If there was any doubt that the United States is supporting terrorists in Syria, neo-con fop John Bolton’s recent statements threatening the Syrian government over its upcoming offensive to liberate Idlib should have removed it. Bolton, of course, was speaking in Jerusalem before his colleagues in the Israeli government. He stated that the U.S. would respond “very strongly” if the Syrian government used “chemical weapons” in the offensive.
“We now see plans for the Syrian regime to resume offensive military activities in Idlib province,” he said. “We are obviously concerned about the possibility that Assad may use chemical weapons again.”
Bolton warned, “Just so there’s no confusion here, if the Syrian regime uses chemical weapons we will respond very strongly and they really ought to think about this a long time.”
In other words, Bolton just encouraged al-Qaeda terrorists to stage a chemical attack so that, once again, Trump will be “forced” to react militarily to please leftists and neo-cons despite the fact that cognizant Americans would prefer to stay out of the whole affair. If that statement isn’t a statement of pretext, an incentivization to stage a chemical weapons attack and blame in on the government of Syria, I don’t know what is.
The build-up to yet more strikes against the legitimate and secular government of Bashar al-Assad aside, however, US support for terrorists in Syria and ISIS specifically has been well-documented.
Likening ISIS to the pirates of times past, 21st Century Wire’s Patrick Henningsen wrote,
They’re being paid for, and directed at the highest levels by powers outside of Iraq and Syria. So it’s no surprise that the US, UK, Saudi, Qatar and Turkey all share the exact same objective as ISIS – the destabilization of secular nation states in the Middle East and the removal of Bashar al Assad in Syria. With the same objectives and agenda, the Western Coalition and ISIS work together like a well-oiled machine.
For financial or political reasons, Empires have always used external militarized cells and mercenaries to commit unsavoury acts under a flag different from the monarchy, nation state, or private corporation who was directing them behind the scenes.
Ruthless and unconventional “asymmetric” enemies are nothing new to the United States. Historically, the Privateer, or Barbary “Corsair”, was a private person or ship authorized by a government to attack foreign vessels or governments, often covertly. During the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, Ottoman Corsairs operated along the North African coast, and attacked Colonial American ships for over a century.
It’s the time-honored practice of non-state actors (with state sponsors) who are let loose to pillage and plunder. Today’s ISIS pirates are really just the 21st century’s version of the ‘privateers’…
Henningsen is correct. Call them modern-day pirates, privateers, proxies, or anything else, they are undoubtedly working for and with Western countries to achieve the dismantling and destruction of states standing in opposition to the Western financier system.
Case in point, the surprise ISIS attacks in Suweida which saw over 140 people killed, 170 injured and dozens of women and children kidnapped.
One need only to look at the map created by Terrametrics in order to see that the United States territory in Eastern Syria is a safe haven for ISIS. Looking at the map, the orange area is the area that was attacked by ISIS and the red is territory held by the Syrian government. The blue area, however, is that held by the United States/”rebels.” It is under official protection of the US military and a US military base is stationed there.
In other words, ISIS is not only allowed to exist but it is able to launch vile attacks on civilians in areas directly adjacent to those under protection of the United States. Indeed, terrorists stationed in the American occupied territory move in and out at will. This fact has led many to question whether or not the terrorists are using the American area as a forward operating base or at least a haven they can retreat to after committing their attacks.
The United Nations’ own report admitted that ISIS was given “breathing room” in the areas occupied by the United States but, of course, refused to point out the elephant in the room. Instead, the UN implied the “loss of momentum by forces fighting it in the east of the Syrian Arab Republic” as if the SAA had simply run out of steam. The reality, however, is that the United States and its “coalition” stopped the SAA’s progress by bombing it and drawing a line in the sand, preventing any further Syrian military victories against the terrorist organization.
Journalist Stephen Lendman has also pointed out the American support for ISIS in his own article entitled, “Trump Regime Continues Supporting ISIS,” where he writes,
US support for ISIS is an open dirty secret – undiscussed by media scoundrels, pretending it’s not so.
Washington actively arms, funds, trains, and directs ISIS and other terrorists – backing the scourge they pretend to oppose.
Obama and Trump’s vow to degrade and destroy ISIS was and remains a bald-faced lie, using these and other cutthroat killers as proxy fighters in Syria and other countries where they’re deployed – their presence unjustifiably justifying illegal US occupation of northeast and southwest Syrian territory.
Last November, Russia’s Defense Ministry said the following:
“The Abu Kamal liberation operation conducted by the Syrian government army with air cover by the Russian Aerospace Force at the end of the last week revealed facts of direct cooperation and support for ISIS terrorists by the US-led ‘international coalition.”
“Americans peremptorily rejected to conduct airstrikes over the ISIS terrorists on the pretext of the fact that, according to their information, militants are yielding themselves prisoners to them and now are subject to the provisions of the Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.”
US-led “coalition’s aviation tried to create obstacles for the aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces in this area to safely shield militants of the Islamic State.”
“There is indisputable evidence that the United States pretends it is waging irreconcilable struggle against international terrorism in front of the international community, while in reality it provides cover for the combat-ready Islamic State groups to let them regain strength, regroup themselves and advance US interests in the Middle East.”
Washington directly aids ISIS and other terrorist fighters, deploying them where Pentagon commanders want them used, relocating them to new conflict zones in Syria and other countries.
Iran has credible documents showing US support for ISIS. Its armed forces deputy chief of staff Major General Mostafa Izadi earlier said “(w)e are facing a proxy warfare in the region as a new trick by the arrogant (US-led) powers against the Islamic Republic,” adding:
“We possess information showing direct support by US imperialism for (ISIS) in the region which has destroyed Islamic countries and created a wave of massacres and clashes.”
Separately, Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani condemned Washington for “align(ing) itself with ISIS in the region.”
So-called Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are infested with ISIS and other terrorists. Washington’s objective in Syria remains regime change – why the Obama regime launched naked aggression in the country, continued by Trump regime dark forces in charge of Washington’s geopolitical agenda.
A new Security Council report showed renewed ISIS strength in parts of Syria controlled by US forces and allies, saying:
ISIS terrorists have “breathing space to prepare for the next phase of its evolution into a global covert network.”
Aided by the Trump regime and allied forces, they control “small pockets of territory in the Syrian Arab Republic on the Iraqi border.”
Russia’s General Staff earlier accused the Pentagon of training ISIS and other terrorists at its illegally established At Tanf base in southwest Syria – calling it a staging ground for US armed struggle against the Syrian government.
ISIS and other terrorists infest the Rukban refugee camp controlled by US Forces, holding tens of thousands of defenseless Syrians hostage, using the camp to recruit anti-government terrorists.
On August 15, AMN News said US-led forces “transported over 250 trucks filled with weapons (and other military hardware) to the Euphrates River Valley this morning” – intended for Syrian Democratic Forces terrorists in Deir Ezzor province, adding:
Washington is “expand(ing) (its) bases and airports in northern and eastern Syria” – indicating US forces will remain in the country, not leave, as Trump earlier said.
Separately on August 18, AMN News said Washington and its allies “sent reinforcements to their military bases in the towns of Tal Tamer, Al-Houl, and Al-Shaddadi.”
Both Henningsen and Lendman, along with myself, have been pointing out the American support of ISIS since the group’s creation. Below are a number of my own articles I would highly recommend accessing for some brief primers and history regarding the most famous terrorist organization in the world and the evidence that its alleged enemies are actually funding and supporting it.
Is The US Targeting Oil Refineries To Stop ISIS or Assad?
MSM Whitewash Admits US Funds ISIS But There Is Much More To The Story
The Roots of ISISMiddle East Officials Question ”Convenient Mistakes” Of US Airdrops To Al-Qaeda
US Warns Of “Firm” Response If Syria Attacks ISIS … No, Really
US Claims Assad Supporting ISIS as US Supports ISIS
US Intelligence Responds ”No Comment” To Questions Of Support for ISIS
Why Is ISIS Attacking The Philippines?
US Support for ISIS: An ‘Open Dirty Secret’ That Continues – 21st Century Wire and Stephen Lendman
Brandon Turbeville writes for Activist Post – article archive here – He is the author of seven books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria, The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President, and Resisting The Empire: The Plan To Destroy Syria And How The Future Of The World Depends On The Outcome. Turbeville has published over 1000 articles on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s radio show Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. His website is BrandonTurbeville.com He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com.
This article may be freely shared in part or in full with author attribution and source link.
Support us at Patreon. Follow us on Minds, Steemit, SoMee, BitChute, Facebook and Twitter. Ready for solutions? Subscribe to our premium newsletter Counter Markets.
While I generally agree with this article, I question the following equation: “In other words, Bolton just encouraged al-Qaeda terrorists to stage a chemical attack so that, once again, Trump will be “forced” to react militarily to please leftists and neo-cons .”
As a lifelong leftist of over 60 years, I know of now leftists who want the US to attack Syria. Putting neocons like Bolton into the same ideological group as leftists is as absurd as it gets. Indeed, leftists have been criticized for NOT denouncing Assad as a mass murderer:
“A great number of leftist in the West and the East have been buying into regime propaganda for years now. From Australian academic Tim Anderson, who’s claimed that Bashar al-Assad has not been involved in mass killings of civilians and was simply demonised by the imperial West to British and US journalists Robert Fisk and Seymour Hersh who have claimed the regime did not use chemical weapons in various attacks on civilians, leftist public figures continue to believe that the Assad dictatorship is a bastion of anti-imperialism in the region and needs to be supported.” aljajeera.com in “The Problem with Leftist Myths about Syria”
I think the author’s confusion is that he equates the centrist liberals who praised Trump’s attacks on Syria with real leftists. Fareed Zakaria and Antony Blinken, a deputy secretary of state under Obama, and Clinton are hardly leftists. And as for Sanders agreeing that Assad is a “war criminal” (and thus being hoodwinked on the false flag CW attacks), he did not embrace the military attacks but criticized Trump and promoted a political solution: ““it’s that it’s easier to get into a war than get out of one,” Sanders demanded that Trump “must explain to the American people exactly what this military escalation in Syria is intended to achieve, and how it fits into the broader goal of a political solution, which is the only way Syria’s devastating civil war ends.”
I think it fair to say that some liberals supported the Trump war crime of attacking Syria but that the left, in general, has opposed US involvement from supporting al Quada to the aggression of Trump.
Why Tony would equate Clinton and a handful of centrist Democrats with the left I cannot imagine. But as for his main point, that Trump and the neocons he has appointed to his war cabinet continue to support ISIS, I think that has been clear to the left since Trump first appointed extreme neocons like Woolsey and Bolton to his early staff as advisers during the campaign. Many Americans were fooled by Trump but I think it is clear that left media like Intecept, Counterpunch, Nation, Mother Jones, etc were never fooled. I suggest Tony replace “leftists and neocons” with “a handful of centrist Democrats and neocons…”