Archive | November 17th, 2015

Battle for the mind: Terrorists deliberately targeted the ‘everyday life’ of ordinary Parisians


© REUTERS/ Vincent Kessler
The six places in Paris targeted by terrorists were chosen in a deliberate attack on the everyday life of ordinary Parisians, reports the French press.The targets chosen by the Islamic State were not famous landmarks visited by tourists, but bars, restaurants, a concert hall and stadium frequented by ordinary Parisians, in an attempt to bring chaos and fear to ordinary life.

In its statement of responsibility, the Islamic State described Paris as “the capital of abominations and perversions,” leading the organization to attack the place where the city’s residents go to enjoy themselves, wrote French newspaper 20minutes.

By carrying out shootings at bars and restaurants in the popular 10th and 11th districts of Paris on Friday evening, the attackers aimed their fire at young people who were enjoying themselves.

“The Bataclan, the restaurant Le Petit Cambodia and the bar Le Belle Equipe are all located within a radius of less than 1.5 km from the headquarters of Charlie Hebdo. The 11th district had since become one of the main places of Parisian memory, including Republic Square, covered with messages for the victims.”

“The area, including the synagogues was also under military surveillance day and night since the events of last January. But neighborhood life, festive weekends, had reasserted itself.”

“The suicide bombers wanted to show that they could still touch a symbolic place that was under police control, at least in appearance.”

Translation: ‘Attacks in Paris: Why These Places, Why These Targets?’

The newspaper explains that the Bataclan concert hall, where a metal band was playing, has previously been the target of threats from Islamic militants; in August a 30-year-old Frenchman who had returned from Syria was arrested, and later admitted during questioning that a commander there had asked him to carry out an attack on one or more concert halls when he returned to France.

“The Islamic State called it ‘A party of perversion for hundreds of idolators.’ In the past, the hall had already been targeted by threats from radical Islamists. In 2011 one militant told the French intelligence services of an intention to target the venue ‘because its owners are Jewish.’ In the mid-2000s it was used as a place of meeting for Jewish organizations, which earned it numerous threats.”

Three suicide bombers blew themselves up outside the Stade de France football stadium, after one of them had been denied entry to the France – Germany friendly football match to be played there.

Spectators gather on the pitch of the Stade de France stadium following the friendly football match between France and Germany in Saint-Denis, north of Paris, on November 13, 2015, after a series of gun attacks occurred across Paris as well as explosions outside the national stadium where France was hosting Germany

Manu Saadia writes in Fusion magazine that the choice of the Stade de France is also symbolic, an attack on modern France and attempts at national unity and pluralism.

“That particular stadium is one of the few places where the promise of a more integrated France is realized, if only intermittently.” 

“The French soccer team, known as ‘Les Bleus,’ is the paragon of the ‘black-blanc-beur’ ideal (black, white, arab). The national team is republican meritocracy in action, and it works. The Stade de France is where a French team led by the Algerian-Frenchman Zinedine Zidane won the greatest trophy in sports, the FIFA World Cup, in 1998,” said Saadia, a former resident of Paris, who described the stadium as a monument to multi-ethnic success.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Battle for the mind: Terrorists deliberately targeted the ‘everyday life’ of ordinary Parisians

Obama goes full blown nutter in ABC News interview

© The White House

In an interview for ABC News, President Barack Obama suggested that sooner or later, Russia will wise up and join the US-led anti-ISIL camp in Syria. Moreover, again emphasizing the need to remove Syrian President Bashar Assad from power, the president noted that he would try to convince his Russian counterpart to that effect over the next year.

The interview airing Friday, has already become the subject of a scandal, with commentators attacking the president for his suggestion that ISIL had been “contained” just hours ahead of the deadly terror attacks in Paris.

In the same interview, asked by his interviewer about whether “Vladimir Putin will start to take [ISIL] on,” (an odd question, given that Russia has been bombing ISIL positions for a month and a half), Obama offered an equally strange response.

Starting off by noting that he sincerely believes that “Putin…from the start has been sincere in seeing ISIL as a threat,” the president turned around and contradicted himself in the same breath, suggesting that “the reason he went into Syria is not primarily because of ISIL, but to prop up Assad.”

With this in mind, the president said, “part of our goal is to underscore for him and for everyone in the region that ISIL is the primary threat and you can’t solve the ISIL problem if, in fact, you’ve got a country that is governed by somebody who’s illegitimate and that the majority of Syrians reject.” This is an especially peculiar line for the president to take given that his own approval ratings have dipped below 50% on numerous occasions in the course of his own presidency.

With these remarks, the president clarified that he is set on continuing to ignore internationally recognized definitions of legitimacy, which suggest that not only is Assad Syria’s legitimate president, but that the Russian air campaign, conducted on the request of Syria’s government, is in fact the only legitimate use of foreign air power on Syrian territory.

As for the suggestion that Russia may not be sufficiently active in engaging ISIL, and that Russian strikes might be aimed against other rebels opposed to Assad, it’s simply worth recalling the analysis of French counterterrorism expert Alain Rodier, who explained to Le Figaro earlier this month that aside from ISIL and the Nusra Front, there are literally “hundreds” of Islamist groups operating in Syria. What is the basis for the president’s criticism of Syrian ground and Russian air operations against these groups? Is he really suggesting that jihadist terrorism should not be targeted, if it is not operating under the ISIL flag?

Asked whether it will be possible to convince Putin on Assad’s “illegitimacy” and to come to the negotiating table, Obama noted that “what’s interesting is we’ve already seen I think a growing awareness on the part of the Russians after several weeks now of fairly high paced bombing that they’re not going to win this militarily. I think they understand that. They may not admit it publicly, but you’re already starting to see indications of that.”

The president’s definitions of military success in Syria aside, it’s worth pointing out, as a number of analysts already have, that Syrians themselves have deemed Russia’s month and a half long campaign of airstrikes to be much more effective than the US-led coalition’s year and a half long effort, costing less, leading to an increase in Syrian army offensives against the terrorists, and resulting in over a million Syrians returning home from refugee camps abroad. What fantastical successes Obama may want from the Russian effort in such a short period of time remains unclear.

Ultimately, Obama told his interviewer that he finds it unfortunate that the Russians have “not yet come to conclusion that Assad can’t be part of a new Syria.” With this in mind, however, the president noted that he thinks “it’s going to take some time for [Russia] to get there. But our goal here, and John Kerry, I think, has done outstanding work in starting to create a platform and a set of principles whereby we agree that a political solution is what’s required, that it has to be inclusive, that there’s going to be a transition. And, by bringing in the Iranians and the Russians, which is tough for us and tough for a number of our coalition allies…we’re starting to shape who are the groups that could responsibly govern Syria.”

The president could not seem to clarify how exactly US diplomacy will be able to convince Moscow and Tehran to abandon its ally in Damascus, but asserted that “if we can keep pushing on that diplomatic track even as we’re squeezing ISIL…then what you see over the course of the next year is I think the possibility that our 60-member coalition and the approach that we’re taking is one that Russia [may join].”


Posted in USA1 Comment

President Hollande beats the drums of war as France begins bombing Syria

Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Are the Paris terrorist attacks being used as a pretext and justification by France to intervene militarily in Syria in violation of international law?
According to French President François Hollande, the Paris terrorist attack was “prepared, organized and planned from outside the country by the Islamic State”, which has it’s command centres in Syria and Iraq.On Sunday, twelve French warplanes were dispatched on orders of President Hollande. Their target was Al-Raqqa, the so-called de facto capital of the Islamic State inside Northern Syria.

France is acting allegedly in “self defense”.

In liaison with the US -which has provided France with intelligence regarding ISIS targets – the French Air Force has initiated a series of bombing raids against ISIS terrorist positions in retribution for the alleged role of the Islamic State in the Paris terror attacks.

President Hollande is “Beating the Drums of War”. There is no evidence that the Paris terror attacks were coordinated out of Syria. Nor is there evidence that the Paris terrorist attacks constitute an “act of war” directed from abroad against France.

The airstrikes were carried out on Sunday, two days after the Paris attacks, some 20 bombs were reported to have been dropped on alleged terrorist positions.

Obama’s air campaign against ISIS is fake. This is not a war against the Islamic State, it is a war against Syria. The “war on terrorism” is a smokescreen.

According to the Independent (November 15): “Sunday’s bombing was the biggest French air raid that has taken place in Syria so far.” According to the French defence ministry, “the first target that the planes destroyed was a command post, which housed a recruitment centre and arms and munitions depot.”

What the reports fail to mention is that from the outset of Obama’s bombing campaign in August-September 2014, the US led coalition has not bombed ISIS rebel positions.

Quite the opposite, the ISIS has been protected by the Western Military alliance. The US led air raids have been used to channel weapons and ammunition to the terrorists.

Most of the press reports are based on information emanating from France’s Ministry of Defense. At the time of writing there is no firmindependent confirmation that the French Air Force operating in liaison with the US has a meaningful way bombed ISIS positions in Raqqa.

The bombings are also for “domestic consumption”. They are used to harness social support for the State of Emergency, not to mention the suspension of civil liberties in the Paris metropolitan area.

Military Escalation in the Middle East

It is worth noting that this scenario of military escalation directed against Syria in which France is actively participating was planned before the November 13 terrorist attacks. Announced on November 5 one week before the Paris attacks, the Council of Ministers confirmed that France had decided to dispatch the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier group to the Middle East to “Fight the Islamic State”.

France’s Charles de Gaulle only aircraft carrier is slated to leave for the Mediterranean “to join the fight against the Islamic State in the region” on November 18.

“The deployment of the battle group alongside the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier has been undertaken in order to participate in operations against Daesch [ISIS] and its affiliate groups” the French president’s office said in an issued statement. (quoted by RT, November 5, 2015)

“The aircraft carrier will enable us to be more efficient in coordination with our allies” President Francois Hollande said, adding that it will “bolster Paris’ firepower in the region amid international efforts to launch Syrian peace talks.” (Ibid)

Posted in France, SyriaComments Off on President Hollande beats the drums of war as France begins bombing Syria

Putin: ’40 countries finance ISIS, including some G20 members’


Russian President Vladimir Putin during a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit in Antalya, Turkey.

President Vladimir Putin says he’s shared Russian intelligence data on Saudi Zio-Wahhabi ‘ISIS’ financing with his G20 colleagues: the terrorists appear to be financed from 40 countries, including some G20 member states. During the summit, “I provided examples based on our data on the financing of different Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) units by private individuals. This money, as we have established, comes from 40 countries and, there are some of the G20 members among them,” Putin told the journalists.

Putin also spoke of the urgent need to curb the illegal oil trade by IS. “I’ve shown our colleagues photos taken from space and from aircraft which clearly demonstrate the scale of the illegal trade in oil and petroleum products,” he said. “The motorcade of refueling vehicles stretched for dozens of kilometers, so that from a height of 4,000 to 5,000 meters they stretch beyond the horizon,” Putin added, comparing the convoy to gas and oil pipeline systems.

It’s not the right time to try and figure out which country is more and which is less effective in the battle with Islamic State, as now a united international effort is needed against the terrorist group, Putin said. Putin reiterated Russia’s readiness to support armed opposition in Syria in its efforts to fight Islamic State. “Some armed opposition groups consider it possible to begin active operations against IS with Russia’s support. And we are ready to provide such support from the air. If it happens it could become a good basis for the subsequent work on a political settlement,” he said. “We really need support from the US, European nations, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran,” the president added.

Posted in Middle East, RussiaComments Off on Putin: ’40 countries finance ISIS, including some G20 members’

Nazi regime stakes claim to Golan after oil find

Jonathan Cook


Naziyahu sounds out Obama on recognising annexation of Syrian territory as test drill promises energy independenceBenjamin Naziyahu took advantage of a private meeting this week with Barack Obama – their first in 13 months – to raise the possibility of dismembering Syria.

According to Israeli officials, Naziyahu indicated that Washington should give its belated blessing to Israel’s illegal annexation of the Golan Heights, captured from Syria during the 1967 war.

Sources close to the talks told the Haaretz daily that Netanyahu claimed Syria was no longer a functioning state, allowing “for different thinking”. Since 2011 the government of Bashar al-Assad has faced off against rebel factions that include al-Qaeda-affiliated groups and the Islamic State (IS).

On Wednesday an unnamed White House official confirmed that Netanyahu had raised the matter. The official said: “I think the president didn’t think it warranted an answer. It wasn’t clear how serious he [Netanyahu] was about it.”

However, it appears Netanyahu’s comments to Obama are part of a coordinated effort by Israeli officials over several months to shift thinking in Washington.

The day before Netanyahu’s meeting at the White House, Michael Oren, Israel’s former ambassador to the US, published a commentary on CNN’s website urging Obama to consider Israeli sovereignty over the Golan.

Had Israel handed back the area to Syria in earlier peace talks, he wrote, it “would today have placed [the Lebanese militia] Hezbollah directly above Israeli cities and villages in northern Galilee” and Islamic State (ISIS) “would be dug in on the Sea of Galilee’s eastern shore”.

Neither Oren nor presumably Netanyahu highlighted another reason why Israel might be anxious to gain US approval of its annexation of the Golan, which it imposed in violation of international law in 1981.

‘Billions of barrels’

Last month Afek, an Israeli subsidiary of Genie Energy, a US oil company, announced that it had found considerable reserves of oil under the Golan. Genie’s chief geologist in Israel, Yuval Bartov, said the company believed the reservoir had the “potential of billions of barrels”.

International law experts say any proceeds from such a find in the Golan should revert to Syria, but Israel has so far indicated it will ignore its legal obligations.

The Israeli energy and water ministry has licensed Afek to drill 10 experimental wells over three years in a 400-square kilometre area, about a third of the Golan’s total territory.

Afek claims that the discoveries it has identified in its first year could make Israel energy independent, satisfying Israel’s consumption of 100 million barrels a year for the foreseeable future.

That would be on top of Israel’s recent finds of huge quantities of natural gas off its Mediterranean coast, offering it the chance to become a gas exporter.

Were the US to recognise Israel’s illegal annexation of the Golan, it would likely clear the way for Israel to plunder any economically viable reserves located there.

Netanyahu appears to have long harboured an interest in tapping the Golan’s potential for oil.

In 1996, in his first term as prime minister, he granted approval for drilling in the Golan by the Israeli National Oil Company. International pressure meant the permit had to be withdrawn soon afterwards.

Resources plundered


Today, 22,000 Syrian Druze live in five villages, alongside a similar number of Jews in 30 illegal settlements.

A 2010 investigation by the Haaretz newspaper revealed that Israel had carried out systematic expulsions of some 130,000 Syrians in 1967 and destroyed 200 villages. The Druze alone were allowed to stay so as not to upset Israel’s own Druze citizens.

Nizar Ayoub, director of Marsad, a Druze human rights centre based in the Golan, said Israel had long taken resources from the Golan.

“Israel has always treated the Golan as a territory to be exploited and plundered, from its water to farming and tourism,” he told Middle East Eye. “Israel has simply ignored its obligations under international law.”

Rainwater from the Golan feeds into the Jordan River, supplying a third of Israel’s needs. The fertile volcanic soil allows Israel to cultivate vineyards and orchards, and graze cattle. And the mountain terrain has also made it a magnet for holidaying, including skiing on Mount Hermon.

In recent years Israel has approved the construction of a series of large wind farms.

Ayoub said Israel had taken advantage of the conflict in Syria to advance oil exploration in the Golan, but such a move was rejected by the local Druze population.

“Even if Netanyahu could persuade the Americans to agree [about recognition], it is not their decision to make. The only people who can decide to change the sovereignty of the Golan are the Syrian people,” he said.

Quadrupling Jewish settlers

Officials close to Netanyahu have been promoting a change of status in the Golan’s since the early summer.

In June Naftali Bennett, leader of the pro-settler party Jewish Home and the education minster in Netanyahu’s current coalition, raised the question of the Golan’s future at the Herzliya conference, an annual meeting of Israel’s political, academic and security elites. The conference is also attended by senior US officials.

Bennett urged the international community “to demonstrate their ethics” by recognising Israeli sovereignty in the Golan.

He added“To this day, no state in the world has recognised the Golan as part of Israel, including our friend, the United States of America. It is time the world stand by the right side – Israel’s side.”

Israel would try to quadruple the Golan’s settler population to 100,000 using financial incentives, he said.

A month later Zvi Hauser, Netanyahu’s former cabinet secretary, wrote a commentary in Haaretz arguing that Israel should seize its first chance since 1967 “to conduct a constructive dialogue with the international community over a change in Middle Eastern borders”.

Recognition of Israeli sovereignty in the Heights could, he said, be presented as serving a “global interest in stabilising the region”.

Hauser added that Israel should demand the Golan as “compensation” for Obama’s recent nuclear agreement with Iran. Such a claim could be based, he said, on a 1975 “pledge” from US President Gerald Ford recognising Israel’s “need to remain on the Golan Heights, even in peacetime”.

In his CNN piece last Sunday, Oren, a widely respected figure in Washington, asserted that, without Israeli sovereignty over Golan, Iran and Hezbollah would become a base from which to launch armed attacks on Israel.

“For the first time in more than 40 years, the Golan could again become a catalyst for war,” he wrote.

He added that Israel had “transformed this once-barren war zone into a hub of high-tech agriculture, world-class wineries and pristine nature reserves”. He did not mention the recent oil find.

Israel’s ‘solidified grip’

Before fighting took hold in Syria, polls showed between 60 and 70 percent of Israelis rejected returning the Golan to Syria, even if doing so would secure peace with Damascus. The percentages are likely to be higher now.

The White House official told Haaretz that recognition of Israel’s annexation would disrupt US policy by suggesting that Syrian opposition forces supported by the US were “allies with people who want to give up the Golan”.

However, a recent commentary by Frederic Hof, a Syria expert in the State Department under Hillary Clinton, hinted that US officials might yet change their view.

He said US efforts before 2011 and the outbreak of fighting to pressure Israel to give up the Golan, as part of talks over a peace treaty with Assad, had been proven “so wrong”. Instead, the war in Syria had “solidified Israel’s grip” on the Golan.

On its website, Genie’s subsidiary Afek claims that its drilling in the occupied Golan Heights will extract “Israeli oil”.

The two companies include figures who have close personal ties to Netanyahu and high-level influence in Washington.

Genie’s founder, Howard Jonas, an American Jewish millionaire, made political contributions to Netanyahu’s recent campaign for the Likud party’s primaries.

Its “strategic advisory board” includes Dick Cheney, the US vice-president under George Bush and widely regarded as the architect of the American invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Media tycoon Rupert Murdoch is also an adviser. He controls large sections of the rightwing English-language media, including his most influential outlet, the US TV news station Fox News.

In September, Genie added Larry Summers, a senior official under Democratic Presidents Bill Clinton and Obama, and James Woolsey, a former CIA director who became a neo-conservative cheerleader for the invasion of Iraq.

The chairman of Afek, Genie’s Israeli subsidiary, is Effi Eitam, a far-right former general and cabinet minister who lives in an illegal settlement in the Golan.

His far-right views include demands to expel both Palestinians from the occupied territories and the large minority of Palestinian citizens from Israel.

After Eitam exited the Israeli parliament in 2009, Netanyahu sent him as a “special emissary to US campuses as part of a “caravan for democracy”.

International law violated

Hala Khoury Bisharat, an international law professor at Carmel Academic College, near Haifa, said it would be hard to persuade the US to recognise Israel’s illegal annexation of the Golan.

“International law is clear that it is never admissable to acquire territory through war,” she told MEE. “It would be very problematic for the US to do this.”

She added that Israel, as an occupier, was obliged by the 1907 Hague regulations to “safeguard the capital” of the occupied party’s natural resources and was not entitled to exploit any oil in the Golan for its own benefit.

The prime minister’s office was unavailable to comment about Netanyahu’s discussions with Obama, or respond to accusations that the operations in the Golan were violating international law.

Since its establishment, Israel has drilled some 530 exploratory wells, but none has produced commercially viable quantities of oil.

Israel briefly had access to significant quantities of oil after the 1967 war, when fields it occupied in the Sinai supplied two-thirds of domestic needs. Israel was eventually forced to hand the wells back to Egypt.

Meanwhile, Israel has discovered large natural gas deposits in the Mediterranean, stoking tensions with neighbouring countries, especially Lebanon, which has claimed that Israel is drilling in areas where maritime borders are disputed.

The Israeli courts are unlikely to place any obstacles in the way of drilling operations in the Golan.

In a ruling in late 2011, Israel’s supreme court created a new principle of “prolonged occupation” to justify the theft of Palestinian resources, such as quarried stone, in the West Bank. The precedent could be extended to the Golan.

The only opposition so far has come from Israeli environmental groups. They have expressed concern that extraction of the oil, especially if fracking is used, could pollute aquifers or trigger earthquakes in a seismically unstable region.

Yuval Arbel, a ground water expert with Friends of the Earth Israel, said the Golan’s deposits were likely to be in the form of “tight oil,” making it difficult to extract. Israel would probably have to set up a grid of drills every half kilometre.

He told MEE that would increase the chances of oil spillages that could leak into the nearby Sea of Galilee, threatening Israel’s main source of drinking water.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, SyriaComments Off on Nazi regime stakes claim to Golan after oil find

Does the U.S. really want to engage in a new World War with Russia?

William Engdahl

The Sukhoi SU-34

Washington continues making an international fool of herself by her inability to effectively counter the impression around the world that Russia, spending less than 10% of the Pentagon annually on defense, has managed to do more against ISIS in Syria in six weeks than the mighty US Air Force bombing campaign has done in almost a year and half. One aspect that bears attention is the demonstration by the Russian military of new technologies that belie the widely-held Western notion that Russia is little more than a backward oil and raw material commodity exporter.

Recent reorganization of the Russian state military industrial complex as well as reorganization of the Soviet-era armed forces under Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu’s term are visible in the success so far of Russia’s ISIS and other terror strikes across Syria. Clearly Russian military capabilities have undergone a sea-change since the Soviet Cold War era.

In war there are never winners. Yet Russia has been in an unwanted war with Washington de facto since the George W. Bush Administration announced its lunatic plan to place what they euphemistically term “Ballistic Missile Defense” missiles and advanced radar in Poland, Czech Republic, Romania and Turkey after 2007. Without going into detail, BMD technologies are the opposite of defensive. They instead make a pre-emptive war highly likely. Of course the radioactive ash heap in such an exchange would be first and foremost the EU countries foolish enough to invite US BMD to their soil.

Then came the highly provocative US-instigated coup d’etat in Ukraine in February 2014, installing a cabal of gangsters, neo-nazis and criminals who launched a civil war against its own citizens in east Ukraine, an ill-conceived attempt to bring Russia into a ground war across her border. It followed two UN Security Council vetoes by Russia and China of US proposals for No Fly zones over Syria as was done to destroy Qaddafi’s Libya. Now Russia has surprised the West by accepting the request of Syrian President Bashar al Assad to help eliminate the terrorism that has ravaged the once-peaceful country for over four years.

What the Russian General Staff has managed, since the precision air campaign began September 30, has stunned western defense planners with Russian technological feats not expected. Two specific technologies are worth looking at more closely: The Russian Sukoi SU-34 fighter-bomber and what is called the Bumblebee hyperbaric mortar weapon.

Sukhoi SU-34 ‘Fullback’ fighter-bomber

The plane responsible for some of the most damaging strikes on ISIS and other terror enclaves in Syria is manufactured by the Russian state aircraft industry under the name Sukhoi SU-34. As the Russian news agency RIA Novosti described the aircraft, “The Su-34 is meant to deliver a sufficiently large ordnance load to a predetermined area, hit the target accurately and take evasive action against pursuing enemy planes.” The plane is also designed to deal with enemy fighters in aerial combat such as the US F-16. The SU-34 made a first test flight in 1990 as the collapse of the Soviet Union and the chaos of the Yeltsin years caused many delays. Finally in 2010 the plane was in full production

According to a report in US Defense Industry Daily, among the SU-34 features are:

– 8 ton ordnance load which can accommodate precision-guided weapons, as well as R-73/AA-11 Archer and R-77/AA-12 ‘AMRAAMSKI’ missiles and an internal 30mm GSh-301 gun.

– Maximum speed of Mach 1.8 at altitude.

– 3,000 km range, extensible to “over 4,000 km” with the help of additional drop tanks. The SU-34 can also refuel in mid-air.

– It can fly in TERCOM (Terrain Contour Matching) mode for low-level flight, and has software to execute a number of difficult maneuvers.

– Leninets B004 phased array multimode X-band radar, which interleaves terrain-following radar and other modes.

Now new EW technologies

Clearly the aircraft is impressive as it has demonstrated against terrorist centers in Syria. Now, however, beginning this month it will add a “game-changer” in the form of a new component. Speaking at the Dubai Air Show on November 12, Igor Nasenkov, the First Deputy General Director of the Radio-Electronic Technologies Concern (KRET) announced that this month, that is in the next few days, SUKHOI SU-34 fighter-bombers will become electronic warfare aircraft as well.

Nasenkov explained that the new Khibiny aircraft electronic countermeasures (ECM) systems, installed on the wingtips, will give the SU-34 jets electronic warfare capabilities to launch effective electronic countermeasures against radar systems, anti-aircraft missile systems and airborne early warning and control aircraft

KRET is a holding or group of some 95 Russian state electronic companies formed in 2009 under the giant Russian state military industry holding, Rostec.

Russia’s advances in what is euphemistically termed in military jargon, Electronic Counter Measures or ECM, is causing some sleepless nights for the US Pentagon top brass to be sure. In the battles in eastern pro-Russian Ukraine earlier this year, as well as in the Black Sea, and now in Syria, according to ranking US military sources, Russia deployed highly-effective ECM technologies like the Krasukha-4, to successfully jam hostile radar and aircraft.

Lt. General Ben Hodges, Commander of US Army Europe (USAREUR) describes Russian ECM capabilities used in Ukraine as “eye-watering,” suggesting some US and NATO officers are more than slightly disturbed by what they see. Ronald Pontius, deputy to Army Cyber Command’s chief, Lt. Gen. Edward Cardon, told a conference in October that, “You can’t but come to the conclusion that we’re not making progress at the pace the threat demands.” In short, Pentagon planners have been caught flat-footed for all the trillions of wasted US taxpayer dollars in recent years thrown at the military industry.

Comment: The Russian military is able to do much more with much less. The U.S. military on the other hand, for all its exotic technology, is a bloated Goliath of mismanagement, waste and incompetence.See also: $aving private profligate: The American way of war in the twenty-first century 

During the critical days of the March 2014 Crimean citizens’ referendum vote to appeal for status within Russia, New York Times reporters then in Crimea reported the presence of Russian electronic jamming systems, known as R-330Zh Zhitel, manufactured by Protek in Voronezh, Russia. That state-of-the-art technology was believed to have been used to prevent the Ukrainian Army from invading Crimea before the referendum. Russian forces in Crimea, where Russia had a legal basing agreement with Kiev, reportedly were able to block all communication of Kiev military forces, preventing a Crimean bloodbath. Washington was stunned.

USS Donald Cook…

Thereafter, in April, 2014, one month after the accession of Crimea into the Russian Federation, President Obama ordered the USS Donald Cook into the Black Sea waters just off Crimea, the home port of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, to “reassure” EU states of US resolve. Donald Cook was no ordinary guided missile destroyer. It had been refitted to be one of four ships as part of Washington’s Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System aimed at Russia’s nuclear arsenal. USS Donald Cook boldly entered the Black Sea on April 8 heading to Russian territorial waters.

On April 12, just four days later, the US ship inexplicably left the area of the Crimean waters of the Black Sea for a port in NATO-member Romania. From there it left the Black Sea entirely. A report on April 30, 2014 in Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta Online titled, “What Frightened the American Destroyer,” stated that while the USS Donald Cook was near Crimean (Russian by that time) waters, a Russian Su-24 Frontal Aviation bomber conducted a flyby of the destroyer

The Rossiyskaya Gazeta went on to write that the Russian SU-24 “did not have bombs or missiles onboard. One canister with the Khibin electronic warfare complex was suspended under the fuselage.” As it got close to the US destroyer, the Khibins turned off the USS Donald Cook’s “radar, combat control circuits, and data transmission system – in short, they turned off the entire Aegis just like we turn off a television by pressing the button on the control panel. After this, the Su-24 simulated a missile launch at the blind and deaf ship. Later, it happened once again, and again – a total of 12 times.” 

While the US Army denied the incident as Russian propaganda, the fact is that USS Donald Cook never approached Russian Black Sea waters again. Nor did NATO ships that replaced it in the Black Sea. A report in 2015 by the US Army’s Foreign Military Studies Office assessed that Russia, “does indeed possess a growing EW capability, and the political and military leadership understand the importance…Their growing ability to blind or disrupt digital communications might help level the playing field when fighting against a superior conventional foe.” Now new Russian Khibini Electronic Counter Measure systems are being installed on the wingtips of Russia’s SUKHOI SU-34 fighter-bombers going after ISIS in Syria.

Killer Bumblebees

A second highly-advanced new Russian military technology that’s raising more than eyebrows in US Defense Secretary ‘Ash’ Carter’s Pentagon is Russia’s new Bumblebee which Russia’s military classifies as a flamethrower. In reality it is a highly advanced thermobaric weapon which launches a warhead that uses a combination of an explosive charge and highly combustible fuel. When the rocket reaches the target, the fuel is dispersed in a cloud that is then detonated by the explosive charge. US Military experts recently asked by the US scientific and engineering magazine Popular Mechanics to evaluate the Bumblebee stated that, “the resulting explosion is devastating, radiating a shockwave and fireball up to six or seven meters in diameter.” The US experts noted that the Bumblebee is “especially useful against troops in bunkers, trenches, and even armored vehicles, as the dispersing gas can enter small spaces and allow the fireball to expand inside. Thermobarics are particularly devastating to buildings — a thermobaric round entering a structure can literally blow up the building from within with overpressure.” 


We don’t go into yet another new highly secret Russian military technology recently subject of a Russian TV report beyond a brief mention, as little is known. It is indicative of what is being developed as Russia prepares for the unthinkable from Washington. The “Ocean Multipurpose System: Status-6” is a new Russian nuclear submarine weapons system designed to bypass NATO radars and any existing missile defense systems, while causing heavy damage to “important economic facilities” along the enemy’s coastal regions.

Reportedly the Status-6 will cause what the Russian military terms, “assured unacceptable damage” to an adversary force. They state that its detonation “in the area of the enemy coast” (say, New York or Boston or Washington?) would result in “extensive zones of radioactive contamination” that would ensure that the region would not be used for “military, economic, business or other activity for a long time.” Status-6 reportedly is a massive torpedo, designated as a “self-propelled underwater vehicle.” It has a range of up to 10 thousand kilometers and can operate at a depth of up to 1,000 meters. At a November 10 meeting with the Russian military chiefs, Vladimir Putin stated that Russia would counter NATO’s US-led missile shield program through “new strike systems capable of penetrating any missile defenses.” Presumably he was referring to Status-6.

US Defense Secretary Carter declared on November 8 in a speech that Russia and China are challenging “American pre-eminence” and Washington’s so-called “stewardship of the world order.” Carter added that, “Most disturbing is Moscow’s nuclear saber-rattling,” which in his view, “raises questions about Russian leaders’ commitment to strategic stability, their respect for norms against the use of nuclear weapons…” 

Not surprisingly, Carter did not mention Washington’s own very loud nuclear saber-rattling. In addition to advancing the US Ballistic Missile Defense array targeting Russia, Carter recently announced highly-advanced US nuclear weapons would be stationed at the Büchel Air Base in Germany as part of a joint NATO nuclear program, which involves non-nuclear NATO states in Europe hosting more than 200 US nuclear warheads. Those NATO states across Europe, including Germany, have just become a potential Ground Zero in any possible nuclear war between the United States and Russia. Perhaps it’s time for some more sober minds to take responsibility in Washington for restoring a world at peace, minds not obsessed with such ridiculous ideas of “pre-eminence.”

Posted in USA, RussiaComments Off on Does the U.S. really want to engage in a new World War with Russia?

The political aftermath of the Paris attacks – how has the game board changed?

Gilbert Doctorow

Most seem unaware of the vicious role France played in the military intervention in Libya, about France’s very hawkish policy line on Syria from the beginning of the civil war, meaning support for the anti-Assad terrorists.

According to Hollande, the terror attacks were directed against French values of Liberté, Egalité and Fraternité. This seems to be the new version of Ich bin ein Berliner. We have now all become glib French speakers in the updated, values-based brainwashing exercise of the moment.

It is now commonplace to hear that life in Paris, life in the world at large has been changed forever by the tragedy that played out in Paris on the evening of 13 November. Indeed, with a 3 month state of emergency declared in France, with French suspension of the Schengen regime of free travel across internal borders of the EU and heightened security throughout Europe including Russia, ordinary citizens woke up on Saturday to a much less friendly routine of daily life, with constant reminders of deadly insecurity.

The airwaves in Europe have been filled with reporting of the carnage in Paris. But with very few exceptions, programming on the two most widely viewed news channels on the Continent, Euronews and the BBC, has been at the level of tabloid press: focused on human interest stories, the little tragedies surrounding the 129 killed on Friday, the trivial testimony of those laying flowers at various impromptu shrines around Paris, none of whom seems to have a clue as to why France was struck. Apparently no one has told any of them about the vicious role France played in the military intervention in Libya, about France’s very hawkish policy line on Syria from the beginning of the civil war, meaning support for the anti-Assad terrorists.

Meanwhile President Hollande in his address to the nation after the tragedy sounded the official note that has been picked up by the television channels and carried far and wide in public tributes to the French suffering, not least of them in the address by Barack Obama from the Oval Office: namely that the terror attacks were directed against French values of Liberté, Egalité and Fraternité. This seems to be the new version of Ich bin ein Berliner. We have now all become glib French speakers in the updated, values-based brainwashing exercise of the moment.

At the level of high policy, it is unclear what was changed by the Paris attacks. The news coming out of Vienna on Saturday from the meeting of the 5 powers discussing solutions to the Syrian civil war seemed to indicate a cardinal change for the better. The televised news briefing at the end of the talks showed a configuration of the table that was stunning: Kerry and Lavrov were seated at the head as the co-sponsors. All that was missing was a red Soviet flag behind them and you could believe we were back in the good/bad old days of the truly bipolar world. The EU’s Mogherini sat at a side table, looking muzzled – only her eyes spoke of her frustration and hostility. And the hosts announced a road map, the timetable from cease fire and bilateral talks between the Opposition and Assad leading to national elections 18 months from now.Golden Age stuff. The Americans were clearly backing down on the issue of Assad’s departure being a precondition to peace in Syria, once again leaving Hollande beached.

John Kerry, the US secretary of state, meets ministers from countries that are both for and against Syria’s regime in Vienna

On Sunday we heard reports of Sarkozy coming out of a meeting with Hollande asserting that it’s crazy to have 2 coalitions fighting the Islamic State in Syria, that they must come together, that Russia’s participation is essential. In saying this, Sarkozy was pulling the blanket away from Marine Le Pen and removing all basis for mainstream media to claim, as it has consistently, that the terrorism issue was only feeding the anti-EU populists, if not the xenophobic fascists altogether. Now it was clearly feeding opposition at the center of the political spectrum.

However, what all these tea leaves really tell us remains to be seen. Yesterday’s reports from the G20 meeting in Antalya presented very mixed and confusing messages. You had Putin and Obama shown in confidential talks on the sidelines of the Summit in what was variously reported as a 20 minute or 35 minute heart to heart chat on Syria and Ukraine. And you also had the loudmouth Russia-hater Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, publicly berating Russia for targeting the wrong folks in Syria.

Today’s Guardian features an article on the Western powers ganging up on Putin in Antalya to press for an end to Russian strikes on ‘moderate opposition’ forces in Syria. If true, this suggests there is a great deal of daylight between the sides to be closed before we can speak of nascent reconciliation, rapprochement between Russia and the West. At the same time, some high visibility pundits in the US who were formerly deeply anti-Putin are suggesting that it is time to do a deal with the devil in the interests of defeating the Islamic State. Theysuggest that if Russia knuckles under and plays by American rules, the West will look after Russian interests in Syria, even acknowledging it is the Russian sphere of influence in the Arab world. However, it seems to me this is only wishful thinking.

In summation, we are possibly at a turning point in Russia-West relations, but as they like to say in Washington, no eventuality can be taken off the table.

Gilbert Doctorow is a professional Russia watcher and actor in Russian affairs going back to 1965. He is a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard College (1967), a past Fulbright scholar, and holder of a Ph.D. with honors in history from Columbia University (1975). After completing his studies, Mr. Doctorow pursued a business career focused on the USSR and Eastern Europe. For twenty-five years he worked for US and European multinationals in marketing and general management with regional responsibility. From 1998-2002, Doctorow served as the Chairman of the Russian Booker Literary Prize in Moscow.

Posted in FranceComments Off on The political aftermath of the Paris attacks – how has the game board changed?

ISIS can be defeated – Putin laid it out in September UN speech

Alexander Mercouris

Ibrahim Abu Bakr Al – The Leader of the Islamic State – the self proclaimed “Caliph Ibrahim”

At the UN General Assembly Session Putin set out a clear plan to defeat ISIS. It is workable but is the West interested?

Ever since the Islamic State emerged on the global stage in 2014 following its capture of Mosul, the Russians have been hammering away warnings about the threat it represents.

Here is what President Putin said at the UN General Assembly:

“The so-called Islamic State has tens of thousands of militants fighting for it, including former Iraqi soldiers who were left on the street after the 2003 invasion.

And now radical groups are joined by members of the so-called “moderate” Syrian opposition backed by the West. They get weapons and training, and then they defect and join the so-called Islamic State.

In fact, the Islamic State itself did not come out of nowhere. 

It was initially developed as a weapon against undesirable secular regimes. 

Having established control over parts of Syria and Iraq, Islamic State now aggressively expands into other regions.

It seeks dominance in the Muslim world and beyond. Their plans go further.

The situation is extremely dangerous.

© Mike Segar / Reuters
Russian President Vladimir Putin addresses attendees during the 70th session of the United Nations General Assembly at the U.N. Headquarters in New York, September 28, 2015.

In these circumstances,it is hypocritical and irresponsible to make declarations about the threat of terrorism and at the same time turn a blind eye to the channels used to finance and support terrorists…….. 

It is equally irresponsible to manipulate extremist groups and use them to achieve your political goals, hoping that later you’ll find a way to get rid of them or somehow eliminate them.

I’d like to tell those who engage in this: Gentlemen, the people you are dealing with are cruel but they are not dumb. They are as smart as you are.

So, it’s a big question: who’s playing who here? The recent incident where the most “moderate” opposition group handed over their weapons to terrorists is a vivid example of that.

We consider that any attempts to flirt with terrorists, let alone arm them, are short-sighted and extremely dangerous.

This may make the global terrorist threat much worse, spreading it to new regions around the globe, especially since there are fighters from many different countries, including European ones, gaining combat experience with Islamic State. Unfortunately, Russia is no exception.

Now that those thugs have tasted blood, we can’t allow them to return home and continue with their criminal activities……

Russia has consistently opposed terrorism in all its forms. Today, we provide military-technical assistance to Iraq, Syria and other regional countries fighting terrorist groups. We think it’s a big mistake to refuse to cooperate with the Syrian authorities and government forces who valiantly fight terrorists on the ground.

We should finally admit that President Assad’s government forces and the Kurdish militia are the only forces really fighting terrorists in Syria. Yes, we are aware of all the problems and conflicts in the region, but we definitely have to consider the actual situation on the ground.

What we propose is to join efforts to address the problems that all of us are facing, and create a genuinely broad international coalition against terrorism.

Dear colleagues, I must note that such an honest and frank approach on Russia’s part has been recently used as a pretext for accusing it of its growing ambitions — as if those who say that have no ambitions at all.

However, it is not about Russia’s ambitions, dear colleagues, but about the recognition of the fact that we can no longer tolerate the current state of affairs in the world

What we actually propose is to be guided by common values and common interests rather than by ambitions.

Relying on international law, we must join efforts to address the problems that all of us are facing, and create a genuinely broad international coalition against terrorism.

Similar to the anti-Hitler coalition, it could unite a broad range of parties willing to stand firm against those who, just like the Nazis, sow evil and hatred of humankind.”

Putin prefaced these words with his now famous rhetorical question – which by the way he also answered in the next sentence:

“I’m urged to ask those who created this situation: do you at least realize now what you’ve done? But I’m afraid that this question will remain unanswered, because they have never abandoned their policy, which is based on arrogance, exceptionalism and impunity.”

Putin and the Russians are right.

The Islamic State – and the various violent jihadi groups it both cooperates with and competes with – are a threat to humanity.

First and foremost the Islamic State is a threat to the people of Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, Egypt, Afghanistan and Syria – in all of which places it has now become established.

It is a threat to the people of Turkey, where it recently carried out a horrible atrocity against people demonstrating for peace in Ankara.

It is engaged in a violent insurgency in Sinai and has claimed responsibility for the crash of a Russian airliner flying from Egypt to Russia, which left hundreds of innocent people dead.

It is a threat to the people of Lebanon, where it recently carried out another horrible atrocity, killing scores of people in Beirut.

Now it has committed the latest in this string of atrocities with its horrifying attack on Paris.

Who doubts that it is a threat to the people of every country including the people of the US?

It is therefore imperative that the leaders and people of the West – first and foremost the opinion formers there – finally heed Putin’s words.

The only way to confront the Islamic State is to eradicate it utterly, together with its vile ideology.

That is not as difficult a task as some people make it out to be.

Firstly, for all its bluster, the Islamic State is militarily weak.

The regions it controls are poor and devastated by war. There is no consensus about the size of its military forces, but however big they are they are essentially a lightly armed militia force lacking advanced technology or sophisticated weapons.

In no way is the the army of the Islamic State a match militarily for the immeasurably more powerful armies of the great world powers – first and foremost those of the US and Russia.

Comment: Only if the ‘immeasurably more powerful army’ wants to defeat IS. Contrast the results of the U.S.’ 18-month effort versus what Russia accomplished within six weeks.

Secondly, it is deeply unpopular with those it rules. Hated is probably not too strong a word.

Its insane cruelty, and the puritanical laws it relentlessly imposes, are such as no human society would ever willingly accept or impose on itself. This is a totalitarianism only matched by the one the Khmer Rouge established briefly in Cambodia.

Once liberated from this sort of yoke the people the Islamic State rules will no more want it back than the people of Cambodia in the 1980s wanted the Khmer Rouge back.

This is not mere inference.

According to an opinion poll conducted recently in Iraq and Syria, only 5% of Iraqis consider the Islamic State a positive influence.

In Syria – possibly because of the greater polarisation caused by the war but more probably because of fear of retribution provoked by its murderous methods – that rises to just 22%, still very much a minority.

What the people of Iraq and Syria really think of the Islamic State is perhaps shown best by another finding in the same opinion poll: more than 80% of the people of both countries believe it is a foreign/US construct – which is to say they overwhelmingly see the Islamic State as an alien force imposed on them from outside.

The Islamic State’s unpopularity means that once defeated its prospects of melting away amongst the local people and waging a guerrilla war are close to nil.

As it happens the Islamic State is so unpopular it needs to recruit a large proportion of its fighters from foreign volunteers, a fact which must reinforce the impression amongst the local people that it is a foreign army of occupation. That makes it all but impossible for its fighters to hide amongst the local people to wage a guerrilla war.

This is in stark contrast to the Taliban, which was a genuine Afghan movement that was far less brutal and far more popular, and which did genuinely provide Afghanistan with a better or at least a more orderly government than what came immediately before and after it.

It was however by proclaiming the Caliphate and declaring its chief – the man who previously called himself “Ibrahim Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi”- as the Caliph, that the Islamic State guaranteed its eventual destruction.

By declaring himself Caliph, Al Baghdadi is claiming leadership of the entire Muslim world. According to him it is now a religious duty for all Muslims to obey him.

This claim gives Al Baghdadi and his movement their allure. It is also however his greatest act of folly.

Firstly, he is making a claim that the vast majority of Muslims – and all Muslim governments – are bound to contest. That alone all but guarantees his eventual failure.

Secondly, as Caliph – i.e. as Commander of the Faithful of God – he can no longer afford to appear to fail.

He cannot copy Osama bin Laden and live life on the run, or become just a guerrilla leader. As Caliph he needs people and territory to rule, otherwise his credibility as Caliph collapses.

The military weakness of his movement however means that he cannot hold territory if there is a determined effort to wrest it from him.

Above all he must constantly show his followers that he is winning, and that he will deliver them the victory ordained by God, which as Commander of the Faithful of God he has promised them. If his followers start to doubt his eventual victory their faith in him will go, at which point his authority and that of his movement will collapse.

This means that neither he nor his organisation can survive defeat in the way the Taliban and Al Qaeda could after they were defeated in Afghanistan in 2001.

That is probably why the Islamic State has embarked on the orgy of violence and destruction we have seen over the last few weeks.

For the first time since the Caliphate was proclaimed last year, Al Baghdadi and his movement feel under pressure.

In Syria Russian air strikes are hurting them as never before.

The Syrian army – backed by Russian air strikes – is gaining ground near Aleppo, and is close to liberating Palmyra.

The Kurds in the north are slowing closing in on Raqqa – the Islamic State’s “capital” – despite obstruction from Turkey.

In Iraq – according to some reports – an Iraqi airstrike wounded Al-Baghdadi himself.

In face of these setbacks Al Baghdadi needs spectacular acts of violence to show his followers that he is still strong, and that they and he are still winning.

That is why there has been this recent spike of atrocities as Al Baghdadi and the Islamic State lash out in all directions.

In reality, the only reason Al Baghdadi and the Islamic State still exist despite the weakness and contradictions at the heart of their movement is because those who ought to be united against them are divided because the US and the Western powers remain fixated with their geopolitical games.

A recent article by Patrick Cockburn we republished recently shows how the US military campaign against the Islamic State in Syria is a fiction, as the US’s priority remains the overthrow of President Assad.

It is this obsession with overthrowing the Syrian government – the one thing standing in the way of Al Baghdadi and his movement taking over the whole of Syria- which explains why Al Baghdadi and his Islamic State are still there.

What makes it worse is that some governments still appear to believe they can manipulate jihadi movements like Al Baghdadi’s to achieve their goal of overthrowing the Syrian government.

Here is what Putin said about that:

“It is equally irresponsible to manipulate extremist groups and use them to achieve your political goals, hoping that later you’ll find a way to get rid of them or somehow eliminate them.

I’d like to tell those who engage in this: Gentlemen, the people you are dealing with are cruel but they are not dumb. They are as smart as you are. So, it’s a big question: who’s playing who here? The recent incident where the most “moderate” opposition group handed over their weapons to terrorists is a vivid example of that.”

Putin again is obviously right. It is incredible that the obvious truths he says have to be spelled out in this way, and it is still more incredible that there are still so many people in positions of power and influence in the West who deny them.

Comment: Actually, it’s very simple for the Neocon reality-creators. They will forge ahead with their plans regardless of real facts.

If the latest atrocity in Paris is used as pretext to step up the West’s undeclared war against President Assad and Syria – as is desired by some and feared by others – then that would be an exercise in utter perversity.

It would be exactly what Al Baghdadi and his movement want, and would be a total betrayal of the people who have been killed in Paris – and before that in Syria, Lebanon, Turkey and Egypt.

If there is one thing however that has become abundantly clear in recent years it is that there are some people in the West who – whether out of vanity or ideology – are prepared to embrace this folly.

The time has come – indeed it is long overdue – for people like that to be shunted aside and for the leaders of the West to put aside their geopolitical games and focus instead on doing what they were elected to do, which is safeguard the interests of their people.

That means working to achieve a peaceful settlement in Syria through honest negotiations held without pre-conditions, whilst uniting to eliminate murderous fanatics like Al Baghdadi, his Islamic State and the other jihadi groups that have proliferated as the war has dragged on.

It means working with Russia and Iran to achieve these objectives.

It means working with the Syrian army and government to defeat the jihadis and the Islamic State. As Putin rightly says, they and the Kurds are the ones who are actually fighting the jihadis in Syria, and it is sheer perversity not to help them do so.

It means accepting the possibility that President Assad may stay if in genuinely free elections a majority of the Syrian people decide to vote for him – as every opinion poll and survey of opinion conducted in Syria since the start of the conflict that I have seen says they will.

It means embracing Putin’s proposal for a global alliance against the sort of jihadi terrorism that Al Baghdadi and people like him represent.

Lastly, it should be obvious that Europe cannot go on admitting without proper checks unlimited floods of refugees from the Middle East.

Here is what Sergei Ivanov – Russia’s Number 2 and Putin’s Chief of Staff – said about that just a few weeks ago in the interview he gave to TASS at the end of October, which we recently published:

“How can one be sure that among the migrants there are no “sleepers” – sleeping agents or undercover terrorists who are on the way to the Old World for the purpose of settling down inconspicuously somehow and waiting for the D-day to come?

And on that D-day they will emerge in the forefront again to play the very well familiar role.

For instance, of a suicide bomber who is prepared to give up one’s life for faith and take as many other human lives as possible? I wouldn’t like to utter gloom prophecies, but I personally have no doubts it will happen this way. I am dead certain!”

In the light of what has just happened in Paris these words sound terrifyingly prescient.

Since Ivanov sees the reports of Russia’s intelligence agencies it is possible he was repeating what they were warning him. However, given the sort of organisation the Islamic State is, the possibility it might do what Ivanov warned about ought to be obvious.

If the Western powers refuse to do all these things then the war against the Islamic State will drag on. There will in that case be many more atrocities like the one in Paris. It will be innocent people who will pay the price.

Posted in Middle East, RussiaComments Off on ISIS can be defeated – Putin laid it out in September UN speech

“Pitiless war”: Illegal French airstrikes on Syria hit stadium, museum, clinics

David Raven, Anna Dubius

Anti-ISIS activists in Syria claim a stadium, a museum, medical clinics and a political building have been hit after France launched airstrikes in retaliation for the Paris terror attack.

Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently, a group of anonymous activists inside the ISIS stronghold, wrote that heavy strikes had been taking place since this morning. The group began documented the airstrikes at around 8am and said it had increased to “30 airstrikes” this evening. No civilian casualties have been reported yet, according to the group.

A spokesperson for the group suggested it was France who were behind the bombs. They said water and electricity was cut due to the strikes. They added: “It’s sad how it always falls on our heads, god bless and safe [sic] the civilians of Raqqa.”

France retaliated to the Paris terror attack by launching deadly airstrikes on an Islamic State jihadi training camp in Syria tonight. Yesterday French president Francois Hollande vowed to crush the extremist group who massacred 129 people on Friday night. Less than 24 hours later, some 10 fighter jets pummeled the ISIS-held city of Raqqa with at least 20 bombs, according to the French defence ministry. The jets hit command and control center, jihadi recruitment center, munitions depot and a training camp.

Posted in France, SyriaComments Off on “Pitiless war”: Illegal French airstrikes on Syria hit stadium, museum, clinics

ISIS as Instruments of Proxy War on Western Populations

Joe Quinn

The obvious result, and therefore goal, of the horrific Paris attacks that were blamed on ISIS terrorists is to provoke the potential socio/political ‘fracture point’ of French Muslims vs. (mostly lapsed) French Christians and ignite a debate on what should be done about France and Europe’s ‘multi-culturalism’ in an age of Jihadist terrorism.

This is a particularly cynical and, frankly, evil, maneuver in the context of the recent influx of large numbers of Syrian migrants into Europe, who are fleeing a war against the Assad government that was ignited and has been fully backed by Western powers, including France.

To put it more bluntly, France has been supporting in Syria the very same type of jihadist terrorists that it blames for the Paris attacks

As I noted in a previous article, it’s a matter of public record that after WW2, the US government and NATO countries established covert paramilitary networks in European countries that were tasked with carrying out terrorist attacks against European civilians to provoke the then socio/political fracture point of East vs. West and Communist vs. Capitalist ideologies.

Many terror attacks were carried out between the 1960s-1980s by this ‘Gladio’ network, several of which targeted and killed European civilians in attacks similar to that in Paris last weekend. Today, the same strategy of creating tension via terror attacks on Western populations in order to achieve geopolitical goals is at work, the only difference being that “Soviet communist” has been replaced with “Muslim terrorist”.

While the goals of such a strategy involve the control over tangible resources like oil and gas that facilitate control over nations, control over public perception – what ordinary people think and feel – is also critical. Ultimately the power of any earthly authority is derived from the people that support it, so that support must be maintained, at any cost.

With a relatively benevolent authority, the process of securing public support evolves naturally through relative transparency in government actions. But when an established authority is actively pursuing policies that are the very antithesis of the values upon which their positions of power supposedly rest: secrecy, deception and covert action is the order of the day with “national security interests” used as a coverall.

Europe and the ‘West’ is generally understood to be a global defender of freedom and democracy and the values of ‘enlightenment’. Yet in the last 4 years Western governments and intelligence agencies have been actively supporting some of the most barbaric examples of human detritus imaginable, all in an effort to illegally overthrow the democratically-elected government of Syria. In doing so, these same Western governments have facilitated the slaughter of up to 250,000 Syrian civilians and caused millions more to flee their homes.

Despite these facts, Western populations are still regaled with the same overworked, clichéd propaganda that posits Western governments as bastions of righteousness fighting against an atavistic horde. Clearly, we are being deceived on the level of Hitler’s ‘big lie’, which holds that “the great masses will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one”.

The truth is that this ‘hoard’ of Muslim extremists are almost entirely a creation of Western governments who use it as an external threat against which the West must ‘fight’ if it is to safeguard its ‘values’. Western ‘values’ in this case are the same values that motivated the British Empire 300 years ago, and every Western Empire since: conquest and control of as much of the globe and its resources, human and natural, as possible.

A battle is underway on our planet, but it is not a battle between any religious or cultural ideology subscribed to by the masses of ordinary people. Rather it is a battle between normal human beings – the world’s most valuable self-replenishing resource – and those psychologically deviant individuals who have insinuated themselves into positions of power over the masses for the express purpose of herding us to an ever finer order of control. If you doubt this, you may want to look back at the course that our global society has taken over the past 15-20 years.

It is no coincidence that the increase in wars and conflict in other parts of the world has progressed in tandem with the militarization of Western society and a loss of civil liberties. I suppose one could argue that the former begets the latter, and it is therefore simply an unintended consequence. But that argument requires you to ignore the mountain of data that proves unequivocally that wars are planned and waged to achieve the very specific goals of accumulation of power into the hands of a few.

As I noted above, those who seek power in this world, must first and foremost seek power over the people. If this is not possible through the honest promotion of genuinely noble values, then it must be exacted through the establishment of a police state infrastructure that demands compliance and obedience from the population, so that the authorities can play their game of ‘who rules the world’ in peace. It seems there is no better way to induce submissive consent in a population than by invoking the fear of painful and bloody death in them. Obviously you don’t want to kill them all, or even a large number of them, but by the power of modern digital media, an entire population can be traumatized by proxy with a well-orchestrated and bloody terror attack.

What is very clear (to me anyway) is that the people of this world, whether directly or by proxy, will not be allowed to ‘live in peace’. War has indeed been loudly and violently declared, and while I agree that the threat is ‘homegrown’, its representatives are not some bearded guys on a Youtube video. They are, instead, the well-spoken suit and tie-wearing gentlemen on the evening news who promise freedom, democracy and security for all, even as they deliver the exact opposite.


Posted in Middle East, USA, EuropeComments Off on ISIS as Instruments of Proxy War on Western Populations

Shoah’s pages


November 2015
« Oct   Dec »