Category Archives: World War

Benjamin Netanyahu’s Declaration of War’

 

Benjamin Netanyahu ‘warned UN settlement a declaration of war’

un-sec-general

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told New Zealand’s foreign minister that his country’s sponsoring of the UN anti-settlement resolution was a “declaration of war“.

Netanyahu has also lashed out at President Barack Obama after Friday’s Security Council vote, on which the United States’ abstention marked a break with tradition, and called the action a “shameful ambush”.

The Security Council voted to condemn settlement building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as a “flagrant violation of international law” and demanded Israel “immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory”, pointing out that the international community views any Israeli construction over the agreed 1967 Green Line as illegal.

According to Haaretz, in a personal phone call Mr Netanyahu told New Zealand foreign minister Murray McCully: “This is a scandalous decision. I’m asking that you not support it and not promote it.

“If you continue to promote this resolution from our point of view it will be a declaration of war. It will rupture the relations and there will be consequences.”

Mr McCully reportedly refused to back down and said the resolution was consistent with New Zealand policy

Israel has recalled its ambassadors to New Zealand and Senegal, and cancelled aid to the latter country.

The resolution was put forward by New Zealand, Senegal, Malaysia and Venezuela, taking place just a day after Egypt withdrew it following significant pressure from both Israel and President-elect Donald Trump.

Mr Netanyahu has said Israel will not abide by the ruling.

He added: “At a time when the Security Council does nothing to stop the slaughter of half a million people in Syria, it disgracefully gangs up on the one true democracy in the Middle East, Israel, and calls the Western Wall ‘occupied territory’.”

Defending New Zealand’s vote on Saturday, Mr McCully said: “We have been very open about our view that the [UN Security Council] should be doing more to support the Middle East peace process and the position we adopted today is totally in line with our long established policy on the Palestinian question.

“The vote… should not come as a surprise to anyone and we look forward to continuing to engage constructively with all parties on this issue.”

The vote was welcomed by Palestinian representatives. A spokesperson from Palestinan Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ office called it a “big blow to Israeli policy, a unanimous international condemnation of settlements, and a strong support for the two-state solution”.

Settlement building – which has accelerated year-on-year under current right-wing Prime Minister Netanyahu – is viewed as one of the major stumbling blocks to a lasting peace deal.

Settlements

• Settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are built on land seized by Israel during the 1967 Arab-Israeli Six-Day War.
• Many in the international community believe that such settlements are illegal and a barrier to any future “two-state” peace deal. Palestinians claim East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state.
• The UN Security Council resolution states that Israel’s settlement program has “no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law.” Israel disputes this.
• A “two-state solution” envisages a Palestinian state existing alongside Israel, based on territory in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem — but Israel’s continued building threatens its viability.
• Settlements are controversial within Israel too. While they are widely supported by right-wing and ultra-Orthodox groups, other Israelis see them as an obstacle to peace.

 

 

ISRAEL EVEN ‘SUSPENDS WORKING TIES WITH 12 UN SECURITY COUNCIL MEMBERS’

 

The Jerusalem Local Planning and Construction Committee is expected to approve permits to build 618 new homes in Jewish neighbourhoods across the Green Line today – and at the same time US Secretary of State John Kerry is due to lay out his vision for ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The speech, less than a month before President Barack Obama leaves office, is likely to be the administration’s last word on a decades-old dispute that Mr Kerry had hoped to resolve during his four years as America’s top diplomat.

It could also be seen in Israel as another parting shot at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has had an especially acrimonious relationship with Mr Obama since they both took office in 2009.

A State Department official said: “We believe that with the two-state solution in peril, it is important to share the deeper understanding we have developed of both sides’ bottom lines during intensive consultations in recent years.”

Benjamin Netanyahu is in fact challanging the whole world, and is a big threat to World Peace.

The international peace conference scheduled for January 15 in Paris could be the forum for discussing such a resolution. That would give the international community time to introduce the resolution at the UN Security Council before the end of Obama’s time in office.
Israel has vowed not to attend the conference. The Palestinians say they will attend.
Settlement building in the occupied West Bank is considered illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this. The United States considers settlements “illegitimate” and “an obstacle to peace.”

sources:

The Independent, U.K http://www.independent.co.uk

CNN http://edition.cnn.com/

arrested-ds-160x32

https://arresteddevelopments.wordpress.com

Along with thanks and compliments to the sources for the shared data

Creative Commons Copyright © Arrested Developments 2015

Advertisements

Western firms primed to cash in on Syria’s Oil and Gas ‘Frontier’

Once Syria conflict resolved, prospects for Syrian offshore production  are high.

US, British, French, Israeli and other energy interests could be prime beneficiaries of military operations in Iraq and Syria designed to rollback the power of the ‘Islamic State’ (ISIS) and, potentially, the Bashar al-Assad regime.

A study for a global oil services company backed by the French government and linked to Britain’s Tory-led administration, published during the height of the Arab Spring, hailed the significant “hydrocarbon potential” of Syria’s offshore resources.

The 2011 study was printed in GeoArabia, a petroleum industry journal published by a Bahrain-based consultancy, GulfPetroLink, which is sponsored by some of the world’s biggest oil companies, including Chevron, ExxonMobil, Saudi Aramco, Shell, Total, and BP.

Geo Arabia’s content has no open subscription system and is exclusively distributed to transnational energy corporations, corporate sponsors and related organisations, as well as some universities.

Authored by Steven A. Bowman, a Senior Geo scientist for the French energy company CGG Veritas, the study identified “three sedimentary basins, Levantine, Cyprus, and Latakia, located in offshore Syria” and highlighted “significant evidence for a working petroleum system in offshore Syria with numerous onshore oil and gas shows, DHIs (direct hydrocarbon indicators) observed on seismic, and oil seeps identified from satellite imagery.”

Read Full Extensive Report at Insurge Intelligence

 INSURGE INTELLIGENCE, is a crowd-funded investigative journalism project

Excerpts from an article by Nafeez Ahmed, the journalist 

Frances secret affair with Assads Syria

At the time, when civil unrest was sweeping across Syria, CGGVeritas was contracted to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Sources.

The French company is one of the world’s largest seismic surveyors. Backed by the French government which owns 18% voting rights in the firm, CGGVeritas had acquired seismic data on offshore Syrian resources in 2005, and since then has been the main point of contact for geophysical and geological datasets on behalf of the Syrian regime.

In 2011, the French firm had an exclusive contract with the Syrian government to provide technical support for that year’s Syrian International Offshore Bid Round for firms to explore, develop and produce oil and gas from three offshore blocks in the Mediterranean Sea by the Syrian coast.

Exploration activity has increased in the Eastern Mediterranean in recent years following a series of major multi-TCF (trillion cubic feet) gas discoveries made in the offshore southern Levantine Basin,” wrote Bowman. “Licensing rounds are scheduled to be announced during 2011 for areas in offshore Syria, Lebanon, and Cyprus, which are believed to share strong geological similarities with these discoveries.”

Describing offshore Syria as “a truly frontier area of exploration”, Bowman — who was also involved in CGGVeritas evaluations of seismic datasets of energy resources in Libya — noted the discovery of several “flat-spots” which, if real, “will represent billion-barrel/multi-TCF [trillion cubic feet] drilling targets given the scale and volumetrics of the structures within which they occur.”

Western Energy majors court Assad

CGG Veritas was also licenced by the British government for the North Sea, where for the last several years Bowman has held responsibility for identifying prospectivity and coordinating licencing round activities.

In 2012, the US Department of the Interior published a US Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook, which observed that Assads government-owned Syrian Petroleum Co.:

“… cooperated with several international oil companies, such as Chinese National Petroleum Co. (CNPC), Gulfsands Petroleum of the United Kingdom, Oil and Natural Gas Resources Corp. of India, Royal Dutch Shell plc. of the United Kingdom, and Total SA of France through subsidiary companies.”

Two years earlier, the Syrian capital, Damascus, was host to the 7th Syrian International Oil & Gas Exhibition, convened by Assad’s Ministry of Petroleum. The exhibition was sponsored by CNPC, Shell, and the French major Total, and was attended by over a hundred representatives of international firms, 40% of whom were based in Europe.

A 2010 draft document produced on behalf of the Syrian Ministry of Petroleum by the exhibition organiser, Allied Expo, described how British company Shell was planning to work closely with the Assad regime to develop Syria’s gas production:

Shell will devise a master plan for the development of the gas sector in Syria, following an agreement signed with the Ministry of Petroleum,” say the presentation slides, created in October 2010 to promote plans for a new oil and gas exhibition in 2012. “The agreement includes an assessment of the overall undiscovered gas potential in Syria, potential for upstream gas production, need for gas transmission and distribution networks…

1ewdq_5ib8evvxh350b5e4g

Throughout 2010, Shell officials held numerous meetings with British government ministers. In July, Shell met David Cameron to discuss “business issues”, Foreign Office minister David Howell to discuss “international energy matters”, and Charles Hendry, minister of state at the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC).

1aeh6hnwg8rgfpnqouanuyq

Such meetings with multiple government departments and often dozens of senior officials continued for every month through to the end of the following year, except June 2010. These included meetings with the Prime Minister’s National Security Advisor Peter Ricketts; business secretary Vince Cable, various DECC ministers to discuss “energy issues” related to Qatar, along with several sessions with Cameron and Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne.

Declassified British government memos show that in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq invasion, oil firms BP and Shell held several meetings with senior government officials to guarantee a role of British energy companies in post-conflict Iraq.

While publicly the government decried criticisms of an oil motive for British involvement in the war as “the oil conspiracy theory”, one memo of a meeting between then Trade Minister Baroness Symons and UK oil firms revealed that in private, they believed “it would be difficult to justify British companies losing out in Iraq in that way if the UK had itself been a conspicuous supporter of the US government throughout the crisis.”

After the 2011 protests, even when Assad was brutalising demonstrators in the streets, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ruled out military intervention and insisted that the Syrian dictator was a “reformer” — which he took as a green light to escalate his crackdown.

As the cycle of violence intensified, Western governments disassociated from Assad when it became clear his rule had become completely unstable. With the outbreak of civil war, the plans of Shell and other oil majors to open up Syria’s offshore resources were unexpectedly suspended.

Military action to protect Mediterranean oil and gas

The sudden crisis in Syria threw a spanner in the works for longstanding efforts to explore and open up lucrative energy resources in the Eastern Mediterranean.

A report published in December 2014 by the US Army’s Strategic Studies Institute (SSI) provides compelling evidence that American, British and Gulf defence strategists see the Mediterranean as an opportunity to wean Europe off dependence on Russian gas, and boost Israel’s energy independence.

As part of this process, the report revealed, military action is viewed as potentially necessary to secure Syria’s untapped offshore gas resources, which overlap with the territorial waters of other Mediterranean powers, including Israel, Egypt, Lebanon, Cyprus, Greece and Turkey.

The report by Mohammed El-Katiri, an advisor to the United Arab Emirates Ministry of Defence and formerly a research director at the UK Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) Advanced Research and Assessment Group (ARAG), explicitly acknowledges that a post-conflict Syria would open up new prospects for energy exploration.

Once the Syria conflict is resolved, prospects for Syrian offshore production — provided commercial resources are found — are high,” wrote El-Katiri. Potential oil and gas resources can be developed “relatively smoothly once the political situation allows for any new exploration efforts in its offshore territories.”

The US Army SSI report noted that Syria’s offshore resources are part of a wider matrix of oil and gas deposits in the Levant basin encompassing the offshore territories of these competing states.

The region is estimated to hold approximately 1.7 billion barrels of oil and 122 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, which could be just a third of the basin’s total hydrocarbons.

US-led military intervention has a key role to play, the report concludes, in “managing” conflicts and tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean, especially the prospect of “Syria destabilising into de facto civil

war.”

US diplomatic and military support has a pivotal role to play in the East Mediterranean’s complex geopolitical landscape, and its importance will only grow as the value of the natural resources at stake increases,” the Army SSI report said:

US security and military support for its main allies in the case of an eruption of natural resource conflict in the East Mediterranean may prove essential in managing possible future conflict.”

Arrested-Dev

https://arresteddevelopments.wordpress.com

Along with thanks and compliments to the sources for the shared data

Creative Commons Copyright © Arrested Developments 2015

India-Pak War?

What if India-Pak Nuke Each Other

aaj2dho-img

Amidst growing tensions between India and Pakistan, of late, citizens from both sides of the Line of Control can be observed taking pride of their respective nuclear arsenal on social media platforms.

With little to zero knowledge, commoners can be easily spotted bragging about the nuclear might of their country on the internet. Also, they mindlessly go ahead in judging which country will even win a nuclear war through their posts, comments and tweets.

So, dear readers (on both sides of the fence), do you have any clue of what will happen if your casual talk on nuclear war becomes a reality?

Of course, you don’t have to drop a bomb to calculate this. Alex Wellerstein, a Harvard-educated historian, who specializes on the history of nuclear weapons and government secrecy has a nuclear effects simulator on their website.

The simulator uses the integration of Google Maps and data points collected from thousands of nuclear detonations that have taken place from 1939. The list also includes India’s largest Nuclear weapon tested which was a 65 kilo-tons bomb and Pakistan’s largest weapons tested at 45 kilotons.

These nuclear weapons are twice the size of ‘Fat Man’, the bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki during World War 2.

What will happen if India detonates its 65 Kiloton nuclear bomb in Karachi?

aaj2tnm-img

The simulator calculates, that if the ground zero is Sarafa Bazar in Karachi, the estimated fatalities will be in excess of 6,41,620 people. The estimated figures of people injured will be 15,96,830. Though the simulator says that modelling casualties from a nuclear attack is difficult and these numbers should be seen as evocative, not definitive.

The model also calculates the humanitarian impact of a nuclear blast. The “humanitarian impact” model works by using the Google Places API to search out tagged places near the ground zero location. This is the same algorithm Google Maps uses, whenever you ask how many restaurants are near where you happen to be.

The point of the “humanitarian impact” model is to emphasise some of the collateral impacts of a nuclear explosion, and, to indicate the ways in which support services like hospitals and fire stations would be themselves impacted by a nuclear attack.

With all these variables in place, 12,00,000 (12 lakh) lives lost is still too big if India and Pakistan go nuclear on each other.

What if Pakistan nukes New Delhi?

aaj2dhn-img

Similarly, if Pakistan hits New Delhi with its 45 Kiloton nuclear bomb the impact is even more disastrous as portrayed by the simulator.

6,56,070 people will lose their lives if a Pakistani nuke is detonated at Connaught Palace. There will be more than 15,28,490 people who will be injured in this attack. Places like, Jama Masjid, Purana Qila, Parliament house and even Rashtrapati Bhavan will be wiped out.

The simulator also calculates the maximum size of the nuclear fireball after detonation along with radiation radius, air blast radius and thermal radiation radius that cause 3rd-degree burns.

The implications are catastrophic if a nuclear bomb is detonated on either side. So, next time you casually talk about whether India should nuke Pakistan, or vice-versa, just head to this website and you’ll be horrified by its implications.

You can also calculate the effects of the blast in your own city on this website. Till now, more than 85.6 million people have detonated a nuclear bomb on this simulator. This is probably the safest and an educative way of detonating a nuclear bomb.

nuke

 Alex Wellerstein the creator of this simulator is an assistant professor of science and technology studies at the Stevens Institute of Technology in New Jersey. He runs Restricted Data: The Nuclear Secrecy Blog and is the creator of the NUKEMAP nuclear effects simulator

Arrested-Dev

https://arresteddevelopments.wordpress.com

Along with thanks and compliments to the sources for the shared data

Creative Commons Copyright © Arrested Developments 2015

 

ISIS And Battle for Mosul

Battle of Mosul

Iraq’s announcement of the start of the offensive to retake Mosul from ISIS is a pivotal moment in defeating ISIS, which has made the city its de facto capital in Iraq since seizing it in mid-2014.

The Iraqi offensive on Mosul is the culmination of a two-year Iraqi military campaign to remove the ISIS military threat from northern Iraq.

Much of the U.S. military presence in Iraq during the last two years has been geared toward training and advising Iraq’s security forces to defeat ISIS militarily and take back the cities controlled by the group, particularly Mosul. So far, 35,000 Iraqi troops have been trained by the U.S.-led coalition.

At the other hand ISIS fighters in Mosul have built berms and trenches along the major roadways into the city and placed bombs along roads, on bridges and inside buildings. Giant pits of tire and oil have been readied to create giant dark clouds that would make it difficult for coalition aircraft to conduct airstrikes in the city.

It promises to be not only Iraqi Army’s largest operation but also its toughest test as ISIS fighters have had more than two years to prepare elaborate defenses inside Iraq’s second largest city known as Mosul.

Mosul the City

Located along the banks of the Tigris River in northern Iraq’s Nineveh province, Mosul is Iraq’s second-largest city, normally with more than 2 million residents.

The population consists of a mix of the diverse ethnic groups in northern Iraq; the majority are Sunni Arabs and Kurds. It is believed that 1 million residents remain in the city.

Mosul is the main industrial city in northern Iraq and a vital transportation hub in the flow of goods to and from Turkey and Syria. It is near significant oilfields in northern Iraq and a major oil pipeline into Turkey.

While mainstream media have thus far focused on the significance of Iraqi forces liberating the town.

Absent from international headlines, however, is what Mosul’s liberation means to those who call it home and to fellow Iraqis across the nation. How was Mosul viewed by Iraqis before the occupation of ISIS, and how will it be viewed after it is liberated?

Traditionally, Mosul has  been viewed as one of the three pillars of Iraq, alongside the cities of Baghdad and Basra, dating back to Iraq’s administrative layout under the Ottoman Empire. The three cities were the capitals of the three Ottoman provinces bearing the same name.

While the three provinces enjoyed local governance, the city of Baghdad retained administrative powers over all three provinces for the majority of the empire’s existence.

Owing to Mosul’s historical ties to Baghdad and Basra, the League of Nations decided – at the time – that the Mosul province would be administered by Iraq rather than Turkey, during the establishment of the modern-day Iraqi state.

This enabled the seamless establishment of Baghdad as the Iraqi capital, and retained Mosul and Basra as the country’s other influential economic hubs.

While Mosul is home to a vast number of ethnicities and sects, its wealth of unique surrounding villages, all bustling with Iraq’s Kurds, Yazidis, Shabak, Christian Assyrians and Armenians, led to Mosul’s unique cultural mix and diversity.

Despite Mosul’s location up north, what connected Maslawis (residents of Mosul) to the rest of Iraq was their significant class of educated citizens and highly regarded institutions. In general, Mosuls were well-educated and respected by the rest of Iraq.

Many Iraqis would go to the city to attend its prestigious University of Mosul, whose medical college dates back to the early establishment of the Iraqi state. If educated Iraqis were not going to Mosul to study, the educated people of Mosul were coming to the rest of Iraq to teach, as their presence was evident in schools and universities across the country. For many Iraqis, this is what Mosul means to them.

Mosul also represents the city that provided Saddam Hussein’s Baathist regime with a large number of military and security personnel.

Unlike Baghdad and Basra, Mosul did not fight the US-led war in 2003. Instead, regime loyalists and the military simply integrated into the civilian population. This has meant that a large concentration of ex-regime loyalists were based in Mosul, which was evident when Hussein’s sons were caught hiding in Mosul in 2003.

At the time, many of those elements morphed into extremist groups such ISIL and carried out attacks to undermine the new political order. This saw the city quickly became a no-go zone for many in Iraq who were afraid of lawlessness and the free reign of armed groups in the city.

Hence, when Mosul fell to ISIS in 2014, many in Iraq were not as surprised.

Why Is It Important to Retake Mosul?

ISIS’ seizure of Mosul was a blow to Iraq’s political stability and a propaganda coup for the group, which wanted to demonstrate it was gaining territory to establish a great caliphate  nation.

A successful offensive on Mosul would take from ISIS its last strategic stronghold in Iraq and end the territorial dominance it commanded over large areas of north-western Iraq for the past two years.

The group’s control of territory there was made easier by the flow of ISIS fighters from its de facto capital of Raqqa in north-central Syria. An ISIS defeat in Mosul would cut off that route and leave the group’s military operations effectively contained to Syria.

The Plan

American military officials have informed that the city would be enveloped from the north and south by Iraqi army. Enveloping the city might take some time, Once that is completed, an elite Iraqi special operations force known as the Counter-Terrorism Service will push into the center of the city to drive out ISIS.

it is believed that around a toatal of 800,000 civilians could flee the city. As part of its planning, the Iraqi government has worked with the United Nations and international relief organizations in building 20 camps to take care of them.

Can Mosul overcome the horrible reign of ISIS and rise again as an Iraqi centre of education and culture.

The question going forward is:

Will Mosul remain a pillar of Iraqi identity or will the legacy of ISIS’s occupation result in trust lost between Mosul’s and the rest of Iraqis?

When this question was posed to a former Iraqi general and resident of the city, with relatives still living there, he said: “Mosul can remain the Mosul of old, the Mosul of officers, teachers and professors only if Mosuls want that to happen.”

Evidence of this is witnessed by the recent liberated Christian-Assyrian villages of Bartella and Qara Qosh, just outside Mosul, by the ISF. There is a newly built trust between the locals and the ISF that will be vital for the future of Iraq, if this trust is replicated in the liberation of Mosul.

Ultimately it will be the actions and reactions of Mosul’s citizens during and after military operations that will decide what the new Mosul will be known for. If they are able to overcome the horrible psychological and social trauma of ISIS’s reign, then Mosul can once again rise as an Iraqi center of education, culture and professionals.

sources:

http://abcnews.go.com/

http://www.aljazeera.com/

Arrested-Dev

https://arresteddevelopments.wordpress.com

Along with thanks and compliments to the sources for the shared data

Creative Commons Copyright © Arrested Developments 2015

Ready To War: Air Force Ready To Mobilize In 15 Minutes

US Russia War: US’ DEFCON Raised To Level 3 – Air Force Ready To Mobilize In 15 Minutes

The state of affairs between the US and Russia at this time seems to be unstable. A US Russia War has become a greater concern more recently; shades of the Cold War and nuclear arms races are being reflected in today’s reality.

nuclear

Given the current situation, has the US elevated its defense system to DEFCON level 3?

DEFCON refers to “Defense Readiness Condition”, the state’s level of readiness to act against an external threat such as that of nuclear war. DEFCON can be referred to in its 5 levels. Level 5 would be the state of lowest risk. Level 1, on the other hand, would refer to an imminent threat of nuclear war and indicate the state’s position to immediately respond. Level 3 means that the US Air Force will be ready to mobilise in a mere 15 minutes.

According to the unofficial site DEFCON Warning System, DEFCON is already atlevel 3. Current international events, rising tensions, and therefore the increased possibility of a declared US Russia War seems to have raised the level. There is no lack of potential triggers – the greatest of which would be the state of the Syrian civil war, which has had both the US and Russia blaming each other over a broken ceasefire agreement, bombed aid envoys, and devastating airstrikes on and around Aleppo. With the US backing rebel groups and Russia pushing Bashar al-Assad’s government, the continued bloodshed has not made communication between the two nations any easier.

Meanwhile, Russia has joined China in trying to block the operation of a US missile network in Europe and Asia. The tensions have even spilled over onto the presidential elections, where suspicions of Donald Trump conspiring with Russians have cropped up.

Though the threat of war seems to be rising on a few fronts, the DEFCON level 3 indication reported by the website is only speculation; the actual DEFCON status is not shared with the public by the US Military for obvious security reasons. The website, unaffiliated with any branch of the military, urges visitors to “make their own evaluations” and “learn what steps to take in the event of a nuclear attack”.

While being ready for a nuclear attack or a US Russia War would certainly put the public at ease, however, nothing would do that better than the two superpowers simply backing down.

It seems a War between US and Russia is imminent

A terrifying Russian television broadcast explicitly told civilians to find out where their nearest bomb shelter is and repeatedly asked viewers if they were ready for nuclear war.

One apocalyptic broadcast told viewers on Moscow’s state-owned TV channel NTV: “If it should one day happen, every one of you should know where the nearest bomb shelter is. It’s best to find out now.”

sources: http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/721008/Russia-America-nuclear-war-Putin-Obama-bunker-fallout-shelter-Syria-Bashar-al-Assad

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/

ard-exp-1cropped

https://arresteddevelopments.wordpress.com

Along with thanks and compliments to the sources for the shared data

Creative Commons Copyright © Arrested Developments 2015