This is part 1. Part 2, “Who Needs Enemies?“, will be posted tomorrow.
The US government is engaged in an epic, generational battle; its very survival might be at stake. That would be its battle against the truth. What it has never been engaged in is a war against terrorism, in particular, a war against state-sponsored terrorism. That would be because its allies are prime sponsors, and the biggest sponsor of all has been…the US government! The world owes an incalculable debt to Vladimir Putin for deftly illustrating both facts.
The US government’s battle against the truth kicked into high gear after 9/11. Wars were launched against Afghanistan and Iraq. The Patriot Act launched a nonstop expansion of the surveillance state. Echoes of that famous Vietnamese village: freedom could only be saved by destroying it. Edward Snowden briefly interrupted America’s television and gadget viewing (but not the march of the surveillance state), with his disclosures in 2013.
Had Americans looked up from their screens earlier, they might have noticed a few things that weren’t exactly classified information: the government was mired in quagmires of its own making in Afghanistan and Iraq; it was creating more, not less, terrorism across the Middle East and northern Africa; and the pinnacle of perversity had been reached in Syria, where the US and its allies were aiding and abetting an offshoot, ISIS, of the group, al Qaeda, behind the 9/11 attacks.
ISIS was the love child between the government’s military intervention in Iraq and its support of Syrian rebels seeking to depose Bashar al-Assad (see “A Perfect Time to Leave the Middle East”). Iraq ISIS obtained much of its weaponry from American-trained Iraqi soldiers, who ran at the first sign of trouble and left their weapons behind, while Syria ISIS got much of its supply from “moderate” Syrian rebels who volunteered themselves and their US-supplied armaments to their fellow moderates.
Thanks to a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, it came out earlier this year that the Defense Intelligence Agency contemplated the formation of an extremist Sunni, or “Salafist,” group back in 2012, which it felt would be useful in the government’s long quest to rid Syria of Assad. ISIS fit the bill, so while ostensibly waging one of those “limited” wars so beloved by presidents since Truman (you have to look like you’re doing something against a group linked to al Qaeda that beheads people on YouTube) the Obama brainless trust (also bereft of integrity) looked the other way while ISIS received funding and tactical support from the US’s Sunni allies Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf States, and while the US’s “moderate” Syrian rebels flocked to ISIS like freshmen flock to fraternities during Rush Week. The loyal opposition stayed loyal. Republicans have long wanted to get rid of Assad, too, so they did nothing to expose the administration’s perfidy.
That role was filled by Putin, after Assad publicly admitted that the ISIS-led rebels were getting the best of his army. Assad is Russia’s ally, and Russia has its only naval base on the Mediterranean at Tartus, Syria. While Syria is not a next door neighbor, it’s a cruise missile’s throw away, and Russia has its own Muslim extremist problems that might be exacerbated by an ISIS takeover. At Assad’s invitation, Russia began moving troops, planes, and ships into Syria and Syrian waters. In a memorable and important speech to the UN General Assembly on September 28, Putin also launched a massive counterattack against the US government’s war on truth.
We should all remember the lessons of the past. For example, we remember examples from our Soviet past, when the Soviet Union exported social experiments, pushing for changes in other countries for ideological reasons, and this often led to tragic consequences and caused degradation instead of progress.
It seems, however, that instead of learning from other people’s mistakes, some prefer to repeat them and continue to export revolutions, only now these are “democratic” revolutions. Just look at the situation in the Middle East and Northern Africa already mentioned by the previous speaker. Of course, political and social problems have been piling up for a long time in this region, and people there wanted change. But what was the actual outcome? Instead of bringing about reforms, aggressive intervention rashly destroyed government institutions and the local way of life. Instead of democracy and progress, there is now violence, poverty, social disasters and total disregard for human rights, including even the right to life.
I’m urged to ask those who created this situation: do you at least realize now what you’ve done? But I’m afraid that this question will remain unanswered, because they have never abandoned their policy, which is based on arrogance, exceptionalism and impunity.
Power vacuum in some countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa obviously resulted in the emergence of areas of anarchy, which were quickly filled with extremists and terrorists. The so-called Islamic State has tens of thousands of militants fighting for it, including former Iraqi soldiers who were left on the street after the 2003 invasion. Many recruits come from Libya whose statehood was destroyed as a result of a gross violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1973. And now radical groups are joined by members of the so-called “moderate” Syrian opposition backed by the West. They get weapons and training, and then they defect and join the so-called Islamic State.
In fact, the Islamic State itself did not come out of nowhere. It was initially developed as a weapon against undesirable secular regimes. Having established control over parts of Syria and Iraq, Islamic State now aggressively expands into other regions. It seeks dominance in the Muslim world and beyond. Their plans go further.
The situation is extremely dangerous. In these circumstances, it is hypocritical and irresponsible to make declarations about the threat of terrorism and at the same time turn a blind eye to the channels used to finance and support terrorists, including revenues from drug trafficking, the illegal oil trade and the arms trade.
It is equally irresponsible to manipulate extremist groups and use them to achieve your political goals, hoping that later you’ll find a way to get rid of them or somehow eliminate them.
I’d like to tell those who engage in this: Gentlemen, the people you are dealing with are cruel but they are not dumb. They are as smart as you are. So, it’s a big question: who’s playing who here?
The recent incident where the most “moderate” opposition group handed over their weapons to terrorists is a vivid example of that. We consider that any attempts to flirt with terrorists, let alone arm them, are short-sighted and extremely dangerous. This may make the global terrorist threat much worse, spreading it to new regions around the globe, especially since there are fighters from many different countries, including European ones, gaining combat experience with Islamic State. Unfortunately, Russia is no exception.
From that speech alone it is obvious why the US government has tried so hard to hamper, harass, and, were its dream to come true, depose Putin. The Russians and their allies—the Syrian army, Iranian-led Shiite militias from Iraq and Iran, and Shiite Hezbollah units from Lebanon—have taken the fight to ISIS, exposing the US’s sham war. Nothing is more telling than the US refusing Putin’s invitation to join them. That the Russian alliance is drawing blood may be inferred from the recent ISIS terrorist bombing of a Russian civilian plane, and bombs and shootings in Beirut, Paris, and San Bernardino.
Part 2, “Who Needs Enemies?”, tomorrow
NO BETTER CHRISTMAS PRESENT FOR THE
LIBERTY LOVERS ON YOUR LIST
Pingback: With Friends Like These… | NCRenegade
That my friends is treason at the highest levels.
Pingback: SLL: With Friends Like These | Western Rifle Shooters Association
“…where the US and its allies were aiding and abetting an offshoot, ISIS, of the group, al Qaeda, behind the 9/11 attacks.”
I must respectfully ask, do you honestly believe that al Qaeda (and not multi-national/corporate forces far more powerful) was behind the 9/11 attacks?
I cannot form honest beliefs without honest evidence. The evidence indicates that al Qaeda may have played some role in 9/11, but I am skeptical of the official story. Unfortunately for those of us not part of the cabal that governs this country, we just do not know what goes on behind the scenes. I am skeptical of official stories and propaganda since at least 1913 (see The Golden Pinnacle), but I am just as skeptical of the many on the Internet who claim to “know” what the cabal is up to. So while I suspect that there is much more to the 9/11 story than what has been made public, and if there is, it probably implicates the “multinational/corporate” forces you cite, I don’t know that. The evidence seems a little stronger for al Qaeda involvement, if only as a patsy for those behind-the-scenes forces. I try to sift through what I believe is the best available evidence from what I regard as trustworthy sources, but there are huge gaps in evidence and conflicting information on every issue of importance. My analyses tries to account for gaps and conflicts, but most of my articles are one or two philosophical levels removed from the always imperfect fact record. In most cases I don’t need all the facts to reach the conclusions I reach and I’ll probably never get all the facts on any issue. That certainly was the case in this article, and if there are those national/corporate forces you cite and I suspect, I think it only strengthens the argument I made in my article. Thanks for your question.
Reblogged this on Starvin Larry.
Pingback: Links Post, Go Visit These Sites | IowaDawg Blogging Stuff
Pingback: Who Needs Enemies? by Robert Gore | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC
Reblogged this on The Lynler Report.
What is the evidence that makes you skeptical of the official account of the “official” account of the attacks of 9/11? Are we to disregard the previous attack on the Work Trade Center and on the American embassies in Kenya and in Tanzania? Should we disregard al-Qaeda and bin Laden’s declarations of responsibility for these attacks? Should we question the evidence of our senses for the sake of an inherent skepticism about government? The comment before yours is a denial of all evidence accumulated by sources inside and outside of government, including a bi-partisan presidential commission, have produced massive evidence that the attacks of 9/11 were caused by members of al-Qaeda directed by Osama bin Laden, plotted by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and executed by 19 Islamists recruited to execute the plan. What are the credible sources that day otherwise?
As I said in the other reply, since I first delved into the Kennedy assassination many years ago (and have continued to do so), I’m skeptical of government reports. I did not say I did not think al Qaeda was involved. However, did people in our government know beforehand of the attack? I wouldn’t put it past them, for their own ends: passage of the Patriot Act, start a war in the Middle East, more power for the government, payoffs for defense and intelligence contractors, etc. My belief is that most of the time, the American public knows about 10 percent of what goes on with ours and other governments. With our government, I generally assume the worst and I’ve rarely been surprised. It is impossible in these matters to reach absolute conclusions one way or the other when the government controls all the evidence and the investigations, and has never demonstrated any reluctance to pressure witnesses whose recollections and testimony do not match the official story line. In that light, I will never relinquish my skepticism about government story lines. The one firm conclusion I’ve reached through the years is that government officials lie more often than not.
Pingback: Who Needs Enemies? by Robert Gore | Starvin Larry
Pingback: SLL: Who Needs Enemies? | Western Rifle Shooters Association
Pingback: Who Needs Enemies? | Suspicious American
Pingback: Who Will Fight the Islamic State? by Peter Van Buren | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC
Pingback: Read the Powerful Saudi Arabia Article Censored by Al-Jazeera, by Michael Krieger | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC
Pingback: Enough Already! It’s Time To Send The Despicable House Of Saud To The Dustbin Of History, by David Stockman | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC
Pingback: They Said That? 1/5/16 | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC
Pingback: “ISIS Has Enjoyed Turkish Money For Oil For A Very, Very Long Time”: Israeli Defense Minister, by Tyler Durden | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC
Pingback: The Quagmire to End All Quagmires, by Robert Gore | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC
Pingback: The Quagmire To End All Quagmires | JPPress
Pingback: The Quagmire To End All Quagmires | ValuBit
Pingback: The Quagmire To End All Quagmires | CAPITOL ZERO
Pingback: Today’s News 27th February 2016 | The One Hundredth Monkey
Pingback: The Quagmire To End All Quagmires | Golden Gate Daily
Pingback: The Quagmire To End All Quagmires - News Near You | Latest Trending News
Pingback: THE QUAGMIRE TO END ALL QUAGMIRES – sentinelblog