Saturday, September 13, 2014

ISIS and the Plan to Balkanize the Middle East
Posted By Kurt Nimmo June 15, 2014
The corporate media reports ISIS in Iraq received many of its weapons as a result of the Iraqi retreat from Mosul. ISIS, however, had plenty of weapons prior to the takeover. Most came from the United States.
The U.S. and Saudi sponsored proxy war in Syria to topple the government of al-Assad provided the terror group with its weapons, according to Michael Knights, the Lafer Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who is described by Vox as “an obsessive ISIS watcher.”

“The war gave them a lot of access to heavy weaponry,” Knights told Vox.

Following the overthrow of Libya, the CIA and its partners moved weapons into Syria. The murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens was collateral damage in this operation. The Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi released last September dwells on the failure to protect Stevens and his staff. It also ignores the underlying operation.
Seymour Hersh, the award-winning investigative journalist who was unceremoniously dumped by The New Yorker due to his penchant for exposing uncomfortable truths, explai- ned how the Senate buried information about the CIA and the gun-running operation in Benghazi:
A highly classified annex to the report, not made public, described a secret agreement reached in early 2012 between the Obama and Erdoğan administrations. It pertained to the rat line. By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria. A number of front companies were set up in Libya, some under the cover of Australian entities. Retired American soldiers, who didn’t al- ways know who was really employing them, were hired to manage procurement and shipping. The operation was run by David Petraeus, the CIA director who would soon resign when it became known he was having an affair with his biographer. (A spokes- person for Petraeus denied the operation ever took place.)
The operation had not been disclosed at the time it was set up to the congressional in- telligence committees and the congressional leadership, as required by law since the 1970s. The involvement of MI6 enabled the CIA to evade the law by classifying the mission as a liaison operation. The former intelligence official explained that for years there has been a recognized exception in the law that permits the CIA not to report liai- son activity to Congress, which would otherwise be owed a finding. (All proposed CIA covert operations must be described in a written document, known as a ‘finding’, sub- mitted to the senior leadership of Congress for approval.) Distribution of the annex was limited to the staff aides who wrote the report and to the eight ranking members of Con- gress – the Democratic and Republican leaders of the House and Senate, and the De- mocratic and Republicans leaders on the House and Senate intelligence committees. This hardly constituted a genuine attempt at oversight: the eight leaders are not known to gather together to raise questions or discuss the secret information they receive.
The annex didn’t tell the whole story of what happened in Benghazi before the attack, nor did it explain why the American consulate was attacked. ‘The consulate’s only mission was to provide cover for the moving of arms,’ the former intelligence official, who has read the annex, said. ‘It had no real political role.’
ISIS Gets Weapons From Its Master
In April we reported on the fact the U.S. provides weapons to al-Nusra and other terrorists groups in Syria by way of its allegedly vetted “moderate” mercenaries. Jamal Maarouf, who runs the Syrian Revolutionary Front (SRF) created by the CIA and Saudi and Qatari intelligence, said if “the people who support us [U.S., Saudis, Qataris] tell us to send wea- pons to another group, we send them. They asked us a month ago to send weapons to Yabroud [a city in Syria] so we sent a lot of weapons there. When they asked us to do this, we do it.”
According to Barak Barfi, a research fellow for the globalist funded New America Foundati- on, al-Nusra, the al-Qaeda-linked group known for summarily executing Syrian soldiers 6/8

and other atrocities (including beheading Christians), receives weapons indirectly from SRF.
The professed leader of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was instrumental in the creation of al- Nusra. Following a power struggle between the two groups, al-Baghdadi announced the dissolution of Jabhat al-Nusra and the integration of its members into the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS.
“ISIS quickly announced its areas of operations publicly and took control of wide areas wi- thout facing much resistance, benefitting from the Jabhat al-Nusra fighters who defected to ISIS,” reports al-Monitor. “Some estimates suggest that about 65% of Jabhat al-Nusra ele- ments quickly declared their allegiance to ISIS. Most of those were non-Syrian jihadists. Entire brigades joined ISIS, among them was the Mujahedeen Shura Council led by Abu al-Atheer, whom ISIS appointed emir of Aleppo, and Jaish al-Muhajireen and al-Ansar, led by Omar al-Chechani.”
Earlier this month, Obama’s top foreign policy advisor, Susan Rice, admitted the United States is providing lethal weapons to the “moderates” in Syria, although she did not menti- on the transfer of these arms to al-Nusra and, we can reasonably assume, other radical Is- lamic groups.
“We are certainly concerned that the fact that [ISIS] has gotten its hands on so many wea- pons, both in Syria and Iraq, is a very serious security concern for both countries,” State Department Deputy Press Secretary Marie Harf told reporters recently.
The Pentagon is also sticking to the story ISIS picked up its equipment from retreating Iraqi security forces.
“They’re driving some of these vehicles, they’re in possession of some of this stuff, but I’d be loathe to tell you that we actually have a really solid sense of what they’ve got,” Penta- gon Press Secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby told reporters Friday.
Most of the “stuff” Kirby mentioned came from the United States with the assistance of Saudi Arabia and Qatar and the CIA, with support from MI6, as Hersh notes. It was trans- ferred from stowed caches in Libya. The arms will now be used to enlarge the perception that ISIS is a serious threat requiring direct intervention by the United States, particularly in Syria where the proxy war against al-Assad has stalled.
Plan to Break Middle East into Ethic and Religiously Divided Vassal States
Back in 2006 Army Lt. Col. (ret.) Ralph Peters “suggested that a reimagining of Middle Eastern and Asian borders along ethnic, sectarian and tribal lines might ease regional ten- sions,” the Armed Forces Journal reported.
How Lt. Col. Ralph Peters and the neocons see Iraq divided.
“Syria’s prime location and muscle make it the strategic center of the Middle East,” Robin Wright wrote for The New York Times last September in an article noting Peters’ map of a rearranged Middle East. “Syria’s unraveling would set precedents for the region, beginning next door. Until now, Iraq resisted falling apart because of foreign pressure, regional fear of going it alone and oil wealth that bought loyalty, at least on paper. But Syria is now sucking Iraq into its maelstrom.”

Iraq now appears closer than ever to dividing along religious and sectarian lines. In fact, this was the plan all along. It was previously envisioned by the Bush neocons who penned A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm. The document created by the Stu- dy Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000 called for overthrowing Saddam Hussein and waging a proxy war against al-Assad in Syria.

Prior to the Clean Break document, Oded Yinon wrote The Zionist Plan for the Middle East. It proposed “that all the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units” and the “dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run.” The destruction of the Arab and Muslim states, Yinon suggested, would be accomplished from within by exploiting their internal religious and ethnic tensions.
P2OG In Action
ISIS is described as a manifestation of al-Qaeda’s influence. However, it would be more accurate to call it a manifestation of the Pentagon under the influence of the Bush neo- cons. In 2005, Frank Morales cited a Pentagon document suggesting the creation of P2OG, or Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group.
According to a classified document prepared for Rumsfeld by his Defense Science Board, the new organization – the “Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG)” – would actually carry out secret missions designed to provoke terrorist groups into com- mitting violent acts. The P2OG, a 100-member, so-called “counter-terrorist” organization with a $100-million-a-year budget, would ostensibly target “terrorist leaders,” but accor- ding to P2OG documents procured by Arkin, would in fact carry out missions designed to “stimulate reactions” among “terrorist groups” – which, according to the Defense Se- cretary’s logic, would subsequently expose them to “counter-attack” by the good guys. In other words, the plan is to execute secret military operations (assassinations, sabota- ge, “deception”) which would intentionally result in terrorist attacks on innocent people, including Americans – essentially, to “combat terrorism” by causing it!
In the case of ISIS stimulation was apparently not enough to get the desire result. The ter- rorist organization was assisted by the CIA and its partners with weapons delivered from Libya to “moderates” in Syria who then transferred the arms to ISIS and other terrorist groups, including al-Nusra.
ISIS may in fact create a brutal caliphate – or it may be bombed back into the Stone Age, a solution championed by Sen. Lindsey Graham and other neocons in Congress.
Either way, the plan to fragment and balkanize the Arab and Muslim Middle East will be realized. The Kurds in Iraq have established a de facto state in response to ISIS and Iran has pledged to help defend Shia Iraqis in the south. All of this activity promotes the plan to unravel the Middle East in a more dramatic and significant way than it was originally unra- veled and recomposed by the British more than century ago.
www.luftpost-kl.de

Bürger-Brief an den russischen Präsidenten und sein Volk

Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident Putin und Bürger Russlands,

wir möchten uns hiermit für das Verhalten unserer Regierungen und Medien entschuldigen. Die westlichen Nationen, angeführt durch die Vereinigten Staaten, scheinen entschlossen zu sein, einen Krieg mit Russland zu beginnen. Eine vernünftige Person würde die schrecklichen Konsequenzen eines solchen Krieges erkennen und alles in ihrer Macht stehende tun, um ihn zu verhindern. Tatsächlich scheint es so, als ob dies exakt das ist, was Sie tun. Im Angesicht eines endlosen Stroms an Lügen und Provokationen haben Sie es geschafft, dass Russland nicht in einen nuklearen Krieg hineingezogen wurde.^1, 2

Die Ereignisse rund um den Krieg in der Ukraine werden verdreht, um Sie als den Aggressor darzustellen, während die Fakten eindeutig etwas anderes zeigen. Neo-Nazi-Banden begehen tagtäglich Gräueltaten an den Bürgern Neurusslands und erhalten finanzielle Unterstützung von westlichen Regierungen. Die ukrainische Armee hat russische Grenzen und Städte angegriffen und wirft regelmäßig Bomben auf Flüchtlinge ab, die versuchen, aus dem Land zu fliehen. Russland wurde die Schuld für die Zerstörung des malaysischen Flugzeugs MH17 zugeschoben, obwohl die Beweise darauf hindeuten, dass das Flugzeug von der ukrainischen Armee abgeschossen wurde. Sie bieten den Menschen aus Luhansk humanitäre Hilfe an und werden hingegen beschuldigt, Waffen in die Ukraine zu schmuggeln.³

Warum sind Sie das Ziel dieser Lügen und Provokationen? Die pathologischen Kriminellen des Westens drängen auf einen Krieg mit Russland, weil sie einen externen Feind brauchen. Solange die Menschen auf die „russische Aggression“ fokussiert sind, bleiben sie im Dunkeln darüber, wer wirklich für den Verfall der amerikanischen Wirtschaft und des sozialen Systems verantwortlich ist. In Europa, mit unserer Geschichte von brutalen Kriegen, die durch Arroganz und Gier entfacht wurden, unterlagen unsere europäischen Anführer einem vollständigen moralischen Kollaps und unterstützen nun die imperiale Aggressionspolitik der USA. Der letzte großartige Präsident der Vereinigten Staaten, John F. Kennedy, beschrieb unseren gemeinsamen Feind im Jahre 1961:

Denn uns stellt sich auf der ganzen Welt eine monolithische und rücksichtslose Verschwörung entgegen, die sich vor allem auf versteckte Mittel für den Ausbau ihrer Einflusssphäre verlässt – auf Infiltration statt Invasion, heimliche Umstürze statt Wahlen, Einschüchterung statt Wahlfreiheit, Guerillas in der Nacht statt Armeen am Tage.

Es ist ein System, welches gewaltige menschliche und materielle Ressourcen einsetzt, um eine engmaschige und effiziente Maschinerie aufzubauen, die militärische, diplomatische, geheimdienstliche, wirtschaftliche, wissenschaftliche und politische Operationen verbindet. Ihre Vorbereitungen sind verdeckt und werden nicht veröffentlicht, ihre Fehlschläge werden begraben und nicht verkündet, ihre Dissidenten werden mundtot gemacht und nicht gelobt, keine Ausgabe wird in Frage gestellt, kein Gerücht veröffentlicht, kein Geheimnis enthüllt.⁴

Seit dieser Zeit wurden die Regierungen der Vereinigten Staaten und anderer westlicher Nationen von dieser „rücksichtslosen Verschwörung“ infiltriert. Während es sich dabei nicht notwendigerweise um eine einheitliche Verschwörung handelt, so glauben wir dennoch, dass die Anführer dieser Verschwörung ohne die Bürde eines normalen menschlichen Gewissens denken und handeln. Das ist der Grund, warum sie bereit sind, das Leben von Millionen oder Milliarden von Menschen zu opfern. Sie versorgen Israel mit Waffen, die für das allumfassende Massaker Tausender Palästinenser benutzt werden. Sie militarisieren die Polizei an Orten wie Ferguson, Missouri USA, um ihre Macht über die Menschen zu bewahren und zu verstärken. Sie verbreiten Lügen, um Kriege loszutreten, welche zum Tod von Millionen von Menschen führen, und um ihre politische Macht zu vergrößern. Sie sind verabscheuungswürdig.^5, 6

Wie JFK haben auch Sie einen militärischen Hintergrund, so dass Sie an das Pflichtgefühl gebunden sind, den Menschen Russlands zu dienen. Es scheint, dass Sie – genau wie er – den Wahnsinn eines nuklearen Krieges erkannt und sich dem Frieden zugewandt haben.⁷Sie weigern sich, das US-amerikanische Imperium zu befürworten und arbeiten stattdessen daran, seine Macht einzudämmen ohne sich auf einen direkten militärischen Konflikt einzulassen. Stattdessen hat Russland durch Organisationen wie BRICS engere Beziehungen mit vielen Ländern geknüpft, alte Schulden erlassen und mit seinen Partnern zusammengearbeitet, um Ziele zu verwirklichen, die den Interessen der Menschen dienen. Das Konzept einer internationalen Partnerschaft wurde als multipolare Herangehensweise betitelt und es steht in starkem Kontrast zu der unipolaren, imperialen Politik der USA, bei der die Ressourcen von Ländern kontrolliert werden, damit eine mächtige Minderheit davon profitiert – auf Kosten von Uns, den Menschen.

Wir lehnen die Gier, den Hass und die Machtgelüste kategorisch ab, die von unseren „Anführern“ an den Tag gelegt werden. Wir sind außer uns vor Wut und entsetzt über das Morden von Millionen von unschuldigen Menschen im falschen Namen der Freiheit und der Selbstverteidigung. Wir wollen Frieden und Gerechtigkeit für alle Menschen. Wir wollen einen wirklichen und anhaltenden Frieden – die Art von Frieden, von der JFK einst sprach:

Welche Art von Frieden suchen wir? Keinen Pax Americana, welcher der Welt durch amerikanische Kriegswaffen aufgezwungen wird. Nicht den Frieden der Grabesruhe oder den der Sicherheit des Sklaven. Ich spreche von echtem Frieden; jene Art von Frieden, der das Leben auf der Erde lebenswert macht; jene Art von Frieden, der es den Menschen und Nationen ermöglicht, zu wachsen und zu hoffen und ein besseres Leben für ihre Kinder aufzubauen – nicht einfach nur Frieden für die Amerikaner, sondern Frieden für alle Männer und alle Frauen – nicht einfach nur Frieden in unserer Zeit, sondern Frieden für alle Zeiten.⁸

Wahrer Frieden und wahre Gerechtigkeit sind solange unmöglich, wie diese „rücksichtslose Verschwörung“ hinter den Kulissen an der Macht ist und die Vereinigten Staaten und andere Nationen kontrolliert. Wir beten dafür, dass wir durch unsere gemeinsamen Anstrengungen die machthungrigen und rücksichtslosen Kriminellen, die danach streben, uns alle zu versklaven, besiegen mögen. Wir beten dafür, dass wir stattdessen einen echten Frieden fördern können, welcher das Leben auf der Erde lebenswert macht.

Hochachtungsvoll

Daniele Pirracchio - Italy
Natalia Schneider - Germany
Dean E - Australia
Michel Ancer - France
Диян Дончев - Bulgaria
wolfgang mair - Austria
Andrew Gillig - United States
Тахир Мамедов - Russia
Irene eckert - Germany
Роман Банников - Russia
Esko Nieminen - Finland
Pierre DAVOINE - France
Joëlle Croteau - France
Michal BANGA - Czech Republic
Александр Симонов - Russia
Rahim Huseynov - Azerbaijan
Gennadiy Demchenko - Ukraine
Олег Иванов - Russia
Драгунов Олег - Kazakhstan
Mario Urberbauer - Austria
Christian Bernhard - France
Александр Федоров - Russia
Макарцов Денис - Russia
Pavel Ruzicka - Czech Republic
Karel Spalek - Czech Republic
Денис Терехов - Russia

Bis jetzt haben 22,865 Menschen den Brief unterzeichnet.

HIER KÖNNEN AUCH SIE DEN BRIEF UNTERZEICHNEN!

Quellen:

Brief als PDF herunterladen (Deutsch)

http://dearputin.com/ Englisch - http://dearputin.com/de/ Deutsch http://dearputin.com/de/#sign

HIER KÖNNEN AUCH SIE DEN BRIEF UNTERZEICHNEN

Getting It Right in Fighting ISIL

Wayne MADSEN | 14.09.2014 | 00:00

President Obama and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry attempted to craft a so-called «coalition of the willing» to help the United States fight the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in both Iraq and Syria. Obama was only able to enlist the support of the fragile new Iraqi government, the battered Kurdistan Regional Government in northern Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. The latter «partner», Saudi Arabia, has been ISIL's main benefactor. Obama also foolishly said he wanted to arm the «Free Syrian Army», even though many of its original members joined ranks with ISIL and its ally, the Al Nusra Front after being trained and armed by CIA and U.S. military teams in Jordan and Turkey.

Of the countries Obama and Kerry approached for their coalition, two - Jordan and Turkey - said no to launching attacks on Syria from their territory. Even the United Kingdom said they would not participate in attacking ISIL positions in Syria. As many as 300 British citizens are said to be fighting for ISIL in Syria and Iraq.

Due to pressure from the Israel Lobby in the United States, a group that always puts the interests of Israel ahead of the quite different and often opposing interests of the United States, Obama missed an opportunity to create a truly effective coalition that could carry out Obama’s wish to «destroy» ISIL. Obama and Kerry continue to cling to the notion that they can simultaneously destroy ISIL in Syria and vanquish the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad at the same time. Such ideas are fanciful and not grounded in reality. The Saudis were the source of the chlorine and sarin gas attacks on Syrian civilians and it was Saudi Arabia that nurtured Al Nusra and ISIL. The notion that a few Syrian government defectors who live in expensive hotels in Istanbul on a Saudi credit card represent any sort of «army» is ludicrous.

It is also clear that Saudi Arabia and Israel have been coordinating their efforts to support ISIL in Syrian, especially around the Golan Heights where Israeli Defense Force personnel have been providing cross-border support to ISIL guerrillas who seized control of Syrian army positions, as well as UN peacekeeping sites. CIA director John O. Brennan, a major supporter of the Saudi kingdom, has reportedly taken part in discussions between Saudi national security adviser Prince Bandar bin Sultan, a major supporter of Al Qaeda cells in the United States prior to 9/11 as spelled out in the redacted 28-pages in a Senate Intelligence Committee report; Saudi intelligence chief Prince Khalid bin Banda; and Israeli Mossad chief Tamir Pardo. In his recent prime time television speech, Obama said he wanted to curtail support for ISIL. However, he can only do that by threatening severe sanctions and other punishment on Saudi Arabia and Israel, ISII's two main friends in the Middle East.

ISIL has served as a propaganda windfall for the Israelis. Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein told Czech Prime Minister Bohuslav Slobotka in Prague that Europe will soon understand Israel's problems with Hamas because ISIL is coming to Europe. Edelstein used ISIL, an Israeli and Saudi creation to topple the government in Damascus, to threaten Europe with terrorist attacks. Edelstein also warned the Czech prime minister against upgrading relations with Iran. Israel's only weapon is to use fear to intimidate not only smaller countries like the Czech Republic, Ireland, and Montenegro, but larger countries like Germany, France, and the United States.

For President Obama there is only one coalition that to eradicate ISIL that makes any sense. And the coalition that is needed most certainly cannot include Saudi Arabia, which has actually volunteered to train «Free Syrian Army» members to fight ISIL. It is more appropriate to say that Saudi Arabia wants to recruit more Free Syrian Army personnel to join ISIL, not fight against them. Obama would have everyone believe that the Wahhabist Saudi army and National Guard would take up arms against fellow Wahhabists who make up ISIL. In fact, the Saudi military exists for only one reason and that is to protect the extended Saudi royal family, nothing more and nothing less.

America’s natural coalition partners against ISIL are those who have already demonstrated their willingness to take on the radical takfiri Wahhabists: the Syrian armed forces, Lebanese Hezbollah volunteers who have fought against the Sunni radicals in Syria; Kurdistan’s peshmerga forces; Iran and members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards who have assisted the Kurds and Turkoman fight ISIL in Iraq; Russia; and President of Chechnya Ramzan Kadyrov, who threatened to destroy the ISIL «bastards.» Obama could enlist Egypt if he drops his pretense of attacking ISIL in Syria and at the same time enlist Syrian opposition «moderates» to overthrow Assad. The Egyptian military, which rules Egypt, has been a longtime ally of the Syrian government under both Hafez and Bashar Assad.

There are other potential allies for a realistic campaign to rid the world of ISIL. The United States should abandon the ill-thought plans to re-federate Yemen under a silly plan drawn up by State Department neocons with close ties to Israel. Doing so, would bring South Yemeni independence restoration forces and Shi'a Zaidi Houthi rebels in north Yemen on America’s side to wipe out Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), which has provided men and other support to ISIL.

Senator John McCain and his Senate «shadow», Lindsey Graham, along with their neocon and Israel Lobby and Saudi influence-peddling friends would cry out against any American rapprochement with the Shi’a Islamic forces of Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, and Syria to take on ISIL but this is a case where the interests of Israel and Saudi Arabia are diametrically opposed to those of the United States,. President Obama, who does not have to face another election, is in a unique position to use his «bully pulpit» of the U.S. presidency to slap down McCain, Graham, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his entourage, and Saudi shills like the American Petroleum Institute lobby. These individuals and groups would have the United States belled more of its military personnel and treasury pursuing cockamamie policies in the Middle East designed only to protect the interests of Israel and the Saudi kingdom.

By abandoning cooperation with the Arabian peninsula's oil-rich potentates, America, after defeating ISIL, could turn its attention on ousting the Islamist radicals who have seized control of Tripoli, Libya. To do so should not involve the Libyan expatriates who were plucked from CIA-financed comfort in northern Virginia, Paris, and England to become to new Libyan government after the brutal ouster of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi. Rather, America must stand ready to bring back into power in Libya some of the major supporters of Qaddafi. Some Qaddafi officials must be freed from prison. A stable Libya could then serve as a springboard to attack Wahhabists who have seized control of parts of northern Nigeria and Cameroon under the Book Haram banner and who have engaged in brutal terrorist attacks in Mali. The United States must also make common cause with the Tuaregs of Mali who want their own homeland of Azawad.

These are the steps that must be taken to right the wrongs committed by Obama’s incompetent interventionists who aided in turning the Middle East upside down.
Source:

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/09/14/getting-it-right-in-fighting-isil.html

“Going After” the Islamic State. Guess Who is Behind the Caliphate Project? By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

13.09.2014 | 11:32

The Islamic State (IS) is portrayed as an Enemy of America and the Western world.

With the support of America’s indefectible British ally, President Barack Obama has ordered a series of US bombing raids on Iraq allegedly with a view to defeating the rebel army of the Islamic State (IS).

“We will not waver in our determination to confront the Islamic State … If terrorists think we will weaken in the face of their threats they could not be more wrong.” (Barack Obama and David Cameron, Strengthening the NATO alliance, op ed published in the London Times, September 4, 2014, emphasis added)

But Who is behind the Islamic State Project?

In a bitter irony, until recently the rebels of the Islamic State, formerly known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) were heralded as Syria’s “opposition freedom fighters” committed to “restoring democracy” and unseating the secular government of Bashar al Assad.

And who was behind the jihadist insurgency in Syria?

Those who ordered the bombing campaign are those who are behind the Caliphate Project.

The Islamic State (IS) militia, which is currently the alleged target of a US-NATO bombing under a counter-terrorism mandate, was and continues to be supported covertly by the United States.

In other words, the Islamic State (IS) is a creation of US intelligence with the support of Britain’s MI6, Israel’s Mossad, Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Presidency (GIP), Ri’āsat Al-Istikhbārāt Al-’Āmah ( رئاسة الاستخبارات العامة‎). Moreover, according to Israeli intelligence sources (Debka) NATO in liaison with the Turkish High Command has been involved in the recruitment of jihadist mercenaries from the outset of the Syrian crisis in March 2011.

In relation to the Syrian insurgency, the Islamic State fighters together with the Al Qaeda affiliated jihadist forces of the Al Nusrah Front are the foot soldiers of the Western military alliance. They are covertly supported by US-NATO-Israel. Their mandate is to wage a terrorist insurgency against the government of Bashar al-Assad. The atrocities committed by Islamic State fighters in Iraq are similar to those committed in Syria.

As a result of media disinformation, Western public opinion is unaware that the Islamic State terrorists have from the very outset been supported by the United States and its allies.

The killings of innocent civilians by the Islamic State terrorists in Iraq are used to create a pretext and a justification for US military intervention on humanitarian grounds. The bombing raids ordered by Obama, however, are not intended to eliminate the Islamic State, which constitutes a US “intelligence asset”. Quite the opposite, the US is targeting the civilian population as well as the Iraqi resistance movement.

The Role of Saudi Arabia and Qatar

Amply documented, US-NATO support to the Islamic State is channeled covertly through America’s staunchest allies: Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Acknowledged by the Western media, both Riyadh and Doha acting in liaison and on behalf of Washington have played (and continue to play) a central role in the financing the Islamic State (IS) as well as the recruitment, training and religious indoctrination of terrorist mercenary forces deployed in Syria.

According to London’s Daily Express “They [the Islamic State terrorists] had money and arms supplied by Qatar and Saudi Arabia.”

“The most important source of ISIS financing to date has been support coming out of the Gulf states, primarily Saudi Arabia but also Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates,” (According to Dr. Günter Meyer, Director of the Center for Research into the Arabic World at University of Mainz, Germany, Deutsche Welle)

This money was channeled to ISIS terrorists fighting against government forces in Syria:

“Through allies such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the West [has] supported militant rebel groups which have since mutated into ISIS and other al‑Qaeda connected militias. ( Daily Telegraph, June 12, 2014)

According to Robert Fisk, the IS caliphate project “has been bankrolled by Saudi Arabia”:

…[M]eet Saudi Arabia’s latest monstrous contribution to world history: the Islamist Sunni caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, conquerors of Mosul and Tikrit – and Raqqa in Syria – and possibly Baghdad, and the ultimate humiliators of Bush and Obama.

From Aleppo in northern Syria almost to the Iraqi-Iranian border, the jihadists of Isis and sundry other groupuscules paid by the Saudi Wahhabis – and by Kuwaiti oligarchs – now rule thousands of square miles. (Robert Fisk, The Independent, June 12, 2014

In 2013, as part of its recruitment of terrorists, Saudi Arabia took the initiative of releasing prisoners on death row in Saudi jails.

A secret memo revealed that the prisoners were being “recruited” to join jihadist militia (including Al Nusrah and ISIS) to fight against government forces in Syria.

Saudi prison

The prisoners had reportedly been offered a deal — stay and be executed or fight against Assad in Syria. As part of the deal the prisoners were offered a “pardon and a monthly stipend for their families, who were allowed to stay in the Sunni Arab kingdom”.

Saudi officials apparently gave them a choice: decapitation or jihad? In total, inmates from Yemen, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Jordan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq, and Kuwait chose to go and fight in Syria.(See Global Research, September 11, 2013)

“Volte Face”: About Turn

On September 11, 2014, the King of Saudi Arabia together with the Monarchs of the Gulf States announced their unbending commitment to support Obama’s holy war against the Islamic State, which has and continues to be funded by Qatari and Saudi money as part of carefully engineered intelligence operation.

Secretary of State John F. Kerry, left, speaks with Joseph W. Westphal, the U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal on his arrival at the King Abdulaziz International Airport in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia on Sept. 11, 2014. (Pool photo by Brendan Smialowski via Associated Press)

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States which actively contributed to the financing of the Islamic State, not to mention the recruitment, training of terrorists on behalf of Washington, pledged their unbending support for Obama’s military campaign to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the Islamic State.

The statement of support contained in the communiqué, commits the “leading Arab states to working with the U.S. to cut off the flow of foreign fighters and funds to the Islamic State.” It also confirms that members discussed “a strategy to destroy the ISIL wherever it is, including in both Iraq and Syria.”

Saudi Arabia has come to understand the Islamic State group is a serious threat to their country as well– that it isn’t a mainstream Sunni movement.One element of Obama’s IS plan seeks to undermine the ideological and religious claims that the Islamic State militants make to Islam.

The administration hopes Riyadh will use its influence among Islamic religious leaders. (Voice of America, September 11, 2014)

Recruiting “Moderate Terrorists”

As part of the agreement, the House of Saud is to “host a training facility for thousands of Syrian rebel fighters who are combating both the Islamic State and President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.” An absurd and fake proposition. Until September 9th, “officially” Saudi Arabia had been supporting the Islamic State against the government of Bashar al Assad and now it has been entrusted in recruiting jihadists to fight the Islamic State. An absurd and fake proposition. But the media has failed to connect the dots and uncover the big lie.

We are dealing with a diabolical project: The architects of the Islamic State have informed the World that they are “going after” their own terrorists as part of a counter-terrorism operation.

While these actions are undertaken under the banner of the “Global War on Terrorism”, the US has no intention to target its IS own terror brigades which are integrated by Western special forces and intelligence operatives. In fact the only meaningful and effective campaign against Islamic State terrorists is being waged by Syrian government forces.

Needless to say, US, NATO, Saudi and Qatari support and funding to the Islamic State will continue. The objective is not to destroy the Islamic State as promised by Obama. What we are dealing with is a US sponsored process of destabilizing and destroying both Iraq and Syria. The campaign against the Islamic State is being used as a justification to bomb both countries, largely targeting civilians.

The endgame is to destabilize Iraq as a nation state and trigger its partition into three separate entities.

The broader US-NATO strategic objective is to destabilize the entire Middle East- North Africa -Central Asia -South Asia region, including Iran, Pakistan and India.

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, globalresearch.ca

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/09/13/going-after-the-islamic-state-guess-who-is-behind-the-caliphate-project.html

The Ukraine Crisis Remains Unresolved

Paul Craig ROBERTS | 09.09.2014 | 09:37

Some Western commentators interpret the cease fire in Ukraine obtained by President Putin as a victory for Russia. The reasoning is that the cease fire leaves Ukraine with disputed borders, which rules out Ukraine’s membership in NATO.

But will the cease fire hold? The right-wing Kiev militias, whose members often wear nazi insignias, are not under Kiev’s complete control. These militias can easily violate the cease fire, and there are already reports of violations. Moreover the billionaire oligarch that Washington has installed in Kiev as president of Ukraine will violate the ceasefire on Washington’s orders, unless, of course, Putin has put the fear of God in him.

To a military strategist the Russian response to the trouble that Washington has caused Russia in Ukraine, longer a part of Russia than the US has existed, is a mystery. Russia lost Ukraine because of its weakness when the Soviet Union collapsed, and Washington forced Russia to permit an independent Ukraine, which served Washington’s purpose of breaking up the Russian Federation.

The western Ukrainians, who fought for Hitler during World War II, maintained an impressive lobby organization in Washington and secured their independent country, but they did not control Ukraine because much of the country consists of former Russian territories made part of Ukraine by Soviet leaders.

Blood ties from intermarriage over centuries and tied economic interrelationships between Russia and Ukraine achieved over centuries essentially left Ukraine as part of Russia, where it has resided for centuries.

This frustrated the World Empire Neoconservatives, who have controlled the US government since the corrupt Clintons, whose regime brought Third World corruption into American political life. Remember, Robert Reich, Clinton’s university friend and Secretary of Labor who resigned from Clinton’s cabinet on principle. Clinton betrayed the constituency that elected him. And his cheated-on wife, allied with Zionist Israel and the war-determined neoconservatives, is the Democrats and feminists’ current favorite for their next presidential nominee.

As in Rome, dynasties are now the sources of presidential leadership. And as in Rome,

the US is on the path to destruction, which occurs when the ambition of leaders take precedence over the fate of the country.

Keeping Ukraine out of NATO is no doubt a goal of the Russian government. However, the trouble that Washington brought to Russia in Ukraine--by orchestrating a coup, installing a puppet government, and unleashing violence against the residents of the former Russian territories that Soviet leaders attached to Ukraine--is being used for wider purposes than to incorporate Ukraine within NATO.

In other words, Washington’s strategic goals go beyond NATO membership for Ukraine.

One goal is to break apart the economic and political relationships between Europe and Russia. By using Ukraine to demonize Russia, Washington has pushed the European Union into imposing sanctions on Russia that disrupt the trade relationships and create distrust.

The distrust serves Washington’s purpose. Washington has demonstrated to Russia that Washington’s bought and-paid-for European politicians are unwilling to have foreign policies independent of Washington’s. Europe’s lack of an independent policy means that the Russian government is hampered in its use of diplomacy.

Another Washington goal is to build up military forces on Russia’s borders. NATO has used the «crisis» to stoke fear of Russia in the Baltics and in Poland. Washington and NATO generals speak of Russian attacks as if it is a foregone conclusion that Russia intends to invade Eastern Europe. To protect against the «Russian threat,» NATO has created a «quick reaction force» and is building up supplies of military equipment and new bases on Russia’s borders. Whatever the outcome in Ukraine, Washington has used Ukraine to start a new Cold War.

The Western presstitute media, a collection of government propagandists, has misrepresented the situation in Ukraine from the beginning. In place of news coverage, there has been propaganda against Russia. Consequently, Western peoples who rely on the media are misinformed about Ukraine and place all blame on Russia. The fact that the American people are misinformed makes it easy for Washington to continue to orchestrate events to Russia’s disadvantage.

Washington has no interest in resolving the troubles in Ukraine. Washington has successfully used Ukraine to create fear of Russia both in Europe and in the United States. Washington has successfully used Ukraine to damage European-Russian economic and political relations, and Washington has succeeded in starting a new Cold War that will keep profits flowing into the US military/security complex.

As the Kiev government is Washington’s puppet, there is no reason to expect a resolution of the conflict that Washington brought to Ukraine and to Russia.

And it is not only Washington that rejects a resolution of the Ukrainian difficulties created by Washington, but also the EU. Washington’s puppet, Herman Van Rompuy, President of the Washington front group--the European Council--announced, if news reports are correct, which they seldom are, that the European Union is imposing sanctions on the Russian energy firms Rosneft, Gazpromneft and Transneft as well as state-run companies with turnover of more than $27 billion a year.

The Russian response to this audacity should be to turn off the gas in the winter without warning. All of it. As Putin’s interest is to separate Europe from Washington’s control, this would do it. All of East and West Europe and Ukraine would be on their knees in Moscow begging for the energy to be turned back on. All Putin would have to say is «only non-NATO members get gas».

That would bring an end to Washington’s assault on Russia.

The American neoconservatives, a deranged collection of scum that comprises the greatest threat to human life in world history, are denouncing Obama for «weakness» for not sending troops to Ukraine. The neocon nazis claim that Obama’s leadership has resulted in NATO loosing its will and its muscle.

It remains for the Russian government to demonstrate that all muscle over Ukraine and Europe resides in Moscow.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/09/09/the-ukraine-crisis-remains-unresolved.html

"Wie der ISIS zu seinen schweren Waffen kam und wer ihn weshalb so stark gemacht hat" fragt der US-Publizist Kurt Nimmo

Der ISIS und der Plan, den Mittleren Osten zu balkanisieren

Friedenspolitische Mitteilungen aus der US-Militärregion Kaiserslautern/Ramstein LP 144/14 – 12.09.14

ALEX JONES' INFOWARS.COM, 15.06.14

( http://www.infowars.com/isis-and-the-plan-to-balkanize-the-middle-east/ )
Die Konzernmedien haben berichtet, die ISIS-Kämpfer hätten die modernen (US-)Waffen übernommen, die von der irakischen Armee bei ihrer Flucht aus Mossul zurückgelassen wurden. Der ISIS hat aber auch vorher schon moderne Waffen erhalten, und die meisten kamen aus den USA.
Michael Knights vom Washington Institute for Near East Policy (s. dazu auch http://www.- washingtoninstitute.org/experts/view/knights-michael ), den die Website Vox.com als ob- sessiven ISIS-Beobachter bezeichnet [s. http://www.vox.com/2014/6/11/5800188/who-is-i- sis-how-they-conquered-mosul ], behauptet, die ISIS-Terroristen seien auch schon vorher mit Waffen versorgt worden, weil sie in dem von den USA und den Saudis gesponserten Stellvertreterkrieg in Syrien die Regierung al-Assad stürzen sollten.
"Dieser Krieg eröffnete ihnen den Zugang zu schweren Waffen," erklärte Knights gegen- über Vox.
Nach dem Umsturz in Libyen schaffte die CIA mit Hilfe ihrer Partner (libysche) Waffen nach Syrien. Die Ermordung des US-Botschafters Chris Stevens war ein Kollateralscha- den dieser Operation. In dem im September 2013 vom Geheimheimdienst-Ausschuss des Senates vorgelegten Bericht über die Vorkommnisse in Bengasi wird zwar gerügt, dass Stevens und sein Personal nicht besser geschützt wurden, der Waffentransfer kommt darin aber nicht vor.
Seymour Hersh, der mit Preisen ausgezeichnete investigative Journalist, den das Magazin The New Yorker wegen seiner Vorliebe für unbequeme Wahrheiten stillschweigend kaltge- stellt hat, berichtete, wie der Senat die Informationen über die CIA und den Waffentransfer über Bengasi unterdrückt hat: [s. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-li- ne-and-the-rat-line ]
Ein streng geheimer Anhang zu dem Bericht (des Senatsausschusses), der nicht veröf- fentlicht wurde, bezieht sich auf ein Geheimabkommen, das Anfang 2012 zwischen den Regierungen Obamas und Erdogans abgeschlossen wurde. Darin geht es um die "Rat Line" (die Rattenlinie, die zum Transfer der libyschen Waffen benutzt wurde). Aus die- sem Abkommen geht auch hervor, dass die Türkei, Saudi-Arabien und Katar den Waf- fendeal finanziert haben; die CIA hat mit Unterstützung des (britischen Geheimdienstes) MI6 (s. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Intelligence_Service ) die Waffen aus den Ar- senalen Gaddafis beschafft und nach Syrien bringen lassen. Dazu wurden in Libyen mehrere, zum Teil australische Scheinfirmen gegründet. Aus dem aktiven Dienst aus- geschiedene US-Soldaten, die nicht immer wussten, wer sie wirklich beschäftigte, wur- den für das Verladen und Verschifften der Waffen angeheuert. Die Operation wurde von David Petraeus, dem damaligen CIA-Direktor geleitet; bald danach musste er zurücktreten, aber nur, weil bekannt wurde, dass er ein Verhältnis mit seiner Biografin hatte. Sein Sprecher bestritt, dass die Operation überhaupt stattgefunden hat.

Über diese Operation wurden vor ihrer Durchführung weder die Geheimdienstaus- schüsse noch die Führung des Kongresses informiert, obwohl das nach einem in den 1970er Jahren beschlossenen Gesetz erforderlich gewesen wäre. Wegen der Beteili- gung des MI6 konnte die CIA den Waffentransfer als geheimzuhaltende Gemein- schaftsoperation ausgeben und damit das Gesetz umgehen. Ein ehemaliger Geheim- dienstmitarbeiter erklärte, die CIA habe diese Ausnahmeregelung jahrelang benutzt, um den Kongress zu täuschen und das ihm geschuldete "Finding" zu vermeiden. Dieses "Finding" ist ein Dokument, das die geplante verdeckte Operation der CIA beschreibt und das der Kongressführung zur Genehmigung vorgelegt werden muss. Kenntnis vom Anhang zu dem Bericht des Senatsausschusses erhielten nur die Verfasser und insge- samt acht führende demokratische und republikanische Politiker aus den Führungen und den Geheimdienstausschüssen des Repräsentantenhauses und des Senates. Die- ses Verfahren kann natürlich die eigentlich erforderliche Vorabinformation nicht erset- zen: Es ist auch nicht bekannt, ob sich die acht informierten Politiker überhaupt getrof- fen und Fragen zu dem geheimen Anhang des Berichtes gestellt haben.
In dem Anhang steht nichts über die Vorgeschichte des Angriffs in Bengasi; darin wir auch nicht erklärt, warum das US-Konsulat überhaupt überfallen wurde. "Die einzige Aufgabe dieses Konsulats war die Organisation des Waffentransfers," erklärte der ehe- malige Geheimdienstmitarbeiter, der den Anhang gelesen hat. "Ansonsten hatte es kei- nen politischen Auftrag."

Der ISIS hat die Waffen von seinem Herrn und Meister erhalten

Bereits im April haben wir berichtet, dass die USA von ihren angeblich "gemäßigten Söld- nern" auch Waffen an Al-Nusra (s. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Nusra-Front ) und andere Terroristengruppen liefern ließen. [s. http://www.infowars.com/more-evidence-u-s-funds-al- qaeda-terrorists-in-syria/ ] Jamal Maarouf, der die von der CIA und von den Geheimdiens- ten Saudi-Arabiens und Katars geschaffene Syrian Revolutionary Front / SRF führt, sagte: "Wenn Leute [aus den USA, Saudi-Arabien oder Katar], die uns unterstützen, uns beauf- tragen, auch einer anderen Gruppe Waffen zu geben, dann tun wir das. Vor einem Monat haben sie uns gebeten, Waffen nach Yabroud [eine Stadt in Syrien] zu schicken, und da- raufhin haben wir viele Waffen in diese Stadt geschickt. Wir tun alles, was sie uns sagen."
Nach Meinung Barak Barfis, eines Rechercheurs der von vielen Geldgebern finanzierten New American Foundation [s. dazu http://newamerica.net/about/funding ] wird auch der Al- Qaida-Ableger Al-Nusra, der massenhaft syrische Soldaten exekutiert [s. http://www.fran- ce24.com/en/20130516-video-al-nusra-rebel-executing-syria-soldiers/ ], Christen enthaup- tet und andere Gräueltaten begangen hat, indirekt von der SRF mit Waffen beliefert.
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, der selbsternannte Führer des Islamischen Staates im Irak und in Syrien / ISIS, hatte sich auch schon bei der Gründung der Al-Nusra als nützlich erwiesen. Nach einem Machtkampf zwischen ISIS und Al-Nusra gab al-Baghdadi die Auflösung der Jabhat al-Nusra und die Eingliederung ihrer Kämpfer in den ISIS bekannt.
"Der ISIS konnte sich schnell mit der Eroberung großer Gebiete brüsten, die fast wider- standslos erfolgte, weil er die Al-Nusra-Kämpfer integriert hatte," meldete Al-Monitor. [s. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/2013/11/syria-islamic-state-iraq-sham-grow- th.html ] "Nach Schätzungen haben sich etwa 65 Prozent der Al-Nusra-Kämpfer dem ISIS angeschlossen. Die meisten von ihnen waren nicht aus Syrien stammende Dschihadisten.

Sogar komplette Brigaden schlossen sich dem ISIS an, darunter auch der Mujahedeen Shura Council (s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen_Shura_Council_%28Iraq%29 ) der von Abu al-Atheer geführt wurde; der ISIS hat ihn dann zum Emir von Aleppo ernannt. Auch die von Omar al-Chechani geführte Gruppierung Jaish al-Muhajireen und al-Ansar (s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaish_al-Muhajireen_wal-Ansar ) ging im ISIS auf.
Noch Anfang Juni hat Susan Rice, Obamas wichtigste außenpolitische Beraterin, zugege- ben, dass die USA "gemäßigte syrische Rebellen" mit tödlichen Waffen versorgen; [s. http://www.infowars.com/susan-rice-admits-u-s-giving-arms-to-al-qaeda-in-syria/ ] dass diese Waffen dann bei Al-Nusra und anderen radikalen islamistischen Gruppierungen lan- den, hat sie natürlich nicht erwähnt.
Erst kürzlich hat Marie Harf, die stellvertretende Leiterin des Pressebüros des US-Außen- ministeriums, vor Reportern erklärt. "Wir sind sehr besorgt über die Tatsache, dass dem ISIS sowohl in Syrien als auch im Irak so viele Waffen in die Hände gefallen sind, das stellt ein großes Sicherheitsproblem für beide Länder dar." [s. dazu auch http://thehill.com/poli- cy/defense/209369-should-us-arm-iraq-its-now-a-tougher-decision }
Das Pentagon hat ebenfalls zur Bewaffnung des ISIS beigetragen, denn der hat auch die (vom Pentagon gelieferten) Waffen der geflüchteten irakischen Sicherheitskräfte übernom- men.
"Sie fahren mit Fahrzeugen (der irakischen Armee) herum und haben auch noch anderes Material erbeutet; ich kann Ihnen aber nicht sagen, was tatsächlich alles in ihre Hände ge- fallen ist," teilte Rear Adm. (Flottillenadmiral) John Kirby, der Pressesprecher des Penta- gons, am Freitag Reportern mit. [s. http://thehill.com/policy/defense/209369-should-us-ar- m-iraq-its-now-a-tougher-decision ]
Der größte Teil des "Materials", von dem Kirby sprach, kam aus den USA – teilweise mit Unterstützung Saudi-Arabiens, Katars, der CIA und des MI6, wie wir von Hersh wissen. Es wurde aus geplünderten Waffenlagern in Libyen (nach Syrien) transferiert. Diese (in die Hände des ISIS gelangten) Waffen werden jetzt benutzt, um den ISIS als gefährlichen Gegner darzustellen, der durch ein direktes Eingreifen der USA auch und vor allem in Syri- en, wo der Stellvertreterkrieg gegen Al-Assad ins Stocken geraten ist, ausgeschaltet wer- den müsse.

Der Plan, den Mittleren Osten in ethnisch und und religiös geprägte Vasallenstaaten aufzuspalten

Bereits 2006 hat der mittlerweile in den Ruhestand versetzte Lt. Col. (Oberstleutnant) Ralph Pe- ters vorgeschlagen, "zum Abbau regionaler Spannungen eine Än- derung der Grenzen im Mittleren Osten und in Asien unter Berück- sichtigung ethnischer, religiöser und stammesgeschichtlicher Trennungslinien" vorzunehmen (s. nebenstehende Grafik); im Ar- med Forces Journal war darüber zu lesen: [s. http://www.armed- forcesjournal.com/peters-blood- borders-map/ ]

"Syriens günstige Lage und seine militärische Stärke machen es zum strategischen Zen- trum des Nahen Ostens," schrieb Robin Wright im September 2013 in der New York Ti- mes [s. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/29/opinion/sunday/imagining-a-remapped-midd- le-east.html?pagewanted=all ] – in einem Artikel zu der Karte, die Peters für die Neuord- nung des Nahen und Mittleren Ostens vorgeschlagen hat. "Mit der Neuordnung Syriens könnte ein Präzedenzfall für die ganze Region schaffen und nebenan fortgeführt werden. Bisher konnte der Irak wegen des vom Ausland ausgeübten Drucks, wegen regionaler Ängste vor irakischen Alleingängen und weil ihm sein Ölreichtum wenigsten auf dem Pa- pier zu loyalen Unterstützern verholfen hat, seinen Zerfall verhindern. Aber der Bürger- krieg in Syrien könnte auch den Irak in den Strudel reißen."
Der Irak scheint einer Aufsplitterung entlang ethnischer und religiöser Trennungslinien jetzt näher als jemals zuvor zu sein. Diese Aufsplitterung haben die Neokonservativen schon vor dem Amtsantritt des jüngeren Bush geplant – in ihrem (bereits 1996 vorgelegten Stra- tegiepapier) "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" (Ein sauberer Bruch: Eine Strategie zur Sicherung der Ostflanke, weitere Infos dazu unter http://en.wiki- pedia.org/wiki/A_Clean_Break:_A_New_Strategy_for_Securing_the_Realm ). In dem Do- kument einer Studiengruppe, das sich mit einer neuen Israel-Strategie über das Jahr 2000 hinaus befasst, wurden bereits der Sturz Saddam Husseins und das Anzetteln eines Stell- vertreterkrieges gegen Al-Assads Syrien gefordert.
Noch vor der Verfassung des "Clean-Break-Dokuments" hat (der israelische Politiker und Journalist) Oded Yinon "The Zionist Plan for the Middle East" (den Zionistischen Plan für den Mittleren Osten, s, http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/The%20Zionist%20- Plan%20for%20the%20Middle%20East.pdf ) vorgelegt. Darin forderte er, Israel solle "die arabischen Staaten in kleinere Territorien zerschlagen und die Aufteilung Syriens und des Iraks in ethnisch oder religiös definierte Teilstaaten wie den Libanon betreiben". Das müs- se "das langfristige Primärziel Israels zu Sicherung seiner Ostgrenze sein". Yinon schlug vor, die arabischen und islamischen Staaten von innen heraus unter Ausnutzung der in ih- nen herrschenden religiösen und ethnischen Spannungen zu zerstören. (Weitere Infos dazu sind nachzulesen unter http://www.globalresearch.ca/geopolitisches-schachbrett-tei- le-erobere-und-beherrsche-den-neuen-nahen-und-mittleren-osten/27994 .)

P2OG in Aktion

Der ISIS wird als Ergebnis des Einflusses der Al-Qaida dargestellt. Es wäre jedoch zutref- fender, ihn als Ergebnis der Einflusses darzustellen, den die Neokonservativen unter Bush auf das Pentagon hatten. Bereits 2005 hat Frank Morales aus einem Pentagon-Dokument, zitiert, in dem die Bildung einer Proactive Preemptive Operations Group / P2OG (einer vor- ausschauend handelnden operativen Gruppe, weitere Infos dazu unter http://en.wikipe- dia.org/wiki/Proactive,_Preemptive_Operations_Group ) vorgeschlagen wird. [s http://ww- w.globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR505A.html ]
Aus einem Geheimdokument, das (der damalige US-Verteidigungsminister) Rumsfeld von seinem Defense Science Board (seiner Beraterkommission aus Wissenschaftlern, s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Science_Board ) erstellen ließ, geht hervor, dass die neue Proactive Preemptive Operations Group / P2OG Terroristengruppen durch ge- heime Operationen (schaffen und) zur Begehung von Gewalttaten anstiften soll. Es wird vorgeschlagen, sie aus 100 Spezialisten für Terrorbekämpfung zu bilden und ihr einen Jahresetat von 100 Millionen Dollar zur Verfügung zu stellen; nach dem von Arkin (s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Arkin ) beschafften Dokument soll die P2OG offiziell "Terroristenführer" jagen, in Wirklichkeit aber Aktionen durchführen, die "Terroristen- gruppen" (entstehen lassen und) zu "gewalttätigen Reaktionen provozieren", damit –

nach der Logik des damaligen US-Verteidigungsministers – unsere "Good Guys" (die US-Soldaten) "zum Gegenangriff" gegen sie vorgehen können. Mit anderen Worten, bei geheimen US-Militäreinsätzen sollen Morde und Sabotageakte begangen und Täu- schungsmanöver inszeniert werden, (um Terroristengruppen zu formen) die dazu ge- bracht werden können, üble Anschläge auf unbeteiligte Zivilisten, möglichst auch auf US-Amerikaner, zu begehen – damit man dann den "Terrorismus" bekämpfen kann, den man selbst geschaffen hat!
Der ISIS wurde nur geschaffen, weil der vorher inszenierte Terror nicht den erwünschten Erfolg gebracht hat. Deshalb musste die CIA nachhelfen und mit Unterstützung ihrer Part- ner und der Hilfe "gemäßigter syrischer Rebellen" Al-Nusra und schließlich den ISIS mit besseren Waffen versorgen.
Der ISIS könnte es tatsächlich schaffen, ein brutales Kalifat zu errichten – wenn er nicht "zurück in die Steinzeit" gebombt wird, wie das Senator Lindsey Graham (s. http://de.wiki- pedia.org/wiki/Lindsey_Graham ) und andere Neokonservative im Kongress fordern.
Auf jeden Fall wird der Plan, die arabischen und islamischen Staaten zu zerschlagen und den Mittleren Osten zu balkanisieren, aufgehen. Als Reaktion auf den ISIS haben die Kur- den im Irak de facto bereits einen eigenen Staat errichtet, und der Iran hat sich angeboten die Schiiten im Süden des Iraks zu verteidigen. All das ist ganz im Sinne des (Peters-)Pla - nes, den Nahen und Mittleren Osten noch stärker zu zersplittern, als das die Briten nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg getan haben.
(Wir haben den bereits am 15. Juni 2014 erschienenen Artikel erst jetzt entdeckt und we- gen seiner Aktualität komplett übersetzt und mit Ergänzungen und Links in runden Klam- mern versehen. Die Links in eckigen Klammern hat der Autor selbst eingefügt. Kurt Immo ist zu sehen und zu hören unter http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFhwhTZZQxE . Ein Vi- deo in englischer Sprache, das die Aussagen in diesem Artikel bestätigt, ist aufzurufen über http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39603.htm . Anschließend drucken wir den Originaltext ab.) ________________________________________________________________________
ISIS and the Plan to Balkanize the Middle East
Posted By Kurt Nimmo June 15, 2014
The corporate media reports ISIS in Iraq received many of its weapons as a result of the Iraqi retreat from Mosul. ISIS, however, had plenty of weapons prior to the takeover. Most came from the United States.
The U.S. and Saudi sponsored proxy war in Syria to topple the government of al-Assad provided the terror group with its weapons, according to Michael Knights, the Lafer Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who is described by Vox as “an obsessive ISIS watcher.”

“The war gave them a lot of access to heavy weaponry,” Knights told Vox.