Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s news conference to sum up the high-level meetings week at the 76th session of the UN General Assembly, New York, September 25, 2021

SEPTEMBER 27, 2021

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s news conference to sum up the high-level meetings week at the 76th session of the UN General Assembly, New York, September 25, 2021

https://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/4867149

Question: Which opportunities and risk factors does the new Taliban’s Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan present? Does Russia fear that the presence of Taliban could somehow feed Islamic extremism in the region? If so, what can be done?

Sergey Lavrov: Of course, Afghanistan is now on everyone’s mind. We believe, and we did believe from the outset, that what has happened there is a reality. Unfortunately, the hasty pull-out, let’s call it this way, by the United States and other NATO countries of their troops was carried out without any consideration of the consequences. As you are aware, many weapons were left behind in Afghanistan. We all need to see to it that these weapons do not serve any unconstructive purposes.

The reality on the ground is based on statements made by the Taliban who proclaimed their commitment to fighting extremism and terrorism, including ISIS and Al-Qaeda, not to project instability on their neighbours. They committed themselves to respecting women’s rights and to creating an inclusive government. You know all this. What matters the most at the moment is that they fulfil their promises.

The first step to form a transitory government structure fails to reflect the whole gamut of the Afghan society in its ethnic, religious and political diversity. We remain engaged with the Taliban, and these contacts have been continuing for several years now. We are doing this, inter alia, within the expanded troika of Russia, the United States, China and Pakistan. Only recently, Russian, Chinese and Pakistani representatives travelled to Doha, and after that they visited Kabul where they engaged with the Taliban, as well as with representatives of the secular authorities. I am referring to former President Hamid Karzai and former Head of the High Council for National Reconciliation Abdullah Abdullah. These contacts primarily focused on the need to form a genuinely representative government structure. The Taliban claim to be moving in this direction, and the current architecture is only temporary. What matters the most is to make sure that they keep the promises that they made in public. For us, the top priority is precisely what you just mentioned: it is unacceptable that extremism spills over into neighbouring countries, and the terrorist threat must not persist on Afghan soil. We will do everything we can to support the Taliban in their determination, as you have said, to fight ISIS and other terrorist groups, and to try to make sure that this determination paves the way to some practical progress.

Question: Does Russia consider easing or lifting its national sanctions against the Taliban members who become part of the new Afghan government in order to facilitate contacts with them? What position will Russia take during UN talks on easing or lifting sanctions against the Taliban?

Sergey Lavrov: As things stand at the moment, nothing is restraining or hindering our contacts with the Taliban. Moreover, the UN Security Council sanctions, as set forth in the corresponding resolutions, are not preventing us from engaging in such contacts. On the contrary, UN Security Council resolutions stipulate the need to advance a political process, and without working together with the Taliban this is impossible.

We have been engaged in contacts with this movement for some years now, and these contacts have been primarily geared towards ensuring the safety ofr Russian nationals, facilitating intra-Afghan reconciliation and political process. I have not heard any suggestions within the UN Security Council about the need to ease or lift international sanctions at one of the forthcoming meetings. There is no need for this for us to be able to engage with the Taliban movement at this stage.

We all expect the Taliban to honour all the good-minded promises they made. For this reason, we will see whether the terrorist and drug trafficking threats are actually eliminated.

Question: The UN Secretary-General has warned of disastrous consequences of a putative economic collapse in Afghanistan. What do you think about the idea to unfreeze Afghan assets held by international organisations?

It appears from your remarks that your policy is to judge the Taliban by their deeds. In what way does the Taliban ideology differ from that of other Islamic groups in other parts of the world, such as the groups in Syria, which you are opposing and showering with bombs?

Sergey Lavrov: Syria, as you may know, is where the seat of terrorism is located. Practically the entire Syrian territory has been liberated, but the so-called de-escalation zone in Idlib province is under the sway of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, an offspring of Jabhat al-Nusra. All the UN Security Council resolutions point out the nature of these terrorist organisations. I see no problem here from the point of view of destroying the terrorists in Syria.

We are holding talks with our Turkish partners, who signed with us, a couple of years ago now, a special agreement whereby they undertook to fight terrorists in the Idlib de-escalation zone and to separate them from armed groups that are not terrorist ones and to cooperate with the Turkish military. In just a few days from now, President of Russia Vladimir Putin will have yet another meeting with President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The presidents will thoroughly analyse how this commitment is being implemented. It is being implemented at a rather slow pace. This is obvious.

As for the Taliban and comparisons between them and other groups, we cannot divide the terrorists into good guys and bad guys. There is a sufficient number of exemptions from sanctions imposed on the Taliban. This has been made on purpose to enable [the international community] to have a dialogue with them. It means that the UN Security Council recognises the Taliban as an inalienable part of Afghan society, which, for Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham are not. This is what makes the difference.

We will induce those who have seized power in Kabul following the flight of the foreign contingents to behave in a civilised way.

We have mentioned the unfreezing of the assets. We think that this matter should be given a practical consideration from the positions you have mentioned in quoting the UN Secretary-General.

Question: The Taliban Government have decided on the candidacies for their ambassador to Russia. Will Russia be prepared to issue an agreement to people proposed by the Taliban?

Sergey Lavrov: We have no information of anyone applying to us for an agrement. Serving in Moscow today is the ambassador appointed by the previous government. No one is urging an international recognition of the Taliban. We will proceed precisely from this principle if and when we receive a request regarding the appointment of a new ambassador.

Question: We have heard US President Joe Biden’s statement. He said that the period of relentless war has ended, and that the era of relentless diplomacy has been ushered in. Do you believe this?

What about Russia’s diplomatic property? Has there been any progress?

Even some of the members of the delegation had problems with their visas, let alone the fact that there was a danger that the Russian delegation would not be allowed into the UN General Assembly because of the vaccination requirements, with vaccines that were approved in the United States. Are they just trying to annoy us whenever they can?

Sergey Lavrov: I do not think that this is an attempt to annoy us in any way. Most likely they are just a bit at a loss over the resumption of in-person UN General Assembly meetings. I cannot blame the New York authorities for being overly cautious. This is a serious event, and a lot of people come here from all around the world. There are quite a few different variants of the virus already, so safety measures do not hurt.

It is another question, as you have so rightly put it, that we do not accept any attempts to discriminate against vaccines that are not registered in the United States but have proven time and again to be effective. Sputnik V is a case in point. Several EU countries, for example, Hungary and Slovakia, have approved our vaccines, and this should serve as an example for other EU and NATO members.

As for visas for our delegation, apart from the epidemiological situation, the delay in the granting of visas was obviously caused by political considerations. We have seen through this. A number of our employees have yet to obtain their visas, including State Duma members who are part of the delegation. We will see to it that the UN Secretariat leadership fulfils its duties as to ensuring compliance with all the provisions of the agreement between the UN and the United States, the headquarters host country. Instances of flagrant violation of this agreement and repeated failures to comply with the UN headquarters host country commitments have been piling up, including the confiscation of diplomatic property, as you have just mentioned. The UN Committee on Relations with the Host Country has said that this is unacceptable and wrong. The Secretary-General should have launched arbitration proceedings against the actions by the United States several years ago. We had a meeting yesterday, and I reminded him of this fact. I was glad that his Legal Counsel, Miguel de Serpa Soares, was present at this meeting, since it is his duty to initiate these steps. They have been long overdue.

United States President Joe Biden said that the United States will no longer use force to change regimes abroad. “Never say never,” as the saying goes. We have seen how the Donald Trump administration pulled out of the Iranian nuclear deal that was concluded by the Barack Obama administration. Now that talks on fully restoring the JCPOA to settle the situation around the Iranian nuclear programme are underway, one of the questions the Iranians are asking the Americans is whether the agreement to restore this plan can include a clause binding future administrations to respect it? The Americans say that they cannot do this, since this is how their system works. International law is one thing, but their law is a nose of wax, and can be twisted about any way they so desire.

United States President Joe Biden said that an era of “relentless diplomacy” has been ushered in. This means that the Americans will seek to impose on other countries what they deem right for them by other means. This could include colour revolutions. They do not require any use of force, but are equally destructive. Just look at Libya, Iraq, Syria, and Ukraine, our neighbour.

We want the United States to make the next step and move beyond the commitment not to use force for reshaping other countries by actually refraining from doing this altogether. They must recognise that we are all different. We have different cultural, civilisational roots, but we share the same planet and must respect each other.

Question: According to our information, preparations for Under Secretary for Political Affairs Victoria’s Nuland’s visit to Moscow are underway. Where do these talks stand at this point? Can you give us a timeline for the visit? What does Moscow expect to receive in response to the temporary lifting of restrictions from someone who is on Russia’s black list?

Sergey Lavrov: If you have sources of information that let you know about this, I encourage you to ask them this question. The Foreign Ministry and the US State Department are working on a number of contacts. This is not the only matter under discussion.

When both parties decide on a date for contact to take place in order to discuss a specific issue, we will make a corresponding announcement.

Question: I have a question about the JCPOA. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said that swift action is needed, because we are running out of time. Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said yesterday that they were ready for that. They appear to be receiving mixed signals from the United States, but they should come up with an agreement soon. You were involved in making this deal happen. As a negotiator, have you any idea what will happen if the United States does not return to the agreement and Iran continues its nuclear programme? What is the worst-case scenario?

Sergey Lavrov: Iran is not doing anything illegal, because it is complying with the Non-Proliferation Treaty and an additional protocol to a comprehensive safeguards agreement. Iran is not complying with most of its obligations included in the JCPOA which are now not binding, because the Americans have destroyed the agreement.

The issue is about restoring it in full so that Iran has no reason to make exceptions to its commitments. The IAEA, including in the person of its Director General, is in contact with the Iranians. They have a complete picture of what is happening there. They are not being denied access to the work that Iran is doing as part of its nuclear programme. The IAEA has no reason to believe that the 2015 findings to the effect that there were no signs of the nuclear programme being re-oriented towards military needs have become outdated. They have no reason to revise these findings. They speak about this explicitly.

Of course, we want the talks on the full restoration of the JCPOA to resume as soon as possible. But, first, the government in Iran has just been formed. They say they will need a week or two (hopefully not more) to put together their negotiating team. There have been personnel changes. Second, when the United States withdrew from the JCPOA, Iran, for over a year, had been conscientiously complying  with its commitments under this document in hope that the United States would come to its senses and return to the deal. Of all people, our counterparts in Washington are not in a position to say that time is up. Indeed, it was carried out by the administration which is now gone, but this is the legacy of the current administration, especially since the JCPOA is its brainchild. It is only fair that it deliver bold action in addressing all related issues.

There are also sanctions that the US has illegally imposed on Iran, allegedly for violating the JCPOA. But the sanctions concern not just Iran. They have also imposed sanctions on everyone who carry out legal trade with Iran, including the supply of military products, which are no longer subject to a ban. These sanctions must be lifted as part of the reinstatement of the JCPOA. And Iran’s trading partners across all areas of commercial exchange must not be affected by America’s unilateral move.

Question: Will Iran’s economy collapse if the JCPOA is not restored?

Sergey Lavrov: We are not even considering scenarios like that. There is serious hope and cautious optimism that we will be able to achieve a result. At least everyone wants it, including the United States and Iran.

Question: The calm in the northwest of Syria has changed with Russia’s intense airstrikes in recent weeks, particularly ahead of the summit between President Erdogan and President Putin. Why is Russia stepping up its attacks just ahead of this summit?

And another question on Syria as well. Is there an agreement or consensus between Russia and the US following the meeting between the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister and US National Security Council Coordinator Brett McGurk, which took place in Geneva? Thank you.

Sergey Lavrov: We are using force in northwestern Syria in conformity with the requirements contained in UN Security Council Resolution 2254, which provides for an uncompromising struggle against terrorism in Syria.

I have mentioned that there was a special agreement on Idlib between President of Russia Vladimir Putin and President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Our Turkish colleagues have committed themselves to separating the normal and sensible opposition forces from the terrorists. This should have been done long ago. So far, this has not happened. There is slow progress, but the threats of terrorism from the militants in the Idlib de-escalation zone are constantly renewed. These people are attacking the positions of the Syrian army and have repeatedly tried to launch strike drones to attack the Russian Khmeimim Air Base.

Our Turkish friends are well aware that we will not put up with this behaviour and with these militants’ attitude to the role performed by the Turkish military in the Idlib de-escalation zone. We will have detailed discussions as part of preparations for the presidential meeting. The September 29 summit will focus on ways to achieve what we have agreed upon and prevent the terrorists from ruling the roost.

As for contacts with the US regarding the right bank of the Euphrates, they are held periodically. We draw their attention to the fact that the US presence in Syria is illegitimate, to the outrageous situation in the 55-kilometre zone called Al-Tanf, which they have occupied, and to the situation at the Rukban camp located in the US-controlled territory. This is a long story.

The contacts taking place between the foreign ministries and the security councils are mostly about the fact that the Americans are present [in Syria] illegally, illegitimately, but they are there.  This is the reality. Given their tendency to fire all their guns with or without reason, we are negotiating the so-called deconflicting mechanism with them.   It is working. Let me draw your attention to the fact that it is functioning despite the legal bans on contacts between the militaries imposed by the US Congress. Not so long ago, the heads of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff officially announced that this was unreasonable and that the bans on military contacts should be lifted. I think this will do good both to the deconflicting process in Syria and our further arms dialogue as a whole.

Question: Turkey has expressed concerns about the voting in Crimea in the recent State Duma elections. This is despite the fact that Russia has provided humanitarian assistance for COVID-19 to Turkey, as well as military cooperation. My question is: could you address the imbalance, what is your analysis of the imbalance in relations?

Sergey Lavrov: Turkey was not the only one to voice “concerns” or “denounce” the vote in Crimea. I can give you two explanations for this “commotion.” First, five years ago, when the previous State Duma elections were held, no one made any statements of this kind, at least not that strong. Had this been the case, I would have remembered it, but no such thing occurred.

However, now they are pouncing on this issue, including the hectic efforts to convene the so-called Crimea Platform in Kiev, and all the commotion around the election. I think that this is an attempt to divert attention from the fact that Kiev, under President Vladimir Zelensky’s leadership, has shamefully failed to honour its commitments under the Minsk Agreements on overcoming the intra-Ukrainian conflict in the east of the country. It is obvious. The adopted laws have been a de-facto obstacle to granting southeastern Ukraine the status required under the Minsk Agreements.

We drew the attention of our German and French colleagues, as well as the European Union to the fact that their “clients” are negating UN Security Council resolutions, because it was the Security Council that approved the Minsk Agreements. Unfortunately, they are all bashfully looking the other way, while President Vladimir Zelensky understood that all he needed to do was divert attention from his own failures and the fact that the Minsk Agreements were sabotaged. Therefore, they are now playing the Crimean card.

A lack of professionalism in foreign policy is the second reason why they are doing this. Professionals know all too well that the Crimea question is closed once and for all.

Question: My second question is regarding Mali. France has expressed concern about the presence of military contractors from Russia in Mali. They are now being joined by their European allies speaking about this concern. My question is: what is Russia’s position on this?

Sergey Lavrov: I have heard these questions. Foreign Minister of France Jean-Yves Le Drian, and EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, have raised them with me.

Mali currently has a transitional government. Those authorities are undertaking efforts to restore the constitutional order, prepare elections and return to civilian rule. The elections are scheduled to take place in February under the auspices of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union.

Mali’s transitional government has emphasised its commitment to international obligations and is combatting terrorism. It has called upon a private Russian military company because, to my understanding, France intends to substantially reduce its military presence there, and these troops were tasked with fighting terrorists entrenched in the north, in an area called Kidal. But they did not succeed, and terrorist are still in control there.

The Malian authorities considered their own capabilities insufficient without support from abroad, but those who had promised to eliminate terrorism in this country decided to draw down their presence. So they went to a Russian private military company. We have nothing to do with this. This activity is legal and consists of a relationship between the host country, which is a legitimate government recognised by everyone as a legitimate transitional structure, on the one hand, and those offering their services as foreign experts.

Let me emphasise that apart from private military companies, the Russian state has been making its own contribution to ensuring Mali’s defence capability and combat readiness for eliminating the terrorist threat and other threats. We do this by supplying military equipment as part of our assistance. We also work within the UN Security Council to devise the best approaches to further peacebuilding efforts.

I do not see any reason to question this. Yesterday I had a meeting with Mali’s Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Minister, Abdoulaye Diop, who talked to the press on this matter. There are no questions here. In fact, the problem lies elsewhere. Our colleagues from the European Union, as Josep Borrell told me, are asking us to stop working in Africa altogether, because this is “their place.” It would be better for the EU and the Russian Federation to align their actions in fighting terrorism not only in Mali, but in the Sahara-Sahelian region in general. Claiming that “they were there first, so we must leave” is, first, an insult to the Bamako government that has invited its foreign partners, and second, it is not the way to treat anyone.

Question: Shortly before the Russian parliamentary elections, the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling on the European Commission to refuse to recognise the results of the vote. Did you discuss this with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell? Will the EU recognise the results of the Russian State Duma elections?

Sergey Lavrov: We have not heard any assessments from the European Union proper because the European Parliament is not a body that determines EU policy. I spoke about this with Josep Borrell; I quoted some of the assessments made during his remarks in the European Parliament, including the absolutely unacceptable statements that the European Union distinguishes between “the regime” in Moscow and the Russian people.

He made some rather awkward and vague excuses. It was quite obvious that he realised the phrasing was lame at the very least. I hope that was just a phrase, not the idea. This happens. Sometimes we let something slip only to regret it later.

We have no information about anyone officially rejecting the results of our elections, which have just been announced.

Question: France calls for a review of the recent nuclear submarine deal between the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom to verify its compliance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). What is your opinion on this matter? What do you generally think of this new triple alliance, which has created such a stir and runs counter to the partnership agreements in NATO and beyond?

Sergey Lavrov: This deal, signed immediately after the flight from Afghanistan, inevitably raises questions from the parties to these alliances. Probably, in addition to a commercial grievance, France is also thinking how reliable these alliances are and how this has increased the relevance of Europe’s strategic autonomy? These are big questions for the Western camp, and they have to address them.

We are not going to interfere in these matters. Yet, we might feel the consequences of what is happening there. This may affect our relations with the European Union, may spur the EU’s interest in cooperating with us, in using the obvious geopolitical and geostrategic advantages of being on one huge continent, especially since the global growth centre is shifting towards Asia.

I have discussed this with many participants here who represent the European Union and who do not like what is happening. Especially when the EU says they should “push back against, constrain, and engage” with Russia. I asked Josep Borrell how they were going to “engage with us,” exactly. Do you know what he answered? “Get out of Mali.” That is all there is to this policy, to this triad. That’s what it is worth. I am being honest. I do not think there is a violation of any ethical norms here because they are also talking about this publicly. I am just giving examples to illustrate their way of thinking.

As regards the Non-Proliferation Treaty, this matter is being discussed a lot on the sidelines in Vienna. The IAEA is responsible for the non-proliferation regime and for ensuring that nuclear research is not diverted to military needs. For a submarine, uranium must be enriched to 90 percent. This is weapons-grade uranium. We will probably have to ask for an IAEA expert review.

A similar attempt to develop such submarines by a non-nuclear country was made a few decades ago. The project was eventually scrapped then, and that settled the whole matter. But now, this deal has been signed. If the IAEA confirms it is in line with nuclear safety and non-diversion to military needs, there will be a queue for such submarines.

Question: In the lead up to the high-level week, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres issued a warning that the world might be drawn into a new vastly more dangerous cold war if the US and China fail to mend their completely collapsed relations. He called for the avoidance of a new confrontation at any cost, and also warned that it would be more dangerous than the cold war between the Soviet Union and the United States and dealing with its aftereffects would be much more difficult. What does Russia have to say to these statements?

Sergey Lavrov: Make no mistake, we had this issue on our radar screen even before UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres mentioned it. We see that tensions in China-US relations are escalating. We are aware of who is “playing the first violin” in this not too pleasant turn of events. This worries us. Confrontational schemes do not help the people of our planet to live a normal life: be it the recently announced Indo-Pacific Strategy, which explicitly proclaimed containing China, including in the South China Sea, one of its main goals, or QUAD that was formed as part of these strategies, or, by the same token, the purported AUKUS “triple alliance,” the purpose of which is to help Australia contain the “Chinese threat.”

Yesterday and today, I met with a number of ministers representing ASEAN member countries and asked them how things were going. Talks are underway between China and ASEAN to draft a legally binding code of conduct in the South China Sea. Things are not moving fast, but this is the most reliable way to ensure freedom of navigation and everything else that worries our Western partners to the extent that they keep holding provocative and non-provocative naval manoeuvres and creating anti-Chinese geopolitical schemes. We stand for mutually respectful relations between the great powers that never escalate into a nuclear war. The presidents of Russia and the United States, Vladimir Putin and Joseph Biden, confirmed the unacceptability of this at the Geneva summit. Any kind of war between nuclear powers is unacceptable, because the risks of it escalating into a nuclear conflict are enormous. Humanity has not come up with anything new in this regard. We must talk and strive to find a compromise and get along. As President Trump put it, we must “make a deal.” This is the right expression to use not only in business, but in politics as well. Politics is needed to create a proper environment for normal life, rather than for someone to promote their ambitions, so that everyone agrees that they are “the coolest guy on Earth.” This is obvious to normal people. Great powers must act responsibly with regard to their people and the rest of humanity.

President Putin proposed holding a UN Security Council permanent members’ summit. The pandemic has delayed this work. We have resumed it now. We aim to come to an agreement with our partners from China and the three Western permanent members of the UN Security Council on specific issues which will then be included in the agenda, and on the format of discussions (we may start out online). Talks are the only way to resolve the issues at hand. The five permanent members of the UN Security Council must set an example to other countries.

Question: In connection with the withdrawal of foreign contingents – official and informal mercenaries – from Libya, disputes arose about over whether it would be better to withdraw them only after the elections, upon receipt of an official request from a new government. Some say this should take place before December 24 to ensure fair and legitimate elections. The spokesman for the Presidential Council said today that you highlighted two points at a meeting with Mohammed al-Menfi: the need for a settlement between the Libyan parties and the withdrawal of foreign troops. Does Russia think it should be done before or after the elections?

Sergey Lavrov: Before or after the elections is not a critical matter. Most importantly, the final document of the second International Conference on Libya held in Berlin in June reads as follows: all foreign armed people must leave Libya. Our Turkish colleagues made a reservation saying they had been invited there by the legitimate leadership in the person of the Prime Minister of the Government of National Accord, Fayez al-Sarraj. However, the other part of Libyan society – the Tobruk Parliament – is no less legitimate. Both of these bodies were created under the Skhirat Agreement. The legitimate parliament along with the legitimate Libyan national army invited armed personnel, whom they have on their payroll, to come and join them from abroad. Concurrently, there were people who can be referred to as mercenaries. People are being transferred from Syria (to both sides), Chad and other African countries.

From the outset, the moment it came up in our discussions, we said that we were in favour of doing this. Considering that foreign military forces are on both sides of the Libyan confrontation, we must make sure that they move out in small groups and simultaneously, so as not to create a military advantage on one side at any point in time. A ceasefire has been observed in Libya for over a year now. No one should be tempted to think that they can return to military methods and try to use force to resolve that country’s problems.

Question: Is Russia facilitating the withdrawal of troops from Libya?

Sergey Lavrov: They should deal with this in their 5+5 commission. We are ready to help, but if they continue to address non-priority matters, there will be no elections on December 24, 2021. They have just adopted the legislative framework for the elections. Then the Parliament voted on the legitimacy of Abdul Hamid Dbeibeh’s Government of National Unity. They need to be pushed towards an earnest discussion about how to live on. There are already speculations about whether the current leaders can run for office (reportedly, there was an agreement that they would not participate, but they want to). Our colleagues in the Secretariat are trying to create artificial difficulties when it comes to the format of the UN presence in Libya. They had better concentrate on fulfilling what we agreed on a year ago now. Nobody expected this. They should not be trying to change this to promote someone’s interests or advance hidden agendas.

Question: At what stage are the US-Russia strategic stability talks at the moment? As for nuclear weapons, what is Russia’s reaction to the recent missile launches in North and South Korea? What could work as an incentive for Kim Jong-un to return back to the negotiating table?

Sergey Lavrov: I heard that Pyongyang is sending signals about North Korea’s interest in normalising relations with South Korea. We have always stood for a direct dialogue between the North and the South. However, it was not always supported by the previous US administration, which wanted to control the process. I hope that in the new situation, the Biden administration will be ready to make more constructive steps to encourage the resumption of normal contacts between North and South Korea.

Missile launches don’t help. We noticed that this time, Seoul tried not to over-dramatise. I think this is the right thing to do. Once we begin to resort to public condemnation and strong rhetoric, this significantly reduces our incentives for diplomatic, professional, and calm dialogue. The final agreement can only be reached through confidential and quiet negotiations, rather than mutual recriminations through loudspeakers.

As regards the strategic stability talks with the United States, the first round took place in July. The second is due next week.

Question: As the UN General Assembly is meeting in New York, the Southern District Court in New York has again denied Russian citizen Konstantin Yaroshenko’s appeal. He continues to be held in American dungeons, as does Viktor Bout. There have been occasional reports in the media about their possible exchange for Americans. Whose court is the ball in? How realistic is the exchange scenario?

Sergey Lavrov: It is difficult to make any predictions or promises on behalf of the United States. We have tried many times to change our citizens’ situation by invoking the Council of Europe Convention on Transfer of Sentenced Persons. The United States is a party to this Convention, just as we are. They categorically refuse to hear anything, including our arguments that both Yaroshenko and Bout (as well as a number of others) have been actually lured into a trap by provocations. They have been literally kidnapped, which is against the law. In Bout’s case, the Thai laws were violated – not all procedures were followed; with Yaroshenko, it was Liberia’s. There was also a case where they took Roman Seleznev in the Maldives in a gangster manner – they just put him on an aircraft and he was flown away. Nobody knew anything. Such methods of provoked attacks on our people are being used to achieve something. Either to persuade them to cooperate, or for some other reason. This is unacceptable.

About prisoner exchanges – Presidents Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden touched upon this matter in Geneva, among other things. They agreed that the respective Russian and US security services in charge of this matter will try to negotiate some mutually acceptable options. So far, we haven’t come to any agreement. The United States is only interested in getting its citizens back and does not seem to take our interests very seriously. They are interested in Paul Whelan, who is convicted of espionage. He was caught red-handed. This crime cannot be even compared with the reasons Yaroshenko and Bout got their sentences in excess of 20 years in prison. We are ready to talk. There are other American citizens as well. For some reason, they are not of interest to the administration in Washington. But talking is always better than not talking.

Question: On the JCPOA, the United States wants to discuss [inaudible] the Middle East. Will this be included into the JCPOA?  And on Syria, why doesn’t Damascus allow the UN to have humanitarian trips there? I know that there is a compromise made in the UN Security Council, but it does not seem to make sense. Does Syria or Damascus think that UN workers are Trojan horses?

Sergey Lavrov: Regarding the JCPOA, all we want is for it to resume without any preconditions. Attempts to add them as a requirement to expand the talks to include the Iranian missile programme or to discuss Iran’s “behaviour” in the region, as our Western colleagues say, have no future. This is like comparing apples and oranges. The agreement on the nuclear programme is a separate subject. If there are any concerns as to someone’s behaviour, Iran’s regional partners are not the only ones to have such concerns. Teheran has its own misgivings regarding them, which is totally normal for any region of the world.

The Persian Gulf countries engage in far-reaching foreign policy activities far beyond their regions. This must be taken into consideration. In this connection, we noted that many years ago Russia drafted a Collective Security Concept for the Persian Gulf region suggesting a dialogue inspired to some degree by the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. This included discussing confidence-building measures, military transparency and attending each other’s exercises, as well as engaging in positive joint projects. Political scientists from the region and other countries have already discussed this topic. In August 2021, we updated our collective security approach for the Persian Gulf region and released it as an official UN General Assembly and Security Council document. We believe that it is at a forum of this kind, and we hope that we will succeed in convening it, that we need to discuss concerns over the presence of missiles in this region, since Iran is not alone in this regard, and what kind of policies various parties follow. The conflict in Yemen is a case in point in terms of exposing the interests of Arab countries and Iran. There is a need to reach agreements. We believe that this forum should reach beyond the Gulf region. You cannot separate Iraq, Egypt and Jordan in terms of their engagement in shaping a new common platform for constructive dialogue. The Arab League, and the five permanent members of the UN Security must all be involved. Probably, the European Union will also be interested. We believe this approach to be concrete and realistic, at least I had the impression that our colleagues were interested in it. Yesterday, I met with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), and they are interested in this topic. We agreed to make it a priority as we resume our ministerial contacts.

As for humanitarian aid to Syria, yesterday I had a lengthy conversation on this topic with Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. We cannot be satisfied with a situation where double standards are being used in the most flagrant and blatant manner. There are six million refugees in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey, or maybe even more. In November 2020, Russia and 20 other countries helped Damascus hold a conference on refugees. It focused on creating conditions that would enable refugees to return home, which is what most of them want. The fact that the United States did everything to intimidate those who were expected to attend this conference in Damascus, and the fact that the UN did not take part in the conference was a real shock for us. In fact, the UN representative in Damascus was the only person representing the UN as an observer. At the time, I wrote a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres saying that this amounted to a failure to comply with UN Security Council Resolution 2254 that provides a framework for the UN’s activity on the Syrian track. It clearly stipulates efforts to facilitate humanitarian deliveries and creating conditions that would enable refugees to return to Syria.

Early in 2021, the European Union held an annual conference on Syrian refugees in Brussels, without the Syrian Arab Republic, but co-chaired by the EU and the UN Secretary-General. How perplexing. Not only was Syria not present, which is already a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, but the funds collected at the conference went towards paying for the accommodation of refugees in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey, instead of being used to restore infrastructure in Syria. For this reason, I ask those of our friends from the media who worry about ordinary people in conflict zones, to note that initiatives of this kind make a mockery of international humanitarian law.

We adopted the compromise resolution in July. It is true that it extends the so-called cross-border humanitarian aid mechanism for another six months, with deliveries primarily coming from Turkey to the Idlib de-escalation zone. However, considering that the West clings to this mechanism that has not been agreed with Damascus and runs counter to the international humanitarian law, we have every reason to believe that there is some kind of hidden agenda there. We do not get any information on what is in the lorries heading to the Idlib de-escalation zone. The UN swears that they inspect every lorry, but there is no way this can be verified. Even more so, no one knows how this aid or whatever these boxes contain is distributed in the Idlib de-escalation zone, or whether terrorists from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and other unacceptable structures benefit from this aid.

Unless specific measures are taken to unblock humanitarian aid deliveries through Damascus, as required under international humanitarian law, we will put an end to this untransparent cross-border activity. Moreover, since the adoption of the resolution requiring that aid be sent into Syria through Damascus as well, there was only one convoy, and even it was far from complete. About half of the supplies that had been waiting to be delivered for almost a year could not reach their destination. The convoy organised by the International Committee of the Red Cross together with the Syrian Arab Red Crescent back in April 2020 remained where it was. Those who care about the starving population must, first, appeal to the Western countries that can influence this situation, and second, reach out to the UN leadership so that it complies with the relevant resolution. Apart from purely the humanitarian aspects, on assisting Syria and humanitarian deliveries, this resolution calls for the so-called early recovery projects, including water supply, electricity, housing, schools and healthcare. This must be done, and the UN Secretariat knows this. Syrians currently face so much hardship. Throughout the Syrian crisis the UN Secretariat did little to create conditions facilitating the return of refugees. However, the UN Security Council Resolution is there. It has been adopted unanimously, and has to be carried out.

Question: Yesterday, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas declared that the Palestinians would withdraw their recognition of the State of Israel, if Israel did not cease its occupation within one year.  This will lead to chaos in the Middle East. What can the Russian Federation as a friend of the Palestinians and a country maintaining good relations with Israel do to avoid this scenario? After the Palestinians lost faith in the efficacy of the peace process, do they have the right to defend themselves and resist the occupation?

Sergey Lavrov: All right, let’s talk about the Palestinian-Israeli problems. These problems are certainly grave ones. They were not helped by the “casting about” we observed during the previous US administration. I am referring to both their recognition of the Golan Heights and the attempts to promote what was actually an annexation inscribed in the context of the efforts to create a quasi Palestinian state. What is important here is that the Biden administration has confirmed its commitment to the two-state approach. But the Israeli prime minister is not confirming this commitment, although there are politicians in Israel and in the Israeli parliament, who have different views on how to ensure security of the Jewish State without living under constant strain and hitting targets threatening Israel. [According to them], the alternative is to come to an agreement and build a stable and peaceful life through a two-state safe and prosperous coexistence in keeping with the principles of a settlement endorsed by the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly. The current Israeli leaders are maintaining contacts that mostly boil down to keeping security in the Palestinian territories.

We believe that it would be a major mistake if the processes in the region – Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, etc. – make us forget about the Palestinian question. After all, it is the outgrowth of this planet’s longest-lasting modern conflict, a conflict that other powers sought to settle through the creation of two states. One state was established in no time, but the other state is still to be created.

I believe that the decision approved by the Arab League at the initiative of the King of Saudi Arabia almost 20 years ago now was a wise decision. I am referring to the Arab Peace Initiative, which said that the Arab countries would normalise their relations with Israel immediately after the creation of a viable Palestinian state conforming to all the UN-defined criteria. That was quite a specimen of statecraft. But the Trump administration attempted to turn everything upside down. The Abraham Accords promoted by a number of Arab countries were based on the logic that the first thing to do was to normalise relations between the Arabs and Israel, with the Palestinian problem to be considered afterwards. We welcome any kind of normalisation between any states. Not at the expense of Palestine in this case. It is gratifying that all the signatories of the Abraham Accords, including Bahrain, the UAE, the Sudan, and Morocco stressed that they were fully committed to the UN decisions on the Palestinian problem. This is where we should stand.

You asked whether they have the right to fight. They will not ask [for anyone’s permission]. The unregulated state of the Palestinian problem is the gravest factor feeding radical sentiments on the Arab “street.”  The extremist preachers are saying that their people have been wronged, that they were promised a state of their own 80 years ago but it was a deception. Young people, particularly uneducated ones, are highly sensitive to this sort of propaganda. But my Israeli colleagues get offended when I explain to them this aspect of the Middle East situation and the impact of the lack of a settlement of the Palestinian problem is exerting on stability in the whole of the region. They say I am wrong and that the problem is not very serious. But this is a shortsighted approach.

This is the reason why we are supporting Palestine President Mahmoud Abbas’ proposal to convene an international conference. But we are confident that it must be thoroughly prepared, for which purpose we would like to resume the activities of the Quartet of international intermediaries consisting of Russia, the United States, the European Union and the United Nations and to recruit for joint work, for example, the foursome of Arab countries – Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, and Bahrain – that have relations with Israel.   Probably Saudi Arabia, the author of the Arab Peace Initiative, should be invited as well. This makes 4+4+1+2 (Israel and Palestine). If some parties believe that it is still too early to meet in this format, we are ready to offer our territory as a venue and support any other invitation for Israel and Palestine to meet for direct talks. The important thing is to avoid procrastination. We will seek to support this approach in every way we can.

Most importantly, while what we have just discussed depends on many factors (some depend on Israel, some on other members of regional organisations), there is one matter that depends on no one but the Palestinians themselves. I am referring to Palestinian unity. Attempts were being made to restore it a couple of years ago now. Certain agreements seemed to be reached and a circle of elections was announced. But eventually nothing came of it.  The lack of rapport between Ramallah and Gaza carries a negative charge. If the Palestinians restored their unity, it would be easier and more effective for them to talk to Israel at future negotiations.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu once said that he did not know who to hold talks with, when it was unclear whom Mr Abbas was representing.  It looked like he had Ramallah alone, while Gaza was controlled by other people. These matters have a strong influence on any attempts to achieve major political results. The Palestinians are unwilling to restore unity. But we are actively working with all the Palestinian factions. I repeatedly invited them to Moscow. During the discussions they agree they should reunite, but later it all somehow goes amiss.

Question (retranslated from English): This week, the European Commission accused Russia of engaging in hacker attacks against European politicians and media representatives, in particular, German politicians and officials, in the run-up to tomorrow’s election in which they are participating. What is your response to these accusations? Do you have any expectations regarding the outcome of elections in Germany?

Trevor Reed’s family believes he was unjustly indicted and sentenced to an unreasonably long term. Could you comment on these statements as well?

Sergey Lavrov: I have already covered Trevor Reed and Paul Whelan, for that matter. Paul Whelan was arrested on espionage charges. He was caught red-handed. Trevor Reed was arrested for attacking and hitting a police officer several times. I am not sure how many years in prison people in the United States would get for violent attacks against a police officer. I think, many. Konstantin Yaroshenko and Viktor Bout were simply lured by deception into a deal where they used an aircraft for some purpose, which got them implicated into a case of arms and drug smuggling. They were sentenced to over 20 years in prison without having hurt anyone or having any intention to violate international rules for trading in particular types of goods. So, our US colleagues need to be consistent, if they are offended over someone being arrested here. The same standards should be applied to all situations. In the case of an attack on police officers, see what is happening at the trial on the “Capitol attack.”

With regard to the accusations advanced by the European Commission, we are willing to review the facts, but they simply will not give us any. We are being unfoundedly charged with the alleged poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko with polonium in London in 2007. They have not yet provided a single piece of evidence, but closed the process to the public and made it “official,” meaning that the judges can now consider secret materials behind closed doors. Now, they want to do the same with the process regarding the woman who died in Salisbury in the context of the Skripal case. They also want closed hearings on the causes of her death in order to avoid disclosing some secret documents. Nobody is making them available to us, but they blame us for everything. As with the Skripal case, they are also blaming us for the Malaysian Boeing case. The court in The Hague ruled that they had reason to believe the United States, which stated it had satellite images to prove that Russia had done it. But they did not show these images to anyone. The Dutch court considers this normal. They believe whatever the Americans say. Arnold Schwarzenegger famously said “trust me” in one of his films, and Ronald Reagan added “but verify.” So, we want to conduct verification. In the case of the MH17 flight, we provided the data from the radars and much more. The Ukrainians refused to share the data from their radars. Allegedly, they “went dead” during the crash. They refuse to provide the exchange between the air traffic controller and the pilots. This speaks volumes. And much more.

We’re being accused of interfering  in the US elections. I discussed this matter with my colleagues on many occasions, in particular, with former US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. He once said they had irrefutable evidence of Russia’s interference in the 2016 US elections, and I asked him to show it to me. He said they would not let us see it and that we should contact our special services for they would know what it was all about. That was all that was said. Is that okay?

The same goes for cyber attacks. The US authorities accused us (President Biden brought this issue up at a meeting with President Putin) or, rather our ransomware hackers, of attacking a meat processor and a fuel pipeline in the United States demanding them to pay ransom. Nobody showed us any evidence. President Biden, however, said their data show it is not the Russian Government that is doing this, but some people who are based in  Russia.

We let them know that most (about half) of the hacker attacks on our resources over the past year were carried out from the United States. Some originated in Germany and other countries. We have sent 45 official inquiries to our US colleagues indicating concrete facts that needed investigation. We received nine replies. We have received about 10 official inquiries and answered every one of them. I am heartened to know that the Americans agreed to move away from sporadic accusations and complaints and to begin systematic work on this matter after President Putin discussed this issue with President Biden in Geneva. The services that deal with cyber security have established dedicated communication channels. We hope that things will get going now.

With regard to the election in Germany, we wish every success to all its participants.

Question: Last week, the preliminary results of an investigation conducted by Justice Department special counsel John Durham into “Russiagate” were made public in the United States. The indictment mentioned one of the probe’s initiators. It is not the first paradoxical situation reported in the United States. American officials are overturning the US accusations against Russia.

The paradox is that the sanctions adopted against Russia have not been lifted despite the refutation. What is Moscow’s position on this score and what are its American partners saying?

Sergey Lavrov: You have answered your own question. It was unreasonable to do this before pondering the matter or investigating the situation. And it is a pity that after the situation was clarified they have not retraced their steps so as not to harm our bilateral relations. This is what American manners are all about. We have become accustomed to this. We will never ask for the sanctions to be lifted. The “limit” has been exhausted by neighbouring Ukraine, which continues making requests, unable to get its bearings of what is happening.  We are not going to act in this manner.

We do not have any other partners [in the US]. However, dialogue is gradually taking shape in some spheres, such as strategic stability and cybersecurity, which gives hope that we will bit by bit develop dialogue based on mutual respect at least in some spheres of international relations.

Question (retranslated from English): My question concerns Palestine. Many people say that Palestinian settlements are occupying too much land, that there are already half a million settlers. Do you think it’s time for the international community to settle the problem by creating one state for two peoples? Could you comment on this please?

As you are aware, WFP Executive Director David Beasley said just two days ago now that at least 50,000 Yemenis are starving and millions need humanitarian aid and food. Do you think that the international community, which includes Russia, has let the Yemeni people down by failing to put sufficient pressure on all the conflicting parties, including Saudi Arabia?

Sergey Lavrov: I would not say that the international community is not doing enough to convince the conflicting parties to sit down at the negotiating table not only to exchange accusations but also to come to some agreements.  There are a number of factors involved here, which are, regrettably, absolutely subjective and have to do with the desire of certain individuals to remain in power as long as possible, which is having a negative effect on the negotiating process and the possibility of compromise. I will not go into any details right now, but Yemen is indeed a country with the world’s largest humanitarian disaster, which was pointed out long ago, when the conflict had only just started and was in the hot phase.

We are involved through our Embassy. Our ambassador to Yemen is currently working from Riyadh, where a group of ambassadors are acting together to support the process and the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Yemen. I hope that everyone will gradually come to see the futility of trying to put off the necessary agreements.

As for the [Palestinian] settlements, we have always condemned the settlement policy, saying, just as you have so rightly pointed out, that this would create facts on the ground that will prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. I have heard about the one state solution where all people would have equal rights. I believe that this is unrealistic. Many academics say that this, if this should happen, will undermine the Jewish nature of the State of Israel. But if equal rights are not granted to everyone in Israel, it might become an apartheid state.

I am quite sure that the two-state solution is the only option. I would just like to point out that many people in the Israeli political elite share this same view and believe that this option must be promoted more actively.

Syrian Arab Army is Ending the Terrorists Presence in Daraa Countryside

ARABI SOURI 

Syrian Army Units Enter Tal Shihab, Zaizoun and Yadudah in Daraa Countryside

Syrian Arab Army units continue to take positions in the countryside of Daraa after eliminating the presence of the US-sponsored Al Qaeda, ISIS, and their other affiliated terrorist groups as part of the larger task in securing the entire southern region of Syria.

SAA units entered this morning the towns of Yadudah, Muzayrib, Tal Shihab, and Zaizoun in the western Daraa countryside, in addition to marching toward the border with Jordan in the south, the collapse of the remnants of ISIS terrorists in Daraa Balad earlier in the month where up to 50,000 residents started returning to their homes after 8 years of being internally displaced in other Syrian cities.

The following report from the Syrian Al-Ikhbaria news channel (in Arabic) shows units of the Syrian Arab Army entering Al-Yadudah in Daraa western countryside:

Hundreds of armed men joined the reconciliation efforts and are returning to their normal lives after settling their legal records, this includes former members of the terrorist organizations most of who were forced to join these groups under threats against their families but have not committed any crimes against other Syrians or the Syrian armed forces. Criminals who have killed or committed other crimes against their fellow citizens will be prosecuted, the state offered amnesty for the public rights, however, the personal rights of the victims will be settled at the respective courts of law.

Many ISIS terrorists who have innocent blood on their hands and the non-Syrian terrorists who are not yet eliminated by the Syrian Army and the Syrian security but have agreed to surrender have been shipped to northern Syria where the regime of the Turkish madman Erdogan will have to handle them, few have fled the liberated areas and sought refuge in the Al-Tanf area where Biden forces of the US army maintain an illegal presence for the time being.

Armed young men who have not served in the Syrian Arab Army as conscripts yet and are due for the service will be given up to 6 months before joining the army for the mandatory service every Syrian male serves, this excludes supporters of their parents if they don’t have other brothers and those with permanent disabilities.

This latest achievement of the Syrian armed forces in continuing to liberate the rest of Daraa is a great victory for the Syrian people, a massive loss for the US-led camp of NATO evil alliance and their regional stooges, it’s the main loss for Israel who have invested greatly in ISIS and other terrorist groups using the huge sums of the billions of US dollars from the US taxpayers’ money it receives every year.

As the Syrian army continues securing the southern region, there are two main fronts coming up next to clean from NATO armies and NATO proxy terrorist groups in the northern region, especially the Al-Qaeda last stronghold in Idlib in the northwest of Syria where the Syrian and Russian air forces have started wiping-out posts, command centers, and weapons depots of the terrorists, which is leading to the hysterical media campaign against the Syrian and Russian armies accusing them of only killing children and women, the accusations coming by Al-Qaeda propagandists, as usual, and there are the areas occupied by the US-sponsored Kurdish SDF separatist terrorists who some reports say they have been warned to welcome the new year without the US army protection.

If you want us to remain online, please consider a small donation, or see how you can help at no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: https://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.
https://youtu.be/jE8vyi1RNTE

Related

انهيار جديد للجماعة الإرهابية!

سبتمبر/أيلول 22 2021

 د. محمد سيد أحمد

ليست المرة الأولى التي نتحدث فيها عن مستقبل جماعة الإخوان الإرهابية، فمنذ الإطاحة بالجماعة من سدة الحكم فى مصر فى 30 حزيران/ يونيو 2013 ونحن نحاول استشراف مستقبلها، وحدّدنا في مقالات سابقة الخيارات المتاحة أمام الجماعة باعتبارها أحد القوى الاجتماعية والسياسية الفاعلة على الساحة المجتمعية المصرية والعربية، فهذه حقيقة سواء قبلها البعض أو حاول إنكارها، ولعلّ محاولات الإنكار هى ما أوصلنا للحالة الراهنة التى تمدّدت فيها الجماعة واتسع نفوذها حتى كادت تبتلع الوطن العربي، حين تمكنت من الوثوب للسلطة فى عدد من الدول العربية في لحظة فارقة من تاريخ الأمة.

 فأخطاء السلطات السياسية داخل البلدان العربية في التعامل مع هذه الجماعة الإرهابية على مدار ما يقرب من نصف قرن كانت سبباً في ما وصلنا إليه الآن من مواجهة شاملة مع هذه القوى الإرهابية، ففي مصر على سبيل المثال ظنّ السادات أنه بإمكانه القيام بثورة مضادة لثورة 23 يوليو/ تموز 1952 يتخلص على أثرها من خصومه السياسيين من الناصريين والشيوعيين، فاستعان على الفور بخصمهم العنيد جماعة الإخوان الإرهابية فأخرجهم من السجون والمعتقلات وأطلق سراحهم لمواجهة هؤلاء الخصوم، لكن هذه المواجهة انتهت باغتياله شخصياً بعدما ظنّ أنهم فرغوا من مهمتهم التي أوكلها لهم.

See the source image

ثم جاء من بعده مبارك ليسير في نفس الطريق، وعلى نفس النهج، حيث قرّر منذ البداية استمالة الجماعة الإرهابية وعقد صفقات تحتية مع قيادتها عبر أجهزته الأمنية، تمكنت على أثرها الجماعة من التغلغل وبناء النفوذ داخل بنية المجتمع المصري، انتظاراً للفرصة التي يمكن من خلالها الانقضاض على السلطة السياسية وانتزاعها، وساعدتهم على ذلك سياسات مبارك المنسحبة من الأدوار الرئيسية للدولة وتخليها عن مسؤوليتها الاجتماعية والاقتصادية تجاه مواطنيها، مما خلق فراغاً تمكنت هذه الجماعة وحلفائها الإرهابيين من ملئه خاصة في الأحياء والمناطق الأكثر فقراً في الريف والحضر.

ومن خلال التحليلات في مقالات سابقة حاولنا طرح مجموعة من الخيارات المتاحة أمام جماعة الإخوان الإرهابية، فعبر قراءة علمية نقدية في أدبيات الجماعة الفكرية، وحركتها التنظيمية، وتجاربها التاريخية، داخل المجتمع المصري والعربي، توصلنا إلى ثلاثة خيارات متاحة أمام الجماعة بعد هزيمتها في 30 حزيران/ يونيو 2013 في مصر وهى: إلى الأمام، والاعتذار عن الفشل وإعادة النظر في تجربتهم والاندماج مرة أخرى في المجتمع بعد مصالحة يتمّ على أثرها معاقبة من أخطأ، والخيار الثانى هو: إلى الخلف، وخوض مواجهة مفتوحة مع الجميع الشعب ومؤسسات الدولة والسلطة السياسية، وهذا خيار اللاعودة فإما الانتصار باستخدام الإرهاب على الشعب ومؤسسات الدولة والسلطة السياسية، أو الانتحار والنهاية الأبدية، والخيار الثالث هو: في المكان، وإتباع مبدأ التقية والعودة مرة أخرى لعقد صفقات وتحالفات مرحلية ومؤقتة مع السلطة السياسية، كما كان يحدث في الماضي، وهي لعبة تجيدها الجماعة تاريخياً، بل هي جزء من عقيدتها حيث اتقاء شر السلطة السياسية حين تكون الجماعة في مرحلة استضعاف، وهو ما تمّ على مدار حكم مبارك، ثم انتهاز الفرصة للانقضاض عليه والإطاحة به والجلوس محله، وهى المرحلة التي تعرف بمرحلة الاستقواء والتمكين.

وكنا قد أكدنا عبر الشواهد والأدلة والبراهين أن الجماعة تسير بالفعل في اتجاه اللاعودة أي الخيار الثاني إلى الخلف، لكننا لم نستبعد الخيار الثالث وهو في المكان، لأنها لعبة تجيدها الجماعة الانتهازية تاريخياً وبشكل كبير، لكننا الآن نستطيع أن نحسم الأمر، فالجماعة عبر السنوات الثمان الماضية قد حسمت أمرها وقرّرت خوض معركة إلى الخلف للنهاية، وذلك من خلال تحالفها مع باقي الجماعات الإرهابية التي خرجت من تحت عباءتها تاريخياً والتي تطلق على نفسها مسمّيات مختلفة ـ سلفية وجهادية وغيرها ـ حيث تعدّدت العمليات الإرهابية المدعومة من بعض القوى الدولية والإقليمية المساندة للتنظيم الدولي للجماعة الإرهابية والتي تسعى لتقسيم وتفتيت مصر والوطن العربي ضمن مشروع الشرق الأوسط الجديد.

وخلال السنوات الثماني الأخيرة كانت حصيلة مواجهة مجتمعاتنا مع الجماعة الإرهابية هزيمة وانهياراً أمام الجيش المصري، ثم انهياراً وهزيمة في سورية تحت أقدام الجيش العربي السوري، ثم هزيمة قبل أيام قليلة في تونس بعد انتصار الرئيس قيس سعيّد لإرادة الشعب، ثم كانت الخاتمة هزيمة مدوية في المغرب وعبر صناديق الاقتراع وهو ما يعبّر عن عودة الوعي للشعب المغربي، حيث فقد حزب العدالة والتنمية الإخواني معظم مقاعده في مجلس النواب الذي سيطر على الأغلبية فيه على مدار عشر سنوات، وصلت للذروة في انتخابات 2016 حيث حصد 125 مقعداً، فقدها في الانتخابات الأخيرة ليحصل على 12 مقعداً فقط وهي هزيمة وصفها المتابعون بالنكراء، وتعد انهيار حقيقي للمشروع الإخواني، سوف تتبعه هزائم أخرى للمشروع في ليبيا بعد محاصرة مصر لتركيا ووضعها لخطوط حمراء لم يتمكن أردوغان من تجاوزها، في ظل تراجع شعبية حزبه في الداخل التركي مما ينبئ بانهيار وشيك، وسوف يضطر الأميركي وحلفاؤئه الأوروبيون التخلي عن دعم التنظيم الدولي الإخواني الذي لم يعد ينفذ لهم ما يريدون.

لكن يجب أن يعيه الشعب العربي والسلطة السياسية في بلداننا معاً أنّ المعركة الراهنة، هي الخيار الأخير أمام هذه الجماعة الإرهابية، وعلينا جميعاً أن نتوحد تحت مظلة الوطن، فالمعركة لا يمكن أن تحسم من خلال الأجهزة الأمنية فقط ـ جيش وشرطة ـ وإنما تحتاج لمواجهة مجتمعية شاملة على كافة المستويات الاجتماعية والاقتصادية والسياسية والثقافية والدينية والإعلامية، وليدرك الجميع أنّ هذه المعركة ستطول ولن تحسم قريباً، فالظهير الاجتماعي للجماعة الإرهابية متغلغل داخل بنية المجتمع العربي وداخل كافة المؤسسات لذلك يجب مواجهته والقضاء عليه، اللهم بلغت اللهم فاشهد.

Syria Puts UNSG and UNSC on Notice: Erdogan’s War Crimes to Be Halted

 MIRI WOOD 

Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs - Damascus, Syria

Syria’s Foreign and Expatriates Ministry has put both UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and the UNSC on notice that it is well past time for the bastion of peace and security to enforce its Charter against member states which breach it, in this case, the Turkish invader and occupation forces. If Guterres and the Security Council continue to refuse to enforce the Charter which prohibits member states from war criminal attacks on other countries, Syria will finally take the matter into its own military hands, which is its legal right, per the Geneva Agreements of 1949 and per the UN Charter.

The polite and overly diplomatic version of this report has been published in SANA, 20 September.

Since the beginning of the heinous NATO Spring dumped on Syria in March 2011, NATO Turkey has led the way in war crimes against the Syrian Arab Republic.

In November 2012, al Qaeda terrorists occupying part of Aleppo, under the commands of NATO Erdogan and the dirty Gulfie gas station — two-thirds of which are US military bases, dismantled Syrian factories and oil machinery parts, and transported them by trucks — in broad daylight — into Turkey.

On 5 December 2012, al Qaeda FSA terrorists in an alleged ‘make shift’ laboratory in Gaziantep, Turkey, announced they had chemical weapons and were prepared to use them against Syrian patriots. They demonstrated that they did — the chemical weapon appeared to be VX — in a fatal experiment with two rabbits. The UNSC refused to investigate the threat.

On 21 December 2012, the al Qaeda FSA terrorists in the same ‘make shift’ lab announced they had developed a quick acting poison that could massacre Syrian patriots via dumping it into the Alsinn Spring water supply to Lattakia. This time one rabbit was used in the fatal demonstration. Again, the UNSC refused to investigate.

Instead of poisoning the spring, the savages used this chemical substance to murder dozens of kidnapped Syrian children, on 4 April 2017, in Khan Sheikhoun.

Prior to Madman Erdogan’s official military invasions of the Syrian Arab Republic — to which it gave Orwellian names of Olive Branch (2018) and Peace Spring (2019), the war criminals had occupied Jarabulus, Syria, and created a Turkish police force.

Syria has previously called on the civilized world to halt Turkey’s cultural aggression against the state.

In September 2019, Erdogan presented his planned annexation of Syria map to the UN General Assembly. He should have had rotten eggs and tomatoes thrown at him; instead, the NATO klansmen and house servants in attendance, bobbed their heads in approval.

Erdogan annexation map of Syria shown at UNGA meeting.
Madman Erdogan’s annexation map received tacit approval by the UN NATO klan at General Assembly meeting September 2019.

Imagine the supremacists at UNGA having tolerated a similar map of annexation plots by countries surrounding France:

Annexation normalized against Syria would not be tolerated against France.

Madman Erdogan simultaneously announced and launched his war criminal Operation Peace Spring aerial bombing and ground invasion bombing of the Allouk electrical grid on 9 October 2019 (supported by American illegal John McCain’s FSA/Jabhat al Nusra pal, Salim Idriss), which was immediately repaired by the Syrian Electricity Army, to be re-bombed and re-repaired. At the 24 October anti-Syria UN meeting, the Security Council P3 and their Ursula Mueller were complicit in ignoring the advent of Turkey’s water war crimes against the Levantine republic.

The reality of Turkey’s water war crimes against Syria was completely ignored by the unindicted war criminals of the UN, at the NATO junta’s anti-Syria monthly meeting, on 24 October 2019. Instead of condemning NATO Turkey’s water war crime against the Syrian people, the urchin honcho disgracefully described Erdogan’s atrocity as perpetrated by “allied non-State armed groups” and inferred that intricate repairs were made by a simple wave of a fairy godmother’s wand.

Mere months later, the same Emergency Relief Coordinator who showed little concern for Erdogan’s water war crimes was nearly frothing at the mouth at the UN anti-Syria klan fest, demanding Tal Abyad have a border crossing opened to ‘help’ the suffering Syrians, though she appeared sedate in the pre-meeting UNSCR meeting of the NATO klan.

On 28 April 2021, the OCHA humanitarian bastards published a report on Alouk, via Reliefweb, wailing its crocodile tears that the water had been “disrupted” twenty-three times since November 2019.

NATO klansman Mueller ignored the water war crimes of terrorists led by Erdogan, in Allouk
Golpista Ursula Mueller, Ass. SG for Humanitarian Affairs & Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator, 24 October 2019. She brushed off Erdogan’s water war crimes against Syria
Months later, Mueller nearly frothing at the mouth, but not over water war crimes.
War crimes of bombing power plants & depriving civilians of drinking water have no relevance in the UN NATO klan hysteria to save al Qaeda in Syria. Mueller’s fixation on Tal Abyad for ‘cross-border’ deliveries — supported by the NATO gang — is likely because the Erdogan regime has occupied this area of Syria since October.
NATO UN klan seem to view water war crimes as facilitating Syria's destruction, on board with terrorists atrocities.

Turkey’s war crimes against Syria must obviously include ethnic cleansing of indigenous Syrians from their homeland, resulting in countless civilians being slaughtered in countless fratricidal terrorist attacks, as vicious ‘collateral damage,’ through crime of forced displacement, and simply to massacre them.

Ethnic cleansing is a war crime. Forced displacement is a war crime. Depriving civilians of potable water is a war crime.

The NATO mobsters ruling the UNSC — and the mob gang includes consummate imperialist SG Guterres — have plotted a new Sykes-Picot against Syria. This is why they avert their collective gaze to the Erdogan regime’s constant war crimes against Syria.

Dr. Faisal Mekdad, Syria’s Foreign and Expatriates Minister will speak at the upcoming UNGA meeting. He will arrive in NYC with his delegation that includes former Syrian Permanent Representative to the UN, and current Deputy Foreign and Expatriates Minister, Dr. Bashar al Jaafari, Dr. Abdhullah Hallaq, and Ehab Hamed.

Syria has put the UNSC and UNSG on notice that one way or another, Erdogan’s war crimes against the Levantine republic will be halted.

ISIS will be crushed and NATO will be ejected
Syria President Dr. Bashar al-Assad: “Every inch of Syria will be liberated”

— Miri Wood

Postscript:

The non-physician NYC Mayor de Blasio, who resurrected the ‘mistook’ racist Bloomberg Stop & Frisk in having his NYPD he was threatening to defund arrest a lot more black folk for breaching his arbitrary lockdown, who recently lied that an UNGA member said everybody had to get shot per de Blasio’s dictate, and who threatened to invade the international territory of the UN, against all border laws between that establishment and its host country, continues to threaten diplomats and heads of state arriving for the UNGA meeting. He still plans to invade the UN, according to recent news reports (not included in the above hyperlink report on his plan to expand his fiefdom.

PLEASE HELP TO SUPPORT Syrian News:

If you want us to remain online, please consider a small donation, or see how you can help at no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: https://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

Erdogan Water War Crimes in Hasakah Continue; UN, ICRC Silent

https://syrianews.cc/erdogan-water-war-crimes-in-hasakah-continue-un-icrc-silent/embed/#?secret=VyC5IoHb0f

Erdogan Forces Kill a Woman in Indiscriminate Shelling of Houses in Hasakah Province

https://syrianews.cc/erdogan-forces-kill-a-woman-in-indiscriminate-shelling-of-houses-in-hasakah-province/embed/#?secret=OLFys6lhuW

Erdogan Terrorist Groups Infighting in Afrin Results in Civilian Casualties

ISIS Claims Responsibility for Blowing Up the Gas Pipeline near Damascus

 ARABI SOURI 

Maintenance teams repairing the Arabian gas pipeline near Deir Ali station blown up by ISIS

US-sponsored ISIS terrorists claimed responsibility for blowing up the Arabian Gas Pipeline feeding the Deir Ali thermal power station in Damascus countryside the day before yesterday, as we anticipated in our report.

Syrian minister for oil confirmed that the maintenance teams have concluded the repairs to the sabotaged gas pipeline and resumed the supplies through it as per SANA.

The ISIS statement circulated by its media and the media of its sponsors referred to the attack on the electric power generating facilities as part of its ‘economic warfare’ against the Syrian people:

‘Within the economic warfare, ISIS ‘soldiers’ managed to booby trap and blow up the gas pipeline between Tishreen and Deir Ali thermal stations and two electric towers of the Deir Ali station yesterday, this resulted in the disconnection of the electric power supplies to the entire southern region…’ the ISIS statement read.

ISIS claiming responsibility for blowing up gas pipeline feeding Deir Ali thermal power station near Damascus
ISIS Statement
Maintenance teams repairing the Arabian gas pipeline near Deir Ali station blown up by ISIS
Maintenance teams repairing the gas pipeline
Maintenance teams repairing the Arabian gas pipeline near Deir Ali station blown up by ISIS

In our post reporting on the terrorist attack when it happened we pointed the fingers at ISIS remnants operating from the At-Tanf area in southeastern Syria, the only area in the southern region with US illegal military presence where these terrorists benefit from the protection provided to them by their sponsors, and they also enjoy the generosity of the US taxpayers who provide them with the 4×4 machinegun-mounted brand new Toyota pickups, and the other weapons and munition.

In the Al-Tanf area where the infamous Rukban concentration camp for Syrian families held hostage and human shields, the ISIS terrorists are called ‘Maghawir Thawra’, or ‘Commandos of the Revolution,’ the US-led regime change ‘revolution’, that is.

US Army carrying out a military drill with ISIS terrorists in Al Tanf area in southeast Syria!
an ISIS terrorist of the Maghawir Thawra thanking the USA for its generosity for providing them with the Toyota pickups

Syria can eliminate ISIS in less than a week as per top Syrian officials if it wasn’t for the direct support these terrorists receive from NATO countries and the direct protection the US military provides them, many among the US military do not distinguish between ISIS terrorists and real rebels, it’s understandable when we know that the US military is incapable of distinguishing between an ISIS terrorist commander in a car and 7 children and 3 adults when it drone-bombs them into non-existence.

‘The Syrian Arab Army can eliminate ISIS in 3 Days – Dr. Bashar Jaafari

The Syrian Army had already defeated ISIS in Syria before July 2014 and the terrorist remnants were regrouped and shipped to Iraq, beefed up, and then sent back to Syria by the US, Jordan, Turkey, Saudi, Qatar, and the rest of the alliance against the Syrian people as per this top Al Qaeda commander, founder of ‘Jihad’ in Egypt and close friend to Zawahiri, Al Qaeda commander in a July 3, 2014 interview:

The same was confirmed by John Kerry, among other top US officials 5 years later:

The Pentagon Threatening to Revive ISIS

For the past 10.5 years, the United States of America has led a number of its stooges in NATO, Western European countries, some new Eastern European countries seeking to join NATO, the Gulfies, among others, and a host of numerous terrorist groups to destabilize Syria, destroy Syria, slaughter as many Syrian people as they could, displace millions of other Syrians from their homes, and suck dry Syrian oil, gas, and food resources, not because the US needs any of these resources or they need the Syrian land described once by Trump as the land of sand and blood, nor because the Syrians have invaded, attacked, or harmed US citizens, not at all, in the matter of fact, whenever the US regimes since Reagan and maybe before needed help to rescue their ‘innocent’ citizens who always find themselves caught up in the middle of conflicts, they would ask Syria for help and Syria was helping within its capabilities, experience in combatting terrorists groups, and by exchanging favors with its allies who can help, it was rewarded by the US regimes with only the bloodshed we’re living in, all of this just that the US serves Israel’s interests in the region and tries desperately to materialize the so-called Greater Israel Project.

If you want us to remain online, please consider a small donation, or see how you can help at no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: https://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

MORE THAN 20 RUSSIAN AIRSTRIKES HIT GREATER IDLIB AS MILITANTS CONTINUE TO LAUNCH ATTACKS (VIDEOS, PHOTOS)

 18.09.2021 

South Front

More Than 20 Russian Airstrikes Hit Greater Idlib As Militants Continue To Launch Attacks (Videos, Photos)
An Su-24 taking off from Hmeimim air base in 2015. IMAGE: Russian Ministry of Defense

On September 18, warplanes of the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) carried out more than 23 airstrikes on militants’ positions in the northwestern Syrian region of Greater Idlib.

According to the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the airstrikes took place as follows:

  • Ten airstrikes targeted the outskirts of the towns of Baluon and Mashoun in the southern countryside of Idlib.
  • Four airstrikes targeted the town of al-Bara in the southern countryside of Idlib.
  • Four airstrikes targeted the town of al-Kindah in the western countryside of Idlib.
  • Five airstrikes targeted the towns of Kabani, al-Khudur and Barza in the northern countryside of Lattakia.

In the last few months, Greater Idlib militants stepped up their attacks in violation of the 5 March 2020 ceasefire agreement forcing the VKS to intensify its combat operations in the region.

One of the most recent attacks was carried out by Ansar al-Islam, a terrorist group allied to al-Qaeda-affiliated Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). The attack, which was carried out with mortars and recoilless rifles, targeted positions of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) in the northwestern countryside of Hama.

HTS and its allies appear to be unwilling to respect the ceasefire in Greater Idlib. This may force the SAA and its allies to launch a ground operation in the region very soon. Such an operation may lead to a confrontation with the Turkish military that maintains a large presence in the region.

MORE ON THIS TOPIC:

Another Look at 9/11: Ask Not ‘What Happened?’ but ‘Who Did It?’

See the source image

Philip Giraldi

September 16, 202

The evidence of Israeli involvement is substantial, based on the level of the Jewish state’s espionage operations in the U.S., Phil Giraldi writes.

The twentieth anniversary of 9/11 last Saturday has raised many of the usual issues about what actually happened on that day. Were hijacked airliners actually crashed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or was the damage in New York City attributable to explosives or even some kind of nuclear device? These are fundamental questions and the so-called “Truthers” who raise them have been inspired by their reading of the 585 page 9/11 Report, which is most charitably described as incomplete, though many would reasonably call it a government cover-up.

I have long believed that unless one actually sees or experiences something first hand the description of any event is no better than hearsay. The closest I came to “seeing” 9/11 was the panicked evacuation of a CIA office building, where I was working at the time. Another related bit of 9/11 narrative also came from two close friends who were driving into work at the Pentagon when they each independently observed what appeared to be a large plane passing over their cars and striking the building. I consider the sources credible but was it an airplane or a missile? And I was not there to see it with my own eyes, so I am reluctant to claim that my friends actually saw something that in retrospect might have been misconstrued.

Critics of the physical and engineering aspects of the accepted narrative certainly have a great deal of expert evidence that supports their case. The way the towers fell as well as the collapse of Building 7 nearby are suggestive of something other than the impact of an airliner near the top of the structure, but I am no expert in the science of the matter and have avoided expressing a view regarding it.

Apart from what happened, I have always been more intrigued by “Who done it?” I found the 9/11 Report to be conspicuously lacking in its failure to cover possible foreign involvement, to include the Saudis, Pakistanis and the Israelis. Indeed, President Joe Biden has taken steps that have resulted in the declassification and release of 16 pages of the notorious 28-page redaction of documents relating to any possible Saudi role. The document consists of interviews with Saudi student Omar al-Bayoumi, who reportedly helped support several hijackers.

The Saudis are being sued by 9/11 survivors, but it is unlikely that anything really sensitive will ever be exposed, as explained by investigative journalist Jim Bovard. Indeed, the documents released last Saturday did not demonstrate that the Saudi government itself played any direct role in 9/11, though it is clear that wealthy Saudis and even members of the Royal Family had been supporting and funding al-Qaeda. It is also known that that Saudi Embassy and Consulate employees in the U.S. had funded the alleged hijackers.

Friends who were in CIA’s Counterterrorism Center at the time of 9/11 tend to believe that the Saudis were indeed supporting their fellow citizens while in the U.S. but were likely not knowledgeable regarding any terrorist plot. They observed, however, that there was considerable evidence that Israel knew in advance about what was impending and may have even been instrumental in making sure that it succeeded.

The evidence of Israeli involvement is substantial, based on the level of the Jewish state’s espionage operations in the U.S. and also its track record on so-called covert actions simulating terrorist attacks designed to influence political decision making in foreign countries. But, of course, in reporting on the 9/11 tragedy no one in the mainstream media did pick up on the connection, inhibited no doubt by the understanding that there are some things that one just does not write about Israel if one hopes to remain employed. That is true in spite of the fact that the Israeli angle to 9/11 is without a doubt a good story, consigned to the alternative media, where it can be marginalized by critics as a conspiracy theory or the product of anti-Semitism.

In the year 2001 Israel was running a massive spying operation directed against Muslims either resident or traveling in the United States. The operation included the creation of a number of cover companies in New Jersey, Florida and also on the west coast that served as spying mechanisms for Mossad officers. The effort was supported by the Mossad Station in Washington DC and included a large number of volunteers, the so-called “art students” who traveled around the U.S. selling various products at malls and outdoor markets. The FBI was aware of the numerous Israeli students who were routinely overstaying their visas but they were regarded as a minor nuisance and were normally left to the tender mercies of the inspectors at the Bureau of Customs and Immigration.

The Israelis were also running more sophisticated intelligence operations inside the United States, many of which were focused on Washington’s military capabilities and intentions. Some specialized intelligence units concentrated on obtaining military and dual use technology. It was also known that Israeli spies had penetrated the phone systems of the U.S. government, to include those at the White House.

All of that came into focus on September 11, 2001, when a New Jersey housewife saw something from the window of her apartment building, which overlooked the World Trade Center. She watched as the buildings burned and crumbled but also noted something strange. Three young men were kneeling on the roof of a white transit van parked by the water’s edge, making a movie in which they featured themselves high fiving and laughing in front of the catastrophic scene unfolding behind them. The woman wrote down the license plate number of the van and called the police, who responded quickly and soon both the local force and the FBI began looking for the vehicle, which was subsequently seen by other witnesses in various locations along the New Jersey waterfront, its occupants “celebrating and filming.”

The license plate number revealed that the van belonged to a New Jersey registered company called Urban Moving Systems. The van was identified and pulled over. Five men between the ages of 22 and 27 years old emerged to be detained at gunpoint and handcuffed. They were all Israelis. One of them had $4,700 in cash hidden in his sock and another had two foreign passports. Bomb sniffing dogs reacted to the smell of explosives in the van.

According to the initial police report, the driver identified as Sivan Kurzberg, stated “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.” The five men were detained at the Bergen County jail in New Jersey before being transferred the FBI’s Foreign Counterintelligence Section, which handles allegations of spying.

After the arrest, the FBI obtained a warrant to search Urban Moving System’s Weehawken, NJ, offices. Papers and computers were seized. The company owner Dominick Suter, also an Israeli, answered FBI questions but when a follow-up interview was set up a few days later it was learned that he had fled the country for Israel, putting both his business and home up for sale. It was later learned that Suter has been associated with at least fourteen businesses in the United States, mostly in New Jersey and New York but also in Florida.

The five Israelis were held in Brooklyn, initially on charges relating to visa fraud. FBI interrogators questioned them for more than two months. Several were held in solitary confinement so they could not communicate with each other and two of them were given repeated polygraph exams, which they failed when claiming that they were nothing more than students working summer jobs. The two men that the FBI focused on most intensively were believed to be Mossad staff officers and the other three were volunteers helping with surveillance. Interestingly, photo evidence demonstrated that they had been seen “casing” the area where they were seen celebrating on the day before, indicating that they had prior knowledge of the attack.

The Israelis were not exactly cooperative, but the FBI concluded from documents obtained at their office in Weehawken that they had been targeting Arabs in New York and New Jersey. The FBI concluded that there was a distinct possibility that the Israelis had actually monitored the activities of at least two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers while the cover companies and intelligence personnel often intersected with locations frequented by the Saudis.

The dots were apparently never connected by investigators. Police records in New Jersey and New York where the men were held have disappeared and FBI interrogation reports are inaccessible. Media coverage of the case also died, though the five were referred to in the press as the “dancing Israelis” and by some, more disparagingly, as the “dancing Shlomos.”

Inevitably, the George W. Bush White House intervened. After 71 days in detention, the five Israelis were inexplicably released from prison, put on a plane, and deported. One should also recall that when the news of 9/11 reached Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was pleased, saying that “It’s very good. Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy.” It will “strengthen the bond between our two peoples, because we’ve experienced terror over so many decades, but the United States has now experienced a massive hemorrhaging of terror.” And, of course, it was conveniently attributable to Israel’s enemies.

The possible role of Israel in 9/11 was first explored in book form in 2003 by Antiwar.com editorial director Justin Raimondo in his The Terror Enigma, a short book focusing on Israeli spying and inconsistencies in the narrative that bore the provocative subtitle “9/11 and the Israeli Connection.”

Currently, the twentieth anniversary of 9/11 has inspired some others to take another look at the possible Israeli role. Ron Unz has recently completed an exhaustive examination of the evidence. He observes that 9/11 and its aftermath have shaped “the last two decades, greatly changing the daily lives and liberties of most ordinary Americans.” He asks “What organized group would have been sufficiently powerful and daring to carry off an attack of such vast scale against the central heart of the world’s sole superpower? And how were they possibly able to orchestrate such a massively effective media and political cover-up, even enlisting the participation of the U.S. government itself?”

Ron Unz answers his question, concluding that there is “a strong, perhaps even overwhelming case that the Israeli Mossad together with its American collaborators played the central role” in the attack. His argument is based on the noted inconsistencies in the standard narrative, plus an examination of the history of Israeli false flag and mass terrorism attacks. It also includes new information gleaned from Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman’s recent book Rise and Kill First: the Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations.

To a certain extent, Unz relies on a detailed investigative article written by French journalist Laurent Guyenot in 2018 as well as on an argument made by an ex-Marine and former instructor at the U.S. Army War College Alan Sabrosky in an article where he records how “Many years ago I read a fascinating discussion of the ‘tactics of mistake.’ This essentially entailed using a target’s prejudices and preconceptions to mislead them as to the origin and intent of the attack, entrapping them in a tactical situation that later worked to the attacker’s strategic advantage. This is what unfolded in the 9/11 attacks that led us into the matrix of wars and conflicts, present (Afghanistan and Iraq), planned (Iran and Syria) and projected (Jordan and Egypt), that benefit Israel and no other country — although I concede that many private contractors and politicians are doing very well for themselves out of the death and misery of others. I am also absolutely certain as a strategic analyst that 9/11 itself, from which all else flows, was a classic Mossad-orchestrated operation. But Mossad did not do it alone. They needed local help within America (and perhaps elsewhere) and they had it, principally from some alumni of PNAC (the misnamed Project for a New American Century) and their affiliates within and outside of the U.S. Government (USG), who in the 9/11 attacks got the ‘catalytic event’ they needed and craved to take the U.S. to war on Israel’s behalf…”

Economist and author Paul Craig Roberts has also been motivated by the anniversary to review the evidence and concludes “Circumstantial evidence suggests that 9/11 was a scheme of George W. Bush regime neoconservative officials allied with vice president Dick Cheney and Israel to create a ‘new Pearl Harbor’ that would generate support on the part of the American people and Washington’s European allies for a Middle Eastern ‘war on terror’ whose real purpose was to destroy Israel’s enemies in the interest of Greater Israel… This is the most plausible explanation, but, if true, it is not one that the U.S. and Israeli governments would ever acknowledge. Consequently, we are stuck with an official explanation long championed by the presstitutes that no one believes.”

Yes, an implausible explanation that no one really believes for the greatest national security disaster in America’s twenty-first century. And Israel gets yet another pass.

American Pravda: Seeking 9/11 Truth After Twenty Years

September 14, 2021

American Pravda: Seeking 9/11 Truth After Twenty Years

by Ron Unz, reposted with permission

The twentieth anniversary of the 9/11 Attacks is almost upon us, and although their immediacy has been somewhat reduced by the events of the last eighteen months, we must recognize that they have drastically shaped the world history of the last two decades, greatly changing the daily lives and liberties of most ordinary Americans.

The widespread doubts about the reality of the official story provided by our government and almost universally promoted by our media has severely diminished popular faith in the credibility of those two crucial institutions, with consequences that are still very apparent in today’s highest profile issues.

Over the years, diligent researchers and courageous journalists have largely demolished the original narrative of those events, and have made a strong, perhaps even overwhelming case that the Israeli Mossad together with its American collaborators played the central role. My own reconstruction, substantially relying upon such accumulated evidence, came to such conclusions, and I am therefore republishing it below, drawn from my previous articles which had appeared in late 2018 and early 2020, with the later material making heavy use of Ronen Bergman’s authoritative 2018 history of the Mossad, which ran more than 750 pages.

Immediately following my own analysis is a link to a particularly noteworthy article along the same lines by French writer Laurent Guyénot, which we had originally released simultaneously with my own, then followed by more than a dozen other significant articles of the previous decade, all published or republished on this website. In coming days, some of these may also be separately featured as part of the twenty-year commemoration.

The 9/11 Attacks – What Happened?

Although somewhat related, political assassinations and terrorist attacks are distinct topics, and Bergman’s comprehensive volume explicitly focuses on the former, so we cannot fault him for providing only slight coverage of the latter. But the historical pattern of Israeli activity, especially with regard to false-flag attacks, is really quite remarkable, as I noted in a 2018 article:

One of history’s largest terrorist attacks prior to 9/11 was the 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem by Zionist militants dressed as Arabs, which killed 91 people and largely destroyed the structure. In the famous Lavon Affair of 1954, Israeli agents launched a wave of terrorist attacks against Western targets in Egypt, intending to have those blamed on anti-Western Arab groups. There are strong claims that in 1950 Israeli Mossad agents began a series of false-flag terrorist bombings against Jewish targets in Baghdad, successfully using those violent methods to help persuade Iraq’s thousand-year-old Jewish community to emigrate to the Jewish state. In 1967, Israel launched a deliberate air and sea attack against the U.S.S. Liberty, intending to leave no survivors, killing or wounding over 200 American servicemen before word of the attack reached our Sixth Fleet and the Israelis withdrew.

The enormous extent of pro-Israel influence in world political and media circles meant that none of these brutal attacks ever drew serious retaliation, and in nearly all cases, they were quickly thrown down the memory hole, so that today probably no more than one in a hundred Americans is even aware of them. Furthermore, most of these incidents came to light due to chance circumstances, so we may easily suspect that many other attacks of a similar nature have never become part of the historical record.

Of these famous incidents, Bergman only includes mention of the King David Hotel bombing. But much later in his narrative, he describes the huge wave of false-flag terrorist attacks unleashed in 1981 by Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon, who recruited a former high-ranking Mossad official to manage the project.

Under Israeli direction, large car bombs began exploding in the Palestinian neighborhoods of Beirut and other Lebanese cities, killing or injuring enormous numbers of civilians. A single attack in October inflicted nearly 400 casualties, and by December, there were eighteen bombings per month, with their effectiveness greatly enhanced by the use of innovative new Israeli drone technology. Official responsibility for all the attacks was claimed by a previously unknown Lebanese organization, but the intent was to provoke the PLO into military retaliation against Israel, thereby justifying Sharon’s planned invasion of the neighboring country.

Since the PLO stubbornly refused to take the bait, plans were put into motion for the huge bombing of an entire Beirut sports stadium using tons of explosives during a January 1st political ceremony, with the death and destruction expected to be “of unprecedented proportions, even in terms of Lebanon.” But Sharon’s political enemies learned of the plot and emphasized that many foreign diplomats including the Soviet ambassador were expected to be present and probably would be killed, so after a bitter debate, Prime Minister Begin ordered the attack aborted. A future Mossad chief mentions the major headaches they then faced in removing the large quantity of explosives that they had already planted within the structure.

I think that this thoroughly documented history of major Israeli false-flag terrorist attacks, including those against American and other Western targets, should be carefully kept in mind when we consider the 9/11 attacks, whose aftermath has massively transformed our society and cost us so many trillions of dollars. I analyzed the strange circumstances of the attacks and their likely nature at considerable length in my 2018 article:

Oddly enough, for many years after 9/11, I paid very little attention to the details of the attacks themselves. I was entirely preoccupied with building my content-archiving software system, and with the little time I could spare for public policy matters, I was totally focused on the ongoing Iraq War disaster, as well as my terrible fears that Bush might at any moment suddenly extend the conflict to Iran. Despite Neocon lies shamelessly echoed by our corrupt media, neither Iraq nor Iran had had anything whatsoever to do with the 9/11 attacks, so those events gradually faded in my consciousness, and I suspect the same was true for most other Americans. Al Qaeda had largely disappeared and Bin Laden was supposedly hiding in a cave somewhere. Despite endless Homeland Security “threat alerts,” there had been no further Islamic terrorism on American soil, and relatively little anywhere else outside of the Iraq charnel house. So the precise details of the 9/11 plots had become almost irrelevant to me.

Others I knew seemed to feel the same way. Virtually all the exchanges I had with my old friend Bill Odom, the three-star general who had run the NSA for Ronald Reagan, had concerned the Iraq War and risk it might spread to Iran, as well as the bitter anger he felt toward Bush’s perversion of his beloved NSA into an extra-constitutional tool of domestic espionage. When the New York Times broke the story of the massive extent of domestic NSA spying, Gen. Odom declared that President Bush should be impeached and NSA Director Michael Hayden court-martialed. But in all the years prior to his untimely passing in 2008, I don’t recall the 9/11 attacks themselves even once coming up as a topic in our discussions.

Admittedly, I’d occasionally heard of some considerable oddities regarding the 9/11 attacks here and there, and these certainly raised some suspicions. Most days I would glance at the Antiwar.com front page, and it seemed that some Israeli Mossad agents had been caught while filming the plane attacks in NYC, while a much larger Mossad “art student” spy operation around the country had also been broken up around the same time. Apparently, FoxNews had even broadcast a multi-part series on the latter topic before that expose was scuttled and “disappeared” under ADL pressure.

Although I wasn’t entirely sure about the credibility of those claims, it did seem plausible that Mossad had known of the attacks in advance and allowed them to proceed, recognizing the huge benefits that Israel would derive from the anti-Arab backlash. I think I was vaguely aware that Antiwar.com editorial director Justin Raimondo had published The Terror Enigma, a short book about some of those strange facts, bearing the provocative subtitle “9/11 and the Israeli Connection,” but I never considered reading it. In 2007, Counterpunch itself published a fascinating follow-up story about the arrest of that group of Israeli Mossad agents in NYC, who were caught filming and apparently celebrating the plane attacks on that fateful day, and the Mossad activity seemed to be far larger than I had previously realized. But all these details remained a little fuzzy in my mind next to my overriding concerns about wars in Iraq and Iran.

However, by the end of 2008 my focus had begun to change. Bush was leaving office without having started an Iranian war, and America had successfully dodged the bullet of an even more dangerous John McCain administration. I assumed that Barack Obama would be a terrible president and he proved worse than my expectations, but I still breathed a huge sigh of relief every day that he was in the White House.

Moreover, around that same time I’d stumbled across an astonishing detail of the 9/11 attacks that demonstrated the remarkable depths of my own ignorance. In a Counterpunch article, I’d discovered that immediately following the attacks, the supposed terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden had publicly denied any involvement, even declaring that no good Muslim would have committed such deeds.

Once I checked around a little and fully confirmed that fact, I was flabbergasted. 9/11 was not only the most successful terrorist attack in the history of the world, but may have been greater in its physical magnitude than all past terrorist operations combined. The entire purpose of terrorism is to allow a small organization to show the world that it can inflict serious losses upon a powerful state, and I had never previously heard of any terrorist leader denying his role in a successful operation, let alone the greatest in history. Something seemed extremely wrong in the media-generated narrative that I had previously accepted. I began to wonder if I had been as deluded as the tens of millions of Americans in 2003 and 2004 who naively believed that Saddam had been the mastermind behind the September 11th attacks. We live in a world of illusions generated by our media, and I suddenly felt that I had noticed a tear in the paper-mache mountains displayed in the background of a Hollywood sound-stage. If Osama was probably not the author of 9/11, what other huge falsehoods had I blindly accepted?

A couple of years later, I came across a very interesting column by Eric Margolis, a prominent Canadian foreign policy journalist purged from the broadcast media for his strong opposition to the Iraq War. He had long published a weekly column in the Toronto Sun and when that tenure ended, he used his closing appearance to run a double-length piece expressing his very strong doubts about the official 9/11 story, even noting that the former director of Pakistani Intelligence insisted that Israel had been behind the attacks.

I eventually discovered that in 2003 former German Cabinet Minister Andreas von Bülow had published a best-selling book strongly suggesting that the CIA rather than Bin Laden was behind the attacks, while in 2007 former Italian President Francesco Cossiga had similarly argued that the CIA and the Israeli Mossad had been responsible, claiming that fact was well known among Western intelligence agencies.

Over the years, all these discordant claims had gradually raised my suspicions about the official 9/11 story to rather strong levels, but it was only very recently that I finally found the time to begin to seriously investigate the subject and read eight or ten of the main 9/11 Truther books, mostly those by Prof. David Ray Griffin, the widely acknowledged leader in that field. And his books, together with the writings of his numerous colleagues and allies, revealed all sorts of very telling details, most of which had previously been unknown to me. I was also greatly impressed by the sheer number of seemingly reputable individuals of no apparent ideological bent who had become adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement over the years.

When utterly astonishing claims of an extremely controversial nature are made over a period of many years by numerous seemingly reputable academics and other experts, and they are entirely ignored or suppressed but never effectively rebutted, reasonable conclusions seem to point in an obvious direction. Based on my very recent readings in this topic, the total number of huge flaws in the official 9/11 story has now grown extremely long, probably numbering in the many dozens. Most of these individual items seem reasonably likely and if we decide that even just two or three of them are correct, we must totally reject the official narrative that so many of us have believed for so long.

Now I am merely just an amateur in the complex intelligence craft of extracting nuggets of truth from a mountain of manufactured falsehood. Although the arguments of the 9/11 Truth Movement seem quite persuasive to me, I would obviously have felt much more comfortable if they were seconded by an experienced professional, such as a top CIA analyst. A few years ago, I was shocked to discover that was indeed the case.

William Christison had spent 29 years at the CIA, rising to become one of its senior figures as Director of its Office of Regional and Political Analysis, with 200 research analysts serving under him. In August 2006, he published a remarkable 2,700 word article explaining why he no longer believed the official 9/11 story and felt sure that the 9/11 Commission Report constituted a cover-up, with the truth being quite different. The following year, he provided a forceful endorsement to one of Griffin’s books, writing that “[There’s] a strong body of evidence showing the official U.S. Government story of what happened on September 11, 2001 to be almost certainly a monstrous series of lies.” And Christison’s extreme 9/11 skepticism was seconded by that of many other highly regarded former US intelligence professionals.

We might expect that if a former CIA intelligence officer of Christison’s rank were to denounce the official 9/11 report as a fraud and a cover-up, such a story would constitute front-page news. But it was never reported anywhere in our mainstream media, and I only stumbled upon it a decade later.

Even our supposed “alternative” media outlets were nearly as silent. Throughout the 2000s, Christison and his wife Kathleen, also a former CIA analyst, had been regular contributors to Counterpunch, publishing many dozens of articles there and certainly being its most highly credentialed writers on intelligence and national security matters. But editor Alexander Cockburn refused to publish any of their 9/11 skepticism, so it never came to my attention at the time. Indeed, when I mentioned Christison’s views to current Counterpunch editor Jeffrey St. Clair a couple of years ago, he was stunned to discover that the friend he had regarded so very highly had actually become a “9/11 Truther.” When media organs serve as ideological gatekeepers, a condition of widespread ignorance becomes unavoidable.

With so many gaping holes in the official story of the events of seventeen years ago, each of us is free to choose to focus on those we personally consider most persuasive, and I have several of my own. Danish Chemistry professor Niels Harrit was one of the scientists who analyzed the debris of the destroyed buildings and detected the residual presence of nano-thermite, a military-grade explosive compound, and I found him quite credible during his hour-long interview on Red Ice Radio. The notion that an undamaged hijacker passport was found on an NYC street after the massive, fiery destruction of the skyscrapers is totally absurd, as was the claim that the top hijacker conveniently lost his luggage at one of the airports and it was found to contain a large mass of incriminating information. The testimonies of the dozens of firefighters who heard explosions just before the collapse of the buildings seems totally inexplicable under the official account. The sudden total collapse of Building Seven, never hit by any jetliners is also extremely implausible.

The 9/11 Attacks – Who Did It?

Let us now suppose that the overwhelming weight of evidence is correct, and concur with high-ranking former CIA intelligence analysts, distinguished academics, and experienced professionals that the 9/11 attacks were not what they appeared to be. We recognize the extreme implausibility that three huge skyscrapers in New York City suddenly collapsed at free-fall velocity into their own footprints after just two of them were hit by airplanes, and also that a large civilian jetliner probably did not strike the Pentagon leaving behind absolutely no wreckage and only a small hole. What actually did happen, and more importantly, who was responsible?

The first question is obviously impossible to answer without an honest and thorough official investigation of the evidence. Until that occurs, we should not be surprised that numerous, somewhat conflicting hypotheses have been advanced and debated within the confines of the 9/11 Truth community. But the second question is probably the more important and relevant one, and I think it has always represented a source of extreme vulnerability to 9/11 Truthers.

The most typical approach, as generally followed in the numerous Griffin books, is to avoid the issue entirely and focus solely on the gaping flaws in the official narrative. This is a perfectly acceptable position but leaves all sorts of serious doubts. What organized group would have been sufficiently powerful and daring to carry off an attack of such vast scale against the central heart of the world’s sole superpower? And how were they possibly able to orchestrate such a massively effective media and political cover-up, even enlisting the participation of the U.S. government itself?

The much smaller fraction of 9/11 Truthers who choose to address this “whodunit” question seem to be overwhelmingly concentrated among rank-and-file grassroots activists rather than the prestigious experts, and they usually answer “inside job!” Their widespread belief seems to be that the top political leadership of the Bush Administration, probably including Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, had organized the terrorist attacks, either with or without the knowledge of their ignorant nominal superior, President George W. Bush. The suggested motives included justifying military attacks against various countries, supporting the financial interests of the powerful oil industry and military-industrial complex, and enabling the destruction of traditional American civil liberties. Since the vast majority of politically-active Truthers seem to come from the far left of the ideological spectrum, they regard these notions as logical and almost self-evident.

Although not explicitly endorsing those Truther conspiracies, filmmaker Michael Moore’s leftist box office hit Fahrenheit 9/11 seemed to raise such similar suspicions. His small budget documentary earned an astonishing $220 million by suggesting that the very close business ties between the Bush family, Cheney, the oil companies, and the Saudis were responsible for the Iraq War aftermath of the terrorist attacks, as well as the domestic crackdown on civil liberties, which was part-and-parcel of the right-wing Republican agenda.

Unfortunately, this apparently plausible picture seems to have almost no basis in reality. During the drive to the Iraq War, I read Times articles interviewing numerous top oil men in Texas who expressed total puzzlement at why America was planning to attack Saddam, saying that they could only assume that President Bush knew something that they themselves did not. Saudi Arabian leaders were adamantly opposed to an American attack on Iraq, and made every effort to prevent it. Prior to his joining the Bush Administration, Cheney had served as CEO of Halliburton, an oil services giant, and his firm had heavily lobbied for the lifting of U.S. economic sanctions against Iraq. Prof. James Petras, a scholar of strong Marxist leanings, published an excellent 2008 book entitled Zionism, Militarism, and the Decline of US Power in which he conclusively demonstrated that Zionist interests rather than those of the oil industry had dominated the Bush Administration in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and promoted the Iraq War.

As for the Michael Moore film, I remember at the time sharing a laugh with a (Jewish) friend of mine, both of us finding it ridiculous that a government so overwhelmingly permeated by fanatically pro-Israel Neocons was being portrayed as being in thrall to the Saudis. Not only did the plotline of Moore’s film demonstrate the fearsome power of Jewish Hollywood, but its huge success suggested that most of the American public had apparently never heard of the Neocons.

Bush critics properly ridiculed the president for his tongue-tied statement that the 9/11 terrorists had attacked America “for its freedoms” and Truthers have reasonably branded as implausible the claims that the massive attacks were organized by a cave-dwelling Islamic preacher. But the suggestion that they were led and organized by the top figures of the Bush Administration seems even more preposterous.

Cheney and Rumsfeld had both spent decades as stalwarts of the moderate pro-business wing of the Republican Party, each serving in top government positions and also as CEOs of major corporations. The notion that they capped their careers by joining a new Republican administration in early 2001 and almost immediately set about organizing a gigantic false-flag terrorist attack upon the proudest towers of our largest city together with our own national military headquarters, intending to kill many thousands of Americans in the process, is too ridiculous to even be part of a leftist political satire.

Let’s step back a bit. In the entire history of the world, I can think of no documented case in which the top political leadership of a country has launched a major false-flag attack upon its own centers of power and finance and tried to kill large numbers of its own people. The America of 2001 was a peaceful and prosperous country run by relatively bland political leaders focused upon the traditional Republican goals of enacting tax-cuts for the rich and reducing environmental regulations. Too many Truther activists have apparently drawn their understanding of the world from the caricatures of leftist comic-books in which corporate Republicans are all diabolical Dr. Evils, seeking to kill Americans out of sheer malevolence, and Alexander Cockburn was absolutely correct to ridicule them at least on that particular score.

Consider also the simple practicalities of the situation. The gigantic nature of the 9/11 attacks as postulated by the Truth movement would have clearly required enormous planning and probably involved the work of many dozens or even hundreds of skilled agents. Ordering CIA operatives or special military units to organize secret attacks against civilian targets in Venezuela or Yemen is one thing, but directing them to mount attacks against the Pentagon and the heart of New York City would be fraught with stupendous risk.

Bush had lost the popular vote in November 2000 and had only reached the White House because of a few dangling chads in Florida and the controversial decision of a deeply divided Supreme Court. As a consequence, most of the American media regarded his new administration with enormous hostility. If the first act of such a newly-sworn presidential team had been ordering the CIA or the military to prepare attacks against New York City and the Pentagon, surely those orders would have been regarded as issued by a group of lunatics, and immediately leaked to the hostile national press.

The whole scenario of top American leaders being the masterminds behind 9/11 is beyond ridiculous, and those 9/11 Truthers who make or imply such claims—doing so without a single shred of solid evidence—have unfortunately played a major role in discrediting their entire movement. In fact, the common meaning of the “inside job” scenario is so patently absurd and self-defeating that one might even suspect that the claim was encouraged by those seeking to discredit the entire 9/11 Truth movement as a consequence.

The focus on Cheney and Rumsfeld seems particularly ill-directed. Although I’ve never met nor had any dealings with either of those individuals, I was quite actively involved in DC politics during the 1990s, and can say with some assurance that prior to 9/11, neither of them were regarded as Neocons. Instead, they were the archetypical examples of moderate business-type mainstream Republicans, stretching all the way back to their years at the top of the Ford Administration during the mid-1970s.

Skeptics of this claim may note that they signed the 1997 declaration issued by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a leading Neocon foreign policy manifesto organized by Bill Kristol, but I would regard that as something of a red herring. In DC circles, individuals are always recruiting their friends to sign various declarations, which may or may not be indicative of anything, and I remember Kristol trying to get me to sign the PNAC statement as well. Since my private views on that issue were absolutely 100% contrary to the Neocon position, which I regarded as foreign policy lunacy, I deflected his request and very politely turned him down. But I was quite friendly with him at the time, so if I had been someone without strong opinions in that area, I probably would have agreed.

This raises a larger point. By 2000, the Neocons had gained almost total control of all the major conservative/Republican media outlets and the foreign policy wings of nearly all the similarly aligned thinktanks in DC, successfully purging most of their traditional opponents. So although Cheney and Rumsfeld were not themselves Neocons, they were swimming in a Neocon sea, with a very large fraction of all the information they received coming from such sources and with their top aides such as “Scooter” Libby, Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas Feith being Neocons. Rumsfeld was already somewhat elderly while Cheney had suffered several heart-attacks starting at age 37, so under those circumstances it may have been relatively easy for them to be shifted toward certain policy positions.

Indeed, the entire demonization of Cheney and Rumsfeld in anti-Iraq War circles has seemed somewhat suspicious to me. I always wondered whether the heavily Jewish liberal media had focused its wrath upon those two individuals in order to deflect culpability from the Jewish Neocons who were the obvious originators of that disastrous policy; and the same may be true of the 9/11 Truthers, who probably feared accusations of anti-Semitism. Regarding that former issue, a prominent Israeli columnist was characteristically blunt on the matter in 2003, strongly suggesting that 25 Neocon intellectuals, nearly all of them Jewish, were primarily responsible for the war. Under normal circumstances, the president himself would have surely been portrayed as the evil mastermind behind the 9/11 plot, but “W” was too widely known for his ignorance for such accusations to be credible.

It does seem entirely plausible that Cheney, Rumsfeld, and other top Bush leaders may have been manipulated into taking certain actions that inadvertently fostered the 9/11 plot, while a few lower-level Bush appointees might have been more directly involved, perhaps even as outright conspirators. But I do not think this is the usual meaning of the “inside job” accusation.

So where do we now stand? It seems very likely that the 9/11 attacks were the work of an organization far more powerful and professionally-skilled than a rag-tag band of nineteen random Arabs armed with box-cutters, but also that the attacks were very unlikely to have been the work of the American government itself. So who actually attacked our country on that fateful day seventeen years ago, killing thousands of our fellow citizens?

Effective intelligence operations are concealed in a hall of mirrors, often extremely difficult for outsiders to penetrate, and false-flag terrorist attacks certainly fall into this category. But if we apply a different metaphor, the complexities of such events may be seen as a Gordian Knot, almost impossible to disentangle, but vulnerable to the sword-stroke of asking the simple question “Who benefited?”

America and most of the world certainly did not, and the disastrous legacies of that fateful day have transformed our own society and wrecked many other countries. The endless American wars soon unleashed have already cost us many trillions of dollars and set our nation on the road to bankruptcy while killing or displacing many millions of innocent Middle Easterners. Most recently, that resulting flood of desperate refugees has begun engulfing Europe, and the peace and prosperity of that ancient continent is now under severe threat.

Our traditional civil liberties and constitutional protections have been drastically eroded, with our society having taken long steps toward becoming an outright police state. American citizens now passively accept unimaginable infringements on their personal freedoms, all originally begun under the guise of preventing terrorism.

I find it difficult to think of any country in the world that clearly gained as a result of the 9/11 attacks and America’s military reaction, with one single, solitary exception.

During 2000 and most of 2001, America was a peaceful prosperous country, but a certain small Middle Eastern nation had found itself in an increasingly desperate situation. Israel then seemed to be fighting for its life against the massive waves of domestic terrorism that constituted the Second Palestinian Intifada.

Ariel Sharon was widely believed to have deliberately provoked that uprising in September 2000 by marching to the Temple Mount backed by a thousand armed police, and the resulting violence and polarization of Israeli society had successfully installed him as Prime Minister in early 2001. But once in office, his brutal measures failed to end the wave of continuing attacks, which increasingly took the form of suicide-bombings against civilian targets. Many believed that the violence might soon trigger a huge outflow of Israeli citizens, perhaps producing a death-spiral for the Jewish state. Iraq, Iran, Libya, and other major Muslim powers were supporting the Palestinians with money, rhetoric, and sometimes weaponry, and Israeli society seemed close to crumbling. I remember hearing from some of my DC friends that numerous Israeli policy experts were suddenly seeking berths at Neocon thinktanks so that they could relocate to America.

Sharon was a notoriously bloody and reckless leader, with a long history of undertaking strategic gambles of astonishing boldness, sometimes betting everything on a single roll of the dice. He had spent decades seeking the Prime Ministership, but having finally obtained it, he now had his back to the wall, with no obvious source of rescue in sight.

The 9/11 attacks changed everything. Suddenly the world’s sole superpower was fully mobilized against Arab and Muslim terrorist movements, especially those connected with the Middle East. Sharon’s close Neocon political allies in America used the unexpected crisis as an opportunity to seize control of America’s foreign policy and national security apparatus, with an NSA staffer later reporting that Israeli generals freely roamed the halls of the Pentagon without any security controls. Meanwhile, the excuse of preventing domestic terrorism was used to implement newly centralized American police controls that were soon employed to harass or even shut down various anti-Zionist political organizations. One of the Israeli Mossad agents arrested by the police in New York City as he and his fellows were celebrating the 9/11 attacks and producing a souvenir film of the burning World Trade Center towers told the officers that “We are Israelis…Your problems are our problems.” And so they immediately became.

General Wesley Clark reported that soon after the 9/11 attacks he was informed that a secret military plan had somehow come into being under which America would attack and destroy seven major Muslim countries over the next few years, including Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya, which coincidentally were all of Israel’s strongest regional adversaries and the leading supporters of the Palestinians. As America began to expend enormous oceans of blood and treasure attacking all of Israel’s enemies after 9/11, Israel itself no longer needed to do so. Partly as a consequence, almost no other nation in the world has so enormously improved its strategic and economic situation during the last seventeen years, even while a large fraction of the American population has become completely impoverished during that same period and our national debt has grown to insurmountable levels. A parasite can often grow fat even as its host suffers and declines.

I have emphasized that for many years after the 9/11 attacks I paid little attention to the details and had only the vaguest notion that there even existed an organized 9/11 Truth movement. But if someone had ever convinced me that the terrorist attacks had been false-flag operations and someone other than Osama had been responsible, my immediate guess would have been Israel and its Mossad.

Certainly no other nation in the world can remotely match Israel’s track-record of remarkably bold high-level assassinations and false-flag attacks, terrorist and otherwise, against other countries, even including America and its military. Furthermore, the enormous dominance of Jewish and pro-Israel elements in the American establishment media and increasingly that of many other major countries in the West has long ensured that even when the solid evidence of such attacks was discovered, very few ordinary Americans would ever hear those facts.

Once we accept that the 9/11 attacks were probably a false-flag operation, a central clue to the likely perpetrators has been their extraordinary success in ensuring that such a wealth of enormously suspicious evidence has been totally ignored by virtually the entire American media, whether liberal or conservative, left-wing or right-wing.

In the particular case at hand, the considerable number of zealously pro-Israel Neocons situated just beneath the public surface of the Bush Administration in 2001 could have greatly facilitated both the successful organization of the attacks and their effective cover-up and concealment, with Libby, Wolfowitz, Feith, and Richard Perle being merely the most obvious names. Whether such individuals were knowing conspirators or merely had personal ties allowing them to be exploited in furthering the plot is entirely unclear.

Most of this information must surely have long been apparent to knowledgeable observers, and I strongly suspect that many individuals who had paid much greater attention than myself to the details of the 9/11 attacks may have quickly formed a tentative conclusion along these same lines. But for obvious social and political reasons, there is a great reluctance to publicly point the finger of blame towards Israel on a matter of such enormous magnitude. Hence, except for a few fringe activists here and there, such dark suspicions remained private.

Meanwhile, the leaders of the 9/11 Truth movement probably feared they would be destroyed by media accusations of deranged anti-Semitism if they had ever expressed even a hint of such ideas. This political strategy may have been necessary, but by failing to name any plausible culprit, they created a vacuum that was soon filled by “useful idiots” who shouted “inside job!” while pointing an accusing finger toward Cheney and Rumsfeld, and thereby did so much to discredit the entire 9/11 Truth movement.

This unfortunate conspiracy of silence finally ended in 2009 when Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former Director of Studies at the US Army War College, stepped forward and publicly declared that the Israeli Mossad had very likely been responsible for the 9/11 attacks, writing a series of columns on the subject, and eventually presenting his views in a number of media interviews, along with additional analyses.

Obviously, such explosive charges never reached the pages of my morning Times, but they did receive considerable if transitory coverage in portions of the alternative media, and I remember seeing the links very prominently featured at Antiwar.com and widely discussed elsewhere. I had never previously heard of Sabrosky, so I consulted my archiving system and immediately discovered that he had a perfectly respectable record of publication on military affairs in mainstream foreign policy periodicals and had also held a series of academic appointments at prestigious institutions. Reading one or two of his articles on 9/11, I felt he made a rather persuasive case for Mossad involvement, with some of his information already known to me but much of it not.

Since I was very busy with my software work and had never spent any time investigating 9/11 or reading any of the books on the topic, my belief in his claims back then was obviously quite tentative. But now that I have finally looked into the subject in much greater detail and done a great deal of reading, I think it seems quite likely that his 2009 analysis was entirely correct.

I would particularly recommend his long 2011 interview on Iranian Press TV, which I first watched just a couple of days ago. He came across as highly credible and forthright in his claims:

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/tpYjyFbJzPZh/

He also provided a pugnacious conclusion in a much longer 2010 radio interview:

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/BigWEQyw6Cb7/

Sabrosky focused much of his attention upon a particular segment of a Dutch documentary film on the 9/11 attacks produced several years earlier. In that fascinating interview, a professional demolition expert named Danny Jowenko who was largely ignorant of the 9/11 attacks immediately identified the filmed collapse of WTC Building 7 as a controlled-demolition, and the remarkable clip was broadcast worldwide on Press TV and widely discussed across the Internet.https://www.youtube.com/embed/Sl2RIqT-4bk?feature=oembed

And by a very strange coincidence, just three days after Jowenko’s broadcast video interview had received such heavy attention, he had the misfortune to die in a frontal collision with a tree in Holland. I’d suspect that the community of professional demolition experts is a small one, and Jowenko’s surviving industry colleagues may have quickly concluded that serious misfortune might visit those who rendered controversial expert opinions on the collapse of the three World Trade Center towers.

Meanwhile, the ADL soon mounted a huge and largely successful effort to have Press TV banned in the West for promoting “anti-Semitic conspiracy theories,” even persuading YouTube to entirely eliminate the huge video archive of those past shows, notably including Sabrosky’s long interview.

Most recently, Sabrosky provided an hour-long presentation at this June’s Deep Truth video panel conference, during which he expressed considerable pessimism about America’s political predicament, and suggested that the Zionist control over our politics and media had grown even stronger over the last decade.

His discussion was soon rebroadcast by Guns & Butter, a prominent progressive radio program, which as a consequence was soon purged from its home station after seventeen years of great national popularity and strong listener support.

The late Alan Hart, a very distinguished British broadcast journalist and foreign correspondent, also broke his silence in 2010 and similarly pointed to the Israelis as the likely culprits behind the 9/11 attacks. Those interested may wish to listen to his extended interview.

Journalist Christopher Bollyn was one of the first writers to explore the possible Israeli links to the 9/11 attacks, and the details contained in his long series of newspaper articles are often quoted by other researchers. In 2012, he gathered together this material and published it in the form of a book entitled Solving 9-11, thereby making his information on the possible role of the Israeli Mossad available to a much wider audience, with a version being available online. Unfortunately his printed volume severely suffers from the typical lack of resources available to the writers on the political fringe, with poor organization and frequent repetition of the same points due to its origins in a set of individual articles, and this may diminish its credibility among some readers. So those who purchase it should be forewarned about these serious stylistic weaknesses.

Probably a much better compendium of the very extensive evidence pointing to the Israeli hand behind the 9/11 attacks has been more recently provided by French writer Laurent Guyénot, both in his 2017 book JFK-9/11: 50 Years of the Deep State and also his 8,500 word article “9/11 was an Israeli Job”, published concurrently with this one and providing a far greater wealth of detail than is contained here. While I would not necessarily endorse all of his claims and arguments, his overall analysis seems fully consistent with my own.

These writers have provided a great deal of material in support of the Israeli Mossad Hypothesis, but I would focus attention on just one important point. We would normally expect that terrorist attacks resulting in the complete destruction of three gigantic office buildings in New York City and an aerial assault on the Pentagon would be an operation of enormous size and scale, involving very considerable organizational infrastructure and manpower. In the aftermath of the attacks, the US government undertook great efforts to locate and arrest the surviving Islamic conspirators, but scarcely managed to find a single one. Apparently, they had all died in the attacks themselves or otherwise simply vanished into thin air.

But without making much effort at all, the American government did quickly round up and arrest some 200 Israeli Mossad agents, many of whom had been based in exactly the same geographical locations as the purported 19 Arab hijackers. Furthermore, NYC police arrested some of these agents while they were publicly celebrating the 9/11 attacks, and others were caught driving vans in the New York area containing explosives or their residual traces. Most of these Mossad agents refused to answer any questions, and many of those who did failed polygraph tests, but under massive political pressure all were eventually released and deported back to Israel. A couple of years ago, much of this information was very effectively presented in a short video available on YouTube.

There is another fascinating tidbit that I have very rarely seen mentioned. Just a month after the 9/11 attacks, two Israelis were caught sneaking weapons and explosives into the Mexican Parliament building, a story that naturally produced several banner-headlines in leading Mexican newspapers at the time but which was greeted by total silence in the American media. Eventually, under massive political pressure, all charges were dropped and the Israeli agents were deported back home. This remarkable incident was only reported on a small Hispanic-activist website, and discussed in a few other places. Some years ago I easily found the scanned front pages of the Mexican newspapers reporting those dramatic events on the Internet, but I can no longer easily locate them. The details are obviously somewhat fragmentary and possibly garbled, but certainly quite intriguing.

One might speculate that if supposed Islamic terrorists had followed up their 9/11 attacks by attacking and destroying the Mexican parliament building a month later, Latin American support for America’s military invasions in the Middle East would have been greatly magnified. Furthermore, any scenes of such massive destruction in the Mexican capital by Arab terrorists would surely have been broadcast non-stop on Univision, America’s dominant Spanish-language network, fully solidifying Hispanic support for President Bush’s military endeavors.

Although my growing suspicions about the 9/11 attacks stretch back a decade or more, my serious investigation of the topic is quite recent, so I am certainly a newcomer to the field. But sometimes an outsider can notice things that may escape the attention of those who have spent so many years deeply immersed in a given topic.

From my perspective, a huge fraction of the 9/11 Truth community spends far too much of its time absorbed in the particular details of the attacks, debating the precise method by which the World Trade Center towers in New York were brought down or what actually struck the Pentagon. But these sorts of issues seem of little ultimate significance.

I would argue that the only important aspect of such technical issues is whether the overall evidence is sufficiently strong to establish the falsehood of the official 9/11 narrative and also demonstrate that the attacks must have been the work of a highly sophisticated organization with access to advanced military technology rather than a rag-tag band of 19 Arabs armed with box-cutters. Beyond that, none of those details matter.

In that regard, I believe that the volume of factual material collected by determined researchers over the last seventeen years has easily met that requirement, perhaps even ten or twenty times over. For example, even agreeing upon a single particular item such as the clear presence of nano-thermite, a military-grade explosive compound, would immediately satisfy those two criteria. So I see little point in endless debates over whether nano-thermite was used, or nano-thermite plus something else, or just something else entirely. And such complex technical debates may serve to obscure the larger picture, while confusing and intimidating any casually-interested onlookers, thereby being quite counter-productive to the overall goals of the 9/11 Truth movement.

Once we have concluded that the culprits were part of a highly sophisticated organization, we can then focus on the Who and the Why, which surely would be of greater importance than the particular details of the How. Yet currently all the endless debate over the How tends to crowd out the Who and the Why, and I wonder whether this unfortunate situation might even be intentional.

Perhaps one reason is that once sincere 9/11 Truthers do focus on those more important questions, the vast weight of the evidence clearly points in a single direction, implicating Israel and its Mossad intelligence service, with the case being overwhelmingly strong in motive, means, and opportunity. And leveling accusations of blame at Israel and its domestic collaborators for the greatest attack ever launched against America on our own soil entails enormous social and political risks.

But such difficulties must be weighed against the reality of three thousand American civilian lives and the subsequent seventeen years of our multi-trillion-dollar wars, which have produced tens of thousands of dead or wounded American servicemen and the death or displacement of many millions of innocent Middle Easterners.

The members of the 9/11 Truth movement must therefore ask themselves whether or not “Truth” is indeed the central goal of their efforts.

Other Noteworthy 9/11 Articles Available on this Website

Related Reading:

Taliban danger

SEPTEMBER 12, 2021

Taliban danger

by Batko Milacic for the Saker Blog

During the 20 years of Afghan occupation, which was initially quick and successful, the Americans and their allies failed to give Afghanistan anything. The impression is that successive US administrations initially had no strategy to pacify the country. After the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, the country’s secular regime, abandoned by the Russians, held out for three years and collapsed only after being completely deprived of all assistance from Moscow. The allied international forces were still in the country when the government of President Ghani, which they controlled, left the capital at the mercy of the Taliban. Why?!

When Russians were in Afganistan, they not only fought, but taught the Afghans, sending one of them into space and building hospitals, roads and factories. Therefore, the Afghans, who fought on the side of the country’s last truly secular government, knew what they were fighting for.

What did the soldiers of the current Afghan army, let alone ordinary Afghans, have to die for? For the president who stole so much money that it didn’t fit into his plane? For kickbacks from US arms manufacturers who supplied Afghanistan with the equipment, all of which was inherited by the Taliban? Maybe for freedom and universal human values, which had allegedly been promoted for 20 years by numerous NGOs that squandered the money of American and European taxpayers?!

Ordinary Afghan people lives by the same rules as their distant ancestors; they don`t understand the advantages of Western culture. Two decades of US rule have cost Afghans nearly a million lives. They faced killings of civilians “by mistake,” cleansing of villages, forced prostitution and humiliation. And a small sliver of “Europeanized Afghans,” supporters of women’s rights, religious tolerance and freedom, are just as alien to ordinary Afghans as are the arrogant US military. Therefore, some Afghans greet the Taliban as liberators, while others have learned to tolerate them and believe that life will not get any worse than it is now!

However, there are still others, who have no other choice than to fight! These are representatives of ethnic minorities. Nine percent of the country’s population are ethnic Uzbeks, and 27 percent – Tajiks. Pashtuns make up 42 percent of the Afghan population and they are the main source of the support for the Taliban`s. The Pashtuns are backed by neighboring Pakistan, and provide most of the volunteers for the militants. As for the Tajiks and Uzbeks, they were the main pillars of the secular state. Their leaders, Ahmad Shah Massoud, Sr. and Marshal Dostum, fought the Taliban throughout the initial period of their rule. They are less religious and not all of them are willing to spend the rest of their lives living according to strict Sharia law. Fully aware of this, the Taliban were all set not to repeat the mistakes they made in 1996-2001. The ethnic minorities must not only submit; they must be deprived of any chance to rebel. Given the fact that the country’s new rulers are divided into several groups, this goal was even easier to achieve. For example, the Haqqani Network, which is even more radical than the Taliban themselves (impossible as it may seem), and has in its ranks a large number of Arabic-speaking immigrants from ISIS and al-Qaeda, has sent out its militants to Panjshir and other northern provinces, while the Taliban still pretended to negotiate with them.

Panjshir is a small mountain valley in the north of the country, which has never really submitted to any conqueror. The passes leading to it are easy to block, and the terrain of the province itself is very conducive to guerrilla warfare. At the same time, routes go through the province to China and the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, making it an important logistics hub. In addition, the sparsely populated valley (around 100,000 inhabitants) is rich in minerals, including emeralds, which actually allowed Massoud Sr. to hold out there for five years. This is why the Taliban are so eager to nip the local resistance in the bud. The only reason they needed negotiations was to improve their image in the world. In Washington, they have already been recognized as a “different” Taliban, not those who are responsible for the attacks on and killings of civilians. Well, you demonstrate to the outside world your flexibility and readiness for dialogue, and, who knows, maybe one day they will also give you diplomatic recognition! Naturally enough, Ahmad Massoud Jr. and Amrullah Saleh (also an ethnic Tajik), who had declared himself the legitimate head of Afghanistan, had no desire to leave the autonomy, give up their ability to maintain self-defense units and exercise real control over part of the government. Meanwhile, the “Haqqani Network” has already put the defense capability of the “lion cub of Panjshir” to the test.

The rest we know from news reports. After the Taliban and their allies suffered their first setbacks, drones suddenly appeared in the air, flown by Pakistani operators. According to numerous reports, Pakistani special OPs helped the Taliban break into the valley, resulting in videos from its center and from the mausoleum of Ahmad Shah Massoud being posted online on the morning of September 6. The “Lion” announced the continuation of the resistance and went into the mountains. Fearing for their life (and with good reason too) most of the local civilian population left with him. Well, the pro-Soviet forces in Afghanistan once also controlled the valley, while Massoud Sr. fought and eventually defeated them in the surrounding mountains. There is a big difference though. The best anti-guerrilla tactic is to deprive the militants of any support – in other words, “scorched earth” or genocide. With Panjshir completely cut off from the outside world, the Taliban simultaneously solve two problems – they will get rid of the disloyal population by killing them or squeezing them out to Tajikistan, and reward their supporters by handing them the houses and property left behind by the escaped local residents, thereby ensuring their loyalty and creating a formidable base against Massoud’s supporters. All of this comes as very good news for Pakistan, which has given the Taliban full control over the country and received access to the resources of the potentially very rich Panjshir.

Massoud Jr., who represents Afghanistan’s eight million Tajiks, will apparently be forced to fight to the bitter end. However, it looks like he will not be getting any outside help now that the White House has apparently decided to leave the region completely and has clinched some kind of secret deals with the Taliban or their patrons from the neighboring countries. How else to explain the position of Dushanbe? The Tajik authorities obviously ignore the situation, refusing to support their fellow country folk. Have the Americans allegedly guaranteed the Central Asian republic security against the Taliban if Dushanbe does not interfere in the process of Afghan unification? But how can one believe an old fox telling the sheep that the wolf will not touch them? All the more so, if the wolves have just bitten the red-haired deceiver?

A much similar situation has developed in Uzbekistan – the country that Marshal Dostum, an ethnic Uzbek and a graduate of Soviet military schools, who is considered a man of great courage, has fled to. However, this brave man with all his associates, including loyal fighters, has crossed the Uzbek border and disappeared. Unusual behavior for a combat-hardened general who fought for 35 years and never accepted Islamists. What was he promised? Security for the Uzbek minority? Or was he simply bought out? Or blackmailed? In any case, the last hero of all wars disappeared from the media radar without firing a single shot.

The information vacuum will allow the Taliban to quickly take control of the whole country. The world media will not write about the millions of victims of ethnic and religious cleansing simply because it will know nothing about that. If the “young lion of Panjshir” and Saleh do not receive real support in the coming days, they are doomed, along with their compatriots. Back in 1975, the world was blissfully unaware of the insane atrocities committed by the Khmer Rouge, who killed a third of their own population, simply because there was no one to write about this in a country shuttered from the outside world. In 2021, they will also try to hide the death of several million people, if only this is what Washington wants. And the White House does want a dialogue with the Taliban, forgetting about the victims of September 11, forgetting about the terrorist attacks across Europe and the hundreds of young men and women who died for “democracy” in Afghanistan. But what will the Taliban do after they crack down on Afghan minorities? Will it be peaceful construction? No, because radical Islam presupposes an eternal struggle against infidels in the name of a global caliphate and constant expansion. Its supporters have no need for music, literature, cinema – all these wonderful things created by mankind. They go to God through blood and violence, and they will go beyond their immediate neighbors. With a solid base and money from the sale of resources to China and Pakistan, the new Afghan authorities will become a unifying center for all like-minded Islamists – the holdovers from al-Qaeda and ISIS. As for the Taliban’s promise to get rid of the sprawling drug industry, which, during the 20 years of US occupation spiked from 120 tons a year to a whopping 10,000 tons, it is hardly credible. Indeed, why destroy what can be sold to infidels with profit and then be spent on a “holy war” bombing peaceful American and European cities. This is exactly what the Western world will get if it fails to figure out (and fast!) how to check the triumphant advance of terrorism from Afghanistan. True, judging by its escape from Kabul, the world policeman now urgently needs to talk this over with Moscow and Beijing. Otherwise, a new 9/11 may not be too far off.

9/11 twenty years later and cheap & ubiquitous cellphones

September 11, 2021

9/11 twenty years later and cheap & ubiquitous cellphones

by Andrei for the Saker blog

Twenty years have passed since 9/11, so where do we stand today?  I will give my short answers as bullet points and then let you post your own conclusions.  Here are mine:

  1. Numerous engineers, architects, chemists, researchers and others have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that 9/11 was a controlled demolition.
  2. There is very strong, albeit indirect, preponderance of evidence that the Israelis were deeply involved and that they had accomplices inside the USA.
  3. From the two above I think that it is reasonable to assume that the Israelis were working with the US Neocons on a common project.
  4. Al-Qaeda (which is a CIA creation in the first place!) had some parts of it activated by the US/Israeli deep states (which are trying run the Takfiris everywhere), but only to play the role of a patsy (there were a few Saudis and there were real aircraft, but they did not bring down any buildings in NY).
  5. It remains unclear to me what really happened at the Pentagon, but I think that we can take the notion that the aircraft over DC and NY were remotely piloted as a pretty good working hypothesis (which still needs to be proven).
  6. Directed energy weapons, Russian naval nuclear cruise missiles, mini-nukes and the like are crude disinformation responses to the 9/11 Truth movement by the US deep state.  These were only moderately effective and only convinced a, shall we say, specific type of “truthers” which are all rejected as idiots (at best) by the mainstream 9/11 movement.
  7. The truth about 9/11 is now slowly getting “JFK status” which is “everybody either suspects/knows, but nobody really cares anymore”.  It’s old news, especially in a society with an attention span somewhere between 2 mins and 2 days.
  8. The real goal of 9/11 was to create a “patriotic pretext” to launch the GWOT and change the entire Middle-East into a compliant entity à la Jordan.
  9. The GWOT was a total failure and one of the worst military campaign in military history.
  10. The plan to create a “new” Middle-East have totally failed and, if anything, created a stronger anti-Israeli environment than before 9/11.  The fact that GWOT medals are handed out by the ton means nothing: after the Grenada faceplant Uncle Shmuel gave out more medals than participants took place in the entire operation.
  11. The AngloZionost Empire died on January 8th, 2020 and the USA, as we knew it, died on January 6th 2021 (see here for a detailed discussion of these dates and context), almost exactly one year later.
  12. By being murdered by the USA, General Soleimani won the biggest victory in his life.
  13. The US will have to leave both Iraq and Syria sooner rather than later.
  14. The Zionist entity calling itself “Israel” is now in a major political and even existential crisis and is now on the ropes and desperate.  But they hide it a lot better than the US propagandists.  But the Palestinians “feel” that, as do quite a few Israelis too.
  15. Both Biden and “Biden” are now fighting for their political lives not only due to “Kabul” but also due to the way Biden has just declared war on those who refuse vaccines.
  16. Anti-vaxxers might be many things, but nobody can deny them the following qualities: they are very strongly driven, for them the entire issue is not medical, but one of self-image, of identity and resistance to tyranny.  Okay, some will quietly cave in, but many will not.  That is why I strongly believe that Biden’s “declaration of war” against the unvaccinated “deplorables” (he did not use the word, but his contempt and hate was obvious) is a huge mistake.  At least in the USA, I believe that there are plenty of anti-vaxxers who will rather die in a firefight than being vaxxed (which they sincerely believe will either chip them, or kill them in a couple of years).  In other words, I do not believe that “Biden” has the means to force 80M+ anti-vaxxers to get the jab, in fact, if anything, his entire speech was a highly divisive slap in the face of millions of US Americans.  Violence is almost inevitable by now.  First isolated incidents, but possibly something bigger too.
  17. The US economy is not growing or recovery.  That is just playing with numbers or, “statistics” in Churchill’s sense of the word.  The truth is that the country is breaking apart and slowly going “3rd world” (okay, there are already plenty of “3rd world” areas of the USA, but these are now expanding).  The real Chinese economy is about 1.5 times larger than the real US one.  Point, set, game and match China.  By the way, the real Russian economy is comparable or bigger to the real German one, and the Russian economy has pretty much recovered from the COVID crisis (but it is not over, cases are still rising in some areas of Russia).
  18. The US military has totally lost its ability to function as a real military.  Ditto for NATO.  They were publicly humiliated pretty much everywhere they set foot.  This process is now irreversible. Point, set, game and match Russia, China and Iran.
  19. Internally, the USA losing its cohesion and that centrifugal process is being accelerated by the truly insane internal policies of “Biden” (just Woke and Covid are a declaration of war against millions of US Americans).  I am not at all confident that “Biden” can bring states like Florida or Texas to heel.  I won’t comment any further on the internal US situation, but that needed to be mentioned.

Conclusions:

  1. As with all Neocon type policies, they initially look “brilliant” only to end up in an abject clusterbleep and the Neocons hated by pretty much everybody else.
  2. The Taliban won the GWOT (even at its best, Uncle Shmuel “controlled” about 40% of the country, max!).
  3. The entire Zone B and a big part of Zone A now realize that (whether they openly admit it or not).
  4. There is a good chance that the very public disaster in Afghanistan will now force the Europeans to distance themselves from a clearly senile, demented and weak Big Brother.
  5. The core Anglosphere (UK/CA/NZ/AUS) seems to be consolidating around the “Biden USA” which might put them on a collision course with the EU.  We are not quite there yet, but that’s were we are heading.
  6. The COVID pandemic effectively “exploded” all the societies in Zone A which are now all in a low-level “brewing” pre-civil war condition.  I do not see what anybody could do to change that.
  7. The COVID pandemic will only get worse, which will only trigger more attempts by Zone A government to try force their population to “obey” and that, in turn, will only further destabilize all, repeat, ALL the regimes in power in Zone A.

The bottom line is this: 9/11 and the GWOT were initial, very short lived, tactical successes which resulted in a strategic disaster or, better, in a strategic collapse of both the AngloZionist Empire and the USA.

And, finally, this.  I cannot prove it, but my reading of modern history and regime collapses brings me to believe the following:

I have always said that US policies, internal and external, are not really the result of careful planning as they are the result of various interests/entities using their influence and power to “pull” US policies in the way they want.  And since there are A LOT of various interests/entities, especially in important cases, what we see is not a “policy outcome” but only a “sum vector”, an “outcome” which is the sum of all the different pulling and the relative strength of the folks doing that pulling.

I believe that this process has only been magnified but by an order of magnitude.  What we see today in the US ruling elites is a huge “cover your ass”, “run for your life”, “protect yourself and your future” and even “grab it while you still can” and NOT, repeat, NOT “real” policies.  Those who believe in a grand conspiracy fail to realize that what happened in Kabul is not the exception, it is the rule!  Kabul was a giant spotlight which finally showed the true face of the US military to the entire planet: not the Tom Clancy kind of patriotic delusional hallucinations or Hollywood, but the “real reality” filmed “on the ground” on cheap but ubiquitous cellphones, by both Afghani and even US/NATO servicemen’s!

The problem for the delusional patriots is this: far from being “Putin agents” or anything like that, the million of folks out there who have cellphones with cameras (no matter how old or cheap) produce such a raw volume of data which makes it impossible to suppress.  The exact same goes for the Israelis, by the way, who have paid a huge price in terms of “losing the propaganda war” since the Palestinians (and quite a few Israelis too!!) now use their cellphones more effectively than any Palestinian rocket or suicide-bomber ever would.  That is also what really screwed up the recent US elections: ubiquitous cellphones (well, and CCTV cameras).

If we imagine the US/Israeli propaganda machine as a huge powerful animal (BILLIONS are invested into this) you can think of poor, oppressed people with cheapo cellphones as fire ants.  Let’s just conclude by saying that time is not on the side of the big powerful heavy animal, but on the fire ants’ side.

Andrei

PS: yes, I mentioned the POLITICAL aspects of the COVID pandemic.  I get to set the rules, since this is my blog.  The COVID topic remains banned on the entire Saker blog (Cafe included), EVEN if I get to mention it if/when it is part of my political analyses (I won’t touch the medicals aspects of COVID anymore, I have said all I have to say on this topic already anyway).  Do do NOT, repeat, NOT try to “sneak in” some COVID comments or you will be banned.  For the alternatively gifted: the article above is NOT about vaccines or the dangers of mRNA, it is about the political evaluation of 9/11 and the GWOT.  Stay on topic or else…

Families of 9/11 Victims Expect Release of FBI Report on Saudi Role 

September 10, 2021

Families of 9/11 Victims Expect Release of FBI Report on Saudi Role 

By Staff, Agencies 

Families of the victims of the September 11 attacks who are suing the government of Saudi Arabia in a United States federal court in New York are expecting the US government to imminently release a key FBI report.

The 16-page report is an FBI summary and analysis of the agency’s long-running investigation into the activities of two of the September 11 hijackers, Saudi nationals, Khalid Al-Mihdhar and Nawaf Al-Hazmi.

In January 2000, the two Al-Qaeda operatives arrived in California where they were assisted by other Saudis. The FBI report, which may be redacted upon its public release, is expected to provide details of the FBI’s inquiry into who helped Al-Mihdhar and Al-Hazmi, according to a lawyer for the September 11 families.

“It’s unclear what other parts of the government may have known what was going on, but clearly, fairly high-level and mid-level Saudi officials working for the government were part of this conspiracy,” said Andrew ‘Duke’ Maloney, a lawyer with the law firm Kreindler LLP representing the September 11 families in the litigation against Saudi Arabia.

Now 20 years after the 2001 attacks that resulted in the deaths of nearly 3,000 people in New York City, Washington, DC, and Shanksville, Pennsylvania, the families’ lawsuit accusing the Saudi government of complicity is nearing a turning point. Either sufficient evidence to support the lawsuit will be presented to the court or it will fail to move forward.

The pending FBI report is an analysis by agents who looked into how Al-Mihdhar and Al-Hazmi, who spoke little English and had no independent resources when they arrived in the US, gained a foothold in Los Angeles and then in San Diego.

Lawyers for the September 11 families believe they can prove there was “a cabal” of Saudi government officials “who were conspiring with Al-Qaeda operatives.” The lawsuit’s goal is to win a financial settlement for the families of the victims of the attack.

Argued largely in private, behind closed doors and in secret filings, the factual underpinnings of the case could soon become public under an executive order by President Joe Biden.

After Biden was told by September 11 family members he would not be welcome at anniversary memorials usually attended by the president, Biden directed the Justice Department and other agencies to review and release still-secret FBI documents and evidence.

Biden’s order specifically directs the release of the 16-page report by the September 11, 2021 anniversary.

The report is likely to shed new light on what the FBI knows about several men connected to the hijackers, including Saudi nationals, Muslim leader Fahad Al-Thumairy and suspect Saudi spy Omar Al-Bayoumi, Maloney said.

A Saudi embassy official, Mussaed Ahmed Al-Jarrah, whose name had emerged previously as part of the legal proceedings, is believed to have provided assistance to the future hijackers, according to the families’ lawyers.

Of the 19 al-Qaeda hijackers, 15 were Saudis and from the beginning of multiple US inquiries in to the September 11 attacks, questions have swirled around the Saudi role.

The Taliban, 9/11, the Empire, MAGA eastern wet pampers

September 09, 2021

The Taliban, 9/11, the Empire, MAGA eastern wet pampers

by Andrei for the Saker Blog

Most of you must have heard it: the Taliban will organize a major celebration on September 11th to mark the liberation of Afghanistan from the US occupation and the creation of the new Afghan government.  The Russians and the Chinese have been invited.  As are the Pakistanis.  Not sure about Iran (do you know?)?

The Afghan government could be called a “GITMO government” since 5 members are former GITMO hostages and one, the head of security/intel, is still on the FBI most wanted list.

Needless to say, the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11.  As for Bin-Laden and al-Qaeda they were somewhat involved, but only as “patsies”.

But the US government declared that the Taliban guilty and invaded Afghanistan.

Twenty years later, the Taliban are in total control and the US has probably executed one of the dumbest, worst and generally immoral military operation in history.  And 20 years later, the US was totally defeated.  Not by Russia.  Not by China.  Not by Iran.  Not even by Venezuela.  By the Afghans, after 20 years of warfare and trillions spent.

I have to agree with a Russian analyst who recently declared that “no, this is not even a “regular/normal” imperial collapse, this is the worst and most shameful imperial collapse in history”.

I fully concur.

As for what the Taliban will do this Saturday, it can’t even be called “spitting in Uncle Shmuel’s face”.  It’s even more than that.  Maybe we could speak of “urinating into Uncle Shmuel’s face” or some other even ruder metaphor showing both the total and utter contempt in which the Taliban hold not only the USA but the entire AngloZionist Empire AND somehow express the magnitude of the humiliation inflicted upon the USA.

I lack the words to come up with a suitable metaphor.

Can somebody come up with something sufficiently powerful?

Also, and especially for the MAGA folks out there:

CNN has reported that the entire “Ukie plan” to kidnap Russian PMCs was organized by the CIA and botched by the Ukies.  The harcore Ukronazis are now accusing CNN of either being “duped by the FSB” or even for being used by Putin personally.  Or both.

Anyway, what this goes to prove that Trump approved a clear terrorist attack against Russia.  Either that, or he did not even know about it, which might be worse…

And you guys are seriously discussing his possible comeback?!?!

Get real!

I saw an interesting poll somewhere (sorry, don’t remember where exactly) which shows that 49% of US Americans feel safer than on 9/11 20 years ago and 41% feel less safe.

And that is the real outcome of this monumentally evil and stupid Neocon plan.

After 20 years of warfare, pompous self-aggrandizement, many thousands dead and maimed and trillions spent.

Nothing will ever wash off this shame from the awareness of folks in Zone B and even many in Zone A.

Finally, today the Ukronazis shelled the Donbass again, with howitzers and mortars.  They were aiming at a water pumping station, miss and wounded/killed a couple.  Either way, this is a warcrime.  The Russians have declared that they have the designation of the unit which fired and the name of the commander who gave the order.

Which is all very predictable, since 1) US officials just visited the Ukraine 2) the CNN story is a HUGE scandal in the Ukie Rada and 3) Zelenskii is desperate to show that he might still be useful to the USA.

As for the Poles, they are fearing Russian invasion, so they put bared wire (I kid you not!) along their eastern border.  Which remind me of a Russian joke: a man walks down the street minding his own business, when he sees a woman on a balcony screaming “help! he wants to rape me! help!!!” from the top of her lungs.  The man looks up and says, “ma’am, calm down, I have no interest in you whatsoever and you are on the balcony while I am in the street” to which the woman replies, “yeah, maybe, but I can come down!“.

The Russian military is engaged in some large and serious, not fake, military maneuvers: 200’000 soldiers in both Russia and Belarus.  Hence all the wet pampers in eastern Europe (especially in Poland – the “hyena of Europe” always was a cowardly animal).

The Poles have even predicted the date of the Russian invasion: tomorrow (not a joke)

I have terrible news for Poland, the Baltic statelets and the Ukraine: nobody in Russia has any need for you, or your land.  Nobody.  Oh, and, for your information: “defenses” like walls, barbed-wires or even trenches cannot stop a modern military, such crap would not even slow the Russians down.

Summary: both Biden and Zelenskii might get impeached or otherwise removed.  That’s won’t solve anything for the US or the Ukraine, but sheer magnitude of their incompetence and stupidity makes such an outcome quite possible.

Not even in my most wildest and craziest dreams could I ever have imagined such a quick and total collapse of the Empire and of the USA.  I have to pinch myself several times a day, each time I get the news 🙂

Cheers

A Busy Month For Russia’s Aerospace Forces Over Syria

 02.09.2021

Video Here

You can read this article in GermanLINK.

Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) continue their aerial crusade over Greater Idlib and Central Syria.

On September 1st, as the capstone of a very active month, seven VKS warplanes carried out more than 25 airstrikes on ISIS cells in Syria’s vast central region.

According to the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), the airstrikes hit fortified hideouts of the terrorist group in the Hama-Aleppo-Raqqa triangle.

More than 550 Russian airstrikes hit ISIS cells in central Syria last August, according to a recent report by the SOHR. The airstrikes killed nine terrorists and wounded 20 others.

The other direction of the airstrike activity is Greater Idlib.

Efforts to contain Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the ruler of Idlib are necessary, as on September 1st a six-year-old girl was killed in the government-held town of Jurin in the northwestern countryside of Hama.

Jurin was one of several government-held towns around the Greater Idlib which were shelled by HTS and its allies. According to the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the militants fired more than 50 shells and rockets at these towns.

Just hours earlier, in the evening of August 31, an old landmine exploded in the area under militant control in the Syria’s countryside of Idlib. As a result of the explosion, a man and his child were killed, while his second child was injured.

The constant escalation in the region prevents any de-mining or other safety procedures to be carried out, forcing civilians to risk their lives daily.

Instead of enforcing the ceasefire and aiding the local populace, the Turkish Armed Forces are fighting their own war and directly supporting the al-Qaeda-affiliated militant groups in northern Syria.

On August 30, the Turkish army and the militants it backs shelled with artillery strikes the surrounding area of the refugee camp north of the city of Ain Issa as well as the nearby village of Muallaq. The villages of Khalidiya, Hoshan, Ma’lek as well as the nearby M4 highway were also reportedly targeted.

On August 31st, a Turkish UAV hit a checkpoint of Kurdish forces in the town of Ain Issa. The town is strategically important as a link between the self-governing regions of Euphrates and Cizîrê. The town is regularly targeted by Turkish and Turkish-backed forces.

There is no apparent end in sight of the endless fighting between the Greater Idlib so-called “moderate opposition” and the Syrian Arab Army and the Russian VKS in one direction, and the constant fighting of Ankara’s forces and the militants it backs against the Kurdish groups in the other. Northern Syria remains as volatile and chaotic as ever, with varying levels of escalation.

Related Videos

MORE ON THIS TOPIC:

Yemen Defense Forces Not Far From Recapturing Whole Marib – Report

September 1, 2021

Yemen Defense Forces Not Far From Recapturing Whole Marib - Report

By Staff, Agencies

Yemen’s allied defense forces decisively escalated their counterattacks on Saudi Arabia’s allies in Marib, the capital of a hugely strategic west-central Yemeni province of the same name, and are reportedly on the verge of recapturing the whole city.

The Yemeni army and Popular Committees were reported on Tuesday to have advanced as far as the city’s “government buildings.”

The advancements were made possible, despite heavy Saudi bombardment of the flashpoints in the city from above, Yemen Press Agency reported. It came after the forces successfully pushed back against the kingdom’s allies there, namely Riyadh-backed militants and al-Qaeda terrorists, the outlet added.

The terrorists, it added, have been forced to abandon their positions and beat a retreat towards the city’s administrative buildings.

The Yemeni forces “are not far from” reestablishing Sanaa’s sovereignty over the city, Yemeni media sources noted.

The two sides are now engaged in intense confrontation “using heavy weaponry,” local sources noted.

The Saudi-led coalition, meanwhile, tried to shift the Yemeni allies’ attention away from their pending victory by trying to create diversionary clashes in other places. It, however, failed in its bid, the Yemeni outlets said.

The locals said the coalition’s forces had suffered considerable human and material losses during the developments. “A large number” of the enemy’s military commanders were either killed or injured during the advances, they announced.

The coalition invaded Yemen in March 2015 in a self-proclaimed bid to restore power in the country to Saudi Arabia’s favorite officials.

Seven years on, however, it is still nowhere close to realizing that avowed aim.

The invasion has, meanwhile, killed tens of thousands of Yemenis in the process. The military aggression and a simultaneous siege of Yemen has also turned the Arab world’s already poorest nation into the scene of, what the United Nations has deplored as, the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

The Yemeni forces have invariably retaliated heavily against the war, striking targets that lie as far as the capital of the kingdom itself and its war ally, the United Arab Emirates.

Pledging never to lay down their arms until Yemen’s complete liberation, the forces have been focusing on Marib and its surrounding province’s recapture for many months now.

Given its strategic location, the province’s liberation is expected to open the floodgates of further victories for the Yemenis.

According to Yemen’s Ambassador to Tehran, Ibrahim al-Deilami, the war in Marib is currently underway in “more than 50 fronts.”

The Yemeni counterblows have managed to fully liberate as many as nine of the province’s 14 districts so far.

Enduring Terror Forever: from al-Qaeda to ISIS-K

August 30, 2021

Enduring Terror Forever: from al-Qaeda to ISIS-K

by Pepe Escobar and first posted at AsiaTimes

It was 20 years ago today. Asia Times published Get Osama! Now! Or Else…The rest is history.

Retrospectively, this sounds like news from another galaxy. Before Planet 9/11. Before GWOT (Global War on Terror). Before the Forever Wars. Before the social network era. Before the Russia-China strategic partnership. Before the Dronification of State Violence. Before techno-feudalism.

Allow me to get a little personal. I was back in Peshawar – the Islamic Rome, capital of the tribal areas – 20 years ago after a dizzying loop around Pakistan, tribal territory, a botched smuggling op to Kunar, biding time in Tajikistan, arriving by Soviet helicopter in the Panjshir valley, a harrowing road trip to Faizabad, and a UN flight that took ages to arrive.

In the Panjshir, I had finally met “the Lion”, commander Masoud, then plotting a counter-offensive against the Taliban. He told me he was fighting a triad: the Taliban, al-Qaeda and the Pakistani ISI. Less than three weeks later he was assassinated – by two al-Qaeda ops disguised as a camera crew, two days before 9/11.

No one, 20 years ago, could possibly imagine the subsequent slings and arrows of outrageous – terror – fortune. Two decades, $2.3 trillion and at least 240,000 Afghan deaths later, the Taliban are back where they were: ruling Afghanistan. Masoud Jr in theory leads a “resistance” in the Panjshir – actually a CIA ops channeled through CIA asset Amrullah Saleh, former Afghan Vice-President.

Al-Qaeda is a harmless skeleton, even rehabilitated in Syria as “moderate rebels; the new bogeyman in town is ISIS-K, a spin-off of the Islamic State in “Syraq”.

After negotiating a stunning package deal with the Taliban, the Empire of Chaos is concluding a humiliating evacuation from the land it bombed into democracy and submitted for two decades. Once again the US was de facto expelled by a peasant guerrilla army, this time mostly consisting of Pashtuns, descendants of the White Huns – a nomad confederation – as well as the Sakas, nomadic Iranic peoples of the Eurasian steppes.

The CIA shadow army

ISIS-K, the new viper’s nest, opens multiple Pandora boxes that may lead to the new incarnation of the Forever Wars. ISIS-K has claimed responsibility for the horrific Kabul suicide bombing.

ISIS-K is apparently led by one ghostly emir Shahab al-Mujahir (no photo, no biography details), supposed to be an urban warfare expert who previously worked as a mere mid-level commander for the Haqqani network.

In 2020 media-savvy ISIS-K released one of his audio messages in Pashto. Yet he may not be Pashtun, but actually from some latitude in the Middle East, and not fluent in the language.

Even CENTCOM commander Gen Mackenzie has admitted that the US military are sharing intel on ISIS-K with the Taliban – or rather vice-versa: Taliban spokesman Zahibullah Mujahid in Kabul stressed that they warned the Americans in the first place about an imminent threat to the airport.

The Pentagon-Taliban collaboration is by now established. The perennial CIA shadow wars are a completely different ball game.

I have shown in this in-depth investigation how the top priority for the Taliban is to target the ramifications of the CIA shadow army in Afghanistan, deployed via the Khost Protection Force (KPF) and inside the National Directorate of Security (NDS).

The CIA army, as I explain, was a two-headed hydra. Older units harked back to 2001 and were very close to the CIA. The most powerful was the KPF, based at the CIA’s Camp Chapman in Khost, which operated totally outside Afghan law, not to mention budget.

The other head of the hydra were the NDS’s own Afghan Special Forces: four main units, each operating in its own regional area. The NDS was funded by the CIA and for all practical purposes, operatives were trained and weaponized by the CIA.

So the NDS was a de facto CIA proxy. And here we have the direct connection to Saleh, who was trained by the CIA in the US when the Taliban was in power in the late 1990s. Afterwards, Saleh became the head of the NDS – which happened to work very closely with RAW, Indian intel. Now he’s a “resistance leader” in the Panjshir.

My investigation was confirmed right away by the deployment of Task Force Pineapple last week, an operation carried out by CIA/Special Forces to extract the last sensitive intel assets from Kabul who were being chased by the Taliban.

In parallel, serious questions are piling up regarding the Kabul suicide bombing and the immediate MQ-9 Reaper response targeting an “ISIS-K planner” in eastern Afghanistan.

This page has been carefully tracking prime information regarding what could be described as the Abbey Gate Massacre, not surprisingly buried by Western mainstream media.

The You Tube channel Kabul Lovers, for instance, is engaging in street-level journalism that puts to shame every multi-million dollar TV network. A military officer who examined the bodies of many of the bombing victims at Kabul Emergency Hospital claimed that most were not victims of the suicide bombing: “All victims were killed by American bullets, except maybe 20 people out of 100.” The full, original report, in Dari, is here.

Scott Ritter, for his part, has emphasized the need of “perspective” on the claimed drone strike against ISIS-K “from an actual drone expert like Daniel Hale, but they put him in jail for telling the truth about how bad our drone program actually is when it comes to killing the right people.”

By now it’s established that contrary to Pentagon claims, the drone strike hit a random house in Jalalabad, not a moving vehicle, and there was “collateral damage”: at least 3 civilians.

And the civilian death toll of a subsequent missile strike on another alleged “ISIS-K planner” in a car in Kabul is already at 9 – including 6 children.

The Syria-Afghanistan rat line

The much-lauded Pentagon offensive against ISIS in “Syraq” has been derided all across the Axis of Resistance as a massive farce.

Over the years, we have had exposés coming from Moscow; Tehran; Damascus; Hezbollah; and some of the People’s Mobilization Units (PMUs) in Iraq.

Hezbollah’s secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah has repeatedly asserted how “the US have been using helicopters to save ISIS terrorists from complete annihilation in Iraq/Syria and transporting them to Afghanistan to keep them as insurgents in Central Asia against Russia, China and Iran.”

The extremely well informed Russian Special Presidential Envoy for Afghanistan, Zamir Kabulov, has pointed out that Russia had received the same information from local tribal leaders. Even former President Hamid Karzai – now a key negotiator forming the next Taliban-led government in Kabul – has branded ISIS-K a “tool” of the United States.

It’s important to remember that ISIS-K has become much more powerful in Afghanistan since 2020 because of what I describe as a shadowy transportation ratline from Idlib in Syria to Kunar and Nangarhar in eastern Afghanistan.

Of course there is no smoking gun – yet: but what we do have is a serious working hypothesis that ISIS-K may be just another CIA shadow army, in collaboration with the NDS.

All that, if confirmed, would point to a dark future: the continuation of the Forever Wars by other means – and tactics. Yet never underestimate the counter-power of those no-nonsense descendants of White Huns and Sakas.

Blowback: Taliban target US intel’s shadow army

August 29, 2021

The Kabul Airport bombing shows there are shadowy forces in Afghanistan, willing to disrupt a peaceful transition after US troops leave. But what about US intel’s own ‘shadow army,’ amassed over two decades of occupation? Who are they, and what is their agenda?

by Pepe Escobar with permission and special and first posting for the new website The Cradle.

Blowback: Taliban target US intel’s shadow army

So we have the CIA Director William Burns deploying in haste to Kabul to solicit an audience with Taliban leader Abdul Ghani Baradar, the new potential ruler of a former satrapy. And he literally begs him to extend a deadline on the evacuation of US assets.

The answer is a resounding “no.” After all, the 31 August deadline was established by Washington itself. Extending it would only mean the extension of an already defeated occupation.

The ‘Mr. Burns goes to Kabul’ caper is by now part of cemetery of empires folklore. The CIA does not confirm or deny Burns met Mullah Baradar; a Taliban spokesman, delightfully diversionist, said he was “not aware” of such a meeting.

We’ll probably never know the exact terms discussed by the two unlikely participants –  assuming the meeting ever took place and is not crass intel disinformation.

Meanwhile, Western public hysteria is, of all things, focused on the imperative necessity of extracting all ‘translators’ and other functionaries (who were de facto NATO collaborators) out of Kabul airport. Yet thundering silence envelops what is in fact the real deal: the CIA shadow army left behind.

The shadow army are Afghan militias set up back in the early 2000s to engage in ‘counter-insurgency’ – that lovely euphemism for search and destroy ops against the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Along the way, these militias practiced, in droves, that proverbial semantic combo normalizing murder: ‘extrajudicial killings,’ usually a sequel to ‘enhanced interrogations.’ These ops were always secret as per the classic CIA playbook, thus ensuring there was never any accountability.

Now Langley has a problem. The Taliban have kept sleeper cells in Kabul since May, and much earlier than that in selected Afghan government bodies. A source close to the Ministry of Interior has confirmed the Taliban actually managed to get their hands on the full list of operatives of the two top CIA schemes: the Khost Protection Force (KPF) and the National Directorate of Security (NDS). These operatives are the prime Taliban targets in checkpoints leading to Kabul airport, not random, helpless ‘Afghan civilians’ trying to escape.

The Taliban have set up quite a complex, targeted operation in Kabul, with plenty of nuance – allowing, for instance, free passage for selected NATO members’ Special Forces, who went into town in search of their nationals.

But access to the airport is now blocked for all Afghan nationals. Yesterday’s double tap suicide-car bombing has introduced an even more complex variable: the Taliban will need to pool all their intel resources, fast, to fight whatever elements are seeking to introduce domestic terror attacks into the country.

The RHIPTO Norwegian Centre for Global Analyses has shown how the Taliban have a “more advanced intelligence system” applied to urban Afghanistan, especially Kabul. The “knocking on people’s doors” fueling Western hysteria means they know exactly where to knock when it comes to finding collaborationist intel networks.

It is no wonder Western think tanks are in tears about how undermined their intel services will be in the intersection of Central and South Asia. Yet the muted official reaction boiled down to G7 Foreign Ministers issuing a mere statement announcing they were “deeply concerned by reports of violent reprisals in parts of Afghanistan.”

Blowback is indeed a bitch. Especially when you cannot fully acknowledge it.

From Phoenix to Omega

The latest chapter of CIA ops in Afghanistan started when the 2001 bombing campaign was not even finished. I saw it for myself in Tora Bora, in December 2001, when Special Forces came out of nowhere equipped with Thuraya satellite phones and suitcases full of cash. Later, the role of ‘irregular’ militias in defeating the Taliban and dismembering al-Qaeda was feted in the US as a huge success.

Former Afghan President Hamid Karzai was, to his credit, initially against US Special Forces setting up local militias, an essential plank of the counter-insurgency strategy. But in the end that cash cow was irresistible.

A central profiteer was the Afghan Ministry of Interior, with the initial scheme coalescing under the auspices of the Afghan Local Police. Yet some key militias were not under the Ministry, but answered directly to the CIA and the US Special Forces Command, later renamed as the infamous Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC).

Inevitably, CIA and JSOC got into a catfight over controlling the top militias. That was solved by the Pentagon lending Special Forces to the CIA under the Omega Program. Under Omega, the CIA was tasked with targeting intel, and Special Ops took control of the muscle on the ground. Omega made steady progress under the reign of former US President Barack Obama: it was eerily similar to the Vietnam-era Operation Phoenix.

Ten years ago, the CIA army, dubbed Counter-terrorist Pursuit Teams (CTPT), was already 3,000 strong, paid and weaponized by the CIA-JSOC combo. There was nothing ‘counter-insurgency’ about it: These were death squads, much like their earlier counterparts in Latin America in the 1970s.

In 2015, the CIA got its Afghan sister unit, the National Directorate of Security (NDS), to establish new paramilitary outfits to, in theory, fight ISIS, which later became locally identified as ISIS-Khorasan. In 2017, then-CIA Chief Mike Pompeo set Langley on an Afghan overdrive, targeting the Taliban but also al-Qaeda, which at the time had dwindled to a few dozen operatives. Pompeo promised the new gig would be “aggressive,” “unforgiving,” and “relentless.”

Those shadowy ‘military actors’

Arguably, the most precise and concise report on the American paramilitaries in Afghanistan is by Antonio de Lauri, Senior Researcher at the Chr. Michelsen Institute, and Astrid Suhrke, Senior Researcher Emerita also at the Institute.

The report shows how the CIA army was a two-headed hydra. The older units harked back to 2001 and were very close to the CIA. The most powerful was the Khost Protection Force (KPF), based at the CIA’s Camp Chapman in Khost. KPF operated totally outside Afghan law, not to mention budget. Following an investigation by Seymour Hersh, I have also shown how the CIA financed its black ops via a heroin rat line, which the Taliban have now promised to destroy.

The other head of the hydra were the NDS’s own Afghan Special Forces: four main units, each operating in its own regional area. And that’s about all that was known about them. The NDS was funded by none other than the CIA. For all practical purposes, operatives were trained and weaponized by the CIA.

So, it’s no wonder that no one in Afghanistan or in the region knew anything definitive about their operations and command structure. The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA), in trademark infuriating bureaucratese, defined the operations of the KPF and the NDS as appearing “to be coordinated with international military actors (emphasis mine); that is, outside the normal government chain of command.”

By 2018, the KPF was estimated to harbor between 3,000 to over 10,000 operatives. What few Afghans really knew is that they were properly weaponized; well paid; worked with people speaking American English, using American vocabulary; engaged in night operations in residential areas; and crucially, were capable of calling air strikes, executed by the US military.

A 2019 UNAMA report stressed that there were “continuing reports of the KPF carrying out human rights abuses, intentionally killing civilians, illegally detaining individuals, and intentionally damaging and burning civilian property during search operations and night raids.”

Call it the Pompeo effect: “aggressive, unforgiving, and relentless” – whether by kill-or-capture raids, or drones with Hellfire missiles.

Woke Westerners, now losing sleep over the ‘loss of civil liberties’ in Afghanistan, may not even be vaguely aware that their NATO-commanded ‘coalition forces’ excelled in preparing their own kill-or-capture lists, known by the semantically-demented denomination: Joint Prioritized Effects List.

The CIA, for its part, couldn’t care less. After all, the agency was always totally outside the jurisdiction of Afghan laws regulating the operations of ‘coalition forces.’

The dronification of violence

In these past few years, the CIA shadow army coalesced into what Ian Shaw and Majed Akhter memorably described as The Dronification of State Violence, a seminal paper published in the Critical Asian Studies journal in 2014 (downloadable here).

Shaw and Akhter define the alarming, ongoing process of dronification as: “the relocation of sovereign power from the uniformed military to the CIA and Special Forces; techno-political transformations performed by the Predator drone; the bureaucratization of the kill chain; and the individualization of the target.”

This amounts to, the authors argue, what Hannah Arendt defined as “rule by nobody.” Or, actually by somebody acting beyond any rules.

The toxic end result in Afghanistan was the marriage between the CIA shadow army and dronification. The Taliban may be willing to extend a general amnesty and not exact revenge. But to forgive those who went on a killing rampage as part of the marriage arrangement may be a step too far for the Pashtunwali code.

The February 2020 Doha agreement between Washington and the Taliban says absolutely nothing about the CIA shadow army.

So, the question now is how the defeated Americans will be able to keep intel assets in Afghanistan for its proverbial ‘counter-terrorism’ ops. A Taliban-led government will inevitably take over the NDS. What happens to the militias is an open question. They could be completely taken over by the Taliban. They could break away and eventually find new sponsors (Saudis, Turks). They could become autonomous and serve the best-positioned warlord paymaster.

The Taliban may be essentially a collection of warlords (jang salar, in Dari). But what’s certain is that a new government will simply not allow a militia wasteland scenario similar to Libya. Thousands of mercenaries of sorts with the potential of becoming an ersatz ISIS-Khorasan, threatening Afghanistan’s entry into the Eurasian integration process, need to be tamed. Burns knows it, Baradar knows it – while Western public opinion knows nothing.

Analysis of Euro-Paralysis: Uncle Sam’s Last Afghan Stand

 August 30, 2021

By Mohammad Al-Jaber

The United States dragged Europe into the Graveyard of Empires and used it as a shield in the face of its own burial.

Europe, under the guise of providing the conditions for ‘long-term’ security and stability in Afghanistan, entered the country, and the rest is history. Havoc, destruction, death, and misery infested the Southern Asian country, placing it among the world’s poorest.

A New Age Crusade

Following the September 11 attacks, the United States developed an interest in “combatting terrorism,” prompting the country known for “exporting democracy” to the rest of the world to launch what was called the “War on Terror”—an international military campaign whose goal was to eradicate terrorism abroad,

not for the safety of the populace, but rather for that of US soil.

The US, a NATO ally and core member state, did what any benevolent ally would do and dragged NATO into a multi-generational war in Afghanistan—the organization’s first commitment outside European territories.

The whole debacle started a week after 9/11, when President George W. Bush signed a resolution authorizing the use of force against those behind the attacks, followed by an October 7 announcement that the US and the UK started launching airstrikes in Afghanistan against Al-Qaeda and Taliban sites when demands for the extradition of Osama bin Laden went unanswered.

After the US ‘retaliation’ act, the Taliban announced they are ready for “Jihad”; alas, it was a short-lived dream.

The “Jihad” lasted barely over two months, as the group was defeated and its rule in the country was declared over after heavy air bombardment from the US and UK, with ground support from its allies, which included the Northern Alliance and other anti-Taliban militias and groups.

Now, the US did not get the man they came after; bin Laden fled the country. However, they did accomplish what they are always after—influence and power. Afghanistan became ruled by the US-backed Hamid Karzai, whom the western power saw as best-fitting to rebuild the war-torn country.

So, the United States had everything laid out the way it wanted it to be:

  • The European hand was forced into Afghanistan
  • The burden was basically split in half with Europe reaping fewer benefits
  • The US was in control of a geopolitically significant country
  • The US intimidating its regional foes, namely Russia, China, and Iran

A Mandated European Venture

Now back to Europe; how and why did the old continent join the war in Afghanistan?

In 2001, the UNSC-mandated International Security Assistance Force, which had the mission of re-instating a central authority in the country that was ruled by militias and the Taliban at the time, in addition to working on enhancing the capabilities of the Afghan National Security Forces, was deployed in Afghanistan. 

The mission was not led by a certain country, as its leadership was rotational between its nations—the most prominent of which were the US, the UK, Germany, Canada, and France.

On August 11, 2003, NATO assumed the ISAF’s leadership. The mission’s goals were still the same; however, when seeing the current state of Afghanistan, it’s safe to say the mission failed miserably.

The ISAF’s European nations accounted for more than half the soldiers in Afghanistan. The countries that had little to nothing to do with the conflict led the invasion of a country that never did any harm to them; the US convinced them to partake in the conflict by raising national security concerns. If anything, failure in Afghanistan would have had way more political and financial repercussions for Europe than the United States, for refugees and terrorists could reach Europe a lot easier than they could North America.

Europe: The United States’ Hadrian’s Wall

Europe has been the main bearer of consequences whenever there had been a US-related flop anywhere in the Eastern hemisphere. Take the Syrian refugee crisis, for example. A US-sparked war on a Middle Eastern country resulted in hundreds of thousands of refugees flocking toward Europe. And, of course, extremists were among those who got into the continent, leading to an increase in terror attacks and national security threats.

This, alongside many other crises, is a fine testament to the US strategy that uses Europe as a shield. In the ongoing crisis and anticipation of the incoming influx of Afghan refugees, Greece took to reinforcing the European borders by building a wall. What this means is that the Syrian scenario will be replayed, as hundreds of dead children will wash up on shore in a failed attempt to flee their country.

The Europeans had little to say regarding invading Afghanistan, for the continent’s nations lacked coordination and had many domestic political issues. Had they been united in the European Union, Europe would have been able to properly alter the coalition and advocate for a much better international approach to the situation in Afghanistan—that would’ve been the best-case scenario for Europe. Obviously, on the ground, it was completely different.

Even the majority of Europeans disagree with using military force to defend a NATO ally from a hypothetical attack by Russia, according to a Pew Research Center report

All that Europe gained from Afghanistan was more refugees, more dead soldiers, and wasted taxpayer money. Altogether, Europe lost nearly a thousand soldiers, gained hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees and asylum seekers, and spent tens of billions of dollars. The UK and Germany, the second-largest troop-contributors, spent an estimated $30 billion and $19 billion respectively, over the course of the two-decade-long war—a portion of what Europe in its entirety paid to keep the war’s flame ablaze.

At the peak of the invasion of Afghanistan in 2011, the year the US had finally achieved its dream of killing bin Laden, there were 90,000 US troops in the country and 41,300 troops from NATO and its allies. The US and its allies did not equally bear the responsibility, for, as we must not forget, this wasn’t a European issue per se. It only became one after the US forced its hand to invade Afghanistan, yet Europe was bearing nearly half the burden.

The situation was incredibly frustrating for Europe, it was stuck in a self (mostly US)-made pit. The choice was between pulling out from Afghanistan and putting the US-European relations at risk, as well as its security and economy following the influx of Afghan refugees from Afghanistan to Europe, (which was not an option altogether), or staying in Afghanistan and putting up with the financial losses and human casualties.

How Europe was the Stalin to the Munich Agreement

To add insult to injury, the United States decided to withdraw from Afghanistan in February of 2020. This was the then-President Donald Trump signed the 2020 Doha Agreement to “end the war in Afghanistan” without consulting European allies—it came as a shock to them. Europeans objected to the decision to withdraw from Afghanistan in such a short period of time but to no avail; there was no reversing the decision.

Furthermore, when the Biden Administration took the decision to completely withdraw from Afghanistan ahead of the agreed-upon date—which had been previously postponed from May 1st as set by the Trump administration—his decision received criticism from all US allies. NATO officials, from Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and Italy, slammed Biden over this decision that was taken without any consultation.

Leaders all across Europe were in disbelief following the decision, even those who long-supported Biden saw it as a mistake and a miscalculation. There wasn’t any direct criticism, for it is known that would harm diplomatic relations; instead, leaders voiced their criticism behind the scenes. However, the storm is yet to come, as no NATO summits have taken place following the failure, which will most definitely redefine the future of US-EU relations.

How will European leaders react to this whole ordeal? Will they be silent in the face of the US abuse? There could be a change in the way Europe manages its external affairs, moving away from the United States and aiming for autonomy; but nothing is certain. One thing that is though, is the fact that even the Israelis do not trust the Americans due to their abandonment of Afghanistan and their allies there, meaning the US is prone to abandoning Europe and other allies in such ‘dire’ circumstances, rendering it unreliable. After all, the US got its troops out of Kabul right around its fall while leaving Europe and the rest of its allies stuck in the mud.

Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign policy chief, went as far as calling for an independent army for the European Union in light of the growing panic amongst the Europeans out of fear of not being able to complete their evacuations before the United States does.

Even prior to this whole fiasco, Europe was considering forming an autonomous army. In 2018, French President Emmanuel Macron had warned that Europeans could not be protected without a “true, European army,” (before declaring that NATO was experiencing “brain death“) – an idea backed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the person who could be Germany’s next Chancellor, Armin Laschet. The idea of a European army did not seem too appealing for the UK, for it could be something that equates to NATO. Instead, they prefer a joint force to defend Europe in a case relying on the US was out of the window.

During the Trump administration, the rift between the US and Europe was at its vastest since the establishment of diplomatic ties and alliances between the two powers, but it seems that the Biden administration will be the straw that broke the camel’s back in the US-EU relations.

Afghanistan reminds us why it’s called the Graveyard of Empires, as the future of diplomacy between the two behemoths could crumble over its invasion.

Daraa Peace Plan Moves Terrorists to Turkish Occupied Syria

August 28, 2021

By Steven Sahiounie

Global Research,

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Today, a bus load Syrian Arab Army (SAA) soldiers has come under attack on the road to the west of Daraa, with reports of one killed and eight injured. Tuesday, a Russian-backed deal went into force in Daraa, ending months-long tension between the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and local terrorists there.  In late July, clashes of artillery began between the two sides.  The city in the south of Syria, on the Jordanian border, had been in military conflict which held the civilian population in peril, resulting in residents fleeing the situation.

The Russian military police entered Daraa al-Balad neighborhood to evacuate terrorists who refused to lay down their arms and receive amnesty from the SAA.  Terrorists on Tuesday night boarded buses to take them to Afrin in the north of Syria, as part of the deal. Those armed fighters who have received amnesty, and laid down their weapons, will remain in the city.

Once the terrorists are removed, the SAA will enter the area, and life will return to normal for the residents who had become hostages.  Thousands of residents who had fled the fighting will be assisted by the SAA to return home, and government institutions such as medical care will be made available, and free public schools are set to resume in mid-September.

Daraa al-Balad neighborhood is home to about 40,000 people, and it had become a critical situation with extreme challenges getting access to food and power.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) placed the number of internally displaced people in Daraa al-Balad area and surrounding areas in province at 38,000, including almost 15,000 women and over 20,400 children.

History of Daraa

Violence broke out in March 2011 in Daraa, which began the 10-year conflict in Syria.  The SAA freed Daraa in 2018 in a Russian-brokered deal which saw terrorists and their families being evacuated to Idlib, and some remaining fighters worked out a deal with the SAA, by which they would peacefully man some checkpoints inside Daraa al-Balad, while the SAA would man other checkpoints.  However, the deal fell apart over time because the fighters repeatedly targeted the SAA using snipers on motorcycles. By July, open fighting between the two-sides began.

Afrin today

Turkey occupies Afrin, and uses their militia, Syrian National Army (SNA) to keep the local population in subjugation. The SNA, despite its name, is not Syrian administered, but is under the Turkish military control, and are mercenaries following Radical Islam.War or Peace: Turkish backed Terrorists, Erdogan’s Decision on Idlib

Turkish charities operate in Afrin distributing food to Syrian Arabs who have been shipped in to displace the original population which was a mixture of Kurds, Christians and Arabs.

Turkey conducted Operation Olive Branch on Jan. 20, 2018, to clear Afrin from the militia known as YPG, who is part of the US-supported SDF militia who fought to defeat ISIS.  By March 18 Afrin had been ethnically cleansed by Turkey.

Since 2016, Turkey has launched a trio of invasion operations across its border in northern Syria: Euphrates Shield in 2016, Olive Branch in 2018 and Peace Spring in 2019. The goal is to create a Turkish administered border swath, which Turkey originally tried to sell to the West as a ‘safe-zone’, but is actually a Muslim Brotherhood safe haven.

Recently, the SNA abducted a number of civilians in Afrin. The battalions named, “al-Jabha al-Shamiya” and the “Sultan Murad Division” have imposed a crippling siege on the locals as they have raided the citizens’ houses and kidnapped more than 30 civilians and took them to an unknown destination.

The sources added that the abducted persons have been exposed to the worst forms of abuse, torture and insults since they have demanded to restore their properties which have been seized by the Turkish occupation mercenaries.

History of ethnic cleansing in Afrin

The National Initiative for Afrin in the German city of Bonn stressed the coordination and unification of efforts working for Afrin and its people, and confronting the Turkish occupation and its mercenaries, and the safe and dignified return of the forcibly displaced residents of Afrin. This initiative aims to expose Turkey’s violations against residents of Syria’s Afrin to international institutions and human rights organizations participating in the initiative.

After Turkey’s invasion of northern Syria, the fighters it sent across the border to carry out the mission have documented their own war crimes. Videos posted online by soldiers of the Turkish-backed SNA showing summary executions, mutilation of corpses, threats against Kurds and widespread looting have struck terror into the population.

The ethnic dimension to many of the crimes has resulted in a mass exodus of Kurds and religious minorities from these once diverse borderlands, and created a dramatic demographic change.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish president, claimed his invasion of Syria was aimed at removing the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a group Turkey classifies as a terror organization for its links to the PKK, and YPG. Turkey has supported the operation with airstrikes, drones and artillery.

Since the invasion began, the SNA has captured a swathe of territory that was home to a large population of Kurds, and smaller numbers of Assyrians, Yazidis and Turkmen. The same area faced massive upheaval when ISIS swept across northern Syria. Tal Abyad was occupied by the terror group for more than a year before being recaptured by the SDF.

Christian families have all been forced to leave their homes as the SNA made public threats to kill them, referring to them as pigs and heathens.  The SNA have uploaded their videos targeting Christians, and non-Sunni Muslims.

A widespread campaign of looting and confiscation of Kurdish property has made clear Turkey and their SNA militia want to keep Kurds out. Human Rights Watch said it had documented numerous examples of Kurdish homes being confiscated and their possessions looted.

A United Nations commission of inquiry found that “armed group members in Afrin committed the war crimes of hostage-taking, cruel treatment, torture, and pillage”.

More than 130,000 mostly Kurdish residents are still displaced from Afrin, living in camps in the SDF-held region of northeast Syria. Many of their homes are now occupied by Syrians from other parts of the country.

NATO has been criticized for allowing a member state, Turkey, to carry out large scale ethnic cleansing in Syria.  However, since the war in Syria beginning in 2011 was a US-NATO project for ‘regime change’, NATO is not complaining to Turkey, who was their partner in the 10-year war.

Idlib today

On Tuesday, an explosion killed eight Al Qaeda terrorists, and wounded 10 others, in Idlib.  The terrorists were meeting when the blast occurred.  Russia and Turkey have a ceasefire deal in Idlib, but it does not cover Al Qaeda. According to the UN, all nations must fight Al Qaeda, wherever they are.  However, Turkey occupies Idlib and supports the Al Qaeda branch there, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.

Turkey currently hosts nearly 4 million Syrians; however, most of the Syrian refugees in Turkey today are Sunni Muslims. Erdogan plans to resettle the Syrian refugees in the border area under Turkish military occupation, and it will permanently alter the demographics. This area stretching from Idlib province to Afrin will become a safe haven for terrorists aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is an award-winning journalist. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from MD

Imperial NATO Chaos: Taliban Are Terrorists while al Qaeda in Syria Supported

MIRI WOOD 

USA good terrorists in Syria - bad terrorists in Afghanistan

The Taliban immediately moved into the Afghanistan presidential palace upon the exit of Ashaf Ghani, with his five million in cash, and possibly his wife, upon the US leaving the tattered country on a jet plane, not knowing when it will be back again. The ensuing hysteria among various factions of NATO imperialist hypocrites — politicians, diplomats, NGO’s, fake charities, media stenographers, underpaid mercenaries — has been so on the same page as to appear to almost be a form of coordinated chaos.

This relatively short piece will mostly involve the double standards of hatred of the Taliban and adoration of the al Qaeda terrorists in Syria, by the finely coiffed and overpaid unindicted war criminals.

Syria News reminds our readers of a few salient points: [1] The US has not officially declared war since 11 December 1941. Such a declaration can create all kinds of extraneous logistical problems, while engaging in invasion, occupation, slow or fast genocide without an official declaration can allow for res inter alios acta and other forms of plausible deniability. [2] Ronald Reagan did not call the Taliban “freedom fighters,” as they did not yet exist in their military formations; he invited the progenitor of the Taliban, the mujahedeen, to visit the White House, where he praised them as similar to the US founding fathers. [3] Ashraf Ghani was considered the president of Afghanistan since 2014, though he functioned more like the chief warlord of Kabul, possibly given his remarkable background that included being a high school exchange student in Oregon, getting a bachelor’s degree at the evangelical American University of Beirut, making the rounds through John Hopkins, the UN, World Bank, the Fulbright scholarship folk — which might explain that impressive net worth of between five and nine million USD in a least developed country that comes in the second to the last in poverty, with an average annual income of $500.

Reagan invited ”freedom fighters” mujahedeen to White House; “Mommy” stayed away.
Synopsis of 40 years of undeclared war in Afghanistan.
Ashraf Ghani has a spook-y history.
Evangelical preacher cum founder of independent American school accredited by NY, in Beirut, Daniel Bliss

The author has just been made aware that Ghani’s background is even more malevolent. He has been involved with the Atlantic Council (which recently came into partnership with Big Brother, Facebook), the UN Democracy Fund, and the World Economic Forum Global Agenda.

In 2021, he co-authored a twenty-four page paper demanding that President Bashar al Assad be removed from office, employing the standard NATO lying propaganda as the cover story for supremacist regime change.

Had the corrupt US warlord not fled the Taliban with five million, one might suggest he also fell prey to that Assad Curse.

ghani demanded transition imposed on syria
institute for state effectiveness

The UAE Foreign Ministry has announced that the Syria-hating, globalist, Taliban-fleeing Ghani and his family have been welcomed with opened arms, despite being almost as “dead broke” as were the impoverished Clintons when they left the White House.” The Ministry claims the five million USD report is “completely baseless,” “lies” (everyone who believes that may cast a vote in the comment sections).

We shall now take a look at a cross-section of the NATO hypocrites, outraged over the Taliban having taken control of the ‘abandoned’ Afghanistan, and compare their rage and wrath to their adoration and full support of terrorists in the Syrian Arab Republic. As these humanitarian bastards are cut from the same cloth of that colonial savior complex, the order of their listing is of no consequence.

To help us continue, please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help at no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR), willfully joined the army in 2005, four years after 9/11, which was plenty of time for even the most naive to grasp that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, time to know there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, that the con involved idiot Bush citing Tony Blair’s lies in his State of the Union Address, time enough to grasp that the destruction of the secular country was to enrich Dick Cheney’s Halliburton war machine. With flagrant amorality, he invaded Iraq, and did his part to destroy the country.

Cotton has ignored all requests by this author to investigate the Arkansas-based charity without charitable status, in its financial support of a chilling organization run by al Qaeda in Idlib, involving little girls garishly made up to look as though degenerates are pimping them on the dark net for pedophiles who should be locked up.

The same Cotton who recently called on Biden to bomb “every Taliban fighter in the vicinity of Kabul,” supported Trump’s war criminal bombing of Syria for al Qaeda terrorists in Idlib, cheered the US/UK/French bombing of Syria for al Qaeda in Douma, supported Trump’s criminal assassination of Major General Qasem Soleimani, gave full support to terrorists in Hong Kong murdering police and torching innocents, and approved of Trump appointing Langley boy Guaido as president of Venezuela — as though the former president were King George, appointing governorships.

He also called for deployment of US military on the streets to such down demonstrations after the George Floyd suffocation killing.

Cotton outraged over Taliban terrorists taking control of Afghanistan.
Cotton silent on Arkansas ‘charity’ engaged in Epstein-like situation with little girls in Idlib.
Supremacist double standards: Hate Taliban but love terrorists in Syria.
Cotton cheered war criminal bombing of Syria for al Qaeda terrorists in Douma.

UNSG Antonio Guterres also went the round of fake teeth-gnashing, being “deeply concerned by accounts of human rights violations against the women and girls of Afghanistan” because of the takeover by the Taliban. Guterres was not Secretary-General in August 2013, when al Qaeda and Qattar’s al Jazeera raided villages in Latakia, slaughtering men and kidnapping women and their children.

He was, however, in office for one month at the time the remaining 57 women and their children were released from captivity in February 2017, in an exchange for arrested terrorists, in a moment long awaited. Guterres was utterly, silent when al Qaeda terrorists massacred upwards of 130 mostly women and children in al Rashidin during another terrorist-abductees exchange, 17 April 2017.

antonio hypocrite
kidnapped latakia women

freed syrian women

freed syrian women2
Latakia Freed Women and Children with President Assad and First Lady Asma

al Rashidin
Shahd survived the massacre in al Rashidin
rashidin

Why has Guterres never been deeply concerned by kidnapped Syrian women being driven around in caged trucks before being murdered for war porn? Why was he not revulsed by the sight of a near full-term baby surgically carved out of his mother’s womb, by terrorists?

women in cages3
atrocity

Were an award to be given for the most arrogant, two-faced, hypocritical, unindicted war criminal on Capitol Hill, it would surely go to Congressman Adam Kinzinger, likely jockeying for a presidential nomination. Previously seen on the Hill trying to squeeze out a couple of tears over 6 January, Kinzinger’s double standards are unprecedented.

He was a bomber pilot, which means that he used to fly over other people’s countries and drop bombs on them.

Now, he is devastated over the Taliban taking over Afghanistan and has shared a suicide hotline for veterans who invaded and occupied Afghanistan who might be depressed over this news.

In 2014, he held a meeting with terrorists — including an armed insurrectionist who supported ISIS terrorists and called them ‘brothers’ — in Turkey. Three years later, he tweeted an attack on Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who visited Syria and had a meeting with President Assad. He sadistically reminded her of Omran, neglecting to mention the child was kidnapped, painted in moulage trauma, and had his iconic photograph taken by the savage who was friends with the deranged psychotics who kidnapped 12 year old Abdullah Issa from a hospital, and cut off his head with a kitchen knife, and videoed the horrific atrocity (Kinzinger has never mentioned Abdullah’s name).

Omran’s sister was a distraction from the “iconic” intention of the photograph.

Original “iconic” photo included gray-painted siblings. Sis was cropped out. AMC is US-funded, with same initials as a

takfiri rslan
Meth freak selfie, lauding child beheaders of al Zinki
hamza friend taunting abdullah

Abdullah Issa, 12 year old Syrian-Palestinian, kidnapped from hospital, moments before his heinous beheading
rslan (2)

Syrian-Palestinian 12 yr old Abdullah Issa was kidnapped from a hospital and beheaded on camera. Congress was sil
These are the degenerates for whom perverts Trump, May, & Macron bomb Syria. Credibility, anyone?
Al Qaeda FSA/Zinki branch kidnapped a child & proudly videoed themselves carving off his head.

Around the same time, he launched an anti-Syria congressional caucus, to support the armed insurrectionists, the criminally insane who slaughtered Syrian soldiers, and mutilated their corpses.

In late 2019, Kinzinger was so offended by Trump’s anemic tweet that gave a whisper of inference that maybe there might be a withdrawal, that he was giving apoplectic interviews condemning the possible ‘abandonment’ by Trump regime troops war criminally in Syria, of the terrorist, Obama-created SDF-NATO-armed-insurrectionists.

Kinzinger whined that they would be slaughtered by the “Turks” — secure in his arrogant knowledge that stenographer media would not point out that he held his meetings with terrorists in Turkey.

kinzinger hypocrisy
kinzinger taliban

suicide hotline for depressed invaders
Babycakes cried at hearings.
kinzinger attack on gabbard
kinzinger brokered c isis akidi
Okaidi with ISIS terrorist in Syria, before meeting Kinzinger in Turkey.
okaidi isil bakr
Okaidi callled other terrorists his brothers.
If al Qaeda in Syria were Taliban would Kinzinger support them?

Peculiarly poetic, immediately after a Category 5 hurricane passed, the author found her notes on Kinzinger in a dirty puddle on the floor, among other, undefinable detritus.

Kinzinger on floor c rest of detritus

As our hypocritical, lying, warmongering ilk on the Hill flaunt their phony attacks of amnesia, and their deadly double-standards, we remind their constituents of the war crimes our taxes fund, the support that these politicians give to the criminally insane, and that our tax dollars arm these savages so that they are able to destroy other people’s countries.

NATO stenographer journalists have treated the world to the imperialist double standards of weeping for the fallen soldiers who invaded Afghanistan, and died there, allegedly fighting terrorists. These are the same supremacists who have supported terrorists in Syria, and who have defamed Syrian Arab Army soldiers who were killed defending their homeland from foreign invaders, within their sovereign borders — including the 83 SAA soldiers that Obama ‘accidentally’ massacred to protect al Qaeda terrorists in al Thardeh, Deir Ezzor. The same western supremacy media wailing over the western soldiers who died in Afghanistan — fighting the Taliban — were silent when Syria released the news of a mass grave containing the remains of 57 Syrian soldiers slaughtered by unknown sects of al Qaeda, discovered in al Raqqa.


soldiers
Unindicted war criminal Blair shows his respect for Brit soldier killed fighting Taliban.
Mass funderal for 83 Syrian soldiers massacred when Obama accidentally bombed them to assist al Qaeda terrorists.

It is a war crime to set up military bases in other people’s homelands without their permission. While Obama merely did the sneaky special operative forces invasion of the SAR, the Trump regime actually invaded with armed soldiers, to steal the oil, and to further arm terrorists and to increase armed insurrection — which are politician crybabies continue to wail about regarding 6 January — against the Levantine republic. The Biden regime, now partially under attack for the abrupt withdrawal from Afghanistan, leaving that ‘vacuum’ for the Taliban to fill (when not playing in the gym, or in the amusement park bumper cars).

The first two screenshots are self-evident. The third shows the degenerate necrophiliac tendencies of the al Qaeda terrorists the US taxpayer arms and funds. These not Taliban psychotics have decapitated a Syrian Arab Army soldier, and are having a fun time pretending to feed the severed head.

The schmuck with the cigar and the rifle is American terrorist in Syria, Brace Belden. A self-described juvenile delinquent, druggie, and young alcoholic who spent much of his time engaged in self-ejaculatory efforts, this criminal somehow found the means to leave his mommy’s home, travel to and illegally enter Syria, and bomb the sh*t out of everything, including helping to turn the city of al Raqqa, population pre-takfiri invasion, 800,00, into rubble.

American terrorist Sotloff is seen practicing with a ground-to-ground military weapon. Sotloff — absurd backstory and other American illegals’ fantastic backstories, here — was reputedly sold by his FSA terrorist friends to ISIS terrorists. Armed American terrorist Eric Harroun had an alleged non-combat vehicular closed head injury which gave him an honorable, medical military discharge. Despite not having put enough money into Social Security, he managed on a paltry disability income to find his way into Syria, where he embedded with the FSA and al Nusra, helping to engage in such freedom-ish things as bombing a military helicopter from the sky, and then stealing salvageable parts (upon returning home, he was arrested, then charges were immediately dropped and he subsequently and conveniently killed himself with a heroin overdose.).

In May 2017, armed insurrectionist terrorists thank the United States for sending them trucks loaded with military weapons, which they planned to use to slaughter SAA soldiers in the battle to destroy Deir Ezzor. The full video of gratitude, here. Please note that these chunks of human garbage succeeded in murdering Gen. Issam Zahreddine, not long after the gifts from Donald Trump.

Matthew VanDyke was reared by a single mother, yet after graduation, he had beaucoup funds to acquire a motorcycle and expensive camera equipment and then enjoyed the good life of traveling to various hot spots in the world, stopping in Libya where he helped al Qaeda destroy the country, before illegally settling in Syria.

From there, he proclaimed that there was no ‘Syrian revolution,’ that the fraud would collapse without the savagery of the “foreign” terrorists, that Jabhat al Nusra — comprised of mostly ‘foreign fighters’ — should be removed from the US, UN, EU terror lists. In between time spent sodomizing goats, he wrote to British intelligence operative Elliot Higgins that the ‘foreign fighters’ had chemical weapons and was prepared to use them and blame on President Assad, who was winning the war.

His recent concern over women under the Taliban rang a bit hallow, given his seduction of a naive, Syrian traitor, the star in his award-winning fraudumentary. Emails he exchanged with her suggests he instructed her in the art of fellatio, and then turned her out, and subsequently sexually harassed her (his hacked emails with her, and with Higgins, here).

A thinking mind might wonder that the NATO stenographers that went into a swoon over his 15 minute docudrama all missed the fact that these armed terrorists supported with US tax dollars had invaded, occupied, and destroyed countless homes of Syrians, though we have no evidence the indigenous habitants were slaughtered in the making of the movie.


armed terrorist in syria
american armed terrorists in syria
armed insurrectionist necrophiliacs
brace belden

brace beldon2
raqqa obliterated
sotloff in syria
eric harroun
takfiri now training c us illegals in syria
vandick
american terrorist vandick
where are the owners
Whose home was this, that was destroyed by US armed and funded terrorists?

The supremacist double-standards involving condemnation of Taliban terrorists and financial support of the various factions of al Qaeda deployed into Syria, are not limited to the rabid dogs of war on the Hill, but are equally shared by other NATO terrorist scum around the world — powerful mobsters who dumped their human garbage into the Levantine republic, to butcher its population, destroy its homeland, and then be killed off, so that they could not return to their filthy homes of birth. The U went so far as to write a paper on how various European countries could protect themselves from ”foreign fighters” come home to roost — though the 149-page report significantly lied about the numbers of human detritus dumped into the SAR.

In addition to providing glowing news stories on the criminally insane foreigners, Germany, France, Italy, and the UK were among the countries with the biggest pockets for arming the beasts with two legs.

These unindicted war criminals now so concerned about the Taliban in Afghanistan dumped in its pathogens, armed them, funded them, cheered their every crime. Italy went so far as to use its odalisques opératives phony kidnapping to launder $12 million to al Qaeda savages, under cover of a ransom story (the pretty Italian agents’ backstory also included in The Final Days of Armageddon missive.

colonialist EU
germany arms terrorists
German Gay in ISIS – Roles and Duties
Yes, indeed. The German media celebrate Al-Qaeda in Syria.
germany-sent-weapons-to-syria

Illegal alien and German terrorist Denis Caspert was killed by the SAA in 2013. Caspert was one of hundreds of pieces of hu

As Obama cheers Merkel’s compassion, she prepares for the deportation of more than 12,000 Afghanis. Note the hypo
17 aug merkel
reuters

bj helmets
British terrorist-illegal Oliver Hall.
bj and death squads
No mention of this short order cook being armed in a foreign country. [Virtue suiciding doubtful]
This Brit illegal was the source of the anti-Syria ‘sarin’ hoax.
Brit terrorist whose medical license was revoked, is interviewed by American terrorist Kareem
French – Belgian Wahhabi terrorist Abdul Rahman Ayachi
hollande-breached-sanctions
Shamima Begum’s alleged concubinator.
italy taliban
haisam saqar idlib
Phony humanitarian aid workers begged their country in English to help them.
italy laundered 12 million to al qaeda in syria

Perhaps the most sanctimonious post Taliban power grab came from the great enucleator of the Gilets Jaunes activists, the criminal who arms and funds al Qaeda and bombs Syria for al Qaeda atrocities, the criminal who gasses his people and then projects his crime onto the beloved Syrian president. The little man throw a hissy fit claim that his words were “twisted,” and so his peeps added English captions: France and other U countries must “protect against large irregular migratory flows that endanger those who are part of them and fuel trafficking of every kind” (the French is not any more intelligible).

For the rabid dogs of war — in political office, or in media stenography work — there is never enough chaos, never enough Pavlovian tricks to set one group against another, along comes a warmonger to attack a war pimp, and the Business Insider immediately reported that a man politician had launched ‘out of context’ accusations against a woman reporter.

As the old Aretha Franklin hit goes, Who’s Zoomin’ Who? Both Cruz and Ward are indictable under Nuremberg Principle VI, Crimes against Peace (i) and (ii):

Crimes against peace applicable to the Taliban and the urchins who lie about Syria.

Cruz supported Trump’s war criminal bombings of the SAR for al Qaeda terrorists there. Ward — who only wears niqab when embedded with terrorists, be they Taliban or various sects of al Qaeda occupying Syria — has an extensive history of criminal propaganda lies, and multiple criminal entries into the Levantine republic to embed herself with (male) terrorists who have destroyed the country, who have kidnapped, raped, and butchered Syrian women, so the scam of sisterhood and or gender victimization were better shoveled elsewhere.

Ward was the first to whitewash al Qaeda — including foreign terrorists — when the savages changed their names and pretended to have gone through an amicable divorce. She subsequently spoke at the UN (seated next to SAMS liar and no longer in niqab), \essentially functioning as mouthpiece for al Qaeda terrorists with who she had criminally embedded herself, winning awards for interviewing foreign savages also illegally in the SAR. On 6 September 2016, she blew kisses to American illegal Bilal Kareem, former stand-up comic from NYC, who is embedded with foreign terrorists in the SDN list, who interviewed the degenerate head of the al Zinki terror gang who kidnapped 12 year old Abdullah Issa from a hospital, and hacked off his head with a kitchen knife. The degenerate lied that the child was a man, and that the poor terrorists had been under a great deal of stress.

UNSC never held a special meeting to condemn the kidnapping and beheading of 12 yr old Abdullah Issa
Abdullah Issa, 12 year old Syrian-Palestinian, kidnapped from hospital, moments before his heinous beheading with a kitchen knife.

The gruesome video of the child being tormented while asking to be shot in the head, instead, has been expunged from the internet — not because of its heinousness, but because: The psychopaths are funded by the US taxpayer; one of the savages was involved with bombing a bakery (while Channel 4 was criminally embedded with him. This video was also expunged, but a screengrab from it found here); and one of the deranged killers was a friend of the fake physician married to the woman whose fraudumentary was nominated for an Oscar early this year.

ward kisses to kareem

To be completely explicit, Clarissa Ward has been a proponent of regime change against Syria since the onset of the NATO Spring. She has consistently embedded with terrorists, and spoken as their mouth piece. She has never concerned herself with the horrors that Syrian women have endured. Anyone who claims that the warmongering Cruz has attacked her because she is a woman — spending time in her element, with terrorists, the recently the Taliban ones — is a low-level propagandist for a variation on war propaganda.

Ward concerned over Taliban terrorists, but safe & secure with al Qaeda in Syria.
cruz and ward war criminals

ward of death
femicide
blocked by ward of death
Hands folded in supplication, head bowed in interview with terrorist in Syria.

Criminal illegal Ward in Syria, interviewing terrorists. Video showed her bowed head, walking several feet behind ma
AFP also somehow missed CNN’s Ward of Death’s tweet tribute to merc Kareem, in Sept. 2016.
Terrorists Kareem & SDN Muhaysini discuss need for Wahhabis of the world to invade Syria .

Bilal Abdul Kareem, American illegal in Syria, interviewed foreign terrorist with explosives belt in Aleppo, 2016.

Kareem interviewed an armed terrorist in Aleppo, groping his explosives belt which he was prepared to use against S

Criminal Bilal Abdul Kareem gives his degenerate audience noble explanation for kidnap & decapitation of a child in S
kareem-supports-childbeheadings
Ward intervieiwing al Qaeda terrorist in Syria.

Ward interviewing American illegal al Qaeda terrorist in Syria.
Terrorists bombed Syrian women enjoying a day in the park.

The western audience, trained over many decades of Operation Mockingbird, to eat the lies of warmongers, then beg, Please, Sir, may I have another, whose previously closeted sadoerotic fantasies pour out whenever it can feign sadness over countless atrocities, and slobber over outright lies, such as the incubator hoax funded by American taxpayers to dupe American taxpayers — is now being deluged with scary photographs of armed Taliban terrorists, some of whom drive around in trucks, reportedly terrifying Afghans, and threatening to kill, or outright killing of civilians, with alleged focus on women and girls.

The media manipulators now feign astonishment that the Taliban has come into possession of NATO weaponsSyria News has published countless reports on hundreds of millions of dollars worth of such weapons, abandoned by fleeing al Qaeda terrorists in the SAR — completely ignored by the double standard bearers of the MSM and corrupt political circles.

Similarly deranged-looking al Qaeda terrorists throughout Syria, armed with RPG’s and MANPAD‘s, have consistently been censored by the media stenographers, now in a frenzied outpouring of fear, regarding the Taliban takeover.

nato armed taliban

Taliban in Afghanistan
Terrorists in Syria supported by NATO that is worried about the Taliban.

scary taliban
arab spring flowers
deranged
Saudi Jaish al Islam was to have released 3,500 hostages.
filthiest of the filth
rpg taliban
helmet terrorist

takfiri 2

takfiri
taliban 5
taliban whiners
Jaish-ISIS-alQaeda terrorist friend of the NYT source.
terrorist c rpg

US CIAID

Were some of these last terrorists of Douma culled from the 1,239 death row inmates the Saudis dumped into Syria?


Journalistic integrity requires us to make note of the very curious terror warning ejaculated by the US Department of Homeland Security, on 13 August 2021 and in effect through 11 November. Though the Biden regime officially announced the beginning of withdrawal from Afghanistan on May Day, 2021, the squirrely declaration of the DHS was shoe-horned between the Taliban taking control of Kunduz on 6 August, and entering Kabul on the 15th.

DHS issued strangely inclusive terror warning prior to the Taliban taking control of Kabul.

The warning was unprecedented in an eerie form of inclusivity, a “diverse and challenging threat” from malign foreign influences, foreign terrorists, domestic terrorists, possible grievance based violence during the ongoing global pandemic in which perceived government restrictions over public health safety measures require all to dutifully say something upon seeing something.

Less than one week later, the obviously disturbed Floyd Ray Roseberry — with a history of financial difficulties — live-streamed threats to detonate his truck near to the Congressional Library, as he told the world his mother recently died of cancer, his wife cannot get treated for her skin cancer, and he cannot get treatment for his bad knees. He live streamed from his Facebook account until it was shut down.

It took almost 15 hours after his uneventful surrender, before US law enforcement official announced no bomb was found in his truck, “but possible bomb making materials were collected from the truck” (emphases added).

Not a Taliban supporter, but a domestic terrorist.
Domestic terrorist under financial distress Floyd Ray Roseberry fit most of the inclusivity in the DHS warning.

The author again reminds our readers that the NATO junta which controls the UNSC has repeatedly supported terrorists in and against the Syrian Arab Republic, has repeatedly lied in support of them, since the launch of the NATO Spring against the Levantine republic, in 2011.

These klan members — and NATO — have begun to issue warnings against the Taliban, not to engage in terrorist activities against their entitled countries.

Gosh, it is almost as though they have decided wave the proverbial red flag in front of the bull in the China shop (mixed metaphors are currently of some use).

Brit ambassador to UN warns Taliban.
Frog ambassador to UN says no money for terrorists…
…except, of course, al Qaeda in Syria.
US supremacist ambassador to UN warns Taliban.
Et voilà! NATO warns the Taliban.

The Taliban – related imperial chaos unleashed by NATO politicians and diplomats has only just begun, and will persist even as the criminal liars continue to arrogantly flaunt their support of terrorists in Syria.

— Miri Wood

Esteemed Syria News readers, please help to support our work in whichever way you are able:

To help us continue, please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help at no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

Why the West Funds Terrorism

Visual search query image
Cynthia Chung is a lecturer, writer and co-founder and editor of the Rising Tide Foundation (Montreal, Canada).

Cynthia Chung

August 15, 202

It is clear that the declared “enemy” in this “War on Terror,” is not what we were led to believe, and increasingly, it is beginning to look like the enemy may in fact be, anyone who resists this global agenda.

I believe in a cruel God who made me in his image and who in fury I name.

– Iago, in Verdi’s Opera Othello

On June 22, 2021, Bulgarian journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva published an expose titled “US fuels Syrian war with new arms supplies to Al Qaeda terrorists,” showing documents obtained by the US Federal Contracts Registry, revealing that the US Army Contracting Command, ACC Picatinny Arsenal,  has contracted eight American companies to procure Category 1 End User Certificate weapons from 2020-2025.

According to Gaytandzhieva, the Pentagon is buying $2.8 billion worth of weapons for conflict zones around the world. Most of the weapons are destined for Syria. After all, the Idlib Province in Syria (which is presently entirely controlled by Al Qaeda) has been recognised as one of the most strategic locations in the Middle East.

There are even a number of propaganda videos by Hayat Tahrir Al Sham HTS (formerly known as Al Nusra Front, which is Al Qaeda’s branch in Syria), showing them using American TOW anti-tank missiles.

A US-made TOW missile system seized by Syrian troops during their offensive in Urum al-Kubra in the de-escalation zone of Idlib. The province is under the control of the terrorist group HTS. (Telegram)

Visual search query image

Propaganda footage published by Ibba news agency, linked to the terrorist organisation HTS, shows HTS militants being trained to operate American BGM-71 TOW weapon systems, Kornet and Konkurs anti-tank systems in the Syrian province of Idlib (Telegram @new_militarycolumnist)

Abu Mohammad al-Julani is the commander of Hayat Tahrir Al Sham (HTS), the Al Qaeda in Syria, and has been listed under the US State Department as a “Specially Designated Global Terrorist.” And yet there is ample evidence that the US has been arming Al Qaeda in Syria all along.

In addition, there is the strange April 2, 2021, PBS fluff piece on Abu Mohammad al-Julani with a fashion make-over, appearing to prepare the American public for his running for public office. Why would a government-funded American broadcasting company do such a thing?

Above picture: Abu Mohammad al-Julani in natural habitat.

Abu Mohammad al-Julani in PBS habitat.

Eight American companies have been contracted to procure non-US standard weapons from 2020 to 2025 through the US Army Contracting Command (ACC) Picatinny Arsenal. The weapons are not American made and thus cannot be used by American soldiers, however, according to the Pentagon solicitation W15QKN-19-R-0049 “Non-standard Weapons, Parts and Accessories”, the weapons will be used in “theaters of conflict”.

The weapons are described as Category 1 End User Certificate, these are issued by the US to third parties other than governments, which means militia or terrorist groups.

Source: dilyana.bg

According to Gaytandzhieva’s report, the weapon descriptions of these non-US standard weapons indicate that they originate from Bulgaria, Serbia and Romania, (see her report for a detailed run through).

Details on End User Certificates. Source: W15QKN19R0049, US Army Contracting Command (ACC) Picatinny Arsenal

What this means is that Eastern European weapons are going to be flooded into “theaters of conflict” and once released “into the wild” will be very difficult to trace where the source came from, say the United States. Eastern European weapons are analogous to Soviet weapons that are being used by the Syrian army. This will also make it difficult to determine the source in acts of terrorism, since the equipment used by both sides will be virtually indiscernible.

However, as already noted above, for sophisticated equipment such as the American-made TOW anti-tank weapon systems, these are still being supplied by the good ‘ol US of A directly.

Of course, for anyone who has been paying attention to the situation in Syria, this is no surprise.

It should be obvious that the American, European and Turkish arms supplying of Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups is meant as a stubborn continuation of Brzezinski’s Arc of Crisis, which he coined in 1977 as President Carter’s National Security Adviser, and which led to the formation of the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) the following year. The Arc of Crisis concept was and is designed to foment ethnic tensions through encouraging religious fanaticism and terrorism in the Muslim communities of the Middle East which could then offshoot into Central Asia. It was believed that such Islamic fanaticism would direct its wrath against the Soviet Union, sparking Islamic anarchy within the Muslim community of the USSR itself. This was thought to be the “soft underbelly” of the Soviet Union.

However, 54 years later, the west is still in a Cold War with Russia and  terrorist cells have now spread across the Middle East, Asia, Africa and even within western countries who thought perhaps they were too far removed from these “theater of conflicts” to be burnt by the fires they started.

Yet strangely, this rather disastrous foreign policy has not been recognised for the absolute lunacy and general mayhem that it emboldens but rather, the disaster has been used as the very justification for why western countries, who cannot even employ the majority of their populace or offer proper healthcare, needed to enter and spend billions of dollars on the forever “War on Terror,” to which these governments are presently arming the other side to combat!

It is not the Assad government who has proven to be a threat to “western democracy,” but rather it is the very terrorism that the west has created and is backing that has caused the most destruction to western people’s lives at home.

These acts of terrorism are then used to justify why the civil rights of a country’s populace need to be “temporarily” revoked, such as the 20 year old and still going strong Patriot Act, to which we can expect further add-ons in addressing “domestic terrorism.

It is clear that the declared “enemy” in this “War on Terror,” is not what we were led to believe, and increasingly, it is beginning to look like the enemy may in fact be, anyone who resists this global agenda.

Made in London Mullahs

In a previous paper, I went through the origins of the Muslim Brotherhood as being essentially a British funded and backed creation, which dates back to intellectual founder of the Salafiyya movement, Jamal al-Din al-Afghani back in 1869.

Al-Afghani’s student Muhammad Abduh would receive direct and full support of the representatives of her Majesty’s imperial force and was given positions of high station and influence in British occupied Cairo. Abduh would work closely and openly with Lord Cromer (aka Evelyn Baring), London’s Egyptian proconsul, and scion of the enormously powerful banking clan (Barings Bank) under the city of London, in establishing the base for the Salafiyya movement. (1)

After London defeated ‘Urabi’s revolt against the British consortium in Egypt, which lasted from 1879 to 1882, Baring returned to Egypt in 1883 as a British agent and consul general, and served as the virtual ruler of the country until 1907.

British support continued with Hassan al-Banna (a follower of al-Afghani) who in 1928 officially founded the Muslim Brotherhood which would be linked with the Wahhabism of Saudi Arabia, which also has a history of British funding.

Banna’s Muslim Brotherhood, which was created in Egypt, would receive a grant from England’s Suez Canal Company. (2) It is no coincidence that the Muslim Brotherhood would be run-out of Egypt by President Gamal Abdel Nasser, only after he managed to nationalise the Suez Canal and successfully call an end to Britain’s occupancy of Egypt in 1956.

And thus it was clear that the British military occupancy of the Suez Canal was quite literally being used as a terrorist hub in support of the Muslim Brotherhood, for more on this refer to my paper.

Thanks to the Sykes-Picot affair, British dominance was not only found in Egypt but also, most notably, Saudi Arabia. As a result of the British orchestrated Sykes Picot, Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud, the British India Office favourite, was proclaimed King of Hejaz and Najd in 1926, leading to the founding of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

From the 1920s on, the new Saudi state merged its Wahhabi orthodoxy with the Salafiyya movement, now organized into the Muslim Brotherhood and has taken form as the modern militant Islamic extremism we are supposedly fighting today.

Who Really Runs the Middle East?

Islamic banking [that is the banking system dominated presently by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States] was born in Egypt and financed by Saudi Arabia and then spread to the far corners of the Muslim world. Eventually the Islamic banking movement became a vehicle not only for exporting political Islam but for sponsoring violence. However, Islamic banking did not get off the ground on its own, as Ibrahim Warde (a renowned scholar of international finance) explains in his book “Islamic Finance in the Global Economy,” Islamic banking:

operates more out of London, Geneva, or the Bahamas than it does out of Jeddah, Karachi or Cairo…Ideologically, both liberalism and economic Islam were driven by their common opposition to socialism and economic dirigisme…Even Islamic Republics have on occasion openly embraced neo-liberalism…In Sudan, between 1992 and the end of 1993, Economics Minister Abdul Rahim Hamdi – a disciple of Milton Friedman and incidentally a former Islamic banker in London – did not hesitate to implement the harshest free-market remedies dictated by the International Monetary Fund. He said he was committed to transforming the heretofore statist economy ‘according to free-market rules, because this is how an Islamic economy should function.’  ” [emphasis added]

However, perhaps the best case study to this phenomenon is the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI).

BCCI was an international bank founded in 1972 by Agha Hasan Abedi, a Pakistani financier. The bank was registered in Luxembourg with head offices in Karachi and London. A decade after opening, BCCI had over 400 branches in 78 countries in excess of $20 billion USD, making it the seventh largest private bank in the world.

In the 1980s investigations into BCCI led to the discovery of its involvement in massive money laundering and other financial crimes, and that the BCCI had illegally and secretly gained the control of a major American bank, First American, according to Robert Morgenthau (Manhattan DA) who had been investigating the bank for over two years.

BCCI was also to be found guilty for illegally buying another American bank, the Independence Bank of Los Angeles, using a Saudi businessman Ghaith Paraon as the puppet owner. The American depositors lost most of their money when BCCI was forced to foreclose since it was essentially operating a Ponzi scheme to fund illegal activity of all sorts.

Investigators in the United States and the UK determined that BCCI had been “set up deliberately to avoid centralized regulatory review, and operated extensively in bank secrecy jurisdictions. Its affairs were extraordinarily complex. Its officers were sophisticated international bankers whose apparent objective was to keep their affairs secret, to commit fraud on a massive scale, and to avoid detection.”(3)

This is an incredibly sophisticated operation, and interestingly, uses the very same methods that the City of London has been using for centuries and presently operates to a diabolical perfection today. There is no way that a solo Pakistani financier, even if he was financed by the Sheik of Abu Dhabi, could rise in less than a decade , operating on the turf of ancient banking channels that go back several centuries, to rise to become the seventh largest bank in the netherworld of finance without a little help from the big boys.

Ibrahim Warde writes:

At the international level, the major Islamic banking groups, rather than trying to establish a global Islamic network that would rival the global banking system, are keen on remaining embedded within that system. Indeed, in its transnational operations, Islamic banking operates more out of London, Geneva or the Bahamas, than it does out of Jeddah, Karachi or Cairo. As for the Islamic Development Bank (IBD), its statutes provide for coordination and collaboration with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other international organizations.” (4) [emphasis added]

On July 29th, 1991, a Manhattan grand jury indicted BCCI on twelve accounts of fraud, money laundering and larceny. Morgenthau has described BCCI as “the largest bank fraud in world financial history.”

So what does this all mean? It means that the so-called terrorists we are supposed to be fighting in this “War on Terror” are essentially working for the orchestrators that justify said narrative.

What it means is that the sin cities steeped in crime, dope, sex-trafficking (including children), arms-trafficking and terrorist groups, are all being funded by the same centralised system of finance, located in the London-Geneva-Bahamas (which is an offshoot of the City of London) triangle.

And it isn’t just Islamic banks that are involved in funding this kind of netherworld activity. It is being done by banks that continue to have an incredibly large role to play in more “respectable” global finance such as HSBC.

Yes, HSBC is still bizarrely considered reputable despite several very embarrassing lost lawsuits, however, the biggest to date occurred in 2012 when allegations were made against HSBC for allowing terrorists to move money around the financial system  and for which it had to pay a record $1.9 billion, with no form of regulated control on the bank afterwards but rather an agreement with the DOJ that the bank itself would install a 5 year independent monitor. (For more on this refer to my paper.)

HSBC managed to avoid being criminally prosecuted, a move that could have stopped the bank from operating in the US.

Lanny Breuer, assistant attorney general at the time, stated:

HSBC is being held accountable for stunning failures of oversight – and worse…that led the bank to permit narcotics traffickers and others to launder hundreds of millions of dollars through HSBC subsidiaries and to facilitate hundreds of millions more in transactions with sanctioned countries.

And just as Africa is being looted twice over with capital flight that amounts to 5x their foreign debt, which then returns to City of London offshore nether regions, only to ask for loans to pay off this debt at exorbitant interest rates by the very same grouping who stole the money…So the “privileged” western world is starting to feel a similar brunt.

While western countries are increasingly unable to provide a proper standard of living, with mass unemployment, lack of healthcare, increased crime and suicide rates, and increased overdoses and homelessness, and pretty much everything you would expect to rise during a Dark Age straight out of a Goya painting, these “first-world” governments are applying further austerity measures on the people, even after prolonged lockdowns, while openly pumping billions of dollars into wars that not only fund the destruction of entire nations, but funds the global drug, arms and sex-trafficking trade. All of this dirty money then circles back into the London-Geneva fondi, benefitting a select class that has existed and thrived for centuries on this sort of backdrop.

In this system, you do not own your money and you do not get to decide what your money is used for. Unknowingly, we are all tied to it, we all labour for it, and if so decided for us, we may even die for it.

Iago’s Prophecy

“From the very vileness of a germ or an atom, vile I was born. I am a wretch because I am a man, and I feel within me the primeval slime. Yes! This is my creed! …I think and do by destiny’s decree. I believe the just man to be a mocking actor in face and heart; that all his being is a lie: tear, kiss, glance, sacrifice and honour. And I believe man the sport of evil fate from the germ of the cradle to the worm of the grave. After all this mockery then comes Death. And then? …Death is nothingness…”

–        Iago, in Verdi’s Opera Othello

For those who are not familiar with Shakespeare’s play “The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice.” Iago is a Venetian, and though he most certainly would have called himself a “Christian,” as we see with his above monologue, his interpretation is rather more akin to that of the Devil.

Venice, was the center of world intelligence at the time, and the direct descendant of the Roman Empire. Venice was an enemy of Florence (the birthplace of the Italian Renaissance) and is the reason why Machiavelli wrote ‘The Prince,’ which was meant as a guidebook to the prince of Florence in understanding Venetian techniques so that he could defeat them.

Iago dislikes Othello and wants to remove him from his position as general. Not only this, but he wants to see Othello destroyed. However, in order to destroy Othello, Iago does not use physical force or confront him directly but rather, from the shadows, plays the fears and insecurities of Othello against himself.

Through this strategy, Othello becomes increasingly distrustful of those who he should keep close and is drawn ever closer to his destructor Iago, thinking him his only true confidante. Finally, Othello turns against his beloved wife and trusted friend Cassio and is driven mad by Iago’s relentless poisoned whisperings in his ear. In the end, Othello in a blind fury suffocates his faithful wife Desdemona in their bedroom chamber.

Incredibly controversial at the time of its first performance, it remains so today. What is the lesson we are to take from Shakespeare? Was Shakespeare making the point that Othello simply acted what was in his nature the entire time, as that of a Berber/Arab Muslim man, nothing more than a savage? Was it only a matter of time before Othello would have committed such atrocities against his beloved and his good friend, and that Iago merely inflamed what was already within him?

Othello is a tragedy, because Othello the man did not recognise that he was caught in the middle of someone else’s orchestration.  He allowed himself to be the plaything of another and to execute actions that were not his own conceptualisation. Othello is guilty of his crimes, but it is Iago who is by far the most formidable and terrible monster in the play. It is Iago who manipulates behind the scenes, and it is an Iago that goes undetected and unchecked by most, allowed to continue his atrocities without ever facing any justice until his death, when he will finally be confronted by the eternal.

As Schiller stated in his Ghost Seer about the Venetian technique, one will only be freed by masked tyranny’s terrible grip when one can comprehend what is the nature of true villainy, that is, the orchestrator of evil and not just a mere hand of evil. Only then will such a villain be unmasked to us, otherwise we will forever be pitted against the other, just a plaything for a higher will than our own.

Thus, let us not be fully distracted by the mayhem on center front stage…but rather, let us take a look at who is standing behind that curtain.

%d bloggers like this: