

    So I would like to propose two questions.

    The first is whether we can ever presume to confidently identify “machinery” with life?. If not, then what exactly do we suppose “drives” our existence? What is the motivating force that governs our conduct and determines our options? Can we back up our “values” with any real evidence?

    The second would be this: how do we distinguish authenticity from authority? I think this might also be framed within the context of how we define certainty and probability. If nothing is certain, then we can only ever begin to reason from the “acceptable” calculus of our (accessible) probabilities. So, how do we determine these? What is the received architecture of intelligence that allows us to dwell in the conceits of an identity-centred world? Dare we invoke Nature and disavow “self?”

    Listening to Prof. Sachs is encouraging, because he espouses perceptions that transgress the “comfort zone” of massaged assurance and delusive propaganda politics. There is a problem of incommensurability here. The game of politics has been reduced to pushing a packaged product, so it is essentially about marketing, not philosophically adept & disciplined discourse.

    So from the start, the “get go,” pundits condescend, appeal and patronize, because they know that the majority who vote do not reason but act from persuasion. One fact seems to me incontrovertible ~ this “cult” of the USA as the epitome of free existence, has destabilized the multipolar world through totalitarian weaponization and hegemonic financial controls.

    The word that really needs to be brought fair and square into the authentic lexicon of public consciousness is “accountable” and in its more active form of “accountability.” So I think modern politics should be conducted more like a criminal investigation, than a celebration of narcissistic hubris.

    Like

    1. Hello David,
      “The first is whether we can ever presume to confidently identify “machinery” with life?. If not, then what exactly do we suppose “drives” our existence? What is the motivating force that governs our conduct and determines our options? Can we back up our “values” with any real evidence?”

      Answers to your questions are dependent on the levels of individual and collective spiritual ignorance or awareness. Those who operate to satisfy their ego-self, in duality consciousness which sees others as, well, other or not-self, are unconcerned about the health and well-being of nobody but themselves – spiritual ignorance. Those who operate, to various extents depending on how thoroughly the ego has been eliminated, see the “other” as themselves with the same spark of the divine inherent, or part of the oneness – unity consciousness.

      After having read Part 1 of 2 of the Sri Aurobindo philosophical/spiritual classic “The Life Divine”, his astounding exposition of the reasons people act as they do seems to make total sense, that the problem(s) on Earth (war, in this case) are solvable with the, what he terms “true truth” or actual knowledge of philosophic or spiritual reality. Left a link for free download of “The Life Divine” at Lo’s, but, not knowing if you saw that, and to share it with those who pass this way if you did, here is that link (Pdf, Epub, and Kindle formats):

      http://www.auro-ebooks.com/the-life-divine/

      People around the Earth are increasingly, rapidly (because of the internet and instantaneous sharing of information) and thankfully coming to understand that the historical major problems and solutions are all – absolutely – about spirituality and evolution of unity consciousness. A good sign was the recent meeting of the Pope and (Kirill?) the leader of the Russian Christians, after 1,000 years where the leaders of those groups hadn’t met and talked. Now we can see whether these two plus the leaders of every spiritual tradition come together and get the spiritual viewpoints injected/inserted much further into the political and media debates, where they are needed in the biggest way.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s