London-based "Syrian Observatory" Consorting Directly with UK Foreign Minister Hague

December 26, 2011 - In May 2011's article "The Siege of Syria," it was reported:

"The coverage by the corporate-owned Western media exclusively relies on "activists inside and outside the country," the London-based "Syrian Human Rights Monitoring Centre" which apparently has no web presence, the Damascus Center for Human Rights which boasts memberships with the National Endowment for Democracy and Tides Foundation-funded International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the Coalition for the International Criminal Court, funded by the European Union, the Ford Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Open Society Institute, the Sigrid Rausing Trust, and Humanity United.

Humanity United in turn boast partnerships with the BBC World Service Trust, NED/Open Society/US State Department-funded Benetech, the Open Society Institute, and the NED-funded Solidarity Center which mobilized Egypt's labor unions just as the US-stoked unrest began to falter. In other words, every organization involved interlocks with the vast corporate/foundation-funded imperial network masquerading as individual "human rights organizations" and benign NGOs. In reality this "civil society" network seeks to supplant national governments, and interface with global "institutions" like the IMF, World Bank, and the UN, all of which have been contrived by corporate-financier oligarchs. It is a modern day empire in the making."

America is filthy rich, but the money is hidden away by the 1 percent while poverty rises all around.

"Squeezed by rising living costs, a record number of Americans, nearly 1 in 2, have fallen into poverty or are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low income."

"Study: 1 in 5 American children lives in poverty."

"In 2010, 17.2 million households, 14.5 percent of households (approximately one in seven), were food insecure, the highest number ever recorded in the United States."

The new US allegations of Iran's involvement in 9/11 attacks are reminiscent of Washington's rhetoric that led to the destructive war imposed on Iraq in 2003, a political analyst tells Press TV.

"We are basically witnessing a repeat of what happened prior to Iraq war in 2001, 2002 and 2003. Essentially the same people, who orchestrated the Iraq war or supported the Iraq war, are at it again, this time against Iran," said Foad Izadi, a Professor at the University of Tehran.

"The problem is that the US government has a tradition of leveling these types of threats and then attacking countries based on dubious allegations," he added.

Izadi was making reference to a Thursday ruling by a US federal judge in Manhattan that alleged Iran, together with the Taliban and al-Qaeda, was involved in the 9/11 attacks.

Iran has rejected a New York judge's finding that Tehran is liable in the Sept. 11 attacks along with the Taliban and al-Qaida.

According to state TV, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman referred to last week's judgment as "clumsy scenario-making" by the U.S.

The spokesman, Ramin Mehmanparast, repeated Iran's insistence that al-Qaida has no presence in the country.

In an attempt to display his statesmanship potential, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney wades into deep foreign policy waters discussing Iraq, North Korea and Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

Speaking on his campaign bus in New Hampshire, the presidential hopeful spoke bluntly on foreign affairs saving his strongest words for Mr Putin whom he called "a real threat to the stability and peace of the world."

With Republican rival Newt Gingrich invoking former president and party idol Ronald Reagan in foreign policy debates, Mr Romney also referred to the Cold War spirit as he harked back to a time when the US defined itself by its opposition to the former-Soviet Union.

Can you hear that? It almost sounds like a little bit of peace and quiet. This year, the holiday season has been fairly uneventful, and for that we should be very grateful. But it isn't going to last long. 2012 is going to be a much more difficult year for the U.S. economy and the global financial system than 2011 has been. So if things are going well for you right now, enjoy this little bubble of peace and tranquility while you can. Because while things may look calm on the surface right now, the truth is that this is a very scary Christmas for financial professionals and world leaders. Most of them know how fragile the global financial system is at the moment.

Most of them know that we are living in the greatest bubble of debt, leverage and financial risk that the world has ever seen. As I wrote about the other day, world leaders would not be throwing huge bailouts around like crazy if everything was going to be just fine. The truth is that we are rapidly approaching another financial crisis that may end up being even worse than the horrific crash of 2008.

Despite unprecedented efforts by the European Central Bank, the yield on 10 year Italian bonds is nearly up to 7 percent again.

Keep an eye on the yield on 10 year Italian bonds. That is going to be one of the most important financial numbers in the world in the coming months.

Here's the other difference between the one percent and the rest of us -

The crimes of the one percent inflict far more damage on society than those of the 99 percent.

And they tend to get away with their crimes.

While we tend to get nailed.

The big multinational corporations, which are the primary delivery systems of wealth to the 99 percent, have rigged the justice system so that when they get in trouble with the law, they either aren't prosecuted for their crimes, of if they are, they get special treatment - non prosecution or deferred prosecution agreements.

If they end up in the civil courts, they also get special deals - like neither admit nor deny consent decrees.

True, they pay fines, often in the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, but this is pocket change to them - the equivalent of a parking ticket for serious wrongdoing.

They marinate the halls of power with campaign cash, flood them with lobbyists, and lubricate the revolving door - all to undermine our system of justice.

Strongly recommend this piece at the Huffington Post by Jeff Connaughton, a former aide to Senator Ted Kaufman. Jeff is one of the smartest guys on the Hill and is particularly strong on issues surrounding Wall Street and the regulatory system. In this piece, he takes apart the oft-stated mantra that what Wall Street firms did during and after the crisis was maybe unethical, but not illegal.

He takes particular aim at Barack Obama, who recently tossed that line out on 60 Minutes in what I thought was one of the real low moments of his presidency. Here's Jeff's take:

Speaking in Kansas on December 6, [Obama] said, "Too often, we've seen Wall Street firms violating major anti-fraud laws because the penalties are too weak and there's no price for being a repeat offender." Just five days later on 60 Minutes, he said, "Some of the least ethical behavior on Wall Street wasn't illegal." Which is it? Have there been no prosecutions because Wall Street acted legally (albeit unethically)? Or did Wall Street repeatedly violate major anti-fraud laws (and should thus find itself in the dock)?

The President is confusing "legal" with "difficult to prosecute successfully."

Vatican: Pope Benedict XVI decried the increasing commercialization of Christmas as he celebrated Christmas Eve Mass on Saturday night, urging the faithful to look beyond the holiday's "superficial glitter" to discover its true meaning.

Benedict presided over the service in a packed St. Peter's Basilica, kicking off an intense two weeks of Christmas-related public appearances that will test the 84-year-old pontiff's stamina amid signs that fatigue is starting to slow him down.

The Christmas Eve Mass was moved up to 10 p.m. from midnight several years ago to spare the pope a late night that is followed by an important Christmas Day speech. In a new concession this year, Benedict processed down the basilica's central aisle on a moving platform to spare him the long walk.

Benedict appeared tired by the end of the Mass and a dry cough interrupted his homily.

Egypt's two leading Islamist parties won about two-thirds of votes for party lists in the second round of polling for a parliament that will help draft a new constitution after decades of autocratic rule, the election committee said Saturday.

The party list led by the Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) won 36.3 percent of the list vote, while the ultra-conservative Salafi al-Nour Party took 28.8 percent, pushing the liberal Wafd party into third place.

The vote, staged over six weeks, is the first free election Egypt has held after the 30-year rule of President Hosni Mubarak, who routinely rigged polls before he was overthrown by a popular uprising in February.

The West long looked to Mubarak and other strongmen in the region to help combat Islamist militants, and has watched warily as Islamist parties have topped votes in Tunisia, Morocco and now Egypt.

Parliament's prime job will be appointing a 100-strong assembly to write a new constitution which will define the president's powers and parliament's clout in the new Egypt.

Second-round results for party lists gave the liberal Wafd Party 9.6 percent of the vote. The Egyptian Bloc of mostly liberal and leftist parties won 7 percent of the list vote.

Analysts say poor coordination among non-Islamist groups has divided the liberal vote, sometimes handing the majority to an Islamist by default.