NYT / AP - "Balkans Reel as Number of Migrants Hits Record" | Sweden's Double Standards

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/world/europe/balkans-slovenia-reel-as-number-of-refugees-migrants-hits-record.html?smid=tw-nytimesworld&smtyp=cur&_r=0 Balkans Reel as Number of Migrants Hits Record By BARBARA SURK and RICK LYMANOCT.  27, 2015 Groups of refugees and migrants waited in a Slovenian border town, a stopping point for most on their journey to northern Europe.  By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS on Publish Date October 27, 2015. SENTILJ, Slovenia — The small Balkan nations on the path of the human migration through Europe are seeing record numbers of asylum-seekers cross their borders, and are overwhelmed in their ability to manage the human flow. Despite hopes that plummeting temperatures and treacherous seas would finally slow the tide of refugees flowing into the heart of Europe, fresh fighting in Syria and growing fears of border closings are driving more migrants to undertake the treacherous trek. At the moment, the biggest crunch appears to be on the southern border of Slovenia, a small Alpine nation on the Adriatic Sea that has become the gateway to Europe for migrants since Hungary closed its border with Croatia on Oct. 16. In recent days, fights have broken out over blankets and in the line of migrants waiting in this northern Slovenian border town to cross the frontier into Austria. There were also growing signs of tension between refugees from Syria, fleeing a growing war in their homeland, and migrants from other nations. In the past 10 days, 83,600 migrants have crossed into Slovenia, government officials said, while 57,981 have crossed from Slovenia into Austria, and 14,000 are waiting in government reception centers. The remaining 12,000 or so are at government registration centers, stuck on trains or buses, or simply in the open, roughing it in the increasingly cold fields and forests of the ragged foothills. “When Hungary closed its border, the Slovenian politicians said, ‘Oh, we are prepared,’ ” said Natasa Pirc Musar, president of the Slovenian Red Cross. “They said Slovenia could handle 2,500 people a day. The problem is, we are getting 10,000 a day and hearing reports that it will soon grow to 13,000. This is something Slovenia cannot cope with anymore.” On Sunday, European Union officials approved a 17-point plan that may not see fruition for months. It includes more accommodations in Greece, the European Union country the migrants usually enter first, as well as along the entire migrant trail through the Balkans, plus fresh reserves of border guards and injections of cash to help financially struggling Balkan nations pay for all of this. Slovenia’s foreign minister, Karl Erjavec, said his country would welcome the support of other European countries, including 400 new police officers. But he warned that Slovenia could not accommodate the growing number of people in need for long without outside support. If help does not come soon, he said, the country will take unilateral measures, including potentially building its own fence along the Croatian border and deploying additional troops to guard the frontier. “All plans remain on the table if promises from the Brussels summit are not fulfilled,” Mr. Erjavec said. Refugee officials worry that it is too little too late, and that the new plan will suffer the same fate as all of the previous, ineffectual European Union efforts to manage and cope with the largest movement of people across Europe since World War II. “This should have been done months ago,” said Babar Baloch, spokesman in Hungary for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Mrs. Pirc Musar, the Slovenian Red Cross president, said, “We are trying to use a small fire extinguisher to kill a giant fire.” Meanwhile, migrants — exhausted, cold and frequently forced to stop — are growing impatient, crossing one border after another. In recent months European nations have worked to block the main route taken by migrants fleeing war and upheaval. Groups of young men from Afghanistan and other countries, noticeably more aggressive toward the police than the terrified families traveling with them, are becoming a challenge for the authorities and other refugees. CONTINUE READING ARTICLE - HERE http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/world/europe/balkans-slovenia-reel-as-number-of-refugees-migrants-hits-record.html?smid=tw-nytimesworld&smtyp=cur&_r=0 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT It is estimated that only 20% of the unstoppable tide that has descended upon Europe are Syrian refugees, according to multiple recent mainstream sources.  As a Sweden source has indicated (today) that Sweden's getting 'less than one in three' Syrians making their way through to Sweden, the guess is that the overall figure of Syrian refugees among the throng is actually significantly lower than that reported. Sweden, taking the Multikulti-R-Us crown, as US-serving neoliberal 'Marxist' EU immigration-destination (with Germany in hot pursuit for the honour), is also -- unsurprisingly -- the 'liberal'-fascist press suppression capital, a press that's heavily taxpayer subsidised.   So the Swedish taxpayers get screwed twice over, but who's keeping count.  The magnanimous state of Sweden sure ain't. Germany, with her own heavy-duty state interest in media & therefore no doubt decades long experience in spinning state propaganda, since Goebbels handed over the baton, is the political dissent suppression Meccca of Europe, alongside its Swedish counterpart. Sweden and Germany:  the evil EU twins.   Who would have guessed?  lol Germany also has the dubious distinction of appointing an ex-Stasi  East German snitch as the Fourth Reich social-media-suppressing Facebook censorship snitch, and, of course, Facebook is more than happy to oblige, because Mutti Merkel and Mark Zuckerberg know what's best for all Germans -- especially the jacked off ordinary Germans. Mutti Merkel's Fourth Reich also resorts to press blackouts to keep the German sheeple ignorant and therefore in line. As Sweden's not to be relied upon for provision of straight immigration figures, and as Sweden is as dodgy as all f*ck (see Julian Assange, detained on trumped up 'allegations' 5 years, no charge), I'd be inclined to conclude Europe's migrant deluge comprises perhaps as little as 10% Syrian refugees landing in Europe. But who'd know?  Germany and Sweden sure as hell don't.  EU doesn't.  There's no medicals.  There's no quarantine.  There's no papers.  But, hey, there's false papers.  Oh, and there's even 700 freshly minted German refugees that have just gone missing in Germany.  Uh-oh!  Most are physically capable young men from demolished, chaotic and/or impoverished surrounding countries.  'Syrian refugees' is the mainstream media sound-bite, often an anti-al-Assad propaganda 'blame card', and also a convenient narrative for this largely Western intervention-induced mass non-European migration frenzy. Judging by previous statements made by politicians, it's safe to ignore anything European politicians have to say:  the European sheeple need to be pacified.  And talk is cheap.  It's plain that Europe's politicians have got no plan and, sadly, no balls.  National sovereignty is dead in Europe. Nothing will come of warnings and 'threats' to restore territorial and social order.  And, in terms of social order, the horse has already bolted.  So whatever 'remedies' are eventually taken, the problem remains. Immigration avoidance strategists take note:  Mutti Merkel's German Open Haus immigration overland march from Greece and Turkey is, of course, making a b-line for the generous, soft, easy policy marks:  Mutti's most accommodating (but disgruntled) Germany, and Sweden's 'feminist foreign policy'  schizo neoliberal-'Marxist' cultural integration Nordic play-pen involving:  knife-wielding maniacs, shootings, frequent grenade tossing, rioting, and fire-setting ... to start with. 'Human traffickers' on a mission to make a fast buck, kindly supplying discarded life vests to many, many thousands of Middle Eastern would-be permanent European residents per day -- every day, is an incongruity nobody's bothered to question or explain.  Screw you, ideologically sold out, deceitful, complicit, and useless elite and corporate fascist serving mainstream press.  The cynic in me sees this Great Migration as a highly organised (and highly expensive), adept feat of logistics ... and, therefore, not so legit.   Of course, the deceitful, lying, double-dealing politicians who have aided and abetted aggressive US-led foreign policy (and have also clearly sold out their own nations and peoples, as US-servile war strategy secondary 'weapons' and their societies as ill-fitting receptacles for displaced Middle Eastern and African migration) knew what to expect from well before 2011, when they partnered in the US-led murder of Gaddafi, plunging Libya into destruction and civil war, before moving right along to:  training, arming, and otherwise supporting terrorist proxies that the West has set upon beleaguered Syria. So, looking past the razzle-dazzle of theatre of state and military (and past the state and media propaganda), Syria is yet another attempted regime change in the Middle East -- in the service of nothing but corporate fascism.  I honestly believe that's the bottom line -- always.  I should probably point out here that it cannot just be the West alone responsible for everything, although, yes, there's masses of interference that is wrong (including an illegal war).  But big, bad US-led allies cannot force proxies in the region do what they don't want to do, or force them to fight among themselves.  So the people in the region -- including Arab players in the region -- also play a part in the destruction and displacement from the region. From my point of view, the domestic public bears no responsibility whatsoever for taking on the blowback problems (including refugees and immigrants) created by the politician shills for corporate fascism, when the crap eventually hits the fan and world populations start moving.  To my way of thinking, nobody is obligated to self-destruct, and certainly not because of decisions made by lying, cheating, con artist politicians that don't even really represent or hear the public. There's indication that Bashar al-Assad has been targeted by the US and its allies since 2006 (mentioned by WikiLeaks), so this European apocalypse is a long time in the making. Yet these servants of corporate fascism did no forward planning?  I don't think so.  The ugly truth is that they do not care about their suffering domestic populations -- they do not care about their own blood or their own land -- and they do not care about the future of Europe itself. The massive displacement of inhabitants from Libya, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and beyond, is predictable once you know the pattern to look for:  intervention/regime-change/war/civil-war, displacement, refugees, immigration (or something like that). As I think I may have said before, any experienced politics observer would have predicted this 'catastrophe', let alone governments who have prior experience with exactly this sort of displacement, and as first world governments who have no shortage of experts and advisers on hand. The highly predictable results of multiple US-led military actions, terrorist proxy destabilisations, and economic sanction assaults on the Middle East, that have been aided and abetted by key European players, would have been very plain to corporate fascist serving lying and scheming European politicians. So these treasonous politicians have squandered an opportunity of at least six years (if not more) to plan, to take control and to take appropriate action to avert what amounts to foreign civilian invasion of Europe. Lying, scheming, cheating, treacherous, European politicians could have made arrangements for in-situ humanitarian assistance for the eligible among those that have been consistently migrating into Europe from Africa and the Middle East for years now, well before Mutti Merkel unleashed mayhem upon Europe. The actions of these European politicians are a gross breach of duty of care to their domestic populations and are, in my opinion, undemocratic and incalculably costly acts of colluding criminal politicians that have placed European nations' long-term social welfare and national security in ongoing and permanent peril. Mutti's Ministry of Truth EXTRACTS ONLY Angela Merkel declares death of German multiculturalism Chancellor's remarks, which claimed multiculturalism had 'failed utterly', interpreted as a shift rightwards from previous views Kate Connolly in Berlin Monday 18 October 2010 06.27 AEDT Chancellor Angela Merkel has declared the death of multiculturalism in Germany, saying that it had "failed utterly" , in what has been interpreted as a startling shift from her previous views. The German leader said it had been an illusion to think that Germans and foreign workers could "live happily side by side". "We kidded ourselves for a while that they wouldn't stay, but that's not the reality," she said at a conference of the youth wing of her Christian Democratic Union party at the weekend, referring to the gastarbeiters, or guest workers, who arrived in Germany to fill a labour shortage during the economic boom of the 1960s. "Of course the tendency had been to say, 'let's adopt the multicultural concept and live happily side by side, and be happy to be living with each other'. But this concept has failed, and failed utterly," she said, without elaborating on the nature and causes of this failure. Merkel's verdict marks a shift in her previously liberal line on immigration which had always put her at odds with the more conservative wing of the party. While she stressed in the same speech that immigrants were welcome in Germany and that Islam was a part of the nation's modern-day culture, her remarks positioned her closer to Horst Seehofer, the Bavarian state premier of the Christian Social Union, who last week called for an end to immigration from Turkey and Arab countries. They also align her with Thilo Sarrazin, the former Bundesbank member whose book on how the failure of many of Germany's 16 million immigrants to integrate was contributing to Germany's decline led to his dismissal. Sharing the same podium as Merkel in Potsdam, Seehofer also said "multiculturalism is dead" and that both the rightwing parties were committed to a "dominant German culture". If Germany did not revise its immigration policies, he said, it was in danger of becoming "the world's welfare office". Seehofer insisted his statement was "an attempt to stop rightwing lunatics" but Jürgen Trittin, for the Greens, called the comments "shabby" and in danger of "lending social acceptability to views similar to those of rightwing extremists". There is a labour shortage in Germany. The chamber of industry and commerce has said Germany is short of 400,000 skilled workers and the gap costs €25bn a year, equivalent to 1% of growth annually. While industrialists have called on the government to remove obstacles stopping more skilled workers entering Germany, citing lengthy bureaucratic procedures as well as unrealistic thresholds, others say that long-term unemployed German workers should be given more of a chance first. Merkel insisted in her speech that immigrant workers should not be considered "until we have done all we can to help our own people to become qualified and give them a chance". The issue has caused tension within Merkel's year-old coalition with the pro-business Free Democrats. ... What they said "At the start of the 60s we invited the guest-workers to Germany. We kidded ourselves for a while that they wouldn't stay, that one day they'd go home. That isn't what happened. And of course the tendency was to say: let's be 'multikulti' and live next to each other and enjoy being together, [but] this concept has failed, failed utterly." Angela Merkel, German chancellor "Germany should … get tougher on those who refuse to integrate before opening itself up to further immigration." Horst Seehofer, Bavarian state premier "Integration is the achievement of one who has integrated … I don't have to recognise anyone who lives from the state, rejects that state, refuses to ensure his children receive an education and continues to produce little headscarfed girls." "A large number of the Arabs and Turks living in this city (Berlin) has no productive function other than selling fruit and vegetables". "Turks are conquering Germany in the same way as Kosovars conquered Kosovo – with a high birth rate." Thilo Sarrazin, former Bundesbank board member http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/17/angela-merkel-germany-multiculturalism-failures Sweden Sweden: It Is Considered Racism Only If the Victims Are Not White by Ingrid Carlqvist October 27, 2015 at 5:00 am http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6760/sweden-victims-racism -------------------- I'm half anticipating a civil war in Europe.  But I think that might be stretching things too far at this point in time, as the only Europeans armed and willing to stand their ground and fight for their land, and their identity, are the people of Novorossiya. ꕤ

US-Coalition Trained Free Syrian Army Militants Enter Syria via Turkey - USD$500-million Destabilisation Mission

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/09/20/429968/Syria-US-Turkey-SOHR-Rami-Abdel-Rahman 75 US-trained militants enter Syria via Turkey: Report Sun Sep 20, 2015 9:38AM  Militants from the so-called Free Syrian Army take part in a military training in Syria’s northwestern city of Aleppo, May 4, 2015. ©AFP Militants from the so-called Free Syrian Army take part in a military training in Syria’s northwestern city of Aleppo, May 4, 2015. ©AFP Dozens of militants, who were newly trained by the US-led coalition purportedly fighting Daesh Takfiris, have entered Syria from Turkey, a report says. The so-called Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) said in a report on Sunday that 75 militants have crossed into northern Syria over the past few days in a convoy of a dozen cars with light weapons and ammunition. The militants that were “trained in a camp near the Turkish capital, entered Aleppo province between Friday night and Saturday morning,” said SOHR Director Rami Abdel Rahman. They were later assigned to the so-called Division 30 and Suqur al-Jabal (Falcons of the Mountain), two units for the US-trained forces. The US-led train-and-equip program in Turkey was launched in May to train up to 5,400 so-called moderate militants a year in the alleged battle against Daesh in Syria. [ie  versus ISIS / Islamic State pretext] Washington claims that the USD-500-million mission aims only to target Daesh elements. Analysts, however, argue that the project actually seeks to create more chaos in Syria and weaken the Syrian government. Before the new dispatch of militants to Syria, the program had only managed to train some 60 militants. Last month, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem slammed the US for making a distinction between the Takfiri groups fighting against the Damascus government, saying, “For us in Syria, there is no such thing as moderate or non-moderate opposition. Whoever that takes up arms against the Syrian state is a terrorist.” Since September 2014, the US, along with some of its allies, has purportedly been conducting airstrikes against Daesh extremists inside Syria without any authorization from Damascus or a UN mandate. The airstrikes in Syria are an extension of the US-led aerial campaign against alleged Daesh positions in Iraq, which started in August 2014. Many have criticized the ineffectiveness of the raids. This is while many members of the same US-led alliance have been among the staunch supporters of the terrorist groups operating to topple the Syrian government over the past four years. http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/09/20/429968/Syria-US-Turkey-SOHR-Rami-Abdel-Rahman ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT The West is has been fully invested in 4 years of producing Middle Eastern mayhem, to weaken Syria. As Western proxies causing destabilisation in Syria continue to receive Western support via US-allied military training (and presumably armament) in Turkey (on Syria's northern border; Syria is the cream coloured region with cities marked), Germany's Merkel is pitching in by spending a staggering amount on absorbing what you might call the 'blow-back'  consequences of Western assaults on Syria and beyond.   Syria in relation to Turkey ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Germany's proposed spending on immigration: @ 1 million refugees per year next 2  years could cost Berlin [ie 2 million refugees @ 2yrs] 25 billion euros ($28.25 billion) (@ 12,500 euros per migrant) http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSL5N11N12820150917 Japanese investment bank Mizuho calculation. Over half a dozen banks contacted by Reuters broadly agreed with Mizuho's calculations.   [ibid] If that's what a single country is spending on what amounts to a 'blow-back' mop-up op, imagine the amount of potential profit and strategic value that is really at stake to Western corporate interests, and how determined the West really is to possess control of Syria ... at any cost.  What Germany, Europe and other US allies are spending is probably just 'petty cash', compared to the expected rewards that follow the destruction of a target nation. Remember, the impact of what the West has been engaged in has spread right around Europe and through to US allies as far-flung as Australia. Australia is spending the following for her part in participating in the 5-year Middle Eastern refugees mop up: AUD$44-million - ie US$31-million (by my estimation, taking in 138,750 persons 2015-2019 incl) Whatever Syria has got, the Western powers (representing corporate interests) want badly. According to this article, it's oil wars that are being waged by the West against Syria: Cables released by Wikileaks demonstrate that control of the world's strategic energy reserves has always been a key factor in the direction of the "War on Terror" http://t.co/vCJoqadlFs Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ꕤ

Syria - Bashar al-Assad Interviewed

ꕤ Article SOURCE https://syria360.wordpress.com/2015/09/15/president-assad-if-you-are-worried-about-refugees-stop-supporting-terrorists/ President Assad’s Interview with Russian Media, September 15, 2015 SANA In a rare interview with Russian media outlets, RT among them, Syrian leader Bashar Assad spoke about global and domestic terrorism threats, the need for a united front against jihadism, Western propaganda about the refugee crisis and ways to bring peace to his war-torn nation. source:  above ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ꕤ

Syria - Russian and Iranian Troops - Jablah, Ghorin, Latakia

SOURCE http://www.debka.com/article/24883/First-Iranian-marines-land-in-Syria-link-up-with-newly-arrived-Russian-troops First Iranian marines land in Syria, link up with newly-arrived Russian troops DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 11, 2015, 8:45 AM (IDT) Iran this week sent its first ground troops to Syria, around 1,000 marines and elite troops of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). They moved straight into Ghorin, a small military air facility just south of the port town of Latakia, and hooked up with the just-landed Russian marines at Jablah. Three weeks ago, DEBKA file began reporting on Russian-Iranian military intervention afoot for saving the Syrian ruler Bashar Assad, followed on September 1 by the first disclosure of the Russian buildup in Syria. Our military sources report now that Moscow is about to send a shipment of advanced S-300 air defense missile systems for deployment at Jablah, the base the Russians have built outside Latakia for the intake of the Russian troops. The S-300 systems will also shield the Iranian facility at Ghorin. Jablah has been converted into a busy depot for the Russian troops still arriving in Syria, combatants from units of Marine Brigades 810 and 336. Russian MiG-31 interceptor craft standing by at the Mezza airbase at Damascus airport offer the combined Russian-Iranian force air cover. To the west, the giant Dmitri Donskoy TK-20 nuclear submarine is on its way to Syrian waters. Latakia is therefore fast growing into a powerful Russian-Iranian military enclave, able to accommodate Assad and top regime officials if they are forced to leave Damascus. According to our military sources, it is too soon to determine the exact function of this enclave, whether defensive or, after settling in, the Russian and/or the Iranian forces are planning to go after Syrian rebel and Islamic State forces making gains in northern Syria. There is no evidence to bear out the curious briefing high-ranking defense sources gave Israeli military correspondents Thursday that the incoming Iranian troops have come to beef up the large-scale Syrian army-Hizballah units, who have been unsuccessfully battering away at the rebel fighters holding the key town of Zabadani for nearly two months. Our sources find the Iranian and Russian units fully occupied for now in expanding and outfitting their new quarters at Ghorin and Jablah. SOURCE http://www.debka.com/article/24883/First-Iranian-marines-land-in-Syria-link-up-with-newly-arrived-Russian-troops ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Jablah, Syria Russian built Russian military base combatants from units of Marine Brigades 810 and 336 Ghorin, Syria * near port town:  Latakia Iranian military facility 1,000 marines and elite troops /  Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Mezza airbase at Damascus airport Russian MiG-31 interceptor = combined Russian-Iranian force air cover Dmitri Donskoy TK-20 nuclear submarine heading to Syrian waters Latakia powerful Russian-Iranian military enclave = may accommodate Assad & officials if forced to leave Damascus Russian and/or the Iranian forces =  to target Syrian rebel & ISIS making gains in northern Syria Israeli reports that Russia & Iran troops are to beef up large-scale Syrian army-Hizballah are false   --  Hezbollah Lebanon-based leader:  Hassan Nasrallah since 1992 purportedly Iran's non-state proxy paramilitary wing of Lebanon political party:  Party of Allah (ie 'Hezbollah') formed following Israeli invasion of Lebanon 1982 formed by clerics, said to be funded by Iran *as a resistance to Israeli occupation *strong support among Lebanon Shia population a large number of alleged attacks attributed to Hezbollah / but these could be false flag more https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT This is sooooooo exciting.   It's kind of like being a stay at home armchair general appraising the gathering of the troops on ancient battlegrounds. It looks like Assad isn't going down without an almighty fight. Israelis are typically doing a Hezbollah scare ... probably to justify bombing somewhere, to make sure that Golan Heights energy deal goes ahead.  In this battle, I'm backing Russia, Syria, Iran ... and, I guess, Hezbollah.  Stay tuned. I should probably add here, that my armchair 'support' in terms of the Middle East is somewhat confused and unreliable ... I swing from thinking I support this side or that, to supporting the Israelis ... who have a certain sort of charm that's hard to resist ... lol UPDATE Expect the above article is pro-US-agenda propaganda, to give the impression of an 'aggressive' Russia and Iran.   Explains what is really going on ... Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ꕤ

SYRIA - On Gen. Wesley Clarke - Pentagon List of Countries to Overthrow - Circa 2001

US plans to topple Syria’s Assad go back to 9/11: Analyst Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:23PM Washington’s plans to overthrow the Syrian government go back to the 9/11 attacks and recent revelations by Wikileaks founder Julian Assange should come as no surprise to anybody, says an American journalist. Wayne Madsen, an author and investigative journalist, made the comments when asked about Assange’s remarks who said on Wednesday that the US had planned to topple the Syrian government long before 2011, the year that the brutal conflict broke out in the country. What Assange has said is nothing new because “we know according to retired Gen. Wesley Clarke that, shortly after 9/11, he was shown in the Pentagon a list of countries that the US wanted to overthrow” their governments, Madsen told Press TV on Thursday. The analyst noted that on the list, Syria came after Iraq and was followed by countries like Libya and Sudan. In his new book, Assange points to a cable pertaining to US Ambassador William Roebuck, who served as the Political Counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Damascus between 2004-2007, about plans for overthrowing the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad at the time. This is “also no surprise because the successive US ambassadors to Syria have sought to undermine the Syrian government,” Madsen maintained. He added that “It clearly is a demonstration that just because the United States maintains diplomatic relations with a country,” there is no guarantee that the US is not going to shy away from taking harsh measures against “the government it recognizes.” This is an extreme version of democracy, Madsen argued, which was sought after not only by President Obama’s administrations, but also Republican government such as that of George Bush also attempted to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government. The Syrian government has been in an all out war against various Takfiri groups, mainly the ISIL, since March 2011. According to reports, the United States and its regional allies - especially Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey – have been supporting the militants operating inside the country. The conflict, according to the UN, has so far taken the lives of about 230,000 people. Millions of Syrians have also been displaced as a result of the conflict. SOURCE http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/09/10/428634/Syria-Assange-US-Assad-Wayne-Madsen-911 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT So the US getting 'cosy' with Iran by way of the nukes deal and the Brits reopening an embassy in Iran can only mean one thing:  stand by for an action replay of the 1953 CIA-MI6 coup in Iran? That's almost a quarter of a million dead in Syria, according to the UN. Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are bankrolling. While the American government keeps a list of countries to destroy, Hollywood celebrity hypocrites front aid agencies and act as American war propaganda agents. So, there you go Europe.  The Americans planned this Middle Eastern and African mayhem well in advance; but, guess what?   It's European taxpayers and European societies that will be paying the price:  the enormous material and social costs of refugee and other immigration - which is incalculable in future social terms. While public welfare funding is being cut, welcome to increased military spending for the 'privilege' of NATO gangster Club Membership. Being under US corporate empire's rule is like voluntarily becoming a taxpayer-funded mercenary (proxy) force for the US corporate empire (thus private interests of the enormously wealthy). Subordinate state proxy forces are then usually also supplied to some extent by US manufacturers, enriching American military manufacturers and providing the means of destroying target nations, to pillage resources and entrap the target nations' populations in future debt servitude of the 'nation rebuilding' kind. The 'nation rebuilding' profits to be received post destructive phase must make destroying nations so rewarding.  Win-win. All these subordinate states' resources are directed in aid of US and Western private corporate and banking masters' profits, while impoverishing generations of 'free' men among NATO member domestic populations. Intergenerational debt slavery for the sheeple, but a what a deal for corporate American and allied corporate interests, so what's not to like ... a European colony that buys US arms & military equipment, enriching US military manufacturers; a colony that self-funds military actions on behalf of the US plutocratic empire (and its own player corporations); and a colony that takes on-board all consequences of the massive human costs of the American empire's aggression and insatiable capitalist expansion. Ummmm, how stupid is Europe? Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ꕤ

UK's Run By Psychopaths - Ignore Parliament Decisons, Hide Facts from Public | Airstrikes Syria

Today's most shocking story. SOURCE http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/british-pilots-flew-airstrikes-against-syria-1828462799 British pilots flew airstrikes against IS in Syria #SyriaWar British PM accused of contempt for democracy after revelations that pilots took part in bombing campaign without parliamentary sanction A British fighter jet returns to its base in Cyprus after a mission over Iraq last September (AFP) Simon Hooper's picture Friday 17 July 2015 12:14 UTC Last update: Friday 17 July 2015 15:19 UTC British military pilots carried out airstrikes in Syria while embedded with allied forces fighting the Islamic State group, the UK government has confirmed, despite parliamentary opposition to military involvement in the civil war-stricken country. Responding to a freedom of information request, the Ministry of Defence said that Royal Air Force pilots embedded with US and Canadian forces “operating in Syrian airspace” had flown “strike missions” against IS targets. British forces have been involved in the air campaign against IS in Iraq since last September but they have not formally participated in the wider coalition effort targeting territory held by the group and other Islamist factions in Syria. The British parliament voted against military action in Syria in 2013, and Michael Fallon, the British defence secretary, had earlier indicated that any expansion of the UK’s air campaign to Syria would be put before parliament. Critics on Friday accused David Cameron, the British prime minister, of displaying contempt for democracy and of keeping the public in the dark about the activities of the country’s armed forces. “Parliament voted against bombing Syria two years ago. Now we find that the government ignored this and allowed British pilots to bomb under US command,” Lindsey German, one of the founders of the Stop the War Coalition, told MEE. “This was a political and not a military decision and shows the contempt our prime minister has for democratic decisions. This should stop now and we should oppose all further attempts to bomb Syria.” 'Open and honest debate' The Ministry of Defence revealed details of British involvement in Syria in response to a freedom of information request submitted by Reprieve, a human rights organisation, which made the information public on Thursday. “It is alarming that parliament and the public have been kept in the dark about this for so long,” said Jennifer Gibson, staff attorney at Reprieve. “Yet more worrying is the fact that the UK seems to have turned over its personnel to the US wholesale, without the slightest idea as to what they are actually doing, and whether it is legal. “We need an open and honest debate about UK involvement in Iraq and Syria. We can’t have that, though, until the UK comes clean about what actions its personnel are already undertaking.” Responding to Reprieve, the Ministry of Defence said it did not have information on the specific number or location of airstrikes carried out by British pilots, and said that its personnel were subject to the chain of command of the forces with whom they were embedded. “UK military personnel embedded with the USA, French and Canadian armed forces have been authorised to deploy with their units to participate in coalition operations against ISIL. UK embeds operate as if they were the host nation’s personnel, under that nation’s chain of command,” it said. “These personnel include pilots flying ISR [intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance] and strike missions against ISIL targets using the equipment of those units. Of these three nations only the USA and Canada are operating in Syrian airspace.” A Ministry of Defence spokesman told the UK’s Press Association news agency that there were currently no British pilots operating in Syria and said only “small numbers” had been involved in operations there as part of the embed programme. Fallon has argued for an extension of British military involvement in the international campaign against IS and suggested it is an “illogicality” to target the group in Iraq but not in Syria. British armed forces have committed about 1,000 personnel to the coalition, with most of them involved in airstrikes in Iraq launched from bases in Cyprus and others deployed in training and advisory roles with Iraqi and Kurdish forces. On Thursday Fallon announced plans to deploy a second RAF spy plane to the region later this year and said the UK was the only coalition member conducting “manned ISR” over Syria. 'Lack of leadership' Cameron has also suggested that the UK should consider joining the military effort in Syria after 30 British tourists died in an attack claimed by IS on a beach resort in Tunisia last month.  [What?  Nothing to do with Syria.] Earlier this week he invited several senior members of the opposition Labour Party to attend a meeting of the government's national security council in an effort to win cross-party support for potential attacks on targets in Syria. A spokesperson for Cameron said on Tuesday: "He has been clear he wants to approach this with consensus. He thinks it is important that people understand the nature of the threat." The Labour Party said it would call for the government to make a statement about the airstrikes in parliament on Monday. Jeremy Corbyn, one of four candidates currently running for the leadership of the party, said the government needed to be straight with the public and said there was no mandate for UK involvement in Syria. "It absolutely has no authority for British forces to be involved in Syria. The excuse that these individual pilots are embedded with other airforces seems to me a very difficult and dodgy argument," Corbyn told Sky News television. Criticism of the role of British pilots in the skies over Syria also came on Friday from inside Cameron's governing Conservative Party, with one parliamentarian suggesting the government had displayed "an insensitivity to parliament's will". "I think this is a lack of, if anything, political leadership. We had a major vote. There should be sensitivity on this issue, and we should be very sensitive to the fact that we have military personnel participating, in effect, in military intervention," John Baron, a Conservative MP, told BBC Radio's Today Programme. "Those individuals should be withdrawn from the embedded programme whilst this vote holds sway, while it still has authority, until we vote again. This is at the end of the day what parliamentary democracy is all about, regardless of the pros and cons of military intervention." Members of parliament rejected a government motion seeking support for British military backing for a proposed US-led campaign against Syrian government forces in 2013 following a deadly chemical weapons attack on the outskirts of Damascus. The US subsequently ruled out taking unilateral military action against Bashar al-Assad's government. The US-led coalition against IS has conducted thousands of airstrikes in Iraq and Syria since launching Operation Inherent Resolve last year. Coalition forces on Wednesday bombed 15 targets in Syria and 16 targets in Iraq, US Central Command said in its latest operational update. -Charles B. Anthony contributed to writing this report. SOURCE http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/british-pilots-flew-airstrikes-against-syria-1828462799 --------------------- COMMENT What a great way this is to palm off responsibility: "UK embeds operate as if they were the host nation’s personnel, under that nation’s chain of command" Ummm, I think this was the work of the US-backed 'moderate rebels': "deadly chemical weapons attack on the outskirts of Damascus" Earlier posts refer to articles about how this 'chemical attack' story was spun. Seeing the US perversely names operations as the exact opposite of true intent, Operation Inherent Resolve must be Op Don't Really Give A F*ck .. which would explain why crazy fundamentalists are overrunning the Middle East, despite these 'thousands of airstrikes' that somehow miss the convoys of barbarians that can probably be seen driving across barren desert, from as far as the moon. Don't know what's going on in the UK, apart from insanity. If UK government is going to go ahead and ignore parliament, doing whatever it wants regardless of parliamentary decisions, then the whole thing's a farce, really.  And if it's that much of a farce, does it really matter what happens in future (re meetings, debate etc), when you're still dealing with liars that do whatever they want?  It's not like they can ever be trusted to be straight. --------------------- As I understand it: The US, Gulf Arabs (incl. Saudi Arabia) & the West are trying to bring down the Assad govt. So they've sponsored and armed the 'moderate rebels' (who turn out to be some shade of ISIS or other), and all these 'rebels' slash religious zealots are running amok all over the Middle East, where the West has already engineered the destruction of the Libyan government & funnelled arms to the Syrian 'moderate opposition' slash jihadists.  And the end game is to undermine Iran and its allies in the region, in favour of fundamentalist Saudi dictatorship regional hegemony. However, the West has recently reached the Iran nukes deal.  But I imagine, the West would be just as keen to bring down Iran as it would Syria, so this is rather odd.  But the deal's done and there's talk of corporate investment in Iran.  Don't understand this development, unless the nukes deal is some kind of ruse and maybe Iran will be surprise attacked. Israel has pretty much said it doesn't care about the deal:  it will ignore the terms and attack Iran, if it sees fit.  But all of this will probably be smoothed over & sweetened by upping USA military aid to Israel ... & releasing Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard, by the look of things. Among all of this, the West is making out like it's attacking ISIS ... but they're not really.  They're violating Syrian sovereignty and, from what I've read, backing regional (US-friendly) Kurds in the bid for control of territory. What's really disgusting is that the nations that wish to bring down the Syrian government, violate Syrian sovereignty rather than co-operate with Syria in tackling the ISIS threat. Likewise, I think there's also a gap in the co-operation with Iran, when it comes to co-ordinating defence in the region. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia gets a 'free' card and bombs Yemen to smithereens, but nobody's squawking in the UN about human rights and sanctions on the Saudis. [This is just my take from what little I've read.]

USA, Western Govts, Gulf States & Turkey Knowingly Sponsor Islamic Terrorism

SOURCE https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-west-saw-isis-as-strategic-asset-b99ad7a29092 Pentagon report predicted West’s support for Islamist rebels would create ISIS  Anti-ISIS coalition knowingly sponsored violent extremists to ‘isolate’ Assad, rollback ‘Shia expansion’ by Nafeez Ahmed     This story is published by INSURGE INTELLIGENCE, a new crowd-funded investigative journalism project.     Support us to break the stories that no one else will — become a patron of independent, investigative journalism for the global commons. A declassified secret US government document obtained by the conservative public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad. The document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, and that these “supporting powers” desired the emergence of a “Salafist Principality” in Syria to “isolate the Syrian regime.” According to the newly declassified US document, the Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of this strategy, and warned that it could destabilize Iraq. Despite anticipating that Western, Gulf state and Turkish support for the “Syrian opposition” — which included al-Qaeda in Iraq — could lead to the emergence of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the document provides no indication of any decision to reverse the policy of support to the Syrian rebels. On the contrary, the emergence of an al-Qaeda affiliated “Salafist Principality” as a result is described as a strategic opportunity to isolate Assad. Hypocrisy The revelations contradict the official line of Western governments on their policies in Syria, and raise disturbing questions about secret Western support for violent extremists abroad, while using the burgeoning threat of terror to justify excessive mass surveillance and crackdowns on civil liberties at home. Among the batch of documents obtained by Judicial Watch through a federal lawsuit, released earlier this week, is a US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document then classified as “secret,” dated 12th August 2012. The DIA provides military intelligence in support of planners, policymakers and operations for the US Department of Defense and intelligence community. So far, media reporting has focused on the evidence that the Obama administration knew of arms supplies from a Libyan terrorist stronghold to rebels in Syria. Some outlets have reported the US intelligence community’s internal prediction of the rise of ISIS. Yet none have accurately acknowledged the disturbing details exposing how the West knowingly fostered a sectarian, al-Qaeda-driven rebellion in Syria. Charles Shoebridge, a former British Army and Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism intelligence officer, said:     “Given the political leanings of the organisation that obtained these documents, it’s unsurprising that the main emphasis given to them thus far has been an attempt to embarrass Hilary Clinton regarding what was known about the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi in 2012. However, the documents also contain far less publicized revelations that raise vitally important questions of the West’s governments and media in their support of Syria’s rebellion.” The West’s Islamists The newly declassified DIA document from 2012 confirms that the main component of the anti-Assad rebel forces by this time comprised Islamist insurgents affiliated to groups that would lead to the emergence of ISIS. Despite this, these groups were to continue receiving support from Western militaries and their regional allies. Noting that “the Salafist [sic], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria,” the document states that “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition,” while Russia, China and Iran “support the [Assad] regime.” The 7-page DIA document states that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the precursor to the ‘Islamic State in Iraq,’ (ISI) which became the ‘Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,’ “supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning, both ideologically and through the media.” The formerly secret Pentagon report notes that the “rise of the insurgency in Syria” has increasingly taken a “sectarian direction,” attracting diverse support from Sunni “religious and tribal powers” across the region. In a section titled ‘The Future Assumptions of the Crisis,’ the DIA report predicts that while Assad’s regime will survive, retaining control over Syrian territory, the crisis will continue to escalate “into proxy war.” The document also recommends the creation of “safe havens under international sheltering, similar to what transpired in Libya when Benghazi was chosen as the command centre for the temporary government.” In Libya, anti-Gaddafi rebels, most of whom were al-Qaeda affiliated militias, were protected by NATO ‘safe havens’ (aka ‘no fly zones’). ‘Supporting powers want’ ISIS entity In a strikingly prescient prediction, the Pentagon document explicitly forecasts the probable declaration of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria.” Nevertheless, “Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are supporting these efforts” by Syrian “opposition forces” fighting to “control the eastern areas (Hasaka and Der Zor), adjacent to Western Iraqi provinces (Mosul and Anbar)”:     “… there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist Principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).” The secret Pentagon document thus provides extraordinary confirmation that the US-led coalition currently fighting ISIS, had three years ago welcomed the emergence of an extremist “Salafist Principality” in the region as a way to undermine Assad, and block off the strategic expansion of Iran. Crucially, Iraq is labeled as an integral part of this “Shia expansion.” The establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, the DIA document asserts, is “exactly” what the “supporting powers to the [Syrian] opposition want.” Earlier on, the document repeatedly describes those “supporting powers” as “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey.” Further on, the document reveals that Pentagon analysts were acutely aware of the dire risks of this strategy, yet ploughed ahead anyway. The establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, it says, would create “the ideal atmosphere for AQI to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi.” Last summer, ISIS conquered Mosul in Iraq, and just this month has also taken control of Ramadi. Such a quasi-state entity will provide:     “… a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it considers one enemy. ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of territory.” The 2012 DIA document is an Intelligence Information Report (IIR), not a “finally evaluated intelligence” assessment, but its contents are vetted before distribution. The report was circulated throughout the US intelligence community, including to the State Department, Central Command, the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, FBI, among other agencies. In response to my questions about the strategy, the British government simply denied the Pentagon report’s startling revelations of deliberate Western sponsorship of violent extremists in Syria. A British Foreign Office spokesperson said:     “AQ and ISIL are proscribed terrorist organisations. The UK opposes all forms of terrorism. AQ, ISIL, and their affiliates pose a direct threat to the UK’s national security. We are part of a military and political coalition to defeat ISIL in Iraq and Syria, and are working with international partners to counter the threat from AQ and other terrorist groups in that region. In Syria we have always supported those moderate opposition groups who oppose the tyranny of Assad and the brutality of the extremists.” The DIA did not respond to request for comment. Strategic asset for regime-change Security analyst Shoebridge, however, who has tracked Western support for Islamist terrorists in Syria since the beginning of the war, pointed out that the secret Pentagon intelligence report exposes fatal contradictions at the heart of official pronunciations:     “Throughout the early years of the Syria crisis, the US and UK governments, and almost universally the West’s mainstream media, promoted Syria’s rebels as moderate, liberal, secular, democratic, and therefore deserving of the West’s support. Given that these documents wholly undermine this assessment, it’s significant that the West’s media has now, despite their immense significance, almost entirely ignored them.” According to Brad Hoff, a former US Marine who served during the early years of the Iraq War and as a 9/11 first responder at the Marine Corps Headquarters Battalion in Quantico from 2000 to 2004, the just released Pentagon report for the first time provides stunning affirmation that:     “US intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as an enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a US strategic asset.” Hoff, who is managing editor of Levant Report — an online publication run by Texas-based educators who have direct experience of the Middle East — points out that the DIA document “matter-of-factly” states that the rise of such an extremist Salafist political entity in the region offers a “tool for regime change in Syria.” The DIA intelligence report shows, he said, that the rise of ISIS only became possible in the context of the Syrian insurgency — “there is no mention of US troop withdrawal from Iraq as a catalyst for Islamic State’s rise, which is the contention of innumerable politicians and pundits.” The report demonstrates that:     “The establishment of a ‘Salafist Principality’ in Eastern Syria is ‘exactly’ what the external powers supporting the opposition want (identified as ‘the West, Gulf Countries, and Turkey’) in order to weaken the Assad government.” The rise of a Salafist quasi-state entity that might expand into Iraq, and fracture that country, was therefore clearly foreseen by US intelligence as likely — but nevertheless strategically useful — blowback from the West’s commitment to “isolating Syria.” Complicity Critics of the US-led strategy in the region have repeatedly raised questions about the role of coalition allies in intentionally providing extensive support to Islamist terrorist groups in the drive to destabilize the Assad regime in Syria. The conventional wisdom is that the US government did not retain sufficient oversight on the funding to anti-Assad rebel groups, which was supposed to be monitored and vetted to ensure that only ‘moderate’ groups were supported. However, the newly declassified Pentagon report proves unambiguously that years before ISIS launched its concerted offensive against Iraq, the US intelligence community was fully aware that Islamist militants constituted the core of Syria’s sectarian insurgency. Despite that, the Pentagon continued to support the Islamist insurgency, even while anticipating the probability that doing so would establish an extremist Salafi stronghold in Syria and Iraq. As Shoebridge told me, “The documents show that not only did the US government at the latest by August 2012 know the true extremist nature and likely outcome of Syria’s rebellion” — namely, the emergence of ISIS — “but that this was considered an advantage for US foreign policy. This also suggests a decision to spend years in an effort to deliberately mislead the West’s public, via a compliant media, into believing that Syria’s rebellion was overwhelmingly ‘moderate.’” Annie Machon, a former MI5 intelligence officer who blew the whistle in the 1990s on MI6 funding of al-Qaeda to assassinate Libya’s former leader Colonel Gaddafi, similarly said of the revelations:     “This is no surprise to me. Within individual countries there are always multiple intelligence agencies with competing agendas.” She explained that MI6’s Libya operation in 1996, which resulted in the deaths of innocent people, “happened at precisely the time when MI5 was setting up a new section to investigate al-Qaeda.” This strategy was repeated on a grand scale in the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, said Machon, where the CIA and MI6 were:     “… supporting the very same Libyan groups, resulting in a failed state, mass murder, displacement and anarchy. So the idea that elements of the American military-security complex have enabled the development of ISIS after their failed attempt to get NATO to once again ‘intervene’ is part of an established pattern. And they remain indifferent to the sheer scale of human suffering that is unleashed as a result of such game-playing.” Divide and rule Several US government officials have conceded that their closest allies in the anti-ISIS coalition were funding violent extremist Islamist groups that became integral to ISIS. US Vice President Joe Biden, for instance, admitted last year that Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Turkey had funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to Islamist rebels in Syria that metamorphosed into ISIS. But he did not admit what this internal Pentagon document demonstrates — that the entire covert strategy was sanctioned and supervised by the US, Britain, France, Israel and other Western powers. The strategy appears to fit a policy scenario identified by a recent US Army-commissioned RAND Corp report. The report, published four years before the DIA document, called for the US “to capitalise on the Shia-Sunni conflict by taking the side of the conservative Sunni regimes in a decisive fashion and working with them against all Shiite empowerment movements in the Muslim world.” The US would need to contain “Iranian power and influence” in the Gulf by “shoring up the traditional Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan.” Simultaneously, the US must maintain “a strong strategic relationship with the Iraqi Shiite government” despite its Iran alliance. The RAND report confirmed that the “divide and rule” strategy was already being deployed “to create divisions in the jihadist camp. Today in Iraq such a strategy is being used at the tactical level.” The report observed that the US was forming “temporary alliances” with al-Qaeda affiliated “nationalist insurgent groups” that have fought the US for four years in the form of “weapons and cash.” Although these nationalists “have cooperated with al-Qaeda against US forces,” they are now being supported to exploit “the common threat that al-Qaeda now poses to both parties.” The 2012 DIA document, however, further shows that while sponsoring purportedly former al-Qaeda insurgents in Iraq to counter al-Qaeda, Western governments were simultaneously arming al-Qaeda insurgents in Syria. The revelation from an internal US intelligence document that the very US-led coalition supposedly fighting ‘Islamic State’ today, knowingly created ISIS in the first place, raises troubling questions about recent government efforts to justify the expansion of state anti-terror powers. In the wake of the rise of ISIS, intrusive new measures to combat extremism including mass surveillance, the Orwellian ‘prevent duty’ and even plans to enable government censorship of broadcasters, are being pursued on both sides of the Atlantic, much of which disproportionately targets activists, journalists and ethnic minorities, especially Muslims. Yet the new Pentagon report reveals that, contrary to Western government claims, the primary cause of the threat comes from their own deeply misguided policies of secretly sponsoring Islamist terrorism for dubious geopolitical purposes. Dr Nafeez Ahmed is an investigative journalist, bestselling author and international security scholar. A former Guardian writer, he writes the ‘System Shift’ column for VICE’s Motherboard, and is also a columnist for Middle East Eye. He is the winner of a 2015 Project Censored Award, known as the ‘Alternative Pulitzer Prize’, for Outstanding Investigative Journalism for his Guardian work, and was selected in the Evening Standard’s ‘Power 1,000’ most globally influential Londoners. https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-west-saw-isis-as-strategic-asset-b99ad7a29092 COMMENT I'm guessing that the roving religious extremist proxy army, that's creating a state of its own across the Middle East, is probably something new (in recent history, at least). But Western support for religious extremists isn't at all new, although perhaps the intelligence report revelations may be something out of the ordinary (I don't know enough in that regard). The West was supporting the Mujahadeen back when the Russians were fighting them.  The West supported Chenchen terrorists versus Russia.  The West supported Kosovo terrorists versus Serbia (pay-off:  US now has a nice, big military base in Kosovo).  And there's probably more examples for anyone that cares to investigate. Washington’s «Civil Society» and CIA Financing of Chechen and Other Caucasus Regional Terrorists http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2013/04/29/washington-civil-society-cia-financing-chechen-other-regional-terrorists.html Kosovo’s “Mafia State” and Camp Bondsteel: Towards a Permanent US Military Presence in Southeast Europe http://www.globalresearch.ca/kosovo-s-mafia-state-and-camp-bondsteel-towards-a-permanent-us-military-presence-in-southeast-europe/30262 So I guess you can say that the West has a fair history of promoting Islamic extremism for strategic gains.  But the big deal here is that the intelligence report indicates they knew support of extremists was likely to create an ISIS style movement, but they went along that road anyway. Surveillance and other control measures have been stepped up to a suffocating level - or that's how it seems when you notice what's going on.  While much of it may well be an opportunistic move on the part of allied Western governments to step up controls over the rabble, I wouldn't discount the risks that those in the West have been gambling with. I'm guessing that religious-political fanatics are probably the most dangerous kind of violent threat, and the West has contributed to creating a religious-political fanatic blowback threat in a number of ways: (a) alignment with fundamentalist religious states, eg Saudi Arabia; (b) support of various Islamist terrorist groups in various regions; (c) interventionist foreign policy - Middle East; (d) promotion/support of extremism in the Middle East; (e) the importation of extremists (or potential extremists) among immigrants and displaced persons, admitted on the basis of non-restrictive immigration policy. Everybody that dismisses Tony Abbott's 'death cult' reference ought to take a look at severed head photos online, streets awash with blood, kids standing around watching head-cutting, kids holding up severed heads, heads on spikes, crucifixion killings, hand chopping, street floggings, young men thrown from buildings, to be stoned by waiting crowds below, women stoned by crowds, and so on. That's just one facet of violence associated with religion in the Middle East.  There's also the constant attacks in places like Kabul.  Every other day there's some attack or suicide bombing. Shia Mosques are also targets of frequent attacks.   The religious-political violence manifested even in France (Charlie Hebdo), followed by: violent clashes by adherents in Niger (45 Churches torched; French cultural centre torched, 4 killed, 45 injured; other: 2 days of protests leave 10 dead) Pakistan (protests outside French consulate, photographer was shot in the back;  passes senate resolution condemning 'wilful slander & insults' in French media;  Lawyers Assoc / Lawyers protest blasphemy);  Dakar and Senegal torching French flags;  Qatar and Bahrain (issuing warnings publishing cartoons will fuel hatred);  Sudan (protesters besiege French embassy in Khartoum / teargas & baton dispersal; demanded expulsion of French ambassador; Sudan prevented French ambassador from speaking at press conference);  Muslims from Asia to Mideast to Africa rage at CharlieHebdo (source: interaksyon);  largest protests in capitals of Algeria and Jordan (ynet);  student protest in Iran;  Iran shuts down newspaper for running Hebdo story with photo of George Clooney wearing Hebdo badge;  Grozny, Chechnya protest against Hebdo cartoon;  Turkey - court ordered a block on websites featuring images of Hebdo cover.  And that's just *some* of the behaviour in the aftermath of a terrorist attack on workers at a French publication.  Someone needs to do a full catalogue, because I think it would be worthwhile studying the reactions. Israel's then Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, declared that Israel would not allow radical Islam to intimidate; and his political party, I think it was, bought up big on the satirical magazine. In a weird way, I find the Israelis reassuring.  But it's a conflicted feeling, because I also find destroyed olive groves and settler attacks on the Palestinians upsetting - and the militant Israeli religious right is rather disturbing in its own right (eg the recent mob march through Jerusalem's Arab quarter, I think it was, and the even more disturbing manhandling of journalists by mobs of soldiers, police or security). Looking at all the religious-political chaos and violence mentioned above as well as, for example, Islamic terrorist attacks on Russian citizens blown up on trains (from some time ago), and the commonplace hacking killings of atheist writers in Bangladesh, as another example, one would think that encouragement of Islamic extremism would be completely out of bounds for any Westerner that appreciates the safety and freedoms that we all take for granted, such as the freedom from belief, the freedom of expression, the freedom from religious/moral police, freedom from the collective - personal freedom / individual freedom, and just freedom from restriction, I suppose. So regime change in Syria is the prize, followed by Iran.  But what then?  Just chaos all over, like Libya? The press lying to everyone about 'moderate rebels' is pretty crap. The further controls on media don't make much sense, when the media is willing to dish out whatever the political agenda is.  I don't get why they're shutting down the compliant press.  That's spooky.  Are we going to war? PS   This comment is just my non-expert view / feelings, based on my limited experiences and knowledge, and how I simply feel at this point in time.