The key idea behind unleashing civil war in Syria using Weapons from Libya and jihadist volunteers from several Arab countries is
to reverse the geopolitical gift to Iran which Bush Iraq war created.
Installation of fundamentalist government in Syria also is in the best interests of Israel as this is by definitely a weak sectarian
government that terrorizes its own population. That's why they openly supported head choppers during Syrian civil war. Politics
make strange bedfellows: Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Political Islam emerges are a reaction to colonialism but now it serve as a puppet of neoliberals to weaken and destroy secular governments
in Arab countries and to weaken territorial integrity of Russia. So Russia in an indirect way is interested in preservation of
secular government in Syria as creation of another large training camp for jihadism is not in their best interest.
The problem is that the US elite lost people who participated in WWII who understood the consequences of WWIII. now the US is represented
by chickenhawks such as Trump, Bolton and the whole gallery of female chickenhawks (which were flourishing in Obama administration)
such as Haley.
This generation of the US elite is indoctrinated is the "sole superpower" status and has difficulties to adapting to new realities
when economically china will be larger then the USA in 2020 and military Russia is on par in some major categories, returning the situation
of mutual assured destruction (MAD) that the USA tried to destroy (and for some succeeded in 1991-2000 due to collapse of the USSR and
Yeltsin marionette government ) since Reagan.
Chemical attacks false flag as a standard method of pursuing civil war by West-connected islamists
Poisoning false flag are the favorite trick used by British intelligence services and it became an important tool for
MI6 supported organizations such as
White Helmets.
They proved to be perfectly suitable for Islamists barbarians (aka "head choppers") who do not care much about human cost
and can kill children and woman in cold blood to achieve their goals.
One of the most interesting features of Syria civil war is the extent of the chemical attacks false flags by islamists to inflict
the damage on Assad forces. They usually resort to it when they are against the wall and need some time to prepare a counterattack,
of escape, or surrender on more favorable conditions.
In this sense political Islam is a national liberation movement that "took the wrong turn on the road" and which was co-opted
by the neoliberals to serve as their geopolitical ram. Instead of fighting Western neoliberal neo-imperialism they are helping
them.
Ghouta 2013This was Aug 21.2013 false flag disguised as a sarin rocket attack carried out by Assad or his supporters.
It was a false-flag stunt carried out by the insurgents using carbon monoxide or cyanide to murder children and use their corpses
as bait to lure the Americans into attacking Assadsee
"Murder in the Sun Morgue" by Dr. Denis
O'Brien (neuropharmacology expert):
"The primary conclusion of this study, based on a pharmacological analysis of the video and photographic evidence, is that
the Ghouta Massacre near Damascus on Aug 21.2013 was not a sarin rocket attack carried out by Assad or his supporters. It was a false-flag
stunt carried out by the insurgents using carbon monoxide or cyanide to murder children and use their corpses as bait to lure the
Americans into attacking Assad."
Syria surrendered its stockpiles of chemical weapons in 2014 to a joint mission led by the US and the Organization for the Prohibition
of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which oversaw the destruction of the weaponry. Damascus has consistently denied using chemical weapons
over the past years of conflict in the country.
Khan Sheikhoun gas attack. On Tuesday April
4th 2017, videos and images emerged from sources belonging to Al Nustra within Syria showing what is claimed to be a chemical weapon
attack that targeted Al Sheikhun south of Idlib. This was the second
major sarin attack in Syria (it it was sarin, which is still unclear; some witnesses reported a strong smell) . The previous
one was a false flag operation in which over thousand people including women and children died. previous (false flag) sarin
attack was staged Syria in 2013 with the explicit goal to provoke Western military response like in Lybia. This was so called "Ghouta
chemical attack"; sarin was used in an attack in the Ghouta region of the Rif Dimashq Governorate of Syria during the Syrian civil
war.[51] Varying[52] sources gave a death toll of 322[53] to 1,729.[54] It were a part of rebels strategy to weaken and isolate internationally
Assad government, which coincides with the desires of the USA and its allies such as Turkey and KSA.
Douma gas attack: Yet another false flag poisoning?
This false flag was supposedly conducted by Jaish al-Islam, but there are serious doubt that the attack took place at all. It was
probably a completly staged event. Here again the main source of inforation was connected scandalous Oscar-winning organization
"White Helmets". Several other similar organizations participated too: the Pro-insurgent "Guta media Center" and the
US-based Syrian-American Medical Society (SAMS). They issued a joint statement with the "Opposition-linked Civil Defense" (The White
Helmets). There are lots of details on the attacks and damage at Douma, but only a tiny mention that Jaish al-Islam launched rockets
into densely populated Damascus. Why are there no reports of death and damage in those areas? And where did SAMS come from? White
Helmets role immediately links this attack to Skripal case.
"For some reason, China provides almost no humanitarian support for Syria...China should at
the very least donate $1 billion a year in humanitarian assistance to Syria. It's hard to
understand China's indifference considering the extent it affects their security. Sometimes
I wonder who wastes more money on the military in relation to otehr spending on foreign
affairs. China's $250 billion military budget in 2020 or America's $800 billion military
spending last year?"<\blockquote>
posternnn | Jun 21 2021 19:32 utc | 7:
From what I gather China sees Syria as a national interests of Israel, Iran, Russia and
Turkey. The last thing they want is to step on their toes especially when some of them are
their allies and or in the process of being lobbied to switch sides.
@26 I don't put Syria and Afghanistan in the same bag. The US is in Syria to protect
Israel from Iran and Hezbullah. Going into Afghanistan was a reaction to the Twin Towers
bombing.....Bin Laden, Bush, we must do something etc.. I could be wrong but I see the
Taliban as quite pragmatic. Of course the MSM wants us to think they are just a bunch of
bloodthirsty muslim fanatics.
It almost seems like China is under some kind of pressure not to help Syria even with
humanitarian help.
China has given political cover to Syria at the UN. It is also probable that its been
agreed between putin and xi that Syria is to be a Russian show. For China to fly in vaccines
now would not make Russia look good.
Additionally there aren't much military nor political ties between Syria and Chinese in
the past like there were between Syria and Russia. To do much more uninvited would breach
Chinese's own policy of non-interference of others internal affairs. Remember this whole
Syria saga is dressed up and still designated as a civil war by the UN...
In any case there's much we don't know, what's not to say China isn't bankrolling
something behind the scenes with Russia as the frontman?
Assad have said those who have helped Syria in its hour of need will be rewarded in its
reconstruction. When that time comes and the contracts doled out we'll know for certain.
It is unlikely that you will see this news on CNN or BBC.
A book on the crimes of the international coalition in Syria
was presented in Moscow. The book is called 'Crimes of the US-led international coalition
in Syria'. The study is based on interviews with over 200 Syrian citizens who witnessed the
crimes of the international coalition. They reportedly allowed the authors to use their
testimony in legal proceedings, including in international courts. The conference dedicated
to the presentation of the book was attended by the Ambassador Extraordinary and
Plenipotentiary of the Syrian Arab Republic to the Russian Federation, Riad Haddad.
The presented facts prove that the US-led coalition systematically destroyed Syrian
hospitals, schools, markets, mosques, houses of civilians, which, according to international
humanitarian law, qualifies as war crimes. Each of the facts is personalized with an accurate
indication of the identity of the victim and the circumstances of the crime, and is also
accompanied by their requests to use this evidence to appeal to national and international
courts.
The book is available for reading online (so
far only in Russian).
Btw, earlier, in February, an
exhibition of the same name was held, which was visited by Sergey Naryshkin, Director of
the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation.
By Kit Klarenberg , an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence
services in shaping politics and perceptions. Follow him on Twitter @KitKlarenberg The epic establishment clean-up
operation launched in the wake of James Le Mesurier's apparent suicide was effective in the
short term, but determined digging by critical journalists means the scandal definitely isn't
over yet.
A Dutch newspaper, De Volkskrant, has published a stunning
exclusive based on internal government emails, exposing how officials conspired to prevent
a minister publicly raising concerns about fraudulent activity at Mayday Rescue, the
now-defunct "humanitarian" organization behind Syria's highly controversial White Helmets.
The internal communications show
that, following the ever-mysterious
demise of Helmets and Mayday founder James Le Mesurier in November 2019 in Istanbul, Sigrid
Kaag, the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, planned to formally caution
parliament about financial impropriety on Le Mesurier's part. Several draft statements were
produced over the ensuing Christmas period, in which Mayday was openly named.
Her anxieties were well-founded. On November 8, three days before his death, Le Mesurier
openly confessed
in an email to his organization's numerous international donors – of which the
Netherlands had been but one – that he was guilty of misconduct and fraud, admitting to
forging receipts to hide the disappearance of $50,000 in cash, paying himself and his wife Emma
Winberg "excessive" salaries, and potential tax evasion, among other malfeasance.
While claiming this wasn't intentional, he took full and sole responsibility, and warned
against further investigation into Mayday's financial affairs, fearing that continued probing
could expose yet more "mistakes and internal failures."
In the wake of his apparent suicide, Volkskrant reports that donor countries – who'd
collectively committed in excess of $100 million to Le Mesurier's cause – convened a
crisis meeting at the Dutch consulate in Istanbul, at which diplomats concluded the Netherlands
was "extra vulnerable", given all the funding it had provided to Mayday, and the
organization having ostensibly been based on its soil, meaning millions in international
payments had been processed through Dutch accounts.
Funding from Amsterdam had nonetheless ceased in September 2018, after a Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
report outlined serious concerns about Mayday's financial practices, including a virtually
total lack of oversight over, and even awareness of, how its money entered Syria, and precisely
where it eventually ended up.
However, top Netherlands State Department officials strongly disagreed with Kaag's proposal,
arguing that if lawmakers were warned at all, it was best done confidentially, as if the
allegations weren't in fact true, it could " unjustly harm" Mayday.
After some toing and froing, a compromise was struck – Kaag agreed to wait for the
results of an independent audit of Mayday by accounting firm Grant Thornton to be published,
whereupon a letter would be sent "immediately" to parliament. As the auditors went about
their assessment, in February 2020 diplomats again travelled to Istanbul to discuss the
organization's possible malpractice. Key considerations for those present were "avoiding
political risks" and ensuring "minimal exposure" for Amsterdam in the case.
As luck would have it, Grant Thornton found no evidence of fraud, but did identify major
failings in bookkeeping and financial supervision, with many payments untraceable. Kaag opted
to keep the report private, and declined after all to apprise parliament of its conclusions.
This move would be somewhat inexplicable if the auditor did indeed exonerate Mayday, but the
emails unearthed by Volkskrant amply demonstrate that it didn't.
In one missive, a Dutch official states that "it cannot be established with
certainty" that the Netherlands' subsidies to Mayday had in fact been provided to the White
Helmets. When asked which funds in particular, they responded, " all expenses to the White
Helmets."
In other words, fraud on the part of Mayday couldn't be detected only because quite
literally no records relating to where any of the sums actually went existed. As such, it's
unsurprising that an independent followup probe of the organization's finances was considered
to be a waste of time.
The Dutch Central Audit Service, which controls government expenditure, in summer 2020 ruled
that €3.6 million should "preferably" be reclaimed from Mayday. However, Grant
Thornton's findings were invoked to argue there were "insufficient grounds" to pursue
the matter, and Mayday was duly removed from the list of cases to be reported to parliament in
July 2020.
Volksrant's seismic revelations will no doubt make extremely uncomfortable reading for a
great many powerful people. After all, the mainstream media, and the numerous governments which
funded Mayday, have struggled to get their story straight on Le Mesurier, his company, and the
group he founded, ever since his fatal plunge. Over the final months of 2020, a concerted
campaign was waged to tie up the assorted loose ends.
First, in October, a fawning 6,000 word Guardian hagiography acquitted Le
Mesurier on charges of fraud, being an agent of British intelligence, using the Helmets as a
Trojan Horse for regime change in Syria, and affiliation with extremist groups.
The next month, a multi-part BBC World Service podcast series amplified this sycophantic
apologism globally, while in the process smearing independent journalists and researchers who'd
raised questions about the Helmets as agents of the Russian and Syrian governments, who bore
significant responsibility for Le Mesurier's suicide by spreading malicious, dangerous
"disinformation" .
Both The Guardian and BBC relied exclusively on Grant Thornton's audit
to exonerate Le Mesurier of fraud charges, despite not actually having seen the findings
– the former firmly contended it was just one example of how "Le Mesurier unravelled
under the weight of claims that would later prove to be false."
That this fundamental aspect of the exculpatory mainstream narrative of Le Mesurier and the
Helmets has now seemingly been demonstrated to be entirely bogus, one can only wonder what
other elements are similarly erroneous, why, and what else Mayday's backers have to hide.
In respect of the latter question, one answer could well be direct or indirect funding of
violent terrorist groups in Syria by the Netherlands if not many other Western governments,
under the cover of humanitarian payments to Mayday. In December 2020, Dutch Prime Minister Mark
Rutte admitted that he blocked a
parliamentary request for an independent investigation into this very question.
After initially attempting to deny having done so, the previous month he told journalists such a
probe may result in "tensions" with Netherlands' allies, and "put the lives of former
members of opposition groups at stake."
Evidently, try as the establishment might, the controversy surrounding the White Helmets
isn't going anywhere, and, in fact, is gaining significantly in volume and credibility. It's
anyone's guess which will be the next domino to fall. Watch this space.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Stranded 15 hours ago 15 hours ago
The government in the Netherlands used taxpayer money to fund terrorism in Syria. This is
what happened and normally if you aid terrorism there is a big price to pay. Not for
politicians though its perfectly fine to stir up trouble abroad and then act oblivious when
it hits home.
Vincent2000 14 hours ago 14 hours ago
This is truly very old news. We knew all along that the white helmets were financially
supported by western governments. All the other intricacies of that support were irrelevant
to us. The white helmets were just another tool used by western governments to topple the
legitimate government of Syria.
zoombeenie 15 hours ago 15 hours ago
Thank you. I long believed the White Helmets had a connection with shady Western Governments.
Did Le Mesurier have an Epstein moment? More probing needs to be done and head role
frankfalseflag 18 hours ago 18 hours ago
The West will soon discover that the Dutch - who invented civilization's first bubble of the
tulip bulb - are also responsible for inventing cryptocurrencies and the bubble that will
soon engulf the investors who believe in them
CrabbyB 19 hours ago 19 hours ago
Evil is exposing itself.. it's up to us how we handle it. If we get it wrong we will suffer
10 fold.
Vera Narishkin 16 hours ago 16 hours ago
Why am I not surprised? What else are they hiding? The real culprits of the downing of flight
MH17, of course!
frankfalseflag 18 hours ago 18 hours ago
It's nice to be hearing about the White Helmets again. One of the CIA's recent, great
successes
Roger Hudson 20 hours ago 20 hours ago
Investigate and expose the whole thing, from MI6/SIS onwards.
errovi 21 hours ago 21 hours ago
Sigrid Kaag profiled herself on "new leadership" during the recent elections...
Hardly anything of that - besides the murder of Soleimani - is mentioned in the
Yahoo piece. There is not one word on Muhandis, his role in Iraq or the consequences
of his death. There is no mention of the Iraqi parliament vote or of the ongoing attacks on
U.S. units in Iraq.
Instead the piece
prominently emphasizes alleged Kurdish collaboration in the assassination:
In late December 2019, Delta Force operators and other special operations members began
filtering into Baghdad in small groups. Kurdish operatives, who played a key role in the
killing, had already started infiltrating Baghdad International Airport by that point,
going undercover as baggage handlers and other staff members.
...
The three sniper teams positioned themselves 600 to 900 yards away from the "kill zone,"
the access road from the airfield, setting up to triangulate their target as he left the
airport. [...] A member of the Counter Terrorism Group (CTG), an elite Kurdish unit in
northern Iraq with deep links to U.S. Special Operations, helped them make the wind call
from down range.
...
After the strike, according to two U.S. officials, a Kurdish operative disguised as an
Iraqi police officer walked up to the wreckage of Soleimani's vehicle, snapped photographs
and quickly obtained a tissue sample for DNA confirmation before walking away and vanishing
into the night.
Muhandis and Soleimani were revered by the Shia majority in Iraq. The revelation of
Kurdish involvement in Soleimani's death might have harsh consequences for Iraqi Kurds.
If the Kurds were really involved why was this released? Why does it come in a piece that
is more or less a recap of already known stuff? What are the motives of those who revealed
this?
I for one do not believe those claims.
Who is interested in (re-)launching an ethnic civil war in Iraq?
The Yahoo piece then comes to the consequences of the attack:
Iran reacted with predictable fury to Soleimani's killing, lobbing dozens of ballistic
missiles at two U.S. bases in Iraq. Though no one was killed, Pentagon officials later said
more than 100 service personnel were diagnosed with traumatic brain injury.
But the rocket attack was just a "slap in the face," said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's
supreme leader, and did not represent Iran's full retaliation for the killing. U.S.
officials and experts believe that Iran may eventually attempt a high-profile assassination
of a senior U.S. official or a terrorist attack aimed at a U.S. facility.
The 'U.S. officials and experts' believe that they are way more important than they really
are. Iran's Supreme Leader Ajatollah Khamenei, who was extremely
near to Soleimani , has let it known that there is no one of Soleimani's caliber in U.S.
ranks who could be taken out as revenge. There will be no Iranian assassination campaign of
U.S. politicians or military leader.
Fears of such only shows that the former Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, one of the
initiator of the assassination of Soleimani, is a
craven milquetoast :
Tucked into the appropriations bill signed by President Trump in the final days of 2020 was
$15 million set aside to provide protective services to "former or retired senior
Department of State officials" who "face a serious and credible threat from a foreign power
or the agent of a foreign power" because of the work they did while in office.
The real second part of the revenge that is still coming was announced by Hizbullah
leader Hassan Nasrallah:
What do we mean by just punishment? Some are saying this must be someone of the same level
as Qassem Soleimani - like Chairman of Joint Chiefs, head of @CENTCOM, but there is no one
on Soleimani or Muhandis' level. Soleimani's shoe is worth more than Trump's head, so
there's no one I can point to to say this is the person we can target.
Just punishment therefore means American military presence in the region, U.S. military
bases, U.S. military ships, every American officer and soldier in our countries and
regions. The U.S. military is the one who killed Soleimani and Muhandis, and they will pay
the price. This is the equation.
...
The response to the blood of Soleimani and Al-Muhandis must be expulsion of all U.S, forces
from the region.
General Esmail Qaani, Soleimani's replacement as commander of the Quds Brigade, confirmed
Nasrallah's statement:
Esmail Qaani, the new leader of Iran's IRGC Quds Force:
"Our promise is to continue the path of martyr Soleimani. Due to the martyrdom of
#Soleimani, our promise will be the expulsion of the US from the region in different
steps."
These are not empty threats but a military project that will play out over the next years.
I would not bet on the U.S. as the winner of that war.
Posted by b on May 8, 2021 at 15:50 UTC |
Permalink
The Kurds have long been associated with Israeli secret agencies, and Israeli
bribes-from-aid to US politicians are the determinant of US ME policy. So Israel via Yahoo
news was likely celebrating to provoke Iran or for similar purposes.
The Yahoo article sure is a real slap in the face to the Kurdish forces working with the
West in occupying northern Iraq and NE Syria. No doubt it was written to deflect Iraqi and
Iranian anger away from Western interference in the Middle East towards the Kurds to get a
sectarian war going to justify continued Western occupation and meddling.
Who are Jack Murphy and Zach Dorfman anyway? From what I could find of Dorfman on search
engines, he is a writer employed or associated with the Aspen Institute headquartered in
Washington DC writing on cyber-security topics. That might suggest he and the other writer
were fed this information or farrago about Kurdish involvement in Soleymani's assassination
from the usual anonymous sources.
Read that paragraph from the MoA article carefully and understand that such an undertaking
means ridding the entire Middle Eastern region of all US military interference. This surely
includes forcing the US to leave Saudi Arabia and other ME nations with their heads stuck in
the US backside.
Understand also that other Western nations also have forces, mercenaries and "advisors" in
the Middle East and their removal from the region is just as much important but less urgent.
If the chief bully can be thrown out first, its minions will follow like the craven cowards
they are. No doubt the British and the French will try to keep a toehold in the region
through proxy forces but whether those govts have the backbone to keep going is another
question.
Starvation via military invasion and looting is a war crime.
"Though the Biden forces dismantled their illicit military base at the silos, in February,
the criminal American troops have returned several times, to empty the grain, so many times
that it might be convenient to create a template and just fill in the dates. Between mid- and
late March, the American war criminals pillaged 112 truckloads of Syria's wheat from this
facility."
US sanctions have brought the number of Syrians who are close to starvation to 12.4 million,
or 60% of the country...
Great dollops of hypocrisy invariably accompany expressions of concern by outside powers for
the wellbeing of the Syrian people. But even by these low standards, a new record for
self-serving dishonesty is being set by the Caesar Civilian Protection
Act , the new US law imposing the harshest sanctions in the world on Syria and bringing
millions of Syrians
to the brink of famine .
Supposedly aimed at safeguarding ordinary Syrians from violent repression by President
Bashar
al-Assad , the law is given a humanitarian garnish by naming it after the Syrian military
photographer who filmed and smuggled out of the country pictures of thousands of Syrians killed
by the government. But instead of protecting Syrians, as it claims, the Caesar Act is a measure
of collective punishment that is impoverishing people in government and opposition-held areas
alike.
Bad though the situation in Syria was after 10 years of warfare and a long-standing economic
embargo, the crisis has got much worse in the nine months since the law was implemented on 17
June last year. It has raised the number of Syrians who are close to starvation to 12.4
million, or 60 per cent of the population, according to the UN.
Already, more than half a million children under the age of five are suffering from stunting
as the result of chronic malnutrition . As the Syrian currency collapsed and prices rose by 230
per cent over the last year, Syrian families could no longer afford to buy basic foodstuffs
such as bread, rice, lentils, oil and sugar.
"The war of hunger scares me more than the war of guns," says Ghassan Massoud, the Syrian
actor famous for playing Saladin in
the 2005 Ridley Scott film Kingdom of Heaven . A politically neutral and popular figure in
Syria, Massoud is quoted as saying that government employees are earning 50,000 Syrian pounds
($13/£9) a month when they need 800,000 Syrian pounds to survive. "I am a vegetarian but
I do not accept that a citizen is not able to eat meat because a kilo costs 20,000 Syrian
pounds."
The Caesar Act threatens sanctions on any person or company that does business with Syria
and thereby imposes a tight economic siege on the country . Introduced just as the Covid-19
epidemic made its first onset in Syria last summer and soon after the implosion of the Lebanese
economy to which Syria is closely linked, the law has proved the final devastating blow to
Syrians who were already ground down by a decade of destruction .
It was supposedly aimed at Assad and his regime, but there was never any reason to believe
that it would destabilize them or compel them to ease repression. Since they hold power, they
are well placed to control diminished resources. As with the 13 years of UN sanctions directed
against Saddam Hussein between 1990 and 2003, the victims were not the dictator and his family
but the civilian population. Iraqi society was shattered, with results that are still with us,
and the same is now happening in Syria.
A concise summary. A cold geopolitical decision by arch war criminal Obama, following
decades of meddling.
The destructions of Iraq, Syria, and Libya are the most serious state-led crimes of this
century, yet in the western bubble the fingers point to Crimea, Xinjiang, and Hong Kong.
Bhadrakumar's "Animal Farm" reference is apt.
Israel has targeted at least a dozen vessels bound for Syria and mostly carrying Iranian
oil out of concern that petroleum profits are funding extremism in the Middle East, U.S.
and regional officials say, in a new front in the conflict between Israel and Iran.
Since late 2019, Israel has used weaponry including water mines to strike Iranian
vessels or those carrying Iranian cargo as they navigate toward Syria in the Red Sea and in
other areas of the region. Iran has continued its oil trade with Syria, shipping millions
of barrels and contravening U.S. sanctions against Iran and international sanctions against
Syria.
Some of the naval attacks also have targeted Iranian efforts to move other cargo
including weaponry through the region, according to U.S. officials.
The attacks on the tankers carrying Iranian oil haven't been previously disclosed.
Iranian officials have reported some of the attacks earlier and have said they suspect
Israeli involvement.
The 'exclusive' leak to the WSJ , by U.S. officials(!), is designed to damage the
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahoo.
It explains a number of recent incidents which Israel had claimed to be 'Iranian
aggressions' but which were caused by Israel itself or were in obvious retaliation for
Israeli deeds.
Israel closed all its Mediterranean beaches until further notice on Sunday, days after an
offshore oil spill deposited tons of tar across more than 100 miles (160 kilometers) of
coastline in what officials are calling one of the country's worst ecological disasters.
Activists began reporting globs of black tar on Israel's coast last week after a heavy
storm.
...
The Environmental Protection Ministry and activists estimate that at least 1,000 tons of
tar, a product of an oil spill from a ship in the eastern Mediterranean earlier this month,
have already washed up on shore. The ministry is trying to determine who is responsible. It
declined commenting on details of the investigation because it was ongoing.
Posted by b at
9:17 UTC |
Comments (21) Surely one significant aspect of this story is that US govt officials,
speaking as they always do "anonymously", informed none other than the Murdoch-owned Wall
Street Journal. Does Rupert Murdoch no longer support Binyamin Netanyahu? Has Netanyahu's
appeal dimmed somewhat since the death of US casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson whose
newspaper "Israel Hayom" was a big Netanyahu supporter? Is the Biden-soon-to-be-Harris
administration tiring of Netanyahu and keen to throw him and his wife Sara under a huge bus?
"... A former senior official from Israel's Aerospace Industries claims to have first-hand
knowledge of the 15-page long legal contract between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and
his wife Sara, writes The Times of Israel.
In a video interview, posted on the internet, David Arzi, former vice president of
commercial and civil aviation at Israel Aerospace Industries, says he was allowed to read
clauses of the contract in 1999, during Netanyahu's first stint as prime minister, by the
Prime Minister's lawyer and cousin David Shimron ...
...The legal contract signed by the couple, he says, grants Sara Netanyahu (Sara
Ben-Artzi prior to her marriage) far-reaching control over their life. Accordingly, she is
reportedly allowed to sign off on appointments of the heads of Mossad intelligence agency,
Shin Bet domestic security service, and the Israeli military.
In line with the contract, according to Arzi, the prime minister vows not to take any
overnight trip without taking along his wife, by profession an educational and career
psychologist, who is also allegedly permitted to take part in top-secret meetings ...
... "She authorises the following appointments, the head of the Mossad, the head of
the Shin Bet and the IDF chief of staff. And that is in writing, she has to give the
authorization in writing, if not, it is a violation of the contract," continues the
ex-Aerospace Industries' official.
He adds in the video that violation of the contract would result in Benjamin Netanyahu
"forfeiting all their property to her."
Regarding finances, the alleged contract stipulates that Sara Netanyahu wields major
control as well.
"There was a very detailed section that she would handle their finances It was written
that he would not have credit cards, only she would. And if he needed money she would give
it to him," says Arzi in Hebrew, as quoted by the outlet ..."
Well, talk about Israel being the only democracy in the Middle East when the place seems
to be run by wannabe Queen Hatshepsut.
@Bemildred 4 "Pres. Biden is, like Trump, a vindictive man, and he does not like Nuttyahoo."
I don't think this has anything to do with anyone's (and especially Biden's, who probably
doesn't remember who Netanyahu is) alleged personality traits. This is not how things are
done. An official leak published by WSJ should have a better explanation, imo.
Shot themselves in the foot again, have they? The Zios are good at doing that. The day is
coming when they will make one misstep too far and go over the edge.
! خلاص
U.S. officials then leak the whole scheme to the WSJ to stop Netanyahoo from continuing the
self-defeating campaign. USA officials don't release this kind of information without a
purpose.
Jen @ 5 thinks maybe "Rupert Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal may no longer support
Binyamin Netanyahu?
<== to jen I add the conspiracy theory that Maybe the official anonymous disclosure
reflects wall streets concern that Netanyohoo is a husband victim of something like this which uses marriage
contracts to cover for spouse side family control over appointments, to the head of the
Mossad, to the head of the Shin Bet and to the IDF chief of staff. I can not imagine any
other reason for documents exposed here today to have been written and their terms
enforced.
Why where those documents written is my question? great work B.
They fall into the pit they dig for others I knew something was up when both the
Mossad and Defense Minister went out of their way to disavow the Israeli EPA minister's
claim. MoA, I know that you are pining for, and holding a torch for Donald J. Trump, the
Insurrector and Chief, but his Administration would NEVER leak this to the press.
Israel's lesson only attack Iranian tankers in the Red Sea. That will harm their
new found friends, the Saudis, Egyptians, and Sudan but I don't think Netanyahu cares about
them.
Bravo, B!
So many distortioners would have written that these oil spills ravaged "the coasts of
Israël". You put tne matter straight through calling entire the stretch of coastline
between Egypt and Lebanon "the coast of Palestine. Thank You!
Why would Israel pollute their own shores by attacking an Iranian ship in the
Mediterranean?
Please do not say 'false flag'. The most simple explanation is that the
Izzies figured that the Iranians (or ship owner) would direct the tanker to the nearest port
for repairs, there are several in Egypt. Victimized tankers likely did that before, but in
this case, the Capt decided to make a run for Syria.
... a new bombshell report in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday reveals Israeli
intelligence has been waging its own tanker sabotage campaign against the Iranians over the
past two years ...
It also appears part of the Israeli and US campaign to essentially starve the Assad
government and bring it to its knees, further amidst near weekly Israeli airstrikes inside
the war-torn country. The new report clearly suggests US intelligence officials knew about
the covert tanker sabotage campaign in real time, and may have even assisted in some level
of the planning or operations ...
<> <> <> <> <> <>
Why didn't they tell us about the continuing tanker war when they announced that the
Israeli ship was "struck" by an explosion?
One must wonder if they are revealing this now because Israel's story about the tanker
being attacked lacks credibility. They desperately want us to believe that the damage to the
ship was NOT a false flag (Israeli sabotage of their own vessel).
But it gets even better. They also implicitly excuse (depict sympathetically) Israel's
attacks on Iranian tankers ... because they oppose Assad and Biden's Iran initiative. Where
is the condemnation for such behavior?
Yes, interesting as to the motives. One hopes this is part of a plan of strategery to
'de-escalate' the wag-the-dog mentality that runs the 'Middle East' foreign policy of the US.
War with Iran is insane. Those who foment war with Iran are insane. It is good to walk it all
back. Is this what is happening? We'll soon know.
The Syrian Arab Army and Russian forces inside that country, fired Tochka Ballistic missiles
at Oil Storage Tank Facilities being occupied by and used by the United States, Turkey and
Israel, inside Syria. Giant explosions levelled most of the storage tank farms, rendering it
impossible for the US, Turkey or Israel to continue STEALING Syrian Oil; something that has
been going on for years while the US was allegedly "fighting ISIS."
... ... ...
Images coming out of Syria provide irrefutable proof the missiles used were Russian Tochka,
also known in NATO circles as the SS-21.
The video below comes from a COVERT INTELLIGENCE SOURCE inside Syria, from directly next to
the destroyed and burning oil storage tank farm: (Article continues below green subscriber
only area below)
PREMIUM CONTENT:
This section of the article is only available for Subscribers who support this web site with
$1 a week billed either Quarterly ($13) or monthly ($5).
This is necessary because this is a CLOUD-BASED web site. The way it works is YOU READ . . .
I GET BILLED for "Data Transfer."
Despite being politely asked for voluntary donations, few people ever bothered to donate.
Then, despite being asked to click an ad within a story to generate ad revenue for this site,
the majority of the general public couldn't be bothered with that, either. So there's no reason
to give the general public free news anymore; they don't pull their own weight.
With tens-of-thousands of people reading stories here every day, the costs nearly drove the
site out of business.
In order to be able to continue providing cutting-edge news, often hours or even DAYS before
Drudge and most of the "mass-media" -- if they even cover it at all -- I need to be able to
sustain this effort. To do that, I rely on folks like YOU contributing a pittance of about $1 a
week; which is chump-change that you won't even miss! Yet that small amount makes all the
difference in the world to the continued existence of this web site.
In the final analysis, knowledge is power. Getting information first, or info that other
sources simply don't report, is usually well worth a few bucks in the long run.
Please click
here to choose a subscription plan in order to view this part of the article.
YOU MUST SET YOUR WEB BROWSER TO "ACCEPT COOKIES" FROM THIS SITE IN ORDER TO LOGIN OR ELSE
YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SEE PREMIUM CONTENT.
The missile debris in the second video above makes clear this was a RUSSIAN attack. Initial
intelligence estimates are saying Russia intentionally destroyed these Syrian oil storage
facilities, likely with the permission of the Syrian government, to put an end to the rampant
THEFT of Syrian oil by the United States, Turkey and most recently, Israel.
Conservative estimates reported that, during it's battle against ISIS, the USA stole $30
Million a month. Later when Turkish troops entered Syria allegedly to contain the Kurds, Turkey
began stealing the oil too, raising the amount stolen to about $60 Million a month. Most
recently, Israel allegedly joined the theft, and was allegedly stealing another 20-30 Million
for themselves each month, causing Syria to lose upwards of $100 Million a month to this theft
ring.
No one knows who is getting all the oil money. Speculation exists that it is greasing the
pockets of American military higher-ups, American politicians, and those of similar position in
both Turkey and in Israel. Russia just slapped all of them in the face and destroyed their
money pipeline. They can't steal the oil anymore because Russia just smashed the needed oil
storage facilities from which the oil was being smuggled out of Syria.
With its free money pipeline cut off, the "Deep State" is likely to go berserk, and thus my
former colleagues in the Intel Community tell me the push will be "on" in the Intel and
military communities, to drive the US to direct war against Russia inside Syria.
My former colleagues also told me that the most immediate and likely retaliation will be a
major escalation inside eastern Ukraine, as the US and the West strike back to cause big
trouble for Russia.
The most staggering warning from my former colleagues is that "this situation could
rapidly escalate to direct warfare, inside Syria, between the US and Russia, with a second
front opened against Russia by Europe, with warfare in Ukraine on the continent of
Europe."
We could be seeing the actual outbreak of what history may call World War 3.
No other mass media outlets are covering this either in the US or in Europe. Both the
American people and folks in Europe are blissfully unaware of how badly things have just
escalated. If war breaks out, the civilian populations in American and Europe will be caught
completely off-guard and with no preparations.
Prep now. Have emergency food, emergency water, spare supplies of medicines you may need.
Spare fuel. Have a way to generate electricity. Have CB or HAM radios for communications.
If this goes bad, it will go bad fast.
MORNING UPDATE
March 6, 2021 - 7:30 AM EST
The Russian missiles not only struck oil storage tank farms, they also went after the oil
smuggling tanker trucks as well. Entire parking areas filled with hundreds of smuggler tanker
trucks were hit and destroyed.
This killed a number of truck drivers, but it also sent a message to every other truck
driver: Don't be involved in stealing Syrian Oil for the Americans or anyone else, or YOU can
be blown up too.
In one fell swoop, Russia stabbed the Syria smuggling and oil theft operation, directly in
its heart. Even if teh US, Turkey and Israel _wanted_ to continue stealing, no one in his right
mind will drive a smuggling truck for them; for fear of being blown to bits by Russia missiles
again.
The "Deep State" has had its illegal oil smuggling cash cow, slaughtered by Russia last
night.
Now that you have read this story, please COVER THE COST for what your visit cost this
site by clicking one or more of the ads below which generates Advertiser revenue of two to
three cents per click - no purchase necessary by you -- and helps offset operating costs for
this web site.
When YOU read a story here, the web hosting company charges us for "data transfer /
Bandwidth" to convey the material to you. Without your help by clicking an ad below, this web
site would be in danger of shut down from the data transfer charges. Please click any ad below
to offset the cost of bringing this news to you
MORNING UPDATE
March 6, 2021 - 7:30 AM EST
The Russian missiles not only struck oil storage tank farms, they also went after the oil
smuggling tanker trucks as well. Entire parking areas filled with hundreds of smuggler tanker
trucks were hit and destroyed.
This killed a number of truck drivers, but it also sent a message to every other truck
driver: Don't be involved in stealing Syrian Oil for the Americans or anyone else, or YOU can
be blown up too.
In one fell swoop, Russia stabbed the Syria smuggling and oil theft operation, directly in
its heart. Even if teh US, Turkey and Israel _wanted_ to continue stealing, no one in his right
mind will drive a smuggling truck for them; for fear of being blown to bits by Russia missiles
again.
The "Deep State" has had its illegal oil smuggling cash cow, slaughtered by Russia last
night.
The USAi has lost control of its occupying army. Xerxes had the same problems in his ancient
chain of command.
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Mar 6 2021 6:02 utc | 82
Yes. I think it has always been that way with a couple of historical exceptions. So it's
what I look for, and why when things happen, I don't assume that "Biden" necessarily knew
about it beforehand. All that stuff about civilian control is "exaggerated", that corporate
trough is mighty tasty. It's common in a lot of places, almost a norm. The CIA is very fond
of taking its own advice too.
If you want to read "Catch-22" by Joe Heller, he's not kidding about all that.
Regarding that particular incident I ran into a piece yesterday that framed it just like
that, and attempt to get an unconsidered response by some officer with ideas. But they hit
the wrong people.
The Russians and/or Syrians seem to be tearing it up in Northern Aleppo. The Russian
military, on the other hand, seems to have its shit unusually well put together these days. I
don't think there is anybody else I can say that about. They do much with little.
These are not normal people in charge. They have lost their minds.
I agree with that. It applies especially to the US, but you can include the rest
of the western "leaders" with the same diagnosis. In fact there is a huge vacuum of sanity
being filled with total insanity, there are no real leaders. They have all been assassinated
like Olof Palme in Sweden or totally corrupted like Jens Stoltenberg and Boris Johnson.
Now these corrupt idiots are getting scared and are doubling down with criminal and insane
behavior. We need a Nuremberg style cleanup.
The Russians and/or Syrians seem to be tearing it up in Northern Aleppo.
That oil smuggling bombardment will perhaps awaken Erdoghan. Given the extreme mendacity of
Erdoghan and his provocation in Nagorno-Karabakh/Azerbaijan, I expect his entire Syrian
playground to be drastically reduced in the next week and the SDF to have its wings
clipped.
Thanks for the Catch 22 reference, read that accurate history lesson in my younger days.
Accurate indeed.
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Mar 6 2021 7:45 utc | 86
Maybe, maybe just a little propaganda from a Turkophobe. That is common enough in the
Orthodox world, however, you never know with Erdoğan, and NATO doesn't even have to be
in the picture. I suppose, we will find out soon enough where the truth lies. Erdoğan
runs his own ship and changes allies depending on the direction of the wind.
Posted by: Bluedotterel | Mar 6 2021 10:47 utc | 92
I agree, I don't think Erdogan is that stupid. He is a smart politician, and Putin does
not want to alienate Turkey, so they play games. The NK situation look unstable, so ...
But I don't think Erdogan is dumb enough to try to plant jihadis there now. This Aliyev
fellow looks like a shifty person though, crooked and ambitious. I see hints that both Russia
& Iran are annoyed about what happened there.
Syria: Aaron Mate gives a penetrating and documented account of U.S. war crimes by showing
clips of Biden and his people admitting their support of Wahabi terrorists and criminal
sanctions. Mate cites Tulsi Gabbard's courageous and consistent positions in support of the
Syrian people against the crimes of Obama, Trump and now Biden/Harris.
https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/05/tulsi-gabbard-calls-out-the-us-dirty-war-on-syria-that-biden-aides-admit-to/
Ecuador:Ben Norton was in Ecuador during and after the first election on Feb. 7. He exposed
Yaku Perez as a "woke" fraud. A number of "woke" inteligencia in the U.S. wrote a letter
denouncing Norton and this is Norton's response. It is one of the most coherent, well
researched, rebuttals I have ever read. In the process he exposes the actions of his accusers
and lists their self-serving actions as they cater to the power elites of the globe,
particularly, Latin America. Norton also gives a lot of background into Yaku Perez's wife, a
French/Brazilian dripping with cutting edge "woke" identity and a consistent supporter of
corporate and right wing powers. Norton gives us a multi-faceted look at the face of our
"liberal" enemy which peels off especially young idealists and turns them against the true
people's movements such as in Bolivia and Ecuador. It's not working there but it's not
over. https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/01/academic-letter-censor-grayzone-ecuador-yaku-perez/
The third piece in this trifecta by Anya Parampil and Max Blumenthal is about "Jimmy" Story,
fake U.S. ambassador to Venezuela, stationed in Bogota, Colombia, also a "must read". Gives
plenty of Story's history through Obama, Trump and now Biden. Starts with an account of
Story's pig barbecue party/meeting at his Bogota home with Colombian and Venezuelan coup
plotters to talk more about how to....wait for it... overthrow Maduro.
https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/03/virtual-ambassador-venezuela-hosts-insurrectionist-bidens-guaido/
The Grayzone has become the best site for investigative journalism by North Americans
especially regarding U.S. imperial actions in Latin America. Aaron Mate is the top guy on
Russiagate which also leads into many topics; Ukraine, Syria, Euro shenanigans.
Lavrov's speech opens the opportunity for me to approach the decline of the American Empire
from a more cultural/social point of view.
During WWII, after suffering its first decisive defeats, Hitler refused to retreat to the
old borders, instead opting for a "stay and fight to the death/fight for every piece of land"
strategy.
Sure, this option saved the Wehrmacht from massacres initially, but it would result in
catastrophic defeats in the third phase of the war (after Kursk).
One of the reasons Hitler insisted with this failed strategy to the end was that, besides
the "stabbed in the back" mythology of the interwar period, he didn't want to suffer the same
humiliating defeat Napoleon did. Napoleon retreated suddenly after he failed to capture the
Czarist government in Moscow, suffering heavy losses in the process. In his return home, he was
politically dead.
Analogously, I think there is an element of "we don't want another Vietnam humiliation" in
the American Empire nowadays. I think every POTUS after Vietnam has made a point of honor (and
of political survival) to never admit defeat and never leave a country it is occupying.
However, this "stubbornness" is also a sign of decline of the POTUS Office:
The two factors are interlinked: Biden is not able to give his own people what it needs, so
he's insisting on an adventure it doesn't need. The more the present and future POTUSes become
impotent at home, the more they'll try to solve the Empire's inner contradictions abroad. In
this case, the narrative is clear: if you want to get your USD 15.00 minimum wage, you have to
invade Syria to get the wealth to back it up.
Sputnik 's report on Lavrov presser after meeting with Afghanistan's FM vk linked
@3, shows Russia's changed attitude toward the EU also extends to the Outlaw Empire. His "new"
information could easily be based on all the Outlaw Empire's past post-WW2 occupational
behavior. Furthermore, in
his remarks prior to media questions , Lavrov mentioned the likely aims of the Outlaw
Empire's Terrorist Foreign Legion known as ISIS:
"We have a common view that ISIS is a serious factor in the deterioration of the situation
in Afghanistan. ISIS wants to enhance its influence, including in the northern provinces of
Afghanistan, with a view to turning it into a bridgehead for expansion into Central Asia
." [My Emphasis]
I trust the transcript will be finished later today and include more info.
In contrast to what we know about Russia's changed attitude toward the EU, we know very
little about its new stance aimed at the Outlaw Empire. Lavrov went well beyond repeating the
usual lines about the Outlaw Empire's many violations of the UN Charter and charged:
"they are making the decision to never leave Syria, even to the point of destroying this
country."
Of course, that was the initial plan for which there's plenty of evidence. But IMO, Russia's
change in attitude is related to the mission given to ISIS, which it likely knows of thanks to
its intel sources. ISIS is clearly the Outlaw Empire's Terrorist Foreign Legion and are only in
Afghanistan because they were airlifted from Syraq. Putin just met with the Kyrgyz president
and certainly talked about this menace aimed at the CSTO. An emergency meeting of Russia's Security
Council was held today ostensibly to "discuss the situation around the Nagorno Karabakh
peace settlement," but also surely including the illegal attack in Syria where only 4 minutes
of warning were provided. Much of Putin's talk with the FSB two days ago centered on Terrorism,
and we know Russia was directly attacked by the Outlaw Empire though its Terrorist Foreign
Legion. IMO, those acts have been forgotten by the Outlaw Empire but not at all by Russia, and
IMO they carry lots of weight in Russia's decision making. Nor will Russia have forgotten that
Biden was involved up to his neck in organizing ISIS and other Terrorist groups to destroy
Syria.
There's more to my assessment than the above; there's also the roots of the conflict to
consider that's been ongoing since the mid 1800s and involves the other part of the Outlaw
Empire, the UK, for they are the source of the Russophobia that now controls the EU's actions
toward Russia as was already known and just reinforced by new revelations. Lavrov's accusation
was made in a very public venue and cannot be ignored by the Outlaw Empire, and IMO is exactly
the right accusation to make since the initial criminal cabal that launched the war on Syria
are back in the saddle.
I do not understand.
US has no more proxy as Al Nusra. Sunni in the area are all dispersed.
US can bomb here and there but without boots on the ground he will get nowhere.
If Biden wants to please Israel than he has to put boots on the Ground.
Than there will be Americans fighting and dying. That could mean internal discontent in US and
even possible revolution. Sunni and Kurds do not trust US anymore.
So any Biden's moves are only humbug.
Moscow Blasts "Extremely Outrageous" Strike On Syria As Biden Stays Silent
BY TYLER DURDEN
FRIDAY, FEB 26, 2021 - 13:15
As expected Russia has reacted fiercely to the overnight US airstrikes on eastern Syria, which marked the first military
action of the Biden presidency, calling out what the Kremlin said is an
"extremely
outrageous"
violation of sovereignty.
"We strongly condemn such actions and call for Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity to be unconditionally
respected," Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said at a press briefing.
Other Russian officials, including a prominent senator for foreign affairs, Sergei Tsekov,
blasted
the
American aggression as an "extremely outrageous" move, saying further,
"Now, if
someone struck a blow on U.S. territory, what would that look like?
They strike at the territory of a sovereign
republic without the consent of Syrian leadership."
But perhaps the most interesting detail is that Russia's defense ministry was forewarned about the strike shortly before it
happened. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov
confirmed
as much
- saying the warning came a mere "minutes" before they commenced.
"This sort of warning -- when strikes are already underway -- gives (us) nothing,"
Lavrov
said
according
to
Moscow
Times
.
Given that over the past years since Russia's invitation by the Assad government in 2015 to assist in defeating the
jihadist insurgency there's been an increasing number of rival warplanes operating over Syria's skies, the Pentagon and
Russia have maintained a military-to-military hotline in order to avoid inadvertent escalations. Presumably the Russians
were "warned" via this method of communication.
While little has ultimately been confirmed, regional media outlets and monitors have cited
over
20 killed in the strike
, which the US claims was on "Iranian-backed militias" operating in Syria.
More details of how the strike unfolded have kept rolling in throughout the day Friday...
"Specifically, the strikes destroyed multiple facilities located at a border control point used by a number of
Iranian-backed militant groups, including Kata'ib Hezbollah and Kata'ib Sayyid al Shuhada," Pentagon spokesman
John
Kirby said
.
"The operation sends an unambiguous message; President Biden will act to protect American coalition personnel. At the same
time, we have acted in a deliberate manner that aims to de-escalate the overall situation in both Eastern Syria and Iraq."
But Biden himself
has remained silent on the strike
, which has angered a
handful of Congress members questioning his basis for authorizing the unilateral attack.
Damascus for its part called the attack "cowardly" and said it will surely "escalate" the crisis in the region. "Syria
condemns in the strongest terms the cowardly US aggression on areas in Deir Ez-Zor near the Syrian-Iraqi border, which is
inconsistent with international law and the Charter of the United Nations. Syria warns that it [this move] will lead to
consequences that will escalate the situation in the region," the country's foreign ministry said, as cited in state-run
news agency SANA.
@Harold
Smith br> Larry Summers (former head of the US Treasury)
Bill Richardson (former Governor of New Mexico, ex-ambassador to the United Nations and
United States Energy Secretary)
Michael Steinhardt (hedge fund manager)
Jacob Rothschild
Mary Landrieu (former United States Senator from Louisiana)
All of the above are complicit in the violation of international law and can be prosecuted
as such one day should anyone have the will to do so, as well as Trump himself.
Trump's reward for this illegal recognition: his name on an illegal Zionist colony on
occupied Syrian territory: "Trump Heights" by none other than Benjamin Mileikowsky
(Netanyahu).
"Respecting the rule of law. And treating every person with dignity. That's the grounding
wire of our global policy. Our global power. That's our inexhaustible source of strength,"
Biden said.
Seventeen people were murdered in Syria today because the US totally ignores any
international law that is in the way. If Biden wanted to send a message to Iran, why murder
those 17 who simply signed up to fight ISIS, to do good a thousand kilometers from where the
US was attacked in Iraq?
Biden is going to sanction Russia over Navalny being poisoned even though the US murders
its own citizens abroad using drones.
Nixon recognized China's sovereignty over Taiwan in the Shanghai Declaration 50 years ago.
Biden sent warships through the Taiwan Strait in his first month in office.
It appears that the inexhaustible strength of the US is derived from profound weakness of
character.
Yes and amazingly the NYT is allowing oomments from people who know the truth of that
tragedy. Assad will need considerable foreign aid to survive given their economic woes so I
would not say the US/Saudi/Israel have lost yet.
Just when I thought (again) that they couldn't possibly sink any lower, I find that the US
and its allies are allegedly committing widespread grain theft and crop destruction in
Syria.
The above articles are all from the same source, which clearly (and very reasonably) has
an axe to grind. Does anybody know of reliable corroborating reports? Thanks.
As telling other nations how to behave backed up by the 101 st Airborne division
has become a wonderful indoor board game in this age of Coronavirus-19, my favorite article for
the past week has to be the news that Honest Joe Biden has appointed yet another Zionist harpy
to his team of war planners in an apparent attempt to keep Nuland, Sherman, Haines, Rice, Power
and Neuberger company. Her name is Dana Stroul and she
will be running the Pentagon's Middle East Desk, making her the senior policy official
focused on that region. Indications are that her eagle eye will be fixed on those major
malefactors Iran and Syria.
Stroul has been whisked away from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP),
where she has been the Shelly and Michael Kassen Fellow in the Institute's Beth and David
Geduld Program on Arab Politics. WINEP is the think tank founded by the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in an attempt to demonstrate that hatred of all of Israel's enemies
in the Middle East is somehow an American vital interest, so it is perhaps odd to consider that
the organization would even allow Arabs to have politics. Stroul had worked at the Pentagon and
had also co-chaired the Syria Study Group set up by Congress prior to landing at WINEP.
Stroul,
who believes that there is a threat to the U.S. from "Iranian nuclear ambitions and support
for terrorist groups throughout the region," also has had some interesting ideas about what
should be done to Syria, some of which was laid out in a final report that was presented to
Congress in September 2019 by the Syria Study Group.
The report states that "From the conflict's beginning in 2011 as a peaceful domestic
uprising, experts warned that President Bashar al-Assad's brutal response was likely to have
serious, negative impacts on U.S. interests. Given Syria's central location in the Middle East,
its ruling regime's ties to terrorist groups and to Iran, and the incompatibility of Assad's
authoritarian rule with the aspirations of the Syrian people, many worried about the conflict
spilling over Syria's borders The threats the conflict in Syria poses -- of terrorism directed
against the United States and its allies and partners; of an empowered Iran; of an aggrandized
Russia; of large numbers of refugees, displaced persons, and other forms of humanitarian
catastrophe; and of the erosion of international norms of war and the Western commitment to
them -- are sufficiently serious to merit a determined response from the United States. The
United States and its allies retain tools to address those threats and the leverage to promote
outcomes that are better for American interests than those that would prevail in the absence of
U.S. engagement. The United States underestimated Russia's ability to use Syria as an arena for
regional influence. Russia's intervention, beginning in 2015, accomplished its proximate aim --
the preservation of the regime in defiance of U.S. calls for Assad to 'go' -- at a relatively
low cost. Russia has enhanced its profile and prestige more broadly in the Middle East."
One immediately notes the incoherence of the argument being made. To make U.S. presence in
Syria palpable to the long-suffering American public, it is necessary to attempt to establish a
threat against the United States even though in this case there is none. And the repeated
citation of "interests" without credibly explaining what interests might compel invading and
occupying a foreign country is completely lacking in any detail. Stroul also several times
cites the heavy terrorist threat, ignoring the fact that the existing terrorists are being
sustained by Israel and by the United States, while President Bashar al-Assad has the
overwhelming support of most of the Syrian people. Reports are that Syrians are returning home
after a refugee crisis caused by the United States and its allies. And we all know that the
last refuge of a scoundrel is to play the Russian card, which Stroul does, as well as surfacing
that perennial demon Iran. U.S. support of Israeli bombing attacks are also just fine in her
opinion, even though they are a clear violation of the "international norms of war" that she
pretends to defend.
Stroul inevitably supports U.S.
retention and what she curiously refers to as "ownership" of the one third of Syria that is
"resource rich." That includes the Syrian oil producing region now occupied by U.S. troops as
well as by what she euphemizes as "Syrian Democratic Forces." She observes that it also
includes the country's best agricultural land, which, if denied to the government in Damascus,
could be used as leverage to bring about regime change. Starving Syrians are not Stroul's
concern so she consequently opposes any form of international relief or reconstruction funding
for the Syrian people and supports U.S. pressure on international lenders through the worldwide
banking system to deny Damascus any money to rebuild.
LINK BOOKMARK So, the
prize for the truly awful story of the week goes to the appointment of this monster daughter of
AIPAC to head Pentagon planning for the Middle East, joining a sterling cast of characters at
State Department and in the intelligence community. Also, if one includes the account of a
diversified U.S. Army where soldiers will now be encouraged to snitch on each other over
privately held views, one has to ask "Can it get any worse?" Judging from Joe Biden's list of
appointments so far, it will, yes it will.
Philip Giraldi, Ph.D. is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest.
John Kerry proudly states that Qatar, Saudi Arabia would fund US army to invade and topple
Syrian President Al Assad. And Israel goad America to fight "for its interests". Words of
Major General Smedley Butler that essentially US army is a mercenary unit comes to mind.
Using the short form of trillion, and counting that the Pentagon budget (+ secret ops) was
already estimated to be 1'2 trillion about five years back. Which makes $3'287'671'232.88 per
day. Three thousand two hundred and eighty two million.. Easier to calculate, (incl US
contribution) is that the total NATO budget is x 22 that of Russia.
No surprise to hear that all of a sudden, and so soon after Joe Biden's inauguration as
US President, Syria is coming back into the United States' target sights. The team that used
to advise O'Bomber on his Middle East policy must have all come back and are probably also
being paid bigger bucks for the next four-year cycle.
Is al-Tanf really a launching pad for ISIS attacks in the region?
This question reminded me of something Putin told Oliver Stone in Episode 1 of The Putin
Interviews regarding the Chechen 'uprising'. About 40 minutes in he tells Stone that "The
Americans were flying fighters around (inside Russia)."
Putin complained about this to Bush II. The US response came in the form of a letter from the
Director of the CIA which said, in effect: "The CIA reserves the right to engage with
Opposition parties and will continue to do so."
In other words "Go fuck yourself."
Putin doesn't say what action, if any, Russia took in response to Yankee Chutzpah inside
Russia but he's certainly familiar with Yankees throwing their weight around inside other
people's countries.
The foregoing occurred AFTER Russia had moved heaven and earth to help and co-operate with
the Yankees in their Fake War in Afghanistan.
This article from
thesaker site last week relates:
"Unable to achieve complete regime change, the Empire has shifted gears and now is
waging a war primarily based on starvation. Limiting the flow of food and energy in the
country may not even succeed in directly impeding military operations, but it can
effectively turn Syria into a third world country by grinding civilian life to a halt and
starving the population."
- Deir Ezzor is a Sign of Things to Come
It ties in how, the US in 2003 "unilaterally disbanded the Iraqi army without pay,
despite warnings that this would create a pool of manpower for terrorism. Many of these
soldiers later filled the ranks of ISIS."
It could also have tied in how, in 2011, the US overthrew the stable, peaceful government
in Libya and ensured the spread of weaponry to Syria/Iraq/ISIS/AQ/Africa, despite many
warnings about that too. So the US deliberately created a pool of manpower for terrorism,
then deliberately created a pool and flow of weaponry.
As stated in a 2014
article , "The states which the US planned to destroy in 2001 (as reported by General
Wesley Clark in his memoirs) - Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Iran and Syria - are now
in fact destroyed societies. All but Iran are left with civil war and majority destitution
where once they had been relatively prosperous and life secure."
The people of Syria suffered far less under Trump than under Obama/H.Clinton/Biden, and,
unfortunately, just days into the new administration it already looks like they will suffer
more again now that Biden has empowered the neocons again.
It's extraordinary that in the current balance of power situation the SAA (Syrian Arab
Army) and the Russian Military have to tolerate these clandestine operations in Syria by US
and UK Special Forces protected by the threat of US and Israeli air power and invasive US
military reaction. These operations have been initiated at the end of the proxy war waged
unsuccessfully by the US/UK since 2012 with the aim in the longer term to extend by violence
and terror the strength and penetration of Salafist Jihadist terrorism (embracing ISIS
remnants etc) into mainland Syria much like the incursions conducted by the Contras in
Nicaragua in the eighties to weaken the state and demoralise the people. That there is some
confusion as to the role of these occupied Syrian territories despite the covert nature of
the US/UK presence is worrying since it must be understood that the US and UK military are
now providing direct operational and logistical support in addition to training, financing,
resupplying terrorists including ISIS all operating from safe, protected bases inside Syria
controlled by the US. It's now obvious that unlike earlier in the Syrian conflict when US/UK
involvement was limited by the policy of fronting the proxy war in Syria by Saudi Arabia,
Gulf States and Turkey the US has stationed its forces on the front line of this low level
proxy war which the US intends to stage manage while economic war is waged against the Syrian
people to further weaken their resolve and resistance. This blatant criminal enterprise
cannot go unanswered by all anti imperialist forces and organisations in the Middle East and
Europe.
Not only is the US/UK military occupation of Syrian sovereign territory illegal but the
'pillage' of Syrian oil is also illegal and prohibited by the Hague Conventions. This has
been customary international law for over one hundred years.
So much for the fabled 'ruled based international order' a phrase which is recited by rote
and trumpeted endlessly by the self same Anglo/Zionists. As if saying the phrase means doing
it.
These war criminals will stop at nothing in the service of bandit state.
Photo of US soldiers training Maghweer al-Thora forces in the al-Tanf pocket (source:
Hammurabi news) bigger
Many questions remain unanswered about the al-Tanf United States base in the Syrian desert,
that is called illegal by the Syrian government and Russia. Why is al-Tanf so important to the
US? What are the US soldiers still doing there? Who else are hosted in the al-Tanf pocket? Why
is ISIS growing again? Is al-Tanf really a launching pad for ISIS attacks in the region?
Why is the al-Tanf base so important to the US?
The al-Tanf base is located in the al-Tanf pocket, at about 20km of the al-Tanf border
crossing. It's 55 km-deconfliction zone is located along the border with Iraq and Jordan, and
cuts off the Baghdad-Damascus highway. By controlling this highway, the United States ensures
that Iranian deliveries to the Syrian capital Damascus cannot take place by land. This is of
high strategic importance to the US, because Iranian shipments and air deliveries are much
easier intercepted, and form an easy target to Israeli airstrikes.
The US-led coalition forces use al-Tanf as an entrance point to launch operations into
Syria. The base can be easily reached from both Baghdad and Jordan. Both the Syrian government
and Russian officials have repeatedly stated that the al-Tanf zone are being used by terrorist
groups active in the region, as a safe haven and a foothold to carry out attacks on
government-held areas and Iranian proxy-groups in the Bukamal area. This 'ISIS rear base' has
been actively protected by the forces stationed at al-Tanf, which threaten any deployment of
the Syrian Arab Army, Iranian proxy-groups and Russian forces close to the al-Tanf zone. The
formal justification given by the US surrounding these actions is that Syrian government troops
as well as Iranian-backed forces in Syria pose a threat to US-backed 'less-radical' rebel
groups and US troops deployed at the garrison.
Oil, Rebels, Iran, Chaos and Leverage
Many allegations exist surrounding the activities of the US soldiers present at al-Tanf,
even though the Trump-administration claimed it wanted to pull back troops from Syria and
victory had been announced over ISIS.
One of the reasons is the presence of US-backed 'rebel' groups such as Maghweer al-Thora.
According to an OIR inspector general
report released Aug. 4. 2020, OIR officials want to want to double the size of US-proxy
forces in Syria and finish training a 2,200-man "oilfield guard" unit there.
The same
report also mentions the oil revenues of the area. US-backed forces likely produced at
least 30,000 barrels of oil per day, garnering nearly $3 million a day in revenue, until the
recent price collapse. "Although US-backed Kurdish forces have "bolstered" their "security
presence near major oil and gas fields in northeastern Syria," they have "remained co-located
with Coalition forces whose protection SDF leaders still depend on," the IG report also reads,
reminding us of the cooperation of a shady US oil company partnering up with the Kurdish-led
SDF to
refine and sell Syria's oil . The Kurdish-led SDF occupies a great part of the country's
wheat fields and the majority of Syria's oilfields, and thus actively threaten Syria's economy.
Another reason the US government might utter are 'humanitarian reasons' As there are 10.000
refugees and Bedouins living inside the deconfliction zone, which is heavily
infiltrated by ISIS militants and said to be a launching pad for 'ISIS' attacks by
Syrian officials . US officials might utter these 'refugees' have been under US protection
for years now, and leaving them behind might put them in danger, so they must stay.
Army Gen. Joseph Votel, the top U.S. commander for the Middle East, acknowledged the base's
strategic importance in
countering the sway of Iran . He was quoted as following: "Al Tanf's location is also
central to its role in preventing the Iranians from gaining a firmer foothold in the region.
The base sits in the heart of what Iran hopes will be part of a "Shia Crescent," a continuous
land bridge linking Iran through Iraq and Syria to Lebanon." US officials have also uttered
that their presence at al-Tanf could form leverage in the negotiations on the outcome of the
conflict. As Syria, Russia, Turkey and Iran all want the United States to leave Syria, it might
give them some leverage when Syria's future will be formed.
Maghaweer al-Thowra, liberated ISIS prisoners, and the British SAS
As mentioned earlier, the rebel group "Revolutionary Commando Army" or 'Maghaweer al-Thowra'
is hosted in the al-Tanf pocket, they are called 'less-radical' are trained by US soldiers to
fight in anti-ISIS operations. Yet, defects of the group have claimed that
'U.S. troops at Al-Tanf base sold weapons to ISIS in Syria' and use the group to hinder
operations of the Syrian Arab Army and Iranian proxies in the area instead.
"American instructors trained them to carry out sabotage at oil and transport
infrastructure, as well as for terrorist acts in the Syrian government-controlled territories,"
state another group of
defectors of Maghaweer al-Thowra. In addition to US-backed rebel groups, it is also stated
that former ISIS militants are being hosted in the al-Tanf pocket. Though the US forces have
not denied that ISIS militants may have infiltrated the refugees there, multiple reports
state that
ISIS prisoners released by Kurdish officials have been massively
transported to the US military base. Western forces are being host in the al-Tanf base as
well. The British special forces SAS have been
operating alongside US forces and Syrian 'rebels' since 2016 in operations hidden from the
public. The British covert operation started as early as 2011
, when the British were assisting the earliest Syrian 'rebels' and assessing their needs to
overthrow Syrian president Assad. The SAS began actively training
the 'rebels' fighting Assad from bases in Jordan in 2012. At the same time, the SAS also began
"
slipping into Syria on missions". That the rebels they supported had strong affiliations
with ISIS did not matter to them. The Free Syrian Army that was supported in the British
operation, was in effect allied to IS until the end of 2013 and was collaborating
with it on the battlefield until 2014, despite tensions between the groups. "We have good
relations with our brothers in the FSA," ISIS leader Abu Atheer said in 2013, having
bought arms from the FSA.
Other reports show that the SAS has been actively training and fighting alongside
the Kurdish-led SDF. British special forces
continue to operate on the ground in Syria in 2019 and are reported to number at least
120
soldiers , as a new cyber unit was announced that 'was created to take on Russian and
Chinese battle tech' and 'also track down remaining ISIS commanders'. In 2020, the SAS has
continued 'secret manoeuvres' in Syria. They have also fought alongside the Kurdish-led SDF and
were clad in Burkas during operations in the area. Reports by British media also state that the
forces will also be deployed to hinder Russia's and Iran's covert activities. SAS forces are
stationed in Jordan and al-Tanf.
Attacks claimed by ISIS in both Iraq and Syria have increased significantly in 2020,
demonstrating both a capacity and a willingness on ISIS's part to continue attacks and retake
territory, support in the area, and resources. ISIS has led a steady beat of assassinations,
ambushes, and bombings in eastern Syria in 2020, and is responsible for the deaths of a number
of regime and SDF forces. By August, 126
attacks by ISIS across Syria were reported for 2020 -- compared to 144 in all of 2019.
Reasons mentioned for the ISIS resurgence in Syria are to be found in several complex
situations. The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces have released more than
600 ISIS fighters and
15.000 ISIS-supporters from al-Hol camp. In addition,
785 ISIS fighters escaped from Ayn Issa during Turkish shelling, and about 100 hardcore
ISIS-militants have reportedly
escaped from ISIS-prisons .
ISIS prisoners in Hasakah (source: Rudaw)
Another reason for ISIS' opportunity to grow are the flaring tensions
between the SDF and tribal forces in Deir ez-Zor, after the assassinations of several powerful
Arab tribal leaders. The SDF
blamed the Syrian government, Turkey, Iran and their respective local allies of using
certain elements in Deir ez-Zor to cause instability. Though in 2019, victory over ISIS was
declared after the last ISIS stronghold was retaken in the battle for
Baghouz , the amount of ISIS attacks has seemed to have risen.
Maps made by Gregory
Waters show the exact location of the ISIS attacks, and how the location of the attacks
suddenly spread from the al-Tanf/al-Bukamal axis to the Deir ez-Zor-Uqayribat axis (ISIS
stronghold that was liberated by the Syrian Arab Army in 2017) in 2020, as well as multiplying
and intensifying by orders of magnitude.
By analyzing these maps, an interesting trend can be seen. ISIS attacks seem to focus on
areas that have been recaptured by the Syrian Arab Army, stretching deeply in SAA territory.
Other ISIS attacks focus on Iranian proxies from al-Bukamal to Deir ez-Zor. An amount of ISIS
attacks also occurred in SDF-held territories, focussing on the Deir ez-Zor region. These
attacks conveniently seem to
target tribal leaders that oppose the SDF-US oil deal .
Is al-Tanf really a launching pad for ISIS attacks in the region?
The controversial al-Tanf base is mentioned as a launching pad for ISIS attacks in the
region by many sides. All sides seem to agree that dubious attacks – claimed to be
committed by ISIS - seem to be launched from the al-Tanf pocket.
The al-Tanf pocket hosts ISIS-affiliated refugees and militias like Maghaweer al-Thowra,
that have cooperated with ISIS and use quite the same modus operandi. These groups
still receive training by US soldiers today.
British SAS forces remain operative in the reason, and are stationed in Jordan and al-Tanf,
from where they launch operations. Little is known about their activities in Syria, as the SAS
is exempt
from freedom of information laws and operates under a strict "no comment" policy. Secrecy
around the corps is pervasive.
Statements of defectors, Russian government officials and Syrian government officials, and
other signs explained in this article all point in the same direction; that al-Tanf has become
the launching pad of dubious activities in the region. They allege US-sponsored ISIS factions,
US-backed rebel groups, or secretive SAS operations are behind the attacks.
Proving these allegations or distinguishing the real perpetrator is very hard, yet all
evidence points at al-Tanf. And even if proven, accusations will remain unheard by the larger
public. Yet, when arguing about this growing threat, one must take the US military's earlier
actions in the Middle East in mind. The US has a long history of state-sponsored
terrorism , and cooperation with terrorist- and radical
jihadist groups. Proof of these operations often only shows up years after. And I myself will
not be surprised if - one day - news about a clandestine ISIS-US cooperation appears in the
media through leaks or whistle blowers, books will be written, and documentaries will be
made.
Posted by b on January 29, 2021 at 10:44 UTC |
Permalink
No surprise to hear that all of a sudden, and so soon after Joe Biden's inauguration as US
President, Syria is coming back into the United States' target sights. The team that used to
advise O'Bomber on his Middle East policy must have all come back and are probably also being
paid bigger bucks for the next four-year cycle.
How can a U.S. citizen even respond? U.S. Intel agency secrets. CENTCOM's treason, the
nation's complicity in another eternal war for Israel. It's just too sad to comment about.
Maybe voting and the law will fix this mess.
" that is called illegal by the Syrian government "
If the Syrian government say something inside Syria is illegal then that's what it is because
they are the Syrian government.
What's this 'regime' you talk about? Is it the American one?
"Many questions remain unanswered about the al-Tanf United States base in the Syrian desert,
that is called illegal by the Syrian government and Russia. "
It's probably unintentional but this phrasing is similar to what the NYT and WaPo use when
they want to cast doubt on a claim made by US "adversaries."
The fact is, the al-Tanf base is unquestionably illegal because the US is in Syria
without Damascus' consent. It is an occupation force but no war was declared nor did the UN
authorize the occupation. This makes it illegal under international law no matter what anyone
says or doesn't say about it.
Not only is the US/UK military occupation of Syrian sovereign territory illegal but the
'pillage' of Syrian oil is also illegal and prohibited by the Hague Conventions. This has
been customary international law for over one hundred years.
So much for the fabled 'ruled based international order' a phrase which is recited by rote
and trumpeted endlessly by the self same Anglo/Zionists. As if saying the phrase means doing
it.
These war criminals will stop at nothing in the service of bandit state.
The SAS ought to be designated publicly as a "terrorist entity" by the Syrians and their
backers.
I note that some of the targets mentioned are tribal leaders. If my memory serves me
correctly the Shaihtah* tribe near Al Bukamal-Al Mayadin and whose original territory was on
the Eastern side of the river, lost 750 people massacred by ISIS and who have now
become (part of?) the SDF. Mainly Women and children of course. It won't change much if
Tribal leaders are assassinated, as the tribe as a whole will remember. That is what Tribal
afffinities are for.
Another reason for ISIS' opportunity to grow are the flaring tensions between the SDF and
tribal forces in Deir ez-Zor, after the assassinations of several powerful Arab tribal
leaders. The SDF blamed the Syrian government, Turkey, Iran and their respective local
allies of using certain elements in Deir ez-Zor to cause instability. Though in 2019,
victory over ISIS was declared after the last ISIS stronghold was retaken in the battle for
Baghouz, the amount of ISIS attacks has seemed to have risen. Maps made by Gregory Waters
show the exact location of the ISIS attacks, and how the location of the attacks suddenly
spread from the al-Tanf/al-Bukamal axis to the Deir ez-Zor-Uqayribat axis (ISIS stronghold
that was liberated by the Syrian Arab Army in 2017) in 2020, as well as multiplying and
intensifying by orders of magnitude.
One factor may be the direct consequence of the other: ISIS was defeated as a regular
force, so now they're scattered around East Syria doing the more traditional terrorist
attacks.
How can a U.S. citizen even respond? U.S. Intel agency secrets. CENTCOM's treason, the
nation's complicity in another eternal war for Israel. It's just too sad to comment about.
Maybe voting and the law will fix this mess.
Posted by: PavewayIV | Jan 29 2021 11:31 utc | 2
I think maybe its time to rethink is it actually the nation state of Israel, OR is it that
the Nation State of Israel is the same as the Nation State of the USA, a warrior, pawn and
get it done group that both holds captive its citizens by rule of law and that serves the
will and wishes of the Oligarch..
Oligarchary has gone global. They are in control of the top of nearly all governments and
they privately own (92% owned by just 6 entities) the media (the ninth tier in the 9 tier
model) At the top and at the bottom they have what it takes to keep divided the populations
so the deplorable cannot effectively organize. Until someone comes up with a way to overcome
the divided nation,nothing effective is likely to surface. Nation states are the pawns, the
war machine (leg breakers) that keep the Oligarch familes wealthy.. forget the nation state
as the center of power, the nation state is not, the center of power is invisible, the nation
state is just the war machine, and law making machine and the wealth extraction machine the
oligarch depend on to keep their wealth and to deny the deplorable their chance at the good
life.
One of the biggest challenges to democracy lay in the copyright and patent monopolies.
these monopolies are creatures of the rule of law, without law there can be no privately
owned monopolies. as of Oct 1, it is reported that 90% of the balance sheets of the traded
companies is either patents or copyrights. that only leaves 10% for physical assets. Rule of
law, without effective input from those who are the governed, is the enemy of the deplorable
and the supression of Democracy, Independence of mind, thought and deed.
If you removed the laws that enable copyright and patents, overnight some mighty big
corporate enterprises would be broke.
My question to you is this, how many SDF [Kurdish soldiers] have ISIS killed over
that time frame? [not rhetorical, I don't know the answer, I'd like to know]
A disparity of numbers will tell you who ISIS sees as their biggest enemy.
[If I ask a rhetorical question, I'll throw in a pompous, 'again I ask' at the end.]
Slightly OT: conspiracy theories Marjorie Taylor Greene
1. Parkland shooting was staged to undermine gun rights, 2. laser beam fired from space to
help
high speed rail in CA
Why do people so quickly embrace such far fetched explanations?
1. the theory has to give a conclusion that the listener wants to believe, 'my rights are
being threatened by powerful people, bad people'. 2. It only requires plausibility, not
proof, or a friends approval.
Back to this topic earlier, I said that ISIS considers the govt of Syria a bigger
enemy than the SDF because they have attacked the SAA thousands of times, and I only see a
few against the SDF.
I did not start with, 'Israel and the U.S. is in an alliance w/ISIS' to explain the same
set of facts. I would say that the U.S. and Israel are more interested in hurting the Syrian
govt even if it helps ISIS but that does not require a conspiracy.
I know this is pedantic. But I am fascinated by people who jump off the ledge and I'm
trying to understand where the line is or if people have other observations.
Louis N Proyect @Jan29 13:04 #9 shows up to administer ideological policing to "you people"
that think outside of the carefully constructed "comfort zone" of media narratives.
But moa readers have seen how fake these narratives have been with psyops like the White
Helmets. And we have not forgotten the "Obama Administration's" "willful choice" to let ISIS
rise after Russia prevented USA from bombing Syria in 2013.
Furthermore, we have noticed that ISIS never attacks Israel. And we can see that ISIS'
continuing existence in Syria is crucial to USA's ability to legally remain in Syria under UN
Resolution 2249.
2249 does not remotely give USA legal cover. If you read only half the resolution while
attempting to reason with the mind of a petulant child you could construct a rationale, but
your older brother would see through that rationale in a second.
Yes, US diplomats often reason like small children. Let us not assist them.
They say the bigger they are the harder they fall. In the end, after the fall, after the
'truth commissions' and investigations, and post-apocalyptic introspection, the citizens of
Empire will live in the shame of a humanity that worshiped greed as a religion, and practiced
inhumanity to humans as simply another course in a feast. Meanwhile the billions of victims
of Empire will dance, sing and rejoice as the current imperial project of the lizard-people
sinks beneath the waves to join another in a long line of human empires that misunderstood
the meaning of life.
The acronym ought to be ISUS or USIS. Of course, al-Tanf is a terrorist base, the terrorists
primarily being forces of the Outlaw US Empire and its main accomplice. Accepting that as
fact, we must then determine WHY? What is the overall aim?
If Hudson's correct about the overall geopolitical aims of the Parasitical Neoliberal
Fascists running the Outlaw US Empire and its NATO vassals, then we've known the answer for
quite awhile. The following is what Hudson has distilled it to:
"All economic systems seek to internationalize themselves and extend their rule throughout
the world. Today's revived Cold War should be understood as a fight between what kind of
economic system the world will have . Finance capitalism is fighting against nations
that restrict its intrusive dynamics and sponsorship of privatization and dismantling of
public regulatory power . Unlike industrial capitalism, the rentier aim is not to become
a more productive economy by producing goods and selling them at a lower cost than
competitors. Finance capitalism's dynamics are globalist, seeking to use international
organizations (the IMF, NATO, the World Bank and U.S.-designed trade and investment
sanctions) to overrule national governments that are not controlled by the rentier
classes . The aim is to make all economies into finance-capitalist layers of
hereditary privilege, imposing anti-labor austerity policies to squeeze a dollarized
surplus .
" Industrial capitalism's resistance to this international pressure is necessarily
nationalist , because it needs state subsidy and laws to tax and regulate the FIRE
sector . But it is losing the fight to finance capitalism, which is turning to be its
nemesis just as industrial capitalism was the nemesis of post-feudal landlordship and
predatory banking. Industrial capitalism requires state subsidy and infrastructure
investment, along with regulatory and taxing power to check the incursion of finance
capital . The resulting global conflict is between socialism (the natural evolution of
industrial capitalism) and a pro-rentier fascism, a state-finance-capitalist reaction against
socialism's mobilization of state power to roll back the post-feudal rentier interests ."
[My Emphasis]
The situation in Syria and Iraq represent the kinetic edge of what's mostly a Cold War
globally. It's noted that some of the Parasitical organizations have powers equal to some
nation-states and that the main underlying aim is the weakening of governments's abilities to
regulate them. The pandemic has weakened a great many nations while the Parasites have grown
stronger as they get massive transfusions from the Fed. Thus it seems very plausible that
given their motive, the Parasites spawned the pandemic, not this or that government. We
watched as those forces operated independently of Trump by disobeying his orders, and now we
have further understanding of why the so-called Forever Wars. We can also understand the real
motive for 911 was the destruction of evidence at Building 7 and the Pentagon that would've
gravely injured the Parasites while also providing a covering reason for launching the
Forever Wars. IMO, the only way the Outlaw US Empire will leave the areas it occupies is if
its physically ousted--Korea, Japan, Europe, Afghanistan, Southwest Asia. It ought to be
possible to now see how Full Spectrum Domination can be obtained without a military conflict,
as well as the real reasons behind the demonization of China and Russia.
Both Putin and Xi told Davos and the Parasites that they're committed to their development
path which is completely at odds with what the Parasites desire. IMO, the global masses would
agree with both and join them if they knew what they said. We can also see why the attack on
the Ummah, which is the Islamic global collective that adheres to the values that promote the
collective, not the Parasites that would feed on it. And we just witnessed how the Parasites
are able to quickly counter any concerted effort to disciple them, which also served the
purpose of outing Big Tech as an enemy of the collective. Cold War or Class War? The
difference between them is close to indistinguishable.
Arch Bungle @19
No matter how frustrated I may get with some comments.
I always leave with a smile.
I always find some point of agreement with every poster.
I have learned more here than in my entire academic career. I rarely post because I cannot
add. I love the tactful and the witty. I do admire those that have come here 'out of their
comfort zone'. It all begins somewhere.
why? because the usa is servant to israel... that and al- tanf is a terrorist base for
usa-israel.... anything else is a lie and what you will read in the msm regularly...
@ karlof1... thanks again for the hudson article...
Using the short form of trillion, and counting that the Pentagon budget (+ secret ops) was
already estimated to be 1'2 trillion about five years back. Which makes $3'287'671'232.88 per
day. Three thousand two hundred and eighty two million, six hundred and seventy one thousand,
two hundred and thirty two dollars, and eighty eight cents.
I wish I had friends like yours, but tell it/them/etc. that I didn't count in the actual
sum spent on contracts and procurement. Ask Congress, I think they have "oversight"
(overshot?). Pelosi will know.
Easier to calculate, (incl US contribution) is that the total NATO budget is x 22 that of
Russia.
-----------
General comment; If ISIS is mainly in the southern part of the desert east of the
Euphrates, then it's arms must come from somewhere near. Al-Tanf is the most likely and the
Israelis have admitted giving some (earlier) from the Golan heights area.
------------
snake | Jan 29 2021 13:52 utc | 12
There are supposed to be 655 "families" that control all. The question is; are the
corporations (Nouveau rich) and the families the one and the same? I do not think they are,
but they use the same methods of control. (Media et al.)
------------
Cheer up. here is a clip of "Putins palace" - the real insider facts. At least you will see
why there is less unemployment in Russia.
- I see a REAL possibility that these US trained fighters have an agenda of their own that
"doesn't align/run parallel" with the plans the US has for Syria & Iraq/Iran.
snake @12, this is indeed what has been happening, and why b's post on the Wall Street
shenanigans is so important. Not only do oligarchs make their billions through monopolies,
(thank you Clinton) but also Wall Street has been shown to be oligarchical territory for
turning billions into trillions and not any little person can have leverage there.
Education happens outside the universities and the state run school system these days. The
soft spots for the oligarchical/tyrannical system are surely educating many that 'it's a big
club and you ain't in it', though I would rephrase that:
Happy Friday America! It's been less than 48 hours and already our brave redacted Commander
in Chief has, finished with using 25,000 troops he says he can't trust to ethnicly cleanse the
Capital of all Americans, sent troops back to Syria. Come on man, we gotta take on the
Roooshans, just like we've been telling you for years. For (check's list) Freedom in the Middle
East.
I guess those four peace treaties the Trump administration helped to get enacted don't
matter. Ready or not, here they come:
That's a brave warrior of Meal Team VI, just finishing protecting Bomb'n Biden from the
YUUUGE inaugural crowds.
You remember when Joe campaigned on bringing the troops home defending Syrians in Syria from
Syrians? It was right there in the answer to the question posed by the third circle
reporter:
Ah, what a campaign. Dominionating the Donald. It will go down in infamy history as the most
free and fair election ever!. Now, back to war. (Thanks Joe! That's what 80 million voted for.)
Here they are,
bravely moving forward from where Donald J. Trump ordered them not to be in the first
place.
I'm so glad our officer corps is loyal. Let me pause here to pronounce my loyalty to the man
who garnered more votes than Barack, more votes than any president in history. Phew, glad I got
that out. I'd hate to be pronoun-ed disloyal the Resistance.
"A large U.S. military convoy was seen entering
northeastern Syria on Thursday, marking the first time since Damascus issued its letter to the
United Nations Security Council demanding the immediate withdrawal of American forces from the
Arab Republic. "According to a field report from northeastern Syria on Thursday, the U.S.
military convoy entered the Al-Hasakah Governorate from neighboring Iraq, as they were observed
entering the Arab Republic via the Al-Waleed Crossing." (Apparently that site is currently
under a DNS attack. Surprise, surprise.) Thank's Joe. Nothing says unity quite like body bags
back from Kabul Baghad NW Syria where we bravely went to do what? Infrastructure, good jobs,
Climate Change? Whatever. I'm sure they'll be remembered: Though unlike
brain cancer victims they won't get to lie in state in the Senate Rotunda. We're back baby!
Bomb's Away! It's the Bomb'n Biden Agenda. 80,000,000 votes. I'm sure that's worth one bomb
each? At least the MSM won't be talking about China, FangFang, Corruprtion, The Big Guy's 10%,
or even why gas prices are already up 10%.
Gosh! The UN General Assembly actually affirmed that Israel's continued occupation of the
Golan Heights is 'a violation of international law'!! But the USA voted against the
resolution. Does that mean the USA supports violations of international law, or that it
believes it has the right to decide what does or does not constitute violations thereof?
My vote is with option B. As others have pointed out, the USA loves to throw the weight of
'international law' about, often when there is no such backing and even more often without
getting any more specific than just 'international law'. The supposed annexation of Crimea is
a natural example – the USA and Ukraine monotonously refer to the transfer of Crimea to
the Russian Federation as such a violation, but do not specify what law was violated, instead
bleating about the Budapest Memorandum.
The latter is not international law, and more importantly, it assumed that conditions
which prevailed at the time of signing would endure; no provision was made for a bloody coup
right next door, and nobody would be fool enough to sign such an agreement as unconditional.
Not to blame it all on the USA and Ukraine, either – the USA's retinue of lickspittles
who depend on it for trade and economic reasons are happy to parrot it as a 'violation of
international law'.
That only shows you how easily an action the west routinely lauds as the very essence of
democratic principles – a declaration of independence supported by a huge majority of
the inhabitants – can be made to seem 'a violation of international law': simply refuse
to recognize the decision as the will of the people, and characterize it as a forced decision
made under duress. Because America says the Crimean referendum was not legal or proper,
Crimea should have been forced against its will to remain a possession of Ukraine – the
very and complete polar opposite of the USA's customary prancing and whooping about
'freedom'.
I wouldn't want to be a Russian in Ukraine now, though. Hysteria will be high, and the
nationalists will be looking for an outlet for their frustration and hate.
Since a nation's territorial Waters extend 12 miles beyond its coast, doesn't that put the
entirety of the Ketch strait in Russian territorial waters ??
BTW What happens where the 12 mile extensions of two nations overlap???
The usual anti-Russian subject in "western" political circles use the incident to
demand more measures against Russia. Fronting the effort is the weapon industry lobbying
group Atlantic Council:
Anders Åslund, a resident senior fellow in the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center,
said: "NATO and the United States should send in naval ships in the Sea of Azov to guarantee
that it stays open to international shipping."
Such action, Åslund said, "would be in full compliance with the UN Law of the Sea
Convention of 1982 and the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits of
1936."
Anders Aslund is listed as member of the "U.S. & Canadian Cluster" of the secret
influence operation by the British Foreign Office describe here two days ago. He is obviously
unable to read a map, sea chart, or UN convention. The Ukrainian attempt to pass through the
Kerch Strait without Russian consent is a breach of Article 7, 19 and 21 of the UN Law of the
Sea Convention (pdf):
Article 7: "Subject to this Convention, ships of all States, whether coastal or
land-locked, enjoy the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea."
Article 19-1: "Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good
order or security of the coastal State. Such passage shall take place in conformity with this
Convention and with other rules of international law."
Article 21-4: "Foreign ships exercising the right of innocent passage through the
territorial sea shall comply with all such [coastal state] laws and regulations and all
generally accepted international regulations relating to the prevention of collisions at
sea."
There will now be again a lot of noise in the media about the 'nefarious Russians' and
new demands for even more useless sanctions. But the legal case is clear. It was the
Ukrainian navy that willfully attempted to pass from the Black Sea into the Sea of Azov
through Russian territorial waters without regard to the laws and regulations of the coastal
state. Russia was within its full rights to prevent the passage and to seize the Ukrainian
boats.
Dear God; Anders Aslund. Now he's an expert in maritime law. Might as well, I guess; he's a
chrome-plated clusterfuck as an economist – good on you, Anders, to make a career
change so late in life.
Anders Aslund is a wooden-head whose sole useful function is to give the veneer of
academia to agit-prop.
The Atlantic Council seems to attract many people who have quite sudden and dramatic mid-life
career changes, for example that former women's lingerie salesman turned investigative
journalist Eliot Higgins.
"...It's so crazy how Israel's constant airstrikes on Syria are just background noise that
hardly anyone is aware of. Imagine a country in western Europe routinely bombing its neighbor
and killing large numbers of people and the public being generally unaware that it's
happening because the press barely reports it..."
with this added paragraph and link in the antiwar.com article
"....US officials are pointing to their own involvement with this, saying Mike Pompeo
provided the intelligence to Mossad. They suggested the intelligence was about Iranian arms.
It's not clear why so many troops were killed if warehouses were the target..."
Surely the war against Syria has to rank as one of the greatest wars crimes of the last
50-60 years or more.... But not a liberal in sight. hah.
Oh I almost forgot that this great crime, along with the complete destruction and
destitution of the richest nation in all of Africa, Libya, was all started under
Obama-Biden-Clinton-Rice-Power administration. double hah.
Trump obviously wants better diplomatic relations with Russia. He is reluctant to
counter its military might. He is doing his best to make it richer. Just consider the
headlines below. With all those good things Trump did for Putin, intense suspicions of
Russian influence over him is surely justified.
There followed 34 headlines and links to stories about Trump actions, from closing Russian
consulates to U.S. attacks on Russian troops, that were hostile to Russia.
In fact no other U.S. administration since the cold war has been more aggressive towards
Russia than Trump's.
But some U.S. media continue to claim that Trump's behavior towards Russia has not been
hostile at all. Consider this line
in Politico about anti-Russian hawks in the incoming Biden administration:
Nuland and Sherman, who entered academia and the think tank world after leaving the Obama
administration, have been outspoken critics of President Donald Trump's foreign policy --
particularly his appeasement of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Where please has Trump 'appeased' Vladimir Putin?
Here are a number of headlines which appeared in U.S. media since we published our first
list two years ago. Which of the described actions were designed to 'appease' Putin or
Russia?
When one adds up all those actions one can only find that Trump cares more about Russia,
than about the U.S. and its NATO allies. Only with Trump being under Putin's influence,
knowingly or unwittingly, could he end up doing Russia so many favors.
Why, you certainly could view most (if not all) of those actions as favors.
People feel attacked, unite, rally around the flag. Internal problems are blamed on the
external enemy. The sanctions, the sort the West likes to impose, help develop domestic
industries. Etc. Yeah, favors.
Point on! Trump was never 'the Russians' bitch'. He was the whore of the Russian
émigré mafia that had relocated to the US in south Queens in New York City. A
major difference!
Well, the logic is to destroy or ad least severely weaken Russia. Yet damn Russia is
getting stronger and stronger, hence what ever happened under Trump's watch must have been a
favor to Russia.
Competent government would look itself in the mirror and admit it is their own fault and
stupidity, but that ship sailed long time ago for US.
The past year began with the assassination of the Iranian military genius General Qasem
Soleimani by the United States, and it ended with the murder of the prominent scholar Mohsen
Fakhrizadeh by the Israelis. In early January, Iran, expecting another aggressive action from
the West, accidently shot down a Ukrainian civil aircraft that had inexplicably altered its
course over Tehran without request nor authorization. Around the same time, Turkey confirmed
the deployment of its military in Libya, beginning a new phase of confrontation in the region,
and Egypt responding with airstrikes and additional shows of force. The situation in Yemen
developed rapidly: taking advantage of the Sunni coalition's moral weakness, Ansar Allah
achieved significant progress in forcing the Saudis out of the country in many regions. The
state of warfare in northwestern Syria has significantly changed, transforming into the formal
delineation of zones of influence of Turkey and the Russian-Iranian-Syrian coalition. This
happened amid, and largely due to the weakening of U.S. influence in the region. Ankara is
steadily increasing its military presence in the areas under its responsibility and along the
contact line. It has taken measures to deter groups linked to Al-Qaeda and other radicals. As a
result, the situation in the region is stabilizing, which has allowed Turkey to increasingly
exert control over most of Greater Idlib.
ISIS cells remain active in the eastern and southern Syrian regions. Particular processes
are taking place in Quneitra and Daraa provinces, where Russian peace initiatives were
inconclusive by virtue of the direct destructive influence of Israel in these areas of Syria.
In turn, the assassination of Qasem Soleimaniin resulted in a sharp increase in the targeting
of American personnel, military and civil infrastructure in Iraq. The U.S. Army was forced to
regroup its forces, effectively abandoning a number of its military installations and
concentrating available forces at key bases. At the same time, Washington flatly rejected
demands from Baghdad for a complete withdrawal of U.S. troops and promised to respond with
full-fledged sanctions if Iraq continued to raise this issue. Afghanistan remains stable in its
instability. Disturbing news comes from Latin America. Confrontation between China and India
flared this year, resulting in sporadic border clashes. This situation seems far from over, as
both countries have reinforced their military posture along the disputed border. The aggressive
actions of the Trump administration against China deepen global crises, which has become
obvious not only to specialists but also to the general public. The relationship between the
collective West and the Russian Federation was re-enshrined in "the Cold War state", which
seems to have been resurrected once again.
The turbulence of the first quarter of 2020 was overshadowed by a new socio-political
process – the corona-crisis, the framework of which integrates various phenomena from the
Sars-Cov2 epidemic itself and the subsequent exacerbation of the global economic crisis. The
disclosure of substantial social differences that have accumulated in modern capitalist
society, lead to a series of incessant protests across the globe. The year 2020 was accompanied
by fierce clashes between protesters professing various causes and law enforcement forces in
numerous countries. Although on the surface these societal clashes with the state appear
disassociated, many share related root causes. A growing, immense wealth inequality, corruption
of government at all levels, a lack of any meaningful input into political decision making, and
the unmasking of massive censorship via big tech corporations and the main stream media all
played a part in igniting societal unrest.
In late 2019 and early 2020 there was little reason for optimistic projections for the near
future. However, hardly anyone could anticipate the number of crisis events and developments
that had taken place during this year. These phenomena affected every region of the world to
some extent.
Nevertheless, Middle East has remained the main source of instability, due to being an arena
where global and regional power interests intertwine and clash. The most important line of
confrontation is between US and Israel-led forces on the one hand, and Iran and its so called
Axis of Resistance. The opposing sides have been locked in an endless spiral of mutual
accusations, sanctions, military incidents, and proxy wars, and recently even crossed the
threshold into a limited exchange of strikes due to the worsening state of regional
confrontation. Russia and Turkey, the latter of which has been distancing itself from
Washington due to growing disagreements with "NATO partners" and changes in global trends, also
play an important role in the region without directly entering into the confrontation between
pro-Israel forces and Iran.
As in the recent years, Syria and Iraq remain the greatest hot-spots. The destruction of
ISIS as a terrorist state and the apparent killing of its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi did not
end its existence as a terror group. Many ISIS cells and supporting elements actively use
regional instability as a chance to preserve the Khalifate's legacy. They remain active mainly
along the Syria-Iraq border, and along the eastern bank of the Euphrates in Syria. Camps for
the temporary displaced and for the families and relatives of ISIS militants on the territory
controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in north-eastern Syria are also breeding
grounds for terrorist ideology. Remarkably, these regions are also where there is direct
presence of US forces, or, as in the case of SDF camps, presence of forces supported by the
US.
The fertile soil for radicalism also consists of the inability to reach a comprehensive
diplomatic solution that would end the Syrian conflict in a way acceptable to all parties.
Washington is not interesting in stabilizing Syria because even should Assad leave, it would
strengthen the Damascus government that would naturally be allied to Russia and Iran. Opposing
Iran and supporting Israel became the cornerstone of US policy during the Trump administration.
Consequently, Washington is supporting separatist sentiments of the Kurdish SDF leadership and
even allowed it to participate in the plunder of Syrian oil wells in US coalition zone of
control in which US firms linked to the Pentagon and US intelligence services are
participating. US intelligence also aids Israel in its information and psychological warfare
operations, as well as military strikes aimed at undermining Syria and Iranian forces located
in the country. In spite of propaganda victories, in practice Israeli efforts had limited
success in 2020 as Iran continued to strengthen its positions and military capabilities on its
ally's territory. Iran's success in establishing and supporting a land corridor linking
Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iraq, plays an important role. Constant expansion of Iran's military
presence and infrastructure near the town of al-Bukamal, on the border of Iraq and Syria,
demonstrates the importance of the project to Tehran. Tel-Aviv claims that Iran is using that
corridor to equip pro-Iranian forces in southern Syria and Lebanon with modern weapons.
The Palestinian question is also an important one for Israel's leadership and its lobby in
Washington. The highly touted "deal of the century" turned out to be no more than an offer for
the Palestinians to abandon their struggle for statehood. As expected, this initiative did not
lead to a breakthrough in Israeli-Palestinian relations. Rather the opposite, it gave an
additional stimulus to Palestinian resistance to the demands that were being imposed. At the
same time, Trump administration scored a diplomatic success by forcing the UAE and Bahrain to
normalize their relations with Israel, and Saudi Arabia to make its collaboration with Israel
public. That was a historic victory for US-Israel policy in the Middle East. Public
rapprochement of Arab monarchies and Israel strengthened the positions of Iran as the only
country which not only declares itself as Palestine's and Islamic world's defender, but
actually puts words into practice. Saudi Arabia's leadership will particularly suffer in terms
of loss of popularity among its own population, already damaged by the failed war in Yemen and
intensifying confrontation with UAE, both of which are already using their neighbor's weakness
to lay a claim to leadership on the Arabian Peninsula.
The list of actors strengthening their positions in the Red Sea includes Russia. In late
2020 it became known that Russia reached an agreement with Sudan on establishing a naval
support facility which has every possibility to become a full-blown naval base. This foothold
will enable the Russian Navy to increase its presence on key maritime energy supply routes on
the Red Sea itself and in the area between Aden and Oman straits. For Russia, which has not had
naval infrastructure in that region since USSR's break-up, it is a significant diplomatic
breakthrough. For its part. Sudan's leadership apparently views Russia's military presence as a
security factor allowing it to balance potential harmful measures by the West.
During all of 2020, Moscow and Beijing continued collaboration on projects in Africa,
gradually pushing out traditional post-colonial powers in several key areas. The presence of
Russian military specialists in the Central African Republic where they assist the central
government in strengthening its forces, escalation of local conflicts, and ensuring the
security of Russian economic sectors, is now a universally known fact. Russian diplomacy and
specialists are also active in Libya, where UAE and Egypt which support Field Marshal Khaftar,
and Turkey which supports the Tripoli government, are clashing. Under the cover of declarations
calling for peace and stability, foreign actors are busily carving up Libya's energy resources.
For Egypt there's also the crucial matter of fighting terrorism and the presence of groups
affiliated with Muslim Brotherhood which Cairo sees as a direct threat to national
security.
The Sahel and the vicinity of Lake Chad remain areas where terror groups with links to
al-Qaeda and ISIS remain highly active. France's limited military mission in the Sahara-Sahel
region has been failure and could not ensure sufficient support for regional forces in order to
stabilize the situation. ISIS and Boko-Haram continue to spread chaos in the border areas
between Niger, Nigeria, Cameroun, and Chad. In spite of all the efforts by the region's
governments, terrorists continue to control sizable territories and represent a significant
threat to regional security. The renewed conflict in Ethiopia is a separate problem, in which
the federal government was drawn into a civil war against the National Front for the Liberation
of Tigray controlling that province. The ethno-feudal conflict between federal and regional
elites threatens to destabilize the entire country if it continues.
The explosive situation in Africa shows that post-colonial European powers and the "Global
Policeman" which dominated that continent for decades were not interested in addressing the
continent's actual problem. Foreign actors were mainly focused on extracting resources and
ensuring the interests of a narrow group of politicians and entities affiliated with foreign
capitals. Now they are forced to compete with the informal China-Russia bloc which will use a
different approach that may be a described as follows: Strengthening of regional stability to
protect investments in economic projects. Thus it is no surprise that influential actors are
gradually losing to new but more constructive forces.
Tensions within European countries have been on the rise during the past several years, due
to both the crisis of the contemporary economic paradigm and to specific regional problems such
as the migration crises and the failure of multiculturalism policies, with subsequent
radicalization of society.
Unpleasant surprises included several countries' health care and social protection networks'
inability to cope with the large number of COVID-19 patients. Entire systems of governance in a
number of European countries proved incapable of coping with rapidly developing crises. This is
true particularly for countries of southern Europe, such as Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Greece.
Among eastern European countries, Hungary's and Romania's economies were particularly badly
affected. At the same time, Poland's state institutions and economy showed considerable
resilience in the face of crisis. While the Federal Republic of Germany suffered considerable
economic damage in the second quarter of 2020, Merkel's government used the situation to inject
huge sums of liquidity into the economy, enhanced Germany's position within Europe, and
moreover Germany's health care and social protection institutions proved capable and
sufficiently resilient.
Coronavirus and subsequent social developments led to the emergence of the so-called "Macron
Doctrine" which amounts to an argument that EU must obtain strategic sovereignty. This is
consistent with the aims of a significant portion of German national elites. Nevertheless,
Berlin officially criticized Macron's statements and has shown willingness to enter into a
strategic partnership with Biden Administration's United States as a junior partner. However,
even FRG's current leadership understands the dangers of lack of strategic sovereignty in an
era of America's decline as the world policeman. Against the backdrop of a global economic
crisis, US-EU relations are ineluctably drifting from a state of partnership to one of
competition or even rivalry. In general, the first half of 2020 demonstrated the vital
necessity of further development of European institutions.
The second half of 2020 was marked by fierce mass protests in Germany, France, Great
Britain, and other European countries. The level of violence employed by both the protesters
and law enforcement was unprecedented and is not comparable to the level of violence seen
during protests in Russia, Belarus, and even Kirgizstan. Mainstream media did their best to
depreciate and conceal the scale of what was happening. If the situation continues to develop
in the same vein, there is every chance that in the future, a reality that can be described as
a digital concentration camp may form in Europe.
World media, for its part, paid particular attention to the situation in Belarus, where
protests have entered their fourth month following the August 9, 2020 presidential elections.
Belarusian protests have been characterized by their direction from outside the country and
choreographed nature. The command center of protest activities is officially located in Poland.
This fact is in and of itself unprecedented in Europe's contemporary history. Even during
Ukraine's Euromaidan, external forces formally refused to act as puppetmasters.
Belarus' genuinely existing socio-economic problems have led to a rift within society that
is now divided into two irreconcilable camps: proponents of reforms vs. adherents of the
current government. Law enforcement forces which are recruited from among President
Lukashenko's supporters, have acted forcefully and occasionally harshly. Still, the number of
casualties is far lower than, for example, in protests in France or United States.
Ukraine itself, where Western-backed "democratic forces" have already won, remains the main
point of instability in Eastern Europe. The Zelenskiy administration came to power under
slogans about the need to end the conflict in eastern Ukraine and rebuild the country. In
practice, the new government continued to pursue the policy aimed at maintaining military
tension in the region in the interests of its external sponsors and personal enrichment.
For the United States, 2020 turned out to be a watershed year for both domestic and foreign
policy. Events of this year were a reflection of Trump Administration's protectionist foreign
policy and a national-oriented approach in domestic and economic policy, which ensured an
intense clash with the majority of Washington Establishment acting in the interests of global
capital.
In addition to the unresolved traditional problems, America's problems were made worse by
two crises, COVID-19 spread and BLM movement protests. They ensured America's problems reached
a state of critical mass.
One can and should have a critical attitude toward President Trump's actions, but one should
not doubt the sincerity of his efforts to turn the slogan Make America Great Again into
reality. One should likewise not doubt that his successor will adhere to other values. Whether
it's Black Lives Matter or Make Global Moneymen Even Stronger, or Russia Must Be Destroyed, or
something even more exotic, it will not change the fact America we've known in the last half
century died in 2020. A telling sign of its death throes is the use of "orange revolution"
technologies developed against inconvenient political regimes. This demonstrated that currently
the United States is ruled not by national elites but by global investors to whom the interests
of ordinary Americans are alien.
This puts the terrifying consequences of COVID-19 in a new light. The disease has struck the
most vulnerable layers of US society. According to official statistics, United States has had
about 20 million cases and over 330,000 deaths. The vast majority are low-income inhabitants of
mega-cities. At the same time, the wealthiest Americans have greatly increased their wealth by
exploiting the unfolding crisis for their own personal benefit. The level of polarization of US
society has assumed frightening proportions. Conservatives against liberals, blacks against
whites, LGBT against traditionalists, everything that used to be within the realm of public
debate and peaceful protest has devolved into direct, often violent, clashes. One can observe
unprecedented levels of aggression and violence from all sides.
In foreign policy, United States continued to undermine the international security system
based on international treaties. There are now signs that one of the last legal bastions of
international security, the New START treaty, is under attack. US international behavior has
prompted criticism from NATO allies. There are growing differences of opinion on political
matters with France and economic ones with Germany. The dialogue with Eastern Mediterranean's
most powerful military actor Turkey periodically showed a sharp clash of interests.
Against that backdrop, United States spent 2020 continuously increasing its military
presence in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea basin. Additional US forces and assets were
deployed in direct proximity to Russia's borders. The number of offensive military exercises
under US leadership or with US participation has considerably increased.
In the Arctic, the United States is acting as a spoiler, unhappy with the current state of
affairs. It aims to extend its control over natural resources in the region, establish
permanent presence in other countries' exclusive economic zones (EEZ) through the use of the
so-called "freedom of navigation operations" (FONOPs), and continue to encircle Russia with
ballistic missile defense (BMD) sites and platforms.
In view of the urgent and evident US preparations to be able to fight and prevail in a war
against a nuclear adversary, by defeating the adversary's nuclear arsenal through the
combination of precision non-nuclear strikes, Arctic becomes a key region in this military
planning. The 2020 sortie by a force of US Navy BMD-capable AEGIS destroyers into the Barents
Sea, the first such mission since the end of the Cold War over two decades ago, shows the
interest United States has in projecting BMD capabilities into regions north of Russia's
coastline, where they might be able to effect boost-phase interceptions of Russian ballistic
missiles that would be launched in retaliatory strikes against the United States. US
operational planning for the Arctic in all likelihood resembles that for South China Sea, with
only a few corrections for climate.
In Latin America, the year of 2020 was marked by the intensification Washington efforts
aimed at undermining the political regimes that it considered to be in the opposition to the
existing world order.
Venezuela remained one of the main points of the US foreign policy agenda. During the entire
year, the government of Nicolas Maduro was experiencing an increasing sanction, political and
clandestine pressure. In May, Venezuelan security forces even neutralized a group of US
mercenaries that sneaked into the country to stage the coup in the interests of the
Washington-controlled opposition and its public leader Juan Guaido. However, despite the
recognition of Guaido as the president of Venezuela by the US and its allies, regime-change
attempts, and the deep economic crisis, the Maduro government survived.
This case demonstrated that the decisive leadership together having the support of a notable
part of the population and working links with alternative global centers of power could allow
any country to resist to globalists' attacks. The US leadership itself claims that instead of
surrendering, Venezuela turned itself into a foothold of its geopolitical opponents: China,
Russia, Iran and even Hezbollah. While this evaluation of the current situation in Venezuela is
at least partly a propaganda exaggeration to demonize the 'anti-democratic regime' of Maduro,
it highlights parts of the really existing situation.
The turbulence in Bolivia ended in a similar manner, when the right wing government that
gained power as a result of the coup in 2019 demonstrated its inability to rule the country and
lost power in 2020. The expelled president, Evo Morales, returned to the country and the
Movement for Socialism secured their dominant position in Bolivia thanks to the wide-scale
support from the indigenous population. Nonetheless, it is unlikely that these developments in
Venezuela and Bolivia would allow to reverse the general trend towards the destabilization in
South America.
The regional economic and social turbulence is strengthened by the high level of organized
crime and the developing global crisis that sharpened the existing contradictions among key
global and regional players. This creates conditions for the intensification of existing
conflicts. For example, the peace process between the FARC and the federal government is on the
brink of the collapse in Colombia. Local sources and media accuse the government and affiliated
militias of detentions and killings of leaders of local communities and former FARC members in
violation of the existing peace agreement. This violence undermine the fragile peace process
and sets conditions for the resumption of the armed struggle by FARC and its supporters. Mexico
remains the hub for illegal migration, drug and weapon trafficking just on the border with the
United States. Large parts of the country are in the state of chaos and are in fact controlled
by violent drug cartels and their mercenaries. Brazil is in the permanent state of political
and economic crisis amid the rise of street crime.
These negative tendencies affect almost all states of the region. The deepening global
economic crisis and the coronavirus panic add oil to the flame of instability.
Countries of South America are not the only one suffering from the crisis. It also shapes
relations between global powers. Outcomes of the ongoing coronavirus outbreak and the global
economic crisis contributed to the hardening of the standoff between the United States and
China.
Washington and Beijing have insoluble contradictions. The main of them is that China has
been slowly but steadily winning the race for the economic and technological dominance
simultaneously boosting own military capabilities to defend the victory in the case of a
military escalation. The sanction, tariff and diplomatic pressure campaign launched by the
White House on China since the very start of the Trump Presidency is a result of the
understanding of these contradictions by the Trump administration and its efforts to guarantee
the leading US position in the face of the global economic recession. The US posture towards
the South China Sea issues, the political situation in Hong Kong, human rights issues in
Xinjiang, the unprecedented weapon sales to Taiwan, the support of the militarization of Japan
and many other questions is a part of the ongoing standoff. Summing up, Washington has been
seeking to isolate China through a network of local military alliances and contain its economic
expansion through sanction, propaganda and clandestine operations.
The contradictions between Beijing and Washington regarding North Korea and its nuclear and
ballistic missile programs are a part of the same chain of events. Despite the public rhetoric,
the United States is not interested in the full settlement of the Korea conflict. Such a
scenario that may include the reunion of the North and South will remove the formal
justification of the US military buildup. This is why the White House opted to not fulfill its
part of the deal with the North once again assuring the North Korean leadership that its
decision to develop its nuclear and missile programs and further.
Statements of Chinese diplomats and top official demonstrate that Beijing fully understands
the position of Washington. At the same time, China has proven that it is not going to abandon
its policies aimed at gaining the position of the main leading power in the post-unipolar
world. Therefore, the conflict between the sides will continue escalating in the coming years
regardless the administration in the White House and the composition of the Senate and
Congress. Joe Biden and forces behind his rigged victory in the presidential election will
likely turn back from Trump's national-oriented economic policy and 'normalize' relations with
China once again reconsidering Russia as Enemy #1. This will not help to remove the insoluble
contradictions with China and reverse the trend towards the confrontation. However, the Biden
administration with help from mainstream media will likely succeed in hiding this fact from the
public by fueling the time-honored anti-Russian hysteria.
As to Russia itself, it ended the year of 2020 in its ordinary manner for the recent years:
successful and relatively successful foreign policy actions amid the complicated economic,
social and political situation inside the country. The sanction pressure, coronavirus-related
restrictions and the global economic crisis slowed down the Russian economy and contributed to
the dissatisfaction of the population with internal economic and social policies of the
government. The crisis was also used by external actors that carried out a series of
provocations and propaganda campaigns aimed at undermining the stability in the country ahead
of the legislative election scheduled for September 2021. The trend on the increase of sanction
pressure, including tapering large infrastructure projects like the Nord Stream 2, and
expansion of public and clandestine destabilization efforts inside Russia was visible during
the entire year and will likely increase in 2021. In the event of success, these efforts will
not only reverse Russian foreign policy achievements of the previous years, but could also put
in danger the existence of the Russian statehood in the current format.
Among the important foreign policy developments of 2020 underreported by mainstream media is
the agreement on the creation of a Russian naval facility on the coast of the Red Sea in Sudan.
If this project is fully implemented, this will contribute to the rapid growth of Russian
influence in Africa. Russian naval forces will also be able to increase their presence in the
Red Sea and in the area between the Gulf of Aden and the Gulf of Oman. Both of these areas are
the core of the current maritime energy supply routes. The new base will also serve as a
foothold of Russia in the case of a standoff with naval forces of NATO member states that
actively use their military infrastructure in Djibouti to project power in the region. It is
expected that the United States (regardless of the administration in the White House) will try
to prevent the Russian expansion in the region at any cost. For an active foreign policy of
Russia, the creation of the naval facility in Sudan surpasses all public and clandestine
actions in Libya in recent years. From the point of view of protecting Russian national
interests in the Global Oceans, this step is even more important than the creation of the
permanent air and naval bases in Syria.
As well as its counterparts in Washington and Beijing, Moscow contributes notable efforts to
the modernization of its military capabilities, with special attention to the strategic nuclear
forces and hypersonic weapons. The Russians see their ability to inflict unacceptable damage on
a potential enemy among the key factors preventing a full-scale military aggression against
them from NATO. The United Sates, China and Russia are in fact now involved in the hypersonic
weapon race that also includes the development of means and measures to counter a potential
strike with hypersonic weapons.
The new war in Nagorno-Karabakh became an important factor shaping the balance of power in
the South Caucasus. The Turkish-Azerbaijani bloc achieved a sweeping victory over Armenian
forces and only the involvement of the Russian diplomacy the further deployment of the
peacekeepers allowed to put an end to the violence and rescue the vestiges of the
self-proclaimed Armenian Republic of Artsakh. Russia successfully played a role of mediator and
officially established a military presence on the sovereign territory of Azerbaijan for the
next 5 years. The new Karabakh war also gave an additional impulse in the Turkish-Azerbaijani
economic and military cooperation, while the pro-Western regime in Armenia that expectedly led
the Armenian nation to the tragedy is balancing on the brink of collapse.
The Central Asia traditionally remained one of the areas of instability around the world
with the permanent threat of militancy and humanitarian crisis. Nonetheless, despite forecasts
of some analysis, the year of 2020 did not become the year of the creation of ISIS' Caliphate
2.0 in the region. An important role in preventing this was played by the Taliban that
additionally to securing its military victories over the US-led coalition and the US-backed
Kabul government, was fiercely fighting ISIS cells appearing in Afghanistan. The Taliban, which
controls a large part of Afghanistan, was also legalized on the international scene by direct
talks with the United States. The role of the Taliban will grow and further with the reduction
of the US military presence.
While some media already branded the year of 2020 as one of the worst in the modern history,
there are no indications that the year of 2021 will be any brighter or the global crises and
regional instability will magically disappear by themselves. Instead, most likely 2020 was just
a prelude for the upcoming global shocks and the acute standoff for markets and resources in
the environment of censorship, legalized total surveillance, violations of human rights under
'democratic' and 'social' slogans' and proxy wars.
The instability in Europe will likely be fueled by the increasing cultural-civilizational
conflict and the new wave of newcomers that have acute ideological and cultural differences
with the European civilization. The influx of newcomers is expected due to demographic factors
and the complicated security, social situation in the Middle East and Africa. Europe will
likely try to deal with the influx of newcomers by introducing new movement and border
restrictions under the brand of fighting coronavirus. Nonetheless, the expected growth of the
migration pressure will likely contribute to the negative tendencies that could blow up Europe
from inside.
The collapse of the international security system, including key treaties limiting the
development and deployment of strategic weapons, indicates that the new detente on the global
scene will remain an improbable scenario. Instead, the world will likely move further towards
the escalation scenario as at least a part of the current global leadership considers a large
war a useful tool to overcome the economic crisis and capture new markets. Russia, with its
large territories, rich resources, a relatively low population, seems to be a worthwhile
target. At the same time, China will likely exploit the escalating conflict between Moscow and
the US-led bloc to even further increase its global positions. In these conditions, many will
depend on the new global order and main alliances within it that are appearing from the
collapsing unipolar system. The United States has already lost its unconditional dominant role
on the international scene, but the so-called multipolar world order has not appeared yet. The
format of this new multipolar world will likely have a critical impact on the further
developments around the globe and positions of key players involved in the never-ending Big
Game.
* * *
DEAR FRIENDS. IF YOU LIKE THIS TYPE OF CONTENT, SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT WORK: PayPal: [email protected] , http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront , BTC:
3Gbs4rjcVUtQd8p3CiFUCxPLZwRqurezRZ, BCH ABC: qpf2cphc5dkuclkqur7lhj2yuqq9pk3hmukle77vhq, ETH:
0x9f4cda013e354b8fc285bf4b9a60460cee7f7ea9 10,271 14
BarrieVV@38
Totally agree with your positive comment on the Grayzone and Aaron Mate's interview with
former British ambassador to Syria: lots of good, accurate history with penetrating insights.
B criticized Grayzone head Max Blumenthal for his initial criticism of Assaad's 2011 response
to the "color revolution". I think B's arguement has some merit but overall the reports from
the Grayzone are very good and I'm hoping B re-visits his position which was critical of Max
Blumenthal.
Blumenthal, Mate and Anya Parampil all have interesting histories intertwined with The
Nation, RT, DemocracyNOW, The Intercept and others. They are careful about their criticism of
these "leftist" groups and I think their stories are very good: Syria, Europe, Bolivia,
Venezuela especially.
Lavrov welcomed to Moscow Syria's new Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of the
Syrian Arab Republic Faisal Mekdad, who took over after Walid Muallem's passing, and his
delegation. The introduction was
followed later by a presser that provided some reminders and updates:
"We confirmed Russia's unchanged stance in favour of unconditional respect for Syria's
sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence as well as the right of the
Syrian nation to determine its own fate and future. All these principles are clearly and
unambiguously stated in UN Security Council Resolution 2254. All countries without
exception must follow these principles ." [My Emphasis]
The bolded sentence is yet another direct demand for the Outlaw US Empire to change its
ways and cease its illegal behaviors. That was quickly followed thusly:
"The attainment of socioeconomic development goals in Syria is being hindered by the
illegal (and even criminal in light of the COVID pandemic) unilateral sanctions adopted
against Syria by the United States and some of its allies.
"We reaffirm our condemnation of the continued illegal presence of foreign troops in
Syria."
This has made the continuance of the "Astana three" a requirement since "[i]t is the only
international assistance mechanism for the Syrian settlement that has actually proved its
efficiency and relevance." On Syria's economy, 2021 looks like it will be a huge improvement
over 2020:
"As for economic rehabilitation, in the past few weeks we have adopted a number of very
serious decisions, which will greatly enhance Syria's opportunities to organise systemic work
in this sphere. We continue providing humanitarian aid. We have delivered 100,000 tonnes of
Russian grain. These deliveries will continue. We are discussing practical steps now. A
comprehensive strategic programme for economic cooperation is being prepared.
"A new Syrian co-chair of the intergovernmental commission in trade and economic
cooperation has been appointed this month. The commission is preparing for a full-scale
meeting early next year, during which all these topics and joint practical actions will be
discussed."
Lastly, Lavrov was asked to comment on Pompeo's most recent series of lies regarding
Russia in Libya and the Mediterranean region. His 5 paragraph reply was as close to a tirade
as Lavrov gets. Here's the first to give readers a taste:
"During the past four years of working with the current US administration, we have become
used to the United States showing no desire, ability or skill when it comes to discussing
their concerns openly and on the basis of facts during direct negotiations. The Americans and
their Western allies have developed a trend of publicly accusing others without any facts,
making these accusations part of the international agenda and, finally, presenting them as a
proved matter. This is what they did and what they are doing regarding the US elections and
the recent complaints about hackers. This is what they did in the case of the Skripals, and
this is what they are doing in the Navalny case. They have no facts, not a single one, to
prove their point."
Do please read the rest! It should be very clear by now after decades of lies,
distortions, and the gamut of other prevarications that nothing uttered by anyone
representing the Outlaw US Empire should be believed while also assuming the opposite is most
likely true until refuted by genuine facts coming from an unbiased source.
Three month ago we
reported on documents obtained from of 'Her Majesties Government' in Britain which revealed
the intense involvement of the UK government in organizing, financing and propagandizing
'Syrian rebels' since the start of the war on Syria. These programs were coordinated with the
CIA's and the Gulf Arab's arming of the various Jihadis:
Most of the documents are detailed company responses to several solicitations from the
Foreign Office for global and local campaigns in support of the 'moderate rebels' who are
fighting against the Syrian government and people.
The documents lay out large scale campaigns which have on-the-ground elements in Syria,
training and arming efforts in neighboring countries, command and control elements in Jordan,
Turkey and Iraq, as well as global propaganda efforts. These operations were wide spread.
...
Most of the documents are from 2016 to 2019. They detail the organization of such operations
and also portray persons involved in these projects. They often refer back to previous
campaigns that have been run from 2011/2012 onward. This is where the documents are probably
the most interesting. They reveal what an immense effort was and is waged to fill the
information space with pro-rebel/pro-Islamist propaganda.
For any informed person who had watched the development of the war on Syria it was no
surprise that such programs existed. But the immense extend of these was really astonishing.
Consider what ARK, one of the involved companies run by 'former' British spies, organized as part of a
British government 'Strategic Communication' program:
ARK,as a company that has specialised in Syria programming for more than three years, has
access to a wide-range of networks in Syria. ARK has trained over 1,400 beneficiaries
representing over 210 beneficiary organisations in more than 130 workshops, and disbursed
more than 53,000 individual pieces of equipment. This network reaches into all of Syria's 14
governorates (see map below), including liberated, regime-and extremist-controlled areas, and
ranges from the most senior Syrian opposition politicians, to armed groups, civil society
organisations and ordinary Syrians. This includes but is not limited to:
61 stringers; 17 teams of distributors;
14 FM radio stations; 11 community magazines; two local TV stations;
17 Civil Defence teams in Aleppo; 16 in Idlib;
58 police stations in Aleppo; 32 in Idlib; eight in Latakia;
10 Syrian field researchers; 60 Syrian researchers who can conduct broad-based
population surveys (a survey study in May 2014 reached 1,300 individuals); a focus group
database of over 800 individuals; Dozens of Local Councils; judicial courts; documentation
centres; and
Keep in mind that these were not social programs for the benefit of Syrians but part of a
number of clandestine support measure for a violent international Jihadi movement organized to
overthrow the Syrian government.
While such a program may be rationalized as part of a war it is astonishing to find that
very similar measures are also used against 'friendly' governments.
New documents obtained from the British government and published here and
here
(complete download here ) reveal an
intense British 'Strategic Communications' program that is directed against the government of
Lebanon.
Those who obtained the files, they use the 'Anonymous' label, introduce the new cache:
Money quote: "First thing to do when 'unrest rears its ugly head' is shut down external
communications and kick out any of the Five Eyes operating an embassy in your country. It
happnens so often."
The most unfortunate aspect of these large scale disruption and regime change operations
exploit actual grievances and truly indigenous civil society reform movements, thereby
compromising even the most authentic efforts by the people. Not only that but this casts
serious doubt on both authenticity and goals of all kind of demonstrations and civil
unrest, even in more developed countries, including ostensibly First World.
Take the HK demonstrations for example - how much of it was real, genuine unrest caused
by this or that more heavy handed China policy? truth is we don't know because by
definition, the exploitation of such protest movements - almost always led by supposedly
disaffected youth - includes a very sophisticated propaganda handbook that seeks to
effectively "erase" the controlling hands behind the scenes.
Or, even the BLM movement - a lot that happened with these protests seem to jive with
the instruction manuals per the ARK. Notice how these could be turned on and off - in this
or that city, made to appear organic, when in fact those invisible hands from behind
directed much of the action.
Another aspect that is very noticeable for both the HK and BLM movements is the way they
were directed at some very specific issue that most people would have a hard time
disagreeing with - on its face. Be it political "freedom", new "rules", new "taxes" and/or
police brutality - there are numerous commonalities - too many to dismiss as mere
coincidences.
At the same time, much care seems to have been taken to not allow these protests to be
directed at the actual ruling class, the 1%, the elites, big finance and the
corporatocracy. I always thought it was kind of funny the way these BLM protesters somehow
were not there when Bernie sanders ran his campaign, even though Bernie had their
grievances near the top of his list on the official platform (police brutality, uneven
criminal justice system and prison reform were huge issues for him). Yes, there were plenty
of black youths who voted with the Sanders movement in the primary (the one that was
basically a fraudulent one, due to outright vote flipping, as was exposed by several
credible analysts). But the BLM protests only came into being following the one GF killing
and were directed mostly against police in large cities, and, of course against anything
the federal government could try and do.
Now that Biden is all but declared as 'elect", those protests have died down (except for
a few flare-up points like Portland, where they seem to have taken permanent residence).
Funny that....must be that the "defund the police" was successful and black people no
longer suffer from unequal law enforcement.....so all is well now.....
Sometimes I thought something like this happened in Libya. Libyan army cleared this
town, that city, next town, moving east to west, then just before Benghazi, we get our
consent manufacturing message that Gaddafi said there would be a slaughter in Benghazi. So
NATO just had to attack, to save Benghazi.
After Libya was smashed, turns out a whole gang of British "diplomats & SAS" were in
Benghazi.
thanks b! informative... this ARK is not noahs or boris's... who is behind this grand
scheme?? it seems the idea of keeping lebannon and syria in a state of tension is the
goal.. whose purpose does this serve? it seems like an agenda written in tel aviv, or is it
washington?? who is behind all this?? it seems clear enough that the goal is to coddle
israel... take this money and make sure israel continues to dominate in the middle east and
all other countries are destabilized basket cases... these are sick people behind all
this.. that much is very clear... who would spend money like this??
the really shocking thing is the UK gov't is in on it, but don't want it to appear this
way.. the people in the UK sure are a weird lot.. i think they are weirder then the people
in the USA!
ARK (Analysis Research Knowledge) has a website and its founder, former British diplomat
Alistair Harris has a LinkedIn account you can look up on Google or whatever search engine
you normally use. The company is based in Dubai.
Among ARK's various activities in Syria was managing the Facebook page and probably
other PR for the White Helmets. The propaganda surrounding Bana Alabed and other Syrian
children seems to be of a type similar to White Helmets propaganda - designed to appeal to
people's emotions, particularly women's emotions - so there is a possibility all this
rubbish was being generated by the same organisation.
In the end the target audience for all this propaganda is us, as our support is needed
to justify an eventual US or NATO invasion of Syria and Lebanon.
First thing to do when 'unrest rears its ugly head' is shut down external communications
and kick out any of the Five Eyes operating an emmbasy in your country. It happnens so
often. Kick Out the Five Eyes (I live in one of them). Media Communications (the industry I
work in) is the publicly acceptable term for Information Program, Propaganda, Information
Warfare. It's all the same thing, with Event Management being the sister of and information
program.
I've worked in both areas; external media communications programs and event
coordination and management , often dovetailing the two and switching between roles in
order to 'maximise stakeholder value' for the benefit of the client. Who is the
client..? If the client isn't obvious then Follow the money. It is always the person
paying the bill. Follow the money people... follow the money and you will understand the
objectives of even the most obtuse communications programs.
As an aside, with all the hundreds of billions of dollars of weapons being pumped into
the MENA, 'no one in Government' is able to 'shut down the wars. It's a joke, Government
can track your spending down to the last cent and hit you up with a fine for 'incorrect tax
return' but they 'can't follow the hundreds of billions of dollars' in weapons that gets
flown around the world. Follow the money people. Follow the money and you'll catch the
culprit.
Jim Bovard urges Trump to open the files to provide activism ammo for the vast numbers of
Americans who vehemently oppose forever wars.
Sen. Kamala Harris, at left, accepts the Democratic Party's nomination as vice president,
Wilmington, Delaware, Aug. 19, 2020. (Lawrence Jackson, Biden for President, Flickr, CC
BY-NC-SA 2.0)
H ow many Syrians did you vote to kill on Election Day? Thanks to our perverse political
system, the answer will be revealed over the next four years if the Biden administration drags
the U.S. back into the Syrian Civil War. But there are steps that President Donald Trump can
take in his final months in office to deter such follies.
Syria was not an issue in the presidential campaign and there were no foreign policy
questions in the two presidential debates. That won't stop the Biden team from claiming a
mandate to spread truth and justice via bombs and bribes any place on the globe.
The Biden campaign promised to "increase pressure" on Syrian
presiden t Bashar al-Assad – presumably by providing more arms and money to his
violent opponents. Vice President-elect Kamala Harris declared that the U.S. government "will
once again stand with civil society and
pro-democracy partners in Syria and help advance a political settlement where the Syrian
people have a voice."
Northeastern University professor Max Abrahms observed, "Every foreign policy 'expert' being
floated for Biden's cabinet supported toppling the governments in Iraq, Libya and Syria,
helping Al
Qaeda and jihadist friends , ravaging the countries, uprooting millions of refugees from
their homes."
Syria policy has long exemplified the depravity of Washington politicians and policymakers
and the venality of much of the American media.
The same "Hitler storyline" that American politicians invoked to justify ravaging Serbia,
Iraq and Libya was applied to Assad by Secretary of State
John Kerry in 2013. Once a foreign leader is irrevocably tagged with the scarlet H, the
U.S. government is automatically entitled to take any action against his nation that would
purportedly undermine his regime.
Every side in the Syrian civil war committed atrocities, but the Obama administration acted
as if there was only one bad guy.
Much of Raqqa, Syria, suffered extensive damage during the battle of June–October
2017. (Mahmoud Bali, Voice of America, Wikimedia Commons)
Trump attempted to extract the U.S. from the Syrian conflict, but his sporadic, often
unfocused efforts were largely thwarted by the permanent bureaucracy in the Pentagon, State
Department and other agencies. Considering the likelihood that the Biden administration will
rev up the Syrian conflict by targeting Assad, recapping how America got involved in this mess
to begin with is worthwhile.
President Barack Obama promised
16 times that he would never put U.S. "boots on the ground" in the four-sided Syrian civil
war. He quietly abandoned that pledge and, starting in 2014, launched more than 5,000
airstrikes that dropped more than 15,000 bombs in Syria.
Lying and killing are often two sides of the same political coin. The U.S. government
provided cash and a massive amount of military weaponry to terrorist groups seeking to topple
the Assad regime. The fig leaf for the policy was that the U.S. government was merely arming
"moderate" rebels -- which apparently meant groups that opposed Assad but which refrained from
making grisly videos of beheadings.
U.S. policy in Syria became so bollixed that Pentagon-backed Syrian rebels
openly battled CIA-backed rebels. The U.S. government spent billions aiding and training
Syrian forces who either quickly collapsed on the battlefield or teamed up with the Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria, or al-Qaeda-linked forces.
Federal law prohibiting providing material support to terrorist groups was not permitted to
impede Obama's Syrian crusade. Evan McMullin, a 2016 presidential candidate, admitted on
Twitter: "My role in the CIA was to go out & convince Al Qaeda operatives
to instead work with us."
Most of the media outlets that shamelessly regurgitated the George W. Bush administration's
false claims linking Iraq to Al Qaeda to justify a 2003 invasion ignored how the Obama
administration began aiding and abetting terrorist groups. The Intercept's Mehdi Hasan
lamented last year that those who warned that the U.S. government "providing money and weapons
to such rebels would backfire were smeared as
genocide apologists , Assad stooges, Iran supporters."
A Turkish think tank analyzed the violent groups committing atrocities in Syria after the
start of the Turkish invasion in 2019: "
Out of the 28 factions , 21 were previously supported by the United States, three of them
via the Pentagon's program to combat [ISIS]. Eighteen of these factions were supplied by the
CIA."
American policy in Syria has been incorrigible in part because most of the media coverage of
the conflict has been like a fairy tale that sometimes showcased our national goodness. Trump's
finest hour, according to the American media, occurred when he launched missile strikes on the
Syrian government in April 2017 after allegations that President Bashar al-Assad's forces had
used chemical weapons.
MSNBC host Brian Williams gushed over the video footage of the attacks: "I am
guided by the beauty of our weapons." Washington Post media columnist Margaret
Sullivan groused that "
praise flowed like wedding champagne -- especially on cable news."
President Donald Trump meeting with advisers at his estate in Mar-a-Lago on April 6, 2017,
regarding his decision to launch missile strikes against Syria. Items in the image were altered
for security purposes. (White House, Shealah Craighead)
That wasn't the only time that top-tier media celebrated carnage. Later in 2017,
Washington Post columnist David Ignatius proudly cited an estimate from a "knowledgeable
official" that "CIA-backed fighters may have
killed or wounded 100,000 Syrian soldiers and their allies over the past four years."
Ignatius did not reveal if his inside source also provided an estimate of how many Syrian
women and children had been slaughtered by CIA-backed terrorists.
Capitol Hill has been worse than useless on Syria. When Trump announced plans to pull U.S.
troops out of Syria, the House of Representatives condemned his move by a 354 to 60 vote.
Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, blathered, "At
President Trump's hands, American
leadership has been laid low." Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who was elected after
lying to voters by claiming he fought in the Vietnam War, said he felt "
horror and shame " over Trump's action.
Congress showed more outrage about a troop pullback than it had shown about the loss of all
the American soldiers' lives in pointless conflicts over the past 18 years.
April 9, 2019: The family of U.S. Army Chief Warrant Officer 2 Jonathan Farmer attend his
military funeral. The deceased was killed in Manbij, Syria on Jan. 16, 2019. (Arlington
National Cemetery, Flickr)
Foreign policy "experts" are Washington's most respected con artists . It will be no
surprise if Biden appointees repeat the same too-clever-by-half routine of the Obama years,
bankrolling terrorists to torment a nation ruled by someone who Washington disapproves of.
If the Biden administration commences bombing Syria to topple Assad, Americans would be
naive to expect to learn the facts from cable news or their morning newspapers. Syrian children
who die in U.S. airstrikes will be as invisible as Hunter Biden's laptop in the vast majority
of American media coverage. The media will also continue to ignore the slaughter of Syrian
Christians, one of the largest and least recognized victims of the civil war.
The best hope to prevent a new round of mistakes, lies, and atrocities is an epic disclosure
of prior U.S. mistakes, lies and crimes in Syria. There is an old saying that sunshine is the
best disinfectant. For U.S. policy in Syria, what is needed is an acid burn that permanently
sullies the reputations of any government official involved in creating, perpetuating or
covering up debacles.
Any U.S. government official involved in arming the "moderate" rebels deserves to be
ridiculed in perpetuity.
(James Bovard)
The vast majority of records on U.S. intervention in Syria are likely classified as military
or national security secrets. But the president is authorized to disclose as he chooses.
Perhaps what is needed is a WikiLeaks -style massive dump of documents with only the
names of innocent Syrians redacted.
Almost 20 years ago, Washingtonians were riveted by the last-minute pardons that Bill
Clinton uncorked until almost the final moment of his presidency. Trump could do the same thing
with deluges of disclosures on Syria and other quagmires until the moment that Biden leaves his
basement for swearing-in.
If blanket revelations are not possible, then selective disclosures with high entertainment
value would include the cozy ties between federal agencies and journalists and think tanks who
won official favor by shamelessly recycling official lies.
Revealing the strings that foreign governments pulled to propel or perpetuate U.S.
intervention could vaccinate Americans against similar ploys in the future. The Israeli
government admitted last year (after years of denials) that it had long provided military
aid to radical Muslim Syrian groups fighting Assad.
With the Obama administration's approval, the
Saudis poured massive amounts of arms and money into the hands of terrorist groups fighting
the Assad regime. Both the Israeli and Saudi military aid made the Syrian assignment more
perilous for American troops. Other governments helped sow chaos and carnage in Syria while the
Obama administration pretended that the main or sole problem was Assad.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir meet on
Dec. 14, 2015, at the French Foreign Ministry in Paris before a multinational meeting to
discuss the future of Syria. (State Department)
Sweeping disclosures could also enable Trump to settle scores with appointees who subverted
his policies. Trump appointed a Never-Trumper letter signer, Jim Jeffrey, as his special envoy
for Syria. Last week, Jeffrey explained how he and others thwarted Trump's efforts to disengage
in Syria: "We were
always playing shell games to not make clear to our leadership how many troops we had
there."
The actual number was far higher than the 200 Trump thought would be left in the country.
The charade on troop deployments was a "success story" for Jeffrey, Defense One noted,
because it "ended with U.S. troops still operating in Syria, denying Russian and Syrian
territorial gains."
But denying "Syrian territorial gains" to Syrians was not the policy Trump touted.
Washington Post reporter Liz Sly savored the charade: "US officials have been lying to
Trump – and the American people – about the true number of US troops in Syria in
order to deter
him from withdrawing them, according to the outgoing Syria envoy. Trump thinks it's
200."
Sly added two laughing emojis after that line. (No word on whether the Post will add
laughing emojis to its "Democracy Dies in Darkness" motto.)
James F. Jeffrey swears in as special representative for Syria engagement, Aug. 17, 2018.
(State Department, Ron Przysucha)
Opening the files on Syria would provide the ammo for activism by vast numbers of Americans
who vehemently oppose new wars. In August 2013, Obama was on the
verge of bombing the Assad regime after allegations it had used chemical weapons.
A vast outcry against intervention, including a dramatic
protest outside the White House while Obama was making a Saturday speech on his Syrian
plans, temporarily deterred further U.S. escalation (beheading videos were the Aladdin's Lamp
for interventionists). There is far more evidence of the folly of U.S. intervening in Syria now
than there was in 2013 and probably more folks today ready to raise hell.
America can no longer afford to cloak its foreign carnage in the shroud of good intentions.
There is no transcendent national interest that justifies pointlessly killing more Arabs in
Syria or elsewhere. Americans need to scoff at those who portray keeping U.S. boots on foreign
necks as a triumph of idealism.
None of this is secret if one bothers to search the Internet to find stories such as this,
or this short video "The Covert War on Syria".
hXXps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ours_8ygO0A
Stephen Verchinski , November 26, 2020 at 18:59
65,000 new military officers are, with advise and consent of the Senate are beought in
every two years. How are these supposed to earn stars and bars without illegal
unconstitutional undeclared wars?
Defund all illegal unconstitutional undeclared wars. U.S. Representatives who fail to do
so need removal.
Only cursory allusion to Israel, though. I find myself wondering if your editors censored
what you know so well and what should be an integral part of any attempt to enlighten readers
about the main factor driving what the U.S. has been doing in Syria. It is a rather clear
case of Washington doing Israel's bidding. Even the NY Times, on one bright shining morning
(Sept. 6, 2013), made that clear when its Jerusalem bureau chief reported what she hear from
senior Israeli officials about Israeli [and of course, lemmingly, U.S.] objectives in
Syria.
That day the headline of the lead article "Israel Backs Limited Strike Against Syria"
provoked little more than a yawn. But those readers who read down the column, and were
familiar with NYT usual coverage of Israel, were in for a shock.
With more dogs of prolonged war about to let slip out of the kennel, Jodi Rudoren, then
NYT Jerusalem Bureau Chief -- to her credit -- sought informed views on Israel's objectives
for Syria. Rudoren got unusually candid responses from senior Israeli officials, when she
asked them about Israel's preferred outcome in Syria. Rudoren minced few words in reporting
Israel's view that the best outcome for Syria's civil war was "no outcome".
She wrote:
"For Jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective,
seems preferable to either a victory by Mr. Assad's government and his Iranian backers or a
strengthening of rebel groups, increasingly dominated by Sunni jihadis.
"'This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don't
want one to win -- we'll settle for a tie,' said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general
in New York. 'Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that's the strategic thinking here.
As long as this lingers, there's no real threat from Syria.'"
Three years later Obama he told journalist Jeffrey Goldberg how proud he was at having
resisted strong pressure from virtually all his advisors to launch cruise missiles on Syria
in Sept. 2013. Obama waxed eloquent that he had for once not adhered to what he derisively
called the "Washington Playbook" (in this context, read "U.S.-Israeli Playbook"). Instead,
Obama chose to take advantage of Russian President Vladimir Putin's offer to get the Syrians
to surrender their chemical weapons for destruction, verified by the U.N., aboard a U.S. ship
configured for such destruction.
Let's hope Biden remembers all that, AND how it took only five months for the neocons to
scuttle the emerging trust between Putin and Obama by mounting the coup in Ukraine and then
demonizing Putin for his JFK-Cuban-missile-crisis-type response.
Regards,
Ray
Andy , November 26, 2020 at 09:41
This is crux of the problem, if you were to speak these truths in the UK you would be
called antisemetic.
I just can't see how things will ever change when AIPAC and other related lobby groups have
so much influence
in Capitol Hill.
David Otness , November 26, 2020 at 17:12
Thank you, Ray. That needed saying. This quote too is all-telling of the morality
structure of this Israeli-induced quagmire:
'Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that's the strategic thinking here. As long as
this lingers, there's no real threat from Syria.'"
The above quote illustrates why and how the U.S. and Israel find such ease of comity in
the misery they both inflict on mostly innocents.
Pure Madeline Albright re: the 500,000 murdered by sanctions Iraqi infants and toddlers: "We
felt it was worth it."
"Once a foreign leader is irrevocably tagged with the scarlet H, the U.S. government is
automatically entitled to take any action against his nation that would purportedly undermine
his regime."
..and sanction anyone or nation who doesnt follow suit
JOHN CHUCKMAN , November 25, 2020 at 16:30
Here is good idea that will not happen, just as so many good ideas fail in America.
Trump has been quite servile towards Israel's interests.
And what was the Syrian horror really about?
Bulldozing part of Israel's neighborhood in a 1960s-style "slum clearance" project. Only
this project took 600,000 lives and continues taking them.
it is hardly likely Trump would act against what Israel regards as its interests as he
leaves office.
Please note how he has illegally kept troops in the NE to deprive Syria's government of
oil revenue for reconstruction. The US troops are also working on encouraging the local Kurds
to fight the national government.
The US is also very active in discouraging the return of refugees that Russia encourages
to help rebuild the country.
This war was not a civil war. That was a façade for a hybrid war on a beautiful and
historic place, one Israel hates.
jo6pac , November 25, 2020 at 18:57
Nailed it, this was never a civil war. I thank the Russian Govt. and others that have help
the Syrian people in the fight to save their country.
Sadly biden will continue the endless wars
Dennis Hanna , November 26, 2020 at 15:26
The truth must always be kept well hidden.
Yes, the archaic
so-called "Military Industrial ( original draft Congressional ) Complex [ modern, current
construct: Military, Industrial Surveillance, Security State – M.I.S.S.S. ] did accrue
some financial benefit.
But, that "benefit" was the magician's distraction, deception and misdirection away from
the real party and people to whom accrued the benefit.
The Zionist colonial, settlement entity, Zionists, Christian Zionists, and
Neo-conservatives were and are the true beneficiaries of so-called Middle East Policy.
Always have been and always will be.
A short history:
Did it start with:
"A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm"
First neocon report calling for Iraq invasion. Delivered to Israel in 1996.
hXXps://zfacts.com/p/139.html
[ further reading from different perspectives:
hXXps://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-07-01/short-history-neocon-clean-break-grand-design-regime-change-disasters-it-has-fostere
"Of course, we say it's our land, the Torah says it, but they (Palestinians & Arabs)
don't believe in the Torah. So that's the reason there is not peace." – Senator Chuck
Schumer's speech at AIPAC.
2,079
8:52 PM – Mar 6, 2018
Did it start with:
Wesley Clark 7 counties in 5 years
Did it start with the Balfour Declaration of 1917.
"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national
home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement
of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice
the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights
and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
( The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917
during World War I announcing support for the establishment of a "national home for the
Jewish people" in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population.
)
Did it start with:
The First Zionist Congress was held in Basel (Basle), Switzerland, from August 29 to
August 31, 1897.
Zionism aims at establishing for the Jewish people a publicly and legally assured home in
Palestine. For the attainment of this purpose, the Congress considers the following means
serviceable:
1. The promotion of the settlement of Jewish agriculturists, artisans, and tradesmen in
Palestine.
2. The federation of all Jews into local or general groups, according to the laws of the
various countries.
3. The strengthening of the Jewish feeling and consciousness.
4. Preparatory steps for the attainment of those governmental grants which are necessary to
the achievement of the Zionist purpose.
1. Israel consisting of the so -called "Biblical" reality of Israel from East bank of the
Nile River, including Cairo, to the West Bank it the Euphrates River, South to
the Red Sea and North to at least all of Lebanon, if not a large part of Turkey and limitless
borders as promised by the Hebrew God.
(References)
Genesis 15:18-21; Exodus 23:31; Numbers 34:1-15; and Deuteronomy 19:8, which claims limitless
borders, "And if the Lord thy God enlarge thy coast, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, and
give thee all the land which he promised to give unto thy fathers; (K.J.V.)
-- ?Formula adopted by the First Zionist Congress
Did it start with:
Book 5 of the Torah
Attributed to a Moses
So-called: Deuteronomy 20:10-17
King James Version (KJV)
10 When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.
11 And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be,
that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall
serve thee.
12 And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt
besiege it:
13 And when the Lord thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male
thereof with the edge of the sword:
14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all
the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine
enemies, which the Lord thy God hath given thee.
15 Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of
the cities of these nations.
16 But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an
inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:
17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the
Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath
commanded thee:
[ Traditionally understood as the words of a "god" as spoke to a Moses delivered before
the conquest of Canaan. ]
Why am I wrong?
dennis hanna
Realist , November 26, 2020 at 07:26
It might be likened to Washington recruiting, arming and training a bunch of Québec
separatists and encouraging them to invade and occupy large swaths of the Maritime provinces
and Eastern Ontario because the American deep state recognises that many of the spoils(I mean
resources) must be seized (I mean protected), like control of the St. Laurence Seaway, the
Grand Banks fisheries and most of the world's production of maple syrup. If the "moderate"
Québécoise can't get the job done, Washington could always turn to recruiting
from among the hard core psychopaths in its supermax prisons. Mind you, this would only be
done out of strict altruistic principles to bring freedom and democracy to the locals. And,
if they are ungrateful for our meddling (I mean intercession), they can always migrate to
Nunavut and live on the dole. Don't think of it as conquering, ravaging and exploiting
another country, consider it more like renovating the place.
Anne , November 26, 2020 at 09:36
Oh So True, Mr Chuckman, so barbarically true And equally true is that the vast majority
of those among the comfortably off who voted in this latest election (laughingly called
democratic) really do not give a bugger about what the US, via any of its MICI arms, does to
peoples, cultures, societies, countries across the seas They might as well not exist and then
there are those folks who work for the MIC (clearly no consciences) and those whose pension
plans benefit nicely from the manufacture and use of all that materiel
Why would anyone think declassifying any Syria documents would make a difference.? The
2012 Defense Intelligence Agency document, inadvertently released, acknowledged that the
"opposition to Assad has been driven by Al Qaida" and that it was likely a Salafist state
would emerge, something the US favored because "It would be a valuable strategic asset to be
used against Assad" was of no consequence whatsoever. The Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons engineers report that was leaked revealed that the "chemical weapons attack"
that precipitated the launching of scores of cruise missiles against Syria was a false flag
and the OPCW itself has been corrupted by the United States. That was a story of immense
importance that got zero coverage in any of the media sources relied upon by the American
public. The US ostensibly has a "free press" but the fact is, it serves as nothing other than
the propaganda arm of the US government. Syria's best hope is that the Russians make it plain
to the US that further intervention in Syria will be met with resistance.
Guy , November 25, 2020 at 16:13
How could anyone disagree with such an article .If reparations for the death of innocents
and damage to the country's infrastructure are out of the question for the perpetrators of
this totally useless carnage then the least that could be done is bring the troops home and
let the country rebuild . The old saying states ,lead,follow or get the hell out of the way
.
The following quote is just one example of the futile battle to stop the juggernaut that
drives endless wars.
"Sweeping disclosures could also enable Trump to settle scores with appointees who
subverted his policies. Trump appointed a Never-Trumper letter signer, Jim Jeffrey, as his
special envoy for Syria. Last week, Jeffrey explained how he and others thwarted Trump's
efforts to disengage in Syria: "We were always playing shell games to not make clear to our
leadership how many troops we had there."
Trump is a complex fellow. In some ways he tried to get and keep us out of quagmires, in
other like Iran and now China, he appears to fall in line or even make it worse.
Bovard idea is a great one. Put it all out there. It's worth a try. Maybe Trump is bitter
enough to do it. And maybe his drive for nomalization between the Jews and Arabs might result
in unintended consequences that are positive, even for the Palesstinians.
Me my self , November 25, 2020 at 15:17
"Declassify America's Dirty Secrets"
I second the notion!
And while you're at it the clean ones as well.
Tell the truth so help you god! Because no one else will.
I did notice what I think is a surprising omission.
You didn't mention once the Israeli/Zionist goal of breaking physical connection between
Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon. That has surely been the underlying motive for Israeli/Zionist
antagonism towards a unified, independent Syria and has explained worldwide Zionist support
for the ongoing foreign-backed assault on Syria that's been underway now for nine years.
Trump tried to buy Israeli/Zionist support by concessions to Israel such as recognizing
annexation of the Golan Heights and moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem. But he baulked at
taking on Russia in Syria – and indeed indicated his lack of enthusiasm for conflict
with Russia as early as the 2016 Primaries. It was one thing that lifted his popularity with
voters – and made many more conventional Zionist Republicans distrust him.
So Trump hasn't really let the Zionists down. They just wanted more. The Golans were a
nice snack, but they were already in the pocket. Completing the destruction of independent,
unified and anti-Zionist Syria – now that would be something worth switching sides to
support. I suspect – and fear – they have reason to believe it more likely that
Biden/Harris will deliver their more prized objective.
A QUESTION FOR MISTER SHAMIR APROPOS THE ARMENIANS AND THE QUESTION OF GENOCIDE:
Question for Shamir: when will the prophecy be fulfilled? When will Russia liberate
Constantinople??? There are certain Holy Elders of the Orthodox Church who prophesied that,
when the Tsar returns, a great war will ensue and Constantinople will be liberated
p.s. "Genocide" is a relative term. One must look at the results. Anatolia was 20%
Christian before WWI. Now it is 0.2% Christian. Stalin gave Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan
against the will of the local Armenian majority. Compare this to the Balkans. The Balkan
Muslims like to adopt victim status in Bosnia and Kosovo and complain of "genocide" at the
hands of Serbs and others. But despite the "genocide" in Bosnia, Muslims are 50% of Bosnia,
20% of Montenegro, 3% of Serbia, 60% of Albania, probably up to 5% in Greece, 30% in
Macedonia, 8% in Bulgaria, 95% in Kosovo
Now remember, Israel, these were lands that the native Christian Slavs and Greeks
liberated at great cost, centuries of passive and active resistance.
So when we consider the word "GENOCIDE," think of the results. If the Yugoslavs and
Bulgarians and Greeks had adopted the brutal and unscrupulous tactics of the Turks, there
would be no Muslims in the Balkans today. Yet, they equal rights, the Mufti of Sandzak is a
regular guest on Serbian television. This doesn't exist in Turkey. The Greeks and Armenians
in Istanbul are second class citizens. The Greeks in Istanbul cannot even re-open the Halki
seminary on the Princes' Islands. The Suriani Christians in Mardin and Midyat live in fear of
their lives from Islamist Kurds. 90% have left for Sweden.
So yes, when considering "GENOCIDE," one must ponder the results. The complete eradication
of all Christian communities in Turkey, whether Greek, Suriani, Armenian, versus the
persistent presence of strong Muslim minorities in places like Thrace or Montenegro, which
suffered centuries of brutal Ottoman occupation.
@A123 onducting
unconventional warfare. That form of combat is defined by the U.S. government's National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 as "activities conducted to enable a
resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, disrupt or overthrow an occupying power or
government by operating through or with an underground, auxiliary or guerrilla force in a
denied area" in the pursuit of various security-related strategic objectives.
"What Syria withdrawal? There was never a Syria withdrawal," Jeffrey said.
" ... even as he praises the president's support of what he describes as a successful
"realpolitik" approach to the region, he acknowledges that his team routinely misled senior
leaders about troop levels in Syria.
"We were always playing shell games to not make clear to our leadership how many troops we
had there," Jeffrey said in an interview. The actual number of troops in northeast Syria is "a
lot more than" the roughly two hundred troops Trump initially agreed to leave there in 2019.
Defense One
-------------
"We?" Who are "We?"
State Department people? Well, certainly some of those were involved.
But ... IMO it would not have been possible to deceive or mislead the WH and specifically
the Commander in Chief without the active cooperation of CENTCOM, the JCS and OSD.
If they had not been participating in the lying, it would have been obvious in any number of
interactions with President Trump that the president's understanding of troop numbers in Syria
was not correct and that he was being deceived by "we." (whoever that was). That revelation
evidently did not happen. The NSC staff should have detected the lack of truth in reported
numbers. That it did not tells me that at least some of the NSC staff were disloyal to Trump.
Obvious? Yes, but that is worth re-stating.
James Jeffrey is quite proud of his achievement in maintaining a "realpolik" stalemate in
Syria, one that stymies both Russia and the Syrian government.
IMO opinion he is revealed by his own words as a treacherous back stabber. "Un hombre
sin honor." pl
This is exactly the result of Trump's lack of interest in fulfilling his original promise
of ending the "forever wars" in the middle east. This is exactly the result of putting
opelny-Democrat Jared Kushner (a lifelong member of Chabad-Lubavich network) and his ilk in
charge of the middle east geopolitics.
It also clearly proves that the State Dep. is a monsterous autonomous entity with its own
permanent objectives and agendas, independent of the WH. No matter what Trump wanted to
achieve in the ME, the so-called Blob (or as Col. Lang here has coined as the "BORG") do what
they will. You have to also remember that back in '17, career diplomats and high-ranking
State Dep. officials sounded the alarm that Rex Tillerson was down-sizing the Department so
much and that it was contrary to American interests abroad etc...fast forward to today, it
would not have mattered how much down-sizing Tillerson actually managed to do, they (people
like Jeffries) were still able to pursue their own agenda and undermine Trump's original
promise of ending the forever wars in the middle east.
The liberal elites managed to 'allegedly' manipulate the election against a sitting
president in favor of an highly unappealing candidate in Joe Biden. In all honesty, does
anyone think the Blob/Borg would NOT undermine the president's agenda and follow their own
permanent objectives aboard?
Trump should be furious about this. He should be firing everyone involved in the
deception. Those involved don't belong in ANY administration. Was convincing Trump that he
was getting the Syrian oil part of this despicable con? As you mentioned last night, this
deception is probably also going on in Afghanistan. This is a clear sign of a totally
dysfunctional nation security apparatus... Trump's national security apparatus. Could Trump
find no one he could trust to carry out his orders? Or did he just not even care? He
certainly wasn't up to the task.
However, our troop level in Syria has been widely and openly reported to be above the 200
level since Trump's initial announcement of a total pull out in December 2018. I thought it
was odd when shortly after that it was announced that more troops were being sent in to
facilitate the withdrawal of the 2,000 plus troops already there. We did reduce the level
somewhat, but then we brought in mech infantry with their Bradleys to secure the oil fields
and later more to counter the Russian patrols in northeast Syria. And isn't counting whatever
we have in Tanf.
"He should be firing everyone involved in the deception"
He just fired Esper. "Trump's national security apparatus." You mean America's natonal
security apparatus, the one that gave us LTC Vindman and that crew of Ambassadors, and the
'whistlebolower' Chief Justice Robert's wouldn't let any senator name nor ask questions about
during the impeachment. You remember all that don't you? I'm sure the same cast of characters
Biden would bring back if he succeeds in the rigged election would never do that to him.
COL(R) Mark Mitchell stated the following recently, regarding the duties and
responsibilities of the SECDEF in response to POTUS directives. The comments were in regard
to Acting SECDEF Miller (a longtime friend and colleague of Mitchell), but apply to any
Cabinet or sub-Cabinet post:
"He [POTUS] may make decisions that other people disagree with. They have two options:
they can do what he directs them to do, or after they've offered their advice, if they find
it illegal, immoral, unethical, unadvisable, they can step down," retired Col. Mark Mitchell,
who most recently served in the Pentagon as the principal deputy assistant defense secretary
for special operations/low-intensity conflict.
Mitchell added that he resented the implication at the defense secretary should be
expected to stand up to the president, or in his way, as the duly elected commander in
chief.
"You either carry out your lawful orders or you resign," he said. "We don't get the option
to 'stand up to him.' "(End of quote)
Unfortunately, President Trump made many poor personnel decisions, and selected people who
believed they had the duty and right to work against the President from within the
Administration. This has driven me nuts for the last four years, as I have watched senior
civilian and uniformed leaders actively undermining the Commander-in-Chief. They weren't
subtle about it. For whatever reason, they mostly got away with it.
To be clear, I am not writing this as a Trump supporter. As a career military
professional, I have a duty to support the Commander-in-Chief, and obey lawful orders from
the Commander-in-Chief.
It is very easy to play shell games with the BOG caps in the war zones.
Looking forward to a reprise of Trump's former starring role in The Apprentice, and
finally uttering yet again his immortal words: You're Fired!
The final days of Trump's first term are going to be awesome. Banish the Borg. BAMN. Put
Biden's fingerprints on any re-hiring.
Typically a new CEO will ask for everyone's resignation, and select and cull according to
new needs and new directions. Something Trump should have done, but he too was the apprentice
in this office when his term began.
Nothing to stop Trump from doing this now in reverse, and finally cleaning out the dross
that was dedicated to his administration's destruction. Better late than never. Our country
deserves nothing less. These insider traitors deserve to have their termination for cause
permanently be part in their career resumes.
It appears that POTUS Trump once his re-election is affirmed, urgently needs to fire a
large percentage of top-level ranks at the Pentagon, fire the CENTCOM CC and his staff, fire
the JCS, close down the NSC until it's thoroughly bleached, and charge all of them under the
UCMJ. Bust them down to slick-sleeves and show them the door. How many back-stabbing Vindman
types remain within the NSC? They need to be fired and prosecuted under the UCMJ as well.
As a citizen I am having great difficulty not concluding that the US is showing all the
signs of decline like the late Roman Republic.
James Jeffrey along with the rest of the herd that have run one agitprop disinformation
scheme after another since the 2016 election are like the roman senators that had the intent
to save the Republic but fatally weakened it by killing Caesar at its very center, in the
Senate.
Biden's people are openly calling for even more internet censorship and continuing to rush
out inherently dangerous mRNA vaccines without proper testing - and may force us to take it.
Groups are starting to create a database of Trump supporters to enable censoring them where
they work and live - what is this other than terrorism against half the voting population? If
just five percent of the 70M that voted for Trump moves together in resistance then the new
regime herd will be holding a tiger by is tail and with the election showing the people are
split right down the middle I fail to see how we can avoid even much worse chaos the next
four years. The American Republic is disintegrating while the herd is having a romp and
thinks it is winning while they are its assassins.
I am sick at heart of this and fear for the future of my children whose standard of living
opportunities are in free-fall.
We are shocked, SHOCKED! that military bureaucrats are acting in the same ways that they
always have. Come on now. The job of president is to get all these people to work in concert
to an extent adequate for getting things to come out mostly in our favor. None of this is
unique to Trump. Nearly every president in my lifetime has had to learn to deal with these
aspects of the military. Jimmy Carter trusted them to plan a rescue mission. They used navy
pilots for a mission over the desert! With no extra to enable adaptation to events! Ronald
Reagan sent a battleship to Lebanon and then found out the brass wouldn't take the risk of
actually using it for anything. Not to mention the superbly uncoordinated near simultaneous
invasion of Grenada. John Kennedy accepted a duplicitous projection of events for the bay of
pigs. Bill Clinton got caught in Somalia. George W. got sucked into a strategically unplanned
invasion of Iraq. Obama was told that an 18-month escalation would resolve Afghanistan. He
believed it! Boy were they shocked when he actually enforced the deadline. This is not a
criticism of any of those presidents. It is normal, however bizarre that may sound. My point
is that they mostly get bit once and learn not to trust the military's own estimates of what
they can or should do. Then they begin to do the job more adequately. They learn to pay
attention to goals and to manage their resources. Trump does not seem capable of this kind of
learning. The last months of an administration are not the time to suddenly discover the
nature of the organizations you are leading. And in any case, there is no time left for
learning how to get actual results.
JFK never should have unionized the government workforce.
Pits existential self-interests against patriotic national interest, should these
interests become in conflict. FDR warned against doing this. More attention needs to be paid
to this fundamental national turning point.
What ills were cured by this act (EO) and has the cure become worse than the perceived
disease. Must like term limits in California - the cure was 100 times worse than the original
disease.
Entrenched political personalities come and go; entrenched and corrupted political systems
are forever, because in the process they learned to self-perpetuate.
Name your favorite EO to strike down with an counter-mand EO, before a sitting president
leaves office:
1. Anchor baby citizenship triggering chain migration
2. Unionized government workforce
1. Use Democrat's standard politics of personal destruction to attack and harass any Trump
appointments; make working for the Trump administration so undesirable none dare even ask for
consideration.
2. Tie up the President's time with endless personal attacks, lies and investigations, so
Trump has no time as elected Chief Executive to oversee and clean up valid government
operations;
3. Take advantage of Trump's exclusively private sector experience to lull Trump into
thinking entrenched government BORGs are loyal government employees, who serve only to help
Trump carry out his Executive Office duties;
4. Leak like crazy; make things up if necessary that ensure the Trump administration
narrative appears chaotic and dysfunctional. Claim anonymous sources that undermine positive
functioning within Trump administration. Make everyone suspicious of everyone else.
5. Obliterate any recognition for the remarkable Trump administration accomplishments that
occurred, regardless of all of the above.
6. Pout relentlessly because regardless of the above, the President and the GOP Senate
appointed over 200 new federal judge and 3 new SCOTUS members.
7. In full public view, tear up the SOTU address listing remarkable administration
accomplishments mouthing - these are all lies -- laying down the gauntlet for all out
war.
8. Gin up pandemic hysteria to fill in any and all loopholes not yet covered by all of the
above.
Democrat skullduggery may have effectively destroyed an temporal administration, but Trump
Judiciary appointments are the equivalent of a very welcomed forever.
President Trump, you are missed already. But I suspect in short order it is you, who will
not miss the office. You are enshrined forever - #45 as President of the United States of
America. History will treat you far kinder than your current fellow citizens.
You broke up the Democrat plantation. You exposed the dark underbelly of the body politic.
Mission accomplished. There is no going back.
this sounds like the definition of a traitor to me - jeffery.... on the other hand one
could say he is working for wall st and the mil complex and has done a good job... which is
it??
I don't understand this. Trump is the Commander in Chief, at any time he could have asked
a straight-up question: How. Many. Troops. Do. We. Still. Have. In. Syria?
I find it astonishing that the military leadership would tell a lie to their Commander in
Chief when the question itself leaves no wriggle-room.
Heck, Trump could has asked for a list of every single one of those brave 200 boys, and
even if it included Name, Rank, and Serial Number that would still fit on a single
letter-sized printout.
I can't understand how Jeffrey's and his band of "we's" could get away with this unless
Trump wasn't paying any attention at all.
@Sirius No one believes the absurd cover story about "protecting oil". The incredibly
obvious & correct explanation is that Trump has no interest in the Erdogan/Obama "Regime
Change" policy.
The path to peace is straightforward. All non-Russian foreign forces and proxies need to
leave – U.S., Turkey, and Iran (including al'Hezbollah and other irregulars). It would
be easy for Trump to withdraw from a 100% Iran Free Syria. The sanctions needed to
prevent Iranian misappropriation of funds would no longer be needed.
However, as long as Syria is contaminated and destabilized by sociopath Khameni, both
Turkey and the U.S. will stay to counter that deranged menace to regional stability.
As easy as 123 huh? That poster has repositioned itself as some kinda conservative in a
few aspects, but a couple months ago was a rabid Zionist. That position becomes obvious at
the very end of the screed when pushing the primary Zionist meme -- hate on Iran, a country
that has never engaged in an act of aggressive war in over 200 years.
The incredibly obvious & correct explanation is that Trump has no interest in the
Erdogan/Obama "Regime Change" policy.
It's not that he "has no interest in (it)"; it's that with Russia involved his options on
the ground are limited, just like Obama's options were limited. This kind of stalemate is no
doubt one reason for Trump's nuclear brinkmanship: he and his handlers and enablers apparently
"think" they can make Russia back down and retreat from pursuing its legitimate interests (and
any other country for that matter e.g. China) if they can achieve nuclear primacy while
telegraphing a willingness to go to any extreme to have their way, apparently even including a
nuclear first strike.
RSH's warning that Trump could still start a war should be taken very seriously. Trump has
vowed that he will never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Will he leave office without
ENSURING that they cannot?
I don't think for a minute think that Zionist Biden will do anything to upset Israel. But
the election of Biden is a convenient excuse for Trump to start a war (probably based on a
false flag of some sort) that Biden (or Kamala-Hillary) will "inherit".
@ pnyx #43 . . .on Biden. Just think of the warmongering role he played for the Iraq war. The Neocons
would have an easier time with Biden than with Tronald
Yes. Biden is a Clintonite, Trump was anti-Clinton.
The US war in Iraq - Operation Iraqi Freedom - with its death, destruction and displacement
has been rightly called the worst US foreign policy move ever.
The Clintons started it, and then promoted it with Biden's assistance as Chair of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee.
President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act into law on October 31, 1998.
On December 16, 1998, President Bill Clinton announces he has ordered air strikes against
Iraq because it refused to cooperate with United Nations (U.N.) weapons inspectors.
Trump's foreign policies were remarkably different? How? He assassinated an Iranian
general, which nearly had the US enter into a hot war with Iran, bombed Syria twice, put
additional sanctions on Iran, Venezuela, Russia and the DPRK. Trump's State Department has
successfully enacted regime change in Zimbabwe, Sudan, El Salvador, Chile, Honduras, Bolivia
(Mike Pompeo congratulating Luis Arce on his win -- very suspicious), and is trying regime
change in Hong Kong, Belarus, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Iran, Eritrea, and Zimbabwe again, and as
of late, Nigeria.
You could argue that Trump wants Iran to be somewhat stronger so he can sell more weapons
to his MIC buddies and profit that way, therefore he pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal, and
the weapons import/export sanctions on Iran expired. But that's a different and more brash
method of managing Empire. It's different from Biden's "strategic de-escalation" policy with
Iran via the Iran nuclear deal, but not that one that necessarily yields better results for
Iran in the long term.
Calm down folks, the elected officials in the US have been puppets of the elite for the
entire history of the country.
The problem we're facing is within the elite community and far above any government's
control.
They didn't legalize drone striking "terrorists" any where on the globe by accident.
This means the elite are terrified of the fact that the internet and Trump both have exposed
them for the morally bankrupt, greedy, mass murdering psychopaths they truly are.
The accidental presidency of Trump made them realize that their useful idiots(elected
officials) where more idiots than useful and that they had to use the state sponsored
monopolies in the press as well as their privately controlled publicly funded covert
community to steer the narrative away from actual reality into their alternative commoditized
version of reality.
Trump was never trying to defend America from the elite for the common man. He was trying
to exploit the elite who had rejected him and his father for decades as well as cash in on
their predicament in order to pay off his debts and start his own reality TV network.
I agree Trump was useful and informative but in the end he, like us is just along for the
ride.
Don't do anything rash and don't for one second think a regime change in America is a rare
occurrence. Remember the Kennedy's ?
The only way to win is to not become one of the elite's useful idiots by lashing out
against another citizen. Poor and middle class only get the illusion they help decide
policy.
The policy is decided and auctioned off within the billionaire funded think tanks and sent to
the useful idiots in DC to be rubber stamped in order to trick you into thinking the
legislative branch is legitimate. These people could f*ck up a two car parade and prove it
over and over again.
Stay sane folks, the motives haven't changed in centuries and the elite are far more
scared of us than they are the other elite's because they all know they're all cowards.
In addition, considering Trump was supposedly a Russian puppet, Congress under his admin
passed a bill which allowed the US to arm Ukraine against Russia even more.
Wonderful and thought provoking analysis of current political affairs b. However I would
like to add that Biden and Trump are the products of political trends that have deep roots in
modern US and world political affairs that have been ongoing for some 100 years or more.
Biden and Trump did not occur in a vacuum. Both are products of the two world wars that were
fought in the last century. More recently, the US since 1940 and continuing to the present
day, has been actively preparing or fighting a major war somewhere on this planet. This
development has in turn created a vast military and civilian bureaucracy that constantly
needs to be fed a diet of real or imagined threats in order to survive.
Western hypocrisy revealed 10 years after the event in today's Independent:
"Tony Blair and Iraq: The damning evidence" . And they go on and on about those wicked,
evil Russians and their tyrannical leader causing death and destruction Syria by their
"support" of the Assad government whilst the West arms the "freedom fighters" there.
Over the last years the Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan has managed to alienate so many of
his countries international partners that it is hard to keep count. He at times did so on
purpose to distract his voters from a sinking economy and other local calamities. But there are
signs that he has now exceeded the patience of the adversaries he has created. He is now
finally receiving the rebukes he has seemed to be seeking.
While Russia has emphasized friendly relations with Turkey, it is
in conflict with it in Syria, Libya and most recently in the war over Nagorny-Karabakh.
Russia at times has a not-so-subtle way to communicate that its patience has run out. Last
Thursday Russian ships in the eastern Mediterranean fired missiles on a oil
smuggling center near Jarablus, Syria:
More than 15 militants from the Turkish-controlled Syrian armed opposition were killed and
injured in a missile strike by an unknown military aircraft on a smuggling market for oil
products in the city of Jerablus, bordering Turkey, in northern Syria, local sources
reported.
It is noted that the rockets were also fired at two fuel tankers, which were moving along
the highway near the village of Kus in the direction of the market. Eyewitnesses reported
that at the time of the strikes, several powerful explosions occurred in the border area.
The oil was smuggled from eastern Syria and was on its way to Turkey.
Today a Russian air attack on a graduation ceremony of Turkish financed 'Syrian rebels'
killed or wounded more than 200 of them.
Russia has attacked the HQ of Faylaq al-Sham, Turkey's favorite armed group in Idlib, and
the leading faction of the NLF of the SNA.
Faylaq al-Sham is also present in the Astana process and the constitutional committee.
Claims that up to 50 Faylaq members died in the attack.
After the recent airstrike on the Jarablus oil refinery, this strike is just another
demonstration of the growing rift between Russia and Turkey.
It seems that many in Moscow are angry about the humiliation of the Russian defense industry
by Turkey.
Well, Russia has a real defense industry while the Turkish weapon 'producers' are just
assembly lines for parts bought from abroad :
The "indigenous" Turkish drone which Turks boast about day and night as the flagship of
their military industry is a not so indigenous after all. It's assembled by top notch western
components.
Turkey has successfully used the drones to destroy old Russian made air defenses in
Nagorny-Karabakh. But as Canada and Austria have now stopped to supply the
necessary components the availability of such drones will soon diminish.
The U.S. Army said Thursday it carried out a drone strike against Al-Qaeda leaders in
northwestern Syria near the Turkish border, killing 17 jihadists, according to a war monitor.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said five civilians were also among those
killed.
"U.S. Forces conducted a strike against a group of Al-Qaeda in Syria (AQ-S) senior leaders
meeting near Idlib, Syria," said Maj. Beth Riordan, the spokeswoman for United States Central
Command (CENTCOM).
It is now likely that Turkey will order its 'Syrian rebel' mercenaries to escalate the war
in Idleb. Russia and Syria have been waiting for this and are well prepared.
Turkish relations with Greece have always been hostile but Turkey currently does its best to
increase them :
Greece said Monday that Turkey plans to carry out a maritime military exercise on Oct. 28, a
Greek national holiday, just hours after NATO's secretary general said both Greece and Turkey
had called off wargames on each other's national holidays.
France has recalled its ambassador to Turkey after the country's President Recep Tayyip
Erdoğan questioned the mental health of French counterpart Emmanuel Macron.
Erdoğan questioned Macron's mental condition while criticising the French President's
attitude toward Islam and Muslims.
His remarks at a local party congress were an apparent response to statements Macron made
earlier this month about problems created by radical Muslims in France who practice what the
French leader termed "Islamist separatism".
Macron's remarks had come after a Chechen terrorist with connections to militants in the
Turkish occupied Idleb had beheaded a French teacher in Paris. Erdogan's remarks were followed
by anti-French protests in Turkish occupied areas of Syria during which flags of the Islamic
State were
raised .
Despite Russian, French and U.S. attempts to set up a ceasefire in Nagarno-Karabakh Turkey
is pressing Azerbaijan to
continue the war :
[I]n the last year, Turkey has violated Israeli, Libyan, Iraqi, Syrian, and Greek
sovereignty. The international community has condemned Turkey's territorial encroachments on
numerous occasions. A similar scenario is playing out in Nagorno-Karabakh today.
On October 21, Turkish Vice President Fuat Oktay pledged to provide full military support
for Azerbaijan if necessary. Oktay has also denounced international efforts to quell the
conflict's escalation in Nagorno-Karabakh. The OSCE Minsk Group, comprised of the United
States, France, and Russia, formed to help mediate the conflict. Turkish officials, however,
claim this group is actively supporting Armenia. In a rebuke of Turkey, U.S. Secretary of
State Mike Pompeo issued a statement highlighting Ankara's malign involvement in the
conflict. He noted Turkish-backed fighters are "providing resources to Azerbaijan, increasing
the risk and firepower" that is only fleshing out the fighting.
A new Nagorno-Karabakh ceasefire, negotiated on Friday in Washington DC, was immediately
breached by new attacks from
Azerbaijani forces.
In Libya a new ceasefire
agreement between the Turkish supported Muslim Brotherhood forces who hold the western part
of the country and the eastern forces of General Hafter, supported by the UAE and Russia,
stipulates that all foreign forces will have to leave the country within three months. The UN
and every involved country but one welcomed the deal:
But President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, which backs the Tripoli government with
military support, questioned the viability of the ceasefire.
"Today's ceasefire agreement was actually not made at the highest level, it was at a lower
level. Time will tell whether it will last," Erdogan said. "So it seems to me that it lacks
credibility."
Turkey had attempted to gain control of the eastern oil fields of Libya but failed to do so
after Russia countered it. Oil production in Libya has been restarted without any
of the profits flowing to Turkey. It will now have to leave the new bases it created or
re-escalate that war.
Since reaching a peak of $951 billion in 2013, Turkey's gross domestic product has reversed
its growth trend, falling to $754 billion in 2019 in nominal terms -- a drop of $200 billion,
nearly the size of the GDP of Greece, in six years. The lackluster performance of the economy
has had a political impact on the AKP's popularity at home. According to the pollster
Metropoll, support for the AKP had fallen to 31 percent in August 2020 -- a significant drop
from the 43 percent of votes the party received in the 2018 parliamentary elections.
...
A foreign policy that gives priority to combative rhetoric, hard power, and maligning the
West can be politically useful in the short term, but remains incompatible with the long-term
requirement of stabilizing the economy. And yet it is the country's economic performance that
will ultimately determine the fate of the next national political contest when the time
comes.
A year ago 5.75 Turkish Lira were the equivalent of 1 U.S. dollar. Today one needs more than
8 Turkish Lira to buy a dollar.
Turkish companies have taken up lots of loans in foreign currencies. They will have to pay
the loans back with 40% more Lira than they had planned to do. Many of them will not survive
the drain.
Saudi Arabia and its allies have launched a boycott of
Turkish products. Turkish made pots and pans and Turkish vegetables have been removed from
Saudi supermarkets.
Over the years Turkey had managed to play off the U.S. against Russia and Russia against the
EU. But now its relations with all of those parties deteriorate at the very same time. This
while its economy has serious problems.
To better his position Erdogan could retreat from some of the many conflicts he created. But
given his previous behavior under pressure he is more likely to go into the opposite direction.
I expect him to soon escalate on one or more fronts with Syria being the most likely one.
Over the last year a lot of Turkish equipment and many Turkish soldiers have been moved to
Idelb. But would they be able to withstand an onslaught of Russian air and missile attacks?
Would Russia launch those provocative strikes on Turkish proxies forces if it thought so?
Turkey has in my view overextended itself. It will have to retreat on several of its current
fronts and concentrate on its economy. It is otherwise likely to suffer a significant military
defeat while its economy will further deteriorate. It would be the end of Erdogan's Neo-Ottoman
dreams.
Posted by b on October 26, 2020 at 16:03 UTC |
Permalink
Looks to me like Turkey is a pawn, or to be more generous a knight, in the political battle
Anglo-Americans are waging against part of continental Europe and Russia. Because of this I
do not believe it will escalate into any full fledged hot war between Turkey, which no need
to emphasize remains part of NATO Central Command structure, and any other opponents. It will
remain the proxy war it has been since 10 years or so ago.
While everything b says is true, it is difficult to see how Erdogan will be able to reverse
his course. That's the big problem with military adventurism. If he tries to quit some or all
of those extra-territorial games, and return his troops and mercenaries home to Turkey, he
will still have a bad economy, but will have a large contingent of unhappy military and
terrorists to deal with, too. The odds of a new coup attempt, but this time a much more
serious and widely supported one, would escalate greatly.
It's similar to the problem the US faces. Decades of screwing with every other country in
the world are coming home to roost, and as much as Trump and a few others have at least
talked about the wisdom of ceasing overseas meddling, the deep state knows that bringing all
those highly trained and pissed-off soldiers home would be a powder keg, even more so that
we're already seeing.
Poor old Turdogan has been left holding the bag of takfiris. The last thing he wants is them
to be used against him, so he has been shipping them out to Libya and now Azerbaijan.
However, his megalomania seems to have gained the upper hand, trying to exploit the
opportunity for multiple purposes, possibly failing in all.
Armenia is just starting to produce so-called 'suicide' drones. They are looking to
purchase others (Iranian?) The Azerjaibanis seem to be rather over-extended along the border
with Iran, with a cauldron in the making, especially as their drone supply may be drying
up.
Great piece 'b'.
When it is all set out so plainly you have to wonder what the hell Erdogan is thinking ...
except about his own future and 2023.
One point though, there is no mention of the changing attitude of Arab countries towards
Turkey. Egypt - supported by Russia - and the UAE especially seem to be taking forward roles
in opposing Turkey.
I posted this article earlier today in the open thread, but here it is again. Far more
relevant here.
"Where you find Emirati activity you often find Turkish activity directly countering it in
a way Iran doesn't," says Michael Stephens, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services
Institute, a think-tank. "They believe they are up against a Turkey that is very hostile in
terms of its nationalism, its power projection and a determination to make sure the UAE
doesn't get its own way."
While no doubt directed at Turkey, that airstrike indirectly also gives the US forces
'guarding the oil' a pretty significant middle finger. Good on Russia on that count.
Let us hope that prick Erdogan gets the lesson he finally deserves and not too many of his
countrymen have to pay with their lives for their stupidity in following his corrupt
ambitions. Fingers crossed Putin holds his nerve and at the same time doesn't get trapped
into a lose-lose scenario either.
No country that has shown such callous aggression deserves to get away with it. Turkey
would be a good place to start on a long list.
Yes, Erdoğan really has never had any sense of foreign policy. Most of this, however, is
not really neo-Ottomanism, but trying to deflect attention from his self inflicted economic
woes.
As to France, it isn't just Erdoğan railing at France's gratuitous support of a
cartoon slandering Islam, pretending it is "freedom of speech". Pakistan, Kuwait, Qatar and
others have done the same, Pakistan even calling in the French ambassador for an explanation.
Yes, there really is an Islamophobia promoted by Western politicians as a part of foreign
policy.
So, try not tarring Erdoğan with every little "negative" news item. Sometimes he does
take a justified position, even if he handles it poorly
Erdogan is a player and is being played. He attacked syria for the saudies en israeli
interest, and defended LNA against the uae and israeli interest. He works well with iran and
russia and the people defend him against the gulen/cia coup but only after the downing of the
russian jet by gulen forces and the nato backing.
Playing both sides is very risky but he is a fighting for his survival. And he is breaking
loose from the dark side, its take time and a lot of money. Give him some slack and watch
your back.
As long as he is democratically elected he must be supported. Turkey doesn't deserve another
fascist western dictator.
It should also be noted that it is France, Britain, the US and, well, the West, that have
created and even financed most of these terrorist groups to begin with over the past 40
years. The Chechen's were financed by who, against who? why? Go back to the late 70s for your
history lesson.
One put together several big political events since 10-15 years ago and a trend emerge in the
"Western Camp". The promotors of the plan being the Anglo-Americans and the passive-reactive
followers being Continental Europe and proxies in the "middle-east". And it looks like we are
in the tail-end of such a trend with some ups and down and likely the whole plan being in a
shamble now:
(*) Anglo-Americans destroy the foundation of the "two-state plan" through their proxies,
Israel and Saudi
(*) Continental Europe's main powers sensing trouble prefer having Turkey as an external
buffer state and oppose her entry in the EU. They start putting huge administrative hurdles
which signal the strategic partnership Turkey is seeking is not for the foreseeable
future
(*) Turkey gradually opts for the burgeoning "Neo-Ottoman" strategic direction (mainly
translated into the leadership of the Sunni Muslims) and turns it's ambitions towards
East
(*) Anglo-Americans politically undermine EU, going as far for UK as leaving the strategic
partnership
(*) Continental Europe digs into its "fundamental values" of "secularism" although in a
plain hypocritical way
(*) Proxy powers, including Turkey fall into internal competitions between each
other.
I interpret the fall of Turkey as a serious blow to the American Empire, as it is NATO'S
second most prized possession (Germany being the first). What a sad end to the "Capitalist
counterpart to Cuba" during the Cold War.
Turkey is suffering from a typical neoliberal crisis: rising debt to keep trade balance
afloat, which devalues the currency, which worsens the trade balance again, which balloons
the debt even more (from a greater base) and so on, in a vicious cycle that ends in default
and "shock therapy" by the IMF. We've already seen this movie in Latin America during the
1990s, Greece in 2011 (against Germany, the EZ) and the Asian Tigers in 1997-1998 (those
countries only escaped the fate of Latin America and Greece because China bailed them out of
the crisis) and post-USSR in the 1992-1998. The most likely scenario is Erdogan to be
murdered in another CIA-backed color revolution and the Turkish people to receive the "Haiti
treatment" and put to its knees by an IMF shock doctrine.
Only this time it is Turkey, not some random shithole in Latin America. This makes all the
difference, because Turkey really has an independent geopolitical project, and a long
tradition of independence that the Latin American peoples simply don't have. Turkey may break
out of the American sphere of influence as it disintegrates (although, in my opinion, the
chances for that really happening are low).
The Americans must be careful with Turkey. Turkey is not Latin America: it really has an
option, which is turning East.
Look at what happened whan Turkey shot down the Russian jet in Syria and one of Erdoguan's
reptile pets shot the Russian Ambassador. Russia halted trade with Turkey, then the sultan
climbed down almost instantly. Don't be surprised to see a repeat if Russia gets ticked of
again.
NOAM CHOMSKY: "I've often myself just not bothered to vote when it didn't matter or voted for
a third party if it didn't matter. This time is unusual. It matters. A lot. In fact, more
than anything ever, literally. So, I therefore think it shouldn't take five seconds for
people to recognize we have to vote against Trump. There's only one way to vote against Trump
in our two-party system. That's to push the lever for the Democrats. That's voting against
Trump. If you decide not to vote against Trump, you're helping him, you're helping him win.
We can debate lots of things, but not arithmetic. If you withdraw a vote from Biden, that
puts Trump one vote ahead. So, you have essentially two choices on November 3rd. Am I going
to vote against Trump or am I going to help him win? I can't imagine how there can be a
discussion about that among rational people."
b " Last Thursday Russian ships in the eastern Mediterranean fired missiles on a oil
smuggling center near Jarablus, Syria:"
Yet your linked source says it was unidentified aircraft
" injured in a missile strike by an unknown military aircraft "
So why would you make the claim you have?
div> @VK
For someone who espouses being a Marxist, you sure accommodate reactionary language on the
underdeveloped nations of Latin America. Who needs adversaries with 'comrades' such as
yourself. One wonders what your thoughts are on the underdeveloped nations in Africa and South
East Asia. Does 'shithole' come to mind as well?
@VK
For someone who espouses being a Marxist, you sure accommodate reactionary language on the
underdeveloped nations of Latin America. Who needs adversaries with 'comrades' such as
yourself. One wonders what your thoughts are on the underdeveloped nations in Africa and
South East Asia. Does 'shithole' come to mind as well?
I don't disagree with b's analysis, except that, IMO, b still does not give sufficient credit
to the reality that Turkey can con to nice to fan dance with all sides in order to promote
its own interests.
In fact, it is not to Turkeys interest to side too far or permanently with any of the powers
around it.
This certainly has reinforced Erdogan's behavior. Even as he installs S400, he hosts an
enormous US base in Incirlik.
Even as Turkey supports Salafists in Syria, Turkey works with Russia to stranglehold the
entry of natural gas from Centra Asia and the Middle East to Europe.
Chaos is to Erdogan's benefit. By not outright allying to anyone and sowing chaos everywhere,
it allows him to hold down the Kurds inside Turkey without a peep of protest from anyone.
What Chomsky leaves out is how this vote matters? What is the meaningful difference
between Trump v Biden. Trump's critics keep calling him a thief, a scam artist and a traitor,
well where's the proof they've spent 4 years investigating Trump for everything under the
sun, but they didn't find anything they could take to court (and i'm certain they would have
leaked anything they found even if it didn't meet the burden to open an investigation). At
the end of the day you got to put up or shut up, and Trump's critics never put up anything
except a bunch of bland slogans. I perfectly understand why people can dislike or even hate
Trump, but if you yourself cant honestly express why you hate Trump while also applying that
same moral logic to your preferred candidate then your opinion is just an ideological slogan
of no real intellectual value.
As someone who is well aware of both candidates huge flaws, let me express Biden's massive
flaws - 1. he has a history of warmongering, in Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, all of
which were illegal wars of aggression under international law. 2 Biden is unwaveringly
corrupt, from his support of usurious Credit Card company interest rates, Bankruptcy
"reform", to Ukraine, China and Russia, Biden has always cut side deals for himself using his
sons, his brother and his friends as intermediaries to ensure he gets his cut. 3 Biden served
as VP for the what he called the "most progressive" presidency of the post-WW 2 era, but what
are his accomplishments that justify rewarding him with the Presidency - NOTHING! Trump was
right when he called Biden out on all of his bland platitudes to the American people during
the debate, Biden talks a big game - but at the end it's just empty platitudes, he's not
going to fight for anything for the American people because he represents the establishment
and the establishment is perfectly happy with the too big to fail status quo, hope and change
was just more of the same!
Now many of these things could be said of Trump (just the details change), but that just
proves the point, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE between Trump and Biden that justifies voting for
Biden over Trump. Well Chomsky is too much of a old man and a coward to tell you the Truth,
but I will. The difference is that Trump's election proves that the establishment has utterly
utterly failed and has been delegitimatized by these failures to such a monumental level that
the "best" and "brightest" that the establishment choses to offer are rejected by the people
in favor of a TV game show host! Chomsky, for all of his criticism of the establishment is at
the end of the day is, in essence, the "official" gadfly of the establishment, an acceptable
outlet for criticism of the establishment but with no power to either change or threaten the
establishment. Perhaps in 40 years some hypothetical political leader might cite Chomsky as a
reason he cast a decisive vote against a policy. But that is it, Chomsky is not trying to
change the establishment or the status quo people live with now, he has never seized the
moment and pushed for change because ultimately he serves the current power structure (after
all, he became rich and mildly famous under this status quo). Trump's (re)election represents
the failure of Chomsky's view of reform, rather than gradually changing the system from
within by the base, a radical populist change of the system from the top was an option. An
option Chomsky foolishly discounted and discouraged.
I don't much agree with anything said so far. OK Erdogan is a megalomaniac, and a bit of a
nutter, which he is. But he has substantial support behind him, and I would say, not unlikely
to be re-elected. He is a populist. Quite Trumpish.
Erdogan's electorate is Anatolian Turkish pro-Sunni and anti-Kurdish. That explains his
policy in Syria. The Kurds are a danger for him, and he can support the jihadis in Idlib.
It's a mistake in my view; better to let Asad recover control over Syrian territory, and let
him keep Kurdish militias in order.
The Mediterranean conflict with Greece. He's right there. The Greeks have claimed sea
areas which aren't theirs, but are defended by the EU, e.g. Macron's statements.
Libya, I can't see one side as better than the other. Supporting one side at least
provides employments for Syrian Turkmens, who he otherwise would like to help.
Nagorno-Karabakh. Unlike others, I don't see this as Turkish led. It might be, but more
likely stimulated by Azerbaijani resentment at the Armenian take-over of part of their
territory by the Armenians in the 90s. The Azerbaijanis don't seem to be doing too badly, in
spite of the Armenian propaganda, supported by b for no good reason.
Chomsky is wrong. This is a perfect opportunity for opposition to the duopoly to make its
weight and numbers felt by refusing to vote for, their enemy, Biden.
They would not win the election but they could demonstrate the real and growing support for
Socialist policies and ideas.
If the price to pay for establishing the base of a real opposition is Trump limping back into
office, less harm will be done than mandating Biden et al.
When the Democrats come crawling to request your vote bear in mind that their expectation of
the support of the "left" is based upon their vigorous campaigns to keep socialist candidates
off the ballot. By supporting them you support your own disenfranchisement and the
omnipotence of the tiny anti-social oligarchy which employees Bidens and Trumps alike.
It's funny, in France we have an expression " tête de Turc"( Turk's head) to designate
somebody that everybody like to hate. A kind of expiatory victim.
Trump's election proves that the establishment has utterly utterly failed and has been
delegitimatized by these failures to such a monumental level that the "best" and
"brightest" that the establishment choses to offer are rejected by the people in favor of a
TV game show host!
Sorry Kadath, but this is just not right. Here's why:
Hillary won the popular vote.
It's difficult not-to-notice that the election was rigged:
Bernie as sheepdog;
Trump as the only MAGA! Nationalist and only populist in the Republican Primary
Eighteen other smart, seasoned politicians didn't adjust their campaign(s) in
any way that could effectively stop Trump which the Republican establishment
supposedly hated;
Hillary's mistakes that no seasoned candidate would make:
- screwing progressives;
- ignoring/alienating the black vote;
- insulting whites (deplorables!)
- not campaigning (in the closing weeks) in the 3 states SHE KNEW would decide
the election.
Wouldn't it be sweet if Israel stepped in to keep Azerbaijan supplied with drones, artillery,
and cluster bombs to fill any void created by Turkish shortages?
Pompeo / Trump could take one last shot at threatening Iran and adding more life
destroying sanctions because of Iran's highly aggressive deployment of security forces on
their northern border.
The irony of a french president condemning "islamist separatism" is certainly quite rich.
And following a gruesome beheading no less.
I suppose it's just another example of that regular cognitive miracle. One where, for
years on end, a nation's entire narrative war effort is focused entirely on glorifying the
image of what can hardly be described as anything but "islamist separatist". A cognitive
miracle indeed when one considers that the french were amongst the most enthusiastic imperial
participants who turned the one african country with the highest living standard into the
sorry mess of rubble and ash it is today.
A few years later, when the same wizards turned their attention to the middle east aiming
to separate yet another secular nation into war-torn wastelands, considerable expense and
effort were invested in building entire armies of bearded meanies.
The miracle is in the disconnect. The complete absence of empathy for our own victims
while we commemorate our relatively tiny national trauma.
p>
Post a comment Name:
Email:
URL: Allowed HTML Tags:
<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)
<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)
"As the country tries to overcome aggression and sanctions from the U.S. and the European
Union, the government plans to create more homes and announces that 11 new artisanal zones
were established in Tartous, Quneitra, Homs, and Hama provinces. Also, with China's support
is has imported transportation, including buses and 708 vehicles for the cleaning
sector."
@RoatanBill
slim Brotherhood mania. The MB was founded in the '20's by British intelligence bodies in
Egypt in order to form a counter-balance to the growth of Arab nationalism. So we have a
bunch of losers who refused to abide in a Syria which the government of that nation wished to
remain NOT under sectarian control and remain a home for all the faiths which have lived
side-by-side in that land for many centuries.
The logical destination for that moth-eaten bunch of fanatics and their dupes would be to
the lands occupied by the Wahabist Saudi crime clan as well as those of the Gulf
Dictatorships. Such brothers in fanaticism should be very welcome at those totally logical
destinations.
@ arby 8
Syria: "Entire neighborhoods have been reduced to rubble. [11]"
According to news reports, Raqqa was devastated by the U.S.-led airstrikes that
accompanied the SDF's four-month offensive to drive out the Islamic State, and a year later
the city is still in ruins.
It's worse than that. The "so-called fight against ISIL" included the US military firing
indirect fire weapons (artillery, rockets, mortars) into a civilian-occupied city. Many of
the victims are still buried there in the rubble caused by indiscriminate indirect fire.
Feb 6, 2018 -- A small Marine artillery battalion fired more rounds than any artillery
battalion since Vietnam. "They fired more rounds in five months in[to] Raqqa, Syria, than any
other Marine artillery battalion, or any Marine or Army battalion, since the Vietnam war,"
said Army Sgt. Major. John Wayne Troxell, the senior enlisted adviser to the chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff. "In five months they fired 35,000 artillery rounds on ISIS targets,
killing ISIS fighters by the dozens," Troxell told Marine Corps Times during a roundtable
discussion Jan. 23. "We needed them to put pressure on ISIS and we needed them to kill ISIS."
. .
here
-- All fighting age males will be turned over to Assad for conscription as expendable
shock troops.
It is a win-win-win.
With that much additional manpower, Assad would be able to drive Turkish interlopers and
Iranian al'Hezbollah terrorists out of his Syria.
It would open the door to Russia-U.S.-Syria cooperation. Once Iran is 100% gone, Deep
State obstructionists in the U.S. establishment would not be able to interfere with Trump
pulling troops out of " ahem .. oil field defense " positions.
Alas, Greek leaders are not willing to go that far. Yet
Yes. Wasn't all that long ago when b and many of the barflies were kind of celebrating the
fact that the Yankees lost in Syria and were getting the boot.
Turns out that is not what has happened at all.
"Here are the consequences of the war for the people of Syria.
The economy has contracted by two-thirds since 2011 [1], the year the United States and
its Western allies, along with the Turks, Saudis, Emiratis, and Qataris, assisted by the
Israelis, fanned the embers of an Islamist insurgency that has burned since the 1960s into a
conflagration.
Over 80 percent of Syrians now live below the poverty line. [2]
Once classified as a lower middle income country, the World Bank in 2018 reclassified Syria
as a low-income country. [3]
According to the country's president, Bashar al-Assad, Syrians are trapped "between hunger
and poverty and deprivation [created by the long war] on one side and death [from the
coronavirus] on the other." [4]
Food prices have increased more than 23 times over the past decade. [5]
The World Food Program warns of an impending famine. [6]
Syria's healthcare system, once one of the finest in the region, is in disarray. The country
suffers a dearth of doctors, drugs and medical equipment. [7]
Dams and oil fields barely function. [8]
Industrial areas have been completely devastated. [9]
Schools and hospitals lie in ruins. [10]
Entire neighborhoods have been reduced to rubble. [11]
Recent attacks on Syrian positions from terrorists of the self-proclaimed "Islamic State"
(ISIS) and the release of thousands of prisoners in US-occupied eastern Syria illustrate how
Washington is demonstratably prolonging instability in Syria as part of its promise to
transform the nation into a "quagmire" for Russia and Iran.
Newsweek itself, in an
article
titled , "US Syria Representative Says His Job Is to Make the War a 'Quagmire' for Russia,"
had admitted earlier this year that:
The US special representative for Syria has urged continued American deployment to the
war torn country in order to keep pressure on US enemies and make the conflict a "quagmire"
for Russia.
The article further elaborated:
Assad -- who now controls the majority of the country -- is backed by Russia and Iran,
both of which the US is trying to undermine. Jeffrey said Tuesday that the US strategy will
both weaken America's enemies while avoiding costly mission creep.
"This isn't Afghanistan, this isn't Vietnam," he explained. "This isn't a quagmire. My
job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians."
Toward that end – efforts in US-occupied eastern Syria to properly deal with ISIS
prisoners and their family members has been neglected – creating conditions aimed at
breeding extremism rather than defusing it. Even the Washington Post – in a recent
article titled ,
"Kurdish-led zone vows to release Syrians from detention camp for ISIS families," would
admit:
Conditions inside al-Hol displacement camp, a sprawl of tents perched in the desert
west of Hasakah city, have alarmed humanitarian groups and in some cases aided the
radicalization of women and children who spent years under Islamic State rule.
The "release" is depicted by the Western media as lacking planning – however –
if the goal of the US is to compound Syria's crisis rather than help resolve it –
releasing thousands of prisoners – many of whom are likely only further radicalized
– is the plan.
US media also reported on a major and recent clash between Syrian forces and ISIS militants
requiring the use of Russian airpower to repel.
Western headlines like Defense Post's article ,
"90 Dead as Syria Govt Forces Clash With IS: Monitor," claimed:
Clashes in the Syrian Desert between pro-government forces and holdouts of the Islamic
State group have killed at least 90 combatants this month, a war monitor said on
Wednesday.
Russian aircraft carried out strikes in support of their Syrian regime ally, the Syrian
Observatory for Human Rights said.
The militants are alleged to be based in Syria's desert regions just west of the Euphrates
River. However, in order to sustain ISIS' fighting capacity in an otherwise desolate region,
weapons and supplies need to be continuously brought in.
Since it is unlikely the Syrian government is supplying ISIS fighters determined to kill
Syrian troops and move westward toward government-held territory – it is the US and its
regional allies supplying them instead.
The combination of the deliberately destructive administration of US-occupied territory in
eastern Syria and the continued supply and arming of militants – including those
affiliated with ISIS – are clear components of Washington's strategy of creating a
"quagmire" for Syria and its allies in addition to the continued US military occupation itself
and ongoing efforts to maintain crippling sanctions aimed at Syria's economy.
The US has made "quagmires" for Russia in the past. This included its support of militants
in Afghanistan through the supply of weapons and training via Pakistan.
The Syrian conflict – since 2011 – has been the result of similar efforts by the
US to create, arm, supply, and otherwise back militants attempting to overthrow the government
in Damascus. Having failed this primary objective and after having spent whatever credibility
the US had upon the international stage – Washington has now moved toward openly
obstructing peace and hampering Syria's recovery from the ongoing conflict – admittedly
to spite its international competitors including Russia, Iran, and even China.
When comparing America's "rules-based international order" with the emerging multipolar
world presented by nations like Russia and China as an alternative – it is difficult to
believe Washington sees its continued destabilization of nations and even entire regions of the
world as a selling point for its world view rather than the primary reason nations around the
globe should both oppose it and back desperately needed alternatives to it.
Attempts by Washington to continue depicting itself as a partner for combating global
terrorism rather than a source of global terrorism seems to have fully run its course with the
US all but admitting its presence in Syria is aimed at prolonging conflict rather than
contributing to efforts to end it. This has been repeatedly illustrated by America's
confrontation with Russia in Syria – including a recent incident in which US military
vehicles unsuccessfully attempted to block a Russian military patrol.
It was Russia's 2015 entry into the conflict on Syria's behalf that decisively turned the
tide of the conflict – using its superior airpower to target ISIS and Al Qaeda supply
lines leading out of NATO-member Turkey's territory into Syria, collapsing their respective
fighting capacities and allowing Syrian forces to restore order to nearly all major population
centers of the country.
Today, remaining hostilities are centered on both Turkish and US-occupied territory inside
Syria – the resolution of which will mark the conclusion of the conflict – a
conclusion and resulting peace Ankara and Washington appear opposed to.
While Western pundits have argued that a US withdrawal would lead to a resurgence of ISIS
– it is clear that ISIS thrives everywhere Syrian forces have been prevented from
retaking because of America's illegal presence inside the country. A US withdrawal would be the
first true step toward eliminating ISIS from both Syria and the region.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your
email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Tony Cartalucci is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the
online magazine "New Eastern Outlook"
where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global
Research.
Tramp was essentially the President from military industrial complex and Israel lobby. So he was not played. That's naive. He
followed the instructions.
On March 20, 2018, President
Donald Trump
sat beside Saudi crown prince Muhammed bin Salman at the White House and lifted a giant map that said
Saudi weapons purchases would support jobs in "key" states -- including Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida and Ohio, all
of which were crucial to Trump's
2016 election victory
.
"Saudi Arabia has been a very great friend and a big purchaser of
equipment but if you look, in terms of dollars, $3 billion, $533 million, $525 million -- that's peanuts for you. You
should have increased it," Trump
said
to the prince, who was (and still is) overseeing a military campaign in Yemen that has deployed U.S. weaponry to commit
scores
of alleged war crimes.
Trump has used his job as commander-in-chief to be America's arms-dealer-in-chief
in a way no other president has since Dwight Eisenhower, as he prepared to leave the presidency, warned in early 1961
of the military-industrial complex's political influence. Trump's posture makes sense personally ― this is a man who
regularly
fantasizes
about violence, usually toward foreigners ― and he and his advisers see it as politically useful, too. The president
has repeatedly appeared at weapons production facilities in swing states,
promoted
the head of Lockheed Martin using White House resources, appointed defense industry employees to top government jobs
in an unprecedented way and expanded the Pentagon's budget to near-historic highs ― a guarantee of future income for
companies like Lockheed and Boeing.
Trump is "on steroids in terms of promoting arms sales for his own
political benefit," said William Hartung, a scholar at the Center for International Policy who has tracked the defense
industry for decades. "It's a targeted strategy to get benefits from workers in key states."
In courting the billion-dollar industry, Trump has trampled on moral
considerations about how buyers like the Saudis misuse American weapons, ethical concerns about conflicts of interest
and even part of his own political message, the deceptive
claim
that he is a peace candidate. He justifies his policy by citing job growth, but data from
Hartung
,
a prominent analyst, shows he exaggerates the impact. And Trump has made clear that a major motivation for his defense
strategy is the possible electoral benefit it could have.
Next month's election
will show if the bargain was worth it. As of now, it looks like Trump's bet didn't pay off
― for him, at least. Campaign contribution records, analysts in swing states and polls suggest arms dealers have given
the president no significant political boost. The defense contractors, meanwhile, are expected to
continue
getting richer, as they have in a dramatic
way
under Trump.
Playing Corporate Favorites
Trump has thrice chosen the person who decides how the Defense Department
spends its gigantic budget. Each time, he has tapped someone from a business that wants those Pentagon dollars. Mark
Esper, the current defense secretary, worked for Raytheon; his predecessor, Pat Shanahan, for Boeing; and Trump's first
appointee, Jim Mattis, for General Dynamics, which reappointed him to its board soon after he left the administration.
Of the senior officials serving under Esper, almost half have connections
to military contractors,
per
the Project on Government Oversight. The administration is now rapidly trying to fill more Pentagon jobs under the guidance
of a former Trump campaign worker, Foreign Policy magazine recently
revealed
― prioritizing political reasons and loyalty to Trump in choosing people who could help craft policy even under a
Joe Biden
presidency.
Such personnel choices are hugely important for defense companies'
profit margins and risk creating corruption or the impression of it. Watchdog groups argue Trump's handling of the hiring
process is more evidence that lawmakers and future presidents must institute rules to limit the reach of military contractors
and other special interests.
"Given the hundreds of conflicts of interest flouting the rule of
law in the
Trump administration
, certainly these issues have gotten that much more attention and are that much more salient
now than they were four years ago," said Aaron Scherb, the director of legislative affairs at Common Cause, a nonpartisan
good-government group.
The theoretical dangers of Trump's approach became a reality last
year, when a former employee for the weapons producer Raytheon used his job at the State Department to advocate for a
rare emergency declaration allowing the Saudis and their partner the United Arab Emirates to buy $8 billion in arms ―
including $2 billion in Raytheon products ― despite congressional objections. As other department employees warned that
Saudi Arabia was defying U.S. pressure to behave less brutally in Yemen, former lobbyist Charles Faulkner led a unit
that urged Secretary of State
Mike Pompeo
to give the kingdom more weapons. Pompeo
pushed
out Faulkner soon afterward, and earlier this year, the State Department's inspector general
criticized
the process behind the emergency declaration for the arms.
MOHAMED AL-SAYAGHI / REUTERS
Red
Crescent medics walk next to bags containing the bodies of victims of Saudi-linked airstrikes on a Houthi detention center
in Yemen on Sept. 1, 2019. The Saudis military campaign in Yemen has relied on U.S. weaponry to commit scores of alleged
war crimes.
Even Trump administration officials not clearly connected to the
defense industry have shown an interest in moves that benefit it. In 2017, White House economic advisor Peter Navarro
pressured
Republican lawmakers to permit exports to Saudi Arabia and Jared
Kushner, the president's counselor and son-in-law, personally
spoke
with Lockheed Martin's chief to iron out a sale to the kingdom, The New York Times found.
Subscribe to the Politics email.
From Washington to the campaign trail, get the latest politics news.
When Congress gave the Pentagon $1 billion to develop medical supplies
as part of this year's
coronavirus
relief package, most of the money went to defense contractors for projects like jet engine parts instead,
a Washington Post investigation
showed
.
https://schema.org/WPAdBlock
"It's a very close relationship and there's no kind of sense that
they're supposed to be regulating these people," Hartung said. "It's more like they're allies, standing shoulder to shoulder."
Seeking Payback
In June 2019, Lockheed Martin announced that it would close a facility
that manufactures helicopters in Coatesville, Pennsylvania, and employs more than 450 people. Days later, Trump tweeted
that he had asked the company's then-chief executive, Marillyn Hewson, to keep the plant open. And by July 10, Lockheed
said
it would do so ― attributing the decision to Trump.
The president has frequently claimed credit for jobs in the defense
industry, highlighting the impact on manufacturing in swing states rather than employees like Washington lobbyists, whose
numbers have also
grown
as he has expanded the Pentagon's budget. Lockheed has helped him in his messaging: In one instance in Wisconsin, Hewson
announced
she was adding at least 45 new positions at a plant directly after Trump spoke there, saying his tax cuts for corporations
made that possible.
Trump is pursuing a strategy that the arms industry uses to insulate
itself from political criticism. "They've reached their tentacles into every state and many congressional districts,"
Scherb of Common Cause said. That makes it hard for elected officials to question their operations or Pentagon spending
generally without looking like they are harming their local economy.
Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, a Democrat who represents Coatesville,
welcomed
Lockheed's change of course, though she warned, "This decision is a temporary reprieve. I am concerned that Lockheed
Martin and [its subsidiary] Sikorsky are playing politics with the livelihoods of people in my community."
The political benefit for Trump, though, remains in question, given
that as president he has a broad set of responsibilities and is judged in different ways.
"Do I think it's important to keep jobs? Absolutely," said Marcel
Groen, a former Pennsylvania Democratic party chair. "And I think we need to thank the congresswoman and thank the president
for it. But it doesn't change my views and I don't think it changes most people's in terms of the state of the nation."
With polls showing that Trump's disastrous response to the
health pandemic
dominates voters' thoughts and Biden sustaining a lead
in surveys of most swing states
, his argument on defense industry jobs seems like a minor factor in this election.
Hartung of the Center for International Policy drew a parallel to
President George H.W. Bush, who during his 1992 reelection campaign promoted plans for Taiwan and Saudi Arabia to purchase
fighter jets produced in Missouri and Texas. Bush
announced
the
decisions
at events at the General Dynamics facility in Fort Worth, Texas, and the McDonnell Douglas plant in St. Louis that made
the planes. That November, as Bill Clinton defeated him, he lost Missouri by the highest
margin
of any Republican in almost 30 years and won Texas by a slimmer
margin
than had become the norm for a GOP presidential candidate.
MANDEL NGAN VIA GETTY IMAGES
President
Donald Trump greets then-Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson at the Derco Aerospace Inc. plant in Milwaukee on July 12,
2019. Trump does not appear to be winning his political bet that increased defense spending would help his political
fortunes.
Checking The Receipts
The defense industry can't control whether voters buy Trump's arguments
about his relationship with it. But it could, if it wanted to, try to help him politically in a more direct way: by donating
to his reelection campaign and allied efforts.
Yet arms manufacturers aren't reciprocating Trump's affection. A
HuffPost review of Federal Election Commission records showed that top figures and groups at major industry organizations
like the National Defense Industrial Association and the Aerospace Industries Association and at Lockheed, Trump's favorite
defense firm, are donating this cycle much as they normally do: giving to both sides of the political aisle, with a slight
preference to the party currently wielding the most power, which for now is Republicans. (The few notable exceptions
include the chairman of the NDIA's board, Arnold Punaro, who has given more than $58,000 to Trump and others in the GOP.)
Data from the Center for Responsive Politics
shows
that's the case for contributions from the next three biggest groups of defense industry donors after Lockheed's employees.
https://schema.org/WPAdBlock
One smaller defense company, AshBritt Environmental, did
donate
$500,000 to a political action committee supporting Trump ― prompting a complaint from the Campaign Legal Center, which
noted that businesses that take federal dollars are not allowed to make campaign contributions. Its founder
told
ProPublica he meant to make a personal donation.
For weapons producers, backing both parties makes sense. The military
budget will have increased 29% under Trump by the end of the current fiscal year,
per
the White House Office of Management and Budget. Biden has
said
he doesn't see cuts as "inevitable" if he is elected, and his circle of advisers includes many from the national security
world who have worked closely with ― and in many cases worked for ― the defense industry.
And arms manufacturers are "busy pursuing their own interests" in
other ways, like trying to get a piece of additional government stimulus legislation, Hartung said ― an effort that's
underway as the Pentagon's inspector general
investigates
how defense contractors got so much of the first coronavirus relief package.
Meanwhile, defense contractors continue to have an outsize effect
on the way policies are designed in Washington through less political means. A recent report from the Center for International
Policy found that such companies have given at least $1 billion to the nation's most influential think tanks since 2014
― potentially spending taxpayer money to influence public opinion. They have also found less obvious ways to maintain
support from powerful people, like running the databases that many congressional offices use to connect with constituents,
Scherb of Common Cause said.
"This goes into a much bigger systemic issue about big money in politics
and the role of corporations versus the role of Americans," Scherb said.
Given its reach, the defense industry has little reason to appear
overtly partisan. Instead, it's projecting confidence despite the generally dreary state of the global economy: Boeing
CEO Dave Calhoun
has said
he expects similar approaches from either winner of the election,
arguing even greater Democratic control and the rise of less conventional lawmakers isn't a huge concern.
In short, whoever is in the White House, arms dealers tend to do
just fine.
A grand jury in Pennsylvania indicted the six men for "conspiracy, computer hacking,
wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and false registration of a domain name," the DOJ
announced on Monday, describing them as officers in Unit 74455 of the Russian Main
Intelligence Directorate, or GRU.
The indictment identifies them as Yuriy Sergeyevich Andrienko, Sergey Vladimirovich
Detistov, Pavel Valeryevich Frolov, Anatoliy Sergeyevich Kovalev, Artem Valeryevich
Ochichenko and Petr Nikolayevich Pliskin.
According to the charges, they used malware like KillDisk, Industroyer, NotPetya and
Olympic Destroyer to attack everything from networks in Ukraine and Georgia to the Olympics
held in PyeongChang two years ago – in which Russian athletes were not allowed to
participate under their national flag, due to doping allegations made by a disgruntled
doctor.
The six are also accused of undermining "efforts to hold Russia accountable for its use
of a weapons-grade nerve agent, Novichok, on foreign soil" – referring to the March
2018 claims by the British government that Russia "highly likely" used the toxin
against a former spy and his daughter, an accusation Moscow repeatedly denied.
Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers has
claimed that "No country has weaponized its cyber capabilities as maliciously or
irresponsibly as Russia, wantonly causing unprecedented damage to pursue small tactical
advantages and to satisfy fits of spite."
Monday's indictment is hardly a surprise, considering that NATO and US officials have
blamed the 2017 NotPetya outbreak on Moscow for years, even though the malware struck
numerous Russian companies – from the central bank to the oil giant Rosneft and
metal-maker Evraz – as well.
The October 2019 Georgia attack was "in line with Russian tactics,"declared
CrowdStrike, the same security company that was tasked with dealing with the 2016
"hack" of the Democratic National Committee. CrowdStrike's president had secretly
admitted to Congress that they had no actual evidence of the hack itself.
The indictment also accuses the "GRU officers" of trying to breach the Organisation
for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). The international body faced a scandal after
whistleblowers revealed that a report blaming chemical attacks in Syria on the country's
government omitted details that did not fall in line with the narrative pushed by the US and
the UK.
In announcing the indictment, the DOJ thanked the authorities in Ukraine, Georgia, New
Zealand, South Korea, and UK "intelligence services" – as well as Google,
Facebook and Twitter – for "significant cooperation and assistance" with the
investigation.
The same "GRU unit" and Kovalev specifically were previously indicted by Special
Counsel Robert Mueller for alleged "meddling" in 2016 US elections. As with Mueller's
indictments, Monday's charges have largely symbolic value; the accused are not likely to ever
see the inside of a US courtroom. The only indictment that was actually contested in court
– against the so-called IRA troll farm – was dropped by the DOJ in
March, due to lack of evidence.
Russia's military intelligence has not gone by the name of GRU since 2010.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
"... Of course the quick objection is that Turkey is getting a crap deal on every single aspect mentioned. This is especially true of Erdogan personally, whose true existential need is to win the war against the Kurds he re-started in Turkey. For instance, the US covertly helps Turkey stay in Syria but simultaneously it "supports" Rojava. And so on and so forth. Yes, the US government is a bully and cheats even its friends. Under Trump it especially cheats its friends, because they are the easiest marks. ..."
james@30 asks "what is the usa offering Turkey here??"
Offering continued intervention in Syria, de facto in alliance with Turkey, which weakens
the Kurds in effect; splitting the Kurds internationally by supporting the KRG; supporting
the continued partition of Cyprus; supporting the effective dismantling of NATO, a very
important point re Greek relations; neutrality in Libya and the disputes over eastern
Mediterranean drilling; deeming Erdogan one of the good Muslims instead of pursuing a
virulent regime change campaign; no economic warfare like in Venezuela.
Of course the quick objection is that Turkey is getting a crap deal on every single
aspect mentioned. This is especially true of Erdogan personally, whose true existential need
is to win the war against the Kurds he re-started in Turkey. For instance, the US covertly
helps Turkey stay in Syria but simultaneously it "supports" Rojava. And so on and so forth.
Yes, the US government is a bully and cheats even its friends. Under Trump it especially
cheats its friends, because they are the easiest marks.
The thing is, Russia cannot bring Erdogan either victory over the Kurds or a healthy
economy. Nor is it clear to me that Putin has any strategy whatsoever for any endgame.
Re Turkey. Erdogan is a megalomaniac nationalist. He is neither a servant of the US nor of
Putin. He does what he thinks is in the interests of Turkey.
Kit Klarenberg is an investigative journalist. A leaked phone call reveals that
outside pressure caused Amnesty to pull its promotion of a webinar featuring Pink Floyd's Roger
Waters – a vocal skeptic of the Douma 'chemical attack' that prompted Western powers to
bomb Syria.
In August this
year, environmental pressure group Amazon Watch broadcast an online panel discussion in support
of Steven Donziger, a crusading attorney who dared try to hold US energy giant Chevron to
account for widespread environmental destruction in the Amazon, and was left fighting for his
life, livelihood and liberty as a result.
In
February 2011, Chevron was found liable by an Ecuadorian court for contamination resulting
from crude oil production in the region by its subsidiary Texaco between 1964 and 1992, in a
legal action that was many years in the making and led by Donziger.
Chevron is yet to pay a penny of the settlement though, for the landmark ruling was
overturned in March 2014 by a US Federal Court on highly dubious grounds – in
reaching his decision, presiding Judge Lewis A. Kaplan relied heavily on the evidence of a
former Ecuadorian justice who subsequently admitted to fabricating his testimony. Donziger has
since been charged
with contempt of court and sat under house arrest for over a year awaiting trial.
Dozinger himself was present on the Amazon Watch webinar that August evening, and was joined
by a number of prominent campaigners, including Simon Taylor, founder of NGO Global Witness,
and Roger Waters, co-founder of rock institution Pink Floyd.
The talk was widely promoted in advance by a number of prominent human rights activists, and
NGOs, perhaps most prominently Amnesty International.
However, the organization's endorsement triggered a deluge of
criticism on social media from a number of notorious advocates for regime change in Syria. This
led to a post advertising the webinar published by Amnesty USA's official Twitter account the
day before broadcast to mysteriously disappear without explanation.
In response to one critic , Amnesty UK Campaigns
Manager Kristyan Benedict said promoting the talk was "not good at all" and confirmed
that the offending tweet had "been deleted."
A leaked recording of a September 25 phone call between Waters and two senior staffers at
Amnesty International USA – Matt Vogel , head of artist relations,
and Tamara
Draut , chief impact officer – sheds fascinating light on the episode.
At the start of the conversation, Waters recalls he was not only informed Amnesty would
promote the panel discussion on Twitter in advance, but also personally retweeted the
endorsement so it reached his circa 375,000 followers at the organization's express
request.
However, an associate informed him just before the webinar began that they couldn't locate
the post. When the talk was over, he went about getting to the bottom of the tweet's
absence.
After conducting "a bit of sleuthing," he determined that the removal followed
pressure being brought to bear by a number of individuals, in particular his "old
adversary" Eliot Higgins, founder of controversial website Bellingcat, due to Waters' views
on the Syrian Civil Defense, aka White Helmets. Seeking answers, he attempted to reach out to
Amnesty, but was repeatedly stonewalled before finally being put in touch with Vogel and
Draut.
In response, Draut confirmed that the tweet's removal was indeed prompted by a
"difference of opinion" on the White Helmets. "We believe they're really champions
for human rights, and have fought for their protection and freedom. When the tweet went up on
our end, it wasn't fully vetted as it should've been, and immediately we heard from folks in
the White Helmets, asking why we were promoting you, due to comments you've made about them. We
also heard from other Syrian human rights activists, who were quite hurt by our support of you
" she began, before Waters interrupts, asking what relevance his views on the group has to
"the plight of rainforest dwellers in northern Ecuador."
"People interpreted our promotion of an event at which you were speaking as promoting
your position on the White Helmets. I got involved in this process too late, I wouldn't have
taken down the tweet, that's not the policy I like to follow, I would've much rather dealt with
this openly and honestly..." Draut explains.
Waters made
headlines the world over in April 2018, when he stopped mid-set during a concert in
Barcelona to talk about a chemical weapons attack in Douma, Syria, which had allegedly taken
place six days earlier.
Branding the White Helmets a "fake organization" creating "propaganda for
jihadists and terrorists," he suggested that Western public opinion was being manipulated
in order that "we would be encouraged to encourage our governments to go and start dropping
bombs on people." Mere hours later , his prediction
came to pass, as France, the UK and US carried out a series of military strikes against
multiple government sites in the country.
In
May 2019, Waters was again the subject of intense criticism when he claimed on his official
Facebook page that a
leaked document had vindicated his position. The file in question was an engineering report
produced by an Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) fact-finding team
that visited Douma in the days following the contested strike, which concluded there was a
"higher probability" that cylinders found at two locations in Douma, alleged by the
White Helmets to have been dropped from Syrian Air Force helicopters, were "manually placed
rather than being delivered from aircraft."
Photos of the cylinders circulated widely in the Western media and on social networks in the
wake of the claimed incident. Such images, along with footage of Douma residents being hosed
down in hospitals, children seemingly foaming at the mouth, and piles of dead bodies in a
housing complex – all produced and disseminated by the White Helmets – were all
damning evidence offered in favor of the idea that the Syrian government had targeted civilians
with chemical weapons, a notion which in turn provided Paris, London and Washington with a
pretext for military intervention.
The OPCW team's dissenting appraisal was, for reasons unclear, entirely unmentioned in the
organization's final report on Douma ,
published two months prior to Waters' Facebook post.
Despite making few if any public comments about the White Helmets or the ongoing crisis in
Syria since, Waters has nonetheless been subject to an unending deluge of online abuse from
their Western supporters.
Back on the call, an indignant Waters cites a since-deleted tweet from Eliot Higgins, which
stated that Amnesty International "needs to explain why Roger Waters is an appropriate
person to talk about human rights." Rather than responding constructively to the question,
the organization opted to simply yield to critical pressure.
Waters said: "Why am I an appropriate person? Because I've been a great advocate for
human rights all my life. The White Helmets were clearly involved in something really dodgy.
Amnesty has never come out and said, 'It's been brought to our attention the video the White
Helmets made in Douma was absolutely fake.'
"Doctors there have said not only were there no deaths that we know about that day, but
the people in the hospital were complaining of dust inhalation, not being gassed. Do you still
believe that video, do you believe that was real?"
Draut responded: "I appreciate your desire to defend your opinion, I don't think it's
productive all I can tell you is you asked why the tweet was taken down, and it was taken down
because of the immediate backlash we received, which is in direct opposition to our position on
the White Helmets, and is very hurtful the position of Amnesty wasn't that you don't have any
right or expertise or commitment to human rights to speak on that panel."
Waters then countered: "Why didn't you explain why I am an appropriate person, and say
you weren't going to delete the tweet, because the webinar was important?!
"When I was growing up, you pretended to care about human rights – you've
demonstrated to me in this conversation that you don't, particularly by refusing to answer my
simple question about the video made by the White Helmets in Douma!" he said.
In response, Vogel hurriedly stepped in, reassuring Waters that Amnesty supports Donziger's
"very critical case," and he personally considered the webinar "a very important
conversation to have."
"So this is just a blacklisting of me?! This is you blacklisting me on the basis of
evidence given by a scumbag like Eliot Higgins! That's what you're telling me now!" Waters
contended.
"You've made a special exception in my case?! To blacklist me, and take a tweet
mentioning me down, on the basis of trolls sending in their negative feelings about me –
because I don't subscribe to their opinions about regime change in Syria, and the non-existent
chemical attack in Douma, Amnesty International will blacklist me and prevent me from acting
for the people of Ecuador, in my capacity as a human rights activist. Wow! What a terrible
indictment of your organization, if you don't mind me saying!"
Draut then returns to the conversation, apologizing outright for the tweet's removal, and
claiming Waters is "in no way" blacklisted by Amnesty, despite the organization
"disagreeing" with his position on the White Helmets.
Thanking her, Waters asked whether Amnesty was willing to publicly explain how and why its
promotion of the webinar was retracted, an act that was "entirely outside the boundaries
that Amnesty International pretends to hold sacred," and apologize to Stephen Donziger and
the Ecuadorian people. No commitment to do so was forthcoming from either Amnesty
representative on the call, and no explanation or apology for the deletion has been offered by
the organization as of October 12.
While Waters' public comments in April 2018 have clearly made him a target for public
vilification and censorship, a great many documents leaked since then strongly suggest his
original suspicions were highly adroit – and the OPCW's conclusions that there were
"reasonable grounds" to believe a chemical weapons attack had occurred in Douma, and
"the toxic chemical was likely molecular chlorine," were directly contrary to the
overwhelming majority of the evidence which its investigators collected.
A vast number of the organization's previously suppressed internal files are now in the
public domain, and while they've been universally ignored by mainstream journalists, they tell
a damning story.
For instance, the documents demonstrate that in July 2018, OPCW chiefs secretly removed all
staff from the investigation who had actually visited Douma, bar a single paramedic.
Responsibility for completing the probe was handed to an entirely separate team, which had
instead traveled to Turkey, and exclusively taken witness statements and soil samples
hand-picked by the White Helmets, and staff who hadn't participated in either mission.
The conclusions drawn from this evidence differed sharply from evidence collected in Syria,
and this incongruity was repeatedly noted in a draft report –
references absent entirely from the version presented to the public.
Other key facts from the draft also indicate OPCW investigators quickly ruled out that a
chemical attack of any kind had taken place. For one, no samples of any nerve agent –
which the White Helmets, Syrian American Medical Society, Union of Medical Care and Relief
Organizations and British and American governments all claimed had been employed in the attack
– were found anywhere on the site, and this had been established by June
2018.
Moreover, at the OPCW's request, four chemical weapons experts conducted a toxicology
review of
available evidence from the incident. They concluded that the observed symptoms of alleged
victims in Douma, as depicted in White Helmets-provided footage from the incident, "were
inconsistent with exposure to chlorine" and "no other obvious candidate chemical causing
the symptoms could be identified."
Further undermining the OPCW's public conclusions, the organization's tests of samples
collected in Douma showed that chlorine compounds were detected overwhelmingly at trace
quantities
, in the parts-per-billion range – a finding referenced in the aforementioned draft,
again absent from the version deemed fit for public consumption.
At a January 2020 meeting of the United Nations Security
Council, former OPCW inspection team leader Ian Henderson, an 11-year veteran of the
organization who was part of the Douma fact-finding mission's inspection
team , testified that the investigation into the alleged incident unambiguously concluded
that no chemical attack had taken place, and suggested it was likely staged by the Syrian
opposition, in order to trigger Western military intervention.
That the White Helmets are a Western construct disseminating propaganda to facilitate
governments dropping bombs on people, as per Roger Waters' phrase, was amply confirmed by the
recent release of internal UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO)
files by hacktivist collective Anonymous.
Among other things, the documents expose a vast and extremely well-funded multi-year
operation to
produce propaganda targeted both at Syrians and Western populations, forging perceptions of a
coherent, credible, moderate opposition to the government of Bashar Assad and extremist groups
such as Islamic State alike, and to cultivate support for British-facilitated regime change in
the country.
Under the auspices of this project, ARK International – a "conflict transformation
and stabilization consultancy" founded by Alistair Harris, a veteran FCO diplomat –
developed and ran an "internationally-focused communications campaign designed to raise
global awareness" of the White Helmets.
"ARK created and continues to run a Twitter feed and Facebook page on behalf of the
Syrian Civil Defense teams, posting photos and updates on their activities in English
throughout the day. This has received high-profile recognition from international websites and
commentators New York-based advocacy group, the Syria Campaign, reached out to the civil
defenders through their Twitter feed, and following subsequent discussions with ARK, selected
the civil defense to front its campaign to keep Syria in the news [emphasis added]," a
leaked internal
document states.
Intriguingly, ARK also extensively trained and equipped over 150
"activists" in Syria on "camera handling, lighting, sound, interviewing, filming a
story," post-production techniques including "video and sound editing and software,
voice-over, scriptwriting," and "graphics and 2D and 3D animation design and
software."
Students were even instructed in practical propaganda theory
– namely "target audience identification, qualitative and quantitative techniques,
media and media narrative analysis and monitoring,""behavioral identification/understanding,"
"campaign planning," "behavior, behavioral change, and how communications can influence it
[emphasis added]," and more.
Content produced by trainees was then fed to ARK's "well-established contacts" at
media outlets including Al Jazeera, the BBC, CNN, The Guardian, the New York Times and Reuters,
in some cases the firm's students were hired directly as on-the-ground 'stringers' by these
organizations, producing reports and conducting interviews.
The files offer no indication that ARK's trainees were further schooled in how to stage
chemical weapons attacks for a Western audience. However, the techniques they learned could
clearly so easily be used and abused for such a purpose – making the question of whether
they did so worthy of intensive further investigation.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
NANCY 12 hours ago I have to ask, why is Amnesty International still considered an organization
advocating for human rights and political prisoners? They have shown themselves to be
hypocritical phonies in the case of Julian Assange and now, the White Helmets and who knows how
many other issues. Kudos to Roger Waters for his courage on calling them out. He is a true
humanitarian. Reply 103 2 Show 3 previous replies Blue8ball713 NANCY 5 hours ago Amnesty is
tainted and hollowed out to be a tool for the war criminals. Reply 24 1 Show 1 more replies
Fred Dozer NANCY 7 hours ago They would not let the leader of the WH into the US , to accept an
humanitarian documentary award. Why ? His name is on the Terrorist and No_Fly list. Reply 16 1
13Englander 6 hours ago I'm ashamed to say that this is more evidence that the West is now
rotten to the core and will pressure any organisation to cooperate in maintaining the fake
veneer of decency. It's a sign that the West is desperate for survival. Reply 17 TheRealElDee 9
hours ago There has been a burning desire by the US and UK to get 'boots on the ground' in
Syria and for this to result in regime change. Prior to the CIA pushing for and funding this
Civil War, Syria was peaceful, stable and able to export it's oil AND have good relations with
both US and UK. BUT, Russia uses Syria as a base for it's navy and therefore this (in addition
to all that lovely oil) is the premise they can presen to their own people for pushing the
Civil War. At every step the public, and many parliaments, have spoke out to prevent war. At
every step the US & UK have come up with further premise for going to full out war. 'Barrel
Bombs', Chemical Weapons, indiscriminate fire on civilians and hsopitals etc etc. Likewise at
every step this has, so far, been debunked - chemical weapons have been shown by our own
investigators to have been placed, the inspectors were subsequently removed from being able to
report. Previous to that old stock of chemical weapons had been made safe in conjunction with
outside help from Russia, the only country that has any right, legally, to be in Syria
militarily. The is another part of the jigsaw that wants to restart the Cold War and to close
off dialogue whilst having never ending war in the middle east destabilising countries with oil
and other assets. There is no other reason for it and that this should be contemplated is
criminal - literally.. Reply 18 2 faireymagic 12 hours ago excellent work by Roger Waters,
standing up for truth and human decency Reply 73 Tengmo 11 hours ago Amnesty was compromised
long ago, so was Greenpeace, Reply 34 shadow1369 12 hours ago Almost all NGOs, originally set
up by altruistic people, have been hijacked by NATO regimes. Amnesty is a stooge supporting
crimes against humanity. Reply 49 1 Hazmat Fuhrer shadow1369 6 hours ago It's important for the
Kremlin to obfuscate it's almost constant attrocities in Syria and those of the Gassad trtr
mrdr disaster Reply 1 18 Show 1 more replies Michael Chan shadow1369 9 hours ago Many news
media suffered the same fate., They too have been hijacked by the NATO regimes. The most
conspicuous of them are Al Jazeera and Asia Times. Both were excellent news sources until they
were bought by Western tycoons and turned into propaganda mouthpieces for the NATO regimes.
Reply 25 Show 1 more replies GottaBeMe 5 hours ago No further donations to that group from me!
I truly believed they were a force for good. I'm with Roger Waters. He has proven time after
time that he cares about people. Bellingcat? Never! Reply 12 Wasey Cerner 8 hours ago <<
...the documents demonstrate that in July 2018, OPCW chiefs secretly removed all staff from the
investigation who had actually visited Douma, bar a single paramedic. Responsibility for
completing the probe was handed to an entirely separate team, which had instead traveled to
Turkey, AND exclusively taken witness statements and soil samples hand-picked by the White
Helmets,... >> Navalny's team followed the same script from the motel to Mass. Reply 8
Sinalco 11 hours ago [1] He was telling the TRUTH [2] Bellingcat is an Establishment Creation,
used to push the establishment narrative. [3] Amnesty just swallowed the lies about the
White-Helmets - what shame... Reply 29 Blue8ball713 Sinalco 5 hours ago 3 Amnesty is part of
this Reply 5 Truthfrees 11 hours ago All those clowns pushing for regime change have no problem
with millions killed and multiple nations destroyed for the regime change whim of the day.
Cowards that sit in their air conditioned living room pushing for evil destruction on nations
and people they know nothing about. Reply 24 frostyboy Truthfrees 3 hours ago Madeleine
Albright (born Marie Jana Korbelová) "Yes, we think it was worth it" regarding civilian
lives sacrificed during the US invasions of Iraq. Why is it that these people care nothing for
innocence, and only crave blood ? Is this tribal ? DavidChu 11 hours ago Let's face it: Amnesty
and Human Rights Watch are just too naked tools of Yankee Imperialism and Hegemony! Reply 24
decided 12 hours ago the logic of it, assad used chemical bomb , so to help the people we will
bomb their country use all types of bombs and many of them as help, and im to think these
politicians are not insane yea ok. Reply 9 Rustofur decided 9 hours ago It's much more
humanitarian to blow children to bits than gas them. Reply 4 1 Show 1 more replies Truthfrees
decided 11 hours ago Syria is a construction delay for Israel's land expansion projects. They
already secured thousands of bulldozers and construction contracts and are losing money every
day Syria is not falling. Poor chicken little Israeli leaders and pork project partners. Reply
11 Show 1 more replies UBV76 12 hours ago "Bellingcrap" Funded via HMG to hide-bury the truth
and pedal untruths misleading "The Daily Sheep". Higgins just a "Lady's Pantyhose" seller with
no experience except for telling lies..! Reply 22 frankfalseflag 9 hours ago L O L . Human
Rights Watch, just another outfit, like Greenpeace, with admirable words in its name, whose
agenda has been co opted by the US CIA. Another Goody two-shoes organization whose major work
is to get on and off the CIA propaganda train when they are told to. You remember in 2013 when
Greenpeace boarded the Prirazlomnaya platform in the Arctic? Greenpeace was so concerned about
the environmental impact on the Arctic Ocean. That was 2013, before the West - and by the West,
I mean Washington DC - realized that they had a vital interest in the Arctic and they would be
steaming through there looking to drop anchor and start drilling for oil. Same with Human
Rights Watch, who cares very little for the human lives lost in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc.
Lives that were lost by the murderous invasions of the Lord Defenders of Capitalism. Reply 5
Sancho Panza 10 hours ago White helmets, Brown noses and Black hearts. Reply 9 Carl Cuckproof
10 hours ago he has been a thorn in their side for a long time. the impact of goys like him can
never be measured. not just another brick in the wall Reply 8 Tinkerbell_Pan 10 hours ago Thank
you and good night, NO MORE MONEY for Amnesty. Reply 7 apothqowejh 7 hours ago Amnesty
International is just another sell-out ngo. Reply 5 Midnight10 4 hours ago Sorry Roger, but
Amnesty International has become just another tool in the US Administration's propaganda
program. Although you were tight about the White Helmets as villagers from the area told the UN
regarding the chemical attack, it wasn't in the script Amnesty gets from the US. Just lackeys
willing to give up their integrity and the organization's reputation to get their "Atta boys"
from Trump. Reply 3 White Elk 12 hours ago Their modern way to execution. Time changes,
hypocrisy and envy remain the same. Possessed people at the helm, blind guiding the blind, sure
shame and disaster. Reply 4 neeon9 4 hours ago This is, as always, American lies. They think
the world is stupid, and blind to the endless garbage spewed forth from Washington! We all know
they use torture , we all know they are guilty of war crimes, and are trying to kill Assange by
slow emotional torment, for outing them for the callous killers they truly are, and that has
only served only to make him a martyr. We all know it was Bush and his cronies, who bombed the
twin towers to cover the theft of and 7 trillion off the US tax payers, and make their M.I.C.
cohorts, many fortunes off the dead children their endless, lie based wars have killed, after
fabricating an enemy, that did not exist, until they murdered their families. We all know that
no claim, or attempt to over throw another foreign government, is backed up by nothing more
than empirical greed, and the constant nagging fear the US has, that it is slipping into decay,
and will loose it's evil grip on the world economy, and it's Ziocorp masters will will stop
funding the lunacy that is US domestic politics, and the 'cult of cash' that has poluted the
planet. Thank gods there are Ppl like Waters who are still brave enough to call them out for
the festering boil they are, on the backside of humanity. As it stands, they are getting what
they deserve . The American dream has become the worlds nightmare, and I for one, am happy to
see the mourning. Reply 4 Kiro919 5 hours ago Amnesty are worse than compromised these days.
Reply 3 dunkie56 8 hours ago They lied now they have to discredit those who would uncover those
lies so now they lie to do this and need to lie again to cover up those lies as well and lie
again to cover the latest batch of lies.........trick is can they remember the lie that got
them here in the first place lying..hmmmm! Reply 4 TrishArch 5 hours ago Amnesty International
is Dodgy. Reply 3 fuser 8 hours ago Amnesty and Human Rights, but some humans are more humans
than the others. Reply 2 Stranded 1 hour ago Roger is forever my hero for defending Assange
Reply 1 frostyboy 3 hours ago Eliot Higgins came from obscurity, and rose into Atlantic Counsel
pimphood as a tool to contaminate evidence over MH17. He has only become more discredited
since. Higgins is the very last level of State actor puppet - a credulous simp who takes the
Kings Shilling and bends over. Reply 1 ahmed nazmy habel 4 hours ago . When the talk was over,
he went about getting to the bottom of the tweet's absence Reply 1 1demeneye 7 hours ago From a
psychological perspective, you have to wonder what motivates people such as Elliot Higgins.
Just money? More money? Is there no point at which people like Higgins have enough money and
make a decision to come clean? Has he had his life threatened if he doesn't co-operate? Has he
been caught doing something that they are holding over him? Have they threatened to just make
stuff up and destroy his life if he tells the truth? Is he just evil? Is he fueled by hate for
someone or something? Reply 1 frostyboy 1demeneye 2 hours ago Higgins, as you already
appreciate, is a shop window dummy. His 'startup' went from zero to hero under the auspices of
the Atlantic Council. Bellingcat is 'trendy' and Hipster-friendly, very much cosmeticized to
appeal to anew young adult generation of political naifs. The latte set. The smashed avocado
grazers. Higgins is a nobody who parlayed a weak mind into the figurehead of a classic Western
propaganda sewerpipe. The damage he did to the honest investigations over MH17 will not be
forgotten. Reply 1 Jimbo_jones 3 hours ago Amnesty International is a joke organization
controlled by Washington. Always has and always will be, Reply 1 Opus111 5 hours ago Amnesty
International is a Fake News bureaucracy controlled by liberal fanatical ruling classes. Reply
2 David9220 4 hours ago follow Money Know Truth Reply 1 Head like a rock 5 hours ago not a huge
fan of the music, but Roger makes Bono look like trump Reply MiloDiddlbomb 7 hours ago It
still comes down to Waters getting bit by his own dog. You don't follow their rules and say the
proper Woke words - seeeeeeeya.They eat their own Reply Richland Yabitches" 13
hours ago Water's being and a Man of his age should've realized by now that his Musical Talent
'Alone' didn't get him to where's he at and in fact he Participated in the Mind Altering of
Social Engineering of Zombies, LSD and Dead-Beat Societies which is Awesome for those
Lib-miserables, drug/alcohol rehab, mental homes and the likes however, Criticize their
Destabilizing Missions and you're fuct" Reply 12 KrautMan Richland Yabitches" 10 hours ago
Pretty obvious who the LSD zombie is on this thread, bubba. Reply 5 Show 1 more replies natrep
2 hours ago Just proves that NGO's like amnesty international are fake...
This past Monday at the UN Security Council, the US, the UK, France, and allies blocked
testimony from a former director-general of the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Jose Bustani is a Brazilian diplomat and was the first
director-general of the OPCW, which was formed in 1997.
Bustani was pushed out of
the organization in 2002 by the Bush administration for his efforts to negotiate with
Saddam Hussein. The Brazilian was prepared to deliver testimony to the UN Security Council on
Monday over the OPCW's investigation into an alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma, Syria ,
in April 2018.
The US, UK, and France responded to the alleged Douma attack with airstrikes on Syrian
government targets. After the strike, OPCW inspectors arrived in Douma to investigate.
Since the OPCW released its final report on the alleged Douma attack in March 2019,
a trove of leaked
documents have surfaced . The leaks, along with whistleblower testimony, suggest the OPCW
suppressed evidence and ignored the findings of senior inspectors to fit the narrative that the
Syrian government carried out a chemical attack in Douma.
The Grayzone published Bustani's prepared statement that he was blocked from delivering at
the UN Security Council. In his statement, Bustani urges Fernando Arias, the current OPCW
director-general, to hear out the inspectors who were on the ground in Douma and had their
findings suppressed:
"I would like to make a personal plea to you, Mr Fernando Arias, as Director General of the
OPCW. The inspectors are among the Organization's most valuable assets. As scientists and
engineers, their specialist knowledge and inputs are essential for good decision making."
"Most importantly, their views are untainted by politics or national interests. They only
rely on the science. The inspectors in the Douma investigation have a simple request –
that they be given the opportunity to meet with you to express their concerns to you in person,
in a manner that is both transparent and accountable."
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS
MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Turkish officials are preparing for the worst case scenario as talks in Ankara made clear
that Moscow doesn't want a new deal
####
This is a Turkey sympathetic piece but may be one reason for current events between
Armenia and Azerbaidjan. As for Syria, Turkey has been claiming to keep the north/Idlib under
control which is has until the last few weeks at it has used the previous time to reinforce
its military presence ('observation posts') – vis Vinyard the Saker – and now
claims it is not reponsible and its not fair that Russia reacts to attacks by its re-dressed
(literally) jihadists. Turkey's preference is of course to do nothing despite the all the
attacks, and that in itself explains a lot. Turkey is now publicly putting out its argument
in advance that it is 'Russia wot broke the agreement' and thus 'we are not responsible for
any of the consequences.' Erd O'Grand is due another significant spanking. Would he call NATO
to his defense as he did before? Certainly. Will it happen? No. Not to mention his current
intreagues around Cyprus and pissing of the French, Greeks and others. Trouble t'mill.
Despite Turkey's efforts to maintain the status quo in Idlib, a Russian-backed Syrian
assault seems increasingly likely.
####
In short, Turkey has not kept up its side of the deal of bringing the rebels under control
and the supposed opening and joint patrols of the M4 & M5 highways has been suspended by
Russia because of the attacks by rebadged jihadis. Turkey has clearly used the agreement to
simply buy time for another 'cunning plan' and as no interest in fulfiling the agreement with
Russia. The latter's patience is almost gone.
"... Virtually every aspect of the Syrian opposition was cultivated and marketed by Western government-backed public relations firms, from their political narratives to their branding, from what they said to where they said it. ..."
"Western government-funded intelligence cutouts trained Syrian opposition leaders,
planted stories in media outlets from BBC to Al Jazeera, and ran a cadre of journalists. A
trove of leaked documents exposes the propaganda network."
"Leaked documents show how UK government contractors developed an advanced infrastructure of
propaganda to stimulate support in the West for Syria's political and armed opposition.
Virtually every aspect of the Syrian opposition was cultivated and marketed by Western
government-backed public relations firms, from their political narratives to their branding,
from what they said to where they said it.
The leaked files reveal how Western intelligence cutouts played the media like a fiddle,
carefully crafting English- and Arabic-language media coverage of the war on Syria to churn out
a constant stream of pro-opposition coverage.
US and European contractors trained and advised Syrian opposition leaders at all levels,
from young media activists to the heads of the parallel government-in-exile . These firms also
organized interviews for Syrian opposition leaders on mainstream outlets such as BBC and the
UK's Channel 4.
More than half of the stringers used by Al Jazeera in Syria were trained in a joint US-UK
government program called Basma, which produced hundreds of Syrian opposition media
activists.
Western government PR firms not only influenced the way the media covered Syria, but as the
leaked documents reveal, they produced their own propagandistic pseudo-news for broadcast on
major TV networks in the Middle East, including BBC Arabic, Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, and Orient
TV .
These UK-funded firms functioned as full-time PR flacks for the extremist-dominated Syrian
armed opposition. One contractor, called InCoStrat, said it was in constant contact with a
network of more than 1,600 international journalists and "influencers," and used them to push
pro-opposition talking points.
Another Western government contractor, ARK, crafted a strategy to "re-brand" Syria's
Salafi-jihadist armed opposition by "softening its image ." ARK boasted that it provided
opposition propaganda that "aired almost every day on" major Arabic-language TV networks."
"The Western contractor ARK was a central force in launching the White Helmets operation.
The leaked documents show ARK ran the Twitter and Facebook pages of Syria Civil Defense,
known more commonly as the White Helmets.
ARK also facilitated communications between the White Helmets and The Syria
Campaign , a PR firm run out of London and New York that helped popularize the White
Helmets in the United States.
It was apparently "following subsequent discussions with ARK and the teams" that The Syria
Campaign "selected civil defence to front its campaign to keep Syria in the news," the firm
wrote in a report for the UK Foreign Office." thegreyzone
--------------
Using really basic intelligence analytic tools; Occam's Razor, Walks like a duck,
Smileyesque back azimuth's, etc. it has been clear that the UK government has been deeply
involved in sponsoring and influencing the Syrian/ jihadi opposition in that miserable country.
The wide spread British Old Boys network of aspirants to the tradition of imperial manipulation
has been visible just below the surface if you had eyes to look and a brain to think.
A lot of the money for this folly came right out of USAID.
I object to the line in the article that they "played the media like a fiddle" - as it
implies the mainstream media is a victim as opposed to willing accomplice.
The American public very strongly told Obama they didn't want another invasion and war in
the middle east (red lines or not) so rather ineffective propaganda.
Moreover, I suspect that given the US public inattention to overseas events that do not
involve much US blood (in places they can not find on a map). Today's mess would be where
more or less the same if the entire IO had never happened - though maybe with less cynicism
of US/UK gov'ts and media.
OTH, it is curious how well the British Old Boys network (and US) aligns with Israeli
interests (and runs counter to US or British interests). Maybe grayzone will investigate that
(impressive) IO campaign. I think a small country in the middle east played US and UK elites
like a fiddle.
I've only given this article a cursory reading so far and it is clear that the Brits are
going balls to the wall on the PSYOPS/perception management front. This campaign flows
naturally from the strong material support for the Syrian "moderate rebels" provided by the
US, the Brits and probably others for years. We may still be blowing up IS jihadis, but we're
also supporting our own brand of jihadis around Al-Tanf, giving free hand to Erdogan's
jihadis along the Turkish-Syrian border and doing our best to stymie R+6 efforts to crush the
remaining jihadis and unite Syria.
The article focuses on the contractors role in PSYOP. I'm not sure if it mentions the
British government's role in this. The GCHQ's Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group
(JTRIG) probably manages most of those contractors. The British Army also has the 77th
Brigade. This brigade's slogan is: "behavioural change is our unique selling point". Gordon
MacMillan, a reserve officer with the 77th Brigade, is now Twitter's head of editorial
operations for the Middle East.
The 77th was formed in 2015 and subsumed the 15th Psychological Operations Group which was
headed by Steve Tathan, who went on to head the defence division of SCL, the now defunct
parent of Cambridge Analytica. I'm sure the 77th is capable of managing some of those
contractors, as well. I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few of contractors were also
reservists in the 77th.
I bet we're not letting the Brits have all the fun. The CIA Special Activities Center
(formerly SAD) includes the Political Action Group for PSYOP, economic warfare and
cyberwarfare. That dovetails nicely with what CENTCOM is doing in Syria. I knew some of those
guys a while back. I remember scaring them with some of my own anarchist hacker rantings when
I was penetrating those hackers.
Our Army has fours PSYOP groups brigade-sized), two active and 2 reserve. I would think
they have advanced their methodology since I took the course at Bragg. For a few years, they
were called military information support operations (MISO) groups rather than PSYOP groups.
They have since reverted to their PSYOP name although their activities are referred to as
MISO. I don't know what the difference is.
There is no such small country as you describe in the Near East.
There is an self-disciplined proxy force masquerading as a state which is mostly funded by
the United States to further the religious policies of the WASP Culture Continent.
It is no accident that in this context, the names of US and UK occur often in the same
sentences; one declared a crusade to wrestle control of Plastine from Muslims, and the otber
one carried out that crusade and escalated it.
That is also the reason that US cannot end the war over Palestine or leave Islamdom
(Oil, Geostrategic considerations, arms sales, Realpolitik are just pseudo-rationications
to obscure the real war.)
"WASP Culture" is into golfing, not crusading. Erik Prince and the religious
fundamentalists, maybe, but they don't drive US policy.
Russia and/or Chinese dominion over Eurasia cannot be permitted. Their means to achieve
that would be less ethical, not that the US or UK have been prince among men and salts of the
earth, as noted in the article.
The US has tried in vain to win over hearts and minds. It has been a mostly noble effort
to bring countries like Iraq and Afghanistan into the 21st century, but it was always more of
a losing game. The problem lies too much in Islam and tribal rivalries.
If you have ever wondered why Syrian jihadists, or so-called 'moderate opposition', got
support from the woke liberal West, a recent leak by Anonymous reveals it's because Western
governments funded this propaganda.
In the end, it is the sheer childishness of the propaganda which amazes me most, not that
our rulers lie about other countries – I have always known that. But somehow there was a
kernel of truth around which the web of lies was spun, for example about life in the old Soviet
Union.
I began to realise the scope of Western ability to literally invent the most baseless lies
only in the run-up to the Iraq War in 2003, and only because I knew more about Iraq than any
politician in Britain or America and ten times more than the average made-up telly-dolly
chuntering through their auto-cued war propaganda. The women presenters weren't any better.
This all came flooding back to me when I received an email from Anonymous earlier this week
and then read Ben Norton's excellent analysis of it all in The GrayZone.
If anyone ever wondered how the hordes of head-chopping throat-cutting heart-eating
gay-murdering women-hating 'Jihadists' of the Syrian War ever managed to get a fair press in a
'woke' liberal West that gets hot under the lace collar about JK Rowling novels, the answers
are all in
the Anonymous leak . The principle answer is that you, the taxpayer, paid for it.
That's right. The blizzard of 'White Helmets' (who made it right up to the Oscars to thank
everyone who'd helped them except those that had helped them the most), "chemical-weapons
attacks" and all the paraphernalia of a newly "moderate opposition" in Syria – was all
paid for by YOU. Millions of pounds of British taxpayers' money was revealed to have been spent
secretly on UK support for the throat-cutting coalition of chaos, which for a decade massacred
its way across Syria wearing a snow-white Western beard of respectability.
It would appear that while the US (or rather its milk-cows in the Gulf) was paying for the
lethal-weapons, perfidious Albion was doing what it does best – lying through its teeth
whilst making those being lied to, pay for the privilege. Now that – thanks to the leaks
– we know this, it should put us on guard for the next one. Yet somehow it doesn't, at
least not for the purveyors of the news.
The Lazarus-like resurrection (and photo-shoot) of Russia's opposition figure and Western
darling Alexey Navalny after yet another alleged Novichok (believed to be 5-8 times more toxic
than VX nerve agent) attack without so much as a tracheostomy to show for it is swallowed whole
in yet another anti-Russian public relations offensive.
Grown sane men call my television show to talk about 'concentration camps' in China in
which, we are told, "a million Uighur Muslims" are being held and forcibly sterilised. This is
despite the allegations being largely based on studies backed by the American government and
statements by Western media favourite, German researcher Adrian Zenz. Zenz, who is part of the
Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, a US-backed advocacy group,
believes that he is "led by God" on his "mission" against China. Meanwhile, according to China's
official statistics the Uighur population in Xinjiang province increased by over 25 percent
between 2010 and 2018, while the Han Chinese rose by only two percent.
The lying industry may be the only sector of the Western economies still in full production.
No need for furlough or bounce-back loans. The lie-machines never still. No smoke is usually
detected from their chimneys, but inside, their pants are well and truly on fire.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
"... Former defense secretary Jim Mattis appears to have been plotting a coup with then-Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats after growing furious with President Trump for banning transgenders from the military and moving to pull out of Afghanistan and Syria. ..."
"... Mattis quietly went to Washington National Cathedral [in May 2019] to pray about his concern for the nation's fate under Trump's command and, according to Woodward, told Coats, "There may come a time when we have to take collective action" since Trump is "dangerous. He's unfit." ..."
"... Translation: we may have to stage a coup to get him out of power. Plenty of Democrats and former and current intelligence officials are working on a Color Revolution come November as we speak . ..."
Former defense secretary Jim Mattis appears to have been plotting a coup with then-Director
of National Intelligence Dan Coats after growing furious with President Trump for banning transgenders from the military and moving to pull out of Afghanistan and Syria.
Mattis quietly went to Washington National Cathedral [in May 2019] to pray about his concern
for the nation's fate under Trump's command and, according to Woodward, told Coats, "There
may come a time when we have to take collective action" since Trump is "dangerous. He's
unfit."
In a separate conversation recounted by Woodward, Mattis told Coats, "The president has no
moral compass," to which the director of national intelligence replied: "True. To him, a lie
is not a lie. It's just what he thinks. He doesn't know the difference between the truth and
a lie."
Mattis doesn't know the difference between a male and a female. Trump reportedly accurately said his generals were a "bunch of pussies."
"Not to mention my f**king generals are a bunch of pussies. They care more about their
alliances than they do about trade deals," Trump told White House trade adviser Peter Navarro
at one point, according to Woodward.
No lie detected!
Ann Coulter, who has repeatedly tried to tell Trump today's generals have nothing in common
with those of the past like Trump-favorite Gen. George Patton, responded to the news on
Wednesday by saying Trump has won her back!
New Documents Reveal Secret British Efforts To Arm, Assist And Propagandize 'Moderate
Rebels' In Syria
In November 2018 some anonymous people published a number of documents that had been
liberated from a clandestine British propaganda organization, the Integrity Initiative
.
The same group or person who revealed the Integrity Initiative papers has now
released several dozens of documents about another 'Strategic Communication' campaign run by
the British Foreign Office. The current release reveals a number of train and assist missions
for 'Syrian rebels' as well as propaganda operations run in Syria and globally on behalf of the
British government.
Most of the documents are detailed company responses to several solicitations from the
Foreign Office for global and local campaigns in support of the 'moderate rebels' who are
fighting against the Syrian government and people.
The documents lay out large scale campaigns which have on-the-ground elements in Syria,
training and arming efforts in neighboring countries, command and control elements in Jordan,
Turkey and Iraq, as well as global propaganda efforts. These operations were wide spread.
Most of the documents are from 2016 to 2019. They detail the organization of such operations
and also portrait persons involved in these projects. They often refer back to previous
campaigns that have been run from 2011/2012 onward. This is where the documents are probably
the most interesting. They reveal what an immense effort was and is waged to fill the
information space with pro-rebel/pro-Islamist propaganda.
The documents are not about the 'White Helmets' which were a separate British run Strategic
Communication campaign financed by various governments. While the operations described in the
new documents were coordinated with U.S. efforts they do not reference the CIA run campaigns in
Syria which included similar efforts at a cost of $1 billion per year.
The various projects and the detailed commercial offers to implement them from various
notorious companies are roughly described in the above two links. I will therefore refrain from
repeating that here. Some of the documents' content will surely be used in future Moon of
Alabama posts. But for now I will let you rummage through the stash.
Please let us know in the comments of the surprising bits that you might find.
Posted by b on September 18, 2020 at 15:51 UTC |
Permalink
Documents the "war crimes industry" of the UK, and others, as expressed in Libya and Syria.
Assad has indicated he will pursue reparations from the nations that have killed 400,000
citizens, destroyed or stolen his industrial infrastructure (whole factories broken down and
trucked into Turkey).
One reason why the US and UK and France want Assad dead is the tens of billions of dollars
they will have to pay the Syrian people for the genocidal war waged for a decade in order to
kill Assad and break Syria into pieces.
This confirms the UK has essentially kept the same military doctrine it adopted by necessity
in 1945, which is: attach itself to the USA, focus on intelligence, punch above your weight.
Ideologically, they rationalize that by attributing themselves the role of the cultured
province of the USA; "Greece to the USA's Rome".
The British were always fascinated with intelligence/paramilitary forces. In their vision,
it gives you (a nation) an air of sophistication, a civilizing aspect to the nation that
wages this kind of warfare.
After the Suez fiasco of 1956, the UK gave up direct interventions in the Middle East. It
now only intervenes there under the skirt of the USA. Of course, whenever they can, they do
that with their weapon of choice, which is intelligence. So, yeah, these documents don't
surprise me.
"... He thinks the Palestinians will accept permanent helot status? Maybe so... But is that something we should relish? ..."
"... And what of Syria? What of Syria? Evidently Trump considered murdering President Assad two years ago. Is he going to abandon regime change now? is he going to abandon the policy of Pompeo and Jeffries? ..."
"... My guess is that the acceptability for Helot status of Palestinians will depend on how much worse it is compared to the status of Palestinian equivalents elsewhere. Syria and Lebanon certainly look far less attractive. ..."
"... Also, from my admittedly limited experience, Palestinians aren't exactly homogenous, Gaza =! West Bank. ..."
"... If the Israelis are smart (and I think they are), they will continue to exploit Palestinian disunity by not having one helot status but several, with privileges to repress and boss around the lesser helots (perhaps even some less desirable Israelis) awarded to the higher helots. ..."
"... The neocons have been firmly ensconced in ME policy since Reagan. At least Trump made a little bit of lemonade. Nothing earth shattering IMO but moved the ball forward 10 yds and away from own goals under the so-called experts & strategists of the past decades. ..."
"... Support for Israel and its maximalist dreams has always been bipartisan. ..."
"... The colonel has a much more realistic take on this: the intention is to co-opt the Arab states into forcing the Palestinians to accept permanent helot status. Not quite slaves but closes to it. ..."
"... There would be many ways to describe that, but I suspect "peace plan" would rank amongst the less accurate ones. ..."
"... I also remember when the Trump admin killed the Gen. Suleimani late last year the same people also touted it a national security success. This is shameful pattern. ..."
"... Just because Jared Kushner, Berkowitz (Kushner's mini-me), David Friedman and the Zionist anti-American paid shills of Christians United For Israel et.al put Israel's interest first does not make it a success for American interests abroad. Trump does not know two things about the ME. He just obeys orders from this outside 'advisors' when it comes to ME policy. ..."
"... When I read that " If you look at relatively successful integration/assimilations in history, jointly overcoming something that was threatening to both typically ranked pretty highly as a cause." I think that The Islamic Republic of Iran is what is being offered or used as that cause. ..."
"... But if the present and future Israelis believe this means that the total advantage is totally theirs to press, then present and future Palestinians will continue searching for ways to make their unhappiness felt. But that outcome would not be Trump's fault. That outcome would be the majority-likudnic Israelis' choice. ..."
"... the problem with "outside in" strategy is that implies that if conditions are bad enough for the Palestinians, they will agree to any deal Trump can force down their throats. Instead, Palestinians have been offered terrible deals since 2000 (ie., a state that is never going to be a real state with permanent Israeli control over its borders, air space, and water tables ..."
"... The smarter plan is to acknowledge that the Zionists killed the Two-State Solution, and Palestinians might as well push this into an anti-Apartheid struggle. ..."
It is clear that the heat has gone away in the fabled "Arab Street" over the issue of
Israel. If that were not so, the rulers would not have dared to do this. That being so ... It
will be very interesting to see how many people from these two countries go to Israel to
visit holy sites like the al-Aqsa Mosque. There have not been many religious tourists from
Egypt and Jordan. This is what the Israelis call pilgrims. Trump thinks that he can bring
Saudi Arabia into such a deal? Good! Let's see it. He thinks that Iran can be brought into
such a deal? Wonderful! Let's see it.
He thinks the Palestinians will accept permanent helot status? Maybe so... But is that
something we should relish?
And what of Syria? What of Syria? Evidently Trump considered murdering President Assad
two years ago. Is he going to abandon regime change now? is he going to abandon the policy of
Pompeo and Jeffries?
I suggest that security should be very tight on airline flights from Bahrein and the
UAE.
I suspect this has less to do with peace and more to do with lining up a coalition against
Iran. He's signing peace deals at the white house the same day he not only threatens Iran for
a make believe assassination plot against our South African Ambassador, but admits he wanted
to assassinate Assad.
He's making a big mistake though if he thinks Iranians will behave and respond similarly
to the Arabs, and they are certainly not North Koreans.
He's being frog marched into a war with Iran while his ego is being stroked under the
guise of a Nobel peace prize.
What say about Alastair Crooke's "Maintaining Pretence Over Reality: 'Simply Put, the
Iranians Outfoxed the U.S. Defence Systems'" at Strategic Culture Foundation?
My guess is that the acceptability for Helot status of Palestinians will depend on how
much worse it is compared to the status of Palestinian equivalents elsewhere. Syria and
Lebanon certainly look far less attractive. The other issue is the degree with which Arab
elites can "reroute" Anti Israeli into Anti Iranian sentiments on the Arab street.
Also, from my admittedly limited experience, Palestinians aren't exactly homogenous, Gaza
=! West Bank.
If the Israelis are smart (and I think they are), they will continue to exploit
Palestinian disunity by not having one helot status but several, with privileges to repress
and boss around the lesser helots (perhaps even some less desirable Israelis) awarded to the
higher helots.
I think this will be fairly hard though. Various Historical, religion and cultural issues
specific to the situation make it quite hard for Arabs to actually assimilate into Israeli
society. There is also a lack of a unifying foe to unite against. If you look at relatively
successful integration/assimilations in history, jointly overcoming something that was
threatening to both typically ranked pretty highly as a cause.
The neocons have been firmly ensconced in ME policy since Reagan. At least Trump made a
little bit of lemonade. Nothing earth shattering IMO but moved the ball forward 10 yds and
away from own goals under the so-called experts & strategists of the past decades.
The TDS afflicted media couldn't bear that some lemonade was made. Wolf Blitzer
interviewing Jared Kushner was all about pandemic nothing about the implications or process
to having couple gulf sheikhs recognize Israel. The fact is that these gulf sheikhs only paid
lip service to the plight of the Palestinians in any case. This formalizes what was reality.
The "Arab Street" have always been a manifestation of whatever were powerful manipulations.
The manipulators have been coopted in the current lemonade making. In any case Bibi must be
very pleased. He didn't have to give up anything in his difficult domestic political
predicament.
The arabs simply do not care anymore, from Morocco to Oman. Their spirit totally broken by
the "Arab spring", youth disillusioned and jobless. The only dream left for most is to ape
the western lifestyle. The others are fighting in wars.
I can see one of two futures, a Clean Break: Securing the Realm-style one in which all of the arabs live life as helots under the
thumb of a Greater Israel. This would bring relative economic prosperity to most of the
helots.
I think I see the flaw in this article: ..."If that turns out to be the case and this
maneuver succeeds in ultimately bringing about a two state solution for Israel and the
Palestinians,"...
Surely you don't believe that these maneuvers are intended to bring about a Palestinian
state?
The colonel has a much more realistic take on this: the intention is to co-opt the Arab
states into forcing the Palestinians to accept permanent helot status. Not quite slaves but
closes to it.
There would be many ways to describe that, but I suspect "peace plan" would rank amongst
the less accurate ones.
One running theme that I have been seeing from the former so-called neocon critics and ME
wars opponents (Michael Scheuer comes to mind) is their uncontrollable exhilaration for any
terrible so-called F.P. 'success' that the Trump admin achieves in the ME.
I also remember
when the Trump admin killed the Gen. Suleimani late last year the same people also touted it
a national security success. This is shameful pattern.
Just because Jared Kushner, Berkowitz
(Kushner's mini-me), David Friedman and the Zionist anti-American paid shills of Christians
United For Israel et.al put Israel's interest first does not make it a success for American
interests abroad. Trump does not know two things about the ME. He just obeys orders from this
outside 'advisors' when it comes to ME policy.
It it exactly what it is. Israel normalized relations with the most notorious
dictatorships and wants to implement Pegasus spying program and wide-scale surveillance
(among other nefarious things) in UAE and Bahrain. How is that a success for America? America
should stay out of these Israeli-first trouble making schemes and stay neutral or out of
there.
Let me tell you what a F.P. success is, OK? It would have been a huge success if America
was able to lure Iran into its orbit to fend of the Chinese communists out of the region and
out of our lives and have a stronger alliance with regards to its upcoming Cold War with
China.
It would have been successful for America to balance China out with Iran, India,
Turkey and Afghanistan, and not let China to invest billions in Haifa port (close to U.S.
military forces there) a major hub of its Belt and Road initiative and a huge blow to U.S.
new Cold war effort against China.
Think about it.
Allow me to raise a few points: first of all , every single one of these brutal backward
Arab dictatorships has had low key but crucial relations with Israel since the Cold War and
they just made it open, Big deal! Second, this joyfulness for a hostile anti-american country
is quite sad for two reasons:
1. that Larry touts it as a success for America, which is
anything but a success for America. It is a success for Bibi and Trump's evangelical/zionist
sugar daddies to cough up some Benjamins for Trump's campaign and his GOP/Likudniks. I guess
nowadays our judgement is so clouded and inverted that MAGA and MIGA are considered
inseparable.
2. The delusion that dems are bitterly angry and anti-Israel (because they are
anti-Trump) and therefore it automatically becomes an issue of partisan support for Trump and
whatever he does. This idea is so absurd that I won't get into it. Dems were the first to
congratulate Israel.
I would like Larry to tell me what he thinks of H.R. 1697 Israel Anti-Boycot Act which
punishes American citizens for practicing their god-given 2nd Amendment rights. or the 3.8
billion of aid, or the the gifting of Golan heights to Bibi? Are these big foreign policy
success too?
What the Arab-Israeli normalization means:
*The U.S. wants out of the ME to focus on China, a wet dream that Israel favors especially
post Cold War. It does not want secular, (semi) democratic sovereign states around it, and if
anyone pays attention close enough they do whatever they can to prevent any kind of political
reform and change of government to occur among Arab nations. Israelis are staunch supporters
of Saudi, Bahraini, UAE, Jordanian, and Egyptian dictatorships in the MENA region.
Israel
will now be better positioned to roll-back any kind of grassroots reform in the ME with the
help of their now openly pro-Israeli Arab rulers by directing policies to these backward
rulers to divest from human development and political reform and instead invest more in
security, tech, surveillance.
This trend also explains Israeli constant opposition to the
Iran Deal, which would have had further ramifications for political reform and accelerated
weakening of Hardliners in Tehran and a better position for America to pivot to China with
the help of a moderated Iran. Israel does not want a powerful democratic nation near its
borders, and especially not in Iran. Just take a look at Israel's neighbors and tell me how
many of them are democratic and friendly with Israel and how does Israel behave when there
are secular Arab democratic states around it?
There is a developing coalition of powerful states as a reaction to the Arab-Israeli
normalization that observers call "the rejectionists". They are, Turkey, Qatar, Pakistan
(impending), Malaysia (impending), Iran, and EU (impending).
It is true that Iran has now a target on its back and if it were smart, it would try its
best to develop some kind of alliance with the secular democratic humanists in EU to try to
remove itself from isolation, save what is left of the Iran Deal, and try to isolate and
condemn Israelis, Arab dictators and their cohorts internationally and through diplomacy back
portraying them as illiberal and anti-democratic or similar things. Although I am not too
hopeful that Iran is be able to do this for a number of obvious reasons.
This Arab-Israeli normalization is a MIGA (Make Israel Great Again) vision of very
tightly controlled development for the MENA region and extremely' special' attention has been
given to the cyber tech development (call it surveillance) to control the 'Arab Street' from
social revolt and the prevention of next rounds of Arab Springs, which again goes back to
Israel's long-standing regional doctrine of propping pro-U.S. and now pro-Israeli Arab
dictatorships in the region.
In the end, it's all just tribal superstition. Logically a spiritual absolute would be the
essence of sentience, from which we rise, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which we
fell.
The fact we are aware, than the myriad details of which we are aware.
One of the reasons we can't have a live and let live world is because everyone thinks their
own vision should be universal, rather than unique. So the fundamentalists rule.
The reason nature is so diverse and dense is because it isn't a monoculture.
Irrespective of our technology, we are still fairly primitive, in the grand scheme of
things.
When I read that " If you look at relatively successful integration/assimilations in
history, jointly overcoming something that was threatening to both typically ranked pretty
highly as a cause." I think that The Islamic Republic of Iran is what is being offered or
used as that cause.
If this all ends up in the longest run leading to today's and tomorrow's Israelis
accepting the lesser Israel that Rabin ended up deciding would be necessary for a
lesser-but-still-real Palestine to emerge as a real country resigned with both resigned
enough to that outcome that they would tolerate eachother's separate independence over the
long term, then this will go somewhere good.
But if the present and future Israelis believe this means that the total advantage is
totally theirs to press, then present and future Palestinians will continue searching for
ways to make their unhappiness felt. But that outcome would not be Trump's fault. That
outcome would be the majority-likudnic Israelis' choice.
To have a two state solution Israel will have to leave enough of Palestine without Jewish
settlement for there to be room for another state. Their actions show that they have no
intention of doing that.
Larry: the problem with "outside in" strategy is that implies that if conditions are bad
enough for the Palestinians, they will agree to any deal Trump can force down their throats.
Instead, Palestinians have been offered terrible deals since 2000 (ie., a state that is never
going to be a real state with permanent Israeli control over its borders, air space, and
water tables)
The smarter plan is to acknowledge that the Zionists killed the Two-State Solution, and Palestinians might as well push
this into an anti-Apartheid struggle. The gerontocracy that rules the PA will soon pass away. The younger generation of
Palestinians are much more sophisticated.
As a trial lawyer, I see this type of behavior all the time. If you offer someone
essentially nothing, they lose nothing by rejecting it. The Arab dictators will not be around forever. And before Camp David, the Palestinians
have suffered far worse than they are suffering now.
In short: "We Jews know that Arabs (Palestinians) will never, ever voluntarily give up
hope of resisting Jewish demands, and Jews will never stop with Jewish demands: that all of
Palestine become Jewish.
Since 'voluntary' will not work, only force -- an Iron Wall -- will suffice.
Jabotinsky defines "Iron Wall" as the enforcement capacity of an outside power:
"we cannot promise anything to the Arabs of the Land of Israel or the Arab countries. Their
voluntary agreement is out of the question. Hence those who hold that an agreement with the
natives is an essential condition for Zionism can now say "no" and depart from Zionism.
Zionist colonization, even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in
defiance of the will of the native population. This colonization can, therefore, continue
and develop only under the protection of a force independent of the local population
– an iron wall which the native population cannot break through. This is, in toto,
our policy towards the Arabs. To formulate it any other way would only be hypocrisy.
Not only must this be so, it is so whether we admit it or not. What does the Balfour
Declaration and the Mandate mean for us? It is the fact that a disinterested power
committed itself to create such security conditions that the local population would be
deterred from interfering with our efforts."
Be aware that Benjamin Netanyahu's father, Benzion, was Jabotinsky's administrative
assistant, then replacement, in New York; that Bibi is very much heir to the ideological
fervor of Jabotinsky & of Benzion; and that Benzion and Benjamin laid out the blueprint
for the GWOT at the Jerusalem Conference July 4, 1979 https://www.amazon.com/International-Terrorism-Challenge-Benjamin-Netanyahu/dp/0878558942
Trump plays only a walk-on role in this carefully scripted 150 year old zionist drama.
"there isn't a lot of difference between KSA and these fiefdoms of uae and bahrain.." A
total crock. you obviously have never been to either of these places.
I always assumed that Trump was the candidate of MIC in 2016 elections, while Hillary was the
candidate of "Intelligence community." But it looks like US military is infected with desperados
like Mattis and Trump was unable fully please them despite all his efforts.
But it looks like US military is infected with desperados like Mattis and Trump was unable
fully please them despite all his efforts. Military desperados are not interested in how many
American they deprived of decent standard of living due to outside military expenses. All they
want is to dominate the word and maintain the "Full Spectrum Dominance" whatever it costs.
It is Trump's tortured relationship with the military that stands out the most, especially
as told through the eyes of former Secretary of Defense Jim 'Mad Dog' Mattis, a retired marine
general. It is clear that Bob Woodward spent hours speaking with Mattis -- the insights,
emotions and internal voice captured in the book show a level of intimacy that could only be
reached through in-depth interviews, and Woodward has a well-earned reputation for getting
people to speak to him.
The book makes it clear that Mattis viewed Trump as a threat to the US' standing as the
defender of a rules-based order -- built on the back of decades-old alliances -- that had been
in place since the end of the Second World War.
It also makes it clear that Mattis and the military officers he oversaw placed defending
this order above implementing the will of the American people, as expressed through the free
and fair election that elevated Donald Trump to the position of commander-in-chief. In short,
Mattis and his coterie of generals knew best, and when the president dared issue an order or
instruction that conflicted with their vision of how the world should work, they would do their
best to undermine this order, all the while confirming to the president that it was being
followed.
This trend was on display in Woodward's telling of Trump's efforts to forge better relations
with North Korea. At every turn, Mattis and his military commanders sought to isolate the
president from the reality on the ground, briefing him only on what they thought he needed to
know, and keeping him in the dark about what was really going on.
In a telling passage, Woodward takes us into the mind of Jim Mattis as he contemplates the
horrors of a nuclear war with North Korea, and the responsibility he believed he shouldered
when it came to making the hard decision as to whether nuclear weapons should be used or not.
Constitutionally, the decision was the president's alone to make, something Mattis begrudgingly
acknowledges. But in Mattis' world, he, as secretary of defense, would be the one who
influenced that decision.
Mattis, along with the other general officers described by Woodward, is clearly gripped with
what can only be described as the 'Military Messiah Syndrome'.
What defines this 'syndrome' is perhaps best captured in the words of Emma Sky, the female
peace activist-turned adviser to General Ray Odierno, the one-time commander of US forces in
Iraq. In a frank give-and-take captured by Ms. Sky in her book 'The Unravelling', Odierno spoke
of the value he placed on the military's willingness to defend "freedom" anywhere in the world.
" There is, " he said, " no one who understands more the importance of liberty and
freedom in all its forms than those who travel the world to defend it ."
Ms. Sky responded in typically direct fashion: " One day, I will have you admit that the
[Iraq] war was a bad idea, that the administration was led by a radical neocon program, that
the US's standing in the world has gone down greatly, and that we are far less safe than we
were before 9/11. "
Odierno would have nothing of it. " It will never happen while I'm the commander of
soldiers in Iraq ."
" To lead soldiers in battle ," Ms. Sky noted, " a commander had to believe in the
cause. " Left unsaid was the obvious: even if the cause was morally and intellectually
unsound.
his, more than anything, is the most dangerous thing about the 'Military Messiah Syndrome'
as captured by Bob Woodward -- the fact that the military is trapped in an inherited reality
divorced from the present, driven by precepts which have nothing to with what is, but rather by
what the military commanders believe should be. The unyielding notion that the US military is a
force for good becomes little more than meaningless drivel when juxtaposed with the reality
that the mission being executed is inherently wrong.
The 'Military Messiah Syndrome' lends itself to dishonesty and, worse, to self-delusion. It
is one thing to lie; it is another altogether to believe the lie as truth.
No single
general had the courage to tell Trump allegations against Syria were a hoax
The cruise missile attack on Syria in early April 2017 stands out as a case in point. The
attack was ordered in response to allegations that Syria had dropped a bomb containing the
sarin nerve agent on a town -- Khan Shaykhun -- that was controlled by Al-Qaeda-affiliated
Islamic militants.
Trump was led to believe that the 59 cruise missiles launched against Shayrat Airbase --
where the Su-22 aircraft alleged to have dropped the bombs were based -- destroyed Syria's
capability to carry out a similar attack in the future. When shown post-strike imagery in which
the runways were clearly untouched, Trump was outraged, lashing out at Secretary of Defense
Mattis in a conference call. " I can't believe you didn't destroy the runway !",
Woodward reports the president shouting.
" Mr. President ," Mattis responds in the text, " they would rebuild the runway in
24 hours, and it would have little effect on their ability to deploy weapons. We destroyed the
capability to deploy weapons " for months, Mattis said.
" That was the mission the president had approved, " Woodward writes, clearly
channeling Mattis, " and they had succeeded ."
The problem with this passage is that it is a lie. There is no doubt that Bob Woodward has
the audio tape of Jim Mattis saying these things. But none of it is true. Mattis knew it when
he spoke to Woodward, and Woodward knew it when he wrote the book.
There was no confirmed use of chemical weapons by Syria at Khan Shaykhun. Indeed, the
forensic evidence available about the attack points to the incident being a false flag effort
-- a successful one, it turns out -- on the part of the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Islamists to
provoke a US military strike against Syria. No targets related to either the production,
storage or handling of chemical weapons were hit by the US cruise missiles, if for no other
reason than no such targets could exist if Syria did not possess and/or use a chemical weapon
against Khan Shaykhun.
Moreover, the US failed to produce a narrative of causality which provided some underlying
logic to the targets that were struck at Khan Shaykhun -- "Here is where the chemical weapons
were stored, here is where the chemical weapons were filled, here is where the chemical weapons
were loaded onto the aircraft." Instead, 59 cruise missiles struck empty aircraft hangars,
destroying derelict aircraft, and killing at least four Syrian soldiers and up to nine
civilians.
The next morning, the same Su-22 aircraft that were alleged to have bombed Khan Shaykhun
were once again taking off from Shayrat Air Base -- less than 24 hours after the US cruise
missiles struck that facility. President Trump had every reason to be outraged by the
results.
But the President should have been outraged by the processes behind the attack, where
military commanders, fully afflicted by 'Military Messiah Syndrome', offered up solutions that
solved nothing for problems that did not exist. Not a single general (or admiral) had the
courage to tell the president that the allegations against Syria were a hoax, and that a
military response was not only not needed, but would be singularly counterproductive.
But that's not how generals and admirals -- or colonels and lieutenant colonels -- are
wired. That kind of introspective honesty cannot happen while they are in command.
Bob Woodward knows this truth, but he chose not to give it a voice in his book, because to
do so would disrupt the pre-scripted narrative that he had constructed, around which he bent
and twisted the words of those he interviewed -- including the president and Jim Mattis. As
such, 'Rage' is, in effect, a lie built on a lie. It is one thing for politicians and those in
power to manipulate the truth to their advantage. It's something altogether different for
journalists to report something as true that they know to be a lie.
On the back cover of 'Rage', the Pulitzer prize-winning historian Robert Caro is quoted from
a speech he gave about Bob Woodward. " Bob Woodward ," Caro notes, " a great
reporter. What is a great reporter? Someone who never stops trying to get as close to the truth
as possible ."
After reading 'Rage', one cannot help but conclude the opposite -- that Bob Woodward has
written a volume which pointedly ignores the truth. Instead, he gives voice to a lie of his own
construct, predicated on the flawed accounts of sources inflicted with 'Military Messiah
Syndrome', whose words embrace a fantasy world populated by military members fulfilling
missions far removed from the common good of their fellow citizens -- and often at conflict
with the stated intent and instruction of the civilian leadership they ostensibly serve. In
doing so, Woodward is as complicit as the generals and former generals he quotes in misleading
the American public about issues of fundamental importance.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
Scott Ritter
is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ' SCORPION
KING : America's Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump.' He served in the
Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff
during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter
@RealScottRitter
Whichever construct you want to believe, the fact remains that US has continued to sow
instability around the world in the name of defending the liberty and freedom. Which brings
to the question how the world can continue to allow a superpower to dictate what's good or
bad for a sovereign country.
Johan le Roux Jewel Gyn 18 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 03:42 AM
The answer you seek is not in the US's proclaimed vision of 'democracy' ot 'rescuing
populations from the clutches of vile dictators.' They just say that to validate their
actions which in reality is using their military as a mercenary force to secure and steal the
resources of countries.
Joaquin Montano 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 04:57 PM
Bob Woodward was enshrined as a great, heroic like journalist by the Hollywood propaganda
machine, but reality is he is a US Security agent pretending to be a well informed/connected
journalist. And indeed, he is well informed/connected, since he was a Naval intelligence man,
part responsible of the demise of the Nixon administration when it fell out of grace with the
powerful elites, and the Washington Post being well connected with the CIA, the rest is
history. And as they say, once a CIA man, always a CIA man.
That is correct. Woodward is a Naval intelligence man. The elite in the US was not happy
about Nixon's foreign policy and his detante with the Soviet Union. Watergate was invented,
and Nixon had nothing to do with it. However, it brought him down, thank's to Woodward.
NoJustice Joaquin Montano 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:48 PM
But he also exposed Trump's lies about Covid-19.
lectrodectus 17 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 04:45 AM
Another first class article by ....Scott .. The book makes it clear that Mattis viewed Trump
as a threat to the Us' standing as the defender of a " rules -based order -built on the back
of decades -old alliances-that had been in place since the end of the second World War". It
also makes it clear that " Mattis and the Military officials he oversaw placed defending this
order above the implementing the will of the American People " These old Military Dinosaurs
simply can't let go of the past, unfortunately for the American people / the World I can't
see anything ever changing, it will be business as usual ie, war after War after War.
Jonny247364 lectrodectus 5 minutes ago 17 Sep, 2020 09:53 PM
Just because donny signs a dictact it does not equate to the will of the americian people.
The americian people did not ask donny to murder Assad.
neeon9 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:56 PM
"a threat to the US’ standing as the defender of a rules-based order –" Who made
that a thing? who voted for the US to be the policeman of the planet? and who said their
"rules" are right? I sure didn't, nor did anyone I know, even my american friends don't know
whose idea it was!
fezzie035fezzm 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:29 PM
It's interesting to note that every president since J.F.K. has got America into a military
conflict, or has turned a minor conflict into a major one. Trump is the exception. Trump
inherited conflicts (Afghanistan, Syria etc) but has not started a new one, and he has spent
his three years ending or winding down the conflicts he had inherited.
NoJustice fezzie035fezzm 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:34 PM
Trump increased military deployment to the Middle East. He increased military spending. He
had a foreign general assassinated. He had missiles fired into Syria. He vetoed a bill that
would limit his authority to wage war. Trump is not an exception.
T. Agee Kaye 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 05:59 PM
Good op ed. 'Rage is built on a lie' applies to many things.
E_Kaos T. Agee Kaye 7 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 02:46 PM
True, the beginning of a new narrative and the continuation of an old narrative.
PYCb988 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 07:25 PM
Something's amiss here. Mattis was openly telling the press that there was no evidence
against Assad. Just Google: Mattis Newsweek Assad.
erniedouglas 12 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 09:14 AM
What was Watergate? Even bet says there were tapes of a private relationship between Nixon
and BB Rebozo.
allan Kaplan 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:03 PM
Continuation of a highly organized and tightly controlled disinformation campaign to do one
singularly the most significant and historically one of the most illegal act of American
betrayal... overthrow American elections at any and all costs to install one of the most
deranged, demoralized sold out brain dead Biden and his equally brown nosing Harris only to
unseat a legally and democratically elected US president according to our Constitution! Will
their evil acts against America work? I doubt it! But at a price that America has never
before seen. Let's sit back and watch this Rose Bowl parade of America's dirtiest of the
dirty politics!
E_Kaos allan Kaplan 7 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 02:49 PM
"brown nosing harris", how apropos with the play on words.
Bill Spence allan Kaplan 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:29 PM
Both parties and their politicians are totally corrupt. Why would anyone support one side
over the other? Is that because you believe the promises and lies?
custos125 17 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 04:35 AM
Is there any evidence that both Mattis and Woodward knew that the allegations of a Syrian use
of chemical weapons by plane were not true, a false flag? On the assumption of this use, the
capacity to fly such attack and deploy such weapons was destroyed for some time. I recommend
reading of Rage, it is quite interesting, even if some people will not like it and try to
keep people away from the book.
E_Kaos custos125 7 hours ago 17 Sep, 2020 02:58 PM
My observations were: 1 - where were the bomb fragments 2 - why use rusted gas cylinders 3 -
how do you attach a rusted gas cylinder to a plane 4 - were the rusted gas cylinders tossed
out of a plane 5 - how did the rusted gas cylinders land so close to each other My conclusion
- False Flag Incident
neeon9 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:58 PM
The is only one threat to peace in the world, and it's the US/Israeli M.I.C.. War mongering
children, who actually believe, against all reason, that they are the most worthy and
entitled race on earth! they are not. The US has been responsible for more misery in the
world than any other state, which isn't surprising given how many Nazi's were resettled there
by the Jews. They are also the only Ppl on the planet who think a nuclear war is winnable!
How strange is that!
NoJustice 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:22 PM
So everything is a lie because Woodward didn't mention that there was no evidence found that
linked the Syrian government to the chemical attack?
Strongbo50 6 minutes ago 17 Sep, 2020 09:58 PM
The left is firing up the Russian Interference narrative again, how Russia is trying to take
the election. The real truth is in plain sight, The main stream media is trying to deliver
Biden a win, along with google yahoo msn facebook and twitter. I say, come on Russia, if you
can help stem that tide of lies please Mr Putin help. That's a joke but the media is real.
And Woodward in his old age wants one more trophy on his mantle.
CuttySark 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 05:41 PM
Trump has become the great white whale. Seems like there are Ahab's everywhere willing to
shoot their hearts upon the beast to bring it down whatever the cost. I think it was this
kind of rage and attitude that got Adolf off to a good start.
NoJustice CuttySark 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 05:44 PM
He's an easy target because he keeps screwing up.
Gryphon_ 1 day ago 16 Sep, 2020 06:59 PM
The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon. Never in my life have I seen a
newspaper that lies as much as the post. Bob Woodward works for the post.
By
Tony
Cox
, a US journalist who has written or edited for Bloomberg and several major daily newspapers.
The New York Times and CNN are desperate to paint Donald Trump as an enemy of the military, due to his desire not to get
involved in pointless wars. But this is simply not true, and Trump has the backing of many soldiers.
Someone should tell the
New York Times, CNN and other mainstream media outlets that soldiers don't actually like getting killed or maimed for no good
reason. Nor do they like generals and presidents who spill their blood in vain.
Alas, ignorance of these
obvious truths probably isn't the issue. This is likely just another case of the biggest names in news pretending to not get
the point so they can take the rest of us along for a ride in their confidence game of alternative reality.
The latest example is the
New York Times spinning President Donald Trump's critique this week of Pentagon leadership and the military industrial complex
as disrespect for the military at large.
"Trump has lost the right and authority to be
commander in chief,"
the
Times quoted
retired US Marines General Anthony Zinni as saying. Zinni cited Trump's alleged
"despicable
comments"
about the nation's war dead – reported last week by
The
Atlantic
, citing anonymous sources – as one of the reasons Trump "must go."
Never mind that Trump and all on-the-record administration sources denied The Atlantic's report. The Times couldn't resist
when the pieces seemed to fit so well together for the military's latest propaganda campaign against Trump. First the
president disses the troops, calling them "losers" and "suckers," then he has the
temerity
to say
Pentagon leaders want to fight wars to keep defense contractors happy.
Except the pieces don't
fit. The many people who occupy so-called boots on the ground don't have the same interests as the few people who send them to
war. In fact, combat troops are given reason to hate the generals who send them to die when there's not a legitimate national
security reason for the war they're fighting. And the US has fought a long line of wars that didn't serve the nation's
national security interests. Even when a war is justified, the interests of top brass and front-line soldiers often clash.
Remember that great 1967
war movie, '
The
Dirty Dozen'
? A group of 12 soldiers who were condemned to long prison sentences or execution in military prison for their
crimes were sent on a 1944 suicide mission to kill high-ranking German officers at a heavily defended chateau far behind enemy
lines. After succeeding in the mission and escaping the Germans, the lone surviving convict, played by tough-guy actor Charles
Bronson, told the mission leader,
"Killing generals could get to be a habit with me."
So no, New York Times, speaking out against ill-advised wars does not equal bashing the military. And sorry, General Zinni,
but generals, defense contractors and their media mouthpieces don't get to decide who has the
"right
and authority"
to be commander in chief. The voters decided that already, and they expressed clearly that they don't want
senseless and endless wars and foreign interventions.
The Times cited General
James McConville, the Army's chief of staff, as saying Pentagon leaders would only recommend sending troops to combat
"when
it's required for national security and a last resort."
And no, it wasn't a comedy skit. What's the last US war or combat
intervention that measured up to that standard? Let's just say the late Bronson, who died in 2003 at the age of 81, was a
young man the last time that happened.
CNN tried a similar ploy
on Sunday, while trying to sell the "losers" and "suckers" story in an interview with US Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert
Wilkie. Host Dana Bash said the allegations fit a
"pattern of public statements
" by
the president because Trump called US Senator John McCain a "loser" in 2015 and said McCain shouldn't be considered a hero for
being captured in the Vietnam War. She repeatedly suggested to Wilkie, who didn't take the bait, that Trump's attacks on
McCain, who died in 2018, showed disrespect for the troops.
Apparently, this follows
the same line of propagandist thought which told us that saying there are rapists among the illegal aliens entering the US
from Mexico – which is undeniably true –
equals
saying
all Mexicans are rapists. In CNN land, a bad word about McCain is a bad word about all soldiers.
McCain was
a
warmonger
who didn't mind getting US troops killed or backing terrorist groups in Syria. If
he
had his way
, many more GIs would be dead or disabled, because the intervention in Syria would have been escalated and the
US might be at war with Iran. Soldiers wouldn't want their lives wasted in such conflicts.
All wars are hard on the
people who have to fight them, but senseless wars are spirit-crushing. An average of about 17 veterans commit suicide each day
in the US, according to Veterans Administration
data
.
Veterans account for 11 percent of the US adult population but more than 18 percent of suicides.
The media's deceiving
technique of trying to pretend that ruling-class chieftains and front-line grunts are in the same boat reflects a broader
campaign of top-down revolution against populism. The
military
is
just one of several pro-Trump segments of the population that must be turned against the president. Other pro-Trump segments,
such as
police
,
are demonized and attacked.
Trump has managed to keep
the US out of new wars and has drawn down deployments to Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan – despite Pentagon opposition. His rival,
Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden, can be expected to rev up the war machine if he takes charge. His foreign policy
adviser, Antony Blinken, lamented in a May
interview
with CBS News
that Trump had given up US "leverage" in Syria.
Trump also has turned
around the VA hospital system, ending
decades
of neglect
that left many veterans to die on waiting lists.
Like past campaigns to
oust Trump, the notion that he's not sufficiently devoted to the troops might be a tough sell. No matter how good their words
may sound, the people who promote endless wars without clear objectives aren't true supporters of the rank and file.
"... There has been a long string of U.S. provocations toward Russia. The first one came in the late 1990s and the initial years of the twenty-first century when Washington violated tacit promises given to Mikhail Gorbachev and other Soviet leaders that if Moscow accepted a united Germany within NATO, the Alliance would not seek to move farther east. Instead of abiding by that bargain, the Clinton and Bush administrations successfully pushed NATO to admit multiple new members from Central and Eastern Europe, bringing that powerful military association directly to Russia's western border. In addition, the United States initiated "rotational" deployments of its forces to the new members so that the U.S. military presence in those countries became permanent in all but name. Even Robert M. Gates, who served as secretary of defense under both George W. Bush and Barack Obama, was uneasy about those deployments and conceded that he should have warned Bush in 2007 that they might be unnecessarily provocative. ..."
"... Such provocative political steps, though, are now overshadowed by worrisome U.S. and NATO military moves. Weeks before the formal announcement on July 29, the Trump administration touted its plan to relocate some U.S. forces stationed in Germany. When Secretary of Defense Mike Esper finally made the announcement, the media's focus was largely on the point that 11,900 troops would leave that country. ..."
"... Among other developments, there already has been a surge of alarming incidents between U.S. and Russian military aircraft in that region. Most of the cases involve U.S. spy planes flying near the Russian coast -- supposedly in international airspace. On July 30, a Russian Su-27 jet fighter intercepted two American surveillance aircraft; according to Russian officials, it was the fourth time in the final week of July that they caught U.S. planes in that sector approaching the Russian coast. Yet another interception occurred on August 5, again involving two U.S. spy planes. Still others have taken place throughout mid-August. It is a reckless practice that easily could escalate into a broader, very dangerous confrontation. ..."
"... The growing number of such incidents is a manifestation of the surging U.S. military presence along Russia's border, especially in the Black Sea . They are taking place on Russia's doorstep, thousands of miles away from the American homeland. Americans should consider how the United States would react if Russia decided to establish a major naval and air presence in the Gulf of Mexico, operating out of bases in such allied countries as Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. ..."
"... I think this has been bipartisan policy since at least 1947. Unlikely to change anytime soon, even with realists gaining ground. Perhaps expanding NATO east, sending support to Ukraine, and intervening in Syria (despite attempts to leave, the best we can get at this point are small troop reductions that most likely are redeployed to neighboring countries) aren't the best idea after all? ..."
"... they think Russia is a weak state and can do nothing therefore they are free to do as they please. ..."
"... the US leadership wants ether country to take a shot at some thing US. Then then can scream and stomp their feet that no one on earth is allowed to trade with ether country and the US can block all trade with ether country. ..."
"... The other thing at play is Americans love it when their leaders act like gangsters. That's why leaders do it. Nothing will get you votes faster in the US than saying your going to kill people. I see US citizens try that non-sense about it's all Washington we don't want that. But you keep voting for people that are going to give you the next war fix. When you stop they will stop. ..."
"... if people are convinced that Russia is a weak state -- then it is easier to approve adventures abroad -- including ringing Russia. ..."
"... Please explain to me, a Russian person, what kind of anti-American policy Russia is spreading in countries? If we exclude acts of counteraction against American expansion and aggression against Russia? ..."
"... The only people that are destroying Americans are within our borders, wielding power to fulfill their mission -- enrich themselves, keep the borders open, and our military all over the globe. ..."
"... I think there is a third option besides escalation and deescalation - exhaustion. Projecting power across the globe is expensive, it is a slow but steady drain on US resources, which are needed elsewhere (for example to quell the riots in major US cities). ..."
"... I see it as exhaustion by corruption. The US military is increasingly bureaucratic, political and ineffectual. Our weapons are gold-plated, hyper-tech focused and require highly-skilled people to maintain them, which means we can't quickly train new people up. The weapons themselves are so complex and expensive that there is no way to manufacture them at scale quickly. ..."
"... Read Jean Lartegy's "The Centurions." That is the direction where the tactically brilliant, but strategically incompetent US military leadership is headed. ..."
"... Stop focusing on what Trump says and look at what his administration does. Troops in Poland and Eastern Europe, Nord Stream 2, intrusive US reconnaissance flights along Russia's borders, support of Ukraine, interference with Russian patrols in Syria, the continuing attempt to destabilize Assad in Syria, the destruction of JCPOA, global sanctions campaign on Russia among others, withdrawal from arms control treaties, accusation that Russia was cheating on INF treaty, hiring dozens of anti-Russia hardliners, etc, etc. ..."
"... I don't think US-Russian cooperation is doable at this point--or any time soon. Given how erratic US policy is--yawing violently from one direction to another--Russia has no reason to accept the damage to its relationship with China that shifting to a strategic arrangement with the US would entail. The risk is too high and the potential rewards too uncertain. ..."
"... We have pretty much alienated the Russian state under Putin, and now we're trying to wait him out, with the expectation that there is no one of his capabilities to maintain the strategic autonomy of the Russian state in the longer term and that once he exits the scene, some Yeltsin-like stooge will present himself. ..."
"... Everyone is focusing on Russia because of the Russia hoax. Dems started a new cold war based on an irrational fear that Russia was threatening our democracy. ..."
"... The foreign policy elite dislikes Russia, always has, and will do anything to keep this "adversary" front and center because their prospects for prestige, power and position depend upon the presence of an enemy. As an example see Strobe Talbot and Michael McFaul. ..."
Tensions are becoming dangerous in Syria and on Russia's back doorstep. US soldiers stand
near US and Russian military vehicles in the northeastern Syrian town of al-Malikiyah (Derik)
at the border with Turkey, on June 3, 2020. (Photo by DELIL SOULEIMAN/AFP via Getty Images)
A dangerous vehicle collision between U.S and Russian soldiers in Northeastern Syria on Aug.
24 highlights the fragility of the relationship and the broader test of wills between the two
major powers.
According to White House
reports and a Russian video that went viral this week, it appeared that as the two sides
were racing down a highway in armored vehicles, the Russians sideswiped the Americans, leaving
four U.S. soldiers injured. It is but the latest clash as both sides continue their patrols in
the volatile area. But it speaks of bigger problems with U.S. provocations on Russia's backdoor
in Eastern Europe.
A sober examination of U.S. policy toward Russia since the disintegration of the Soviet
Union leads to two possible conclusions. One is that U.S. leaders, in both Republican and
Democratic administrations, have been utterly tone-deaf to how Washington's actions are
perceived in Moscow. The other possibility is that those leaders adopted a policy of maximum
jingoistic swagger intended to intimidate Russia, even if it meant obliterating a constructive
bilateral relationship and eventually risking a dangerous showdown. Washington's latest
military moves, especially in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea, are stoking alarming
tensions.
There has been a
long string of U.S. provocations toward Russia. The first one came in the late 1990s and
the initial years of the twenty-first century when Washington violated tacit promises given to
Mikhail Gorbachev and other Soviet leaders that if Moscow accepted a united Germany within
NATO, the Alliance would not seek to move farther east. Instead of abiding by that bargain, the
Clinton and Bush administrations successfully pushed NATO to admit multiple new members from
Central and Eastern Europe, bringing that powerful military association directly to Russia's
western border. In addition, the United States initiated "rotational" deployments of its forces
to the new members so that the U.S. military presence in those countries became permanent in
all but name. Even Robert M. Gates, who served as secretary of defense under both George W.
Bush and Barack Obama, was uneasy
about those deployments and conceded that he should have warned Bush in 2007 that they might be
unnecessarily provocative.
As if such steps were not antagonistic enough, both Bush and Obama sought to bring Georgia
and Ukraine into NATO. The latter country is not only within what Russia regards as its
legitimate sphere of influence, but within its core security zone. Even key European members of
NATO, especially France and Germany, believed that such a move was unwise and blocked
Washington's ambitions. That resistance, however, did not inhibit a Western effort to meddle in Ukraine's
internal affairs to help
demonstrators unseat Ukraine's elected, pro-Russia president and install a new, pro-NATO
government in 2014.
Such provocative political steps, though, are now overshadowed by worrisome U.S. and
NATO military moves. Weeks before the formal announcement on July 29, the Trump administration
touted its plan to relocate some U.S. forces stationed in Germany. When Secretary of Defense
Mike Esper finally made the announcement, the media's focus was largely on the point that
11,900 troops would leave that country.
However, Esper
made it clear that only 6,400 would return to the United States; the other nearly 5,600
would be redeployed to other NATO members in Europe. Indeed, of the 6,400 coming back to the
United States, "many of these or similar units will begin conducting rotational deployments
back to Europe." Worse, of the 5,600 staying in Europe, it turns out that at least 1,000 are going
to Poland's eastern border with Russia.
Another result of the redeployment will be to boost U.S. military power in the Black Sea.
Esper confirmed that various units would "begin continuous rotations farther east in the Black
Sea region, giving us a more enduring presence to enhance deterrence and reassure allies along
NATO's southeastern flank." Moscow is certain to regard that measure as another on a growing
list of Black Sea provocations by the United States.
Among other developments, there already has been a surge of alarming incidents between
U.S. and Russian military aircraft in that region. Most of the cases involve U.S. spy planes
flying near the Russian coast -- supposedly in international airspace. On July 30, a Russian
Su-27 jet fighter
intercepted two American surveillance aircraft; according to Russian officials, it was the
fourth time in the final week of July that they caught U.S. planes in that sector approaching
the Russian coast. Yet
another interception occurred on August 5, again involving two U.S. spy planes. Still
others have
taken place throughout mid-August. It is a reckless
practice that easily could escalate into a broader, very dangerous confrontation.
The growing number of such incidents is a manifestation of the surging U.S. military
presence along Russia's border,
especially in the Black Sea . They are taking place on Russia's doorstep, thousands of
miles away from the American homeland. Americans should consider how the United States would
react if Russia decided to establish a major naval and air presence in the Gulf of Mexico,
operating out of bases in such allied countries as Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.
The undeniable reality is that the United States and its NATO allies are crowding Russia;
Russia is not crowding the United States. Washington's bumptious policies already have wrecked
a once-promising bilateral relationship and created a needless new cold war with Moscow. If
more prudent U.S. policies are not adopted soon, that cold war might well turn hot.
Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in security studies at the Cato Institute and a
contributing editor at The American Conservative, is the author of 12 books and more
than 850 articles on international affairs. His latest book is NATO: The Dangerous Dinosaur
(2019).
I mean, I think this has been bipartisan policy since at least 1947. Unlikely to change
anytime soon, even with realists gaining ground. Perhaps expanding NATO east, sending
support to Ukraine, and intervening in Syria (despite attempts to leave, the best we can
get at this point are small troop reductions that most likely are redeployed to neighboring
countries) aren't the best idea after all?
This is a very anti American article! Patriots know that where the U.S. gives political
or economic ground Russia and other adversaries will fill the vacum with policies intended
to destroy American peoeple. So no, it is not a bad idea to be involved in Syria and
Ukraine in fact it is a very good idea.
The entire framing of Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood as "pro American"
and those who oppose them as "anti American" is delusional.
Russia is a weak state trying to maintain its natural spheres of influence along the Curzon
line. Why has the State Department/ Pentagon decided to try and roll this back? How the F
to they expect Russia to react. How would America react if a foreign power tried to turn
Mexico into a strategic asset. So why is it ok to make Ukraine into a Nato member? It's
reckless and ultimately it is pointless. Weakening Russia further serves little strategic
purpose and potentially threatens to destabilize the Balkans and mid east with Turkish
adventurism. What will America do if the Turks seize Rhodes under some pretext?
Syria is another case of State Department midwits not understanding the results of their
regime change. What purpose does it serve to put a Sunni extremist government in Damascus.
How hateful do you have to be to subject Syria's minorities to genocide at the hands of an
ISIS sympathetic government? How do you delude yourself that such a regime will serve
America's interests in the long run? So you can own Iran before the election? You are
trading victory today for permanent loss tomorrow. It's insane.
Just like you, they think Russia is a weak state and can do nothing therefore they are free to do as they please.
Also, since Turkey is a NATO member and as such an ally to the U.S. shouldn't you be cheering in good faith for Turkey
and against Russia?
You got that one. Because Turkey is a thorn in NATO side. It has massive economic
interests in Russia, China and the rest of Asia. The "adventure" in Syria is coordinated
with Russia to the last detail, while playacting tensions. US problem in Syria is not
Russia or Turkey, but Russia AND Turkey.
As US is frowning at Egypt Al-Sisi , or Saudi MBS -- it is because they frown at Egypt
AND Russia, as well as Saudi Arabia AND Russia.
Basically, countries nominally counted in OUR camp are frowned upon when collaborating with
the ENEMY countries.
Our foreign policy is stuck in Middle East -- and cannot get unstuck. Cannot be better
illustrated then Pompeo addressing Republican convention from Jerusalem.
The only way Russia can challenge encirclement is by challenging US in its home away
from home -- Middle East. And creating new realities in the ground by collaborating with
the countries in the region -- undermining monopoly.
And as the entire world is hurting from epidemic related economic setbacks, Russia and
China are economies that are moving forward. And nobody in the Middle East can afford to
ignore it.
I agree with you with the exception of Russia being weak. One day the US which has never
seen any thing in advance will push Russia one time to many and find the Russian Army in
Poland and Romania. That is if China doesn't take out some thing precious to the US in the
mean time like a U2, aircraft carrier etc.
There are two things at play here. The first is the US leadership wants ether country to
take a shot at some thing US. Then then can scream and stomp their feet that no one on
earth is allowed to trade with ether country and the US can block all trade with ether
country.
The other thing at play is Americans love it when their leaders act like gangsters. That's why leaders do it. Nothing will get you votes faster in the US than saying your going
to kill people. I see US citizens try that non-sense about it's all Washington we don't
want that. But you keep voting for people that are going to give you the next war fix. When
you stop they will stop.
I agree with your assessment except Russia will not put troops into any country without
the express request from the legitimate government.
They are not going into Poland and especially not Romania (Transnistria maybe) why would
they? The countries do not have any resources that Russia wants.
The only reason to put troops into Belarus is to maintain a distance between Poland and the
borders.
Russia needs nothing from the rest of the world except trade. Un-coerced, free trade. This
drives the US corporations crazy as no one will trade with the US anymore without
coercion.
PS the same goes for China with the proviso that Taiwan is part of China and needs to be
reabsorbed into the mainstream. It will take +20 years but China just keeps the pressure on
until there will be no viable alternative.
It has never meant to serve American interests. Ever. Once you put it in perspective, it
makes sense.
But if people are convinced that Russia is a weak state -- then it is easier to approve
adventures abroad -- including ringing Russia.
The problem for never satiated Zealots is the following -- regional powers in the Middle
East are hitching their wagons to Eurasian economic engine. That is definitely true of
Turkey, Egypt and even Saudi Arabia.
The tales of Moslem Brotherhood are here to interpret something today from the iconography
from the past. And to explain today what an entirely different set of leaders did -- be
that few years ago or one hundred years ago. Same goes for iconography of Al-Qaeda, ISIS,
Communism, Socialism, authoritarianism, and other ISMS.
Those icons serve the same purpose as icons in religion or in cyber-space. You look at
them, or you click -- and the story and explanation is ready made for your consumption. Time to watch actions -- not media iconography to tell us what is going on.
If we're being purely ideological here those with an overtly internationalist
disposition (barring leftists) are those who want to be involved overseas, hardly ones to
go on about national interest or pride. Its been a common stance associated with American
Nationalism and Paleoconservatives to be anti-intervention, these people (of which I
consider myself a part) can hardly be bashed for holding unpatriotic views.)
Russia has a declining population, and an economy smaller than that of Spain. Its hardly
a threat and our involvement in Eastern Europe was relatively limited pre-2014 and even so
the overall international balance of power hasn't shifted after Russian annexation of
Crimea, and the Ukrainians proved quite capable of defending their nation (though not so
capable as to end retake separatist strongholds.
Please explain to me, a Russian person, what kind of anti-American policy Russia is
spreading in countries? If we exclude acts of counteraction against American expansion and
aggression against Russia? What ideological foundations does Russia have after 1991? Isn't
Russia's actions a guerrilla war on the communications of the self-proclaimed "Empire of
Good", which is pursuing a tough offensive policy? And is it not because the Russians
support a significant part of Putin's initiatives (despite a number of Putin's obvious
shortcomings) precisely because they have experience of cooperation with the "Empire of
Good" in the 90s: give loans, corrupt officials and deputies, put Russian firms under
control big American companies, and then just give orders from the White House.
PS. I beg your pardon my google english
Another Zealot in Patriot garb. The only people that are destroying Americans are within our borders, wielding power to
fulfill their mission -- enrich themselves, keep the borders open, and our military all
over the globe.
It would be interesting to read the minds of the US pilots engaged in these activities.
My guess is that the cognitive dissonance energy in those heads is equivalent to the
biggest nuclear bomb ever exploded...
Hmmm... I think there is a third option besides escalation and deescalation -
exhaustion. Projecting power across the globe is expensive, it is a slow but steady drain on US
resources, which are needed elsewhere (for example to quell the riots in major US cities).
In a major crisis this could lead to a breaking point. What if some US adversary decides to
double down and attack (directly or by proxy) US troops and the US will not be able to
respond? A humiliating defeat combined with an exhausted public decidedly set against
military adventures abroad could cause a rapid retrenchment and global withdrawal.
I see it as exhaustion by corruption. The US military is increasingly bureaucratic,
political and ineffectual. Our weapons are gold-plated, hyper-tech focused and require
highly-skilled people to maintain them, which means we can't quickly train new people up.
The weapons themselves are so complex and expensive that there is no way to manufacture
them at scale quickly.
The DOD today is only about personal political position, and grubbing tax-payer dollars
for self-aggrandizement. In any real war with a real adversary, we wouldn't stand a
chance.
I wouldn't be so pessimistic regarding US military capabilities and I'm neither a US
citizen or a fan of US global hegemony.
The US armed forces are made up of professionals. There are some universal advantages
and disadvantages of such forces. A professional army is good at fighting wars but bad at
controlling territory because of its limited size and higher costs-per-soldier. In order to
control territory you need "boots on the ground" in great numbers, standing at checkpoints
and patrolling the countryside. They didn't have to be trained to the level of Navy SEALS,
for them it is enough if they can shoot straight and won't be scared from some fireworks
and the US lacks such forces.
So how is one going to get the millions of manpower to fulfill these tasks? Pauperize
the masses so that joining the army becomes the only viable solution? Introduce the Draft?
Provide a pathway for US citizenship for any foreigner that joins, establishing a US
Foreign Legion?
And then, how you'll have enough boots on the ground to pacify Russia or China. It took
more than a month to establish and secure the beach heads in Bretagne in France in 1944.
How do you think you can even get those boots to land in Russia or China, when you know
that the ICBMs are going to start flying towards the continental US if something like this
will ever happen?
So how is one going to get the millions of manpower to fulfill these tasks? Pauperize
the masses so that joining the army becomes the only viable solution? Introduce the
Draft?
It is no longer possible to introduce the draft in the US - even mentioning it would
lead to social unrests.
Read Jean Lartegy's "The Centurions." That is the direction where the tactically
brilliant, but strategically incompetent US military leadership is headed.
In addition, those gold-plated weapon systems often do not work as advertised. Look how
the multi-billion IADS of the Saudis couldn't protect their refinery complex from a cruise
missile attack from Yemen. Look at the embarrassing failures of the LCS and Zumwalt ship
classes, and the endless problems with the Ford CVN. The F35 is proving a ginormous
boondoggle that will massively enrich LM shareholders but will do squat for US military
capabilities.
He already did and the Military ignored him.
He backtracked with endless excuses and conditionals.
https://www.nbcnews.com/new...
**
Bill Clinton once reportedly told senior White House reporter Sarah McClendon, "Sarah,
there's a government inside the government, and I don't control it."
**
Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of
the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid
of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organised, so subtle, so
watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their
breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
– Woodrow Wilson, 28th President of the United States (1856-1924)
**
Do you really think that the adults with so much to lose would allow an idiot like Trump
(or Clinton or Obama or Bush) to actually run things?
Stop focusing on what Trump says and look at what his administration does. Troops in Poland and Eastern Europe, Nord Stream 2, intrusive US reconnaissance flights
along Russia's borders, support of Ukraine, interference with Russian patrols in Syria, the
continuing attempt to destabilize Assad in Syria, the destruction of JCPOA, global
sanctions campaign on Russia among others, withdrawal from arms control treaties,
accusation that Russia was cheating on INF treaty, hiring dozens of anti-Russia hardliners,
etc, etc.
I'll repeat: Focus on what Trump does, not what he says, and then total up the
pro-Russia and anti-Russia actions of this administration and see what that reveals.
A danger with this "new Cold War" is the assumption it will end like the first one
– peacefully. If this is the thinking among policy-makers we are in a very perilous
situation. History shows that fatal miscalculations contributed to the First World War, and
as a consequence the second. Today there is no room for miscalculation, which will set off
unstoppable escalation into a third.
https://www.ghostsofhistory...
Russians deliberately repeatedly ram an American vehicle, but I'm sure it's all our fault. Shouldn't have worn that skirt
I guess.
Before y'all armchair Putin experts say all your loving things: you have nothing to contribute unless you speak fluent
Russian. I watched the video taken and published by the Russians and it was pretty clear what they were doing.
Something critical is being missed entirely. The United States has invaded Syria without
a mandate from the UN. Its' president has explicitly stated that it is the intention of the
US to take Syria's oil. Both are violations of international law. Any hostile action taken
against the illegal US presence in Syria is justifiable as self defense. While the US
presence in Syria is illegal, Russia's presence is not. Russia was invited into Syria by
the UN recognized Syrian government to assist it in defending against the US regime change
by Al Qaeda proxy operation..
establish a major naval and air presence in the Gulf of Mexico, operating out of
bases in such allied countries as Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.
What would happen if China or Russia established bases in the Caribbean and Latin
America? Trump joked about selling Puerto Rico, what if the Chinese bought it?
If the Israeli's have a problem with Russia being in Syria then Israel should deal with
it. Its not our problem and Russia is not our enemy. Infact India is bringing closer
relations between Russia and Japan. Which do you want? Russian antagonism because Israel
doesn't want Russians in Syria or Russian partnership with India, Japan, Australia and the
US dealing with China? Remember....you could spend 1000 years in the middle east and not
make a dent in the animosities between peoples there...so one is a futile endeaver...while
the other has great benefit.
Note that Russian soldiers are in Syria at the request of its government to help fend
off foreign invaders. The American troops are there illegally, with no UN or even
Congressional authorization.
Also note the USA risks another Cuban missile crisis by withdrawing from the INF treaty
after illegally building missile launch complexes in Romania and Poland that can hit Russia
with nuclear cruise missiles.
The USA did much more than "meddle" in Ukraine. The Obama/Biden team openly organized a
coup to overthrow its elected President because he didn't want to join NATO and the EU.
Is that guy in the middle of the left seated Vlad Klitschko? I great boxer no doubt, but
also known for his stunning stupidity. Is he part of the new Ukrainian political elite?
Poor Ukraine.
A Russian vehicle sideswipes an American vehicle, injuring two US soldiers, and that's
an American provocation? An American spy plane claims to be in international waters, and
you tack in a "supposedly" in that sentence? "Violating" a tacit promise, really?
Russia aggression against Georgia and Crimea is OK because Sphere of Influence? This
article is loaded with Blame America First crap usually associated with the Left
(much to this liberal's disgust). Never expected to find it here.
Yes, the expansion of NATO east must have looked to Russia like something coming at
their borders entirely too fast. I thought it was a terrible idea at the time, and wrote it
off to the wheels of a fifty-year-old bureaucracy not knowing how to slow down. Your
eye-straining gaze at the tea-leaves for Deeper State motives is unpersuasive, even without
your odious prejudices.
Maybe some play of Rashomon would be in order here. That is your perspective.
Now your honor, what I have seen is that Georgia attacked first and hoped to occupy a
certain area that Russian Federation was protecting, As a side comment, I have to point to
an Orwellian use of the word "aggressive" and "attack". It seems that anything that the US
cannot wantonly control or bomb is inherently aggressive and attacking either directly or
indirectly the "rules based order".
Crimea had Russian assets that became endangered. Crimea was part of Russia until 1954,
when was donated in an unsanctioned manner to Ukraine. The majority Russian population in
Crimea has been persecuted by the Ukrainian state since at least 1994. The Euromaidan would
have exacerbated that. A referendum was carried on and just considering ethnic lines,
Russians won in their desire to re-unite with the Russian Federation. There aren't many
legal arguments against that referendum and that process, if one looks for them...
So the above perspectives have nothing to do with just "sphere of influence" but with
direct core interests of the Russian state and its core security...
The deep state is a tool that is trying to fulfill one objective: integration of Russian
economy under the control of US and its Oligarchy. Otherwise it will always be a threat. A
Nationalist, democratic (but not oligarchic) and sovereign Russia will always be considered
an enemy of the world hegemon...
And the provocation is the actual presence in Syria of US troops. Ramming the US
military vehicle is not a provocation from Russians, it is a simple eviction notification.
End of story!
Isn't it just amazing how this writer gets to turn an incident of provocation by Russian
soldiers into a story of persistent provocation by America. That is remarkable dexterity
even for this paper. I am used to them suggesting that we should leave the people of
Eastern Europe to the tender mercies of the whims and wishes of a dictator in Moscow -
because they are in his backyard. But to be able to switch from that incident to their
regular theme is an achievement one can recognize, though not respect. The people of those
countries should have a choice about who they associate, and they certainly have a right
not to align with people they fear. Calling us for not respecting he rights of other people
to decide their fates is right and proper. I enthusiastically support this paper when they
do. But when they turn right around and castigate us for not respecting Russia's right to
do it - I am flabbergasted.
This piece spends too much time re-hashing everything Russia-US since 1990 and fails to
focus on the key current issues.
The vehicle incidents in Syria are distinct from the European issue -- see below in this
post -- that is generating some of the other tensions the author lists. Syria is really part
of the larger Middle East issue.
His brief summary of the latest Syria mishap is inadequate to convey what actually
happened.
If you actually look at the video, it does NOT appear to be the case that a Russian
vehicle simply "sideswiped" a US vehicle. It appears that the US was maintaining a
checkpoint on a road that in effect blocked Russian passage. Given the terrain, the
Russians could of course bypass such a checkpoint, which is what they appear to have done.
Then, however, other US vehicles left the checkpoint and attempted to block and turn back
the Russian bypass movement, and this led to the collision. So the incident is part of a
larger US policy to impede Russian operations in NE Syria.
Almost two years ago, Trump ordered US forces out of Syria, and Russia, in agreement
with that plan, sent patrols to the NE to ensure that provisions of an stability agreement
with Turkey and the Kurds were maintained. But then Trump was almost immediately
convinced--by whom is not clear, but ultimately Israel in all probability--to do a 180 and
keep US forces in NE Syria, the superficial rationale being to take control of oil, the
kind of pirate operation that Trump likes. In fact, the goal of those who influence Trump
is to keep Syria weak and unable to rebuild with the expectation that Assad can still be
overthrown at some future point. This is the desire of Israel and its operatives in the
US.
Trump's zag after the zig of planned withdrawal left the US-Russian understanding in
chaos. Now both the US AND the Russians were operating in NE Syria. And over time the US
has become more and more aggressive about impeding Russian operations. The Russians
claim--credibly--that we are demanding that they, in moving their patrols up to the area of
the Syria-Turkey border area not use the M4 highway, the main and direct route and instead
follow a secondary route that circuitously follows the border. The Russians don't accept
that demand. And the vehicle incidents that we are seeing are the outcome of that
disagreement. The Russians are driving up Highway 4 and when they get to the US checkpoint
are bypassing and then continuing up the highway. We are aggressively trying to deter them
from that route choice.
Not sure why this article does not go into detail on this issue in order to clarify
it.
Much of the other stuff the author is talking about here--intrusive air ops in the Black
Sea, etc--is really a separate, European issue. The US is highly concerned about the
economic interactions between Russia and Europe--especially the big economies of Western
Europe and most especially Germany. We are worried that over time Russian-European economic
integration will erode our strategic control and dominance over Europe in general.
Hence, we are making common cause with the anti-Russian elements in "the New Europe,"
i.e., Eastern Europe to try, in essence, to place a barrier between Russia and Western
Europe, playing off Poland, the Baltics and Romania, among others, against Russia, Germany,
France et al. Moving more US forces into Poland and the so-called "Black Sea Region";
impeding Nord Stream 2 and other Russian pipeline initiatives; indulging in recurrent
anti-German propaganda for not maintaining a more robust anti-Russian military posture;
fomenting (behind the scenes) the recent disturbances in Belarus; and promotion of the
so-called "Three Seas Initiative" intended to weld Eastern and Central Europe together into
a reliable tool of US policy are all part of this plan to retain US strategic control of
Europe over the long term.
That's what the heightened tensions in Europe are about.
As I said, the Syria issue, part of the larger Middle East struggle, is separate from
the parallel struggle for mastery in Europe.
It's all an important topic, but this article doesn't really capture the salient
points.
And you're playing word games. Syria's oil is effectively under US control. Yes, we are
deriving strategic benefit from it in that we are denying it to the Syrian government in
order to further destabilize it. It's not a good policy, but the policy does benefit from
denying Syria its oil.
The problem is that most of the oil is on Arab land, not Kurdish land, and the Arabs of
the Northeast are now realigning themselves with Assad, so holding on to the oil is likely
to get more difficult in the future.
I have no idea what you mean by "slander." Guess that means truths you find
inconvenient. Sorry--not in the business of coddling the faint of heart. Trump likes the
idea of taking resources which he imagines to be payment for services we have
rendered--like leaving the country in a state of ruin. He talked about Iraqi oil that way
too, but taking that would be much harder.
Time for you to stop dismissing every reality you don't like as unpatriotic.
The "Assad regime" is the UN recognized government of Syria. That is the only entity
entitled to the country's resources. How is it "the property of the Syrian nation" if the
Syrian government and its people no longer have access to it? To whom is the oil being
sold? Who is receiving the proceeds of the oil sales?
Here are some of Trump's own words with respect to Syria's oil. "I like oil. We are
keeping the oil." 4/11/2019. "The US is in Syria solely for the oil." "We are keeping the
oil. We have the oil. The oil is secure. We left troops behind only for oil." "The US
military is in Syria only for oil." What part of Trump's public assertion that "We are
keeping the oil" are you having difficulty in understanding? How can you say the US "did
not take possession of the oil" when Trump could not have been more explicit in saying
precisely the opposite? Do you not comprehend that the US presence in Syria has no mandate
either from the UN or from the US Congress. Do you not understand that the US presence in
Syria is illegal under international law? Do you not understand that "Keeping the oil" is a
violation of international law? Your post is one of the most ridiculous I have even
read.
1. It's quite clear from the video that the US had set up a checkpoint on the road at
left in the video. (Indeed, we are open about the fact that we are doing so in general in
NE Syria.) And it's equally clear that Russian vehicles are seen bypassing those
checkpoints. The encounter between US and Russian vehicles takes place off the road. There
is only one logical interpretation of what happened. What is your alternative
explanation?
2. "No one reading this can believe that Eastern Europeans have genuine cause to fear
Russia, or that these countries continually request more military and political involvement
than we are willing to provide or that we are not inducing them to do anything or
manipulating them."
First of all, there are no current indications of any Russian intent to do anything in
regard to Eastern Europe. Yes, one can understand the history, which is why there is
anti-Russian sentiment in Eastern Europe, but aside perhaps from the Baltic states in their
unique geographic position, there is no country that has any basis in reality to worry
about Russian aggression in the present.
Of course, this does not stop the Poles from doing exactly that. And perhaps the
Romanians to a much lesser extent. So yes, there is fear in a few key countries based on
past history, Poland being the keystone of the whole thing, and yes, we are indeed
manipulating that fear in an attempt to block/undermine any economic integration between
Germany and Russia. We are also trying to use the "Three Seas Initiative" to block Chinese
commercial and tech penetration of Eastern Europe--5G and their plan to rebuild the port of
Trieste to service Central and NE Europe.
Do you actually believe Russia, which has lately been cutting its defense budget, is
actually going to invade Europe? That really is a fantasy. The only military operations
they will take are to prevent further expansion of NATO into Ukraine and Belarus. The real
game today is commercial and tech competition. Putin knows it would be disastrous for
Russia to start a war with NATO. Not sure why that's hard for you to see.
Your notion of the Russian threat--as it exists today--is wildly exaggerated.
Once President Putin remarked that there are forces in the United States trying to use
Russia for internal political struggle. He added that we will nevertheless try not to be
drawn into these confrontations.
A scene from a Hollywood action movie rises before my eyes, when two heroes of the film are
fighting and a circular saw is spinning nearby, and each of the heroes is trying to shove a
part of the enemy's body under this saw.
The relationship between Russian and American servicemen, I would compare with two hockey
teams, when the tough behavior of the players on the ice does not mean that the players of
one team would be happy with the death of the entire opposing team, say in some kind of
plane crash, since the presence of a strong opponent is a necessary condition for getting a
good salary.
Still, I would not completely deny the possibility of a "hot war".
Since the times of the Roman Empire, the West of Europe has been trying to take control of
the territory of Europe, Eurasia, and Eurasia, in turn, dreams of mastering the
technologies of the West.
The defeat of the 3rd Reich provided the Soviet Union with a breakthrough in the nuclear
industry and space...
It's hard to imagine that Russia is capable of defeating NATO, but I can imagine that in
the current situation, President Putin can offer China to build military bases in western
Russia for a million Chinese servicemen, for 100 thousand on the Chukchi Peninsula, for 500
thousand on Sakhalin...
The extra money for renting military bases in a coronavirus crisis will not hurt
anyone.
Of all the things about Hillary Clinton to despise, her selfish attempt to explain her
loss, and to attack the President (to whom she never conceded the election!) by blaming
Russia, is at the top of the list. To generate a completely unnecessary conflict with a
nuclear super-power that could burn this country to ashes in minutes, out of personal
vindictiveness, ... is lower than it can get.
I don't think US-Russian cooperation is doable at this point--or any time soon. Given
how erratic US policy is--yawing violently from one direction to another--Russia has no
reason to accept the damage to its relationship with China that shifting to a strategic
arrangement with the US would entail. The risk is too high and the potential rewards too
uncertain.
We have pretty much alienated the Russian state under Putin, and now we're trying to
wait him out, with the expectation that there is no one of his capabilities to maintain the
strategic autonomy of the Russian state in the longer term and that once he exits the
scene, some Yeltsin-like stooge will present himself.
We thought we were dealing with the main threats to our global hegemony
sequentially--Russia "defeated" in the Cold War, and then on to a defeat of "militant
Islam" in the Greater Middle East and finally to a showdown with China. But now, the
sequencing has fallen apart, and we're trying to prosecute all three simultaneously.
You have inverted the facts. The video evidence shows the Americans side-swiped the
Russian vehicle and claimed "American soldiers had 'concussions'". A concussion requires
loss of consciousness or significant changes in mental function. In football, you have your
"Bell rung". You can't add 2+2 correctly. There is no evidence to support that.
Everyone is focusing on Russia because of the Russia hoax. Dems started a new cold war
based on an irrational fear that Russia was threatening our democracy.
Along with Dems, I also blame Putin; he bribed Hillary millions for uranium -- that
doesn't lend to good relations.
The foreign policy elite dislikes Russia, always has, and will do anything to keep
this "adversary" front and center because their prospects for prestige, power and position
depend upon the presence of an enemy. As an example see Strobe Talbot and Michael
McFaul.
Near the end of July, one of the most important recent developments in US foreign policy was
quietly disclosed during
a US Senate hearing. Not surprisingly, hardly anybody talked about it and most are still
completely unaware that it happened.
Answering questions from Senator Lindsey Graham, Secretary of State Pompeo confirmed that
the State Department had awarded an American company, Delta Crescent Energy, with a contract to
begin extracting oil in northeast Syria. The area is nominally controlled by the Kurds, yet
their military force, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), was formed under US auspices and
relies on an American military presence to secure its territory. That military presence will
now be charged with protecting an American firm from the government of the country that it is
operating within.
Pompeo confirmed that the plans for implanting the firm into the US-held territory are "now
in implementation" and that they could potentially be "very powerful." This is quite a
momentous event given its nature as a blatant example of neocolonial extraction, or, as Stephen
Kinzer
puts it writing for the Boston Globe, "This is a vivid throwback to earlier imperial eras,
when conquerors felt free to loot the resources of any territory they could capture and
subdue."
Indeed, the history of how the US came to be in a position to "capture and subdue" these
resources is a sordid, yet informative tale that by itself arguably even rivals other such
colonial adventures.
To capture and subdue
When a legitimate protest movement developed organically in Syria in early 2011, the US saw
an opportunity to destabilize, and potentially overthrow, the government of a country that had
long pushed back against its efforts for greater control in the region.
Syria had maintained itself outside of the orbit of US influence and had frustratingly
prevented American corporations from penetrating its economy to access its markets and
resources.
As the foremost academic expert on Middle East affairs, Christopher Davidson,
wrote in his seminal work, "Shadow Wars, The Secret Struggle for the Middle East,"
discussing both Syria and Libya's strategic importance, "the fact remained that these two
regimes, sitting astride vast natural resources and in command of key ports, rivers, and
borders, were still significant obstacles that had long frustrated the ambitions of Western
governments and their constituent corporations to gain greater access."
"
With Syria ," Davidson wrote, "having long proven antagonistic to Western interests a
golden opportunity had presented itself in 2011 to oust [this] administration once and for all
under the pretext of humanitarian and even democratic causes."
The US, therefore, began organizing and overseeing a militarization of the uprising
early on , and soon co-opted the movement along with allied states Turkey, Jordan, Saudi
Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar. Writing at the end of 2011, Columbia University's Joseph Massad
explained how there was no
longer any doubt that "the Syrian popular struggle for democracy [has] already been
hijacked," given that "the Arab League and imperial powers have taken over and assumed the
leadership of their struggle."
Soon, through the sponsoring of extremist elements, the insurgency was dominated by
Salafists of the al-Qaeda variety.
According to the DIA and the Joint
Chiefs of Staff , by 2013 "there was no viable 'moderate' opposition to Assad" and "the US
was arming extremists." Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh revealed that "although many in
the American intelligence community were aware that the Syrian opposition was dominated by
extremists," still "the CIA-sponsored weapons kept coming."
When ISIS split off from al-Qaeda and formed its own Caliphate, the US continued pumping
money and weapons into the insurgency, even though it was known that this aid was going into the
hands of ISIS and other jihadists. US allies directly supported
ISIS.
US officials admitted that they saw the rise of ISIS as a beneficial development that could
help pressure Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to give in to America's demands.
Leaked audio of then-Secretary of State John Kerry revealed that "we were watching and
we know that this [ISIS] was growing We saw that Daesh was growing in strength, and we thought
Assad was threatened. We thought, however, we could probably manage -- that Assad would then
negotiate." As ISIS was bearing down on the capital city of Damascus, the US was pressing Assad
to step down to a US-approved government.
Then, however, Russia intervened with its air force to prevent an ISIS takeover of the
country and shifted the balance of forces against the jihadist group. ISIS' viability as a tool
to pressure the government was spent.
The arsonist and the firefighter
So, a new strategy was implemented: instead of allowing Russia and Syria to take back the
territories that ISIS captured throughout the war, the US would use the ISIS threat as an
excuse to take those territories before they were able to. Like an arsonist who comes to put
out the fire, the US would now charge itself with the task of stamping out the Islamist scourge
and thereby legitimize its own seizure of Syrian land. The US partnered with the Kurdish
militias who acted as their "boots on the ground" in this endeavor and supported them with
airstrikes.
The strategy of how these areas were taken was very specific. It was designed primarily
to allow ISIS to escape and redirect itself back into the fight against Syria and Russia.
This was done through leaving "
an escape route for militants " or through deals that were made where ISIS voluntarily
agreed to cede its territory. The militants were then able to escape and go
wreak havoc against America's enemies in Syria.
Interestingly, in terms of the oil fields now being handed off to an American corporation,
the US barely even fought ISIS to gain control over them; ISIS simply handed them over .
Syria and Russia were quickly closing in on the then-ISIS controlled oilfields, so the US
oversaw a deal between the Kurds and ISIS to give up control of the city. According
to veteran Middle East war correspondent Elijah Magnier, "US-backed forces advanced in
north-eastern areas under ISIS control, with little or no military engagement: ISIS pulled out
from more than 28 villages and oil and gas fields east of the Euphrates River, surrendering
these to the Kurdish-US forces following an understanding these reached with the terrorist
group."
Sources quoted by the
Syrian Observatory for Human Rights claimed that ISIS preferred seeing the fields in the hands
of the US and the Kurds rather than the Syrian government.
The rationale behind this occupation
was best described by Syria expert Joshua Landis, who wrote that the areas of northern
Syria under control of the Kurds are the US' "main instrument in gaining leverage" over the
government. By "denying Damascus access to North Syria" and "controlling half of Syria's energy
resources" "the US will be able to keep Syria poor and under-resources." So, by "promoting
Kurdish nationalism in Syria" the US "hopes to deny Iran and Russia the fruits of their
victory," while "keeping Damascus weak and divided," this serving "no purpose other than to
stop trade" and to "beggar Assad and keep Syria divided, weak and poor."
Or, in the words of Jim Jeffrey, the Trump administrations special representative for Syria
who is charged with overseeing US policy, the intent is to "make life as miserable as possible
for that flopping cadaver of a regime and let the Russians and Iranians, who made this mess,
get out of it."
Anchoring American troops in Syria
This is the history by which an American firm was able to secure a contract to extract oil
in Syria. And while the actual resources gained will not be of much value (Syria has only 0.1%
of the world's oil reserves), the presence of an American company will likely serve as a
justification to maintain a US military presence in the region. "It is a fiendishly clever
maneuver aimed at anchoring American troops in Syria for a long time," Stephen Kinzer
explains , one that will aid the policymakers who hold "the view that the United States
must remain militarily dominant in the Middle East."
This analysis
corroborates the extensive scholarship of people like Mason Gaffney, professor of economics
emeritus at the University of California, who, writing in the American Journal of Economics and
Sociology, sums up his thesis that throughout its history "US military spending has been
largely devoted to protecting the overseas assets of multinational corporations that are based
in the United States The US military provides its services by supporting compliant political
leaders in developing countries and by punishing or deposing regimes that threaten the
interests of US-based corporations."
In essence, by protecting this "global 'sprawl' of extractive companies" the US Department
of Defense "provides a giant subsidy to companies operating overseas," one that is paid for by
the taxpayer, not the corporate beneficiaries. It is hard to estimate the exact amount of money
the US has invested into the Syria effort, though it likely is
near the trillion dollar figure . The US taxpayer doesn't get anything out of that, but
companies that are awarded oil contracts do.
What is perhaps most important about this lesson however is that this is just a singular
example of a common occurrence that happens all over the world. A primary function of US
foreign policy is to "
make the world safe for American businesses ," and the upwards of a thousand military bases
the US has stationed across the globe are set up to help protect those corporate investments.
While this history is unique to Syria, similar kinds of histories are responsible for US
corporation's extractive activities in other global arenas.
So, next time you see headlines about Exxon being in some kind of legal dispute with, say,
Venezuela, ask yourself how was it that those companies became involved with the resources of
that part of the world? More often than not, the answer will be similar to how this US company
got involved in Syria.
Given all of this, it perhaps might seem to be too mild of a critique to simply say that
this Syria enterprise harkens back to older imperial eras where conquerors simply took what
they wished: the sophistication of colonialism has indeed improved by leaps and bounds since
then.
https://www.facebook.com/v2.6/plugins/like.php?action=like&app_id=172525162793917&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df240e55f8864604%26domain%3Dronpaulinstitute.org%26origin%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fronpaulinstitute.org%252Ff31f7bfd9ea8e34%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&font=arial&height=25&href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ronpaulinstitute.org%2Farchives%2Ffeatured-articles%2F2020%2Faugust%2F27%2Fto-capture-and-subdue-america-s-theft-of-syrian-oil-has-very-little-to-do-with-money%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=false&share=false&show_faces=false&width=90
Related
The first and the most important fact that there will no elections in November -- both candidates represent the same oligarchy,
just slightly different factions of it.
Look like NYT is controlled by Bolton faction of CIA. They really want to overturn the
results of 2020 elections and using Russia as a bogeyman is a perfect opportunity to achieve this
goal.
Neocons understand very well that it is MIC who better their bread, so amplifying rumors the simplify getting additional budget
money for intelligence agencies (which are a part of MIC) is always the most desirable goal.
Notable quotes:
"... But a new assessment says China would prefer to see the president defeated, though it is not clear Beijing is doing much to meddle in the 2020 campaign to help Joseph R. Biden Jr. ..."
"... The statement then claims: "Ahead of the 2020 U.S. elections, foreign states will continue to use covert and overt influence measures in their attempts to sway U.S. voters' preferences and perspectives, shift U.S. policies, increase discord in the United States, and undermine the American people's confidence in our democratic process." ..."
"... But how do the 'intelligence' agencies know that foreign states want to "sway preferences", "increase discord" or "undermine confidence" in elections? ..."
"... But ascribing motive and intent is a tricky business, because perceived impact is often mistaken for true intent. [...] Where is the evidence that Russia actually wants to bring down the liberal world order and watch the United States burn? ..."
"... Well there is none. And that is why the 'intelligence' agencies do not present any evidence. ..."
"... Is there a secret policy paper by the Russian government that says it should "increase discord" in the United States? Is there some Chinese think tank report which says that undermining U.S. people's confidence in their democratic process would be good for China? ..."
"... If the 'intelligence' people have copies of those papers why not publish them? ..."
"... Let me guess. The 'intelligence' agencies have nothing, zero, nada. They are just making wild-ass guesses about 'intentions' of perceived enemies to impress the people who sign off their budget. ..."
"... Nowadays that seems to be their main purpose. ..."
But when one reads the piece itself one finds no fact that would support the 'Russia
Continues Interfering' statement:
Russia is using a range of techniques to denigrate Joseph R. Biden Jr., American intelligence
officials said Friday in their first public assessment that Moscow continues to try to
interfere in the 2020 campaign to help President Trump.
At the same time, the officials said China preferred that Mr. Trump be defeated in
November and was weighing whether to take more aggressive action in the election.
But officials briefed on the intelligence said that Russia was the far graver, and more
immediate, threat. While China seeks to gain influence in American politics, its leaders have
not yet decided to wade directly into the presidential contest, however much they may dislike
Mr. Trump, the officials said.
The assessment, included in a
statement released by William R. Evanina, the director of the National
Counterintelligence and Security Center, suggested the intelligence community was treading
carefully, reflecting the political heat generated by previous findings.
The authors emphasize the scaremongering hearsay from "officials briefed on the
intelligence" - i.e. Democratic congress members - about Russia but have nothing to back it
up.
When one reads the
statement by Evanina one finds nothing in it about Russian attempts to interfere in the
U.S. elections. Here is the only 'evidence' that is noted:
For example, pro-Russia Ukrainian parliamentarian Andriy Derkach is spreading claims about
corruption – including through publicizing leaked phone calls – to undermine
former Vice President Biden's candidacy and the Democratic Party. Some Kremlin-linked actors
are also seeking to boost President Trump's candidacy on social media and Russian television.
After a request from Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's personal attorney, a Ukrainian
parliamentarian published Ukrainian
evidence of Biden's very real interference in the Ukraine. Also: Some guest of a Russian TV
show had an opinion. How is either of those two items 'evidence' of Russian interference in
U.S. elections?
The statement then claims: "Ahead of the 2020 U.S. elections, foreign states will continue to use covert and overt
influence measures in their attempts to sway U.S. voters' preferences and perspectives, shift
U.S. policies, increase discord in the United States, and undermine the American people's
confidence in our democratic process."
But how do the 'intelligence' agencies know that foreign states want to "sway preferences",
"increase discord" or "undermine confidence" in elections?
The mainstream view in the U.S. media and government holds that the Kremlin is waging a
long-haul campaign to undermine and destabilize American democracy. Putin wants to see the
United States burn, and contentious elections offer a ready-made opportunity to fan the
flames.
But ascribing motive and intent is a tricky business, because perceived impact is often
mistaken for true intent. [...] Where is the evidence that Russia actually wants to bring
down the liberal world order and watch the United States burn?
Well there is none. And that is why the 'intelligence' agencies do not present any
evidence.
Even the NYT writers have to
admit that there is nothing there:
The release on Friday was short on specifics, ...
and
Intelligence agencies focus their work on the intentions of foreign governments, and steer
clear of assessing if those efforts have had an effect on American voters.
How do 'intelligence' agencies know Russian, Chinese or Iranian 'intentions'. Is there a
secret policy paper by the Russian government that says it should "increase discord" in the
United States? Is there some Chinese think tank report which says that undermining U.S.
people's confidence in their democratic process would be good for China?
If the 'intelligence' people have copies of those papers why not publish them?
Let me guess. The 'intelligence' agencies have nothing, zero, nada. They are just making
wild-ass guesses about 'intentions' of perceived enemies to impress the people who sign off
their budget.
Nowadays that seems to be their main purpose.
Posted by b on August 8, 2020 at 18:08 UTC |
Permalink
"There's no difference between John Bolton, Brian Hook or Elliott Abrams," Iranian Foreign
Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi said in
a tweet with the hashtag #BankruptUSPolicy on Friday.
"When U.S. policy concerns Iran, American officials have been biting off more than they can
chew. This applies to Mike Pompeo, Donald Trump and their successors," Mousavi added.
Indeed in perhaps one of the greatest symbols or representations of the contradictions and
absurdity inherent in US foreign policy of the past few decades, and a supreme irony that can't
be emphasized enough: the new US envoy to Iran who will oversee Pompeo's 'maximum pressure'
campaign remains the most publicly visible face of the 1980's Iran-Contra affair .
Elliott Abrams has been named to the position after Brian Hook stepping down. This means the
man who will continue to push for the extension of a UN arms embargo against Iran once himself
was deeply involved in illegally selling weapons to Iran and covering it up .
Most famously, or we should say infamously, Abrams pleaded guilty to lying to Congress in
1991 following years of the Iran-Contra scandal engulfing the Reagan administration; however,
he was also pardoned by outgoing president George H.W. Bush at around the same time.
"Pardoned by George H.W. Bush in 1992, Abrams was a pivotal figure in the foreign-policy
scandal that shook the Reagan administration, lying to Congress about his knowledge of the plot
to covertly sell weapons to the Khomeini government and use the proceeds to illegally fund the
right-wing Contras rebel group in Nicaragua ,"
NY Mag reviews.
Some are noting this heightens the chances that Washington could get dragged into a war
involving Israel and Iran.
Recall too that Abrams has been Trump's point man for ousting Maduro from Venezuela, and it
appears he'll remain in the post of special envoy for Venezuela as well.
https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1291783763945574402&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fmarkets%2Fno-difference-between-john-bolton-brian-hook-or-elliott-abrams-iran-fm&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=223fc1c4%3A1596143124634&width=550px
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
The Grayzone journalist, Anya Parampil, who has frequently reported from Venezuela, alleged
this week that Abrams will "try and destroy Venezuela and Iran at the same time".
https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=4879&num_ads=18&cf=1258.5.zerohedge%20190919&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fmarkets%2Fno-difference-between-john-bolton-brian-hook-or-elliott-abrams-iran-fm Wild Bill Steamcock , 14 hours ago
Abrams is a disgrace. This Administration should be dying in it's own shame bringing this
swine back into government.
He's a leach. He's about lining his own pockets. He can't even own a .22 single shot, yet
he's shaping international policy.
This country is dead. And the fact Trump has democrat and zionist Kushner as advisor,
bringing in guys like Bolton and Abrams, Reince Priebus, H.R. McMaster and that Ukranian pet
goblin of his, in not firing Comey et. al day 1 means he's not the answer. Face it.
And to be fair, it doesn't matter anymore who is POTUS. It hasn't really mattered in quite
some time. The Plan rolls along.
Kinskian , 15 hours ago
Trump is a clumsy and transparent Zionist stooge.
PT , 14 hours ago
Gotta admit, if you're going to have a Zionist stooge then you are better off having a
clumsy and transparent one.
Dank fur Kopf , 14 hours ago
Elliott Abrams is a moron. He's been running the exact same stupid coup strategy for
decades, and can't conceive of a world where the enemy has worked out how to defeat that.
Venezuela was set to be US foreign policies most embarrassing failure--but maybe Iran will
be worse.
Dank fur Kopf , 14 hours ago
Let's predict what Abrams will attempt:
Running out of the US/UK embassies, Abrams will attempt to identify a potential
alternative leader who is corrupt and controllable. They'll throw political support behind
this false leader, and try and find enough military to support him. Then, protests in the
streets, and the small faction of the military--supported by foreign forces--will attempt to
establish control.
Counter: China and Russia will import anti-coup specialists. Individuals in the Iranian
military will pretend to be on board claiming to have thousands at call, and when the false
leader gives the call, they won't answer. All the conspirators will be caught out on the
street, and have to flee to embassies for political asylum. Like what happened in Venezuela
recently, and Turkey in 2016. This will allow Iran to do a purge of all the real threats
(remembering that Iran has the death penalty for sedition), and give them enough
justification to end diplomatic missions in the country that are being used as launch
pads.
I put these comments on the open thread about the same time b started this one
https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1289724554982629377
The Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria signed a deal to market oil to
US-based Delta Crescent Energy LLC "with the knowledge and encouragement of the White
House."
Trump a few months back "We've kept the oil". Well, he hasn't had a problem hanging onto
it and getting an American company involved.
The Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria signed a deal to market oil
to US-based Delta Crescent Energy LLC "with the knowledge and encouragement of the White
House."
Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 2 2020 14:35 utc | 2
Very likely the Kurds were under pressure from Trump, and the act wasn't voluntary. It's
not even the Kurds' oil to sign a deal on (except one well). We'll see whether the
operation actually succeeds. At the moment, everybody is waiting to see whether Trump is
re-elected in November. Signing a piece of paper now is of no significance.
Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 1 2020 16:47 utc | 121 The United States will not use or
threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons
states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation
obligations.
Which is precisely my point: the US had to say this because if they did it the
geopolitical heat would be to great.
I've had further thoughts:
1) The only reason the US hasn't attacked Syria is because Putin out-maneuvered the US six
times: 3 times in the UNSC and 3 times on the ground during Obama. The third time Russia
explicitly said that anyone attacking Syrian military would be shot down. The reason that
held was because Russia troops were *already* on the ground in Syria with the capability to
do just that. Obama recognized that was a non-starter for him and he backed down from his
contemplated "no-fly zone".
And when Trump launched his cruise missiles, that's exactly what Russia did - they used
their ECM to degrade or down most of those missiles.
2) Now, if Putin were to figure out some way to *actually* threaten the US with nuclear
retaliation - whether directly or *implied* (more so than anything you've quoted so far),
that might actually work as a deterrent. The best way to do that would be what Putin did in
Syria - put Russian boots on the ground. If Putin could work a deal with Iran that put a
significant number of Russian forces on the ground inside Iran, thus making any US or Israeli
attack on important Iranian assets an attack on Russian forces, that would likely be a
deterrent.
The problem is that Iran didn't even want Russian planes based in Iran for use in Syria
(except one time IIRC). No country wants someone else's military inside their borders,
especially in large numbers, so Iran is unlikely to agree to basing large numbers of Russian
troops inside Iran. A few nuclear technicians wouldn't be enough of a deterrent - it would
require significant Russian assets. I don't see it happening, but it is possible.
3) Putin's responses to the US Nuclear Posture Review relate to Russia and the former
Soviet states. Apparently no one can figure out that the word "ally" has more significant
meanings depending on context, and as I've said before, nothing Putin has said has put that
context in military alliance terms with regard to Iran.
4) Apparently, as US and Israeli provocations against Iran continue to grow, signaling a
continuing intent to get a war started, everyone's cognitive dissonance has apparently grown
with it, so now everyone is hiding behind the notion that Putin will launch WWIII over Iran
as an excuse to believe that an Iran war is "impossible".
Dream on. We'll see. As I've said elsewhere many times, once the Iran war starts, I expect
to see abject apologies from everyone who doubted the possibility.
"... Perhaps he was even the initiator of the White Helmets? My take away from those reports is that Cummings and Johnson have commenced a transition strategy within the UK and that the future of Integrity Initiative and its bogan crew may be limited. ..."
"... They have also restrained the MI6 manipulators that would conspire and contrive the overt 'Hate Russia' policy. Not that Bojo and Cummings will necessarily change anything other than a superficial rearrangement in their favour (for a month or two anyway). ..."
"... Caitlin Johnston has recently posted an astute analysis of the current distraction politics and why we should not be distracted by Covid19 rants from seeing the immediate rendition of the great game. ..."
"... I guess the UK will be less overt re Russia but expect the Libyan war to escalate as UKUSAI use Turkey in Libya to push back against Russia and even Sisi in Egypt. ..."
"... The UK could stage yet another 'Suez incident' with this mendacious confluence of opportunities. ..."
"... The USA has become the patsy for these thugs, when will they rise? ..."
Thank you for those John Helmer reports. I note that the new head of MI6 is a lover of all
fine Turkish things including Erdoghan. "Richard Moore, currently a third-ranking official of
the Foreign Office, an ex-Ambassador to Turkey; an ex-MI6 agent; and a Harvard graduate".
Perhaps he was even the initiator of the White Helmets? My take away from those reports is
that Cummings and Johnson have commenced a transition strategy within the UK and that the
future of Integrity Initiative and its bogan crew may be limited.
They have also restrained
the MI6 manipulators that would conspire and contrive the overt 'Hate Russia' policy. Not
that Bojo and Cummings will necessarily change anything other than a superficial
rearrangement in their favour (for a month or two anyway).
AtaBrit #9 includes an excellent link to a National Interest report on Turkey and is worth
the read in this context of the rise and rise of Richard Moore. Thank you AtaBrit.
I guess the UK will be less overt re Russia but expect the Libyan war to escalate as
UKUSAI use Turkey in Libya to push back against Russia and even Sisi in Egypt. They have a
willing US president now and likely continuing in the next few years (be it Trump or Biden).
The UK could stage yet another 'Suez incident' with this mendacious confluence of
opportunities.
The USA has become the patsy for these thugs, when will they rise?
The joint Russian-Turkish patrol set to be held in southern Idlib on July 29 was delayed due
to increased military tensions and the inability of Ankara to ensure the security of the patrol
in its area of responsibility. And the situation does not seem to be improving.
According to pro-militant sources, on the evening of July 29th and morning of July 30th, the
Syrian Army launched over 500 shells at militants' positions in the Zawiya Mount area,
including Kansafra, al-Bara, Kafar Aweed, Fatterah and Erinah. In response, Hayat Tahrir
al-Sham and its allies struck Syrian Army checkpoints at Kafr Nabl, As Safa, Hakoura and in
nearby areas.
In the last few days, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the Turkistan Islamic Party reinforced their
positions on the contact line with the Syrian Army, south of the M4 highway. Their forces
reportedly remain on high alert. Pro-government sources say that the inability of Ankara to
secure another joint patrol in southern Idlib is a signal that the militants are preparing for
offensive actions there.
Meanwhile, the Syrian Army uncovered a hideout that had been used by militants working as
organ traders in the village of al-Ghadfah in southern Idlib. According to Syria's state-run
news agency SANA, government forces found human organs, including hearts, livers and heads in
the hideout. The organs were preserved in jars with chloroform. The jars carried the names of
the victims. Personal IDs of the victims, men and women, were also found in the hideout.
The hideout included a room designated for religious studies with radical ideological
publications. This indicates that the site had belonged to one of the multiple militant groups
that still operate in Greater Idlib thanks to the Turkish opposition to counter-terrorism
operations there.
Al-Ghadfah is located in the vicinity of the city of Maarat al-Numan and for a long time it
has been controlled by Turkey's main partner in Idlib – Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. The town
was liberated by the Syrian Army and its allies in January 2020.
Lt. Sharif al-Nazzal of the Syrian Military Intelligence Directorate (MID) was assassinated
in the town of Sahem al-Golan in western Daraa on July 29. The lieutenant was with another
intelligence officer known as "Abu Haider", when they were attacked by unidentified gunmen.
Both officers were shot dead on the spot.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Opposition sources claimed that al-Nazzal, a native of Sahem al-Golan, was close to
Lebanon's Hezbollah and Iranian forces. The officer headed a detachment of the MID in the
western Daraa countryside. No group has claimed responsibility for the assassination.
Nonetheless, in previous stages of the conflict Israel was extensively supporting militant
groups in southern Syria. It is possible that Tel Aviv may have access to cells of these groups
for support with particular operations.
Two members of the US-backed Revolutionary Commando Army militant group based in al-Tanf
were detained by the Syrian Army near the US-controlled zone. The detained persons were moving
on a motorcycle and possessed assault rifles and night-vision goggles. They were reportedly
involved in an information gathering operation about civilian and military facilities in the
Homs desert.
In the past, Damascus has repeatedly claimed that the US was planning to use its proxies in
al-Tanf for destabilizing operations in the government-controlled area.
Executed Turkish general exposed misuse of Qatari funds for Syria extremists: Report Semih Terzi, a general within the Turkish army, was executed on the night of the 2016
Turkish coup attempt against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. (Photo via the
stockholmcf) Ismaeel Naar, Al Arabiya English Friday 31 July 2020 Text size A A A
The Turkish army executed a senior general within its ranks after he had discovered the
embezzlement of illicit Qatari funding for extremists in Syria by public officials, according
to a 2019 court testimony unveiled in a report by the Nordic Monitor.
Semih Terzi, a general within the Turkish army, was executed on the night of the 2016
Turkish coup attempt against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
The new allegations unveiled in court testimonies from a hearing March 20, 2019at Ankara
17th High Criminal Court were made by Col. Fırat Alakuş, an army officer working
within Turkey's Special Forces Command's intelligence section.
According to the Nordic Monitor, Terzi is said to have been executed after discovering that
Lt. Gen. Zekai Aksakallı, in charge of the Special Forces Command at the time, was working
covertly with Turkey's National Intelligence Organization (MIT) "in running illegal and
clandestine operations in Syria for personal gain while dragging Turkey deeper into the Syrian
civil war."
"[Terzi] knew how much of the funding delivered [to Turkey] by Qatar for the purpose of
purchasing weapons and ammunition for the opposition was actually used for that and how much of
it was actually used by public officials, how much was embezzled," Col. Alakuş was quoted
as saying by the Nordic Monitor via his court testimony.
The Nordic Monitor said in its report published on Friday that Alakuş testified that
Aksakallı had run a gang outside of the chain of command within the Turkish intelligence
that was involved in illicit activities.
The report further alleged that Terzi was aware of public officials involved in
oil-smuggling operations with ISIS from Syria.
"[Terzi] was aware of who in the government was involved in an oil-smuggling operation from
Syria, how the profits were shared, and what activities they were involved in," Alakuş
said in his testimony.
Ambassador John Bolton hinted that he doesn't like being called a hawk, since foreign policy labels are simplistic.
But first of all, he labeled libertarian Sen. Rand Paul an isolationist, rather than say, a non- interventionist. And after
nearly 500 pages (all but the epilogue), what you will absorb is absolutely the worldview of a geopolitical hawk. He is not technically
a neoconservative (like, say, Paul Wolfowitz) because the latter were more focused on nation building and spreading democracy.
Bolton sees what he's promoting as defense, but it requires a constant offense.
Bolton is very bright, as Jim Baker noted decades ago, and very well-read, even endorsing his fellow Baltimorean and my teacher
Steve Vicchio's book on Lincoln's faith. But his intelligence is all put into an ideological reading of situations. As Aristotle
would put it, the problem is not lack of theoretical wisdom, but the deficiency in practical wisdom and prudential judgment. Certainly
there are bad actors in the world, and vigilance is required. But when is aggressive action called for, and when is it better
to go with diplomacy? In this book, I find few cases of such restraint. For Bolton, it seems that the goal of peace and security
requires the constant threat of war and presence on every continent. All this intervention around the world requires troops, soldiers,
real men and women and their lives and those of their families, requiring lots of sacrifice. At times, his theorizing seems distant
from these realities on the ground.
So Bolton is critical of the "axis of adults" in the Trump administration, the "generals", but not Kelly and not much on his
predecessor McMaster, much less the eccentric Flynn. So his beef is with Mattis, another fine student of history. Bolton says
he went by the rules, as James Baker had said that Bush 41 was "the one who got the votes". He tried to influence Trump within
the rules, while Mattis, Tillerson and Haley pursued their own foreign policy. I'm sure that Mattis was sometimes right and sometimes
wrong, but I would trust his prudential judgment above that of the equally bright Bolton, because of his life experience, being
the one on the ground and knowing what war is like.
When Bolton was considered for secretary state right after the 2016 election, I said, well I don't care for the guy, but at
least I've heard of him and we know what we're dealing with. His opponent in GOP foreign policy is the libertarian and non-interventionist
Sen. Rand Paul. What does Bolton say about the big players in the Trump administration? Nikki Haley is dismissed as a lightweight
who was posing for her political future. Well, that's basically what Trump, "the one that got the votes", put her there for. But
it's interesting that Bolton is so anti-Haley, when she was for Rubio and the more hawkish platform.
Tillerson's successor Mike Pompeo had sort of a love-hate relationship with Bolton.
Steve Mnuchin is the epitome of the globalist establishment, along with Javanka. Jared Kushner is dismissed as no Kissinger,
but when it comes to China, his soft stance is blamed on Kissinger! While Bolton didn't testify in the impeachment, Fiona Hill
is mentioned only with respect in this book.
Everybody's flaw, from Bolton's point of view, is being less belligerent than Bolton. (Even in the Bush administration, the
only name I can think of would be Michael Ledeen). He even defends the concept of Middle Eastern "endless wars" on the grounds
that we didn't start them and can't dictate when they end. Obama was a dove, but in 2016 the GOP marked a shift, with Trump, Paul,
Ben Carson and even Ted Cruz opposing the "invade every country on earth" philosophy that this book promotes. It's true that Trump
is not an ideologue and thinks in terms of individual transactions. But the movement I see is a dialectic of alternating between
aggression and diplomacy, or as he sees it, friendly relationship among leaders.
Bolton is a superhawk on North Korea and Iran throughout, while China and Russia are our hostile rivals. Other matters are
Syria, Iraq and ISIS, Venezuela, Afghanistan and finally Ukraine, which by the end of the book I had almost forgotten. If Bolton
is dovish anywhere, it's on the Saudis, the rivals with Iran in the Sunni-Shiite dispute chronicled recently in the book "Black
Wave".
You can learn a lot from this book, but just keep in mind that it's filtered through the mind of a strong ideologue, so other
people's faults are seen through that lens. But he has great knowledge of the details of policy. Bolton would like to be an inter-generational
guru like Henry Kissinger or Dean Acheson, but both parties have turned away from the "endless wars" philosophy.
If you are looking for anti-Trump material, I don't really see the point of investing this time and intellectual effort. The
more sensational parts have been reported-the exchanges involving Xi Jinping and Kim Jong Un, and to a lesser extent Erdogan.
As most reviewers have said, it's about 100 pages too long, but Bolton is looking for a scholarly work like Kissinger's Diplomacy
or World Order, and this is the one that he hopes people will read.
John Bolton, on some fundamental level, is a brilliant, dedicated conservative intent on improving the future of the country
he and I love. THAT similarity is probably the only point we share.
I wanted to love this book, because I knew it would be jam-packed with juicy tidbits that justify me derision of the biggest
failure ever to assume the office of POTUS. Instead, quite early on, I realized the reason Trump became President was the enormous
ineptitude of those otherwise brilliant people who, in short, simply felt that somebody opposing those the person they despise,
on principle, was better for America than the other guy or gal.
Throughout this book, Bolton reminds us of Trump's inability to focus attention on the information provided by his handlers.
Yes, Trump is naive and intellectually lazy. Yes, so, too, are many of those aiding and abetting Mr. Trump. But, yes, Mr. Bolton
also suffers from gross naďveté, and, is just plain foolish. His ego led him to join the Trump Administration, as he admits in
"The Room Where It Happened."
Bolton's greatest error, however, was in refusing to tell the country what he chose to sell to the public through this book.
The writing is, mechanically, quite good. But, Bolton comes across as thinking he is the only person of intelligence. That
becomes clear by page two, and never changes, except for his insight that he was wrong about Trump.
Unfortunately, Bolton also was wrong about Bolton.
Whoa. Hold on. Just about everyone in both political parties is no better than Bolton. A few exceptions would be Former governor
John Kasick and Utah Senator Mitt Romney. Oh, and former Vice President Joe Biden, I believe. Yet, to be honest, I need to see
him prove me right. I would hate to make the same mistake regarding Biden as Bolton did regarding Trump.
Americans need to take a good, hard look at how we are governed and at those whom we support.
BOTTOM LINE
Writing quality, passable. But don't expect to gain a great deal of new knowledge.
Turkey is currently involved in quite a few international military conflicts -- both against
its own neighbors such as Greece, Armenia, Iraq, Syria and Cyprus, and against other nations
such as Libya and Yemen. These actions by Turkey suggest that Turkey's foreign policy is
increasingly destabilizing not only several nations, but the region as well.
In addition, the Erdogan regime has been militarily targeting Syria and Iraq, sending its
Syrian mercenaries to Libya to seize Libyan oil and continuing, as usual, to bully Greece.
Turkey's regime is also now provoking ongoing violence between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.398.1_en.html#goog_1565758762 NOW PLAYING
Erdogan leads first Muslim prayer after Hagia Sophia mosque reconversion
Istanbul's Hagia Sophia reconversion to a mosque, 'provocation to civilised world', Greece
says
Turkish top court revokes Hagia Sophia's museum status, 'tourists should still be allowed
in'
Erdogan: Interference over Hagia Sophia 'direct attack on our sovereignty'
Libya's GNA says Egypt's warning on Sirte offensive a 'declaration of war'
Erdogan says 'agreements' reached with Trump on Libya
What Turkish Election Results Mean for the Lira
Erdogan Sparks Democracy Concerns in Push for Istanbul Vote Rerun
Since July 12, Azerbaijan has launched a series of cross-border attacks against Armenia's
northern Tavush region in skirmishes that have resulted
in the deaths of at least four Armenian soldiers and 12 Azerbaijani ones. After Azerbaijan
threatened to launch missile attacks on Armenia's Metsamor nuclear plant on July 16, Turkey
offered military assistance to Azerbaijan.
"Our armed unmanned aerial vehicles, ammunition and missiles with our experience, technology
and capabilities are at Azerbaijan's service,"
said İsmail Demir, the head of Presidency of Defense Industries, an affiliate of the
Turkish Presidency.
One of Turkey's main targets also seems to be Greece. The Turkish military is targeting
Greek territorial waters yet again. The Greek newspaper Kathimerini
reported :
"There have been concerns over a possible Turkish intervention in the East Med in a bid to
prevent an agreement on the delineation of an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) between Greece
and Egypt which is currently being discussed between officials of the two countries."
Turkey's choice of names for its gas exploration ships are also a giveaway. The name of the
main ship that Turkey is using for seismic "surveys" of the Greek continental shelf is
Oruç Reis , (1474-1518), an admiral of the Ottoman Empire who often raided the
coasts of Italy and the islands of the Mediterranean that were still controlled by Christian
powers. Other exploration and drilling vessels Turkey uses or is planning to use in Greece's
territorial waters are named after Ottoman sultans who targeted Cyprus and Greece in bloody
military invasions. These include the drilling ship
Fatih "the conqueror" or Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II, who invaded Constantinople in 1453; the
drilling ship
Yavuz , "the resolute", or Sultan Selim I, who headed the Ottoman Empire during the
invasion of Cyprus in 1571; and
Kanuni , "the lawgiver" or Sultan Suleiman, who invaded parts of eastern Europe as well as
the Greek island of Rhodes.
Turkey's move in the Eastern Mediterranean came in early July, shortly after the country had
turned Hagia Sophia, once the world's greatest Greek Cathedral, into a mosque. Turkish
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan then
linked Hagia Sophia's conversion to a pledge to "liberate the Al-Aqsa Mosque" in
Jerusalem.
On July 21, the tensions arose again following Turkey's announcement that it plans to
conduct seismic research in parts of the Greek continental shelf in an area of sea between
Cyprus and Crete in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean.
"Turkey's plan is seen in Athens as a dangerous escalation in the Eastern Mediterranean,
prompting Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis to warn that European Union sanctions could follow
if Ankara continues to challenge Greek sovereignty," Kathimerini
reported on July 21.
Here is a short list of other countries where Turkey is also militarily involved:
In Libya , Turkey has been increasingly involved in the country's civil war. Associated
Press reported on July 18:
"Turkey sent between 3,500 and 3,800 paid Syrian fighters to Libya over the first three
months of the year, the U.S. Defense Department's inspector general concluded in a new
report, its first to detail Turkish deployments that helped change the course of Libya's
war.
"The report comes as the conflict in oil-rich Libya has escalated into a regional proxy
war fueled by foreign powers pouring weapons and mercenaries into the country."
Libya has been in turmoil since 2011, when an armed revolt during the "Arab Spring" led to
the ouster and murder of dictator Muammar Gaddafi. Political power in the country, the current
population of which is around 6.5 million, has been split
between two rival governments. The UN-backed Government of National Accord (GNA), has been led
by Prime Minister Fayez al Sarraj. Its rival, the Libyan National Army (LNA), has been led by
Libyan military officer, Khalifa Haftar.
Backed by Turkey, the GNA
said on July 18 that it would recapture Sirte, a gateway to Libya's main oil terminals, as
well as an LNA airbase at Jufra.
Egypt, which backs the LNA,
announced , however, that if the GNA and Turkish forces tried to seize Sirte, it would send
troops into Libya. On July 20, the Egyptian parliament
gave approval to a possible deployment of troops beyond its borders "to defend Egyptian
national security against criminal armed militias and foreign terrorist elements."
Yemen is another country on which Turkey has apparently set its sights. In a recent video ,
Turkey-backed Syrian mercenaries fighting on behalf of the GNA in Libya, and aided by local
Islamist groups, are seen saying, "We are just getting started. The target is going to be
Gaza." They also state that they want to take on Egyptian President Sisi and to go to
Yemen.
"Turkey's growing presence in Yemen," The Arab Weekly reported
on May 9, "especially in the restive southern region, is fuelling concern across the region
over security in the Gulf of Aden and the Bab al-Mandeb.
"These concerns are further heightened by reports indicating that Turkey's agenda in Yemen
is being financed and supported by Qatar via some Yemeni political and tribal figures
affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood."
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
In Syria , Turkey-backed jihadists continue occupying the northern parts of the country. On
July 21, Erdogan
announced that Turkey's military presence in Syria would continue. "Nowadays they are
holding an election, a so-called election," Erdogan said of a parliamentary election on July 19
in Syria's government-controlled regions, after nearly a decade of civil war. "Until the Syrian
people are free, peaceful and safe, we will remain in this country."
Additionally, Turkey's incursion into the Syrian city of Afrin, created a particularly grim
situation for the local Yazidi population:
"As a result of the Turkish incursion to Afrin," the Yazda organization
reported on May 29, "thousands of Yazidis have fled from 22 villages they inhabited prior
to the conflict into other parts of Syria, or have migrated to Lebanon, Europe, or the
Kurdistan Region of Iraq... "
"Due to their religious identity, Yazidis in Afrin are suffering from targeted harassment
and persecution by Turkish-backed militant groups. Crimes committed against Yazidis include
forced conversion to Islam, rape of women and girls, humiliation and torture, arbitrary
incarceration, and forced displacement. The United States Commission on International
Religious Freedom (USCIRF) in its 2020 annual report confirmed that Yazidis and Christians
face persecution and marginalization in Afrin.
"Additionally, nearly 80 percent of Yazidi religious sites in Syria have been looted,
desecrated, or destroyed, and Yazidi cemeteries have been defiled and bulldozed."
In Iraq , Turkey has been carrying out military operations for years. The last one was
started in mid-June. Turkey's Defense Ministry
announced on June 17 that the country had "launched a military operation against the PKK"
(Kurdistan Workers' Party) in northern Iraq after carrying out a series of airstrikes. Turkey
has named its assaults "Operation Claw-Eagle" and "Operation Claw-Tiger".
The Yazidi, Assyrian
Christian and Kurdish
civilians have been terrorized by the bombings. At least five civilians have been killed in
the air raids, according to
media reports . Human Rights Watch has also issued a
report , noting that a Turkish airstrike in Iraq "disregards civilian loss."
Given Turkey's military aggression in Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Armenia, among others, and its
continued occupation of northern Cyprus, further aggression, especially against Greece, would
not be unrealistic. Turkey's desire to invade Greece is not exactly a secret. Since at least
2018, both the Turkish government and opposition parties have openly been calling
for capturing the Greek islands in the Aegean, which they falsely claim belong to
Turkey.
If such an attack took place, would the West abandon Greece?
Gaius Konstantine , 10 hours ago
If such an attack took place, it will get real messy, real fast. The Turkish military is
only partially adept at fighting irregular forces that lack heavy weaponry while Turkey has
absolute control of the sky. Even then, the recent performance of Turkish forces has been
lacklustre for "the 2nd largest Army in NATO".
Turkey should understand that a fight with Greece will mean that the advantages she
enjoyed in her recent adventures will not be there. Nor should Turkey look to the past and
expect an easy victory, the Greek Army will not be marching deep into Anatolia this time,
(which was the wrong type of war for Greece).
So what happens if they actually take it to war?
The larger Greek islands are well defended, they won't be taken, but defending the smaller
ones is hard and Turkey will probably grab some of those. The Greeks, who have absolute
control and dominance in the Aegean will do several things. Turkish naval and air bases along
the Aegean coastline will be attacked as will the bosphorus bridges, (those bridges WILL go
down). The Greek army, which is positioned well, will blitz into eastern Thrace and stop
outside Istanbul where they will dig in and shell the city, thereby causing the civilians to
flee and clogging up the tunnels to restrict military re-enforcement.
That's Greece acting alone, a position will be achieved where any captured islands will be
traded for eastern Thrace. Should the French intervene, (even if it's just air and naval
forces), it gets a lot more interesting.
The mighty Turkish fleet was just met by the entire Greek navy in the latest stand-off, it
was enough to cause Turkey to reconsider her options. There will be no Ottoman empire 2.0
OliverAnd , 9 hours ago
The Greeks need their navy for surgically precise attacks against Turkey's navy. Every
island, especially the large ones are unsinkable aircraft carriers. No one has mentioned in
any article that Turkey's navy is functioning with less than minimum required personnel. No
one has mentioned that their air force is flying with Pakistani pilots. The only way Turks
will land on Greek uninhabited islands is only if they are ship wrecked and that for a very
very short period of time. Turkey's population is composed of 25% Kurds... that will also be
very interesting to see once they awaken from their hibernation and realize their great and
holy goal of Kurdistan. Egypt will not waste the opportunity to join in to devastate whatever
Turkish navy remains. Serbian patriots will not allow the opportunity to go to waste and will
attack Kosovo and indirectly Albania composed primarily of Turkish descendants... realize the
coverage lately of how the US did wrong for supporting these degenerate Muslim
Albanians.
I have no doubt Greeks will make it to Aghia Sophia but will not pass Bosporus. The result
will be a Treaty that is a hybrid of the Treaty of Lausanne and the Treaty of Sevron. If the
Albanians decide to support the Turks by attacking Greeks in the North and in Northern
Epeirus they should expect annexation of Northern Epeirus to Greece. Erdogan bases his
bullying on Trump's incompetences and false friendship. This is why America is non existent
in any of these regions. If Trump wins the election it will be a long war and very
destabilized for the region. If Trump loses the war will be much much quicker. The outcome
will remain the same. The Russians will not allow Turkey to dictate in the area. Israel will
not allow Turkey to dictate in the area. Egypt will not allow Turkey to dictate in the area.
Not even European Union. UK is the questionable.
The West has Turkey's back otherwise the Turkish currency the Turkish Lira would have
collapsed by now under attacks from the City of London Freemasonic Talmudic bankers.
Remember what happened to the Russian Rouble when Russia annexed Crimea?
The Fed and the ECB in cahoots with the usual Talmudic interests, are supporting the
Turkish Lira and propping up the Erdogan regime.
There is NO OTHER explanation.
The Turks have NO foreign currency reserves, no net positive euro nor dollar reserves.
Their tourism industry and main hard currency generator has COLLAPSED (hotels are 95 percent
empty). The Turkish central bank has resorted to STEALING Turkish citizens'
dollar-denominated bank accounts via raising Turkish Banks' foreign currency reserve
requirements which the Turkish central bank SPENDS upon receipt to buy TLs and prop up the
Turkish Lira.
This is utter MADNESS and FRAUD and LARCENY.
London-based currency traders would be all over the Turkish Lira and/or Turkish bonds and
stocks by now UNLESS they had been instructed by the Fed and the ECB or the Talmudic bankers
that own and control both, to lay off the Turkish Lira.
Despite the noise on TV or the press,
BY DEFINITION,
Erdogan and the Turks are only doing the bidding of the TRIBE hence Erdogan has the
blessing and the protection of the people ZH censors the name.
BUT
You know how those parasites treat their host and what the inevitable outcome is,
right?
Indeed,
Erdogan and the Turks are being set up to be thrown under the proverbial bus at the
appropriate time.
The Neo-Ottoman Sultan has inadvertently set up his (ill begotten) country for eventual
destruction and partition. The Kurds will get a piece of it. Who knows, maybe even the
Armenians will be able to recover some bits of their ancient homeland.
Greeks in Constantinople? Nothing is impossible thanks to the hubris and chutzpah of
Erdogan who is purported to have "Amish" blood himself.
Know thyself , 5 hours ago
Good for the UK that they have left the EU.
Apart from the Greeks, who would be fighting for their lives and homeland, the only EU
forces capable of acting are the French. German does not have an operative army or navy;
Italy, Spain and Portugal have neglected their armed forces for many years, and the Baltic
and Eastern Nations are unlikely to want to get involved. The Netherlands have very good
forces but not many of them.
MPJones , 7 hours ago
We can live in hope. Erdogan certainly seems to need external enemies to hold the country
together. Let us also hope that Erdogan's adventurism finally wakes up Europe to the reality
of the ongoing Muslim invasion so that the necessary Muslim repatriation can get going
without the bloodshed which Islam's current strategy in Europe will otherwise inevitably lead
to.
Know thyself , 5 hours ago
The Turkish army is a conscript army. They will need to be whipped up with religious
fervour to perform. Otherwise they will look after their own skins.
But remember that the Turks put up a good defence in the Dardanelles in the First World
War.
HorseBuggy , 9 hours ago
What do you expect? He killed Russian fighter pilots and he survived, this empowers
terrorists like him. Those pilots were the only ones at that time fighting ISIS. May they
RIP.
Max.Power , 9 hours ago
Turkey is in a "proud" group of failed empires surrounded by nations they severely abused
less than 100 years ago.
Other two are Germany and Japan. Any military aggression from their side will be met with
rage by a coalition of nations.
US position will be irrelevant at this point, because local historical grievances will
overweight anything else.
monty42 , 10 hours ago
"Libya has been in turmoil since 2011, when an armed revolt during the "Arab Spring" led
to the ouster and murder of dictator Muammar Gaddafi. Political power in the country..."
Kinda gave yourself away there. The coordinated assault on Libya by the US, Britain,
France, and their Al-CiA-da allies on the ground resulted in the torture, sodomizing, and
murder of Gaddafi, as well as his son and grandchildren killed in bombings by the US.
Also, let's not forget that Turkey is still in NATO, and their actions in Syria were
alongside the US regime and terrorist proxies labeled "moderate rebels". The same terrorists
originally used in Libya, then shipped to destroy Syria, now flown back to Libya. The attempt
to paint all of those things as Turkey's actions alone is not honest.
When Turkey isn't in NATO anymore, let me know.
TheZeitgeist , 10 hours ago
Don't forget that Hiftar guy Turks are fighting in Libya was a CIA toadie living in
Virginia for a decade before they gave him his "chance" to among other things become a client
of the Russians apparently. Flustercluck of the 1st order everywhere one looks.
monty42 , 10 hours ago
Then they put on this whole production where it's the CIA guy or the terrorist puppet
regime they installed, so that the rulers win regardless of the outcome. The victims are
those caught up in their sick game.
GalustGulbenkyan , 9 hours ago
Turkish population has been recently getting ****** due to the economic contractions and
devaluation of the Lira. Once Turkey starts fighting against a real army the Turks will
realize that they are going to be ****** by larger dildos. In 1990's they sent thousands of
volunteers to Nagorno Karabagh to fight against irregular Armenian forces and we know how
that ended for them. Greeks and Egyptians are not the Kurds. Erdogan is a lot of hot air and
empty threats. You can't win wars with Modern drones which even Armenians have learned how to
jam and shoot down with old 1970's soviet tech.
Guentzburgh , 5 hours ago
Greece should be aligned with Russia, EU and USA are a bad choice that Greece will
regret.
Greece needs to pivot towards Russia which will open huge opportunities for both
countries
KoalaWalla , 6 hours ago
Greeks are bitter and prideful - they would not only defend themselves if attacked but
would counter attack to reclaim land they've lost. But, I don't know that Erdogan is clever
enough to realize this.
60s Man , 9 hours ago
Turkey is America's Mini Me.
currency , 3 hours ago
Erdogan is in Trouble at home declining economy and his radical conservative/Thug type
policies. Turks are moving away from him except the hard core radicals and conservatives. He
and his family are Corrupt - they rule with threats and use of THUGS. Sense his constant wars
may be over stretched Time for a Turkish Spring.
Time for US, Nato and etc. to say goodbye to this THUG
OrazioGentile , 7 hours ago
Turkey seems to be on a warpath to imploding from within. Erdogan looks like a desperate
despot with a failing economy, failing political clout, and failing modernization of his
Country. Like any despot, he has to rally the troops or he will literally be a dead man
walking.
HorseBuggy , 9 hours ago
The world fears loud obnoxious tyrants and Erdogan is the loudest tyrant since Hitler.
Remember how countries pandered to Hitler early on? Same thing is happening with Erdogan.
This terrorist will do a lot more damage than he has already before the world wakes
up.
By the time Hitler was done, 70 million people were dead, what will Erdogan cause?
OliverAnd , 9 hours ago
Turkey is not Germany. Not by far. Erdogan may be a bigger lunatic than Hitler, but Turkey
is not Germany of the 30's. Without military equipment/parts from Germany, Italy, Spain,
France, USA, and UK he cannot even build a nail. Economies are very integrated; he will be
disposed of very very quickly. He has been warned. He is running out of lives.
NewNeo , 9 hours ago
You should research a lot more. Turkey is a lot more power thank Nazi Germany of the
1930's. Turkey currently have brand new US made equipment. It even houses the nuclear arsenal
of NATO.
You should probably look at information from stratfor and George Friedman to give you a
better understanding.
The failed coupe a few years ago was because the lunatic had gone off the reservation and
was seen as a threat to the region. Obviously the bankers thought it in their benefit to keep
him going and tipped him off.
OliverAnd , 8 hours ago
Clearly the lockdown has hindered your already illiteracy. Turkey has modern US equipment.
Germany did not need US equipment. They made their own equipment; in fact both the US and
USSR used Grrman old tech to develop future tech.
The coup was designed by Erdogan to bring himself to full power. When this is all done he
will be responsible for millions of Turkish lives; after all he is not a Turk but a Muslim
Pontian.
The above link exhaustively details how the fraud was perpetrated and how the White
Helmets were funded. The most disturbing facts were the murder of captive Syrian civilians
including children for use as props for Western media. There is little doubt in my mind that
these murders were viewed as standard business practice with the only concern being related
to complication from being caught. Of course, being "caught" was a minor inconvenience that
the MSM could easily manage into oblivion.
Mr. Le Mesurier may have been killed as the White Helmets no longer had value and dead men
rarely talk:
His wife was not very helpful in the investigation having changed her story several
times.
Winberg said she looked for her husband inside the house and saw his lifeless body when
she looked out of the window. Police are investigating now how she was able to wake up about
half an hour after she took a sleeping pill and why she stacked a large amount of money
inside the house into bags immediately after Le Mesurier's body was found.
Among questions that are needed to be addressed in the case is why Le Mesurier, who intended
to sleep, did not change his clothes, did not even loosen his belt or remove his watch. It is
also not known why he did not choose a definitive suicidal action to kill himself, instead of
jumping from a relatively low height and why he chose to walk along the roof, passing around
the air conditioning devices on the roof, instead of jumping to the street directly from the
section of the roof closer to his window.
Honour among thieves – he says he didn't mean to steal, it was a mistake, and they
conduct an investigation on the down-low so the press doesn't get wind of it, or is warned
that it should not. The same cooperative that solemnly preaches western morality, and
screeches 'Russia!!!' as soon as anything happens before it can be attributed to someone
else. I think I understand Russia a little better every time something like this happens
– it's a honour to be hated by such a crooked and wretched entity, and approbation by
the same would be an implication that one has as little a sense of values.
Erdogan never ceases to amaze. He's the weakest standing strongmen, the midget giant on
glass legs. He can barely cling on to power domestically yet he still makes big dawg moves in
Syria and Egypt. He needed this Hagia Sophia conversion like he needed a bullet to his
head.
On one level I'm sure that he's aware of all this, which just means that his ego is of
galactic proportions.
Also I don't see him allowing a peaceful power transfer to happen, he knows that anyone that
defeats him in election will do so not only on the merits he might have as a candidate, but
also because of anti-Erdo sentiments that grow. So someone will run on "lock him up" platform
and win, maybe not this year but soon, and when that happens there will be blood.
P
resident Donald Trump's third National Security Advisor opens his memoir with this quote from the
Duke of Wellington at Waterloo: 'Hard Pounding, this, gentlemen. Let's see who will pound the longest.' And
pound for pound, that's the (nearly) 500 page memoir in a nutshell. Unremitting pounding is both the theme
and the style. As John Bolton urged the White House to take a 'harder line" on Iran and North Korea, Trump's
chief of staff "urged me to keep pounding away in public, which I assured him I would.' China 'pounded away
during my tenure, sensing weakness at the top.' As with Bolton's mission, so too with America's statecraft,
that must 'keep moving and keep firing, like a big grey battleship.'
From his infamous unsubtle moustache to his bellicosity,
Bolton traffics on a self-image of straight shooter who sprints towards gunfire. He does not set out to
offer a meditation on a complex inner life. This image is also slightly misleading. For all the barrage,
Bolton turns out to be a more conflicted figure, especially when his supporting fire is most called upon.
The Room Where it
Happened
is Bolton's account of his part in
the power struggles within Trump's almost medieval court, his attempt to steer the executive branch towards
the right course, unmasked supremacy everywhere, and his failure and disillusion with Trump's chaotic,
self-serving and showbiz-driven presidency.
The
room where it happened: A White House memoir, by John Bolton
The memoir itself is a non-trivial political event.
Other reviewers have assailed it for being turgid. Bolton, though, has at least done the state some service
by habitually recording and recounting every meeting. This is an important record of an important eighteen
months packed with the escalating brinksmanship with Iran, an impeachment inquest, the return of great power
competition and a fierce struggle to control the policy levers in Washington itself. For that detail,
especially when contrasted with the exhausting melodrama of the era, Bolton deserves a little credit. The
Trump administration's determined effort to suppress it on the grounds of classified information suggests
there is substance to Bolton's allegations of corruption and turmoil at the heart of government.
It is also, though, a work of self-vindication. Bolton's
life is an adversarial one. A former attorney, he became a policy advocate and a Republican Party
institution, consistently taking the hardest of lines. He was ever drawn to aggressive combatants – like
Hillary Clinton, in his formative years he supported Barry Goldwater. He interned for Vice-President Spiro
Agnew, the "number one hawk." As a measure of Bolton's faith that war works and that co-existence with
"rogue states" is impossible, he advocated attacking a heavily (and nuclear)-armed North Korea in 2018, an
adversary that lies in artillery range of Seoul and thousands of Americans as effective hostages, and
offered up a best-case scenario in doing so.
Bolton brought to government a world view that was
dug-in and entrenched. For Bolton, the world is hostile, and to survive America must be strong (wielding and
brandishing overwhelming force) at all times. Enemy regimes cannot be bargained with or even co-existed with
on anything less than maximalist terms dictated by Washington. The US never gives an inch, and must demand
everything. And if those regimes do not capitulate, America must topple or destroy them: Iran, Syria, Libya,
Venezuela, Cuba, Yemen and North Korea, and must combat them on multiple fronts at once. In doing so,
America
itself must remain unfettered with an absolutely free hand, not nodding even hypocritically to law or custom
or bargaining.
If Bolton's thoughts add up to anything, it is a general
hostility, if not to talking, certainly to diplomacy – the art of giving coherence and shape to different
instruments and activities, above all through compromise and a recognition of limits. The final straw for
Bolton was Trump's cancelling an airstrike on Iran after it shot down a drone. An odd hill to die on, given
the graver acts of corruption he as witness alleges, but fitting that the failure to pull the trigger for
him was Trump's most shocking misdemeanour.
What is intended to be personal strength and clarity
comes over as unreflective bluster
This worldview is as personal as it is geopolitical.
Importantly for Bolton, in the end he fights alone, bravely against the herd. He fights against other
courtiers, even fellow hawks, who Bolton treats with dismissive contempt – Nikki Haley, Steve Mnuchin, Mike
Pompeo, or James Mattis who like Bolton, champions strategic commitments and views Iran as a dangerous
enemy, but is more selective about when to reach for the gun. The press is little more than an "hysterical"
crowd. Allies like South Korea, who must live as neighbours with one of the regimes Bolton earmarks for
execution, and who try conciliatory diplomacy occasionally, earn slight regard. Critics, opponents or those
who disagree are 'lazy,' 'howling' or 'feckless.'
For a lengthy work that distils a lifetime's experience,
it is remarkably thin regarding the big questions of security, power and order. The hostile world for him
contains few real limits other than failures of will. He embraces every rivalry and every commitment, but
explanations are few and banal. 'While foreign policy labels are unhelpful except to the intellectually
lazy,' he says, 'if pressed, I like to say my policy was "pro-American".' Who is lazy, here?
The purpose of foreign policy, too, is largely absent.
Armed supremacy abroad, and power-maximisation, seems to be the end in itself, regardless of what is has
wrought at home. This makes his disdain for Trump's authoritarian ways especially obtuse: what does he think
made possible an imperial presidency in the first place?
There's little room for principled or reasonable
disagreement. What is intended to be personal strength and clarity comes over as unreflective bluster, in a
town where horse-trading and agility matter. Unintentionally, it is a warning to anyone who seeks to be
effective as well as right, and to those of us who debate these questions.
The most provocative part of the book comes at the end,
and points to a man more conflicted than his self-image of the straight shooter. Bolton issues an extended,
uneasy defence of his decision not to appear as a witness before the House impeachment inquiry against a
president he believed to be corrupt. Having celebrated the need to "pound away" with inexhaustible energy,
it turned out his ammunition was low. 'I was content to bide my time. I believed throughout, as the line in
Hamilton
goes,
that "I am not throwing away my shot".' Drawing on a characteristic claim to certainty, 'it would have made
no significant difference in the Senate outcome.' How can he know this? And even if the odds were long, was
there not – for once – a compelling basis in civic virtue to be that relentless grey battleship, pounding
away? He now hopes "history" will remember Trump as a one-term president. History needs willing agents.
Other reviews have honed in on Bolton's decision to
delay his revelations for a book pay-day. But consider another theme – the war-hawk who is in fact torn and
agonised around combat when it comes to himself. It echoes his retrospective rationale for not fighting in
Vietnam, a war he supported, and (as he has recorded) the detailed efforts he made to avoid service in that
tragic theatre after being drafted. It was, he decided, bound to fail given that the anti-war Democrats
would undermine the cause, a justification he later sheepishly regretted.
So twice the advocate of forceful confrontation refused
the call to show up, generously awarding to himself a rationale for non-intervention that relieves him of
commitment. He refuses to extend that same exonerating, prudential logic to his country, when it debates
whether to wade in to conflict abroad. Neither does he extend it to other Americans who think the nation,
like Bolton, might be better off sometimes holding its fire, biding its time, dividing its enemies, and
keeping its powder dry.
Given that Bolton failed in the end to attend the "room
where it happened", his title is unwittingly ironic. In his favour, Bolton's testy defence of his absence at
least suggests something. In contrast with the front cover of another
forthcoming,
Trump-era memoir
, he retains a modest
capacity for embarrassment.
By middle of last week
we observed of the Russian bounties to kill American troops in Afghanistan story that "at
this point this non-story looks to be dead by the weekend as it's already unraveled."
Indeed by Thursday and Friday, as more Congressional leaders received closed door
intelligence briefings on the allegations which originated with an anonymously sourced NY Times
report claiming Trump supposedly ignored the Russian op to target Americans, the very Democrat
and Republican lawmakers previously hyping it as a 'major scandal' went conspicuously silent
.
Recall too that John Bolton, busy with a media blitz promoting his book,
emerged to strongly suggest he had personal knowledge that Trump was briefed on the matter
. The former national security adviser called the Trump denial of being briefed "remarkable".
Well, look who is now appearing to sing a different tune. A week ago Bolton was all too wiling
to voluntarily say Trump had "likely" been briefed and that was a big scandal. The whole story
was indeed dead by the weekend:
Bolton: 'Fickle' Trump would sell out Israel for photo op with Iran's leaders
U.S. should consider sanctions if bounty reports true: Bolton
Bolton book hits shelves, bruises Trump's ego
Viral Finland PM quote about US being under Russian control 'not true' | #TheCube
Bolton's New Claims
Bolton Claims Trump Asked China's XI to Help Win Re-Election
Bolton book creates shockwaves
Senator Who Voted Against Bolton Testifying Is Now Angry Bolton Didn't Testify
Other reports said Bolton has been telling people he had personally
briefed the president :
Former national security adviser John Bolton told colleagues that he personally briefed
President Donald Trump about intelligence that Russia offered Afghan militants bounties to
kill American troops , U.S. officials told the Associated Press .
Bolton briefed Trump on the matter in March of 2019, according to the report, a year
earlier than previously
reported by The New York Times . The information was also included in at least one
presidential Daily Brief, according to the AP,
CNN and
The Times . The AP earlier reported that it was also
included in a second presidential Daily Brief earlier this year and that current national
security adviser Robert O'Brien discussed the matter with Trump.
His Sunday refusal to even address the question - again after he was all too willing to
speak to the issue a week ago when it was driving headlines - speaks volumes.
Now that even The Washington Post
awkwardly walked back the substance of much of its reporting on the 'Russian bounties'
story, Bolton has conveniently gone silent .
"... the essential backdrop for the timing of this story. It really reveals how completely decayed mainstream media is as an institution, that none of these reporters protested the story, didn't see fit to do any independent investigation into it. At best they would print a Russian denial which counts for nothing in the US, or a Taliban denial which counts for nothing in the US. And then and this gets into the domestic political angle because so much of Russiagate, while it's been crafted by former or current intelligence officials, depends on the Democratic Party and it punditocracy, MSNBC and mainstream media as a projection megaphone, as its Mighty Wurlitzer. ..."
"... That took place in this case because, according to this story, Donald Trump had been briefed on Putin paying bounties to the Taliban and he chose to do nothing. Which, of course Trump denies, but that counts for nothing as well. But, again, there's been no independent confirmation of any of this. And now we get into the domestic part, which is that this new Republican anti-Trump operation, The Lincoln Project, had a flashy ad ready to go almost minutes after the story dropped. ..."
"... They're just, like, on meth at Steve Schmidt's political Batcave, just churning this material out. But I feel like they had an inkling, like this story was coming. It just the coordination and timing was impeccable. ..."
"... And The Lincoln Project is something that James Carville, the veteran Democratic consultant, has said is doing more than any Democrat or any Democratic consultant to elect Joe Biden. ..."
"... the Carter Administration, at the urging of national security chief Zbigniew Brzezinski, had enacted what would become Operation Cyclone under Reagan, an arm-and-equip program to arm the Afghan mujahideen. The Saudis put up a matching fund which helped bring the so-called Services Bureau into the field where Osama bin Laden became a recruiter for international jihadists to join the battlefield. And, you know, the goal was, in the words of Brzezinski, as he later admitted to a French publication, was to force the Red Army, the Soviet Red Army, to intervene to protect the pro-Soviet government in Kabul, which they proceeded to do. ..."
"... What he means is by basically paying bounties, which the US was literally doing along with its Gulf allies, to exact the toll on the allies of Assad, Russia. So, let's just say it's true, according to your question, let's just say this is all true. It would be a retaliation for what the United States has done to Russia in areas where it was actually legally invited in by the governments in charge, either in Kabul or Damascus. And that's, I think, the kind of ironic subtext that can hardly be understated when you see someone like Dan Rather wag his finger at Putin for paying the Taliban as proxies. But, I mean, it's such a ridiculous story that it's just hard to even fathom that it's real. ..."
"... just kind of neocon resistance mind-explosion, where first John Bolton was hailed as this hero and truthteller about Trump. ..."
"... And then you have this and it, you know, today as you pointed out, Chuck Todd, "Chuck Toddler", welcomes on Meet the Press John Bolton as this wise voice to comment on Donald Trump's slavish devotion to Vladimir Putin and how we need to escalate. ..."
"... This is what Russiagate has done. It's taken one of the most Strangelovian, psychotic, dangerous, bloodthirsty, sadistic monsters in US foreign policy circles and turned him into a sober-minded, even heroic, truthteller. ..."
Max Blumenthal breaks down the "Russian bounty" story's flaws and how it aims to prolong the
war in Afghanistan -- and uses Russiagate tactics to continue pushing the Democratic Party to
the right
Multiple US media outlets, citing anonymous intelligence officials, are claiming that Russia
offered bounties to kill US soldiers in Afghanistan, and that President Trump has taken no
action.
Others are contesting that claim. "Officials said there was disagreement among
intelligence officials about the strength of the evidence about the suspected Russian
plot," the New York Times reports. "Notably, the National Security Agency, which specializes in
hacking and electronic surveillance, has been more skeptical."
"The constant flow of Russiagate disinformation into the bloodstream of the Democratic Party
and its base is moving that party constantly to the right, while pushing the US deeper into
this Cold War," Blumenthal says.
Guest: Max Blumenthal, editor of The Grayzone and author of several books, including his
latest "The Management of Savagery."
TRANSCRIPT
AARON MATÉ: Welcome to Pushback, I'm Aaron Maté. There is a new supposed
Trump-Russia bombshell. The New York Times and other outlets reporting that Russia has
been paying bounties to Afghan militants to kill US soldiers in Afghanistan. Trump and the
White House were allegedly briefed on this information but have taken no action.
Now, the story has obvious holes, like many other Russiagate bombshells. It is sourced to
anonymous intelligence officials. The New York Times says that the claim comes from
Afghan detainees. And it also has some logical holes. The Taliban have been fighting the US and
Afghanistan for nearly two decades and never needed Russian payments before to kill the
Americans that they were fighting; [this] amongst other questions are raised about this story.
But that has not stopped the usual chorus from whipping up a frenzy.
RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC: Vladimir Putin is offering bounties for the scalps of American
soldiers in Afghanistan. Not only offering, offering money [to] the people who kill Americans,
but some of the bounties that Putin has offered have been collected, meaning the Russians at
least believe that their offering cash to kill Americans has actually worked to get some
Americans killed.
FORMER VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: Donald Trump has continued his embarrassing campaign
of deference and debasing himself before Vladimir Putin. He had has [sic] this information
according to The Times, and yet he offered to host Putin in the United States and sought
to invite Russia to rejoin the G7. He's in his entire presidency has been a gift to Putin, but
this is beyond the pale.
CHUCK TODD, NBC: Let me ask you this. Do you think that part of the that the
president is afraid to make Putin mad because maybe Putin did help him win the election and he
doesn't want to make him mad for 2020?
SENATE MINORITY LEADER CHUCK SCHUMER: I was not briefed on the Russian military
intelligence, but it shows that we need in this coming defense bill, which we're debating this
week, tough sanctions against Russia, which thus far Mitch McConnell has resisted.
Joining me now is Max Blumenthal, editor of The Grayzone, author of The Management of
Savagery . Max, welcome to Pushback. What is your reaction to this story?
MAX BLUMENTHAL: I mean, it just feels like so many other episodes that we've
witnessed over the past three or four years, where American intelligence officials basically
plant a story in one outlet, The New York Times , which functions as the media wing of
the Central Intelligence Agency. Then no reporting takes place whatsoever, but six reporters,
or three to six reporters are assigned to the piece to make it look like it was some
last-minute scramble to confirm this bombshell story. And then the story is confirmed again by
The Washington Post because their reporters, their three to six reporters in, you know,
capitals around the world with different beats spoke to the same intelligence officials, or
they were furnished different officials who fed them the same story. And, of course, the story
advances a narrative that the United States is under siege by Russia and that we have to
escalate against Russia just ahead of another peace summit or some kind of international
dialogue.
This has sort of been the general framework for these Russiagate bombshells, and of course
they can there's always an anti-Trump angle. And because, you know, liberal pundits and the,
you know, Democratic Party operatives see this as a means to undermine Trump as the election
heats up. They don't care if it's true or not. They don't care what the consequences are.
They're just gonna completely roll with it. And it's really changed, I think, not just US
foreign policy, but it's changed the Democratic Party in an almost irreversible way, to have
these constant "quote-unquote" bombshells that are really generated by the Central Intelligence
Agency and by other US intelligence operations in order to turn up the heat to crank up the
Cold War, to use these different media organs which no longer believe in reporting, which see
Operation Mockingbird as a kind of blueprint for how to do journalism, to turn them into keys
on the CIA's Mighty Wurlitzer. That's what happened here.
AARON MATÉ: What do you make of the logic of this story? This idea that the
Taliban would need Russian money to kill Americans when the Taliban's been fighting the US for
nearly two decades now. And the sourcing for the story, the same old playbook: anonymous
intelligence officials who are citing vague claims about apparently what was said by Afghan
detainees.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: This story has, as I said, it relies on zero reporting. The only
source is anonymous American intelligence officials. And I tweeted out a clip of a former CIA
operations officer who managed the CIA's operation in Angola, when the US was actually fighting
on the side of apartheid South Africa against a Marxist government that was backed up by Cuban
troops. His name was John Stockwell. And Stockwell talked about how one-third of his covert
operations staff were propagandists, and that they would feed imaginary stories about Cuban
barbarism that were completely false to reporters who were either CIA assets directly or who
were just unwitting dupes who would hang on a line waiting for American intelligence officials
to feed them stories. And one out of every five stories was completely false, as Stockwell
said. We could play some of that clip now; it's pretty remarkable to watch it in light of this
latest fake bombshell.
JOHN STOCKWELL: Another thing is to disseminate propaganda to influence people's
minds, and this is a major function of the CIA. And unfortunately, of course, it overlaps into
the gathering of information. You, you have contact with a journalist, you will give him true
stories, you'll get information from him, you'll also give him false stories.
OFF-CAMERA REPORTER: Can you do this with responsible reporters?
JOHN STOCKWELL: Yes, the Church Committee brought it out in 1975. And then Woodward
and Bernstein put an article in Rolling Stone a couple of years later. Four hundred
journalists cooperating with the CIA, including some of the biggest names in the business.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: So, basically, I mean, you get the flavor of what someone who was in
the CIA at the height of the Cold War I mean, he did the same thing in Vietnam. And the
playbook is absolutely the same today. These this story was dumped on Friday in The New York
Times by "quote-unquote" American intelligence officials, as a breakthrough had been made
in Afghan peace talks and a conference was finally set for Doha, Qatar, that would involve the
Taliban, which had been seizing massive amounts of territory.
Now, it's my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, that the Taliban had been fighting
one of the most epic examples of an occupying army in modern history, just absolutely chewing
away at one of the most powerful militaries in human history in their country for the last 19
years, without bounties from Vladimir Putin or
private-hotdog-salesman-and-Saint-Petersburg-troll-farm-owner Yevgeny Prigozhin , who always comes up
in these stories. It's always the hotdog guy who's doing everything bad from, like, you know,
fake Facebook ads to poisoning Sergei Skripal or whatever.
But I just don't see where the Taliban needs encouragement from Putin to do that. It's their
country. They want the US out and they have succeeded in seizing large amounts of territory.
Donald Trump has come into office with a pledge to remove US troops from Afghanistan and ink
this deal. And along comes this story as the peace process begins to advance.
And what is the end-result? We haven't gotten into the domestic politics yet, but the
end-result is you have supposedly progressive senators like Chris Murphy of Connecticut
attacking Trump for not fighting Russia in Afghanistan. I mean, they want a straight-up proxy
war for not escalating. You have Richard Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign
Relations, someone who's aligned with the Democratic Party, who supported the war in Iraq and,
you know, supports just endless war, demanding that the US turn up the heat not just in
Afghanistan but in Syria. So, you know, the escalatory rhetoric is at a fever pitch right now,
and it's obviously going to impact that peace conference.
Let's remember that three days before Trump's summit with Putin was when Mueller chose to
release the indictment of the GRU agents for supposedly hacking the DNC servers. Let's remember
that a day before the UN the United Nations Geneva peace talks opened on Syria in 2014 was when
US intelligence chose to feed these shady Caesar photos, supposedly showing industrial
slaughter of Syrian prisoners, to The New York Times in an investigation that had been
funded by Qatar. Like, so many shady intelligence dumps have taken place ahead of peace summits
to disrupt them, because the US doesn't feel like it has enough skin in the game or it just
simply doesn't want peace in these areas.
So, that's what happened here. That's really, I think, the essential backdrop for the timing
of this story. It really reveals how completely decayed mainstream media is as an institution,
that none of these reporters protested the story, didn't see fit to do any independent
investigation into it. At best they would print a Russian denial which counts for nothing in
the US, or a Taliban denial which counts for nothing in the US. And then and this gets into the
domestic political angle because so much of Russiagate, while it's been crafted by former or
current intelligence officials, depends on the Democratic Party and it punditocracy, MSNBC and
mainstream media as a projection megaphone, as its Mighty Wurlitzer.
That took place in this
case because, according to this story, Donald Trump had been briefed on Putin paying bounties
to the Taliban and he chose to do nothing. Which, of course Trump denies, but that counts for
nothing as well. But, again, there's been no independent confirmation of any of this. And now
we get into the domestic part, which is that this new Republican anti-Trump operation, The
Lincoln Project, had a flashy ad ready to go almost minutes after the story dropped.
THE LINCOLN PROJECT AD: Now we know Vladimir Putin pays a bounty for the murder of
American soldiers. Donald Trump knows, too, and does nothing. Putin pays the Taliban cash to
slaughter our men and women in uniform and Trump is silent, weak, controlled. Instead of
condemnation he insists Russia be treated as our equal.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: I mean, maybe they're just really good editors and brilliant
politicians who work overtime. They're just, like, on meth at Steve Schmidt's political Batcave, just churning this material out. But I feel like they had an inkling, like this story
was coming. It just the coordination and timing was impeccable.
And The Lincoln Project is something that James Carville, the veteran Democratic consultant,
has said is doing more than any Democrat or any Democratic consultant to elect Joe Biden.
They're always out there doing the hard work. Who are they? Well, Steve Schmidt is a former
campaign manager for John McCain 2008. And you look at the various personnel affiliated with
it, they're all McCain former McCain aides or people who worked on the Jeb and George W. Bush
campaigns, going back to Texas and Florida. This is sort of the corporate wing of the
Republican Party, the white-glove-country-club-patrician Republicans who are very pro-war, who
hate Donald Trump.
And by doing this, by them really taking the lead on this attack, as you pointed out, Aaron,
number one, they are sucking the oxygen out of the more progressive anti-Trump initiatives that
are taking place, including in the streets of American cities. They're taking the wind out of
anti-Trump more progressive anti-Trump critiques. For example, I think it's actually more
powerful to attack Trump over the fact that he used, basically, chemical weapons on American
peaceful protesters to do a fascistic photo-op. I don't know why there wasn't some call for
congressional investigations on that. And they are getting skin in the game on the Biden
campaign. It really feels to me like this Lincoln campaign operation, this moderate Republican
operation which is also sort of a venue for neocons, will have more influence after events like
this than the Bernie Sanders campaign, which has an enormous amount of delegates.
So, that's what I think the domestic repercussion is. It's just this constant it's the
constant flow of Russiagate disinformation into the bloodstream of the Democratic Party and its
base that's moving that party constantly to the right, while pushing the US deeper into this
Cold War that only serves, you know, people who are associated with the national security state
who need to justify their paycheck and the budget of the institutions that employ them.
AARON MATÉ: Let's assume for a second that the allegation is true, although, you
know, you've laid out some of the reasons why it's not. Can you talk about the history here,
starting with Afghanistan, something you cover a lot in your book, The Management of
Savagery, where the US aim was to kill Russians, going right on through to Syria, where
just recently the US envoy for the coalition against ISIS, James Jeffery, who handles Syria,
said that his job now is to basically put the Russians in a quagmire in Syria.
JAMES JEFFREY: This isn't Afghanistan. This isn't Vietnam. This isn't a quagmire. My
job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Yeah, I mean, it feels like a giant act of psychological and
political projection to accuse Russia of using an Islamist militia in Afghanistan as a proxy
against the US to bleed the US into leaving, because that's been the US playbook in Central
Asia and the Middle East since at least 1979. I just tweeted a photo of Dan Rather in
Afghanistan, just crossing the Pakistani border and going to meet with some of the Mujahideen
in 1980. Dan Rather was panned in The New York in The Washington Post by Tom
Toles [Tom Shales], who was the media critic at the time, as "Gunga Dan," because he was so
gung-ho for the Afghan mujahideen. In his reports he would complain about how weak their
weaponry was, you know, how they needed more how they needed more funding. I mean, you could
call it bounties, but it was really just CIA funding.
DAN RATHER: These are the best weapons you have, huh? They only have about twenty
rounds for this?
TRANSLATOR: That's all. They have twenty rounds. Yes, and they know that these are
all old weapons and they really aren't up to doing anything to the Russian weaponry that's
around. But that's all they have, and this is why they want help. And he is saying that America
seems to be asleep. It doesn't seem to realize that if Afghanistan goes and the Russians go
over to the Gulf, that in a very short time it's going to be the turn of the United States as
well.
DAN RATHER: But I'm sure he knows that in Vietnam we got our fingers burned. Indeed,
we got our whole hands burned when we tried to help in this kind of situation.
TRANSLATOR [translating to the Afghan man and then his reply]: Your hands were burned
in Vietnam, but if you don't agree to help us, if you don't ally yourself with us, then all of
you, your whole body will be burnt eventually, because there is no one in the world who can
really fight and resist as well as the as much and as well as the Afghans are.
DAN RATHER: But no American mother wants to send her son to Afghanistan.
TRANSLATOR [translating to the Afghan man and then his reply]: We don't need
anybody's soldiers here to help us, but we are being constantly accused that the Americans are
helping us with weapons. What we need, actually, are the American weapons. We don't need or
want American soldiers. We can do the fighting ourselves.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: And a year or several months before, the Carter Administration, at
the urging of national security chief Zbigniew Brzezinski, had enacted what would become
Operation Cyclone under Reagan, an arm-and-equip program to arm the Afghan mujahideen. The
Saudis put up a matching fund which helped bring the so-called Services Bureau into the field
where Osama bin Laden became a recruiter for international jihadists to join the battlefield.
And, you know, the goal was, in the words of Brzezinski, as he later admitted to a French
publication, was to force the Red Army, the Soviet Red Army, to intervene to protect the
pro-Soviet government in Kabul, which they proceeded to do.
And then with the introduction of
the Stinger missile, the Afghan mujahideen, hailed as freedom fighters in Washington, were able
to destroy Russian supply lines, exact a heavy toll, and forced the Red Army to leave in
retreat. They helped create what's considered the Soviet Union's Vietnam.
So that was really but the blueprint for what Russian for what Russia is being accused of
now, and that same model was transferred over to Syria. It was also actually proposed for Iraq
in the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998. Then Senate Foreign Relations chair Jesse Helms actually
said that the Afghan mujahideen should be our model for supporting the Iraqi resistance. So,
this kind of proxy war was always on the table. Then the US did it in Syria, when one out of
every $13 in the CIA budget went to arm the so-called "moderate rebels" in Syria, who we later
found out were 31 flavors of jihadi, who were aligned with al-Qaeda's local affiliate Jabhat
al-Nusra and helped give rise to ISIS. Michael Morell, I tweeted some video of him on Charlie
Rose back in, I think, 2016. He's the former acting director for the CIA, longtime deputy
director. He said, you know, the reason that we're in Syria, what we should be doing is causing
Iran and Russia, the two allies of Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, to pay a heavy
price.
MICHAEL MORELL: We need to make the Iranians pay a price in Syria. We need to make
the Russians pay a price. The other thing
CHARLIE ROSE: We make them pay the price by killing killing Russians?
MICHAEL MORELL: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: And killing Iranians.
MICHAEL MORELL: Yes, covertly. You don't tell the world about it, right? You don't
stand up at the Pentagon and say we did this, right? But you make sure they know it in Moscow
and Tehran.
MAX BLUMENTHAL:What he means is by basically paying bounties, which the US was
literally doing along with its Gulf allies, to exact the toll on the allies of Assad, Russia.
So, let's just say it's true, according to your question, let's just say this is all true. It
would be a retaliation for what the United States has done to Russia in areas where it was
actually legally invited in by the governments in charge, either in Kabul or Damascus. And
that's, I think, the kind of ironic subtext that can hardly be understated when you see someone
like Dan Rather wag his finger at Putin for paying the Taliban as proxies. But, I mean, it's
such a ridiculous story that it's just hard to even fathom that it's real.
AARON MATÉ: Let me read Dan Rather's tweet, because it's so it speaks to just
how pervasive Russiagate culture is now. People have learned absolutely nothing from it.
Rather says, "Reporters are trained to look for patterns that are suspicious, and time and
again one stands out with Donald Trump. Why is he so slavishly devoted to Putin? There is a
spectrum of possible answers ranging from craven to treasonous. One day I hope and suspect we
will find out."
It's like he forgot, perhaps, that Robert Mueller and his team spent three years
investigating this very issue and came up with absolutely nothing. But the narrative has taken
hold, and it's, as you talked about before, it's been the narrative we've been presented as the
vehicle for understanding and opposing Donald Trump, so it cannot be questioned. And now it's
like it's a matter of, what else is there to find out about Trump and Russia after Robert
Mueller and the US intelligence agencies looked for everything they could and found nothing?
They're still presented as if it's some kind of mystery that has to be unraveled.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: And it was after, like, a week of just kind of neocon resistance
mind-explosion, where first John Bolton was hailed as this hero and truthteller about Trump.
Then Dick Cheney was welcomed into the resistance, you know, because he said, "Wear a mask." I
mean, you know, his mask was strangely not spattered with the blood of Iraqi children. But, you
know, it was just amazing like that. Of course, it was the Lincoln project who hijacked the
minds of the resistance, but basically people who used to work on Cheney's campaign said, "Dick
Cheney, welcome to the resistance." I mean, that was remarkable. And then you have this and it,
you know, today as you pointed out, Chuck Todd, "Chuck Toddler", welcomes on Meet the
Press John Bolton as this wise voice to comment on Donald Trump's slavish devotion to
Vladimir Putin and how we need to escalate.
CHUCK TODD, NBC: Let me ask you this. Do you think that part of the that the
president is afraid to make Putin mad because maybe Putin did help him win the election and he
doesn't want to make him mad for 2020?
MAX BLUMENTHAL: I mean, just a few years ago, maybe it was two years ago, before
Bolton was brought into the Trump NSC, he was considered just an absolute marginal crank who
was a contributor to Fox News. He'd been forgotten. He was widely hated by Democrats. Now here
he is as a sage voice to tell us how dangerous this moment is. And, you know, he's not being
even brought on just to promote his book; he's being brought on as just a sober-minded foreign
policy expert on Meet the Press . That's where we're at right now.
AARON MATÉ: Yeah, and when his critique of Trump is basically that Trump was not
hawkish enough. Bolton's most the biggest critique Bolton has of Trump is, as he writes about
in his book, is when Trump declined to bomb Iran after Iran shot down a drone over its
territory. And Bolton said that to him was the most irrational thing he's ever seen a president
do.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Well, Bolton was mad that Trump confused body bags with missiles,
because he said Trump thought that there would be 150 dead Iranians, and I said, "No, Donald,
you're confused. It will be 150 missiles that we're firing into Iran." Like that's better!
Like, "Oh, okay, that makes everything all right," that we fire a hundred missiles for one
drone and maybe that wouldn't that kill possibly more than 150 people?
Well, in Bolton's world this was just another stupid move by Trump. If Bolton were, I mean,
just, just watch all the interviews with Bolton. Watch him on The View where the only
pushback he received was from Meghan McCain complaining that he ripped off a Hamilton
song for his book The Room Where It Happened , and she asked, "Don't you have any
apology to offer to Hamilton fans?" That was the pushback that Bolton received. Just
watch all of these interviews with Bolton and try to find the pushback. It's not there. This is
what Russiagate has done. It's taken one of the most Strangelovian, psychotic, dangerous,
bloodthirsty, sadistic monsters in US foreign policy circles and turned him into a
sober-minded, even heroic, truthteller.
AARON MATÉ: And inevitably the only long-term consequence that I can see here is
ultimately helping Trump, because, if history is a pattern, these Russiagate supposed
bombshells always either go nowhere or they get debunked. So, if this one gets forcefully
debunked, because I think it's quite possible, because Trump has said that he was never briefed
on this and they'll have to prove that he's lying, you know. It should be easy to do. Someone
could come out and say that. If they can't prove that he's lying, then this one, I think, will
blow up in their face. And all they will have done is, at a time when Trump is vulnerable over
the pandemic with over a hundred thousand people dead on his watch, all these people did was
ultimately try to bring the focus back to the same thing that failed for basically the entirety
of Trump's presidency, which is Russiagate and Trump's supposed―and non-existent in
reality―subservience to Vladimir Putin.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: But have you ever really confronted one of your liberal friends who
maybe doesn't follow these stories as closely as you do? You know, well-intentioned liberal
friend who just has this sense that Russia controls Trump, and asked them to really defend that
and provide the receipts and really explain where the Trump administration has just handed the
store to Russia? Because what we've seen is unprecedented since the height of the Cold War, an
unprecedented deterioration of US-Russia relations with new sanctions on Russia every few
months. You ask them to do that. They can't do it. It's just a sense they get, it's a feeling
they get. And that's because these bombshells drop, they get reported on the front pages under
banners of papers that declare that "democracy dies in darkness," whose brand is something that
everybody trusts, The New York Times , The Washington Post , Woodward and
Bernstein, and everybody repeats the story again and again and again. And then, if and when it
gets debunked, discredited or just sort of disappears, a few days later everybody forgets about
it. And those people who are not just, like, 24/7 media consumers but critical-minded media
consumers, they're left with that sense that Russia actually controls us and that we must do
something to escalate with Russia. So, that's the point of these: by the time the
disinformation is discredited, the damage has already been done. And that same tactic was
employed against Jeremy Corbyn in the UK, to the point where so many people were left with the
sense that he must be an antisemite, although not one allegation was ever proven.
AARON MATÉ: Yeah, and now to the point where, in the Labour Party―we
should touch on this for a second―where you had a Labour Party member retweet an article
recently that mentioned some criticism of Israel and for that she was expelled from her
position in the shadow cabinet.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Yeah, well, you know, as a Jew I was really threatened by that
retweet [laughter]. I don't know about you.
I mean, this is Rebecca Long Bailey. She's one of the few Corbynites left in a high position
in Labour who hasn't been effectively burned at the stake for being a, you know, Jew hater who
wants to throw us all in gas chambers because she retweets an interview with some celebrity I'd
never heard of before, who didn't even say anything that extreme. But it really shows how the
Thought Police have taken control of the Labour Party through Sir Keir Starmer, who is someone
who has deep links to the national security state through the Crown Prosecution Service, which
he used to head, where he was involved in the prosecution of Julian Assange. And he has worked
with The Times of London, which is a, you know, favorite paper of the national security
state and the MI5 in the UK, for planting stories against Jeremy Corbyn. He was intimately
involved in that campaign, and now he's at the head of the Labour Party for a very good reason.
I really would recommend everyone watching this, if you're interested more in who Keir Starmer
really is, read "Five Questions for [New Labour Leader] Sir Keir Starmer" by Matt Kennard at
The Grayzone. It really lays it out and shows you what's happening.
We're just in this kind of hyper-managed atmosphere, where everything feels so much more
controlled than it's ever been. And even though every sane rational person that I know seems to
understand what's happening, they feel like they're not allowed to say it, at least not in any
official capacity.
AARON MATÉ: From the US to Britain, everything is being co-opted. In the US
it's, you know, genuine resistance to Trump, in opposition to Trump, it gets co-opted by the
right. Same thing in Britain. People get manipulated into believing that Jeremy Corbyn, this
lifelong anti-racist is somehow an antisemite. It's all in the service of the same agenda, and
I have to say we're one of the few outlets that are pushing back on it. Everyone else is
getting swept up on it and it's a scary time.
We're gonna wrap. Max, your final comment.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Well, yeah, we're pushing back. And I saw today Mint Press
[News], which is another outlet that has pushed back, their Twitter account was just
briefly removed for no reason, without explan