November so far has been a trying month, a month of tragedy, heartbreaks and fear … from ISIL targeting Russia, Lebanon, Syria, and Paris to Turkey’s downing of a Russian jet over Latakia in Syrian territory, terror has dominated the global narrative, darkening our future with talks of war.
Make no mistake: Turkey’s actions towards Russia are tantamount to a declaration of war. As it stands, Moscow could quite legitimately retaliate against Ankara, all within the boundaries of international law. But Russia is not the United States! Russia does not simply smite the hands of its enemies - unlike most; Russia understands that if wars are easily started, they almost never serve those powers engaged in them. That is not to say however that the ‘Great Russian Bear’ will simply look on as its people are put in the line of fire; only that national interests are best served through clever leadership, not brutal force.
Peace is not built on blood but through cooperation, and stability is only ever achieved through alliances and common interests, not fear of oppression. Those are the policies Moscow has carried for the past decade or so, and those are the fundamentals Russia has sponsored where neocons have all but spat lead at the world by way of crisis resolution.
In that sense Turkish President Recep Erdogan profoundly misplayed its cards in this new thaw against Moscow. President Vladimir Putin is unlikely to get drawn in a game of military tit-for-tat against Ankara.
And if Erdogan imagined for a second that its membership of NATO would shield him from any political or military repercussions, the past 48 hours must have proven indeed disappointing. Very much alone in the storm he created, no Western “allies” came to whisk Erdogan on a white horse. And yes US President Barack Obama did indeed assert that Turkey had every right to defend its airspace, arguing that Russia ought to be more careful while targeting ISIL, but that’s political lip-service, not an undying promise of support, come what may.
Turkey is only ever really a member of NATO when it suits NATO! I believe Israel shooting at Turkey’s flotilla near Gaza in 2010 highlighted those double standards.
Miscalculations aside, what did Turkey hope to achieve by downing one of Russia’s planes? A border violaton? Turkish warplanes violates Greek airspace almost on a regular basis with 2,244 breaches in 2014 alone.
While there is little doubt in my mind that Turkey did not act on a simple impulse, or even out of genuine fear that its sovereignty had been threatened - those details will surely surface in due time - the real story behind this tragedy stands beyond a simple territorial spat in between two regional superpowers.
Let me put it this way - for a state to risk war the stakes must be rather high.
Allow me to point out to what we already know for certain before delving in any further.
To begin with Turkey and other Western powers’ claims that Russia had been targeting so-called civilian areas in Latakia were debunked by a video published by America’s “moderate militias” featuring one of the fallen Russian pilots - first lie. As Marwa Osman postulated in her comments to RT, those men on the ground do not exactly scream civilians.
Then, President Obama came out with this quote: "They [Russians] are operating very close to a Turkish border, and they are going after moderate opposition that is supported by not only Turkey but a wide range of countries” … another lie. This one sentence essentially confirms that Western powers have colluded with radicals to further their agenda in the region - but not only that. It also lifts the veil on Turkey’s dealings in the Latakia region - home to ISIL contraband oil operations.
We know that the Latakia region is crawling with armed militants in league with the likes of al-Nusra, ISIL and other terror denominations. We also know that Latakia has been an important financial stronghold of several oil and gas fields remaining under militant control. Finally, and this is a big one, Latakia is a geostrategic goldmine in that it offers direct access to Turkey, thus making the transport of men, weapons, and contraband more than just a little convenient.
This vein in between Turkey and ISIL is worth millions, if not billions of dollars - notwithstanding the fact it offers political opportunity.
Now can you see why Turkey’s attack was not out of sorts? Turkey lashed out at Russia because Russia hit a sensitive nerve.
If you look deeper, Erdogan’s knee-jerk reaction to President Putin’s advances in Syria stands testimony to Moscow’s successes against ISIL. So what if Russia actually stumbled upon one very Turkish smoking terror gun. What if Latakia held the keys to ISIL’s “invisible patrons”?
Those are the questions Moscow will undoubtedly demand the answers to, especially now that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov confirmed at a press conference that “evidences suggest that the downing of the place was pre-planned.”
Another aspect of this crisis needs to be considered when assessing all implications.
An attack on Russia could really serve an alternative political agenda.
Consider this: for every day that Russia and Syria are eroding the terror networks, for every day that civilians return to their homes, the United States and its Western partners are losing both political and military credibility.
Within this logic and in view of past manipulations, would it not be plausible to assume that Turkey aimed to shift the media narrative away from the war on terror and back onto the old East versus West cold war mantra?
After all if the public were to live in fear of WWIII, terror would most likely take a back seat, allowing for a media re-calibration.
In the aftermath of the spate of ISIS atrocities – first the downing of the Russian passenger plane, Metrojet Flight 7K9268 over the Sinai at the end of October, killing all 224 on board, followed by the killing of 43 civilians in Beirut in a suicide bomb attack, and most recently the slaughter of 130 people in Paris in multiple suicide bombings and shootings – we now know who is serious about confronting this medieval death cult and who is not.
More, we are starting to uncover those who speak the language of anti-terrorism while in practice working to facilitate and support it.
Turkey is a key culprit in this regard. A murky relationship has long existed between Ankara, ISIS, al Nusra, and other jihadi groups operating in Syria. Indeed, on the most basic level, without their ability to pass back and forth across the Turkish border at will, those groups could not have operated as easily and effectively as they had until Russia intervened.
However, according to a report by David L Phillips of Columbia University, Turkey’s support for extremist groups operating in Syria, including ISIS has been even more extensive than previously thought. Drawing on a wide variety of sources, Phillips reveals that the Turkish government, a member of NATO and a key Western ally, has been involved in helping ISIS with recruitment, training, and has provided it with intelligence and safe havens and sanctuary. Most recently it has been exposed as a major customer for stolen Syrian oil, supplied by the terrorist group.
Perhaps the most damning evidence contained in the report when it comes to Turkey’s role, is in relation to its actions and inaction when it came to the siege of the Kurdish town of Kobani on the Syrian-Turkish border in September and October of 2014.
Anwar Moslem, Mayor of Kobani, said on September 19, 2014: ‘Based on the intelligence we got two days before the breakout of the current war, trains full of forces and ammunition, which were passing by north of Kobani, had an-hour-and-ten-to-twenty-minute-long stops in these villages: Salib Qaran, Gire Sor, Moshrefat Ezzo. There is evidence, witnesses, and videos about this. Why is ISIS strong only in Kobani's east? Why is it not strong either in its south or west? Since these trains stopped in villages located in the east of Kobani, we guess they had brought ammunition and additional force for the ISIS.’ In the second article on September 30, 2014, a CHP delegation visited Kobani, where locals claimed that everything from the clothes ISIS militants wear to their guns comes from Turkey.
Intelligence eporta indicate that Turkey is the primary customer for ISIS oil, providing logistical support in the form of arms, uniforms, vehicles, food, and cash for the Iriqui Oil now controlled by ISIS.
If the U.S. led coalition was serious, they would fist take out the Terrorist controlled oil fields and refineries stolen from Iraq, thus leaving ISIS without barter power.
Very little was reported on how, during the siege of Kobani, as its Kurdish defenders mounted a heroic defense of the town against thousands of ISIS fighters, armed with tanks and artillery, Turkish tanks and troops sat just over the border and did nothing to intervene.
Likewise, earlier this year Turkey carried out airstrikes against those same Kurdish volunteers of the PKK/YPG within Syria, while depicting them as terrorists. Turkey’s oppression of its Kurdish minority going back many years is of course a matter of record.
President Erdogan and his government has undeniably been a key in the destabilization of Syria, doing its utmost to foment U.S. backed regime change. As with the Saudis and other Gulf monarchies, before Russia’s intervention Turkey was hovering over Syria as a vulture hovers over a dying animal, waiting for it to perish before descending to feed on its carcass.
The fact that Turkey remains a key Western ally exposes the moral high ground from which Washington and its allies have lectured Russia over its role in Syria as nothing more than a dung-heap of hypocrisy.
If the West was serious about confronting terrorism, was serious about returning stability to a region it has helped to set on fire, it would reconsider its close ties to both Turkey and the Saudis, whose governments between them have been wading in the river of blood they have helped shed these past four years. Turkey’s claim that the Russian military aircraft it shot down had encroached on its airspace and ignored multiple warnings should be treated with the credibility it deserves, especially when we recall that prior to Russia’s participation in the conflict, Turkey’s violation of Syrian airspace and the Syrian border was happening on a regular basis.
With Russia’s presence in Syria has put paid to Erdogan’s objective of toppling the Syrian government, we begin to discern its efforts to enlist the support of NATO in putting pressure on Russia to desist. It also helps to explain why the West continues to refuse President Putin’s call for cooperation and unity in the effort to eradicate ISIS and other extremist groups massacring and slaughtering their way across the country, with the intention of turning it into a mass grave.
In the wake of the recent spate of ISIS atrocities unleashed against Russian, Lebanese, and French civilians, the grounds for refusing to enter such an alliance are as indefensible as Turkey’s role in the conflict and its most recent action in shooting down a Russian aircraft.
As the man said: “Those who sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind.”
Top Secret papers reveals the history surrounding the notorious Operation Northwoods. The Northwoods plan called for US military and intelligence agents to carry out a series of false flag attacks, including terrorist attacks in US cities. The events would be blamed on Cuba as an excuse for a military intervention. Though most aspects of the plan were never carried out, the history of how and why the operation was put together is fascinating and highly significant in light of the several False Flag attacks being perpetuated around the world today. So many Americans still hold the idea that our military leaders would never turn on their country. Take your time and read about Northwoods.
The U.S. Military has changed over the years from an American Defense mechanism into a gigantic cash cow for retiring Generals, Politicians, and Defense Contractors.
The average income for a General or Admiral is about $180,000/yr. In peace time that salary is decreased substantially. So it is in the best interest of our top militar leaders to look for and in many cases influence conflicts around the world. There is always a tie for a Gerneral to retire, in peacetime they simply get on their Sportsfisher and enjoy retirement fishing, or golfing, or relaxing, living solely off of their retirement pay.
Four-star officer retiring with 40 years of experience would receive a pension of $237,144, according to the Pentagon. Base pay for active-duty top officers is $181,501, according to Navy Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a Pentagon spokesman. Housing and other allowances can boost their compensation an additional third.
But if there are skirmishes ongoing around the world, a retiring general becomes prime property and goes out to the highest bidding Defense Contractor bidding for the lucrative defense contracts. In wartime that same general that earned $180,00 as a active duty military leader can become an instant millionaire simply by joining the staff of one of hundreds of contractors.
Here is an example of the Department of Defense's solution to a mundane retirement.
Whatever happened to the promise that anyone could build a better life by honest labor? That my life would be better than my parents’, and that my kids’ lives would be better than mine?
That America is gone, now seen only in old Frank Capra movies late at night.
But what Happened?
Why do we continue to "defend" a region that doesn't like us?
Think of what the money we are throwing into the Middle East conflict could do for America.
Yet we continue to fund the black hole, And Americans continue to suffer the consequences of a bankrupt nation.
Lets start here.
"Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force."
—Jimmy Carter, state of the union address, Jan. 23, 1980
Middle Eastern oil has enchanted global powers and global capital since the early twentieth century. Its allure has been particularly powerful for the United States. The American romance began in earnest in the 1930s, when geologists working for Standard Oil of California discovered commercial quantities of oil on the eastern shores of Saudi Arabia. In the years that followed, enchantment turned into obsession. Shortly after World War II it became clear that oil was more than merely a coveted industrial commodity. The most visible and celebrated event in that history occurred when Franklin D. Roosevelt hosted ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Ibn Saud, the founding monarch of Saudi Arabia, aboard the USS Quincy on Egypt’s Great Bitter Lake in February 1945. The meeting permanently linked Middle Eastern oil with American national security. It also helped forge one of the twentieth century’s most important strategic relationships, in which the Saudis would supply cheap oil to global markets in exchange for American protection. A bargain was made. And so too was a future tinderbox.
Over the course of the twentieth century, preserving the security not just of Saudi Arabia but of the entire Persian Gulf region and the flow of Middle Eastern oil were among the United States’ chief political-economic concerns. The pursuit of American power in the Gulf has been fraught with peril and has proved costly in terms of both blood and treasure. Oil has flowed, although not without difficulty. Since the late 1970s the Gulf has been rocked by revolution and almost permanent war. Security, if measured by the absence of conflict, has been elusive, and safeguarding the Persian Gulf and the region’s oil producers has meant increasingly more direct and dearer forms of U.S. intervention.
The US appears to be after a full-blown war with Russia in Syria, as Moscow has exposed Washington's “fraudulent attitudes” in the Middle East, says an American philosopher.
“Because the situation is so appallingly bad for the United States, because Russia has embarrassed and exposed fraudulent attitudes of the United States, [President Barack] Obama feels he has to precipitate World War III, that appears to be what is taking place now,” James Fetzer told Press TV on Saturday.
Fetzer said the United States wants to sacrifice its force in the region "in order to begin and initiate a war on Russia."
The comments come on the heels of a Washington announcement to send Special Operations Forces troops to Syria to "assist" militants fighting against the government in Damascus and the Daesh (ISIL) terrorist group, in an apparent breach of President Barack Obama's promise not to put US “boots on the ground" there.
“They are sending the troops to be sacrificed for the sake of starting a third world war, because everything is going against the United States,” Fetzer pointed out.
He further noted that some of America's allies have turned to Russia for support under the circumstances. “Even former allies of the United States are now seeking the aid and assistance of Russia.”
The philosopher added, “The United States has had years now to do something about ISIS (ISIL), but it's only now with the intervention of Russia that ISIS has been taken out very systematically, very methodically and frankly, the Middle East is never going to be the same again.”
The United States has been carrying out airstrikes in Syria, allegedly pounding Daesh positions there for over a year now.
Russia began its own air campaign in the Arab country after warning US to take its warplanes out of the territory. The Pentagon, however, refused to comply with Moscow’s demand.
Regarding the US plan to send up to 50 special operations troops to northern Syria to advise “Kurdish and Arab forces” in their fight against Daesh (ISIL) militants, Fetzer said, "The latest reports, however, of sending more troops to Syria are profoundly disturbing."
But First an All News Network Commentary of the press briefing found below.
By now most have heard that the Obama Regime has ordered an American ground presence in Syria. Before getting into the Official Department of Defense Press Briefing below, let's look historically at past U.S. military introductions into foreign soils.
Vietnam: U.S. Advisors
The U.S. military advisory effort in Vietnam had a modest beginning in September 1950, when the United States Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG), Vietnam, was established in Saigon. Its mission was to supervise the issuance and employment of $10 million of military equipment to support French legionnaires in their effort to combat Viet Minh forces. By 1953 the amount of U.S. military aid had jumped to over $350 million and was used to replace the badly worn World War II vintage equipment that France, still suffering economically from the devastation of that war, was still using.
During the period -- from 1955 through 1960 -- the U.S. had between 750 and 1,500 military advisors assisting the Diem government to establish an effective army, organized as the Military Assistance and Advisory Group (MAAG), Vietnam.
By 1961 the steady progress of the insurgency was near crisis levels. The new Kennedy administration increased American support for the Diem regime to prevent a collapse. By December of 1961, 3,200 U.S. military personnel were in Vietnam as advisors
By 1963, U.S. military advisors in Vietnam had grown to 16,000.
By 1970 the number of U.S. Troops had elevated to 270,000.
Iraq: U.S. Trainers
In 2012 the number of trainers in Iraq numbered 300
in Nov 2014 the following announcement was made:
One of the pillars of the United States’ counter-ISIL strategy is building the capacity of local forces to take the fight to ISIL. We have been providing this support for Iraqi Security Forces through advise and assist programs; through the provision of weapons, equipment, and intelligence; and through airstrikes with our coalition partners to enable our Iraqi partners’ success. As a part of our strategy for strengthening partners on the ground, President Obama today authorized the deployment of up to 1500 additional U.S. military personnel in a non-combat role to train, advise, and assist Iraqi Security Forces, including Kurdish forces. U.S. troops will not be in combat, but they will be better positioned to support Iraqi Security Forces as they take the fight to ISIL. They will not be in the combat zones.
by September 2015 the number of U.S. troops in Iraq numbered 3500. Additionally Local commanders were given the option to embed U.S. troops with Iraqi Forces.
(The decision to embed advisers should be made by the commanders on the ground, Odierno said)
So to recap the past, it seems that the government believes that Americans have no memory of past events.
Here is the M.O. of troop escalation.
ALLNEWSNETWORK - Two days ago I shouted out, following a meeting with Chinese Officials in Miami, that this was coming down the pike. We need to really watch our step. Call your Congressman! According to the Officials i spoke to they "allowed" the U.S. to violate their waters so that they could collect data on the ship. They had monitoring facilities both on the island and on the sea monitoring signals, data, and movements. "We will need this data to evaluate for future use as we prepare for a defensive battle."
On Tuesday, the Aegis destroyer USS Lassen entered within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef, an undersea cliff in the South China Sea, which Beijing turned into an artificial island. The destroyer was reportedly traveling with a Navy surveillance airplane near the contested Spratly Islands. China views the man-made creation as part of its territory and claims territorial sovereignty over the waters surrounding it.
Addressing the issue of US intrusion on Thursday in a video teleconference, Admiral Wu Shengli warned the chief of US naval operations Admiral John Richardson to refrain from further “provocative acts”.
“If the United States continues with these kinds of dangerous, provocative acts, there could well be a seriously pressing situation between frontline forces from both sides on the sea and in the air, or even a minor incident that sparks war,” Wu said, according to a Chinese naval statement.
“(I) hope the US side cherishes the good situation between the Chinese and US navies that has not come easily and avoids these kinds of incidents from happening again,” Wu added.
Commenting on the bilateral exchange during the teleconference, an American official told Reuters that both sides agreed to avoid clashes. The US and Chinese navies also decided to maintain dialogue and follow protocols stipulated under the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES).
“They agreed that it’s very important that both sides continue to use the protocols under the CUES agreement when they're operating close to keep the chances for misunderstanding and any kind of provocation from occurring,” said the official.
The US Navy stressed that it is entitled to “protect the rights, freedoms, and lawful uses of the sea and airspace guaranteed to all nations under international law.”
Following the incident Beijing had summoned the American ambassador to protest the “provocative” maneuver that according to China’s foreign ministry placed personnel and infrastructure on the island in jeopardy. Close to 200 Chinese troops are believed to be stationed at Subi reef. The reef is also claimed by Taiwan, Vietnam and the Philippines.
Subi Reef lies 500 nautical miles away from Hainan Island, the nearest Chinese shoreline, but only 230 nautical miles from the island of Palawan in the Philippines which disputes Beijing’s territorial claim.
On Thursday, the court in the Hague ruled that it has jurisdiction to hear territorial claims that were filed by the Philippines over the disputed areas in the South China Sea. The UN-based body will hold further hearings to settle the issue but they will not focus on sovereignty but rather economic entitlements.
“This arbitration concerns the role of ‘historic rights’ and the source of maritime entitlements in the South China Sea, the status of certain maritime features in the South China Sea and the maritime entitlements they are capable of generating, and the lawfulness of certain actions by China in the South China Sea that are alleged by the Philippines to violate the Convention,” a press release issued by the Permanent Court of Arbitration read.
We were warned that the day would come. Well it has begun!
Moscow 28 Oct, 2015 10:38
Russian President Vladimir Putin blasted the government for turning a blind eye on US dollar payments in the domestic oil trade.
"Settlements in foreign currencies are now prohibited by [Russian] law. Currently, fees for shipment of oil products and crude oil in the Russian ports of Novorossiisk, Taman, Ust-Luga, Kozmino, Primorsk and others – are either directly priced in US dollars, or denominated in US dollars on online trading systems, practically in real time,” stated the President.
“This is, of course, unacceptable. It directly contradicts current legislation. Additionally, The U.S. Dollar will not be used in International Trade". continued Putin.
"We need to seriously consider strengthening the role of the ruble in settlements; this also includes Russian fuel and energy products. We also need greater use of national currencies in transactions with the countries which are our active trading partners,” the President added.
Tampa Florida, MacDill AFB
The Downplay by media. A Reuters report Oct 28, 2015
The United States is considering sending a small number of special operations forces to Syria and attack helicopters to Iraq as it weighs options to build momentum in the battle against Islamic State, U.S. officials said on Tuesday.
The options appeared to stop short of deploying American troops in any direct ground combat roles, something Obama has so far ruled out.
The Real Deal Oct 27, 2015
During lunch with old friends outside MacDill AFB in Tampa, two U.S. Special Operations Command officials, who spoke to me on condition of anonymity, reported that the orders are in and that we will be deploying 3,000 troops to the AO (Area of Operations).
"Chip, we are concerned due to the scope of our mission there. We will be embedded with Syrian Opposition forces, we believe that many are al-Qaeda or ISIS sympathizers who are not actively engaged against the terrorist threat but rather in support of a regime change.
In this lies our dilemma. Russia is currently carrying our their air war against both the terrorist threat and enemies of Assad. That places American Troops dead in the target sights of Russia.
We believe that we are being used as pawns and many will be sacrificed as a means to war with Russia. The defense contractors with whom we deal in contracts and purchases are gearing up for a war against Russian style equipment.
There are just too many indicators pointing to the administrations move to false flag a war. At the cost of American Lives again!"
What say you America. In for another war, this one of colossal magnitude? Why? It will not just be Russia, But rather Russia and their new Ally, China.
AllNews Network.Please consider a small donation to keep us on the air.
To be sure, groups of oil rags are accumulating in the Western financial basement. They await an incident to light them on fire to produce[…]Read more...
There's a saying in the resource sector investment community regarding whether or not a person might be privy to a good private placement or the[…]Read more...
Commodity prices are plunging, the dollar is powering higher, the yield curve is flattening, ObamaCare is collapsing, global trade is plummeting and terrorism is spreading[…]Read more...
New York closed at $1,070.60 down from $1075.40.In Asia prices were lifted to $1,172. 45 as the dollar slipped slightly, still below 100 on the[…]Read more...
Time and time again over the last number of years the largest global banks have been found complicit in the manipulation of key rates, indices[…]Read more...
This Video is heartwarming. Our Veterans under this administration experience Abuse of basic Human rights.
In the speech above, Pres Obama admits to the U.S. Role in training ISIS Fighters
|SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHANNEL|