Posted tagged ‘Middle East War’

A leaked German document confirms what we already know about Turkish support to Syrian rebels

October 8, 2015

A leaked German document confirms what we already know about Turkish support to Syrian rebels

Published October 6th, 2015 – 09:44 GMT

via SyndiGate.info

Source: A leaked German document confirms what we already know about Turkish support to Syrian rebels | Al Bawaba

Ahrar al-Sham is an ally of al-Nusra Front, Syria's al-Qaeda affiliate. (AFP/File)

Ahrar al-Sham is an ally of al-Nusra Front, Syria’s al-Qaeda affiliate. (AFP/File)

It’s a report we’ve all heard before — that Turkey, along with Saudi Arabia, is supporting Syrian rebels to help take President Bashar al-Assad down.

According to the document leaked from the German Intelligence Services, Turkey is providing Ahrar al-Sham and the Islamic Front with weapons. Turkey denied the claim again in May, but it still doesn’t come as much of a surprise.

The document shows German parliamentarian Katrin Kunert’s written request from the German government on May 18.

Here’s a translation:

… Question 25 asked which Syrian parties are receiving which type of weapons from the Turkish government (if possible please list border cities where deliveries take place).

Answer: Since mid-November of 2014, information from Federal German Intelligence Service indicate that Ankara delivers weapons to armed Syrian rebel groups. Recipients are said to be the groups Ahrar al-Sham and Islamic Front. 

German paper Die Welt (“The World”), which published a photo of the document, seemed to confirm the document’s legitimacy when it reported Germany’s attempts to find the person who leaked it to PKK-owned media.

“The German Parliament is filing charges,” said Martin Steltner, a speaker of the prosecution, according to Die Welt. “We are investigating and the investigations will continue.”

So what’s the problem with Turkey supporting these rebels? Both Salafist groups, Ahrar al-Sham and the Islamic Front are known to have more extreme goals in the Syrian conflict. Ahrar al-Sham has partnerships with al-Nusra Front, which is affiliated with al-Qaeda and sometimes considered more dangerous than Daesh (ISIS) itself.

By Hayat Norimine

 

 

turkey-syria-border

 

The so-called “buffer zone” — allegedly established to protect refugees and stage military operations aimed at ISIS — is a de facto no-fly zone used to protect jihadist fighters entering the country from Turkey.

More Evidence of Turkish Collusion with ISIS

Earlier this week a leaked German intelligence document confirmed reports that Turkey is directly assisting Harakat Ahrar ash-Sham al-Islamiyya, a coalition of Islamist and Salafist units that have vowed to establish a Sunni Wahhabist state under Sharia law in Syria.

Ahrar ash-Sham is aligned with al-Nusra which has pledged allegiance to the Islamic State.

The Russians understand that Ahrar ash-Sham — currently the most powerful and effective jihadist group fighting in Syria — must be targeted if it hopes to turn back the effort to unseat Bashar al-Assad.

If NATO follows through on its promise to “defend all allies” by inserting troops in Turkey’s illegal “safe zone,” it will be effectively aiding and abetting the Islamic State.

In May declassified US Defense Intelligence Agency documents from 2012 revealed the United States and its partners in the Gulf states and Turkey supported the Islamic State and plan to establish a Salafist principality in Syria.

The Missiles of October, 2015 Edition

October 8, 2015

The Missiles of October, 2015 Edition

Author By Doug Hagmann —

Bio and Archives October 8, 2015

Source: The Missiles of October, 2015 Edition

When the farmer in Iowa plowing his field suddenly and unexpectedly hears a noise and feels the ground shake from missiles being fired from a hidden underground silo in retaliation against Russia, perhaps then Americans will wake up to the litany of lies we’ve been fed by our leaders and a complicit media. Even then, I suspect that most Americans will continue to believe the lies of the U.S. leaders and succumb to revisionist history that has little-to-nothing to do with the truth.

We are at the precipice of World War III, yet the average American has no idea. The average American is oblivious to the fact that America has been captured from within, its leadership is traitorous, and the media complicit in all aspects of seditious criminality. Many of those who might have a level of understanding however, don’t know the real story about how we arrived at this point in time. For both, we have our elected officials in Washington to thank…or to blame… or perhaps congratulate, depending upon which agenda you’re pushing.

In the event you missed the news, twenty-six cruise missiles were fired into Syria by Russian warships yesterday as Syrian ground troops launch an offensive against ISIS and U.S., NATO and Saudi-backed anti-Assad terrorists. Who didn’t see this coming?

Three years ago to the day – October 8, 2012, I wrote Lemmings…On the precipice of World War III, explaining that Barack Hussein Obama, in his capacity as the man selected for the Oval Office, was overseeing a private war in the Middle East at the direction of the Saudis. What was taking place in Syria at that time was the result of the Obama-Clinton parallel CIA/State Department’s “Fast & Furious, Libyan Edition.” To Hillary Clinton’s cackling delight, Gaddafi was deposed and killed, and Libya was being used as a supply depot for weapons funneled to Syria via Turkey and other areas in close proximity. The primary staging area in Libya was Benghazi, and specifically, the CIA complex that was attacked on September 11, 2012.

The actions by this rogue element within the U.S. government, many who are still in power and continue to hold positions of influence, led to the attack on the CIA compound that caused the murder of a U.S. Ambassador and three others. Although the attack was conducted by proxy groups, those groups were acting on behalf of Russia. Accordingly, the United States did not respond, as doing so would have certainly widened the conflict and exposed the largest weapons running operation in the Middle East. Stevens, having a rolodex full of unsavory contacts including those he met while on assignment in Syria, reportedly oversaw a portion of this operation, according to my contacts in the intelligence venue.

To fully understand the perilous situation the Renegade-in-Chief has created for us as a nation, it is critical to understand the truth regarding how we arrived here. That, of course is something that Obama, Clinton and their facilitators cannot have exposed at any cost. To understand Russia’s response in Syria, the current situation must be viewed through the larger lens of past events for accurate historical context, and those events include Benghazi. It is for this reason that the American people will never get the truth about Benghazi or the mysterious Clinton e-mails, as any truthful revelation would expose the criminally traitorous activities of this unlawful administration.

How deep the lies

The lies, however, go much deeper than most reasonable people can comprehend, as we are not dealing with reasonable or rational people. We do not have truth in the media, as all media outlets are controlled by only six corporations that act as chokepoints for truth. The large media conglomerates dutifully report only what they are told to report and nothing more. Included in this pattern of control are those media pundits, including most who are identified as conservative, and most who host talk shows and television panels.

The above, therefore, explains why the background of Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama II, the Renegade-in-Chief was declared “off-limits” to discussion by even those “conservative” pundits. Anyone out of compliance was (and still is) publicly ridiculed. This complete takeover is overtly obvious even in Hollywood, where many night-time talk show hosts often mock and ridicule anyone daring to question the bona-fides and allegiance of the Communist Muslim occupant of the White House.

I stress the above in this report as it is relevant even today, for the events we are watching unfold could have been prevented with a true conservative effort and media pundits who could have chosen to place the fate of their nation over their careers. They chose their paycheck over the truth, and bowed to their corporate handlers as deeply as Obama bowed to his handler, the king of Saudi Arabia.

We have grown to expect as much from the toxic liberal “progressive” Marxists, but find it difficult to accept such from the self-proclaimed conservative media and pundits. Depicted as intellectual talking heads, they never seem to break through the thin veneer of lies that covers the truth. They entertain rather than inform, which appeals to the average, non-thinking American. They offer just enough “us versus them,” play-by-play action of the long-dead partisan paradigm to satisfy those addicted to mainstream news.

What every thinking American needs to understand is that the lies that have been and continue to be perpetuated by those in elected positions emanate from members of both political parties, for most members of both parties have chosen to take their assigned seats at the globalists’ table. It is easy to see how others may have been blackmailed into taking their assigned seats, especially after drinking from the fountain of power and wealth within the beltway. That assertion also applies to certain members of the Supreme Court, a body that has become an activist arm of the globalists.

We did not, however, arrive here overnight. The subjugation of America’s sovereignty was an incremental process. It seems that the tactics of the Fabian Socialists won out over those of the Communists. Their goals are the same, only their approach is different. The ultimate objective is nearly complete, and each of us has a front seat to the next act of this Orwellian play. From Woodrow Wilson to the Clinton cabal to the globalists currently in power, Americans have been led into servitude. Sadly, many Americans are enjoying their servitude, or have no idea that they are being held captive. Feel free to call it Stockholm syndrome, but dare not call it “battered wife syndrome,” for this phrase has been deemed off limits by the thought police.

For those reasons and many more, don’t expect to learn the truth about Benghazi, for the next act of this Orwellian play has already been written. While most Americans could not find Benghazi on a globe, those who could seem to have long forgotten about the attack and its implications. A dutiful and complicit press has made sure of that.

While many quickly dismiss ludicrous explanations concerning the Benghazi attack, including the embarrassingly laughable narrative relating to the anti-Muslim video The Innocence of Muslims, they will often stop there, purposely neglecting the evidence that is highly suggestive of a rogue CIA, Clinton, Obama and Brennan cover-up.  As I detailed in my report of that video, its creation appears to trace back to people and groups close to the CIA. Additionally, the same people and entities whose fingerprints appear on the video also appear to be involved in the breach of the passport office files in 2008. It was that breach that prompted the admission by Obama that he traveled to Pakistan in 1981, and also appears to have played a role in the murder of one of those involved at the periphery of that incident.

Although seemingly tedious and arguably off-topic, it is vital to understand that everything we are presently seeing taking place has been carefully orchestrated. We are not living in a world of coincidence, but one of conspiracy. Laugh if you must, but do so only after you’ve investigated all of the facts. And then, laugh at your own peril.

Three years ago, I wrote that World War III would begin in Syria, not Iran. Admittedly, Iran would play a role, but the flashpoint, Putin’s red line in the sand runs directly through Damascus. It still does, and now over two-dozen sophisticated Russian cruise missiles have served to emphasize and validate my assertions.

Obama’s deliberately destabilizing actions across the Middle East, known as the “Arab Spring,” was planned long ago in the bowels of a Saudi mansion. With the approval of Washington leadership of both parties, including the “gang of eight,” Obama was selected to oversee the operation. Obama is acting on orders from his Saudi and globalist handlers. John Boehner and other Republican leaders provided the necessary cover for Obama to complete his task. He was assisted by the Clinton criminal cabal, and given a pass by a complicit media.

If you look long enough and close enough, the evidence is there. Sadly, there are too few with the intellectual and moral integrity to report it. Or, they have already submitted their reservations for their seats at the globalists’ table.

For those with the temerity to report the truth, there is a solution to deal with you. If you’re not silenced by the restrictions of the soon-to-be-passed Trans-Pacific Partnership Treaty or its Atlantic counterpart, there’s always room for you at one of your local non-existent re-education centers. They’ll even leave the light on for you.

From there, you’ll have a front row seat to the series of final acts of the screenplay of the globalists. The “Missiles of October 2015 edition,” produced and written by the Globalista’s studios, although a bit behind schedule, has been “launched.” Pun intended.

Prepare. Pray.

The Conventional Wisdom on Putin is Dangerously Wrong

October 8, 2015

The Conventional Wisdom on Putin is Dangerously Wrong It’s not about ‘order’—it’s about empire

BY: Aaron MacLean October 8, 2015 5:00 am

Source: The Conventional Wisdom on Putin is Dangerously Wrong – Washington Free Beacon

 The official Washington line on Vladimir Putin’s military action is as follows: It is a mistake,

The official Washington line on Vladimir Putin’s military action is as follows: It is a mistake, demonstrating Russian weakness, sure to get the Russian military stuck in a “quagmire,” according to President Obama. Josh Earnest, the president’s press secretary, took that observation one further, comparing Putin’s policies to those of the Bush administration (the sickest of White House burns) by arguing the Russians “will not succeed in imposing a military solution” just as the U.S. did not succeed in imposing one in Iraq. Adopting the characteristic snark of his boss, at a later press conference Earnest assessed Putin not to be “playing chess—he’s playing checkers.” Ash Carter, the secretary of defense, weighed in by noting that the Russian strategy was “a backward approach that’s sure to backfire.”

If the Syria deployment is such an obvious mistake, why is Putin doing it? The conventional wisdom has concluded that his actions are driven by fear. The Assad regime, long friendly to Moscow, was about to fall, and Putin takes a dim view of the collapse of sovereign states as a consequence of popular uprisings or foreign interventions. Steven Lee Myers, long time Moscow correspondent for the New York Times, is out with a perfectly timed book assessing Putin’s life and ideology. Applying his broader argument to the case of Syria in the Times, Myers says:

Many have variously interpreted Mr. Putin’s intervention in Syria as a response to domestic pressures caused by an economy faltering with the drop in oil prices and sanctions imposed after Crimea; a desire to change the subject from Ukraine; or a reassertion of Russia’s position in the Middle East.

All are perhaps factors, but at the heart of the airstrikes is Mr. Putin’s defense of the principle that the state is all powerful and should be defended against the hordes, especially those encouraged from abroad. It is a warning about Russia, as much as Syria.

Myers’ argument fits well with the White House’s assessment, and has been echoed in publications friendly to the administration’s policies. You know who else agrees? Vladimir Putin—without the emphasis on fear and the expectation of failure, of course. But in his address last week to the United Nations, Putin made an argument that journalists like Myers have largely taken at face value:

It seems, however, that instead of learning from other people’s mistakes, some prefer to repeat them and continue to export revolutions, only now these are “democratic” revolutions. Just look at the situation in the Middle East and Northern Africa already mentioned by the previous speaker. Of course, political and social problems have been piling up for a long time in this region, and people there wanted change. But what was the actual outcome? Instead of bringing about reforms, aggressive intervention rashly destroyed government institutions and the local way of life. Instead of democracy and progress, there is now violence, poverty, social disasters and total disregard for human rights, including even the right to life.

I’m urged to ask those who created this situation: do you at least realize now what you’ve done?

It is no small irony that the same American politicos and journalists who are quick to accuse their domestic political opponents of acting in bad faith now go to impressive lengths to take the Russian president at his word, and to see him as a man whose actions are, if foolish, at least driven by an understandable sense of self-preservation and a realist’s principled opposition to disorder. Indeed, when there are no cameras around, those friendly to the administration will tell you that Putin’s intervention is actually a great boon to American policy, and that our opposition to Assad has been misguided from the start. This wing of American politics, the members of which seem to believe that they are “realists,” believes that the American presence in the Middle East is at the root of the instability there.

Putin understands this all too well, and much of his UN speech was pitched directly at the consciences of these men and women. It was impossible not to chuckle at the strongman’s chutzpah when, nearing his conclusion, Putin explained his hope to partner with other nations on an “issue that shall affect the future of the entire humankind”—climate change. In his recent 60 Minutes interview with Charlie Rose, Putin parried a question about the rule of law in Russia by invoking American race relations—a tried and true rhetorical gambit of the Soviet era:

How long did it take the democratic process to develop in the United States? Do you believe that everything is perfect now from the point of view of democracy in the United States? If everything was perfect there wouldn’t be the problem of Ferguson. There would be no abuse by the police. But our task is to see all these problems and to respond properly.

Putin understands American liberals better than most of them understand themselves, and lightyears better than they understand him. This is among the reasons their assessment of his motivations is so misleading and incomplete. By presenting his actions as essentially reasonable and defensive in nature, by continuing, humiliation after humiliation, to hope that Putin will one day be their partner, they fail to focus their analysis on the dark core of his beliefs, which are ironically the very traits they believe compromise American conservatism: toxic nationalism and neo-imperialism.

He’s not trying that hard to hide it. Consider the terrifying implications of this remark, also from the Charlie Rose interview:

I indeed said that I believe that the collapse of the USSR was a huge tragedy of the 20th century. You know why? … Because, first of all, in an instant 25 million Russian people found themselves beyond the borders of the Russian state, although they were living within the borders of the Soviet Union. Then, all of a sudden, the USSR collapsed—just overnight, in fact. And it’s turned out that in the former Soviet Republics—25 million Russian people were living. They were living in a single country. And all of a sudden, they turned out to be outside the borders of the country. You see this is a huge problem. First of all, there were everyday problems, the separation of families, social problems, economic problems. You can’t list them all. Do you think it’s normal that 25 million Russian people were abroad all of a sudden? Russia was the biggest divided nation in the world. It’s not a problem? Well, maybe not for you. But it’s a problem for me.

This is not an offhand aside. This is a casus belli, and racialist rhetoric one tends to identify with fascism. It is coming from a man who has invaded two nations in the last decade, has his sights set on NATO, and has just made a big play for dominance in the Middle East, to which Obama is all but certainly going to acquiesce completely. It is true that Putin fears phenomena like the Color Revolutions and the Arab Spring, but it is dangerously wrong to reason further that the man who seized Crimea in a surprise attack has some sort of principled preference for order over chaos. It isn’t order he wants. It’s the return of the Russian Empire.

Syrian armed forces launch large-scale offensive against ISIS – Syrian General Staff

October 8, 2015

Syrian armed forces launch large-scale offensive against ISIS – Syrian General Staff

Published time: 8 Oct, 2015 07:13

Edited time: 8 Oct, 2015 12:52

Source: Syrian armed forces launch large-scale offensive against ISIS – Syrian General Staff — RT News

Multiple rocket launchers Grad fire at positions of ISIS militants near the border between Homs and Hama Governorates, Syria. © Michael Alaeddin
The Syrian Army announced a large-scale offensive aimed at retaking several key cities and regions from terrorist forces after a week-long bombing campaign by Russia targeting the jihadists.

The government forces “have been keeping the initiative for several years,” said General Ali Abdullah Ayyoub, the head of the Syrian General Staff, announcing the offensive. The offensive was made possible by the effort made by Russia in supporting the Syrian government militarily, Ayyoub said.

“The airstrikes of the Russian Air Force have damaged the capabilities of the international terrorist organization Islamic State and other groups,” the general said.

READ MORE: Less talk, more action: Russian jets destroy ISIS HQs, tanks, munition depots – all in just 1 week

Russian warplanes began attacking terrorist targets in Syria last week, hitting over 100 targets throughout the country. According to Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad, Russia “has produced significant results in several days that greatly surpass those achieved by the [US-led anti-ISIS] coalition in over a year.”

Earlier, local media reported that government forces were deployed in several Syrian provinces with the biggest operation taking place in Hama, 200 kilometers north of the capital, Damascus. Lebanese TV channel Al-Manar said the Syrian army group in Hama advanced some 50 kilometers on Wednesday, taking several towns and strategically important mountain strongholds from militants of the Al-Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria, and other terrorist groups operating in the area.

Syrian government forces also went on the offensive in the Idlib province.

‘Which side are you fighting for?’ Russia blasts US for refusing to share intel on ISIS

October 8, 2015

Which side are you fighting for?’ Russia blasts US for refusing to share intel on ISIS

Published time: 8 Oct, 2015 09:26

Edited time: 8 Oct, 2015 12:50

Source: ‘Which side are you fighting for?’ Russia blasts US for refusing to share intel on ISIS — RT News

A still image captured from U.S. Navy video footage shows a Tomahawk Land-Attack Missile (TLAM) is launched against ISIL targets from the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea in the Gulf, September 23, 2014. © Abe McNatt / U.S. Navy / Handout
Washington’s failure to share data with Russian intelligence about terrorist positions in Syria makes one question the goals that Americans have in their anti-ISIS campaign in Syria and Iraq, a senior Russian diplomat has said.

The refusal to share intelligence on terrorists “just confirms once more what we knew from the very start, that the US goals in Syria have little to do with creating the conditions for a political process and national reconciliation,” Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said Thursday.

“I would risk saying that by doing this the US and the countries that joined the US-led coalition are putting themselves in a politically dubious position. The question is: which side are you fighting for in this war?”

Sergey Ryabkov, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation © Mikhail Voskresenskiy

Earlier, the Russian military said they would welcome American intelligence on the forces of terrorist group Islamic State (formerly ISIS/ISIL) to help with Russia’s bombing operation in Syria. But the US State Department said it would not be possible because Russia and the US do not share the same goals in Syria.

“I don’t know how you can share intelligence when you don’t share a basic, common objective inside Syria. We’re not at that – we’re nowhere near that point. There’s no shared, common objective here about going after ISIL,” said John Kirby, a State Department spokesman.

The US has accused Russia of failing to target ISIS and instead bombing moderate rebel forces, which Washington wants to replace the government of President Bashar Assad. Russia denies the allegations.

Ryabkov said that without US intelligence Russia would remain quite effective in the Syrian operation, considering that it has plenty of other sources.

“There are our own means of reconnaissance. We get intelligence from a number of other countries and coordinate its flow through the Baghdad information-sharing center,” the Russian diplomat said, referring to a facility in the Iraqi capital that is used by Syria, Iraq, Iran and Russia to coordinate their efforts in fighting ISIS.

The US-led coalition has been bombing ISIS targets for over a year and provided supplies and assistance to forces such as Iraqi and Kurdish militias, which are fighting the terrorists on the ground. But it has refused to deal with either Damascus or its key regional ally Tehran, saying that the downfall of the government of President Assad is part of the solution to the crisis. Despite the coalition’s efforts, ISIS has enlarged the territory under its control over the last year.

Senior Syrian and Iranian officials questioned America’s determination to defeat ISIS, saying that the coalition airstrikes are more of a show and are not intended to actually harm the terrorists. Instead Washington is trying to get ISIS topple the Assad government, hoping to deal with them later.

Russia voiced similar concerns on Wednesday, after reporting that its week-long effort had done serious harm to the jihadists in Syria.

“The US Air Force and other parties has been conduction airstrikes for a year. We have reasons to believe that they don’t often hit terrorist targets, or rather do so very rarely,” said Igor Konashenkov, the spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry.

Meanwhile Russia’s effort seems to have paid off, as on Tuesday the Syrian Army announced a major offensive against various terrorist groups. Commenting on what role Russia’s support played in turning the tables on the jihadists, Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad said that Russia “has produced significant results in several days that greatly surpass those achieved by the [US-led anti-ISIS] coalition in over a year.”

ISIS training militants from Russia in Afghanistan, ‘US and UK citizens among instructors’

October 8, 2015

ISIS training militants from Russia in Afghanistan, ‘US and UK citizens among instructors’

Published time: 8 Oct, 2015 10:27

Edited time: 8 Oct, 2015 12:48

Source: ISIS training militants from Russia in Afghanistan, ‘US and UK citizens among instructors’ — RT News

Islamic State is training militants from Russia in Afghanistan as part of its efforts to expand into Central Asia, a senior Russian diplomat told a security conference in Moscow. He added that US and UK passport holders are among the instructors.

“There are several camps operated by [Islamic State, previously ISIS/ISIL, in Afghanistan] that train people from Central Asia and some regions of Russia. They speak Russian there,” said Zamir Kabulov, President Putin’s special representative for Afghanistan.

He added that there is a wide national variety of instructors in those camps. There are Arabs, Pakistanis and even people with US and British citizenship, he said.

Russian intelligence estimates the number of militants in Afghanistan who have pledged allegiance to the Syria- and Iraq-based Islamic State, at 3,500, Kabulov said, and the number is rising.

“The rise of [Islamic State] in Afghanistan is a high-priority threat. Just think about it: [ISIS] showed up in Afghanistan for real just a year ago, and now it has 3,500 fighters plus supporters who may be recruited into the ranks of the militants,” he said.

Overall, there are some 50,000 fighters belonging to more than 4,000 militant groups in Afghanistan, said Army General Valery Gerasimov, who heads the Russian General Staff. He was addressing the same conference in Moscow, which is discussing the security situation in Afghanistan. The Afghan Taliban is by far the strongest militant movement in the country, with some 40,000 fighters in their ranks.

But their dominant position is being challenged by Islamic State, which sees Afghanistan as a recruiting ground, a source of income and a foothold for further expansion over Central Asia, reported Colonel General Igor Sergun, the head of the Main Intelligence Directorate, Russia’s military intelligence agency.

“ISIL [a former name for Islamic State, along with ISIS] uses the worsening of the situation in Afghanistan to strengthen its position,” he said, adding that such development poses a real threat to Russia’s security.

“We estimate that ISIL gets new troops by bribing field commanders of Taliban, the Islamic movement of Uzbekistan and other radical religious organizations operating on Afghan territory,” Sergun said.

Russia believes that if Islamic State is allowed to grow in Afghanistan unchecked, the group could spread its influence north toward Russia and east to China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, the general said. There the jihadists would be recruiting people from national minorities and local terrorist organizations.

The Afghan government in Kabul is unable to turn the tables on the militants, despite having superior weapons and numbers, Sergun said. He blamed poor planning skills of Afghan commanders and bad training of their troops for it.

On the other hand, Afghan tribal society resists ISIS’s ideology, which makes the terrorist group’s effort to gain support somewhat more difficult, the general said.

“The will to fight for ISIL in most cases comes from financial interest. But at the same time, the ISIL message is spreading quickly among the educated youth who have access to the internet and other media that is spreading the radical version of Islam,” Sergun warned.

slamic State is targeting radical fighters in Afghanistan who are falling for ISIS propaganda, accusing Taliban leaders of abandoning the fight against the United States and the government in Kabul, Sergun reported. This year alone clashes between the Taliban and ISIS have claimed an estimated total of 900 lives on both sides, he added.

Russian officials accused Washington of orchestrating the deterioration of security in Afghanistan and the expansion of Islamic State there.

“It seems like someone’s hand is pushing freshly trained ISIL fighters to mass along Afghanistan’s northern border. They don’t fight foreign or Afghan government troops,” Kabulov said.

He added that on several occasions Taliban groups that refused to join Islamic State were “set up” to be targeted by airstrikes.

“The Afghan Army practically has no aircraft. Only the Americans do. These details bring some very bad thoughts and concerns. We have to take them into account and draw conclusions accordingly,” he said.

Sergun said the US has a long-term goal of preventing stabilization in Central Asian countries and surrounding Russia and China with a network of regimes loyal to America and hotspots of tension.

Iranian Terrorist Attack Against U.S. Revealed

October 8, 2015

Iranian Terrorist Attack Against U.S. Revealed

By Arnold Ahlert — Bio and Archives

October 8, 2015

Source: Iranian Terrorist Attack Against U.S. Revealed

A bombshell report by the Washington Times reveals that fecklessness in the face of terror isn’t a condition exclusive to the Obama administration. “Bill Clinton’s administration gathered enough evidence to send a top-secret communique accusing Iran of facilitating the deadly 1996 Khobar Towers terrorist bombing,” the Times states, “but suppressed that information from the American public and some elements of U.S. intelligence for fear it would lead to an outcry for reprisal, according to documents and interviews.”

Nineteen American servicemen were killed in that attack and another 372 people were wounded when a tanker laden with plastic explosives was driven into the parking lot and detonated next to the eight-story dormitory used for U.S. Air Force personnel assigned to the Gulf. A U.S. indictment was issued in 2001 charging 13 Saudis and a Lebanese man with the crime for which then-Attorney General John Ashcroft blamed Iran, stating they “inspired, supported and supervised members of Saudi Hezbollah.” Yet no Iranian officials were named or charged, nor was the Iranian government accused of any legal responsibility for the atrocity.

According to memos obtain by the Times, the intelligence demonstrating Iranian involvement in the attack was characterized as extensive and credible. It included interviews by the FBI of a half-dozen Saudi co-conspirators who told the agency their passports were provided by the Iranian embassy in Damascus. They further revealed they reported to a top Iranian general, and received training from Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (IRGC), according to FBI officials.

The Times further notes the revelation about what former President Clinton knew has taken on “new significance” due to the August announcement that Ahmed al-Mughassil, described by the FBI in 2001 as both head of the military wing of Saudi Hezbollah and the alleged leader of the attack, had been captured. According to the Saudi newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat, al-Mughassil was arrested in Beirut and transferred to Riyadh. U.S. officials contend his capture has revealed new evidence of Iran’s and Hezbollah’s complicity in the attack—as well as Clinton administration efforts to shield both from responsibility.

Former FBI Director Louis Freeh minced no words describing what occurred. “The bottom line was they weren’t interested,” he stated during an interview. “They were not at all responsive to it. They were looking to change the relationships with the regime there, which is foreign policy. And the FBI has nothing to do with that. They didn’t like that. But I did what I thought was proper.”

Freeh insists that when he initially sought help from the Clinton White House to gain access to the Saudi suspects, he was repeatedly turned down. When he went around the Clinton and succeeded in bringing the evidence to light, it was dismissed as “hearsay,” and a request was made not to disseminate it to others because the administration was endeavoring to improve relations with the world’s foremost state sponsor of terror. Freeh was also dismissed as a partisan when he revealed the same allegations in a book he wrote a decade ago about his time with the bureau. The same Clinton defenders further insisted the evidence obtained by Freeh was inconclusive.

“But since that time, substantial new information has emerged in declassified memos, oral history interviews with retired government officials and other venues that corroborate Mr. Freeh’s account, including that the White House tried to cut off the flow of evidence about Iran’s involvement to certain elements of the intelligence community,” the Times reports.

Damning memo sent in 1999 by Clinton to newly-elected Iranian President Mohammad Khatami.

The chief piece of evidence cited by the paper is a damning memo sent in 1999 by Clinton to newly-elected Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. Clinton stated the American government “has received credible evidence that members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), along with members of Lebanese and Saudi Hizballah were directly involved in the planning and execution” of the bombing. Clinton insisted the United States viewed the evidence “in the gravest terms,” and though the atrocity had occurred before Khatami’s election those responsible “have yet to face justice for this crime.” Clinton further stated “the IRGC may be involved in planning for further terrorist attacks against American citizens,” and that such a possibility remains a “cause of deep concern to us.”

The 2001 indictment was issued after Clinton left office, and whatever doubt remained about Iranian involvement in the crime was shattered in 2006, when U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth ruled that Iran was responsible for the bombing, and ordered the Iranian government to pay $254 million to the families of 17 Americans who died. “The totality of the evidence at trial . . . firmly establishes that the Khobar Towers bombing was planned, funded, and sponsored by senior leadership in the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Lamberth wrote.

Following the linkage of Iran to the attack, Clinton had initially ordered the military to come up with plan for a retaliatory strike, and gave the CIA the green light to pursue “Operation Sapphire” aimed at disrupting Iranian intel operations in several nations. Yet just like our current president, Clinton believed the election of the ostensibly more moderate Khatami would produce a thaw in the U.S./Iranian relationship leading to Iran aiding the investigation, and renouncing terror.

Iran pushed back with a vehement denial—and a threat to publish Clinton’s cable to Khatami. Clinton officials were scared such a revelation would force the president’s hand. “If the Iranians make good on their threats to release the text of our letter, we are going to face intense pressure to take action,” wrote top Clinton aide Kenneth Pollack in a Sept. 15, 1999 memo.

As the evidence linking Iran to the crime piled up, the administration was backing down, speculating that Saudi Arabia was fanning a Shia-Sunni confrontation and that it would be better to work with the new Iranian regime rather than dealing with the possibility of engendering a wider war against terror, according to former aides. Thus, despite the State Department and FBI getting increased cooperation from the Saudis with regard to Iranian involvement, the flow of information suddenly stopped. “We were seeing a line of traffic that led us toward Iranian involvement, and suddenly that traffic was cut off,” said career intelligence officer Wayne White, who served as deputy director of the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research’s Office of Analysis for the Near East and South Asia.

When White tried to get the intel flowing again, he discovered “the stream had been cut off by Sandy Berger, and the original agency producing the intelligence was struggling to work around the roadblock,” he said. Berger was Clinton’s top security aide—and the man who was fined $50,000 following his 2008 conviction for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives, some of which he intentionally destroyed.

White’s account was confirmed to the Times by several U.S. officials “with direct knowledge of the matter” including Freeh, who also revealed he tried to get around Berger by contacting former President George H.W. Bush, who had a good relationship with the Saudis. “I explained to him what my dilemma was and asked if he would contact the Saudis. And he did,” Freeh revealed. White noted that intel analysts didn’t want Iran involved in the attack because of the serious long-term ramifications it would engender for America. But when the evidence became irrefutable, he was disgusted with the administration’s politically-motivated reaction. “You cannot provide your intelligence community selective intelligence without corrupting the process, and that was an outrage,” he declared.

It is an outrage allegedly reprised by the Obama administration, which has been accused by 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military’s Central Command of doctoring their reports in an effort to downplay the danger ISIS and the Syrian branch of al Qaeda presented. The same Obama administration got equally traitorous Democrats to sustain a filibuster against the Iran deal in Congress. The GOP abetted the outrage, allowing a vote to proceed despite the law requiring all parts of that agreement, including Iran’s “side deals” with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to be part of the process. Their cowardice was exemplified by Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell, who refused to invoke the nuclear option and force a vote on what is arguably the most important national security issue of our time.

Exactly like Bill Clinton, who also promised us the Agreed Framework of 1994 would prevent a nuclear North Korea, Obama is embracing appeasement with Iranian Islamo-fascists responsible for far more American deaths than the Khobar Towers attack. Beginning with the 1979 hostage crisis, during which Americans were beaten and placed in solitary confinement, Iran has precipitated numerous instances of aggression, including kidnapping and murder, against America. The terror timeline is highlighted by 1983 U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, killing 17 Americans and the Beirut barracks bombing that killed 241 U.S. Marines. Moreover their involvement in both Afghanistan and Iraq cost at least 500 American soldiers their lives, according to Congressional testimony presented last July by current Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford. And one is left to wonder if Iran’s propensity for killing Americans was part of the equation to which our contemptible Secretary of State John Kerry referred, when he admitted the part of the Iranian deal that frees up billions of dollars for their use will be devoted to “nefarious activities.”

Like the Clinton administration before them, the Obama administration is indulging the fantasy they can improve relations with terrorist thugs whose contempt for America hasn’t diminished an iota in 37 years. And as these revelations from the Washington Times indicate, Bill Clinton and his apparatchiks were every bit as dishonest as Barack Obama and his equally duplicitous underlings when it came to pursuing an agenda utterly inimical to American interests and security. Make no mistake: both men have demonstrated a willingness to countenance the murder of their fellow countrymen in pursuit of appeasement. Times have changed. The unconscionable nature of the Democratic/progressive mindset with regard to America’s enemies remains a constant.

Russia ready to consider Iraqi request for airstrikes

October 8, 2015

Russia ready to consider Iraqi request for airstrikes – Upper House speaker

Published time: 6 Oct, 2015 12:25

Edited time: 6 Oct, 2015 14:10

Source: Russia ready to consider Iraqi request for airstrikes – Upper House speaker — RT Russian politics

The crew of a Russian Su-30 fighter prepare to take off at Hmeimim aerodrome in Syria. © Dmitriy Vinogradov
Russia would consider an Air Force operation against ISIS in Iraq if that country’s authorities make such a request, Federation Council speaker Valentina Matviyenko told reporters, adding that Russia’s only interest was in defeating ISIS.

In case of an official address from Iraq to the Russian Federation, the leaders of our country would study the political and military expediency of our Air Force’s participation in an air operation. Presently we have not received such an address,” Matviyenko told reporters on Tuesday during an official visit to Jordan. She also asked the press “to stop reading tea leaves” before actual events take place.

I want to emphasize that Russia has no other political objectives and no interests other than the defeat of ISIS [formerly ISIS/ISIL] and that differs us from other nations that participate in another coalition,” Interfax news agency quoted Matviyenko as saying at a meeting with the head of the Jordanian Senate, President Abdur-Ra’uf Rawabdeh. She also said that Russian authorities understood the necessity of political reforms in Syria, but the final decision on the nature of these reforms and future head of the Syrian state must be made by Syrian people without any external pressure or direct interference of foreign nations.

READ MORE: Federal Security Service calls for broader international anti-ISIS coalition

During the meeting with her Jordanian colleague, Matviyenko stated that Russia was calling upon all states that see the Islamic State as a threat to join the information center in Baghdad used by Russian, Iraqi, Syrian and Iranian security specialists and military. She added that Russia was ready for other forms of cooperation with all nations that share the common goal of fighting international terrorism.

Last week, Russia started to carry out surgical airstrikes on terrorist positions in Syria after a request for such military aid was made by President Bashar Assad. The head of Russia’s presidential administration, Sergey Ivanov, emphasized that Moscow would not be involved in any ground operation – aid would only be in the form of airstrikes.

READ MORE: 39% of Russians approve Putin policies on Syria

In comments on the Upper House’s license on use of Russian military forces abroad, Valentina Matviyenko said that fighting against the Islamic State was in Russia’s national interests because terrorists posed a threat to Europe, Russia and the whole world. She also expressed confidence that the operation would be supported by an absolute majority of the world’s nations.

Russia Declares ‘Holy War’ on Islamic State

October 7, 2015

Russia Declares ‘Holy War’ on Islamic State While Obama sides with Christian-murdering “freedom fighters.”

October 7, 2015

Raymond Ibrahim

Source: Russia Declares ‘Holy War’ on Islamic State | Frontpage Mag

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

The Orthodox Christian Church, which holds an important place in an insurgent Russia, has described its government’s fight against the Islamic State and other jihadi opposition groups in Syria as a “holy war.”

According to Vsevolod Chaplin, head of the Church’s Public Affairs Department,

The fight with terrorism is a holy battle and today our country is perhaps the most active force in the world fighting it.  The Russian Federation has made a responsible decision on the use of armed forces to defend the People of Syria from the sorrows caused by the arbitrariness of terrorists. Christians are suffering in the region with the kidnapping of clerics and the destruction of churches. Muslims are suffering no less.

This is not some new “gimmick” to justify intervention in Syria.  For years, Russia’s Orthodox leaders have been voicing their concern for persecuted Christians.  Back in February 2012, Putin met with representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church.  They described to him the horrific treatment Christians are experiencing around the world, especially the Muslim world:

The head of External Church Relations, Metropolitan Illarion, said that every five minutes one Christian was dying for his or her faith in some part of the world, specifying that he was talking about such countries as Iraq, Egypt, Pakistan and India. The cleric asked Putin to make the protection of Christians one of the foreign policy directions in future.

“This is how it will be, have no doubt,” Putin answered.

Compare and contrast this with U.S. President Obama, who denies the connection between Islamic teachings and violence; whose policies habitually empower Christian-persecuting Islamists; who prevents Christian representatives from testifying against their tormentors; and who even throws escaped Christian refugees back to the lions, while accepting tens of thousands of Muslim migrants.

The Russian Patriarch Kirill even once wrote an impassioned letter to Obama, imploring the American president to stop empowering Christian persecuting jihadis.  That the patriarch said “I am deeply convinced that the countries which belong to the Christian civilization bear a special responsibility for the fate of Christians in the Middle East” must have only ensured that the letter ended in the trash bin of the White House.

Of course, Russian’s concern for Christian minorities will be cynically dismissed in America by the major talking heads on both sides.  While such dismissals once resonated with Americans, they are becoming less and less persuasive to those paying attention, as explained in “Putin’s Crusade—Is Russia the Last Defender of the Christian Faith?”

For those of us who grew up in America being told that the godless communist atheists in Russia were our enemies, the idea that America might give up on God and Christianity while Russia embraces religion might once have been difficult to accept.  But by 2015, the everyday signs in America show a growing contempt for Christianity, under the first president whose very claims of being a Christian are questionable.  The exact opposite trend is happening for Russia and its leaders—a return to Christian roots.

Indeed, growing numbers of Americans who have no special love for Russia or Orthodoxy—from billionaire tycoon Donald Trump to evangelical Christians—are being won over by Putin’s frank talk.

How can they not?  After one of his speeches praising the West’s Christian heritage—a thing few American politicians dare do—Putin concluded with something which must surely resonate with millions of traditional Americans: “We must protect Russia from that which has destroyed American society”—a reference to the anti-Christian liberalism and licentiousness that has run amok in the West.

Even the Rev. Franklin Graham’s response to Russia’s military intervention in Syria seems uncharacteristically positive, coming as it is from the head of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association:  “What Russia is doing may save the lives of Christians in the Middle East….  You understand that the Syrian government … have protected Christians, they have protected minorities from the Islamists.”

Should U.S supported jihadis (“rebels”) succeed in toppling the government of Syria, Graham correctly predicts that there will be “a bloodbath of Christians”:

There would be tens of thousands of Christians murdered and slaughtered and on top of that, you would have hundreds of thousands of more refugees pouring into Europe. So Russia right now, I see their presence as helping to save the lives of Christians.

It is, of course, an established fact that the “good rebels”—the moderates—are persecuting Christians no less than the Islamic State.

When asked why the Obama administration is ignoring the persecution of Christians, Graham, echoing Putin, said Obama was more invested in promoting the homosexual agenda than he is in protecting Christian minorities:

I’m not here to bash the gays and lesbians and they certainly have rights and I understand all of that, but this administration has been more focused on that agenda than anything else. As a result, the Middle East is burning and you have more refugees moving today since World War II. It could have been prevented.

Indeed, at day’s end, it is not Russian claims of waging a holy war to save Christians from the sword of jihad that deserves to be cynically dismissed, but rather every claim the Obama administration makes to justify its support for the opposition in Syria (most of which is not even Syrian).

There are no “moderate rebels,” only committed jihadis eager to install Islamic law, which is the antithesis of everything the West used to hold precious.  If the “evil dictator” Assad kills people in the context of war, the “rebels” torture, maim, enslave, rape, behead, and crucify people solely because they are Christian.

How does that make them preferable to Assad?

And, based on established precedent—look to Iraq and Libya, the other countries U.S. leadership helped “liberate”—the outcome of ousting the secular strongman of Syria will be more atrocities, more Christian persecution, more bombed churches and destroyed antiquities, and more terrorism, including in the West, despite John Kerry’s absurd assurances of a “pluralistic” Syria once Assad is gone.

Thus, and once again, the U.S. finds itself on the side of Islamic terrorists, who always reserve their best for America.  The Saudis—the head of the Jihadi Snake which U.S. presidents are wont to kiss and bow to—are already screaming bloody murder and calling for an increased jihad in Syria in response to Russia’s audacious call to holy war.

Will Obama and the MSM comply, including through an increased propaganda campaign?  Top Islamic clerics like Yusuf Qaradawi—who once slipped on live television by calling on America to wage “jihad for Allah” against Assad—seem to think so.  Already the U.S. “welcomes” the new cruel joke that Saudi Arabia—one of the absolute worst human rights violators—will head a U.N. human rights panel.

At day’s end and all Realpolitik aside, there is no denying reality: what the United States and its Western allies have wrought in the Middle East—culminating with the rise of a bloodthirsty caliphate and the worst atrocities of the 21st century—is as unholy as Russia’s resolve to fight it is holy.

Russia has ‘substantial’ number of troops inside Syria, says Nato secretary-general

October 6, 2015

Russia has ‘substantial’ number of troops inside Syria, says Nato secretary-general

Lizzie Dearden

Tuesday 6 October 2015 10:25 BST 188 comments

Source: Russia has ‘substantial’ number of troops inside Syria, says Nato secretary-general | Middle East | News | The Independent

Here we go again !

Did we not here this before and proved by false pictures  in the Ukraine ?

Vladimir Putin has previously said there will be ‘no Russian boots on the ground’ in Syria AFP/Getty Images.

Russia has built up a “substantial” military presence including ground troops in Syria, according to the Nato secretary-general.

Jens Stoltenberg told journalists that Vladimir Putin’s forces have not mainly been targeting Isis, but other opposition groups.

“I will not go into any specific numbers but I can confirm that we have seen the substantial build-up of Russian forces in Syria – air force, air defences but also ground troops in connection with the air base they have,” he continued.

20-Russia-Pilot-AP.jpg
A Russian pilot climbs from an SU-25M jet fighter at Hmeimim airbase in Syria

“And we also see increased naval presence of Russian ships and naval capabilities outside Syria or in the eastern part of the Mediterranean.

“So there has been a substantial military build-up by Russia with many different kinds of capabilities and forces, over the last weeks.”

Mr Putin previously said that he had no plans to deploy ground troops in Syria.

“Russia will not take part in any field operations on the territory of Syria or in other states; at least, we do not plan it for now,” the Russian President told CBS last week.

Mr Stoltenberg said the US has made contact with Moscow to establish ways to ensure Russian planes and jets from the international coalition fighting Isis do not clash during their missions over Syria.

But relations with Turkey seemed less cordial after Russia’s Air Force reportedly violated its airspace on Saturday and Sunday.

Mr Stoltenberg said the reported incidents were “very serious“, adding: “It doesn’t look like an accident, and we’ve seen two of them over the weekend.”

Russia’s defence ministry said the first incursion was unintentional and lasted only “a few seconds” as a fighter jet approached a Syrian air base just over the nearby border in bad weather.

There were reports of air strikes in the Isis-held city of Palmyra today, targeting the jihadist group’s vehicles and weapons, as the Kremlin’s campaign continued today.