Sanction-Drunk West Forgets to Target ISIS Sponsors

Sanction-Drunk West Forgets to Target ISIS Sponsors

Ulson Gunnar
New Eastern Outlook
September 21, 2014

As the US and Europe prepare another round of sanctions against Russia over the ongoing Ukrainian conflict, the third round of such sanctions since the conflict began shortly after the Euromaidan unrest resulted in the installation of a NATO-backed regime in Kiev, a curious and inexplicable oversight appears to have been made.

While wild accusations have been leveled against Russia over its involvement over the violence in Ukraine, claims ranging from covert support up to and including unsubstantiated claims of a “full scale invasion,” prominent media organizations across the Western World have for years reported a flow of cash, weapons, equipment and fighters from America’s allies in the Persian Gulf as well as from nations like NATO member Turkey, and into the conflict raging within Syria’s borders.

While baseless claims leveled against Russia have served as ample justification for the West to continue leveling sanctions against Moscow, no sanctions have as of yet been leveled against the overt sponsors of militancy and, in fact, terrorism in Syria. So widespread has state-sponsored terrorism become in the Middle East that what began as a limited proxy war against Syria has transformed into an immense regional army with tens of thousands of paid soldiers requiring millions of dollars a day to operate across multiple borders and confounding the forces of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon combined.

ISIS is State-Sponsored, So Why Aren’t These States Being Sanctioned? 

Clearly, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria also known as ISIS or ISIL, are the benefactors of vast state-sponsorship and yet the West has not identified nor condemned these sponsors, let alone move toward leveling sanctions similar to what it is seeking to impose upon Moscow.

News articles by prominent British and American news outlets like the Daily Beast’s “America’s Allies Are Funding ISIS,” the London Telegraph’s “How Isil is funded, trained and operating in Iraq and Syria,” and the Daily Mail’s “Cameron tells European leaders to ‘be good to their word’ and stop funding ISIS with ransom payments,” give explanations ranging from outright admissions that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, and Turkey are directly arming, funding, aiding and abetting ISIS, to descriptions that read like an immense money laundering operation, to ridiculous claims including “ransom payments” and “robbed banks” have been behind ISIS’ regional rise to menace.

At one point in the Daily Beast’s article it claims, “the U.S. has made the case as strongly as they can to regional countries, including Kuwait. But ultimately when you take a hands off, leading from behind approach to things, people don’t take you seriously and they take matters into their own hands.” If ever there was a case to use sanctions to be “taken seriously,” it would appear to be in this case, yet sure enough, no sanctions appear to be on the table.

Systematic Hypocrisy Undermines Legitimacy 

American and European hypocrisy so stark undermines the legitimacy of both their governments and institutions as well as their agenda domestically and abroad. Condemning and leveling sanctions against Russia for allegedly doing in Ukraine what the West is openly doing in Syria and Iraq with its own immense proxy army leaves the global audience to decide between Russia managing a crisis on its borders and a West meddling thousands of miles from its borders.

Beyond sanctions, the West’s presence across the Middle East has had a negative impact on public perception both across the region and back home. This is owed to a larger pattern of hypocrisy, deceit, and meddling that has been done under various pretenses but for obvious self-serving interests.

What West’s Missing Sanctions Tell Us About Its “War” on ISIS 

Versus Russia, the United States and Europe have used every means at their disposal to support their regime of choice in Ukraine as well as undermine both eastern Ukrainians and Russia who has emerged as their champion upon the international stage. From multiple rounds of sanctions, to threats of direct military force, and an overall strategy of geopolitical and military encirclement of Russian territory has been pursued to exact from Moscow concessions regarding Western designs in Ukraine.

Why hasn’t a similar full-spectrum commitment been used to render from Persian Gulf monarchies the same desired capitulation to Western desires in the Middle East and more specifically, in regards to ISIS? The answer is simple, the West does not desire an end to the massive state-sponsorship of ISIS via its own allies, namely Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Jordan, and others.

It appears instead that the West and its partners are pursuing a dual-track strategy of inflaming the region with barbarism and violence so appalling, global public opinion will desperately beg for military intervention by the United States and its allies it has been so far utterly unsuccessful selling to the public under any other pretense.

The lack of biting sanctions against state-sponsors of terrorism aiding and abetting ISIS in both Iraq and Syria is an indictment of the West’s lack of sincerity in its “war” on ISIS. Short of a signed confession, no other indicator could be more telling of yet another war being sold within a pack of lies than a West eager to sanction every nation on Earth to the point of isolating itself to exact global obedience, but absent of sanctions amid overt support for terrorists it believes are so dangerous it must militarily intervene in Iraq and Syria.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

http://journal-neo.org/2014/09/21/sanction-drunk-west-forgets-to-target-isis-sponsors/

| Leave a comment

America’s “Game” of Wars and Interventions

America’s “Game” of Wars and Interventions

Salman Rafi Sheikh
New Eastern Outlook
September 25, 2014

Since at least the end of the Second World War, the US has been directly and indirectly fostering, aiding, funding and training fighting militias and groups in different regions of the world to further its own interests. However, the irony of this policy is that in most of the cases, the US ended up fighting, in the name of establishing peace, these very forces of destruction. History is replete with such examples. As the ‘sole’ super power of the world, it has actually been fighting the war of its own survival, that is, to continue to survive as the ‘sole’ super power. As such, not only does it ‘invent’ enemies, but also reasons to fight them. Let’s have a look at some of these ‘invented’ wars.

A number of examples can be given from history to justify this proposition. For example, the emergence of the Taliban is most directly the result of the CIA’s involvement in the Soviet-Afghan War. Not only did CIA provide all possible funding, but also established camps across Pakistan-Afghan border which were extensively used to train people to do “Jihad” against the Soviet Union. And, the fact that the Americans joyfully disseminate information about different aspects of this war in the form of Hollywood movies shows the extent of acknowledgement the US has publicly made regarding once supporting the Taliban when they were hailed and glorified as the “defenders” of the “free world.” Given that, now it looks remarkably amazing how that very Taliban later on turned into enemies and dragged the US into the longest war of its history.

Nothing can explain this fundamental transition except the fact that the US first needed the Taliban to use them against its cold war rival, and then to use, as a pretext to go to war, the Taliban’s refusal to allow the US a free way to build oil and gas pipelines from the Central Asia to the India Ocean. The force that the US once ‘proudly’ created thus turned into the most pernicious enemy of the world—hence the war against “terrorism.” In other words, the most important reason of this longest war is nothing but the US’ own created group of fighters.

On the other hand, the US could still have ‘invented’ any reason to launch attack on Afghanistan even if the Taliban had not refused to accept American plans; after all, extensive militarization of the entire region around Afghanistan was, and still is, one of the cardinal policy objectives of the US’ twenty-first century grand strategy. The fact that the US wanted to militarize the entire region in order for controlling the flow of energy from here to many parts of the world becomes quite evident when we look at the very location of the key military bases of the US in Afghanistan. All of the key bases have been built on the proposed route of the TAPI pipeline.

Similar kind of things took place in Africa where the US first sponsored “rebels” to fight against the Qaddafi regime in Libya and then the same “rebels” started to threaten the US’ and its allies’ interests in Africa, particularly in Mali—hence, the French led attack on Mali in 2013. Contrary to the official propaganda narrative of the US and its allies, the “terrorists” in Mali were, until a few months earlier, the US’ frontline allies in Libya.

As a matter of fact, according to some of the very credible published material in the Western media, militancy in Mali is a direct result of the US’ and its allies’ own policies. For example, Jeremy Kennan(Professor at University of London) reported in one of his articles about the shadowy ties that link the ‘fundamentalist forces’ across the North Africa to Algeria, the U.S. and the Gulf states. The facts presented in such other reports show that the catastrophe now being played out in Mali, as also in Africa at large, is basically an inevitable outcome of the way in which the Global War on Terror has been inserted into the Sahara-Sahel by the US, in concert with Algerian intelligence operatives, since at least 2002.

According to a report of the New York Times, which uncovers the truth about the presence of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) in Mali, much of the instability in Mali is a direct outcome of the US led NATO intervention in Libya. The report highlights a very crucial fact of the mechanisms of the US’ geo-politics. According to the said report, it was the (US-backed)heavily armed, battle-hardened Islamist fighters who returned from combat in Libya and played the precipitating role in the collapse of the US-supported central government in Mali.” Similarly, according to a report of the Guardian, Al-Qaeda itself does not as such exist in Mali. As a matter of fact, the so-called AQIM is a successor of an Algerian Islamist group, (a product of Algerian civil war) which is only using the brand “al-Qaeda”, and which is further being imposed by the West for propaganda. This militant group was smashed by the Algerian authorities, and most of its leadership is, in fact, Algerian. And, now after having been ousted from Mali, they are again challenging the Algerian government.

The fact of the matter is that it was neither AQIM nor the Tuaregs, but the US trained military officers of the Malian army, who actually overthrew the Malian government because of the latter’s inability to address the Tuareg problem, leading to instability and eventually to intervention of the West. The so-called defection of the Malian army can also be explained with reference to the US led intervention in Libya when we take into account the fact that Tuaregs – who traditionally hailed from northern Mali – made up a large portion of his army, and when Gaddafi was ejected from power, they returned to their homeland and joined the local armed resistance. Thus intervention in Libya precipitated the Malian crisis, the latter being the consequence of the former, as later on acknowledged by the UK’ Foreign Secretary William Hague himself.

Let’s now have a look at the crisis going on in Iraq. Much like the Libya-Mali case, the crisis in Iraq are deeply linked, notwithstanding the US’ own long war with Iraq, to the wider regional problem. The phenomenon of the ISIS, which was deliberately and most fervently ‘mothered’ by the US and its allies in the Middle East, has now all of a sudden gone rogue, causing a massive ‘threat’ to the US and its allied Kingdoms. However, a look at the circumstances preceding the emergence of the ISIS in the current form would suffice to show that the ISIS is also, like Afghan Taliban and fighters in Libya-Mali, a ‘child’ of the US’ geo-politics.

It is a bitter irony that until recently the rebels of the Islamic State were glorified and heralded by the West as Syria’s “opposition freedom fighters” committed to “restoring democracy” and unseating the “brutal” government of Bashar al Assad. Evidences presented and collected by certain Israeli Intelligence sources has sufficiently revealed that a number of US allies in the Middle East did take part in the recruitment, training and funding of the “jihadists” of the ISIS; and, these fighters of the ISIS, along with Al-Nusra front, had previously been the linchpin of the Western strategy to defeat the Syrian Army on ground. According to a report of London’s Daily Express, the most important source of ISIS financing, to date, has been the support coming out of the Gulf States, primarily Saudi Arabia but also Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. It is quite surprising to note that even such reports fail to mention the role of the US in channeling this support.

Undoubtedly, the crisis in Iraq has paved the way for the US intervention; however, this is not the end of the story. As a part of its favourite “game” of wars, the US is again backing the Saudi government to create another Jihadist organization to counter the ISIS in Iraq and Syria. As a part of the understanding reached between Saudia and the US, the former is to host a training facility for thousands of Syrian rebel fighters who are combating both the Islamic State and President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. In simple words, the chief architects of the ISIS are now, in order to conceal their true intentions and purposes, coming up with something new that would help them perpetuate chaos in order to maintain their own monopoly over the region’s Oil. The allies from Europe have, precisely for ensuring smooth supply of oil, been supporting every move engineered by the US and Saudia.

While all these actions are being undertaken under the banner of the “Global War on Terrorism”, the US has no real intention of targeting the ISIS’ terror brigades which are being systematically integrated by the Western Special Forces and intelligence operatives. In fact, the only meaningful and effective campaign against the ISIS terrorists is being waged by the Syrian army itself, which also happens to be the target of the US geo-politics.

Given that the US and its allies are at the helm of the ISIS even after the latter has occupied a large swath of territory, it becomes quite obvious that the actual purpose of this on-going “game” of war is perpetual destabilization of both Iraq and Syria, as also of other possible targets, such as Iran. The “Sunni” outlook of the ISIS is sufficient to understand that after Iraq and Syria—the two “Shia” states in the Middle East—Iran could possibly be the next target; and therefore, the government of Israel has not even opposed the ISIS’ expansion.

Such “games” of war are not and have never been waged to establish “peace” as is claimed by the so-called ‘democratic’ US and the West; rather their real aim is to eliminate all forces that stand in their way of maintaining hegemony in the world. From Asia to Africa, the “game” of wars is supposed to lead to one end: unchallenged politico-economic and military supremacy of the US and its allies. Nowhere in this “game” do ‘humane considerations’ find any reasonable space. The rhetoric of “peace and development” is only for the masses to digest to make them believe that the war is to “end all wars.” This, however, remains only a myth when it comes to ground realities where every “war on terrorism” sows seeds of a new “war,” just like stages of any game, where every stage leads to another stage, to another level.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

http://journal-neo.org/2014/09/25/america-s-game-of-wars-and-interventions/

 

| Leave a comment

Turn the Tables: Stopping Western Aggression in Syria

Turn the Tables:  Stopping Western Aggression in Syria

Tony Cartalucci
New Eastern Outlook
September 29, 2014

As the US begins token airstrikes on both sides of the Syrian-Iraqi border, the fighting capacity of the “Islamic State” or “ISIS,” has seen no visible setbacks. This is because ISIS is in fact the very proxy mercenaries intentionally created to fight the West’s proxy war against Iran and its arc of influence stretching from neighboring Iraq, through Syria, and into Lebanon.

As early as 2007 – a full 4 years before the 2011 “Arab Spring” would begin – Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his New Yorker article titled, “”The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” would warn specifically (emphasis added):

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

After the West’s flooding of the region with billions of dollars worth of weapons, equipment, vehicles, training, and cash for the purpose of bolstering “moderate rebels,” what has emerged is precisely the “extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam” and are “sympathetic to Al Qaeda” Hersh warned about in 2007. The West has thus far otherwise failed to explain who else besides extremists could have received the aid, or who is funding extremists above and beyond the collective support provided by the US, Europe, and the West’s Middle Eastern partners, that have allowed these extremists to dominate the battlefield so decisively.

Now the US claims it must raise another army of “moderate” ground troops to augment its aerial bombardment of “ISIS.” But in reality, attacks on phantom enemies in the desert serve the singular purpose of creating a no-fly zone and no-drive zone for Syria’s military, preventing the final annihilation of the West’s terrorist mercenaries in Syrian territory and in fact giving them a second chance to finally march on the gates of Damascus with US airpower in tow.

For all intents and purposes, the US through its airstrikes has carved out a defacto buffer zone protected by US airpower. The ground troops it seeks to deploy “against ISIS” are intended instead for Damascus, the overthrow of the Syrian government, and the handover of Syria to sectarian warlords for the same genocidal conflagration still being suffered in Libya after a similar “intervention” by the US and its NATO allies.

Turning the Tables 

Despite this diabolical, criminal conspiracy unfolding before the world’s eyes – a verbatim repeat of the crimes against humanity committed by NATO in Libya – there still exists an opportunity to turn the tables on the West, using its propaganda and the precedents it has set against it and its insidious agenda. 

While in all actuality ISIS and other extremist factions already constitute the ground component of the West’s campaign against Damascus, now enjoying sanctuary under the cover of US airpower, the general public neither knows this, nor would ever accept this should they find out. The rhetorical hysteria surrounding the “awesome threat” ISIS suddenly poses to the world still has considerable momentum.

In a move of geopolitical redirection, Syria’s allies can cite that “awesome threat” of ISIS as impetus for their own actions in Syria – and more specifically – an overt, wide-ranging, arming, training, and funding regiment for forces already on the ground, already guaranteed not to be extremists, and the only legitimate force in Syrian territory – the Syrian Arab Army.

The Syrian Arab Army or More “Moderates?” – A Clear Choice 

Indeed, the biggest quandary facing the West’s next attempt to overthrow Syria is the creation of its “ground force.” These troops would by necessity need to be indeed “moderates,” and not simply “more moderate” than the boogeymen Western propaganda has created under the name “ISIS.” Already, terrorists factions confirmed to have been armed with heavy weapons by the US have condemned airstrikes on ISIS and have openly admitted they fight alongside and within the ranks of Al Qaeda itself.

The Daily Beast would report in its article, “Al Qaeda Plotters in Syria ‘Went Dark,’ U.S. Spies Say,” that (emphasis added):

One Syrian rebel group supported in the past by the United States condemned the air strikes on Tuesday. Harakat Hazm, a rebel group that received a shipment of U.S. anti-tank weapons in the spring, called the airstrikes “an attack on national sovereignty” and charged that foreign led attacks only strengthen the Assad regime.The statement comes from a document, purportedly from the group, that has circulated online and was posted in English translation from a Twitter account called Syria Conflict Monitor. Several Syria experts, including the Brookings Doha Center’s Charles Lister, believe the document to be authentic. The Daily Beast would report in its article, “Al Qaeda Plotters in Syria ‘Went Dark,’ U.S. Spies Say,” that (emphasis added):

Before the official statement, there were signs that Harakat Hazm was making alliances in Syria that could conflict with its role as a U.S. partner. In early Septemeber a Harakat Hazm official told a reporter for the L.A. Times: “Inside Syria, we became labeled as secularists and feared Nusra Front was going to battle us…But Nusra doesn’t fight us, we actually fight alongside them. We like Nusra.”

Harakat Hazm is the rule, not the exception. Beyond the nebulous title “moderates,” the West has thus far failed to name any of these actual groups – because they do not exist. Weapons and cash it is pouring into Syria have ended up “alongside” Al Qaeda’s al-Nusra front and ISIS, just as groups like Harakat Hazm have.

Russia, China, and Iran have an opportunity to cite the Syrian Arab Army as the most capable and appropriate force in the region with which to fight ISIS – a task the Syrian Arab Army has been demonstrably doing since at least 2011. It was the US State Department itself that stated in their official designation of Jabhat al-Nusra as a foreign terrorist organization that Al Qaeda and other hardcore sectarian terrorists had been fighting the Syrian government, spearheading the violence in Syria since the conflict began in 2011.

The US State Department’s official press statement titled, “Terrorist Designations of the al-Nusrah Front as an Alias for al-Qa’ida in Iraq,” stated explicitly that:

Since November 2011, al-Nusrah Front has claimed nearly 600 attacks – ranging from more than 40 suicide attacks to small arms and improvised explosive device operations – in major city centers including Damascus, Aleppo, Hamah, Dara, Homs, Idlib, and Dayr al-Zawr. During these attacks numerous innocent Syrians have been killed.

It is no stretch then to characterize Syria’s conflict as one between a secular government and a menagerie of foreign-backed sectarian extremists. Without even mentioning these extremists’ foreign sponsors, Syria’s allies can use the current hysteria created by the Western media itself to offer overt and wide-ranging military and political support to the Syrian government and above all, the Syrian people. Beyond the buffer zone the West is struggling tactically, strategically, and politically to establish and maintain, will be a Syrian nation-state backed with the resources necessary to stop further aggression in its tracks and roll back the terrorist hordes the West is clearly perpetuating within Syria’s borders and all along them. 

The US is Not the Only Nation Entitled to “Defend” Itself Against ISIS 

The US appears to believe it is entitled to unilaterally attack, invade, and even occupy nations to “defend” itself against supposed threats. In the case of Syria, it is clear that after multiple failed attempts to sell regime change under the pretext of supporting “democracy,” multiple manufactured “humanitarian” pretexts, and the threat of “chemical weapons,” neutralizing ISIS is simply the latest excuse in a long line of verified, increasingly desperate lies being used to advance the West’s agenda in the Middle East.

Russia – threatened explicitly by ISIS terrorists – and China are both demonstrably facing sectarian extremists within their own borders – many of whom are directly linked to Al Qaeda. Both could easily make a case for assisting the Syrian government in eliminating the “ISIS threat.” Moscow and Beijing – and many others – could argue that clearly the West’s strategy of arming “moderates” has failed, and their latest plan to arm and train between 5,000-15,000 more is a disaster in the making.

Instead, the secular nation-state of Syria should be given the resources and support it needs to finally bury the threat of extremism it itself has warned the world of since the West began disingenuously both stoking and perpetuating the conflict in 2011. If the West can unilaterally begin military operations within a sovereign nation and without a mandate from either Syria or the UN, surely Syria’s allies can offer substantial and overt material and political support if given Damascus’ approval.

For the so-called “moderates” – if any in fact exist – an opportunity to join the Syrian government in its fight and broker a truce with government forces could be an attractive alternative to the zero-sum and zero-gain scenario Washington has planned for Syrians on both sides of the conflict.

A Syrian soldier needs only look at the current state of Libya to understand the necessity to continue fighting on, and any genuine rebels there may be can do likewise, understanding the ploy against their own nation they have been used and abused for, and the ignoble end their fight is leading toward.

Tony Cartalucci, is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.

http://journal-neo.org/2014/09/29/turn-the-tables-stopping-western-aggression-in-syria/

| Leave a comment

Dutch MH17 Investigation Omits US “Intel”

Dutch MH17 Investigation Omits US “Intel”

Tony Cartalucci
Land Destroyer Report
September 19, 2014

The absence of America’s so-called “intelligence” regarding the downing of Malaysia Airlines MH17 over Ukraine in a 34 page Dutch Safety Board preliminary report raises serious questions about the credibility and legitimacy of both America’s political agenda, and all agencies, organizations, and political parties currently behind it.

The report titled, “Preliminary Report: Crash involving Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200 flight MH17″ (.pdf), cites a wide variety of evidence in its attempt to determine the cause of flight MH17’s crash and to prevent similar accidents or incidents from occurring again in the future. Among this evidence includes the cockpit voice recorder (CVR), the flight data recorder (FDR), analysis of recorded air traffic control (ATC) surveillance data and radio communication, analysis of the meteorological circumstances, forensic examination of the wreckage (if recovered and possible foreign objects if found), results of the pathological investigation, and analysis of the in-flight break up sequence.

Satellite images are referenced in regards to analyzing the crash site after the disaster, however, no where in the report is mentioned any evidence whatsoever of satellite images of missile launchers, intelligence from the United States regarding missile launches, or any information or evidence at all in any regard suggesting a missile had destroyed MH17. In fact, the report concludes by stating:

This report is preliminary. The information must necessarily be regarded as tentative and subject to alternation or correction if additional evidence becomes available. Further work will at least include the following areas of interest to substantiate the factual information regarding:

  • detailed analyses of data, including CVR, FDR and other sources, recorded onboard the aircraft;
  • detailed analyses of recorded ATC surveillance data and radio communication;
  • detailed analyses of the meteorological circumstances;
  • forensic examination of wreckage if recovered and possible foreign objects, if found;
  • results of the pathological investigation;
  • analyses of the in-flight break up sequence;
  • assessment of the operator’s and State of Occurrence’s management of flight safety over a region of conflict or high security risk;
  • any other areas that are identified during the investigation. 

With the black boxes in hand and a wealth of data from multiple sources both onboard the aircraft and from the ground in both Ukraine and Russia, the Dutch Safety Board was still hesitant to draw any conclusions and insisted that none be jumped to.

The report specifically mentions information collected from Russia, including air traffic control and radar data – both of which were publicly shared by Russia in the aftermath of the disaster. The report also cites data collected from Ukraine air traffic controllers. The United States however, apart from providing technical information about the aircraft itself considering it was manufactured in the US, provided absolutely no data in any regard according to the report.

Missing US Intel Points to Fabrications  

Had the US actually possessed any credible information to substantiate its claims that MH17 was shot down by a missile, such evidence surely would have been submitted to and included in the Dutch Safety Board’s preliminary reporting. That it is predictably missing confirms what commentators, analysts, and politicians around the world had long since suspected – the West’s premature conclusions regarding MH17’s demise were driven by a political agenda, not a factually based search for the truth. The evidence that MH17 was shot down by a missile as the West insisted is missing because it never existed in the first place.

That the Dutch Safety Board possesses such a vast amount of information but is still unable to draw anything but the most tentative conclusions, exposes the alleged certainty of Western pundits and politicians in the hours and days after MH17’s loss as an utterly irresponsible, politically motivated, exploitation of tragedy at best, and at worst, exposing the West – NATO in particular – as possible suspects in a crime they clearly stood the most to benefit from.

Fabrications Establish Motive

In the wake of the MH17 tragedy, the West would rush through a series of sanctions against Russia as well as justify further military aid for the regime in Kiev, Ukraine and the literal Neo-Nazi militant battalions serving its pro-Western agenda amid a brutal civil war raging in the country’s eastern most provinces. With sanctions in hand, and the war raging on in earnest, the MH17 disaster dropped entirely out of Western narratives as if it never occurred. Surely if the West had solid evidence implicating eastern Ukrainian rebels and/or Russia, the world would never have heard the end of the MH17 disaster until the truth was fully aired before the public.

When Dutch investigators published their preliminary report, the West merely reiterated its original claims, simply imposing their contradictory nature upon the report – most likely believing the public would never actually read its 34 pages.

For example, Reuters in a report titled, “Malaysia: Dutch report suggests MH-17 shot down from ground,” would brazenly claim:

Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 broke apart over Ukraine due to impact from a large number of fragments, the Dutch Safety Board said on Tuesday, in a report that Malaysia’s prime minister and several experts said suggested it was shot down from the ground.

The title of Reuters’ propaganda piece directly contradicts its first paragraph which reveals “experts,” not the actual Dutch Safety Board report, claimed it was “shot down from the ground,” while the report itself says nothing of the sort. The experts cited by Reuters in fact had no association whatsoever with the preliminary report and instead are the same mainstay of cherry picked commentators the West constantly defers to while building up and perpetuating utterly fabricated narratives to advance its agenda globally.

The lesson to be learned from the MH17 disaster is that real investigations and their subsequent conclusions take time – weeks or even months. Anyone drawing immediate conclusions within hours or days after an event like the MH17 disaster are exploiting tragedy at best, and at worst implicate themselves as suspects having created it in the first place to serve as impetus for further chaos, conflict, and confusion.

Those incapable of resisting the need to jump to conclusions are those who are least suitable to lead. The United States, United Kingdom, and the European Union have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are at best tasteless, irresponsible, politically motivated exploiters of human tragedy, and at worst, the prime suspects of a heinous act of mass murder aimed at perpetuating their agenda of war and carnage in Ukraine and beyond.

Tony Cartalucci, is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2014/09/dutch-mh17-investigation-omits-us-intel.html

 

| Leave a comment

ISIS to the Rescue

ISIS to the Rescue
Amid NATO’s failures in Ukraine, America’s terrorist mercenaries threaten war with Russia.

Tony Cartalucci
Land Destroyer Report
September 4, 2014

As the crisis in Ukraine continues to fare poorly for Kiev and its NATO-backers, an “unlikely” ally has emerged – ISIS. Threatening to “liberate” Chechnya and the Caucasus, ISIS would essentially be handing over regions of Russia to its Western and Persian Gulf sponsors. While one would imagine the West would attempt to at least appear to stand in solidarity with Russia in the face of this recent threat, it has instead used the threat to stir fear among Russians, and as leverage against Moscow.

The Fortune 500-funded Carnegie Europe think tank recently published an op-ed titled, “Forget NATO, Russia’s Got Bigger Problems.” In it contains astounding admissions – that NATO’s agenda is expanding itself all along Russia’s borders, that “the EU is now in direct competition with Russia over the future of the lands straddling the EU and Russia,” and that its plans in Ukraine are in utter disarray

The op-ed would also leave readers with an unmistakable threat:

What could deter him [Russian President Vladimir Putin] is his own combustible southern flank and Islamic State, which Russia would be very unwise to ignore. It is these threats that are far, far more dangerous to Russia than NATO’s limited intentions in Poland and the Baltic states.

These threats are also more dangerous than the EU, whose openness has hugely profited Russian companies and ordinary Russian citizens.

If Putin thinks NATO and the EU are his big threats, competitors and enemies, he hasn’t seen anything yet.

The threat is clear. The Islamic State (ISIS), a creation of US, European, Saudi, Qatari, and Israeli designs, is a global mercenary expeditionary force, precisely as Al Qaeda was since its inception in the 1980’s in Afghanistan. While it is currently being used by the West to divide and destroy the Middle East and smash the Iranian arc of influence stretching from Tehran, across Iraq and Damascus, and all the way to Lebanon, it can easily be redirected into the hotbeds of sectarian extremism in Russia’s southern Caucasus region.

Image: A look at US, European, and Persian Gulf-backed terrorism and destabilization across the Middle East and North Africa and the proximity of Russian territory now under direct threat by the West’s terrorist hordes. 

In fact, all the Islamic State is, is little more than a re-branding of Al Qaeda – with many other Western-backed “legacy” Al Qaeda affiliates still fighting along side ISIS. While propaganda attempts to portray ISIS as mortal enemies of the West, every battle ISIS fights are battles the West has openly desired but has consistently failed to justify fighting. Western propaganda has also categorically failed to account for how a regional military force could appear, challenging both the national army of Iraq and the Syrian Arab Army, without significant state-sponsorship.

ISIS Inception

ISIS is in fact the intentional, engineered creation of the US. A comment made in the wake of Steven Sotloff’s alleged death by US Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen who claimed:

This atrocious and brutal act shows that ISIL’s cruelty knows no bounds and that it has no respect for human life. ISIL is a global terror group that espouses an ideology that poses a grave threat to regional security as well as U.S. national security interests both at home and abroad.

Before the inception of ISIS by the Western media, and as far back as 2007, Pulitzer Prize-winning veteran journalist Seymour Hersh would portend the creation of just such a terror group in his 9-page report in the New Yorker titled, “The Redirection Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” He stated that (emphasis added):

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

That “by-product” is ISIS. Through America’s own premeditated conspiracy to plunge not only Syria, but  the entire region and now potentially Russia, into genocidal sectarian bloodshed – resulted directly in the alleged murders of both James Foley and Steven Sotloff, not to mention tens of thousands of Iraqis, Syrians, Lebanese, and many others. The creation of ISIS and its use as a proxy mercenary force for Western designs is once again revealed in ISIS’ otherwise irrational declaration of war on Russia.

Impetus to Intervene 

America’s doctrine of global intervention amid chaos of its own creation is a two-way road. While it is attempting to justify military intervention in Syria to fight its own ISIS mercenaries, with ISIS’ recent threat against Russia, it has given Syria’s allies a golden opportunity to openly declare their backing of Damascus including arms, equipment, intelligence, and other forms of direct assistance in crushing ISIS and its Al Qaeda affiliates still fighting within Syria’ borders.

Such a counterstroke would boost the legitimacy of the Syrian government using the West’s own propaganda regarding ISIS against it. It would also allow Syrian, Iranian, and Lebanese forces to fill the geostrategic space the West intends to seize as part of its “war on ISIS,” thus permanently taking Western intervention off the table.

By crushing ISIS where it is, may mean fighting an enemy with shorter logistical lines and more concentrated forces – a scenario that would be vastly different if ISIS attempted to fight Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Russia. A balance between boosting Syria and its allies’ ability to cope with ISIS, and allowing ISIS to overextend itself would be optimal – and interventionism used in a manner to stop a true threat to global stability. Identifying, exposing, and punishing ISIS’ sponsors is also a necessary component of confounding and eliminating ISIS – a component curiously absent from Western plans to “intervene.”

Global Domination by Any Means 

While it seems unfathomable that such a gambit – spanning the entire Middle East and edging into Russia – can be conceived let alone executed, it should be remembered that the Arab Spring and the subsequent violent subversion of Syria was planned as far back as 2007-2008, with the indirect consequence of undermining Iran as the ultimate objective. That this itself is part of a grander strategy originating from machinations hatched as far back as 1991, orchestrated by US policy makers who compare geopolitics and the world map to a “Grand Chessboard,” is fairly easy to comprehend.

There is no better way to control the vast resources, geography, and populations of Eurasia and beyond than granting everything from North Africa, the Middle East, and Eurasia to ignorant, indoctrinated, medieval zealots led by duplicitous co-conspirators who will wheel-and-deal with the corporate-financiers of the West while keeping their own populations in fear and darkness – simultaneously, perpetuating Al Qaeda throughout the developing world allows the West to impose draconian repressive measures at home, stifling true political and economic independence and self-determination across their own populations.

The result is global hegemony uncontested both at home and abroad, with a world population subjected to the machinations and whims of a scientific dictatorship rooted in Hilterian eugenics and Malthusian ideology.

Tony Cartalucci, is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2014/09/isis-to-rescue.html

| Leave a comment

Turkey Preparing for Syria Occupation?

Turkey Preparing for Syria Occupation?

Tony Cartalucci
Land Destroyer Report
September 25, 2014

As Western-backed terrorists drive allegedly tens of thousands of refugees into Turkish territory, and amid what is being called a “sustainable, persistent campaign” of air assaults, missile strikes, and other assorted attacks on Syrian territory, the West is preparing to dust off plans to establish a “buffer zone” in northern Syria protected by NATO troops – particularly from Turkey.

Hurriyet Daily News in its article, “Turkey’s top soldier inspects troops on Syrian border as gov’t signals joining anti-ISIL bid, ” indicated Turkey was preparing to join the unilateral, illegal strikes on Syria led by the US and backed by several Persian Gulf autocracies. Hurriyet reported:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Turkey’s Planned Occupation of Syria is a Documented Conspiracy

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

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

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

Image: The Brookings Institution, Middle East Memo #21 “Assessing Options for Regime Change (.pdf),” makes no secret that the humanitarian “responsibility to protect” is but a pretext for long-planned regime change. Failing to sell the “humanitarian intervention,” the old “War on Terror” has been dusted off and utilized as a pretext.

Brookings continues by describing how Turkey’s aligning of vast amounts of weapons and troops along its border in coordination with Israeli efforts in the south of Syria, could help effect violent regime change in Syria (emphasis added):

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

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

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

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

The paper would also report:

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

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

Of course, with US airstrikes carving out a vacuum soon to be filled with extremists uncontested by the Syrian Arab Army forced to back off in fear of provoking further Western aggression, the situation will undoubtedly “deteriorate.” Just as Turkey staged false flag operations along its border last year in attempts to trigger a war with Syria directly, and by supporting terrorists resulting in a predictable humanitarian catastrophe now spilling over into Turkey’ territory, the vacuum the US is intentionally creating is meant to be filled with terrorist mercenaries and NATO forces to protect them as the front is inched ever closer to Damascus in the form of a “buffer zone.”

The only way for Syria to prevent this from happening is for it and its allies to quickly assemble tactical, strategic, and political means with which to fill the void in eastern Syria to prevent the West’s “sustainable, persistent campaign” from taking root. Because if this campaign does take root, any attempts by Damascus to retake territory the West and its terrorist proxies are operating in  may trigger a direct confrontation between the US and Damascus – the ultimate provocation the West is searching for to conclude its long-stalled plans for regime change in Syria.

Long-term US operations in Syrian territory, with or without Turkish forces involved, could still be turned into a trap by Syria and its allies. By avoiding provocations and direct military confrontation with the West, Syria can use proxy forces to ensnare the West in yet another protracted and costly quagmire. Such a strategy would require building up enhanced deterrence against further incursions toward vital Syrian population centers along with immeasurable political patience. The West will be left with further delays and complications, as well as immense costs that will become increasingly difficult to justify before an already war-weary Western public.

Tony Cartalucci, is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2014/09/turkey-preparing-for-syria-occupation.html

| Leave a comment

Fraud at the CDC uncovered, 340% increased risk of autism hidden from public

Fraud at the CDC uncovered, 340% increased risk of autism hidden from public

CNN PRODUCER NOTE:    CNN iReport is the network’s user-generated news community. This story was initially pulled for further review after it was flagged by the community. CNN has reached out to the CDC for comment and is working to confirm the claims in this iReport.

By eplettner
CNN iReport
August 24, 2014

A top researcher at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) played a key role in helping uncover data manipulation by the CDC. This fraud obscured a higher incidence of autism in African-American boys. The whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson, came forward after a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for original data on an autism study was filed and these highly sensitive documents were received with the assistance of U.S. Representative Darrell Issa, Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The CDC documents and discussions with the whistleblower reveal widespread manipulation of scientific data and top-down pressure on CDC scientists to suppress a causal link between the MMR vaccine and later autism diagnosis, particularly in a subset of African-American males who received their immunization “on-time” in accordance with the recommended CDC schedule.

The received documents from the CDC show that in 2003 a 340% increase in autism in African American boys related to the MMR vaccine was discovered and then hidden due to pressure from senior officials. The CDC researchers then recalculated their results by removing a population to get the results that were desired.

William Thompson has worked for the government agency for over a decade and confirmed that “the CDC knew about the relationship between the age of first MMR vaccine and autism incidence in African-American boys as early as 2003, but chose to cover it up.” He remarked “we’ve missed ten years of research because the CDC is so paralyzed right now by anything related to autism. They’re not doing what they should be doing because they’re afraid to look for things that might be associated.” He alleges criminal wrongdoing by his supervisors, and he expressed deep regret about his role in helping the CDC hide data.

Thompson’s revelations call into question the nine other studies cited by the CDC as evidence denying a link between vaccines and autism. They also have spurred a change.org petition to have the fraudulent study retracted from the Journal of Pediatrics, which published it in 2004.

A recently released memo from 2004 of Dr. Thompson expressing concerns to Dr. Gerberding, the head of the CDC at the time, about this problematic study has citizens upset. Does this mean Dr. Gerberding could have committed perjury during a congressional hearing? More investigation will be needed to know. A copy of the letter obtained under FOIA can be found here:

http://www.naturalnews.com/images/CDC-Gerberding-Warning-Vaccines-Autism.jpg

Regardless many citizens view this as a deliberate malfeasance at the taxpayers’ expense have begun a social media blitz to inform others of this story as it unfolds. Using the Twitter hashtags #CDCwhistleblower and #CDCfraud. Parents are hoping to have the agency held accountable for its role in any cover-up and are demanding an investigation on whether Dr. Coleen Boyle also perjured herself in testimony before Congress when addressing concerns of a potential vaccine-autism link.

The US Department of Health Resources and Services Administration has already recognized autism as a secondary cause of vaccine injury as documented in the Update to the Vaccine Injury Table following the 2011 IOM report. They did reject Autism as a direct adverse effect of the MMR specifically, but in view of these revelations that may be revisited:

http://hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/iomreportupdate030812.pdf

 

More on this story from Yahoo News:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/study-focus-autism-foundation-finds-133000584.html

The peer reviewed analysis of the original CDC data showing a 340% increase in autism in African American boys due to the MMR vaccine can be found here:

http://www.translationalneurodegeneration.com/content/3/1/16

 

CBS coverage can be found at:

http://www.cbs46.com/story/26316561/focus-autism-releases-findings-on-2003-cdc-autism-study-higher-autism-rate-among-african-american-boys-receiving-mmr-shot-earlier-than-36-months#.U_noAOE5EeE.twitter

 

UPDATE: CDC responds to claims stating that they recognize this study showed an increased risk of autism from the MMR:

“findings revealed that vaccination between 24 and 36 months was slightly more common among children with autism, and that association was strongest among children 3-5 years of age.”

They dismissed this with an assumption that parents with children that have autism rushed to get vaccinated for school.

“most likely a result of immunization requirements for preschool special education program attendance in children with autism.”

This raises questions as there are immunization requirements for all children attending public school and they already excluded children that had a vaccine exemption, so this should not have differed from the controls.

The CDC also states that “Additional studies and a more recent rigorous review by the Institute of Medicine have found that MMR vaccine does not increase the risk of autism”. The Studies that the CDC uses to confirm no link between the MMR and autism are 4 that they list on their website.  A quick look at these 4 studies raises several questions:

(http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Vaccines/MMR/MMR.html )

  • One is the study talked about in this article showing a significant connection
  • A second was done by the infamous Dr. Thorsen who is awaiting extradition to the US on Fraud and is listed on the CDC’s most wanted list putting any of his work into question and this is outside of other potential problems with the study that have been brought up.
  • A third is an exploratory study of very small sample sizes, 28 children total, making this unreliable. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2526159/
  • The last one also used a small control sample size of only 31 children and relied on parent interviews to provide medical and behavioral information. Beyond that they did find that oer half (50%) of children with autism did regress shortly after the MMR vaccine (<5 months) even though they then concluded there was no connection. http://www.bu.edu/autism/files/2010/03/2006-Richler-et-al-MMR-Vaccine1.pdf

This begs the question as to why there are only these four studies used to support the claims that the MRR is safe and yet a quick search of PubMed finds A 2012 peer reviewed research paper studying over 500,000 children that found significant increase adverse effects after certain MMR vaccinations including a 22 Times increased risk of meningitis, 500% increase risk of febrile seizure, and other major side effects including a blood clotting disorder:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22336803

The full CDC statement can be seen here:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Autism/cdc2004pediatrics.html

 

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1164794

 

 

| Leave a comment