[Захумље]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-21...timatum-us

With ISIS Now Controlling 35% Of Syria And Most Of Its Oil Fields, Iraq Issues An Ultimatum To The US

Remember when the extremist Al Qaeda spinoff ISIS (or, now known as Islamic State following the formation of its own caliphate in the middle of Iraq and Syria) was still a "thing" two weeks ago? In this case out of sight does not mean out of mind, and while the world has found a new story line to follow in the middle east with the war between Israel and Gaza, now in its 14th day - whenever it is not busy responding to emotional appeals about the MH 17 crash - ISIS has continued to expand and as Al Arabiya reports it "is now in control of 35 percent of the Syrian territory following a string of victories, the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said Friday."

What's more troubling is that ISIS holdings now include nearly all of Syria’s oil and gas fields. While these are hardly significant on a global scale, they certainly allow ISIS to preserve its self-sustaining and self-funding status.

One of the latest gains of the self-proclaimed “caliphate” was the seizure of the country’s biggest oil fields, in Deir el-Zour in eastern Syria, earlier in the week.

Deir Ezzor borders Homs province as well as Iraq, where the jihadist group has spearheaded a major Sunni militant offensive that has seen large swathes of territory fall out of the Baghdad government’s control.

Meanwhile, jihadists have killed 270 Syrian regime fighters, civilian security guards and employees since seizing a gas field in Homs province, the Observatory added, according to Agence France-Presse.

The London-based group described Thursday’s takeover of the Shaar field as “the biggest” anti-regime operation by the ISIS since it emerged in the Syrian conflict a year ago.

“Eleven of the dead were civilian employees, while the rest were security guards and National Defence Forces members,” he added.

A counter-attack by Bashar al-Assad’s forces on Friday left 40 ISIS militants dead, Abdel Rahman said.

The Syrian government did not officially confirm the deaths, but supporters of Assad posted photographs of the dead, and described their killings as a “massacre”.
Ironically, it only took ISIS a little over a month to take over Syria's energy infrastructure and cripple the Assad regime, something the US forces were unable to do last summer. Perhaps it is time for the Pentagon to retain them, i.e., al-Qaeda 2.0, as mercenaries?

As for ISIS in Iraq, things continue to escalate and as the Institute for the Study of War reports, ISIS has placed IEDs in places such as Mada'in, Yusifiyah, and Mahmudiyah in the southern belts of Baghdad. Iraqi Shi'a militia executions inside Baghdad may increase in response to the VBIED wave in Shi'a neighborhoods on July 19. The deployment of volunteers from southern Iraq to Kirkuk province signifies the spread of their role to protect shrines in areas where ISIS is making advances. The reallocation of Iraqi security forces from Baghdad to Dhuluiya signals the real challenge that ISIS poses there.

ISW's conclusion is that ISIS may try to draw the ISF out of Baghdad in advance of more robust attackes there.

Visually, here are the latest areas of conflict in Iraq.





Perhaps sensing the fact that the tide of war may be shifting for the worse, Iraq has become increasingly more vocal in demanding US assistance and a few hours ago went as far as to issue an ultimatum on the US - help us now or we will find another bigger borther, one who will actually help us.

Bloomberg reports that earlier today, speaking at the Atlantic Council, the Iraqi Ambassador to U.S. Lukman Faily called for US air strikes warning that Iraqis are skeptical about U.S. intent to support Iraq in its fight against Sunni terrorist groups, and implicitly threatening that "other countries will step in to fill the vacuum if greater American support isn’t forthcoming."

Faily calls for U.S. air strikes to stop influx of terrorists from Syria, to target “terrorist camps,” and precision air strikes in urban areas “occupied by ISIL terrorists”

He also said that Iraq has chosen the U.S. as its preferred strategic partner, has bought >$10b in U.S. military equipment and plans "to buy billions more."

"If Iraqis do not believe meaningful U.S. assistance is forthcoming, they will not have enough incentives to adopt political reforms. Now more than ever the United States needs to be careful not to send mixed signals about its intentions. These mixed signals will create vacuum that will be filled by others."

Such as Russia?

As for Iraq, in the future pick better "preferred strategic partners."




I believe the time for oil.....has finished.....

You looking at the cost of extracting oil.....ever more expensive, ever more difficult......mass and irrevocable environmental damage!

How many barrels of oil do you need to consume just to get to the "dirty oil" that your targeting!

The people of the planet need to serious look at sustainability and renewable resources as way forward!

There needs to be a levy on these companies, who for the last 170 has given us more death, more destruction than all the other industries combined apart from defense. Which is totally intertwined and a surrogate to the oil industry!

[Захумље]

Isis brings its war to Lebanon - and it could be key to a masterplan

Battle for Arsal exposes new front in expansion of self-styled caliphate
ROBERT FISK Author Biography Monday 04 August 2014






3K
PRINT A A A
After all the warnings and all the clichés about a war that would “spill” over Syria’s border, the savage fighters of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s Sunni Muslim “caliphate” have at last arrived in Lebanon.

Ads by Google

KIA Dealer Peterborough
KIA Offers a 7 Year Warranty. Visit Boongate Kia Peterborough Now
kia.co.uk/Boongate_Kia
Apple iPhone 5c Sale.
Cheap Apple iPhone 5c Sale. Hurry While Stocks Last !
storescompared.com
Thibaut Fabrics
Huge Range of Fabric Collection for Interior Designs, Affordable Price!
tm-interiors.co.uk/Thibaut-Fabrics
So far, the Lebanese army has lost 13 of its soldiers in a costly battle with rebels to retake the north-eastern Sunni town of Arsal – on the Syrian border and hitherto a resupply base for Islamists trying to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad – while the conflict has generated the same gruesome events which followed Islamist victories in Iraq and Syria: reports of civilian executions, government soldiers taken hostage, at least 12 civilians confirmed dead, including five children, and the prospect of long and bloody fighting ahead.

The world’s attention, of course, has been concentrated on the slaughter in Gaza. In the Middle East, tragedy must come one day at a time, so the Syrian civil war and the Isis takeover of western Iraq continued in the shadows of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. But the Islamists’ arrival in Lebanon and the prospect of a mini-civil war around Arsal – and perhaps as far as Tripoli – could have repercussions far graver than the Gaza war. As Islamists take over Lake Mosul and other districts from the Kurds in northern Iraq and press harder against Syrian government troops, their extension into Lebanon marks their furthest progress yet from the Tigris towards the Mediterranean. In Arsal, the fighters – officially from el-Nusra, whose own members are already joining those of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s caliphate – adopted their usual practice of seizing large buildings in the centre of the town (in this case, the technical college, a hospital and a mosque) and clinging to them in the hope that their opponents would disintegrate. The Lebanese army, which has twice defeated Islamist rebellions inside Lebanon in the past 15 years, claimed to have retaken the college, but the statements from both the Lebanese commander and Prime Minister may be taken as accurate: that the takeover of Arsal had been planned long in advance and is part of a far greater rebel strategy.

The Lebanese army says it has so far killed 50 fighters – a tally that sounds very like the Syrian army’s premature claims of victory on the other side of the border – but government forces in Lebanon are unlikely to fall back. Sunni Muslims make up the larger part of the Lebanese forces whose units are among the best integrated of Middle East armies – and this has never prevented them from attacking and subduing Sunni Muslim rebels in the past, first at Sir el-Diniyeh in the northern mountains in 2000, and then within the Palestinian camp of Nahr el-Bared in 2007, at a cost of almost 500 dead soldiers, fighters and civilians.

VIDEO: WHO ARE ISIS?
For more than a year, the Lebanese army has tried vainly to close the frontier east of Arsal, and a Syrian army victory over rebels in Yabroud on the other side of the border earlier this year suggested that Sunni insurgents might leave Arsal lest they be cut off. But their resurgence shows that the Syrians have nothing like the control they have been claiming in the frontier lands. Indeed, the Nusra men had no difficulty in seizing 15 soldiers and almost as many Internal Security Force personnel when they first struck at Arsal. A battle between those Sunni forces opposing the Assad regime in Damascus – who are also responsible for the bombing of Shia targets in Lebanon – and Lebanese troops was almost inevitable. Less than two weeks ago, Lebanese special forces in Tripoli killed Mounzer el-Hassan, a Sunni “jihadist” logistics officer who was reported to have given suicide belts to bombers who attacked Beirut’s Shia southern surburbs and the Iranian embassy in the capital. Those present at the battle said that el-Hassan was playing taped Islamic music as he finally died, when a hand grenade – possibly in his own possession – blew up in his face.


His death followed shortly after the capture of Houssam Sabbagh, a Salafist militant who led Sunni militia forces in recent battles against Alwite Shias in Tripoli. Sabbagh, who has fought in Afghanistan, Chechenya and in Iraq against US forces, was one of the few Tripoli leaders who refused to participate in a government “security” plan for the city.

The battles in Syria, however, are more complex. While Isis – which still uses its acronym of the Islamic Army of Iraq and the Levant despite its incorporation into what al-Baghdadi calls the “Islamic State” or caliphate – has strengthened its position in Deir el-Zour and neighbouring villages (with its usual ferocious executions and heads-on-stakes), the Syrian military seems intent on blasting rebels out of the Damascus suburbs, especially Douma, a district which lies close to the main road north of the capital. If al-Baghdadi’s men are fighting for control in the east of the country, Assad doesn’t want them taking the place of less spirited rebels around Damascus.

Reports of independent resistance groups who oppose both Assad and Isis – and supposedly call themselves “White Shrouds” – should be taken with the usual Syrian caution. Various militia outfits of both Sunni and mixed persuasions have strode fitfully onto the stage of the civil war over the past two years, only to vanish or merge into larger rebel or government forces.

But just as they must abide by tribal rules in Iraq, Islamists have found it dangerous to take on individual Syrian tribes in the “Jazeera” plateau north of Deir ez-Zour. They may have no love for Assad, but they will not allow fighters from Algeria or Chechenya to rule their tribal lands.

More disturbing, however, is the news that Sunni gunmen from the caliphate may have taken Iraq’s largest dam outside Mosul from Kurdish peshmerga guerrillas.

The Kurds enlarged their territory by perhaps 40 per cent when the Iraqi army fled the northern Iraqi city, but the reputation of their supposedly unconquerable peshmerga army is taking a battering now that they have admitted losing villages close to the dam.

If the Islamists can capture the entire facility, they would technically have the ability to close off the waters from Baghdad – or flood the capital city, whose Shia government has proved itself incapable of governing – or recapturing – Sunni territory in Iraq.

These is a Saudi and Qatari sponsored war.....

---

http://www.larouchepub.com/special_repor...r_axis.pdf

[Захумље]

War Propaganda: Supposed ISIS Beheading Of American Journalist – Pretext for Military Intervention in Syria?

Stoking popular outrage and setting the stage for Syrian intervention

The corporate media is employing adverbs – purportedly, seemingly, apparently – to describe the reported beheading of American freelance journalist James Wright Foley.

Foley was reportedly abducted in Syria. Soon after his disappearance the Columbia Journalism Review said he was “almost certainly being held by the Syrian government in a detention center near the capital city of Damascus.” It was later said he was taken by ISIS, now known as IS, or the Islamic State.



Fox News: “We need to go into Syria.”

On Tuesday a video was posted to Youtube allegedly showing Foley’s beheading. The video is titled “A message to America” and shows a man said to be Foley on his knees, dressed in an orange jumpsuit, next to a black-clad man British authorities believe is a Briton.

Photos and videos also appeared on Twitter accounts linked to IS groups.

“I call on my friends, family, and loved ones to rise up against my real killers, the US government, for what will happen to me is only a result of their complacency and criminality,” the man said to be Foley declares.

“My message to my beloved parents — save me some dignity and don’t accept any meagre compensation for my death from the same people who effectively hit the last nail in my coffin from their recent aerial campaign in Iraq,” a reference to the Obama administration’s token bombing campaign directed at IS in Iraq.

“I call on my brother John, who’s a member of the US Air Force, think about what you are doing.”

“I died that day, John. When your colleagues dropped that bomb on those people, they signed my death certificate.

“I guess all in all, I wish I wasn’t American.”

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said the executioner in the video is probably a British citizen.

“On the face of it, it appears to have been a British person. We’ll have to do some more analysis to make quite certain that that is the case,” Hammond said.

The British Prime Minister David Cameron “cut short his summer vacation to return to London and chair urgent meetings on the threat posed by ISIS in Iraq and Syria,” according to NBC News.

Precisely Timed War Propaganda

The alleged beheading is now dominating the establishment news cycle, overshadowing events in Ferguson, Missouri. The media invariably engages in wall-to-wall coverage when a journalist is killed, especially in such a sensational and grotesque manner.

The alleged murder will undoubtedly be exploited by the state as it ramps up re-intervention in Iraq under the humanitarian banner. In the meantime, it is the responsibility of the corporate media to produce public outrage and further demonize IS, a paramilitary group created by the U.S. and its Gulf Emirate associates and trained by the United States military in Jordan.

“The extremists’ immediate goal was to use the shocking images to intimidate the Obama administration into halting U.S. airstrikes on ISIS strongholds in Iraq,” reports the International Business Times.

In fact, as ISIS undoubtedly knows, the exact opposite will occur – the United States and its partners will step up their bombing campaign, using the video as a convenient propaganda tool and capitalizing on popular outrage over the group.

The New York Post, owned by News Corp. magnate Rupert Murdoch, mustered its editorial board this morning and declared the “time for games is over” and the “horrific wake-up call” of Foley’s alleged murder demands military retaliation. “With American lives now being taken and even more at risk, America is now directly involved. No more playing footsie with butchers.”

Johan Galtung, a Norwegian sociologist and the principal founder of the discipline of peace and conflict studies, has described how the establishment media exploits violence to propagandize the foreign policy objectives of the state.

Manicheanism, the art of portraying one side as brutal and evil while the other is viewed as a chaste and innocent victim, plays a dominant role in war propaganda. This is the process we are now witnessing in regard to the alleged murder of James Foley.

The establishment media will continue to employ this tactic, along with decontextualizing the violence – dwelling on irrational emotional responses while ignoring the underlying reasons for violence and, in the case of ISIS, omitting the fact the group and its mercurial leader are largely a creation of U.S. intelligence and its partners.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/war-propaga...ia/5396624

[Захумље]

You Do Realize that the U.S. Funded and Trained ISIS, Right?

The Daily Sheeple
www.TheDailySheeple.com
August 22nd, 2014
Reader Views: 2,134
Comments (5)
119 37 191

ISIS-Flag-In-Iraq-300x300

Just so we are all clear here.

Now that ISIS, or the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, is becoming a threat so powerful Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told reporters at the Pentagon that the terrorist group is “beyond anything we’ve seen,” it’s time to remind everyone of a few little factoids regarding how exactly that came to be.

Hagel’s exact quote was:

“They are beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology, a sophistication of … military prowess. They are tremendously well-funded. This is beyond anything we’ve seen.”

Well-trained in military prowess. Tremendously well-funded. Super sophisticated terrorists. Hm.

And how do you think they got that way so fast? Super magic terrorist training money tree fairy dust?

Apparently the mainstream establishment media would more likely attempt to have people believe such a thing exists rather than expose the blatant reality that yes, the U.S. has trained and funded ISIS and without the U.S. government, ISIS would not be the threat it has become.

It came out back in 2012 that the U.S., Turkey and Jordan were jointly running a US CIA and Special Forces command training base for Syrian rebels out of the Jordanian town of Safawi, but apparently according the Jordanian officials, that training ‘wasn’t meant to be used in Iraq’ (via WND):

Syrian rebels who would later join the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIS, were trained in 2012 by U.S. instructors working at a secret base in Jordan, according to informed Jordanian officials.

The officials said dozens of future ISIS members were trained at the time as part of covert aid to the insurgents targeting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. The officials said the training was not meant to be used for any future campaign in Iraq.

So future ISIS members were specially trained by the U.S. government, huh? Ya don’t say. But they weren’t supposed to be used for campaigns in Iraq?

Oops.

This was, at least superficially, so they could wage war against the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, and again, they weren’t called ISIS at the time, they were referred to as the Syrian rebels.

But the government won’t even admit what they’ve done here. Instead, they’re just bombing Iraq and hoping for the best…

Meanwhile, our government is still funding the “Syrian rebels” today!

Back at the end of June, Obama was requesting another $500 million in aid for them, even though the fact that many were now calling themselves ISIS was so blatantly obvious even back then that it could no longer be disputed.

As Hagel said, ISIS are not just well-funded, but “tremendously well-funded.” Now you know where ISIS gets a hefty chunk of its tremendous funding.

This really isn’t that hard to figure out, just hard to comprehend; mostly because IT’S COMPLETELY INSANE.

Even worse, former state department official Andrew Doran let the cat out of the bag back in June that some of these ISIS members are actually combat veterans from Western nations including the U.S. who have passports and could return home anytime, basically asserting that ISIS could easily attack America at any time.

Of course, it isn’t like anyone would need a passport, what with the porous U.S.-Mexico border basically sitting there wide open.

A documentary maker recently even dressed up in an Osama Bin Laden mask and crossed the Southern border just to make the point.

Either way, this is madness.

Now we not only have Hagel telling America that ISIS is ‘beyond anything the Pentagon has ever seen’ but in the same week the former deputy director of the CIA is telling CBS This Morning that he fears ISIS is going to start carrying out 9/11-style attacks on American soil, including this little gem:

“If an ISIS member showed up at a mall in the United States tomorrow with an AK-47 and killed a number of Americans, I would not be surprised.”

If anyone is terrorizing America directly right now, it’s the American government that would first fund and train terrorists who are raping people and setting them on fire, crucifying Christians and beheading children, then conspire with the media to scare the American people that the government’s own terrorist creation is going to attack here 9/11-style RIGHT BEFORE ANOTHER 9/11 ANNIVERSARY.

Creating one’s own enemies then declaring war on them while putting the rest of the world in grave danger…

- See more at: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/you-do-re...viK0o.dpuf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EAAuGvh_5s

[Захумље]

MOSCOW, August 28 (RIA Novosti) - Washington should establish a new Syrian army in order to fight both the Islamic State and Bashar al-Assad, allowing the US to end the Syrian war "on its own terms," believes Kenneth M. Pollack, a former CIA intelligence analyst and Senior Fellow at the Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.
"There is, in fact, a way that the United States could get what it wants in Syria – and, ultimately, in Iraq as well – without sending in US forces: by building a new Syrian opposition army capable of defeating both President Bashar al-Assad and the more militant Islamists," he writes in his article "An Army to Defeat Assad," which was recently published by Foreign Affairs.
"Since the fall of Mosul in June 2014, the Syrian and Iraqi civil wars have become entangled," claims Kenneth Pollack, presenting a detailed road map for creating a new Syrian fighting force. The author insists that the strategy "would serve the US interests" in both Syria and Iraq.
According to the former CIA analyst, the military group should be initially created and trained outside Syria: for instance, in Jordan, "where the United States is already providing some aid to rebels," and in Turkey. In order to launch an offensive, Washington should amass at least two or three brigades, each consisting of 1,000 – 2,000 servicemen, and provide this military contingent with heavy weapons, "including tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery and surface-to-air missiles," Mr. Pollack stresses. However, the strategy could also require support from the US Air Force. Pollack believes that the Syrians, who are tired of both "Assad's tyranny" and "Islamist fanaticism," would likely to support the new army and join it as volunteers.
As they moved deeper into Syrian territory, the opposition leaders could proclaim "a new provisional government" in Syria and receive recognition from the United States and its allies, the political analyst writes. After the new government is proclaimed, the US Department of Defense would openly train and advise the army of the "legitimate" Syrian authorities. Pollack emphasizes that since establishing the new government could take years in postwar Syria, "a special representative of the UN secretary" would "retain sovereignty" of the state until a new leadership was grown "from the bottom up." At the same time, according to the strategy, the US would actively assist in Syria's economic and political reconstruction. It should be noted that the scheme described by Mr. Pollack looks similar to that implemented in Kosovo, where the United Nations Interim Administration Mission was established in 1999, while the region was turned into a NATO stronghold in former Yugoslavia.
In other words, a former CIA analyst, who represents a policy center which was created under the aegis of the Brookings Institute by ardently pro-Israeli Jewish media tycoon Haim Saban in 2002, is proposing a plan to seize the territory of a sovereign state, which is governed by an internationally-recognized
President, Bashar al-Assad. Mr. Pollack underscores that the military campaign would take two to five years and cost $18-$22 billion per year. The expert suggests that since the Persian Gulf states are interested in ousting al-Assad, they could provide the US with substantial financial support. It's worth mentioning that "they have already spent billions of dollars backing various Syrian militias," he notes.
Pollack admits that the US may pay some unexpected costs and it "would need to be prepared to lose some American lives." "US pilots could be shot down and US advisors could be wounded, killed, or captured." (This notion of Mr. Pollack may remind one of the disturbing incident in Benghazi.)
Kenneth Pollack notes that the involvement of US-backed forces in the Middle East may provoke a sharp escalation of the conflict in the region, engaging both Iran and Hezbollah. He also admits that the new Syrian army may even lose the war or fail to secure postwar Syria, which could fragment and become a failed state. Since there would be no American boots on the ground, Washington would be able to choose whether to involve itself deeper in the conflict or walk away, Pollack explains. Although his "ambitious proposal" looks exceptionally risky, the cost of inaction would be much higher, insists the policy analyst. One obvious beneficiary of this expensive plan would be Israel, which would understandably prefer an American client state on its border to Al-Assad or a fervently anti-Israeli Islamic Caliphate.
The comments of Foreign Affairs' readers regarding Mr. Pollack's plan are as interesting as the article itself. "In what way is Assad a threat to the US? In no way whatsoever! To oust him will create carnage on an imaginable scale," writes a user named Alterity. "Pollack advocates for a strategy which has failed in the past, most notably in Afghanistan in the 80s, in training a mercenary army to complete US goals," notes another user. "To summarize the below post… the US taxpayer should be prepared, for the next decade, to shoulder an additional $175 billion just in civil assistance/security for Syria and Ukraine," underscores a user named Alexis Pleshcoy.
Alarmingly, the number of experts advocating a "double strike" on the Islamic State and Bashar al-Assad is growing. Moreover, a theory, allegedly created by the Syrian opposition, that Assad was supporting ISIS, has appeared recently in the reputable Western media. "The Assad regime played a key role in ISIL's rise… The Syrian regime fostered the growth of terrorist networks," claimed Marie Harf, a US State Department spokeswoman and former CIA spokeswoman, as cited by the Wall Street Journal. Meanwhile, Barack Obama is considering a 'limited' air assault on jihadi fighters in Syria. The question remains open whether the 'limited' assault will turn into a large-scale military operation against both the Islamic State and Bashar al-Assad.

[Захумље]

UK doesn’t need Assad’s permission to launch airstrikes in Syria – Cameron
Published time: September 04, 2014 15:39 Get short URL
British Prime Minister David Cameron ® speaks with US President Barack Obama during the 2014 NATO Summit in Newport, Wales, on September 4, 2014.(AFP Photo / Leon Neal )British Prime Minister David Cameron ® speaks with US President Barack Obama during the 2014 NATO Summit in Newport, Wales, on September 4, 2014.(AFP Photo / Leon Neal )
3.9K484
Tags
NATO, Politics, Syriagate, UK, War, War witness
Britain could conduct airstrikes in Syrian regions captured by Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) militants, UK Prime Minister David Cameron has said. He added that he did not need permission from Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Speaking at the start of the NATO summit in Wales on Thursday, Cameron said he did not recognize Assad as a legitimate leader, labeling him as “part of the problem.”

“We have got to understand that Assad has been part of the creation of IS, rather than part of its answer," he said.

The statement seemingly rejects proposals made earlier this month by MPs suggesting that the UK temporarily ally with Assad to put down the militant Islamist group, who have allegedly killed thousands in Syria and Iraq.

Cameron also urged NATO countries to join the UK and the United States to tackle IS militants. Writing in The Times in a joint article with US President Barack Obama, Cameron said that the West could not be “cowed by barbaric killers.”

'Those who believe in stepping back and adopting an isolationist approach misunderstand the nature of security in the 21st century,” they added.

Additionally, Cameron said the West often found itself in ‘moral quagmires’ by taking the position that ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend.’

"I don't think it's that complicated because obviously the Iraqi government is a legitimate government ... whereas President Assad has committed war crimes on his own people and is therefore illegitimate."

Syria's President Bashar al-Assad.(Reuters / SANA)Syria's President Bashar al-Assad.(Reuters / SANA)

Cameron also defended the need for Western intervention, though he acknowledged that it needed to be aligned to the aims and goals of regional forces currently fighting IS militants.

“I think, in the past sometimes people have seen Western intervention as something that goes right over the heads of the local people fighting these horrors and over the heads of the regional powers and neighbors,” he said.

Cameron continued that helping those fighting on the ground, including Kurds and Iraqis, should be the primary focus. He also asked how “regional players” and countries could be brought in to help “squeeze the problem at the source.”

The prime minister has come under greater pressure to act in Iraq, following the identification of a British hostage in an IS social media video, entitled “a second message to America”, in which American journalist Steven Sotloff was beheaded. Sotloff’s murderer, who may have also murdered American photojournalist James Foley, is believed to be a British man from South London.

The hostage is believed to be David Haines, an aid worker who has 16 years’ experience working for humanitarian NGOs.

Following the video’s publication, Cameron told MPs in the House of Commons that Britain will “never give into terrorism”.

‘'The only way to defeat it is to stand firm and to send a very straightforward message - a country like ours will not be cowed by these barbaric killers,” he said, adding: “We will be more forthright in the defense of the values - liberty under the rule of law, freedom, democracy - that we hold dear, and I'm sure a united message to that effect will go forward from this House today.'

Both Cameron and Labour leader Ed Miliband have agreed that more resources are needed to support Syrian and Iraqi forces fighting IS, as well as providing humanitarian aid and surveillance materials. Former defense secretary Liam Fox has also expressed support for conducting airstrikes in Syria, saying that it was necessary to diminish the militia groups’ “military capability” so that “countries who are our allies are able to deal with them more effectively on their own.”

However, despite a new Yougov poll showing that 47 percent of British people back airstrikes in Syria, senior government figures have not made any public announcement to launch airstrikes, or engage in military combat in the region.

Britain is set to directly supply Kurdish forces battling against IS militants in Iraq with arms, as a more comprehensive NATO-run military operation in the region becomes more likely.

One of the last Western establishments to officially arm the Kurds, the UK government is now following the lead of Italy, France, the US, Australia and several smaller states. Cameron has stressed, however, Downing Street will not channel military wares to Iraq until the besieged state has formed a new government, due to be put in place on September 11.

[Захумље]

Lavrov: West may use ISIS as pretext to bomb Syrian govt forces
Published time: September 09, 2014 16:10 Get short URL
Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov adresses to his Malian counterpart Abdoulaye Diop (not pictured) during their meeting in Moscow, September 9, 2014. (Reuters/Sergei Karpukhin)Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov adresses to his Malian counterpart Abdoulaye Diop (not pictured) during their meeting in Moscow, September 9, 2014. (Reuters/Sergei Karpukhin)
3.3K58441
Tags
Air Force, Army, Iraq, Lavrov, Military, NATO, Politics, Security, Syria, Terrorism, USA, Violence
If the West bombs Islamic State militants in Syria without consulting Damascus, the anti-ISIS alliance may use the occasion to launch airstrikes against President Bashar Assad’s forces, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said.

“There are reasons to suspect that air strikes on Syrian territory may target not only areas controlled by Islamic State militants, but the government troops may also be attacked on the quiet to weaken the positions of Bashar Assad’s army,” Lavrov said Tuesday.

Such a development would lead to a huge escalation of conflict in the Middle East and North Africa, Lavrov told reporters in Moscow after a meeting with the foreign minister of Mali.

Moscow is urging the West to respect international law and undertake such acts only with the approval of the legitimate government of a state, Lavrov said.

“Not a single country should have its own plans on such issues. There can be only combined, collective, univocal actions. Only this way can a result be achieved,” he said.

His comments came shortly after Washington announced plans to go on the offensive against the Islamic State jihadist group. The US military has already launched over 100 airstrikes against militant targets in Iraq, including a new series that the military said killed an unusually large number of Islamic State fighters, AP reported.

US military launches airstrikes near Iraq's Haditha Dam

Following the beheading of two American journalists, President Barack Obama is considering a military strike against Islamic State in Syria. The plans are expected to be announced in a speech Wednesday.

Moscow has repeatedly voiced its readiness to cooperate with Washington in countering terrorism, Lavrov said. Secretary of State John Kerry, in response, has proposed that the US, Russia and countries in the region cooperate to work out “a balance of interests so that they could eliminate terrorism threat,” he added.

“However, this hasn’t got beyond words,” Lavrov said.

Militant Islamist fighters parade on military vehicles along the streets of Syria's Raqqa province June 30, 2014. (Reuters/Stringer)Militant Islamist fighters parade on military vehicles along the streets of Syria's Raqqa province June 30, 2014. (Reuters/Stringer)

Russia has long warned its western partners about the threat posed by Islamic State, al-Qaeda and other groups that later merged into the Islamic Front, Lavrov said.

“We have repeatedly suggested to the US, the EU and leading European states to realize the extent of this threat. We have called on the UN to resolutely condemn terrorist attacks staged by Islamists in Syria. But we were told that it was Bashar Assad’s politics that gave rise to terrorism, and that denouncing such acts was possible only alongside with the demand for his resignation,” Lavrov said.

In Moscow’s view, this represents “a double standard” and an attempt to justify terrorism.

Up until the Syrian conflict, Russia and the West were unanimous that terrorism cannot be justified “no matter what motive was behind them,” Lavrov said. But in case with Syria the West had a “different, two-faced stance.” It was only when the terrorism threat which originated in Libya crept to Lebanon and then Iraq that Western countries realized it was time to deal with that, Lavrov said.

“Having admitted it with a huge delay, western partners for some reason think that this threat should be eliminated on the territory of Iraq, while on the territory of Syria it might be left to the consideration of those who conduct the operation,” Lavrov said.

The US agreed its airstrikes against Islamic State militants on Iraqi territory with Baghdad, Lavrov said. However, “it was rumored… no such permission was required from the government of Syria because they claim ‘Assad should resign and his regime should be overthrown’.”

Lavrov said that there could be no different interpretation when it comes to the common interests of the West, Russia and other states: “Terrorist threats must be eliminated and terrorists liquidated,” he said.

Obama vows to ‘hunt down’ Islamic State militants

Earlier in August, when the US State Department’s spokeswoman Jen Psaki was asked to comment on whether it would be possible for the US to launch airstrikes inside Syria without coordinating it with the government, she said: “I think when American lives are at stake, when we’re talking about defending our own interests, we’re not looking for the approval of the Syrian regime.” She added, though, that it was for the US president to make such a decision.

Бато ти тешко окаснио са овом изјавом!

---

10 Signs That ISIS is a Scripted Psyop
Scripted Oddities Portray ISIS As "James Bond" of Terrorism

Bernie Suarez
Activist Post

Has the ISIS psyop calmed down a bit? Before it dies out let's examine some incredible ironies and oddities surrounding CIA's ISIS. After all, the ISIS psyop deserves a thorough analysis from every angle, so I thought it appropriate to outline for the sake of humanity. Hopefully, humanity can use the ISIS psyop as a tool for the final or further awakening. It may be wishful thinking, but it is worth exposing every crack and corner of this psyop and let government know that we are not going for it this time.

I declare humanity too intuitive to buy into this psychological operation and hopefully I'm right. So while the core TV-watching, mainstream media-believing community drinks the government Kool Aid, let us get started by pointing out several glaring observations regarding the ISIS psyop.

Glancing ahead, the ISIS kids have knowledge of things that require you to have education, modern technical skills, a little bit of decency, structure, conformity to societal norms and somewhat transparent connection to the outside world. What are these things and what are some of the surreal oddities surrounding ISIS? Let's examine:

1. Professional Camera, Editing Software and Skills

Incredibly, despite being savages that only want to kill for apparently no specific burning reason other than that fact that you are not ISIS, ISIS has at least some kind of production department that can skillfully provide what could be considered Hollywood-style editing (of supposed beheading videos) with multiple camera angles, consistent daylight on their subjects and proper daylight mode video exposure. They clearly have the skills for setting up multiple cameras and using those precise angles for their production department. In order to put out these supposed beheading videos, they also had to make sure that the sounds were just right and that there was no shaking of the camera.



Someone then had to take the various video angles and properly edit the footage so as to make it look professional. The editor, apparently a man of class and decency, then is careful not to show any actual action and blood. Savage killers who are ALSO respectful and classy about being too disturbing with their videos. Instead they courteously (but sloppily) cut from the early hand action of their British-sounding supposed lead man, to the post beheading amazingly clean shot of a head sitting on a corpse with the classic Photoshop drop shadows. In Hollywood style, reminiscent of Alfred Hitchcock films, the editor essentially leaves the action to the viewer's imagination. Even though this beheading movie created by ISIS is not being submitted for any film festivals, they carefully comply with techniques that would make this film fully acceptable into almost any gore film festival.

To those who want to point out to viewers the amazing lack of blood during those first critical throat slices of James Foley's neck, sorry, exposing this lack of blood is in itself apparently too grotesque by YouTube standards and should you post such a video it will be conveniently removed.

2. Professional Image Editing Software and Skills.

Like the editing software, the ISIS production team shows off their skills in Photoshop image editing software, which often requires an extended learning period, resources, and practice. Despite a few imperfections, the ISIS production department seems to know how to cut and splice out sections of images to produce the desired effect of disconnecting a head from the body. Even if obtaining and using the software is believable, let's remember we're talking about savage "terrorists" that are supposedly inhumane. In other words, these are clinically, factually documented psychopaths and not your average person according to government legend. Let's keep this in mind (psychopaths) when speaking about ISIS.

3. Internet Connection, Video Uploading Capabilities, and Social Media Accounts.

According to U.S. "intelligence sources" mouthpieces, ISIS has all the above including social media capabilities. Amazingly, these covered-face killers have unraveled the secret of how to outsmart every world power including the U.S. Empire with regard to every form of communication. They have stomped out the U.S. military, NSA, CIA, NATO, U.N. and the intelligence of Israel, U.K. and every other nation that surrounds them. You may think it's not every day that a small group of young face-covered kids can outsmart the world, but this could be attributed to pure luck if you believe in the ISIS psyop. Just to be able to say that you've outsmarted the U.S. Empire 13 years after they accelerated their plans to rule the world outlined in The Project for the New American Century document titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses." According to the ISIS psyop, that accomplishment alone is worthy of historic recognition.

Here's a group of young kids with covered faces who maintain Internet accounts without any past due balances, they have wide open social media accounts (Facebook? YouTube? Twitter?) that are also apparently well maintained. They must understand and be properly following the rules of these social media accounts. But wait, if they have social media accounts doesn't that mean that the social media providers are terrorists too? Unless these geniuses called ISIS are also fooling them as well. I suppose this would be realistic according to the government narrative since ISIS has apparently outsmarted everyone else.

Okay, forget social media, how is ISIS able to log on to the Internet? Do they have their own ISIS hackers?? Who do they pay their Internet bill with? Without Internet aren't they lost? No social media and no way of knowing what is going on right? I doubt they have analog TV in their convoys? Doesn't this present a communication problem? ISIS again quietly has overcome this problem in a flawless and mysterious manner.

4. ISIS Intelligence Operation Apparently Far Superior to CIA/Mossad

Amazingly this group of geniuses who have outsmarted the entire global intelligence community seem to have all the capabilities to put the U.S. Empire's CIA and their globalist partner Israel's Mossad to shame. ISIS has put on a clinic and has officially handed the U.S. and Israel their butts in the intelligence department. They not only formed right below their noses, they did it quickly, they figured out unanimously what their mission would be and all agreed on it. Football teams and all sports team for that matter throughout the world could learn from ISIS. ISIS apparently is teaching the world how a team works together. Imagine, the CIA's mainstream media would have us believe that ISIS is powerful and high in numbers. Really? How would you get that many people to agree on anything? Every NCAA coach would learn a lot from ISIS. Here's a group of young face-covered men who actually agree on everything. They even all agree not to attack Israel for no reason at all.

How quickly ISIS rose to power and fame and how they operate in such unity should strike everyone as very odd, yet the ISIS psyop narrative continues without missing a beat in regards to these technicalities and finer points. Any way we slice it, the ISIS psyop narratives has a group of kids with hidden faces who have revolutionized the concept of the "intelligence" operation. They solved the CIA Mossad and NSA problems and now are laughing at the global intelligence community. They did this at a time, by the way, even as uncharged innocent prisoners sit in George W Bush's Guantanamo illegal prison for life. Can you imagine what is going on in the minds of the men in Guantanamo hearing about ISIS?

5. Super Secret Database Holding the Secret Names and Identities of Their Members

Have you noticed that no one knows who ISIS is? What are their names? Why not snag up one or two of them and let the identities come out? No, not ONE member of ISIS is capturable or identified to the world. It's like they never existed. Not one wife, sister, brother, father, cousin, nephew, aunt, or uncle is speaking out. Apparently they never lived anywhere and never told their friends that they were going to join ISIS. Not one of the has a girlfriend or a spouse that would have spoken by now. No one has come out testifying that ISIS tried recruiting them. Oddly, we haven't even heard of an angry former girlfriend speaking out about the initial call, the recruiting effort or anything whatsoever. But without a powerful recruiting effort how did they recruit? Somehow they got around this one too. No one knows how. They simply came into being. Let that sink in.

6. Anti Surveillance Technology- Able to Avoid All Existing Surveillance

In the age of super advanced government biometric surveillance, tracking and spying, ISIS has one less problem than anyone in America. Unlike Americans who are constantly under the threat of being surveilled and spied on by the U.S. empire, ISIS lives free of the threat of technological surveillance of any kind. For some reason, their images, faces, voices and actions are not surveilled, tracked or recorded by those who can do it.

"Intelligence sources" are powerless in the face of ISIS. All of the U.S.'s NASA, NSA and USAF technology and equipment makes no difference when it's ISIS. Despite all this, amazingly we hear nothing about the U.S. military or NSA trying to steal or decode the ISIS counter surveillance technology. Oddly, the topic of ISIS's amazing counter-surveillance technological abilities is not talked about by anyone in the media or in Washington.

7. Endless Secret Water, Food, Farming and Meals Supply

Anyone who has served in the military knows that being a soldier makes you hungry. ISIS fighters definitely require lots of food and drinks that keep their energy up. You can't go around killing people just for not being part of ISIS without having plenty of energy and lots of water and drinks. Even in the military, working in the mess hall for some was a career. Why? Because someone has to do it.

When I was in the military I remember the supply specialists; their full time job was tagging along on our field trips, making sure the unit had enough food and water. When necessary, the supply guys had to go to work to make sure everything went smooth. So where is ISIS getting their supplies? Who's feeding them with food and water? Do they also own the farms? Do they grow their own food? Amazingly, according to the ISIS psyop they do. Or perhaps their food and water suppliers are all part of a secret operation being hidden by the world's new leader of counter intelligence, ISIS. And speaking of supplies, who's supplying their actual bullets? Ammunition? Guns without ammo are useless, so the question is where are they getting their bullets from?

8. All American Timing! - Common Enemies, Lucky Gift

ISIS is a unique group from which almost all their goals fit in perfectly with the Bush Neocon plans to militarily control the world. I covered this topic in a recent article. Amazingly, ISIS now happens to hate Russia, too, just like the United States. What are the odds? Bush Neocons controlling Obama and the globalists benefit greatly from more, not less, terrorism. An end to the War on Terror would leave the U.S. without the planned conquering of Syria and Iran and re-conquering Iraq. Without a bogeymonster like ISIS to provide the pretext for invading these countries (in some cases, again) the plan has no legs. That ISIS fits in perfectly with the Bush Neocon plans is merely a coincidence according to the ISIS psyop narrative. Like Lucky Larry Silverstein taking the day off only on 9/11/01 to go to an appointment after never missing work for years if ever at all. Luck, the narrators of the ISIS psyop would have you believe, is something that just happens and should be accepted without question.

But wait, ISIS is so close to Israel, they may attack Israel any given day. Given how fast they move, how well they operate together, their skillful blend of technology and brute force surely they could cause a historic massacre in Israel overnight and leave their trail of blood through large sections of Israel. Isn't that the stated goal of ISIS? IDF and Mossad have already failed to detect or stop ISIS in any way shape or form so I wouldn't expect them to provide much of a challenge for the ISIS powerhouse terror group. Given how brave they are, I would imagine they wouldn't have any problems getting the young men to volunteer for the big Israel attack.

The big Israel attack would gain them all the PR and Marketing they need. Isn't that the goal when someone opens up a social media account? Hasn't ISIS demonstrated in the supposed beheading videos that they are serious, they want everyone to know who they are and they want certain things? An attack on Israel would get them everything they want; yet, for another lucky reason (luck of the U.S. and Israel) ISIS doesn't seem motivated about pulling off the big damage/low-cost attack on Israel.

The irony gets even crazier here. According to U.S. politicians pushing the ISIS psyop narrative, ISIS is not only unwilling to attack Israel, which they could do in a day or two, they instead prefer to make plans to travel all the way to the other side of the world to attack the world's most powerful Empire of all time. Yes, they would rather risk getting caught, imprisoned or killed traveling halfway around the world than to go for an easy quick strike at Israel. And, for good measure, as if to flaunt their super counter-intelligence capabilities, they are willing to announce ahead of time their travel plans to fly halfway across the world to attack American cities.

So this previously incredible intelligence organization that outsmarted all of the world's intelligence agencies at once, is now giving away their plans before they even happen. Doesn't that sound like a monumental change in intelligence strategy from such a stellar counter-intelligence skilled violent organization? Apparently in the "new" ISIS philosophy they now give away their plans ahead of time knowing that NOT giving away their plans worked pretty well during their secret and rapid rise to power under everyone's noses. Keep in mind ISIS uses U.S. military gear which they accidentally "found" in Iraq. The military gear - including tanks, artillery weapons and high-powered guns - all just happened to work perfectly, and for good measure they apparently have all the ammunition to go with these weapons.

But wait, you might say, how can ISIS transport huge military equipment to the U.S. for an attack? Not one U.S. "intelligence source" seems to know the answer to this. Apparently ISIS is not just lucky like lucky Larry, they also have a lot of money (that no one seems to know the origin of) and they are very versatile. The ISIS engineers are apparently working on brand new smaller, easier to hide weapons that are not detectable by airport scanners or surveillance cameras. Is ISIS starting to sound like James Bond yet?

9. Complete Ongoing Immunity and Hidden Identities

Amazingly, ISIS is unknown to anyone (as mentioned in number 6). Even if their database is never discovered, ISIS is skilled at knowing when to wear their masks. I mean, you wouldn't want to be caught without your mask right? And if you are caught without your mask and someone videotapes you, does that mean they kill you? No big deal? How does that work? One thing we know is that ISIS thus far (and they have been around allegedly a few years) has been perfect at hiding their faces. Not ONE video or photo exists where one member of ISIS showed his face. Amazing? Yes, for a group that has regular social media and Internet access. Where are the images of these men that belong to ISIS and why hide your face anyway? This amazing stroke of luck of not having even one member show his face or having his identity known to the world is an amazing accomplishment given all the technology and media available as mentioned before.

With this ongoing face-hiding playing out to perfection, once again ISIS is schooling the world on how to be a criminal in the face of the global police state and get away with it. Do you realize someone you know or someone they know could be part of ISIS without anyone knowing? Is ISIS really Blackwater? Academi? You know, the U.S.'s private mercenary organization that likes to change its name all the time. Is this the reason why "ISIS" covers their face? Even James Bond could not successfully hide his identity for very long and he's just one person. Remember, we're talking about supposedly thousands if not tens of thousands of young men working as one without one of these men making a mistake. Try to imagine how ridiculous this really sounds. Ultimately, as long as secrecy of the faces of ISIS is maintained, we really don't know for sure just who ISIS really is. We know what the federal government would have us think, but humanity as a whole is now moving past this type of solution for procurement of legitimate information.

10. Untraceable Money and Endless Spending

Yes, according to government mouthpiece "experts" like Colonel Anthony Shaffer and others, we (the U.S. "intelligence sources") know a lot about ISIS. They have money, they are organized, etc. But think about it, how come they "know" so much about ISIS's financial abilities but don't "know" who funded them or what bank accounts they currently have?? U.S. and its allies' intelligence only "know" enough to scare you with ISIS but not enough to act to actually stop their banking activity. That would actually stop ISIS dead in its tracks wouldn't it? But nope, we don't want ISIS to go away too quickly. The script needs to play out doesn't it?

This script is indeed playing out, and America and the world is the audience watching the show. Those that are awakened stand in dismay at the level of propaganda we are seeing and are wondering what ridiculous narrative will the globalists spin next to get into Syria and continue into Iran? Others who wanted to believe mainstream media news but perhaps are intuitive enough to not be fooled yet again are scratching their head. We call that The WTF Moment.

While sadly others have seen this script before and for some reason they kind of liked it before. Perhaps they love the post-9/11 feeling of believing government and looking to it for protection from terrorism. Perhaps they love the police state and maybe they are comfortable being surveilled 24/7. Perhaps they know that the only way to maintain their sanity and their lifelong and hard-fought-for paradigm is to simply believe whatever mainstream media news says. This third group will welcome the CIA script.

It is this group (those that welcome the mainstream media script) that makes this next (information war) chess game between humanity's awakened segment and humanity's governing segment very interesting. This third (asleep) segment of humanity is playing out the last bit of fantasy left in their personal paradigms. Some of them would probably rather die than face reality. Some of them think they are "saving" themselves from reality. Reality, with some of these people, thus takes on the role of sin in that they want to save themselves from this consciousness. For others the same reality takes on a role of "insanity". The goal thus becomes to "preserve" their consciousness from this "insanity" or tin foil, crazy, lunatic, "conspiracy theories"- you get the picture.

That is how the ISIS psyop divides itself upon humanity. Recognizing the three primary forms of consciousness will help us arrive at a consensus on how to move forward to fix this problem. Let's hope that we (humanity) can figure it out quickly this time and with the fewest amount of lost lives. Let us pray for humanity and for the survival of the human race. Let's remember that all those logos, flags, ideologies, and concepts of governments are all just artificial agreements. Let's all try to see the biggest picture, which is that we are all part of a species (humanity) which is actually trying to kill itself off. Let's not let tiny individual samples of our own species ruin it for all of us. They've tried everything they have, so they have to start repeating their tactics. They are making the script easier for us all. Let's take advantage of this weakness they are showing. The weakness of lack of creativity. This lack of creativity is glaringly obvious to all of us now. The globalists are not very creative and they like to repeat their tactics. This is why history is a great tool to expose the globalists and their new world order.

Its been said and I declare again that those who ignore the lessons of history are bound to repeat it; never has this been more true than today. Here's a word of caution to those who still believe government's ongoing War on Terror. Look at the past, look at attacks of 9/11/01, don't you agree it didn't work out very well for us? And on top of that they took all our liberties away. This is a failed government. Are you going to trust them at a game where you are always the loser? Ask yourself, how did their phony war on terror improve your life last time? Why would this next round of ISIS be expected to be any different? Don't you want to thrive while you are alive? Then let go of government-engineered lies and narratives and see the greater agenda now for yourself. Then share this message with someone.

Bernie Suarez is an activist, critical thinker, radio host, musician, M.D, Veteran, lover of freedom and the Constitution, and creator of the Truth and Art TV project. He also has a background in psychology and highly recommends that everyone watch a documentary titled The Century of the Self. Bernie has concluded that the way to defeat the New World Order is to truly be the change that you want to see. Manifesting the solution and putting truth into action is the very thing that will defeat the globalists.

[Захумље]

Congressman Lynch, Former Ambassador, Blast Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for Supporting ISIS/Al Nusra

Sept. 5, 2014 (EIRNS)—"Saudi Arabia is led by a Sunni monarchy, the same branch of Islam whose extremist elements make up the violent Islamic State," wrote Boston Globe reporter Bryan Bender in a Sept. 5th article entitled, "U.S. Wants More from Saudis in Fight against Extremists." Bender says, "Counterterrorism experts in the U.S. worry Saudi Arabia is not exerting enough influence to undermine the group’s terrorist acts, including the recent beheadings of two American journalists."

Highlighting Rep. Stephen Lynch’s (D-MA) effort to declassify the 28 pages of the Congressional 9/11 report, Bender reports that Lynch "has proposed legislation to declassify still-secret U.S. intelligence information relating to Saudi support for the 9/11 hijackers," and then quotes Lynch on the current terrorist threat.

Representative Lynch, who heads the bipartisan Task Force on Terrorism and Proliferation Financing, says:

"I think the Saudis—and there are different elements within the Saudi leadership—have been promoting some of the Sunni factions that have been challenging Assad up in Syria. ... I think the Saudis in some capacity have been supporting the Al Nusra Front financially. ... There are probably a fair amount of Saudi citizens fighting for that group. Some of them went over to the Islamic State when they had success."

Bender quotes two well-known U.S. experts, former Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Chas Freeman, and retired Col. W. Patrick Lang, saying that Saudi Arabia should do more. Lang, the former head of the Middle East and South Asia section of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) says that "If you wish to really go after the Islamic State, a group of scholars can launch a campaign and denounce them for their view of Islam. You could attack this thing by undercutting its foundation." Freeman says that the Saudis are the "only ones" that can counter the IS’ "ideological bent."

But, "The Muslim leadership in Saudi Arabia would rather spend their time writing [religious edicts] on the color of women’s fingernail polish," James B. Smith, the American Ambassador to Saudi Arabia from 2009 to 2013, told the Globe.

Rep. Lynch will participate with Reps Walter Jones (R-N.C.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), and representatives of the 9/11 families, in a Tuesday, Sept. 9 press conference in 2360 Rayburn House Office Building, in support of their H. Res. 428 to declassify the secret 28 pages of the Joint Congressional Inquiry’s report on 9/11.

---

ISIS: Saudi-Qatari-Funded
Wahhabi Terrorists Worldwide

by Ramtanu Maitra

[PDF version of this article]

Aug. 25—The sudden emergence of another organized militant Islamist-terrorist group, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), aka the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), or simply IS, along the Iraqi-Syria borders, was not really "sudden" at all. A series of West-organized military actions, particularly the Iraq invasion of 2003, invasion of Libya in 2011, and arming and facilitating the passage of Islamists and terrorists, in the garb of freedom fighters, to Syria to dismantle the Assad regime, has served to bring together thousands of hard-core Islamic terrorists, from as many as 50 countries, who have for years been funded and indoctrinated by the Saudis, Qataris, and Kuwaitis, with the "kill them all" Wahhabi-Salafi vision of Islam, to establish what ISIS calls the Islamic State.

That state currently encompasses a swath of land stretching from the outskirts of Baghdad in the east, to the outskirts of Aleppo in Syria, bordering Lebanon and Turkey, in the west. Estimates of the number of fighters that might be affiliated with ISIS vary from more than 10,000, to as many as 17,000.

While many policy errors have contributed to creating this horror, there is one center of evil with the intention of spreading such brutal sectarian warfare, which destroys civilization and nation-states alike. This center is in London, often dubbed "Londonistan," for its role as a center for incubating international terrorists. As we review the history of the creation of ISIS below, keep in mind the reality that we are dealing here with a London imperial project being carried out through Saudi Arabia, other Gulf States, and sundry British tools.

Setting Up Sectarian War

Although this large group of Wahhabi-Salafi terrorists in Iraq and Syria, who are killing Shi'as, and grabbing large of tracts of land for setting up a Wahhabi-Salafi Caliphate, has been much better organized and trained over the decades, it is not altogether different from the London-organized, Saudi-funded, and Pakistan-trained mujahideen in the 1980s, who showed up in Afghanistan to drive out the invading Soviet military. While the objective of the mujahideen brought in by Western powers was to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan, and then become terrorists-for-hire, ISIS is busy setting up a Caliphate in Southwest Asia.

It is perhaps because of this distinction that the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, told reporters on Aug. 24, on his way to Afghanistan, that he believes ISIS is more of a regional threat, and is not currently plotting attacks against the U.S. or Europe. He also pointed out that there is no indication, as of now, that ISIS militants are engaged in "active plotting against the homeland, so it's different than that which we see in Yemen." In Yemen, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) has attempted attacks against Western countries.

There is no doubt that the threat that ISIS poses, as observed by General Dempsey, is a regional threat, and is primarily directed against Iran, Iran's allies, and Shi'as in general. But it also poses a serious threat to all Arab monarchies and countries such as Lebanon.

The objective of ISIS became evident from its actions in Iraq and Syria. It is clear that the staunchest promoters of anti-Shi'a ideology, which is aimed at undermining Shiite Iran, are the Saudi monarchy, the Qatari monarchy under the al-Thanis, and the Kuwaiti monarchy under the al-Sabahs. These monarchies are exporters of the Salafi-Wahhabi version of Sunni Islam, which does not accept Shi'as as Muslims, and considers them to be heretics who should be annihilated in order to purify Islam.

Saudi Fears and Coverups

Nonetheless, the rise of the ISIS and its military prowess, seen in its securing a large tract of land not too-distant from the Saudi Arabian borders, has evoked an existential fear in the House of Saud. In addition, the presence of thousands of Western jihadi fighters who could raise hell upon their return to their home countries, has also made the Americans, the British, the French, and some other European governments—friends of the Saudi-Qatari-Kuwaiti axis—a bit uneasy. In order to assuage their Western friends' fears, the Saudis have begun a propaganda campaign to convince others that they do not fund ISIS.

The West, with its vested interest in Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Gulf nations, has continued to defend Saudi Arabia; U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry went on record praising the Saudi Kingdom for donating $100 million to the UN Counter-Terrorism Centre. Riyadh is also spewing out the lie that the ISIS militants are not adherents to Wahhabism. In a statement to the Aug. 23 London-based Saudi news daily Asharq al-Awsat, a spokesperson for the Royal Embassy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in London said:

"Saudi Arabia wants the defeat and destruction of ISIS and other terrorist networks. Terrorist networks are as abhorrent to the government and people of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as they are to the governments and peoples of the rest of the world.... There have been suggestions that ISIS followers are members of some sort of Wahhabi absolutist sect. Indeed, certain UK media outlets often refer to Muslims within Saudi Arabia as Wahhabists. The unsubstantiated use of this invented connotation must end because it is untrue. Wahhabism is not a sect of Islam."

"Muhammad [Ibn] Abd Al-Wahhab was a scholar and jurist of the 18th century who insisted on the adherence to Qur'anic values and the teachings of the word of God as revealed to the Prophet Muhammad," the statement added. The Saudi spokesperson criticized Western media attempts to draw comparisons between Wahhabism and extremist ideology.

But some Western news media are not buying these denials by Riyadh and Washington about the Saudi-Qatari-Kuwaiti connections to ISIS. The British weekly The Spectator, on Aug. 21, alluded to the common ideology of the Saudi and ISIS Wahhabists: "Saudi Arabia is a close ally of Britain and a keen customer of our killing machines, and like most of the Arab states is hostile to lunatic elements like ISIS and Hamas. Yet they are part of the problem; like many Islamists, including those in Britain, the Saudis are happy to condemn ISIS in what they do but not their basic ideology, largely because it mirrors their own."

The article pointed out that "the Saudi hostility to ISIS could even be described in Freudian terms as the narcissism of small differences. ISIS is dangerous to them because for those raised in the Saudi version of Islam, the Islamic State's even more extreme interpretation is not a huge leap."

Wahhabi 'Peaceniks' of Yesteryear and Today's ISIS

In 1744, Muhammad ibn Saud and Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab swore a traditional Muslim oath, in which they promised to work together to establish a state run according to Islamic principles. Until that time, the al-Saud family had been accepted as conventional tribal leaders whose rule was based on longstanding, but vaguely defined, authority. Ibn Abd al-Wahhab labeled all those who disagreed with him heretics and apostates, which, in his eyes, justified the use of force in imposing both his beliefs and his political authority over neighboring tribes. This in turn led him to declare holy war (jihad) on other Muslims (neighboring Arab tribes), an act which would otherwise have been legally impossible under the rules of jihad.

In 1802, the Wahhabis captured Karbala in Iraq, and destroyed the tomb of the Shi'ite Imam Husayn. In 1803, the Wahhabis captured the holy city of Mecca. The Ottoman Turks became alarmed, and in 1811, dispatched Muhammad Ali, the Ottoman ruler of Egypt, to challenge the Wahhabis. He succeeded in re-imposing Ottoman sovereignty in 1813. Nearly a century later, in 1901, with Wahhabi help, Saudi emir Abd al-Aziz al-Saud recaptured Riyadh. Al-Saud's sovereignty over the Arabian peninsula grew steadily until 1924, when his dominance became secure. At that point, the Wahhabis went on a rampage throughout the peninsula, smashing the tombs of Muslim saints and imams, including the tomb of the Prophet's daughter Fatima. Saudi Arabia was officially constituted as a kingdom in 1932.[1]

In Newsweek July 8, Lucy Westcott wrote, "The Islamist militant group ISIS has been destroying Iraq's Shiite mosques and religious shrines as it continues to put pressure on the country and further its extreme agenda. The AFP reported that four shrines that commemorated Sunni Arab or Sufi figures have been destroyed, while six Shiite mosques were demolished. The destruction seems to have been limited to Iraq's northern Nineveh province, including militant-held Mosul. One local resident told Al-Arabiya that members of the group had also occupied the Chaldean cathedral and the Syrian Orthodox cathedral, both in Mosul, removing their crosses and replacing them with the black flag of the Islamic State."

There is another hallmark that ties Wahhabism with ISIS like an umbilical cord. Human Rights Watch reported recently that Saudi Arabia has beheaded 19 people since the beginning of August. Some confessions may have been gained under torture, and one poor defendant was found guilty of sorcery. Beheading of Kafirs (in Arabic, a slur to describe non-believers) is also the high-profile act of both ISIS and al-Qaeda under Sheikh Osama bin Laden, another group that was a beneficiary of Saudi money and wide-ranging Gulf support.

ISIS beheaded the American journalist James Foley recently in Iraq; while another American journalist, Daniel Pearl, was beheaded in 2002 in Pakistan. In both cases, videos of the beheadings were widely circulated to rev up emotions among the Wahhabis.

The Financing of ISIS

In 2011, in Syria, when President Obama, Prime Minister David Cameron, and President François Hollande joined forces to remove Syria's elected President Bashir al-Assad from power, and thus deal a body blow to the Russians and the Iranians, who acknowledge Assad's legitimacy, not-so-militant groups within were bolstered by attaching them to well-trained Salafi-Wahhabi terrorists from a number of countries. While the Western countries were quite generous with arms, and worked with the neighboring countries to facilitate entry of arms into Syria, the bulk of the money came from the Salafi-Wahhabi bastions of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Kuwait.

Despite denials issued from Riyadh and Doha to quiet gullible Westerners, the funding of various Sunni groups seeking to establish Salafism and Wahhabism in a number of countries has long been well-documented. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), for example, who is keen to see Assad, and the Russian influence over Syria, vanish altogether, praised the Saudis and Qataris for financial help lent to the Syrian "rebels," in a discussion on CNN, in January 2014,

"Thank God for the Saudis and Prince Bandar, and for our Qatari friends," the Senator repeated at the Munich Security Conference in late January. McCain praised Prince Bandar bin Sultan, head of Saudi Arabia's intelligence services and a former ambassador to the United States, for supporting forces fighting Assad in Syria. McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) had previously met with Bandar to encourage the Saudis to arm Syrian rebel forces.[2]

But McCain was a bit off the mark. At the time he was bloviating on CNN, the "rebel" power in Syria was already firmly in the hands of ISIS—now an enemy of the U.S. Indeed, in Syria, where the moderate Friends of Syria (those who, according to what the White House conveyed to the American people in 2011-13, were the recipient of arms thanks to American and other Western largesse), Jabhat al-Nusra (a faction of al-Qaeda), and ISIS worked together in the early stages of the West-orchestrated and Saudi-Qatari-Kuwaiti-funded anti-Assad militancy. These groups used to carry their flags together during militant operations against Damascus; but that changed, and the Salafi-Wahhabis, having seized arms and ammunition from their earlier collaborators, became the powerhouse.

Now, it is evident that ISIS has enough killing power to loot and extort funds to sustain itself, and even grow.

How Saudi Money Created Foreign Wahhabi Terrorists

In 2010, Britain's news daily The Guardian citing Wikileaks, Dec. 5, 2010, quoted U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying that Saudi Arabia is the world's largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups such as the Afghan Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)—but the Saudi government is reluctant to stem the flow of money. Both the Afghan Taliban and the LeT espouse the Wahhabi version of orthodox Islam. "More needs to be done," wrote The Guaridan, "since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaida, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups, says a secret December 2009 paper signed by the US secretary of state. Her memo urged US diplomats to redouble their efforts to stop Gulf money reaching extremists in Pakistan and Afghanistan."

"Donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide," she said.

Three other Arab countries are listed as sources of militant money: Qatar, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. The cables highlight an often ignored factor in the Pakistani and Afghan conflicts: that the violence is partly bankrolled by rich, conservative donors across the Arabian Sea whose governments do little to stop them. The problem is particularly acute in Saudi Arabia, where militants soliciting funds slip into the country disguised as holy pilgrims, set up front companies to launder funds, and receive money from government-sanctioned charities.

In other words, a small fraction of the Saudi money may have gone directly to ISIS, but it is definitely Saudi money that armed and trained terrorists in Russia's Chechnya, Dagestan, North Ossetia, Ingushetia; in Pakistan; along the Afghanistan-Pakistan borders; in the Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan belt in Central Asia and also in Europe, particularly in Britain's Londonistan. These militants have come in droves to the Syrian theater with their expertise to boost ISIS's killing power.

In short, the Saudis have shipped money, sermons, and volunteers to Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Russia's North Caucasus, just as they're doing now in Syria. In Chechnya, Saudis such as Ibn al-Khattab, Abu al-Walid, and Muhannad (all noms de guerre) indoctrinated, armed, and trained militants who mired the Chechens in an endless war that killed some 160,000 people, while forcing Chechen women into Saudi-style isolation, and throwing Chechnya, Dagestan, Ingushetia, and North Ossetia into turmoil. Many of these jihadis are now on full display in the Syria-Iraq theater on behalf of ISIS.

In Afghanistan, Saudi money, and the Pakistani military, backed by Saudi money and support, have created a relatively small, but hardcore, Wahhabi capability in a number of provinces. Although these Afghan Taliban were not notably visible in either Syria or Iraq, they have helped facilitate movement of Saudi-funded Wahhabi terrorists coming down from the north to participate in the Caliphate-formation war in Iraq and Syria.

In Pakistan, myriad Saudi-financed Wahhabi and anti-Shi'a terrorists are growing in strength, and trying establish inroads into the Pakistani military; while in Afghanistan, the Saudi- and opium-funded Taliban, spewing Wahhabi venom, are trying to seize power again. In addition, Saudi money is also being distributed to build bases in several nations for recruitment and training of jihadis for future operations. It is evident that such a widespread operation cannot be carried out in stealth for years; it is therefore fair to assume that such base-building is done in collaboration with the targeted nation's intelligence community. These recruits remain available for use by the mother-nation. This became visible when the Libyan Islamic Fighters Group (LIFG) was used to dismantle the Libyan state and kill Colonel Qaddafi. Pakistan and Britain are two important centers where the Saudis operate hand-in-glove with those nations' intelligence apparatus.

Britain in the Spotlight

Take, for instance, the recent beheading of the American photo-journalist James Foley by a British jihadi working with ISIS. Whether the British jihadi actually carried out the execution, or not, it was evident that ISIS was keen to project its strength, boasting that it has muscle in developed countries, such as Britain. And, indeed, it has.

The identified British jihadi was a product of the East London Mosque, situated at the heart of Londonistan, in the borough of Tower Hamlets in East London. Londonistan is a world unto itself, where British intelligence recruits and trains Saudi-funded radical and criminal Sunni Muslims to kill and assassinate, and then deploys them wherever needed to serve the "Empire's interest."

Tower Hamlets is where the Shi'a-hating radical Saudi cleric and head Imam of Mecca, Sheikh Adel al-Kalbani (who last year was refused entry into Britain) went to meet local council leaders for a "private meeting" in 2008. He was the guest of the Mayor of Tower Hamlets, Lutfur Rahman, a fanatic Islamist who heads the Saudi-funded Jamaat-e-Islami in Britain. According to a Bangladeshi journalist, Tower Hamlets has been converted into the "Islamic Republic of Tower Hamlets" under the mayor. That statement was right on the mark.

On Aug. 9, The Guardian reported that some 20 Asian youths had gathered around the Tower Hamlets gates, where a black flag, resembling that of ISIS, was hoisted. The flag was subsequently taken down by a Catholic nun.

Tower Hamlets is one of many centers where the Saudis breed their Wahhabi recruits. In 2013, when Sheikh al-Kalbani was denied entry to the U.K., followers of radical hate preacher Anjem Choudary, spokesman for the Islamist group Islam4UK, led a demonstration in London in May against Shi'a Muslims, three years after Islam4UK was officially proscribed, on Jan. 14 2010, under the U.K.'s counter-terrorism laws. In other words, the proscription of Islam4UK is a paper job to cover up that group's activities.

It is also evident that the Saudi funding for Wahhabi-indoctrinated jihadi fighters has not gone to waste. Among the ISIS foreign fighters, the Londonistan-created jihadists are the largest and most dominant group. The Telegraph, in an Aug. 21 article, "More British Muslims fight in Syria than in U.K. Armed Forces," cited Khalid Mahmood, the Member of Parliament from Birmingham, another recruiting and training center of Londonistan, saying that "1,500 British Muslims have gone to wage jihad since 2011, as opposed to the 400-500 the government estimates and the 650 serving in the British armed forces."

[1] Ted Thornton, "The Wahhabi Movement, Eighteenth Century Arabia," Islam Daily, Dec. 7, 2004.

[2]Steve Clemons, "Thank God for the Saudis: ISIS, Iraq, and the Lessons of Blowback," The Atlantic,June 23, 2014.

[Захумље]

US Will Use ‘ISIS Airstrikes’ in Syria as Aircover for Rebels, Hit Syrian Military Targets
SEPTEMBER 12, 2014 BY 21WIRE 5 COMMENTS
Pat3_colorPatrick Henningsen
21st Century Wire

President Obama’s much celebrated ISIS(L) ‘strategy’ speech came on Tuesday night amid great fanfare and even greater debate. Sure, he outlined a strategy, but the President has been harboring another hidden agenda – one you won’t get a straight answer on.

Obama rode a wave of public outrage and fear into Tuesday’s address, mostly due to the extensive media coverage of the alleged murders of two American journalists, James Foley and Steven Sotloff – a drama played out on Youtube of all places. The beheadings were important in this process because they set the US military media campaign into hyper-drive. The timing in the run-up to the 9/11 anniversary seemed uncanny.

Obama’s public agenda is the one you can see on the table, one where the US officials promise to “degrade and destroy ISIS”. Sounds great. Who can disagree with that?

Then there’s the hidden agenda, somewhere under the table, and not really up for rational debate. That’s probably because it’s highly illegal and has something to do with what started the ISIS crisis to begin with.

This is how Obama plans to sneak back in and re-ignite with last year’s failed bombing campaign that never was in Syria. He explains, “I have made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria.”


SLIPPERY WHEN WET: Obama twisting and turning to hide the real agenda to ‘degrade and destroy’ Bashar al Assad in Syria.

Put aside for a minute that any US airstrikes conducted inside Syria without consultation from the Syrian government would be classed by international law and perhaps even by the UN as an act of war against Syria.

The central flaw in all of this is that Washington has no real policy on Syria other than hyperbole. Any policies it does have are centered around clandestine and illegal operations there. US officials will spout now and again how, “we do not recognize Syria as a sovereign state”, even though the US has no legal basis on which to maintain such a position. They simply announce in 2011 that, “Assad must go”, ala regime change per usual.

Obama tried to explain Tuesday evening, “In the fight against ISIL, we cannot rely on an Assad regime that terrorizes its people; a regime that will never regain the legitimacy it has lost.”

Instead the US only recognizes the fabled “Free Syria Army” – more of a concept than an actual army, as the legitimate governing body in Syria. So much so, that for the last 3 years Washington and its agencies like the CIA have been supporting and arming this proxy guerrilla fighting force – in effect driving a bloody civil war inside Syria.

Ironically (well, not really), the US has been doing the very thing that it’s been accusing (but has yet to prove) the Russians of doing in Eastern Ukraine. If any other country did what the US is doing in Syria, it would be roundly condemned by the US as ‘violating the sovereignty of Syria’ and disrespecting what John Kerry too often refers to as ‘international norms’. But for Obama, John Kerry, McCain and company, they’ve given themselves a free pass. That’s American exceptionalism.

Syrian Rebels Are Actually Working with ISIS

The President is pulling the wool over Americans’ eyes when he tries to sell them the idea that more money, arms and training for his ‘moderate Syrian opposition’ will somehow degrade The Islamic State in Syria. The absence of logic here is pretty stunning.

“Across the border, in Syria, we have ramped up our military assistance to the Syrian opposition. Tonight, I again call on Congress to give us additional authorities and resources to train and equip these fighters”, said Obama.

What he really means here is, ‘this seems like a good opportunity to get another half billion in Congressional funding for our proxy army in Syria’. If Congress won’t pass it, he’ll go the dictator route. Notice how Obama was careful not to call it a “war”.

The Myth of the ‘Moderate Rebel’ in Syria

The problem with the ‘Moderate Rebels’ is that Washington has never been able to identify who’s moderate and who’s borderline radical, and who are closet Islamic extremists. Rather inconvenient for spooks and politicians in Washington, rebel fighters in Syria don’t carry I.D. bracelets indicating how extreme they are or will be in the future.

It is this very problem which helped to enable the growth of ISIS inside Syria over the last three years. As foreign money, guns and NON-SYRIAN foreign fighters began to flow into Syria, the US and its allies turned a blind eye to a host of known terrorist groups and their heinous acts, as they infested the region from outside (including hundreds of British, French, and American terror recruits), including al Qaeda, AQI, al Nusra, Front Victory, and of course, ISIS.

Like it or not, that is what has hapened over the last three years. The logic in Washington and London was basically, “whoever is fighting the Syrian government is OK by us. We want regime change, so the end justifies the means”.

Yes, US and NATO guns and equipment have moved from FSA hands to ISIS hands, and US special forces have knowingly or unknowingly (only they know) trained and armed future ISIS terrorists in Jordan. That’s not a theory, that’s a fact. Still, no comment from Washington.

Here’s the real kicker. Even today, as the FSA/Moderate Rebels being backed by the US – they are also working together in joint operations with ISIS. Beirut’s Daily Star reported this week:

“Often at odds on the Syrian battlefields, the FSA, Nusra Front and ISIS have entered a tenuous allegiance of convenience to fight Assad-aligned forces in the badlands surrounding Arsal.

“We are collaborating with the Islamic State and the Nusra Front by attacking the Syrian Army’s gatherings in … Qalamoun,” said Bassel Idriss, the commander of an FSA-aligned rebel brigade.
“We have reached a point where we have to collaborate with anyone against unfairness and injustice,” confirmed Abu Khaled, another FSA commander who lives in Arsal.”
So Obama wants to fund and arm rebels working with ISIS(L) in Syria. His plan will give aid and comfort to ISIS. On this basis alone, the Obama ‘strategy’ should be disqualified and the president should be dragged in front of a hearing to explain himself. Look at how we got here in the first place. Another $500 million dollars into the hands of these ‘moderate rebels’ will only yield more of the same – more well-equipped jihadist fighters marauding through Syria and Iraq. More ISIS.

Of course, even a Middle East novice knows full well that that in addition to all the residual aid and arms from Washington and the CIA, terror brigades like al Nusra and ISIS wave been financed and assisted by persons and intelligence agents in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Kuwait – all staunch US and British allies. ISIS would be history in a fortnight if the west applied real pressure on the Gulf monarchies responsible for terrorist infestations like the Islamic State and al Nusra. But that will never happen, because as any State Department official will tell you off the record, “It’s a very sensitive issue. There are grey areas there.” I think ‘duplicitous’ is the word they are really looking for.

Still, President Obama will go in front of the country with a straight face and try to sell the fiction – as a cheap trick to reboot his and the Neocon’s so far unsuccessful nation-building project in Syria.


US Will Use Airstrikes to Direct its Civil War in Syria.

Think about it: only 12 months after failing to secure another WMD narrative laying blame on Bashar al Assad and the Syrian government, the US military machine has done the impossible and found a new backdoor into Syria.

We’ve been observing US airstrikes overseas for a few decades now, long enough to understand the reality beyond Pentagon propaganda. Not to be naive, expect that the US will certainly use any air strikes in Syria to offer real time air intel to the rebels, provide air cover, and create much-needed corridors for the FSA Syrian rebels.

In addition, the US would not lose the opportunity to test all of Syria’s air defense systems and generate extensive target lists, eventually using the cover of their ‘ISIL Operation’ to hit key Syrian military targets. The deception will be carried out under a complete media blackout, with no western media reporting ‘wrong targets’ or ‘mistakes’. Any such attack will not exist from a western perspective, and only the Syrian and Lebanese news agencies will report these incidents

The US debate has already reached confusing and insane levels, with US pundits arguing that, “airstrikes could be problematic because ISIS is also fighting against the Syrian government and if we strike ISIS in Syria, this could actual provide relief to Assad which is not good for the US”.


Worthless Coalition

Obama claims he’s gathered a broad ‘coalition of the willing’, but in reality, there is no coalition, at least no one willing to get their hands dirty on the ground.

Beyond Americans’ willful denial and refusal to recognize Syria and its people, is the fact that of all countries in the Middle East, no one has done more to fight extremist terrorists on the ground than Bashar al Assad and the Syrian military. No one has spilled more blood than the people of Syria.

In a logical world, if the real objective was to eliminate ISIS, then you would expect that Washington would want to sit down with both the Syria and Iraqi govt’s in order to form a strategy to flush out and destroy the ISIS brigades. With that level of coordination, the terror group could be wiped out in a matter of weeks, but that cannot happen because the US is playing their double agenda. The fact that the US is not coordinating with Syria and Iraq together shows more than anything, that the US is not fully committed to flushing out ISIS, and seems much more interested in regime change in Syria. One only needs to look at Libya today to get an idea of how bad Washington can be get it wrong on such important geopolitical matters.

A coalition without, Iraq, Greater Kurdistan, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan and Iran – all together, is a meaningless coalition. That looks to be the case here. Lebanon is not invited because of their links to Syria. Iran is out because they have already been designated as a pariah state by the US and Israel and therefore are not allowed to participate in anything, not to mention they are the wrong branch of Islam for American planners. Syria is obviously out because the US has vowed not to recognize that state until Washington has installed their own government in Damascus. Jordan cannot participate because Jordan has been instrumental in providing training and refuge for foreign fighters heading into Syria. NATO member Turkey has also gone conspicuously quiet because it has allowed itself to be used as both a staging ground and well as a safe haven for extremist and ISIS fighters inside Turkish borders just over Syria’s the northern border.

---

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/se...trike-plan

[Захумље]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...bbott.html

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...e39665.htm

[Захумље]

http://cassad-eng.livejournal.com/100067.html

[Захумље]

http://www.aina.org/news/20140922152404.htm

---

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ights.html

[Захумље]

http://hendersonlefthook.wordpress.com/2...mbs-syria/
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/20...tisil.html
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/09/23/...sil-syria/.....???

[Захумље]

The Real Reasons For U.S. Airstrikes In Syria – Breaking The Assad Regime

By Brandon Turbeville
Global Research, September 25, 2014
Activist Post 24 September 2014
Region: Middle East & North Africa
Theme: US NATO War Agenda, Women's Rights
In-depth Report: SYRIA: NATO'S NEXT WAR?
7 4 0 18


bombing liberty statue
Image: Anthony Freda Art

With the recent and ongoing airstrikes launched against Syria by the United States and its “regional” and NATO allies, a number of questions have arisen from a variety of quarters who remain entirely confused as to the ongoing angles of the players involved in the Syrian crisis. Confusion, of course, is a natural state resulting from the mainstream media’s attempt to conceal the fact that the United States and NATO/GCC are entirely responsible for the Syrian crisis to begin with as well as for the massive seizure of territory across Iraq and Syria by ISIS militants. These same media outlets have also played a major role in the obfuscation of the understanding of the crisis by providing false delineations and name changes bound to confuse an American population already afflicted with a short attention span.

With even the basic facts surrounding the Syrian crisis forced into obscurity by mass ignorance of their existence, the facts surrounding the recent US bombing of Syria have also given way to more questions.

For that reason, a number of points must be made regarding the recent events and those that will unfold in the future inside Syria.

Information Does Not Equal Coordination

The recent airstrikes by the United States and its allies allegedly against ISIS positions in Syria have been soundly condemned by both Iran and Russia. Both countries have accurately pointed out that the airstrikes were a violation of Syria’s national sovereignty and a violation of international law. Syria, however, has refrained from outrage and has even stated that the United States informed it of the attacks before they took place.

Syria’s reaction has caused many to believe one of two things: First, that the United States truly is focused on eliminating ISIS; and, second, that the United States and Syria are now working together to achieve this end.

Despite Syria’s forbearance, however, the truth is far from either of these ideas. The United States is in no way interested in destroying its own proxy army nor is it interested in working with the secular Assad government. After all, Assad and the Syrian government are the ultimate target of the West to begin with.

It is thus very important to note that informing Syria of attacks taking place on its soil is not the same as coordinating those attacks or cooperating with the Syrian government. In other words, information is not the same as cooperation.

The United States has repeatedly stated that it refuses to coordinate any airstrikes with the Syrian government and responded with an Orwellian statement that it would oust Assad military if he dare defend himself against American attacks.
Even Congressman Justin Amash, during the Congressional debate on whether or not to support arming the mythical “moderate rebels,” was able to recognize the fact that the plans to “detect and degrade” ISIS was a clever disguise for a war on the secular government of Syria with no options off the table, including the use of ground troops.
In his own statement announcing his opposition to the amendment, Amash stated,

Today’s amendment ostensibly is aimed at destroying ISIS—yet you’d hardly know it from reading the amendment’s text. The world has witnessed with horror the evil of ISIS: the public beheading of innocents, the killing of Christians, Muslims, and others.
The amendment’s focus—arming groups fighting the Assad government in Syria—has little to do with defeating ISIS. The mission that the amendment advances plainly isn’t the defeat of ISIS; it’s the defeat of Assad.

[...]

The Obama administration has tried to rally support for U.S. involvement in the Syrian civil war by implying that our help would be at arm’s length. The amendment Congress will vote on broadly authorizes “assistance” to groups in Syria. It does not specify what types of weapons our government will give the groups. It does not prohibit boots on the ground. (The amendment is silent on the president’s power to order our troops to fight in the civil war; it states only that Congress doesn’t provide “specific statutory authorization” for such escalation.) It does not state the financial cost of the war.

[...]

If the Syrian groups that are “appropriately vetted” (the amendment’s language) succeed and oust Assad, what would result? Would the groups assemble a coalition government of anti-Assad fighters, and would that coalition include ISIS? What would happen to the Alawites and Christians who stood with Assad? To what extent would the U.S. government be obligated to occupy Syria to rebuild the government? If each of the groups went its own way, would Syria’s territory be broken apart, and if so, would ISIS control one of the resulting countries?While Amash was correct to suggest that Congress should have opposed the amendment and that the amendment was actually a plan for an assault against the Syrian government as well as the fact that that anarchy, chaos, and unspeakable violence will reign supreme in Syria if the “appropriately vetted” groups managed to gain control of the country, Amash does miss part of the point.

The truth is not that “we don’t know much about the groups we are funding in Syria.” The truth is that “we” know full well that they are ISIS/Al-Qaeda terrorists, with only an occasional name change and branch off due to Western political motives or internal squabbling. That has been and still is the whole point.

Assad’s refusal to react in frothing rage and declarations of war could very well be an attempt to save face in the eyes of world opinion and in the eyes of the Syrian people. The only other options available to the Syrian government would be to shoot down the American fighter jets and sign Syria’s death warrant or to denounce the attacks and seem impotent when it comes to defending against them. Considering the options at the moment, one can clearly see how admission of foreknowledge with no immediate consequences directed at the United States might seem to be the best available selection.

Who Were The Actual Targets?

The low level of death squad casualties resulting from the U.S. airstrikes brings to mind one question – Were the airstrikes really meant to deal a significant blow to IS? After all, the bombing in areas like Deir al-Zor would have produced minimal results against IS to begin with since the Western-backed terrorists conveniently began leaving the city and many of their positions days ago.

Indeed, the SAA had already launched an offensive against death squad positions in Deir al-Zor, causing many observers to assume that the military assault was the reason IS and its “moderate” terrorist affiliates began evacuation. However, six days later, after bombs and missiles were rained down upon the city and surrounding areas, the reasons for death squad evacuation have become clearer to avoid U.S. airstrikes and move north to reinforce other IS battalions. Thus, one must ask whether or not the IS terrorists were evacuating for fear of defeat at the hands of the SAA or on the orders of the USA?

In addition, while some mainstream outlets have attempted to claim that the death squads “simply managed to escape” Deir al-Zor in order to avoid being struck by US airstrikes, the question then remains how they would have been aware of the bombing plans when even Assad was not informed until the last minute. Thus, any media outlet that claims this is the reason for low casualities among the terrorists is admitting to the fact that the terrorists had some kind of forewarning. Otherwise, how would they have known to evacuate these specific areas? Was it by intuition? Did they have a crystal ball? Or were they warned and/or ordered by their NATO commanders to reconfigure their forces in other locations?

Bombing Campaign Or Death Squad Herding?
The fact that the terrorist casualties were much lower than one would have expected considering the previously heavy presence of fighters in the area should lead one to question the true objective of the bombing mission. After all, some reports even put the number of dead civilians higher than that of dead terrorists.

Yet, with the terrorists evacuating Deir al-Zor, cities and towns such as Kobani (Ayn El Arab) have seen a dramatic rise in the presence of IS fighters. In short, IS may have reduced the amount of fighters in Deir al-Zor but it has reinforced its positions at Ayn El Arab, a smaller town but one located on the Turkish border. Significantly, the Turkish border has facilitated tens of thousands of death squad fighters in their access to Syria over the last four years making it a main artery for the influx of Western-backed foreign jihadis into Syria.

The Huffington Post reported the situation in Ayn El Arab by recording the statement of a Syrian Kurd who had fled into Turkey with his family to escape IS. The report is revealing as to how the situation in Ayn El Arab disintegrated after the bombing of Deir al-Zor and the “escape” of terrorists from that city and region. The article reads,

“Because of the bombing in Raqqa, Islamic State has taken all of their weapons and brought them here. There are more and more Islamic State fighters in the last two days, they have brought all their forces here,” said Ahmed Hassan, 60, a Syrian Kurd who fled to Turkey with his family.

“They have heavy weapons. We are running away from them. YPG haven’t got heavy weapons. That’s why we need help,” he said, referring to the main Kurdish armed group.

Thus, the new assault on Ayn El Arab might very well be an attempt to re-secure and reopen the Turkish/Syrian border so as to allow even greater numbers of IS fighters and military equipment to flood into Syria. It also goes some distance in aiding the future creation of a “buffer zone,” in Northern Syria, a wish of NATO since the beginning of the Syrian crisis.With the establishment of this “buffer zone,” a new staging ground will be opened that allows terrorists such as ISIS and others the ability to conduct attacks even deeper inside Syria.

Working together with its NATO/GCC allies as well as the ever-present provocateur Israel, the United States is helping to create a buffer zone in the North and East of Syria while continuing to facilitate the opening of a “third front” on the Syrian border with Israel.
Such a strategy was discussed in 2012 by the Brookings Institution in its publication “Assessing Options For Regime Change,” where it stated
An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under Annan’s leadership. This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power. This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts.

[...]

In addition, Israel’s intelligence services have a strong knowledge of Syria, as well as assets within the Syrian regime that could be used to subvert the regime’s power base and press for Asad’s removal. Israel could posture forces on or near the Golan Heights and, in so doing, might divert regime forces from suppressing the opposition. This posture may conjure fears in the Asad regime of a multi-front war, particularly if Turkey is willing to do the same on its border and if the Syrian opposition is being fed a steady diet of arms and training. Such a mobilization could perhaps persuade Syria’s military leadership to oust Asad in order to preserve itself. Advocates argue this additional pressure could tip the balance against Asad inside Syria, if other forces were aligned properly.

Are The Airstrikes Designed To Provoke Assad?
One possibility of the purpose US airstrikes in Syria is that the aggressive presence of the U.S. military is in reality an attempt to poke and prod Assad into shooting down an American aircraft. As American planes currently act as a deadly and mechanical sheepdog to the terrorist herd, it is quite likely that the mission will creep closer and closer to Damascus and government-held territory. This “mission creep” will likely begin in and around the Aleppo region since the city and surrounding areas are strategically significant with heavy fighting taking place between government forces and the Western-backed death squads.

As these airstrike missions grow closer and closer to government-held territory and Syrian military forces, perhaps even making the occasional “mistake” of hitting SAA military installations or soldiers, Syria will be forced into a walking a tight rope between defending itself against open US military aggression before it inflicts too much damage to Syria’s military capabilities or responding in kind and sealing its own fate against the superior US Air Force. As Tony Cartalucci writes,

For now, Syria and its allies must formulate carefully a strategy that resists overreaction to immense provocations, understand the true nature of America’s aggression, determining whether it was exercised from a position of strength or immense weakness, and devise countermeasures that accommodate long-term consequences of America’s current campaign. A balance between allowing the West to exhaust its last desperate options, but preventing long-term entrenchment of Western-backed proxies must be struck.

At the end of the day, it is important to remember that the U.S. airstrikes against Syria are nothing more than a farce. The death squads running amok in Syria are themselves entirely creatures of NATO and they remain under NATO’s command. The true enemy of ISIS, Khorasan, and the cannibals of the Levant has always been and continues to be Bashar al-Assad.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina.

---

Turkey Preparing for Syria Occupation?

By Tony Cartalucci
Global Research, September 25, 2014
Land Destroyer Report
Region: Middle East & North Africa
Theme: US NATO War Agenda
In-depth Report: SYRIA: NATO'S NEXT WAR?
0 3 0 11


syrian refugees
As Western-backed terrorists drive allegedly tens of thousands of refugees into Turkish territory, and amid what is being called a “sustainable, persistent campaign” of air assaults, missile strikes, and other assorted attacks on Syrian territory, the West is preparing to dust off plans to establish a “buffer zone” in northern Syria protected by NATO troops – particularly from Turkey.
Hurriyet Daily News in its article, “Turkey’s top soldier inspects troops on Syrian border as gov’t signals joining anti-ISIL bid, ” indicated Turkey was preparing to join the unilateral, illegal strikes on Syria led by the US and backed by several Persian Gulf autocracies. Hurriyet reported:

Turkey’s land forces commander inspected troops along the Syrian border on Sept. 24, as the Turkish government signaled a policy change in actively joining the international coalition led by the United States against the jihadist threat in Iraq and Syria.

Land Forces Commander Gen. Hulusi Akar visited Turkey’s military facilities and troops deployed along the Syrian border, where he was briefed by officers in the field.

Turkey boosted its military presence along the Syrian border to deal with refugee influx in recent years and with the potential Syrian offensive last year. There are also reports that the army has intensified its military mobility in the region after the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) attacked the Syrian Kurds in the Kobane region bordering Turkey.




Image: Even maps of ISIS territory used by the Western media reveal well-
defined corridors leading from Turkish territory and into both Syria and
Iraq. It is clear that ISIS is not a “state,” but rather an invasion and
occupation originating from NATO territory.


While last year’s planned military offensive was to directly strike at the Syrian Arab Army for provocations later revealed to have been false flag attacks carried out against Turkey by the Turkish government itself, it appears that now the so-called “Islamic State,” (ISIS) will serve as cover for NATO’s extraterritorial ambitions.

ISIS, which is neither Islamic, nor a state,is the culmination of years of US, European, Persian Gulf, and Turkish cash, weapons, and semi-covert support.

Turkey in particular has served as a safe haven for ISIS terrorists for the past 3-4 years. In fact, maps showing ISIS’ territory across the Western media have clearly defined corridors leading directly from Turkish territory. The billions in cash, weapons, equipment, and even vehicles used to build what is now a mercenary force contesting power simultaneously in three nations – Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq – were provided by nations like Saudi Arabia and Qatar and funneled into terrorist hands by US CIA agents operating along Turkey’s border with Syria.

Despite the rhetorical shell game of renaming this mercenary force to confuse an unwitting public, no other explanation accounts for the scale of ISIS’ operations beyond concerted multinational state-sponsorship. If Syria, Lebanon, Iran, and Iraq are fighting ISIS, through the process of elimination, these state-sponsors – whether they admit it or not – can be easily identified.

Turkey’s Planned Occupation of Syria is a Documented Conspiracy

Carving off territory from Syria and creating “buffer zones” was part of the US agenda in Syria for years – long before the threat of ISIS was wielded as a potential pretext for direct US military intervention. ISIS is simply the latest construct being used to implement the strategy.

While the idea of a buffer zone is meant to look like the latest honest attempt to solve a growing regional crisis and to “win” the war in Syria, in reality this has been planned since at least March of 2012, where the idea was proposed by the corporate-financier funded Brookings Institution in their “Middle East Memo #21″ “Assessing Options for Regime Change” where it stated specifically (emphasis added):

“An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under Annan’s leadership. This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power. This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts.”


Image: The Brookings Institution, Middle East Memo #21 “Assessing Options for Regime Change (.pdf),” makes no secret that the humanitarian “responsibility to protect” is but a pretext for long-planned regime change. Failing to sell the “humanitarian intervention,” the old “War on Terror” has been dusted off and utilized as a pretext.
Brookings continues by describing how Turkey’s aligning of vast amounts of weapons and troops along its border in coordination with Israeli efforts in the south of Syria, could help effect violent regime change in Syria (emphasis added):

In addition, Israel’s intelligence services have a strong knowledge of Syria, as well as assets within the Syrian regime that could be used to subvert the regime’s power base and press for Asad’s removal. Israel could posture forces on or near the Golan Heights and, in so doing, might divert regime forces from suppressing the opposition. This posture may conjure fears in the Asad regime of a multi-front war, particularly if Turkey is willing to do the same on its border and if the Syrian opposition is being fed a steady diet of arms and training. Such a mobilization could perhaps persuade Syria’s military leadership to oust Asad in order to preserve itself. Advocates argue this additional pressure could tip the balance against Asad inside Syria, if other forces were aligned properly.

Clearly, a “buffer zone” is the next step for Western designs aimed at exacting regime change in Syria. It is also a step that merely needs a pretext to move forward. In 2012, fabricated border incidents with Turkey were being used to help implement this strategy but failed. Now the threat of ISIS is being used to resell the exact same scheme.

Turkey’s Daily Sabah would report in an article titled, “Turkish Army to be Authorized in Iraq and Syria. Davutoglu Says,” that:

Turkish government will ask for the parliament’s authorization for military operations in Syria and Iraq, the newly-elected PM Ahmet Davutoğlu said at a press conference on Tuesday.

The paper would also report:
“There can be two different bills depending on the risks in the region,” Davutoğlu said. “We hope that the security situation will not deteriorate for Turkey in the region and that we will not have to send armed forces.”

Turkey will, however, take every means necessary against risks that will jeopardize the country’s national security and the region’s stability, according to Davutoğlu.

Of course, with US airstrikes carving out a vacuum soon to be filled with extremists uncontested by the Syrian Arab Army forced to back off in fear of provoking further Western aggression, the situation will undoubtedly “deteriorate.” Just as Turkey staged false flag operations along its border last year in attempts to trigger a war with Syria directly, and by supporting terrorists resulting in a predictable humanitarian catastrophe now spilling over into Turkey’ territory, the vacuum the US is intentionally creating is meant to be filled with terrorist mercenaries and NATO forces to protect them as the front is inched ever closer to Damascus in the form of a “buffer zone.”
The only way for Syria to prevent this from happening is for it and its allies to quickly assemble tactical, strategic, and political means with which to fill the void in eastern Syria to prevent the West’s “sustainable, persistent campaign” from taking root. Because if this campaign does take root, any attempts by Damascus to retake territory the West and its terrorist proxies are operating in may trigger a direct confrontation between the US and Damascus – the ultimate provocation the West is searching for to conclude its long-stalled plans for regime change in Syria.Long-term US operations in Syrian territory, with or without Turkish forces involved, could still be turned into a trap by Syria and its allies. By avoiding provocations and direct military confrontation with the West, Syria can use proxy forces to ensnare the West in yet another protracted and costly quagmire. Such a strategy would require building up enhanced deterrence against further incursions toward vital Syrian population centers along with immeasurable political patience. The West will be left with further delays and complications, as well as immense costs that will become increasingly difficult to justify before an already war-weary Western public.