August 28, 2014

Updates On Iraq [8:28.14] Washington Tries To Rally Same Allies That Propped Up ISIS To Defeat ISIS; Iran Puts Its Weight Behind Western-Backed Al-Abadi; EU Changes Its Policy

1. An excerpt from, "Islamic State: Arab leaders reluctant to heed US call for 'allies against Isis': Saudi Arabia, UAE and Jordan know dangers of Isis but tribal ties and fears of boosting Syria's Assad are prompting caution" by Ian Black, The Guardian, August 27, 2014:
No one is falling over themselves to respond to Barack Obama's quest for a new "coalition of the willing" to attack the jihadis of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria – least of all, it seems, the Arab governments that are most immediately threatened by its brutal, border-demolishing agenda. 

The dangers are not in doubt: Jordan has been suffering the jitters since Islamic State (Isis) fighters took the northern Iraqi city of Mosul in June. This week it announced the arrest of 40 alleged extremists as a "precautionary measure".
"Each of these states, whether they like it or not, is bound to Iraq and Syria's warring factions by tribal links, religion and history," said Wehrey. "Their rulers are still sensitive to public opinion and especially the pockets of pro-Isis sympathy among certain segments, some of them wealthy and influential."

Another worry is that fighting Isis will inevitably mean strengthening Assad, as western calls for tacit cooperation with him suggest is already happening. Bombing the Arab Sunni heartlands of Iraq and Syria is not the same as action against the universally despised Muammar Gaddafi in Libya in 2011.
So the barbaric liver-eaters in ISIS are well-liked, while Gaddafi, who built up Libya from a tribal hellhole to a proud African country, is hated by Gulf Arabs? There's the problem right there. The Sunni rulers who run Qatar, UAE, and Saudi Arabia are beyond stupid. ISIS will finish them, and many powerful people in these countries actually want that to happen.

2. An excerpt from, "Resurgent Iraq?" Conflicts Forum, published on August 25, 2014:
Al-Abadi’s perfect English (which Maliki did not have) and his western links may not have been perceived as a ‘disqualifier’ in Iran, but rather the reverse. And this is significant. It says much about how Iran is approaching the Iraqi crisis. Beyond the very clear statements of support for Abadi from all quarters in Iran, the Iranian foreign minister particularly emphasized, in a phone call to his Italian counterpart, the need for the new Iraqi government to be broadly inclusive.

That Iran favours an inclusive government in Iraq is nothing new – it has been urging this on Maliki (fruitlessly) and the Shi’i political leadership for a long time – but the thrust of all these Iranian statements is important: Despite the failure in the P5+1 ‘initial phase’ talks, Iran remains open to international diplomacy on the crisis in Iraq, and in resolving the challenge from Da’ish (ISIS). Iran takes ISIS very seriously (perhaps more seriously than anyone else in the region, or beyond). Iran then, manifestly has lent its full-support to an English-speaking Iraqi leader, who like Iran’s own foreign minister, can interact effectively with the West. This is a clear signal: Iran clearly is reacting – not with escalation against the West (post P5+1) – but with statesmanship.

It is self-interest, too, of course: Iran clearly has set as a priority the need for the Baghdad government to woo as many of the Sunni tribal leaders away from ISIS as possible, and to bind the Kurds too (in their now weakened and vulnerable state) back into the Iraqi state.

The first question is whether America will read these signals correctly. They are pretty clear: Iran is not escalating against western interests, but is open to co-operation on issues on which mutual interests intersect (defeating ISIS and stabilizing Iraq and Syria). This should not be seen as a signal of weakness, or that Iran is ready to collude militarily with US – it is not.

More significantly than the question of whether the Iranian signals will be correctly read however, is whether the West is able to react positively to them. We have argued before that – the bursting onto the scene of a radical Sunni jihadist movement that really does threaten the Saudi hand that conjured them out from the magic lantern – represents an overturning of decades of western policy. The West has come to be heavily dependent on the belief that Saudi Arabia somehow could manage radical Sunnism in both its interest and that of the West. Now that hypothesis stands as tragically mistaken.
In all, it is not promising. There seems to be a considerable element of wishful thinking in the general expectation that the appointment of al-Abadi – in itself – can pull together an inclusive, strong and competent government of Sunnis, Shia and Kurds working concertedly in Baghdad. The government will continue to be weak and corrupt. ISIS looks set to be around for a while yet – and the Sunni ‘state’ will become the ‘wedge’ struck into the heart of the Muslim world – breaking apart the post-WWII order for good.
The U.S. and Iran have been, if not on the same page, then at least in the same book, when it comes to Iraq's political destiny since the U.S. invasion in 2003. Behind the scenes they have different strategies but their public statements about Iraq and its desired direction moving forward are the same. The U.S. State Department might as well be the mouthpiece for the Ayatollah regime. Both countries vouch for al-Abadi, who comes from the same party as Maliki, and has pretty much the same political views. It's crazy to think he can fix a state that has been broken to pieces.

3. An excerpt from, "EU's policy shift on Syria, Iraq" by Peter Custers, Prothom Alo, August 28, 2014:
Is this one of those rare occasions where policymakers self-critically correct a gigantic blunder? Or is it a cold turn-about guided by pure self-interest?

On 15 August, the foreign ministers of EU countries gathered in Brussels and decided that each would henceforth be free to supply arms to Kurdish rebels fighting Sunni extremists of ISIS in the North of Iraq.

The decision of Europe’s foreign ministers may surprise some, for barely a year and four months ago, in April of 2013, the European Union had lifted a previously instituted ban on all imports of Syrian oil. 

Moreover, the lifting of this boycott was quite explicitly intended to facilitate the flow of oil from areas in the North-East of Syria, where Sunni extremist rebel organisations had established a strong foothold, if not overall predominance over the region’s oil fields. ISIS was not the only Sunni extremist organisation disputing control over Syrian oil fields. Yet there is little doubt but that the fateful decision the EU took last year has helped ISIS consolidate its hold over Syrian oil resources and prepare for a sweeping advance into areas with oil wells in the North of Iraq.

The outcome of the recent Brussels’ meeting thus appears to over-turn a disastrous previous decision. To underline the point, it is useful to briefly describe the extent to which Sunni extremist rebels have meanwhile established control over oil extraction and production in both Syria and Iraq.
The world was not even aware that the EU had an Iraq policy so it can be easily forgiven for inadvertently strengthening a terrorist group that also threatens Europe's security, as Assad had warned them three years ago. Plus, it is never too late to correct a mistake.

August 27, 2014

Demise of Sykes-Picot? Rise of ISIS And PKK

The good and the bad of the Middle East: indigenous women fighting to defend their land and freedom versus foreign Jihadists fighting to lay claim to a place they're not even from and who take women and children as slaves.

An excerpt from, "The Middle East's Durable Map: Rumors of Sykes-Picot's Death are Greatly Exaggerated" by Steven Simon, Foreign Affairs, August 26, 2014:
Just as hysteria about the demise of Sykes-Picot was starting to die down, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) has revived it by declaring its intention to revive the caliphate at least over what is now Iraqi and Syrian territory. The news arrived in two separate ISIS videos, one featuring a Chechen militant presiding over the dismantling of an outpost on the Syrian-Iraqi border and the other showcasing an English-speaking Chilean jihadist.

Amid the post–Arab Spring everything-has-changed anxiety, fears that Syria’s dismemberment would lead to the unraveling of all the hard work that Sir Mark Sykes and Fran├žois Georges-Picot did back in 1916­–17 have loomed large. The civil war in Syria seemed to presage the breakup of the state and the rejiggering of its borders to serve Iraqi Sunni, Israeli, Lebanese, Kurdish, and Turkish purposes. Ankara, for example, had threatened to seize the Syrian city of Idlib if refugee flows out of the country exceeded a very low threshold, which has long since been crossed. Syria’s Kurds, meanwhile, were expected to cordon off their part of Syria from the rest of the country and then join Iraqi Kurdistan in declaring independence. Along the Lebanese-Syrian border, Hezbollah was expected to expand its territory at Syria’s expense to preserve lines of communication to a coastal Alawite enclave if Assad lost control of the rest of the country. And, if Israel felt threatened by radical Sunnis in Syria, the thinking went, it might want to push its existing boundaries in the Golan Heights eastward to establish a kind of buffer zone between the interior and Israeli towns on the escarpment. Above all, there was a fear that the Iraqi-Syrian border would crumble, as it eventually did. Indeed, anxiety about Sykes-Picot seemed to raise the stakes of the civil war in Syria, intensifying dread about a broader Middle East meltdown.

Thus far, however, the parade of horrors emanating from Syria has not included the demise of Sykes-Picot borders. The Turks have not taken a bite out of Syria, although they have helped undermine its eventual reconstitution by incubating ISIS. Syrian Kurds have not proposed -- or implemented -- new borders, and their Iraqi counterparts have refrained from secession or the formalization of their de facto autonomy. Hezbollah has not picked up any new territory, even as the Syrian regime’s disintegration has threatened Hezbollah’s lifeline to Iran. Israel has certainly taken advantage of anarchic conditions in Syria to strike targets of opportunity, but it hasn’t made any decisive attempt to carve out a cordon sanitaire. And, before it was breached by ISIS, the Iraqi-Syrian border had been permeable for generations, owing to the nature of the terrain and the large tribal confederations on either side whose economic interests require that the border not impede their movements.

In short, despite the regional pandemonium, Sykes-Picot seems to be alive and well. 
An excerpt from, "Is PKK becoming a new Middle East power?" by Kadri Gursel, Al-Monitor, August 27, 2014:
The world is apprehensively watching the dramatic rise and expansion of the Islamic State group (IS) in Iraq and Syria. The jihadists becoming the No. 1 threat to global security is no doubt a grave development and an appropriate focus of international attention. Yet, the jihadist threat should not overshadow the interrelated rise of another power in the region: Turkey’s Kurdish movement, the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK).

On the Syria-Iraq track, the PKK has emerged as the sole power capable of confronting and stopping the jihadist expansion in the past two years. In Rojava, the Kurdish-populated region in northern Syria, the PKK has fought the jihadists since the summer of 2012. In Iraq, it has only recently arrived on the scene following IS’ capture of Mosul and its ensuing thrust into Kurdish areas. With Iraqi Kurdish peshmerga forces retreating without a fight, the PKK became the force to stop IS, putting up a particularly notable resistance in Sinjar.

The Kurdish forces in Syria have surprised the world not only with their resolve against the jihadists, but also with their female fighters. Against a barbarian mindset that enslaves and sells women as concubines, the PYD has displayed a secular mindset embracing gender equality, which has enormously contributed to its international image.

August 26, 2014

[Videos] Unintended consequences from US foreign policy threatening Iraq turmoil + Importance of Mosul Dam for Iraq's economy

Unintended consequences from US foreign policy threatening Iraq turmoil. Source: CCTV America. Date Published: August 26, 2014. Description:
When looking at what's happening in the current turmoil in Iraq, U.S. foreign policies play an important role.For more on this topic of unintended consequences of how they might play in the U.S.' current mission in Iraq and what we can learn from previous conflicts, here is an interview with Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, the senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Importance of Mosul Dam for Iraq's economy. Source: CCTV America. Date Published: August 26, 2014. Description:
For more on Iraq's economy, CCTV America spoke to Bessma Momani, a senior fellow at the Center for International Governance Innovation, and an associate professor at the University of Waterloo's Basillie School of International Affairs.

August 24, 2014

The Powers Behind The Islamic State (Follow The Money)

Title: The Powers Behind The Islamic State. Source: The Real News. Date Published: August 24, 2014. Description:
Investigative journalist Nafeez Ahmed gives specific examples of how Saudi, Qatari, and American interests have supported the group formerly known as ISIS, and what the global community can do now to reign them in
Excerpt from the interview:
"And what makes it more murky is how these groups really became as kind of virulent and kind of influential as they have, which is really the kind of--you know, you follow the money. And you follow the money, we're looking at the involvement of the Gulf states, which have really empowered these groups over time and increased their ability to operate."

Lester Freamon: "when you start following the money..." (The Wire)

August 22, 2014

Washington Created ISIS In Iraq, As It Created Al-Qaeda In Afghanistan, To Pose As The Saviour

"The lesson of the rise of the IS is that sustained U.S. engagement in the Middle East is essential to stability and progress. Many may wish to turn their backs on the region, but the costs of doing so have already proven higher than those of a smart engagement strategy. This lesson implies that we should keep a residual force in Afghanistan beyond 2016 and that shaping the region in positive ways will require presence and active management of partnerships across the region." - Zalmay Khalilzad, "A Five-Step Plan to Destroy the Islamic State" The National Interest, August 22, 2014. Khalilzad is the former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan and Iraq.
Who does this crook think he is fooling? Washington's criminal policies have produced disasters after disasters in the Middle East, especially in Iraq. Washington has created the exact opposite of stability and progress.

"Mr. Khalilzad, you and your neocon buddies had your chance in Iraq and Afghanistan, and you blew both. Please spare us another pitch for another war for your new lobby effort constituents, whomever they may be. You have killed 6000 of my comrades, 6 of my personal friends, and over a 100,000 Iraqis and countless Afghans. In another time and place you would have been executed or forced to commit suicide. Only in an oligarchic revolving door regime that is the US, the likes of you are continually given a voice. May justice prevail over people like you. And please, keep your recycled non-advice to yourself." - David H. Park, from the comment section for the article cited above.

Will IS Strike Willis?

The global 9/11 truth and justice community has been warning the world for over five years that a future false flag terror target in the United States to be blamed on a radical Islamist group is the Willis Tower in Chicago, formerly known as the Sears Tower.

MetLife Inc. sold the Willis tower to personalities connected to Larry Silverstein and the ownership of the WTC. A more disturbing fact is that the company responsible for Willis Tower's security is the same company that was in charge of the WTC's security on 9/11. So, there are enough reasons to be suspicious and on guard.

Recent reports say that ISIS or IS (Islamic State) might target Chicago as "revenge" for U.S. airstrikes in Iraq. This is very suspicious. It is obvious that the U.S. intelligence community is planting the seeds they want in the public mind, so that when they carry out their next terrorist attack in America in collaboration with Mossad the public will immediately point the finger at ISIS as the main culprit. This script pretty much writes itself. They're making it very obvious.

Connecting ISIS to Chicago and then staging a terror attack there is public brainwashing 101. But it will only have a chance of working if the CIA and Mossad actually go forward and commit a terror attack in Chicago, which shouldn't be out of the realm of possibility since they have already done so on numerous occasions in the past.

These evil bastards don't care if tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians die in one of their false flag terror attacks. And to them American blood is not more sacred than Muslim blood, so they commit false flags anywhere if it advances their sick agenda.

The biggest thing we should all be worrying about is a false flag nuclear event, a nuclear 9/11. Here is an excerpt from an article written three years ago:
The weeks, months and years ahead will be difficult not just for America but for the whole world. Sacrifices will be made. People will lose their minds. Depression and anxiety will continue to rise. A full breakdown of society and civilization will most likely occur. The shadow governments in Israel and America may kill more Americans to advance their hegemonic domination of the Middle East.
A Nuclear 9/11 is around the corner. The media has hyped it for years. Notice all the propaganda around you. Read the article, "A Nuclear 9/11?" that was published by the RAND Corporation on September 11, 2008. Read the article, "A Nuclear 9/11. It Could Happen," that appeared in Newsmax magazine. Read the article, "World ‘on brink of nuclear 9/11’ as Al Qaeda plans large ‘dirty’ bomb," that was published in The Daily Mail in February 2011. Read this New York Times Op-Ed by Nicolas D. Kristof called, "A Nuclear 9/11," that was published in March of 2004.
The idea of a "Nuclear 9/11" is in people's heads. Bringing it to reality is just a matter of technicality. Getting people familiar with the ideas of nuclear terrorism and total nuclear warfare is the tricky part, and that psychological hurdle has been crossed.
Obviously, Al-Qaeda won't be behind the nuclear 9/11. The Al-Qaeda brand lost its steam back in May 2011 when Obama lied and said he killed Bin Laden in Pakistan. A new Jihadi balloon had to be blown up.

A new terrorist enemy had to be created and rolled out, so after beheading innocent Syrians backstage for the last three years, ISIS finally made its entrance on the Western stage this summer. Their intelligence directors tried to portray them as the sideshow to the Syrian drama, but in this new act in the state-managed play they are the main characters.

There are claims that ISIS is getting its hands on dirty bombs and other dangerous material for future use in an American city like Chicago. But those are most likely scare stories.

As we've seen before, the real threat to life and property in a city like Chicago comes not from ISIS, but from the shadow U.S. and Israeli intelligence communities. They are the real evil agents who have the means, the will, the knowledge, and the motive to carry out monstrous terrorist attacks anywhere in the world, including in Chicago.

Is The Willis Tower Being Set Up For A False Flag Terror Attack? (June 2011).

Christian Patriarchs of the East Visit Kurdistan, Appeal to International Community for Help

Title: Christian Patriarchs of the East Visit Kurdistan, Appeal to International Community for Help. Source: Eretz Zen. Date Published: August 21, 2014. Description:
Patriarchs of several eastern churches in the Middle East traveled to the Kurdistan region and met with Iraqi Christian refugees from Mosul and the Nineveh Plain in the town of Ankawah. They also visited Erbil and gave a press conference in which they appealed to the international community for help in protecting the Iraqi Christians and other minorities and preventing them from leaving their land, thereby bringing an end to a people whose roots go back thousands of years in that part of the world. Blame was placed mainly on certain regional countries that provide a breeding ground for ISIL-like ideologies to fester and grow due to their embrace of Wahhabism and financially support such groups. The West was also blamed for providing support to Wahhabi groups during the Syrian war.

The Patriarchs included Beshara al-Rahi, Patriarch of the Maronite Church, Gregorios III Laham, Patriarch of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, Syriac Catholic Patriarch Youssef III Younan, and Ignatius Aphrem II, Patriarch of the Syriac Orthodox Church. They were hosted by Chaldean Patriarch, Louis Sako.

Source: OTV, LDC
Excerpt from the video below:
"We cannot only speak about the tragedy and genocide of a Christian constituent or of Yazidi or Shabak constituents. We must raise our voice loudly and tell the whole world that it is not permissible for the civilized world in the 21st century to accept the extermination of a human group, irrespective of what religion, race, or color it belongs to.

We know that this genocide or attempted genocide of our people was at the hands of a Takfiri group that does not accept the 'Other.' The very dangerous issue about this is that this group (ISIL) grew up and was raised in societies with the support of countries known in the region. . . (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait), which are founded on Wahhabism in Islam and are now trying to dodge this by not taking responsibility because they claim that al-Qaeda is their enemy.

Today, we, as spiritual shepherds, we want to participate with all those who defend human rights and raise the voice to all the international powers, as the Patriarchs just said. We would like to remind them, especially the West - the U.S., Britain, and France - that these Takfiri groups did not become strong if it weren't for their - at best - hidden support. Today, they are retreating and trying to hide the issue under the rug." [1:48 - 3:40].