Rabu, 23 Oktober 2013





Top US Military Officer: America Is Considering Entering Syrian War

America's top military officer told a Senate committee that the Obama administration is considering the use of military force in Syria,  
Martin Dempsey
REUTERS/Gary Cameron
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, the highest-ranking American military officer
 U.S. Army General Martin Dempsey testified that he has provided President Barack Obama with options for the use of force in Syria, including "kinetic strikes."
The military is constantly laying out potential courses of action, but Dempsey's comments signal at least a willingness to directly enter the conflict.
The issue "is under deliberation inside of our agencies of government," the four-star general said.
In March Dempsey implied military force would be a bad idea: "I don't think at this point I can see a military option that would create an understandable outcome. And until I do, it would be my advice to proceed cautiously."
U.S. military options range from one-off missile strikes on infrastructure linked to chemical weapons, to funneling more weapons to rebels, to carving out no-fly zones, and even as far as putting 20,000 U.S. troops in Jordan for a ground invasion.
"Senator, I am in favor of building a moderate opposition and supporting it," Dempsey said on Thursday.

 "The question whether to support it with direct kinetic strikes ... is a decision for our elected officials, not for the senior military leader of the nation" (emphasis ours).
Also on the table are drone strikes targeting rebels linked to al-Qaeda, which indicates that America would actually be attacking the strongest elements on both sides of the conflict.
Consequently, all signs point to a quagmire as American goals would include attempting to arm only moderate rebels and marginalizing the opposition's best forces while simultaneously attempting to topple Assad's regime.
Meanwhile Assad has regained the upper hand on the battlefield in the west of the country while jihadists control much of the north and east.
“Assad is powerful now, not as a president who controls a state but as a warlord, as someone who has more and more sophisticated weapons than the others,” Hassan Hassan, a Syrian journalist at the Abu Dhabi-based English-language newspaper The National, told The New York Times. “He is not capable of winning back the country.”
The scope of the conflict continues to expand as Syria's borders blur, which provides an opportunity for the radical rebels in Lebanon and northeastern Syria.
Dempsey's statements come days after the U.N. envoy to Iraq told the U.N. Security Council that the Syrian civil war and the escalating violence in neighboring Iraq can no longer be separated because "the battlefields are merging."
The envoy, Martin Kobler, noted that the last four months have been among the bloodiest in Iraq in the last five years as nearly 3,000 people have been killed and more 7,000 injured.
"These countries are interrelated," Kobler stressed. "Iraq is the fault line between the Shia and the Sunni world."
The Iraqi government has backed Assad, but Sunni jihadists in Iraq's western Anbar province have poured into Syria to fight with al-Qaeda-affiliated rebels.
Basically, the U.S. would be throwing their hat into a very messy ring.
Here's a look at the battlefield from an interactive graphic from Al Jazeera:

The CIA has a presence on at least three of Syria's borders.
In March The Wall Street Journal reported that since 2011 the U.S. has been expanding the CIA's role in Iraq as radical Syrian rebels threaten the border region.
Last June The New York Times reported that CIA officers in southern Turkey were funneling weapons to Syrian rebels.
In October and November we reported on potential but unconfirmed indications that the CIA may have been funneling heavy weapons from Benghazi, Libya to Turkey. Overt U.S. promises to provide arms to the Free Syrian Army have stalled amid concerns that the weapons would fall into the wrong hands.
In May Der Spiegel reported that Americans were training Syrian anti-government fighters in Jordan, noting that the program aimed to build around a dozen units totaling some 10,000 fighters.
The Syrian war began in March 2011 as a nonviolent revolution with an Arab Spring "Day of Rage" when 200 mostly young protesters gathered in the Syrian capital of Damascus to demand democratic reforms and the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad.
Assad swiftly cracked down on the dissent, and over the next 28 months the conflict transformed into a proxy war and then a full-blown sectarian conflict exacerbated by by radical jihadists and local militias loyal to Assad.

syria 57
Air superiority remains Assad's greatest asset, but recently he has been bolstered by Hezbollah fighters from Lebanon, guerrilla training from Iran, and continued support from Russia.
In November Russia sent six warships from its Black Sea Fleet to the Mediterranean in response to the Israel-Gaza conflict. That month the U.S. also began making moves to increase the American military presence in the east Mediterranean.
In May a detachment from Russia’s Pacific Fleet entered the Mediterranean waters for the first time since the Cold War, and the next month the Kremlin sent its only aircraft carrier to the region.
"The Russian Defense Ministry started setting up a special force of warships in the Mediterranean in order to protect Russia's interests in the region," Syria's state-run news agency, citing a spokesman for Russia defense ministry, reported.

Google Maps
The port of Tartus (A), which is the last Russian military facility outside the former Soviet Union.
Over the course of the conflict, the Kremlin has provided Assad with supplies including guns, grenades, tank partsfighter jetsadvanced antiship cruise missileslong-range air defense missilesmilitary officers as advisorsdiplomatic cover, and lots of cash.

Options for Intervention in Syria

Pros and cons of intervening in the Syrian conflict

Talk of intervention in Syria resurfaces whenever a new massacre of civilians by Syrian government forces hits the world headlines, but there’s little appetite in Western capitals for the huge risks involved in a direct military intervention in the Syrian conflict.
Several other options are still on the table, including an enforcement of a no-fly zone, establishment of humanitarian corridors, and support for Syria’s armed opposition, although none of them promises a quick end to the Syrian tragedy.

1. Ground Troop Intervention


  • Breaking Syria-Iran alliance: Syria is Iran’s chief Arab ally, conduit for weapons that flow from the regime in Tehran to the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah, and sponsor of various radical Palestinian groups. It’s difficult to overstate the impact that the fall of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad would have on the region.

  • Humanitarian concerns: Violence by Syrian government forces has provoked genuine revulsion in Western capitals and among Syria’s neighbors. Governments behind the regional push against Assad, such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, have staked their reputation on pushing through Assad’s departure.
Read more on why Saudi Arabia supports the Syrian opposition


  • Lack of UN mandate: Direct intervention will not win an authorization in the UN Security Council, given Russia and China’s intense opposition to any form of interference in Syria.

  • Ghosts of Iraq: US has little taste for sending soldiers into another Arab country, after the calamity in Iraq. Turkey is likewise wary of getting bogged down in Syria’s civil war, which would risk a direct confrontation with Iran, or possibly rally the Syrian population behind Assad against a foreign army.

  • Who could replace Assad: There’s no credible, cohesive political body that could assume transitory authority and prevent a descent to chaos. Syria’s opposition is divided and has little influence on the events on the ground.

  • Regional destabilization: A full-scale war could spark clashes in Lebanon, which is polarized between Hezbollah-led pro-Assad camp and political parties backed by Saudi Arabia and the West.
Read more on on who supports the Syrian regime.
Crisis in Syriacrowdvoice.org/protests-in-syriaGet the latest news & videos on Syria. Visit today to learn more!
Gold & Silver BullionWealthDaily.com/Gold_BullionThere's A Precious Metals Shortage Here's How You Can See Big Returns
Create a Facebook Profilewww.Facebook.comFind & Share A Wide Variety Of Facebook Applications. Sign Up Now!

2. No-fly Zone


  • Libyan model: Proponents of some form of intervention argue that not doing anything will not prevent a civil war or stop the violence from spilling over to Lebanon. Rather than a ground invasion, US legislators such as Senator John McCain argue for intensive bombardment of Syrian military installations that would disable the Syrian Air Force, similar to NATO-led intervention in Libya.

  • Weaken regime’s morale: Bombardment could encourage further defections from the military, goes the argument, and with air-cover whole army units could desert together with heavy weaponry. Balance of power would tilt toward the opposition and precipitate the meltdown of the regime.


  • International tension: Russia will of course never consent to bombardment of its sole Arab ally. Moscow would step up arms shipments to Syria, although it's unlikely it would actually choose to confront US planes for Assad's sake.

  • Rebels’ weakness: Libya’s lessons show bombardment alone will not break the regime unless there’s a capable, centrally-led rebel force that can take on Assad’s ground forces. Syria's armed opposition, represented by the Free Syrian Army, is a long way from reaching that stage.

3. Safe Zones


  • Limited risk: This is probably the least well defined option. Some governments, particularly Turkey and France, have argued for the establishment of “safe zones” inside Syrian territory, along with corridors for delivery of aid. One idea was for Turkey to secure a buffer zone across its border with Syria, creating a safe haven for civilians, while stopping short of direct military intervention.


  • Armed confrontation: How would safe zones be enforced and protected from Assad’s forces? Wouldn't that amount to occupation of parts of Syrian territory? It’s difficult to imagine this scenario not provoking clashes with the Syrian military or pro-government militias, with similar implications as with other intervention scenarios.
Read more: Will Turkey Go To War With Syria?

4. Support for Syria’s Rebels


  • Playing it safe: This is a scenario already in play: provision of logistical support and arms for Syrian rebel groups to avoid the pitfalls of more direct forms of intervention, while presumably giving foreign powers a degree of control over the conflict. Saudi Arabia and Qatar have spearheaded the calls for arming the Free Syrian Army.


  • Who do you arm: Syria’s armed opposition has no effective central leadership, and an influx of foreign money and weapons could make the matters worse by proliferating the number of poorly coordinated and poorly trained armed groups. There are fears that some of the money would end up in the hands of militant Islamists, such as the Al Qaeda-linked Al Nusra Front.

  • Unclear outcome:Unless senior commanders of the Syrian army started deserting Assad, Syria would still be looking at a prolonged conflict, including the risk of growing violence between the Sunni majority and Alawite minority and tensions in Lebanon.
Right-leaning Drudge Report shows a picture of an Al Qaeda soldier with weapons:

Saudi Arabia severs diplomatic ties with US over response to conflict in Syria


  • Saudi Arabia is an important ally to the U.S. as it provides a secure source of oil
  • Saudi diplomats now promise a 'major shift' in relations with the U.S. over inaction in the conflict in Syria
  • Secretary of State John Kerry says he is committed to keeping a good relationship with the Saudis
Upset at President Barack Obama's policies on Iran and Syria, members of Saudi Arabia's ruling family are threatening a rift with the United States that could take the alliance between Washington and the kingdom to its lowest point in years.
Saudi Arabia's intelligence chief is vowing that the kingdom will make a 'major shift' in relations with the United States to protest perceived American inaction over Syria's civil war as well as recent U.S. overtures to Iran, a source close to Saudi policy said on Tuesday.
Prince Bandar bin Sultan told European diplomats that the United States had failed to act effectively against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, was growing closer to Tehran, and had failed to back Saudi support for Bahrain when it crushed an anti-government revolt in 2011, the source said.

Scroll down for video
'Major change': Prince Bandar Bin Sultan said the kingdom will make a
'Major change': Prince Bandar Bin Sultan said the kingdom will make a "major shift" in relations with the United States

'The shift away from the U.S. is a major one,' the source close to Saudi policy said. 'Saudi doesn't want to find itself any longer in a situation where it is dependent.'
It was not immediately clear whether the reported statements by Prince Bandar, who was the Saudi ambassador to Washington for 22 years, had the full backing of King Abdullah.
The growing breach between the United States and Saudi Arabia was also on display in Washington, where another senior Saudi prince criticized Obama's Middle East policies, accusing him of 'dithering' on Syria and Israeli-Palestinian peace.
In unusually blunt public remarks, Prince Turki al-Faisal called Obama's policies in Syria 'lamentable' and ridiculed a U.S.-Russian deal to eliminate Assad's chemical weapons. He suggested it was a ruse to let Obama avoid military action in Syria.
'The current charade of international control over Bashar's chemical arsenal would be funny if it were not so blatantly perfidious. And designed not only to give Mr. Obama an opportunity to back down (from military strikes), but also to help Assad to butcher his people,' said Prince Turki, a member of the Saudi royal family and former director of Saudi intelligence.  

Inaction: The Saudis say they are getting upset by President Obama's inaction in dealing with the conflict in Syria
Inaction: The Saudis say they are getting upset by President Obama's inaction in dealing with the conflict in Syria
The United States and Saudi Arabia have been allies since the kingdom was declared in 1932, giving Riyadh a powerful military protector and Washington secure oil supplies.
The Saudi criticism came days after the 40th anniversary of the October 1973 Arab oil embargo imposed to punish the West for supporting Israel in the Yom Kippur war.
That was one of the low points in U.S.-Saudi ties, which were also badly shaken by the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals.
Saudi Arabia gave a clear sign of its displeasure over Obama's foreign policy last week when it rejected a coveted two-year term on the U.N. Security Council in a display of anger over the failure of the international community to end the war in Syria and act on other Middle East issues.
Prince Turki indicated that Saudi Arabia will not reverse that decision, which he said was a result of the Security Council's failure to stop Assad and implement its own decision on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Picking sides: Russian President Vladimir Putin, seen here with bin Sultan, has sided with the Syrian government in the conflict
Picking sides: Russian President Vladimir Putin, seen here with bin Sultan, has sided with the Syrian government in the conflict

'There is nothing whimsical about the decision to forego membership of the Security Council. It is based on the ineffectual experience of that body,' he said in a speech to the Washington-based National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations.
In London, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said he discussed Riyadh's concerns when he met Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal in Paris on Monday.
Kerry said he told the Saudi minister no deal with Iran was better than a bad deal. 'I have great confidence that the United States and Saudi Arabia will continue to be the close and important friends and allies that we have been,' Kerry told reporters.
Prince Bandar is seen as a foreign policy hawk, especially on Iran. The Sunni Muslim kingdom's rivalry with Shi'ite Iran, an ally of Syria, has amplified sectarian tensions across the Middle East.
A son of the late defense minister and crown prince, Prince Sultan, and a protégé of the late King Fahd, he fell from favor with King Abdullah after clashing on foreign policy in 2005.
But he was called in from the cold last year with a mandate to bring down Assad, diplomats in the Gulf say. Over the past year, he has led Saudi efforts to bring arms and other aid to Syrian rebels.
'Prince Bandar told diplomats that he plans to limit interaction with the U.S.,' the source close to Saudi policy said.

Secretary of State John Kerry says he's confident the U.S. will continue to have a good relationship with Saudi Arabia
Secretary of State John Kerry says he's confident the U.S. will continue to have a good relationship with Saudi Arabia

This happens after the U.S. failed to take any effective action on Syria and Palestine. Relations with the U.S. have been deteriorating for a while, as Saudi feels that the U.S. is growing closer with Iran and the U.S. also failed to support Saudi during the Bahrain uprising," the source said.
The source declined to provide more details of Bandar's talks with the diplomats, which took place in the past few days.
But he suggested that the planned change in ties between the energy superpower and the United States would have wide-ranging consequences, including on arms purchases and oil sales.
Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest oil exporter, ploughs much of its earnings back into U.S. assets. Most of the Saudi central bank's net foreign assets of $690 billion are thought to be denominated in dollars, much of them in U.S. Treasury bonds.
'All options are on the table now, and for sure there will be some impact,' the Saudi source said.
He said there would be no further coordination with the United States over the war in Syria, where the Saudis have armed and financed rebel groups fighting Assad.
The kingdom has informed the United States of its actions in Syria, and diplomats say it has respected U.S. requests not to supply the groups with advanced weaponry that the West fears could fall into the hands of al Qaeda-aligned groups.

Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki Al Faisal also is outraged the international community has let the war continue in Syria
Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki Al Faisal also is outraged the international community has let the war continue in Syria
Saudi anger boiled over after Washington refrained from military strikes in response to a poison gas attack in Damascus in August when Assad agreed to give up his chemical weapons arsenal.
Representative Chris Van Hollen, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives' Democratic leadership, told Reuters' Washington Summit on Tuesday that the Saudi moves were intended to pressure Obama to take action in Syria.
'We know their game. They're trying to send a signal that we should all get involved militarily in Syria, and I think that would be a big mistake to get in the middle of the Syrian civil war,' Van Hollen said.
'And the Saudis should start by stopping their funding of the al Qaeda-related groups in Syria. In addition to the fact that it's a country that doesn't allow women to drive,' said Van Hollen, who is close to Obama on domestic issues in Congress but is less influential on foreign policy.
Saudi Arabia is concerned about signs of a tentative reconciliation between Washington and Tehran, something Riyadh fears may lead to a 'grand bargain' on the Iranian nuclear program that would leave Riyadh at a disadvantage.
Prince Turki expressed doubt that Obama would succeed in what he called an 'open arms approach' to Iran, which he accused of meddling in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Bahrain.
'We Saudis observe President Obama's efforts in this regard. The road ahead is arduous,' he said. 'Whether (Iranian President Hassan) Rouhani will succeed in steering Iran toward sensible policies is already contested in Iran. The forces of darkness in Qom and Tehran are well entrenched.'
The U.N. Security Council has been paralyzed over the 31-month-old Syria conflict, with permanent members Russia and China repeatedly blocking measures to condemn Assad.
Saudi Arabia backs Assad's mostly Sunni rebel foes. The Syrian leader, whose Alawite sect is derived from Shi'ite Islam, has support from Iran and the armed Lebanese Shi'ite movement Hezbollah. The Syrian leader denounces the insurgents as al Qaeda-linked groups backed by Sunni-ruled states.
In Bahrain, home of the U.S. Fifth Fleet, a simmering pro-democracy revolt by its Shi'ite majority has prompted calls by some in Washington for U.S. ships to be based elsewhere.
Many U.S. economic interests in Saudi Arabia involve government contracts in defense, other security sectors, health care, education, information technology and construction.


The American public is extremely hesitant to intervene directly in Syria’s fighting.
Indeed, a June 1st NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found:
The American public is extremely hesitant to intervene directly in Syria’s civil war.
Asked to pick a response to stop the killing of civilians in Syria, just 15 percent in the poll say they favor U.S. military action, and only 11 percent want to provide arms to the opposition.
By comparison, a plurality of respondents — 42 percent — prefer to provide only humanitarian assistance, and 24 percent believe the U.S. shouldn’t take any action.
Perhaps more significantly, those attitudes cut across party lines and almost all demographic groups.
“Whether you voted for Romney or Obama, they have the same opinion on Syria,” said Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted the survey with the Democratic firm Hart Research.
“It explains the great reticence of the American public,” McInturff added.
Similarly, Gallup found on May 31st:
Sixty-eight percent of Americans say the United States should not use military action in Syria … even though they expect that diplomatic efforts will fail to bring peace.
Gallup found that 72% of Democrats, 70% of Independents and 64% of Republicans oppose war in Syria.
And the Philadelphia Tribune reported on May 26th:
Americans are right to be wary about the United States getting more involved in Syria.
A new Fox News poll released days before Memorial Day, a day of remembering the men and women who died in military service for the United States, shows that 68 percent of voters say the U.S. should stay out of greater involvement in Syria because it’s a civil war and the U.S. could actually end up helping anti-American extremist groups.
The poll showed that opposition to getter involvement in Syria was across the political spectrum: Of those who are Independents 65 percent agree the U.S. should stay out of Syria, Democrats (69 percent) and Republicans (70) agree.
Of voters who have served in the military 67 percent say the U.S. should not intervene.
The opposition of American voters is understandable after two long, costly and unnecessary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Americans have not forgotten that the Bush administration used the claim that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction as a pretext for invading that country. That claim proved to be false.
There is evidence that the U.S. could be making the mistake of getting involved in a civil war that is not vital to U.S. national security interest and that could actually end up arming anti-American extremist groups.
Indeed, there is substantial doubt that the Syrian government – as opposed to other parties, or even other countries – used chemical weapons.
And we are backing Al Qaeda and other terrorists in Syria, and pissing off Hezbollah and other terrorist groups even more.  That’s a recipe for increasing terrorism.
But where there are petro-resources at play, the U.S. is always willing to invade.


  • These aren't Syrian's. They're paid foreign contractors. Why do they need to wear masks? The US planned to launch a chemical weapons attack and BLAME it on Assad months ago.
    Jooland wants to control the land between the Nile and the Euphrates (because 'god' said so) and one look at the map will tell you EXACTLY what's going on in the middle east. Syria is part of the GREATER ISRAEL. And Israel's lapdog the US will go git 'em.
    It's also unfortunate that this article show references to a Huffpo article and a Drudge Report article. neither of which is a very reputable source.

  • basitali

    I wanna teach online holy quran.I feel honored to spread the message of Almighty Allah and be a part of the divine task of serving humanity.
    I'm Hafiz Abdul Ba-sit and I completed my quadrangular in the guidance of some very esteemed teachers. I have five years experience to teach Holy Duran. I live in Karachi. I have six students from London and ten students in Karachi. basitali_90@hotmail.com
    Contact# 03243368271
    Skype ID basit.ali950

  • gozounlimited

    The Truth About Syria..... Activist Post
    This video is a bit long, but it has many comprehensive and important
    videos strung together to show the real story about Syria's so-called
    civil war...... http://www.activistpost.com/20...

  • Tonto

    The only reason for this war is Obama is too stupid to understand he doesn't need the MSM to rule this country. All the recent propaganda, from Snowden, IRSgate and NSAgate has NOT been geared toward moving public opinion. It all has been geared toward making Obama live in fear.
    And it's working too. It's working even though none of it means anything in the greater scheme of things for the remaining years of the Obama Administration. Obama is more afraid of MSM than any recent president simply because he is isolated and his advisers read the MSM as if all the rubbish printed there meant something.
    Neither Snowden, IRSgate nor NSAgate mean anything. This is all old news.

  • gozounlimited

    Commentary Around The Hacked, Spied On, Controlled Web......
    Arrest Obama Under NDAA For Supporting Terrorists in Syria.....
    Under the terms of the National Defense Authorization Act that he personally signed into law, President Barack Obama should immediately bearrested and indefinitely detained for providing support to Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria..... read more: http://www.prisonplanet.com/de...
    Man Behind Syrian ‘Chemical Weapons’ Claim Is Fiction Writer Who Ran Benghazi Cover-Up

    Ben Rhodes, the White House national security advisor behind the claim that President Bashar Al-Assad used chemical weapons in Syria, is a fiction writer with zero educational background in government, diplomacyor national security who also played a key role in covering up the truth behind the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi..... read more: http://www.prisonplanet.com/ma...
    Is Obama Starting A War With Syria Just To Distract Us From All The Scandals?

    The whole point of the "war on terror" was to supposedly fight al-Qaeda, but now the U.S. military is allied with them.
    Why in the world would we want to help the people who are supposed to be our greatest global enemy?....... read more: http://theeconomiccollapseblog...
    Scores of People Massacred in Hatla Village by Western Funded Death Squads

    According to reports by The News broadcast on the Syrian Official TV Channel on June 13, 2013, Jabhat al-Nusra, one of many groups of the foreign-backed death squads that have terrorized Syria for the last two years, have now gunned down 30 villagers. The motivation behind the killings, as is typical of the death squads, is currently unclear...... read more: http://www.activistpost.com/20...
    What We The People of The World Seek ......Universal Consciousness

1 komentar:

  1. Hari ini saya ingin mengunkapkan tentang perjalanan hidup saya,karna masalah ekonomi saya selalu dililit hutang bahkan perusahaan yang dulunya saya pernah bagun kini semuanya akan disitah oleh pihak bank,saya sudah berusaha kesana kemari untuk mencari uang agar perusahaan saya tidak jadi disitah oleh pihak bank dan akhirnya saya nekat untuk mendatangi paranormal yang terkenal bahkan saya pernah mengikuti penggandaan uang dimaskanjeng dan itupun juga tidak ada hasil yang memuaskan dan saya hampir putus asa,,akhirnya ketidak segajaan saya mendengar cerita orang orang bahwa ada paranormal yang terkenal bisa mengeluarkan uang ghaib atau sejenisnya pesugihan putih yang namanya Mbah Rawa Gumpala,,,akhirnya saya mencoba menhubungi beliau dan alhamdulillah dengan senan hati beliau mau membantu saya untuk mengeluarkan pesugihan uang ghaibnya sebesar 10 M saya sangat bersyukur dan berterimakasih banyak kepada Mbah Rawa Gumpala berkat bantuannya semua masalah saya bisa teratasi dan semua hutang2 saya juga sudah pada lunas semua,,bagi anda yang ingin seperti saya dan ingin dibabtu sama Mbah silahkan hubungi 085 316 106 111 saya sengaja menulis pesan ini dan mempostin di semua tempat agar anda semua tau kalau ada paranormal yang bisah dipercaya dan bisa diandalkan.untuk lebih lengkapnya buka saja blok Mbah karna didalam bloknya semuanya sudah dijelaskan PESUGIHAN DANA GHAIB TANPA TUMBAL