Quote:

---

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is ready to hold snap parliamentary elections and could share power with a "healthy" opposition.

Russia, along with Iran, has been Assad's principle international ally in the war that has raged in Syria for four-and-a-half years and has claimed a quarter of a million lives.

Moscow has made clear it does not want to see Assad toppled and has seized on gains made by Islamic State in Syria and Iraq to urge his foreign foes, including the United States and Saudi Arabia, to work with Damascus to combat the common enemy.

"We really want to create some kind of an international coalition to fight terrorism and extremism," Putin told journalists on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, saying he had spoken to U.S. President Barack Obama on the matter.

"We are also working with our partners in Syria. In general, the understanding is that this uniting of efforts in fighting terrorism should go in parallel to some political process in Syria itself," Putin said.

---

Quote:

---

Russia is providing “serious” training and logistical support to the Syrian army, Vladimir Putin has said, in the first public confirmation of the depth of Russia’s involvement in Syria's civil war.

Commenting on reports that Russian combat troops have been deployed to Syria, the Russian president said discussion of direct military intervention is “so far premature,” but did not rule out that such a step could be taken in future.

“To say we're ready to do this today - so far it's premature to talk about this. But we are already giving Syria quite serious help with equipment and training soldiers, with our weapons,” the state-owned RIA Novosti news agency quoted Mr Putin as saying when asked about Russian intervention in Syria during an economic forum in Vladivostok.

"We really want to create some kind of an international coalition to fight terrorism and extremism," Mr Putin said.

"To this end, we hold consultations with our American partners - I have personally spoken on the issue with US President Obama."

---

Quote:

---

Russia has repeatedly used its UN Security Council veto to support Bashar al-Assad throughout the four and a half year-long war, which is believed to have claimed some 250,000 lives. Russia has also been a long-term supplier of arms to the Syrian government, something it now justifies by the need to fight Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil).

---

Quote:

---

Speculation is growing that Russia has significantly expanded its involvement in recent months, including with deliveries of advanced weaponry, a raft of spare parts for existing machines, and the deployment of increasing numbers of military advisers and instructors.

Last week Syrian state television released images showing an advanced Russian-built armoured personnel carrier, the BTR-82a, in combat. Videos have also appeared in which troops engaged in combat appear to shout instructions to one another in Russian.

Last week the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth cited western diplomatic sources

---

Quote:

---

saying that Russia was on the verge of deploying “thousands” of troops to Syria to establish an airbase from which the Russian air force would fly combat sorties against Isis.

Russian analysts called the Yedioth report far-fetched, pointing to Russian wariness of repeating the American experience in Iraq and the current strain on the Russian military from a covert war in Ukraine.

---

Quote:

---

Most government-connected analysts have previously insisted that Russia’s support for Mr Assad is “strictly political”, and have dismissed reports of military involvement as “madness”.

“It is a canard. A deployment of that size would require approval from the Federation Council [Russia’s upper house of parliament],”

---

Quote:

---

said Yevgenny Buzhinsky, a retired Russian general who now heads the PIR analytical centre in Moscow. “As far as I am aware any advisers there do not engage in combat.”

But Mr Putin’s comments chime with experts who say the Russian government would be willing to supply substantial logistical support and advice even if it shies away from large-scale intervention.

“Such things are kept very secret, but there is definitely an adviser and instructor mission there, possibly numbering in the hundreds,” said Pavel Felgenhaeur, an independent commentator on Russian military affairs.

“It definitely includes technical advisers and engineers to maintain sophisticated military equipment, and marines to protect them. There is no way Assad’s jets could still be flying after four years of war without Russian technical assistance,” he said.

Mr Felgenhauer said it was “quite conceivable” that members of the advisory mission occasionally found themselves in combat or had even suffered casualties.

---

Quote:

---

The Internet is flooded with rumors about a Russian military intervention in Syria. It all began with an article by Thierry Meyssan in Voltaire Net and now this rumor made it to Zero Hedge. Finally, the Israeli website Ynet also joined the rumor mill. Here are the two main assertions made by these sources:

1) Russia has just created a Russo-Syrian Commission and has begun supplying weapons, sharing intelligence, and sending advisors. All of this is more or less coordinated with the White House.
2) Russia has begun its military intervention in Syria, deploying an aerial contingent to a permanent Syrian base, in order to launch attacks against ISIS and Islamist rebels; US stays silent.

What is interesting in these rumors is that they appear to come from two very different sources. Meyssan gets his information from Syrian sources while Ynet quotes “western diplomatic sources”.

Finally, I will readily admit that there could be a Russian rationale for an intervention in Syria: the Russian security establishment is united in the belief that the US plan is to eventually turn Daesh (aka ‘ISIS’) against Russia and this one of the reasons it is so important to assist the Syrians: it is better to fight Daesh in Syria than it is to fight it in southern Russia.

So the rumor about a Russian intervention is at least credible. And yet, I don’t buy it.

I will gladly admit that I cannot prove a negative and that I have absolutely no privileged access to any special Russian sources. All I can offer are my conjectures and nothing more, and there is a good chance that I might be wrong. But having said that, here is my personal reaction to this rumor.

First, I don’t believe that there is much public support in Russia for a foreign military intervention. It is one thing to be ready to defend your own country or your own citizens when the latter are directly attacked (as in 08.08.08) and quite another to intervene 1’200km away from your national border. And we are not talking about just anywhere 1’200km away from Russia, but very much inside US controlled territory: the US controls Turkey via NATO and the entire Middle-East (except for Iran) via CENTCOM.

Do you remember when the Russian paratroopers moved from Bosnia to Kosovo and took over the Pristina Airport? Russia was unable to resupply them because the US basically controlled the entire airspace between Russia and Serbia. The situation is similar today in the sense that the resupply and support of a Russian contingent in Syria would largely depend on the US goodwill. Yes, the Russian could also use their Navy to resupply and support any Russian contingent through the Mediterranean, but that could be very time consuming and difficult. I have said it many times on this blog: the Russian military is not designed to operate further than roughly 1’000km from the Russian border and a military intervention in Syria, while possible, would definitely stretch this self-imposed limit.

Second, while the first part of the rumor (sending advisors, sharing intelligence and supplying weapons) does not represent a major Russian commitment, the second part of the rumor would represent a major political and military commitment from Russia.

Russia still has a very painful and, I would say, even traumatic recollection of what a “limited military intervention” looks like. After all, this is exactly how the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan was presented to the Russian public, as a “limited military intervention” to protect a friendly country from subversion, foreign intervention and destabilization. How is that different from what is happening today in Syria?

“Limited military intervention” have a strong tendency to lead to an open-ended escalation, and the Russians are quite aware of this. [AS THE USA AND SAUDIS SHOULD BE AWARE BY NOW!] I strongly believe that the Russian withdrawal from Georgia after 08.08.08 is largely explained by this awareness: the Russians could have easily invaded all of Georgia (the Georgian military had basically ceased to exist and there was nothing standing between Russian paratroopers and Tbilissi) in 24 hours or less, and yet they chose to stop and turn back. And when the Russians recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia they still withdrew most of their forces from these two republics and worked hard to put most of the responsibility for the defense of these two countries on the local people. The same approached was used in Chechnia were Russia has a powerful and capable Federal military contingent, but where 99% of the responsibility for security is placed on local, Chechen, forces.

In purely military terms, much of what these rumors claim make no sense to me. For example, Meyssan and Ynet both mention the deployment of MiG-31s to Syria. The problem with this is that the MiG-31 is a pure interceptor designed to protect a huge volume of Russian airspace from a US Air Force attack involving low flying cruise missiles and strategic bombers. As a counter-insurgency weapon the MiG-31 is simply useless. True, the six MiG-31s rumored to be sent to Syria would provide a formidable deterrent against any US, NATO, Turkish or Israeli aircraft entering the Syrian air space, but this is also why I would expect these countries to protest such a delivery with utmost outrage and determination rather than “more or less” coordinate it or “remain silent”. It would be much more logical to send SU-24s and SU-25s to Syria if the goal is to support Syrian army operations against Daesh. But these rumors do not mention these aircraft.

Finally, Ynet speaks of a major military operation. Here is a quite from the article:

“A Russian expeditionary force has already arrived in Syria and set up camp in an Assad-controlled airbase. The base is said to be in area surrounding Damascus, and will serve, for all intents and purposes, as a Russian forward operating base. In the coming weeks thousands of Russian military personnel are set to touch down in Syria, including advisors, instructors, logistics personnel, technical personnel, members of the aerial protection division, and the pilots who will operate the aircraft.”

A quick look at the recent news out of Syria will tell you that Daesh is already operating in the suburbs of Damascus. So where exactly would Russia deploy “thousands” of military personnel “in an area surrounding Damascus”? This makes no sense at all.

Ever since the crisis in Syria began I have been repeating that the Russians are not, repeat, not coming!! (see here, here and here) and, so far, the Russians never showed up. Of course, it is possible that this time around they might. Again, the first part of the rumor about sending advisors, sharing intelligence and delivering weapons makes more sense to me. But the notion of Russians flying MiG-31s out of Damascus to somehow change the course of the civil war makes no sense to me at all. Neither does the idea of “thousands” of Russians being deployed to Syria. In fact, last time I checked, the Russians were evacuating their citizen from this country, not sending more in.

Again, everything is possible and I cannot prove a negative. Maybe this time around the Kremlin decided that a major military effort against Daesh was needed. And maybe the US does not object to it. But the logical distance between “possible” and “likely” is a very long one and, at least at this point in time and with the information I have, I don’t see any reasons not to dismiss these rumors as wishful thinking.

The Saker

---

Quote:

---

BEIRUT (Reuters)
State news agency SANA said the foreign ministry had sent two letters to United Nations chiefs which objected to "brazen standpoints" taken by British officials, and accused Britain and France of a "colonialist" agenda.

On Saturday, finance minister George Osborne said Britain and Europe had to find a way to tackle the conflict in Syria, which has fueled Europe's biggest refugee crisis since World War Two, and described the government of President Bashar al-Assad as "evil."

"You've got to deal with the problem at source, which is this evil Assad regime and the ISIL (Islamic State) terrorists, and you need a comprehensive plan for a more stable, peaceful Syria," Osborne told Reuters in an interview.

The Sunday Times newspaper said British Prime Minister David Cameron wanted to hold a vote in parliament in early October to pave the way for air strikes against IS in Syria, joining an international coalition led by the United States which has been carrying out such strikes for the past year.

---

Quote:

---

Greece received a request from the United States to deny Russia the use of Greek airspace for aid flights to Syria, a spokesman for the foreign ministry in Athens said on Monday. The spokesman said the request was being examined. Greece has sought to foster closer ties with Russia during the economic crisis that nearly forced it out of the euro zone.

Russian newswire RIA Novosti earlier said Greece had refused the U.S. request, citing a diplomatic source, adding that Russia was seeking permission to run the flights up to Sept. 24. The Russian foreign ministry was not immediately available for comment. Russia is a long-time ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whose rule the United States and other western powers favor ending via a political transition.

The request from Washington comes after it expressed concerns to Moscow on Saturday about reports that Russia was moving toward a major military build-up in Syria widely seen as aimed at bolstering Assad.

---

Quote:

---

On Thursday evening, we chronicled the latest in the drama that is Syria’s horrific civil war, noting that, according to an Israeli defense source, “hundreds” of Iran’s

---

Quote:

---

Revolutionary Guards are on the ground in Syria fighting alongside the Russians to support Bashar al-Assad’s depleted forces as they battle to regain control of the country.

If true, that would answer the following question which we’ve been asking for quite some time: will Iran remain on the sidelines and allow the Houthis to be routed in Yemen and Assad deposed in Syria, or will Tehran, like Moscow, finally decide that the time for rhetoric has come to an end?

---

Quote:

---

Reports of Iranian involvement come on the heels of rampant speculation about the scope of Russia’s military buildup near Latakia where US “intelligence” and a series of unnamed “Lebanese sources” claim Moscow is essentially preparing for a full-on push to rout any and all domestic opposition to the Assad regime.

---

Quote:

---

The question, of course, is what happens when foreign opposition to the Assad regime isn’t willing to accept the restoration of the strongman’s rule.

---

Quote:

---

Predictably, there’s been no shortage of back-and-forth banter between John Kerry and Sergei Lavrov over the past several days. Here's how Lavrov characterizes the exchange:

“Kerry was also pushing the very strange idea that supporting Bashar Assad in his anti-terror fight only strengthens the positions of ISIS, because the sponsors of ISIS would pump even more arms and money into it,” Lavrov said.

---

Quote:

---

... “It's an absolutely upside-down logic and yet another attempt to appease those who use terrorists to fight dissenting regimes,” the Russian FM said, mentioning US attempts to cooperate with various extremist groups in Syria over the past few years.

“It's a colossal mistake that the US-led [anti-ISIS] coalition never considered interaction with Syria, not even information exchange,” Lavrov said. “I cannot comprehend this logic, or rather absolute lack of logic.”

“We help not only Syria, we also provide weapons to Iraq and other countries of the region that find themselves on the frontline with the terror threat. Equally for Iraq and other countries, we do so without any political preconditions,” Lavrov said.

And on Friday, Lavrov took it up a notch with a series of very serious-sounding (albeit hilariously overstated, we hope) soundbites delivered at a news conference in Russia. Here’s Reuters:

At a news conference, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Russia was sending equipment to help Assad fight Islamic State. Russian servicemen were in Syria, he said, primarily to help service that equipment and teach Syrian soldiers how to use it.

Russia was also conducting naval exercises in the eastern Mediterranean, he said, describing the drills as long-planned and staged in accordance with international law.

Lavrov blamed Washington for cutting off direct military-to-military communications between Russia and NATO over the Ukraine crisis, saying such contacts were "important for the avoidance of undesired, unintended incidents".

"We are always in favor of military people talking to each other in a professional way. They understand each other very well," Lavrov said. "If, as (U.S. Secretary of State) John Kerry has said many times, the United States wants those channels frozen, then be our guest."

---

Quote:

---

Yes, "be our guest", which, unless something is lost in translation there (as it was when Hillary Clinton hilariously presented Lavrov with a giant red button that was supposed to say "reset" but actually said "overcharged" in 2009) sounds quite a bit like the Kremlin telling Washington that it's just fine with Russia if the West wants to risk getting into a scenario where Russian and US jets end up in an "accidental" dog fight in the skies above Syria.

We will now anxiously await Kerry's response which will almost certainly contain the words "very" and "concerned", which would be accurate as long as he's talking about Assad's fate and not the fate of ISIS.

---

Quote:

---

A political solution is required.

---

Quote:

---

The Syrian rebels (non-ISIS) will never accept a political solution that does not involve Assad stepping aside.

---

Quote:

---

And the rebels will always have support from the countries in the region.

---

Quote:

---

Assad, slaughterer of so many civilians

---

Quote:

---

Thus an obvious solution is for Assad, slaughterer of so many civilians, to step aside

---

Quote:

---

"All of these players, these politicians are nothing more than puppets, they don't serve the people there is no real democracy, they serve the rich and powerful who run the world and that would be the bankers who control the money supply. The bankers make huge amounts of money....wars are great for them and ultimately they control the politicians. Psychopaths are running the world."

Ken O’ Keefe is a former US Marine turned anti-war campaigner who appeared on a Press TV debate called Syria: War of Deception, and absolutely owned his opponent in such an awesome way that you’ll be cheering at his every comment.

Recorded in August 2013, this interview is now two years old, but in light of the current European refugee crisis it’s more relevant today than ever before. Passionate, articulate and knowledgeable about the subject matter, O’Keefe is the perfect guy to step up and tell these home truths- and boy, does he do a good job.

This guy nails so many crucial points about the Syria situation in one interview, he’ll have you jumping around and punching the ceiling.

“We have tortured and killed and maimed and raped around this planet; who in their right mind would consider the United States or the West in general to be in any position to punish anybody?” the veteran begins angrily, going on to outline the evidence for Syria being a false flag attack (Note: leaked emails showing how Assad was framed by the USA are detailed in this cached Daily Mail report from January 2013, which was published online briefly before being removed). http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/n
ews/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html

He rightly points out that the USA dropped more bombs in Vietnam than during the whole of WW2 combined, that it regularly arms terrorists (but the mainstream press refer to them as ‘freedom fighters’ when it suits them) and the former marine also points out how the so-called ‘War on Terror’ is nothing more than a well-planned strategy to be in a “perpetual state of war to destabilize the region for the Greater Israel plan.”

“We don’t operate under international law; we have the law of the jungle in which the rich and powerful basically determine what goes and what doesn’t go.” O’Keefe shouts. He correctly points out that Bush and Blair would be “rotting in prison cells” if the law were administered equally to all, or even “executed if their own rules were applied to their own crimes“. He also acknowledges that these men are nothing more than puppets who “serve rich and powerful bankers who control the money supply.”

O’Keefe rants about the hypocrisy of the West, who are arming terrorist organizations in the name of ‘freedom’ for civilians in geo-politically strategic countries while turning a blind eye to vile human rights abuses in countries like Saudi Arabia. The only people who still fall for all this crap, O’Keefe passionately points out, are “bought-off prostitutes [our politicians] or the dumbest of the dumb.”

---

Quote:

---

The United States had planned to topple the Syrian government long before conflict broke out in the country in 2011, says WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Assange made the comments during an interview about his new book, the WikiLeaks Files. A chapter of the book refers to a cable from US Ambassador William Roebuck, who had been stationed in Damascus in 2006, about plans for overthrowing the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“That plan was to use a number of different factors to create paranoia within the Syrian government; to push it to overreact, to make it fear there’s a coup,” RT quoted Assange on Wednesday.

He noted that the key components of the plan were fostering tensions between Shias and Sunnis, creating and promoting rumors and exaggerations “that are known to be false” against Iran with the help of Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

He emphasized that this particular cable was “quite concerning” as the US plans for the region were “all hanging out” in it. He added that in order to understand what is happening in and around Syria, regional alliances must be examined.

“Part of the problem in Syria is that you have a number of US allies surrounding it, principally Saudi and Qatar that are funneling in weapons. Turkey as well [is] a very serious actor. [They] each have their own hegemonic ambitions in the region. Israel also, no doubt, if Syria sufficiently destabilized, it might be in a position where it can keep the Golan Heights forever, or even advance that territory,” he said.

---

Quote:

---

According to documents leaked by WikiLeaks, a secret treaty among Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia shows they intended to overthrow the Syrian government. The revelation came from Julian Assange, the founder of the controversial website.

Assange claimed to a Russian TV channel Sunday that the secret deal had been signed by the Gulf nations in 2012. He added that Western powers like France, Britain and the United States were also involved in the secret agreement.

However, Assange said that U.S. allies in the Middle East acted in a more hostile manner. Saudi Arabia even acted against Washington’s instructions, Press TV reported.

The leaked documents are among hundreds of thousands of government papers that apparently revealed secret information about a number of key Middle Eastern powers, especially Saudi Arabia. The leaked documents also allegedly include internal communications among Saudi embassies around the world.

The political unrest in Syria has killed more than 230,000 people since 2011. The U.S. government and its allies have been aiding militant groups in Syria in its fight against government forces.

WikiLeaks also released documents claiming Riyadh had contacts with one of the most dangerous rivals of the United States in Afghanistan. Saudi Arabia has been a U.S. ally for years, but Washington has expressed concerns over allegations that Saudi donors sponsor the Afghan insurgency as well as other militant groups in the region, the Wall Street Journal reported.

According to other leaked documents, the Saudi ambassador in Pakistan had a meeting with Nasiruddin Haqqani in 2012. Haqqani is the main fundraiser for the Haqqani network, the extremist group that has been on the U.N. terrorism watch list since 2010.

Haqqani asked the Saudi ambassador to accommodate the medical treatment of his father, Jalaluddin Haqqani. Jalaluddin is the founder of the extremist organization. According to the leaked documents, the father has a Saudi passport.

WikiLeaks started leaking classified documents in June. It also obtained online communications between the foreign ministry in Riyadh and other countries. Most of the documents are written in Arabic.

In 2010, Assange published numerous classified U.S. military documents related to conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. The action infuriated U.S. authorities but gave Assange international prominence.

---

Quote:

---

Carey Wedler via TheAntiMedia.org,

The Pentagon has erupted in “revolt” amid claims from 50 intelligence analysts that senior defense officials manipulated intelligence reports to downplay the severity of the Islamic State’s increasing upper-hand in the Middle East. According to allegations made in an official complaint with the Department of Defense Inspector General, the officers in question doctored reports — among other things — in order to maintain the Pentagon and president’s narrative that the war against the Islamic State, as well as Al Qaeda in Syria, is succeeding. To the contrary, the dissenting analysts — now effectively whistleblowers — have repeatedly attempted to warn that the situation is far more dismal than what authorities are revealing to the public.

“The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” one defense official told the Daily Beast, which broke the story late Wednesday. Two senior analysts at CENTCOM — the U.S. military’s central command Middle East and Central Asia — filed the formal complaint with the Defense Department’s Inspector General in July (the analysts are formally employed by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s dedicated spy wing).

Other analysts are willing to back up allegations with “concrete examples.” 11 of 50 intelligence analysts spoke anonymously with the Daily Beast, detailing various methods senior defense officials have used to downplay the terrorist groups’ influence and power. This is particularly concerning considering the story told to the public is already pitiful, portraying grave threats to the United States.

In some cases, analysts allege reports that portrayed the war in too negative a light were simply prevented from moving higher up the chain of command. In other cases, they were sent back down to analysts, prompting many to self-censor their reports out of fear of rejection or punitive action.

Most sordid, perhaps, are claims that senior officials blatantly altered reports ”…to be more in line with the Obama administration’s public contention that the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda is making progress.” Additionally, protesting officials told the Daily Beast that

“…in some cases key elements of intelligence reports were removed, resulting in a document that didn’t accurately capture the analysts’ conclusions.” They allege “…the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration’s public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda’s branch in Syria, the analysts claim.”

Many analysts said that because of these practices, they felt they could not provide an honest, unbiased analysis of the situation in Iraq and Syria — a task they were hired to perform. Others expressed this was because of the career ambitions of high-ranking officials who did not want negative reports about the conflict to compromise their chances of further advancement.

This leadership was also accused of creating an unsustainable work environment. “One person who knows the contents of the written complaint sent to the inspector general said it used the word ‘Stalinist’ to describe the tone set by officials overseeing CENTCOM’s analysis,” the Daily Beast reported (This should come as little surprise considering the free reign the United States military has enjoyed not only since 9/11, but throughout the 20th century. That officials are eager to bolster their own personal power seems inevitable within an institution that has projected the same megalomania around the world).

Two analysts who spoke to the Daily Beast said complaints about ignored and doctored reports warning of the grimness of the conflict had been expressed since last October. Some who complained were urged to retire from their positions while others agreed to leave. Because of the lack of response from superiors to these grievances, the two senior analysts filed the formal complaint with the Inspector General.

In response to the Daily Beast’s article, the Pentagon offered a tepid, generic response that appeared little more than a jumble of key terms intended to obfuscate the seriousness of the issue at hand.

“While we cannot comment on the specific investigation cited in the article, we can speak to the process. The Intelligence Community routinely provides a wide range of subjective assessments related to the current security environment. These products and the analysis that they present are absolutely vital to our efforts, particularly given the incredibly complex nature of the multi-front fights that are ongoing now in Iraq and Syria,” Air Force Colonel and CENTCOM spokesman Patrick Ryder said.



“Senior civilian and military leadership consider these assessments during planning and decision-making, along with information gained from various other sources, to include the insights provided by commanders on the ground and other key advisors, intelligence collection assets, and previous experience,” he added, failing to address the analysts’ concerns.

In light of these revelations, it is difficult to tell which is worse: that the Pentagon has monumentally failed in its exploits of the Middle East — creating an environment for ISIS and Al Qaeda to rise to power — or that its leaders willfully withhold information for the sake of self-preservation and misleading an already terrified public. Regardless, the sheer number of analysts willing to step forward simultaneously highlights the systemic decay of integrity and effectiveness within the agency tasked with protecting the public — and a small shred of hope for forcing a modicum of accountability.

---

Quote:

---

While the Western media attempts to portray the sudden influx of refugees suddenly appearing out of no where at Europe’s gates, the reality is that for years they have been gathering in expansive, well-funded refugee camps in Turkey.
Image: Turkey has eagerly invited 2 million refugees into their country to stay at camps funded by upward to 6 billion USD, not out of altruism, but to use refugees together with the US, NATO, and the EU, as a geopolitical weapon.

In fact, Turkey has brought in over 2 million refugees with a suspiciously eager “open door” policy and has spent upward to 6 billion USD on building and maintaining these immense camps. They have done so as part of a long-standing strategy to justify creating “safe havens” in northern Syria – essentially NATO invading and occupying Syrian territory, protecting their terrorist proxies within Syria’s borders so that they can strike deeper toward Damascus and finally topple the government of President Bashar Al Assad.

US plans to carve out a “safe haven” or “buffer zone” in northern Syria stretch back as far as 2012 – before a real crisis even existed. In their “Middle East Memo #21,” “Assessing Options for Regime Change,” it was stated specifically (emphasis added):

An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under Annan’s leadership. This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power. This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts.

Brookings would elaborate upon this criminal conspiracy in their more recent report titled, “Deconstructing Syria: Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country.” It states (emphasis added):

The idea would be to help moderate elements establish reliable safe zones within Syria once they were able. American, as well as Saudi and Turkish and British and Jordanian and other Arab forces would act in support, not only from the air but eventually on the ground via the presence of special forces as well. The approach would benefit from Syria’s open desert terrain which could allow creation of buffer zones that could be monitored for possible signs of enemy attack through a combination of technologies, patrols, and other methods that outside special forces could help Syrian local fighters set up.

Were Assad foolish enough to challenge these zones, even if he somehow forced the withdrawal of the outside special forces, he would be likely to lose his air power in ensuing retaliatory strikes by outside forces, depriving his military of one of its few advantages over ISIL. Thus, he would be unlikely to do this.

Unfortunately for US policymakers, little justification or public support underpins any of these plans to intervene more directly in Syria in pursuit of what is obviously regime change dressed up as anything but.

Bring in the Refugees

However, in hopes of solving this lack of public support, the West appears to have taken a huge number of refugees created by its years of war upon the Middle East and North Africa, and suddenly releasing them in a deluge upon Europe. The Western media itself implicates Turkey as the source of these refugees, and reports like that from the International New York Times’ Greek Kathimerini paper, in an article titled, “Refugee flow linked to Turkish policy shift,” claims (emphasis added):

A sharp increase in the influx of migrants and refugees, mostly from Syria, into Greece is due in part to a shift in Turkey’s geopolitical tactics, according to diplomatic sources.

These officials link the wave of migrants into the eastern Aegean to political pressures in neighboring Turkey, which is bracing for snap elections in November, and to a recent decision by Ankara to join the US in bombing Islamic State targets in Syria. The analyses of several officials indicate that the influx from neighboring Turkey is taking place as Turkish officials look the other way or actively promote the exodus.

This wasn’t done until after years of staged terror attacks across Europe, in attempts to ratchet up fear, xenophobia, racism, and Islamophobia. Every attack without exception involved patsies tracked by Western intelligence agencies in some cases for almost a decade. Many had traveled to and participated in NATO’s proxy war on Syria, Iraq, and Yemen before returning home to carry out predictable acts of violence.

In the case of the infamous “Charlie Hebo” massacre, French security agencies followed the gunmen for years- even arresting and imprisoning one briefly. This surveillance continued up to but not including the final six months needed for them to plan and carry out their final act of violence. When asked why French security agencies ended their surveillance of known terrorists, they cited a lack of funds.

With Europeans intentionally put into a state of fear at home and in hopes of eliciting support for wars abroad NATO appears to now be undulating Europe with a tidal wave or refugees intentionally accumulated and cared for in Turkey either to flood back into NATO-established safe zones in Syria or into Europe to extort from the public backing for further military aggression.

The Big Reveal

The Huffington Post’s article, “David Cameron Facing Pressure To Bomb Islamic State In Syria After Lord Carey Calls To Group To Be ‘Crushed‘,” in covering the political discourse in England provides us with the final reveal of what was really behind this sudden “crisis.”

It states (emphasis added):

David Cameron is facing growing pressure to extend RAF air strikes into Syria as the worsening conflict threatened to drive increasing numbers of desperate refugees to seek sanctuary in Europe.

Former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey became the latest senior figure to call for a renewed military effort to “crush” Islamic State (IS) in its Syrian heartlands.

He also backed calls for British military intervention to help create “safe enclaves” within the country where civilians would be protected [BY WHOM?] from attack by the warring parties in Syria’s bloody civil war.

His intervention came after Chancellor George Osborne acknowledged that a comprehensive plan was needed to tackle the refugee crisis “at source”.

Speaking to reporters at a meeting of G20 finance ministers in Turkey on Saturday, he said that meant dealing with the “evil” regime of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad as well as the militant jihadists of IS.

At the end of the day, the “refugee crisis” is yet another contrivance by the same special interests who first sought to intervene in Syria to back “freedom fighters,” then to stop the use of “WMDs,” and most recently to fight “ISIS.” Now with all three failing to justify what is otherwise naked military aggression openly pursuing regime change in Syria as a basis for wider confrontation with Iran, Russia, and even China, “refugees” are being used as human pawns to provoke fear and rage across Europe.

---

Quote:

---

Russia has no intention of allowing another Libya. They're going to save us from ourselves.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kpo:

Quote:

---

Russia has no intention of allowing another Libya. They're going to save us from ourselves.

---

Lol, yes, God forbid peaceful and stable Syria become another Libya...

It's not personal. It's just war.

---

Quote:

---

WASHINGTON

The United States and Russia agreed Friday to consider potential areas of military cooperation in civil war-wracked Syria as a powerful al Qaida-allied rebel group vowed to “defeat” the expanding Russian military force that’s being deployed in northwestern Syria.

The agreement to hold military-to-military talks in parallel with diplomatic consultations was reached in a telephone conversation between Defense Secretary Ash Carter and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Shoygu, the first time they’ve spoken since Carter took his post seven months ago, a Pentagon statement said.

---

Quote:

---

The U.S. government, including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, President Obama and spokespeople for the State Department, has been saying that Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad's "days are numbered" since 2011. As many journalists have pointed out in State Department briefings, it's become a very long number.

---

Quote:

---

“The secretary and the minister talked about areas where the United States and Russia’s perspectives overlap and areas of divergence,” the statement said, adding that further talks on possible coordination would be held.

The discussions herald a significant shift in great power involvement in the four-year-old Syrian conflict and are the result of the new influence attained by Russian President Vladimir Putin through the buildup of Russian aircraft, tanks, artillery and troops near the Syrian port city of Latakia.

The buildup is Moscow’s first major military operation outside of the former Soviet Union

---

Quote:

---

since the 1979-89 occupation of Afghanistan. As such, it represents a dangerous gamble for Putin because his intervention to bolster embattled Syrian President Bashar Assad offers a powerful incentive to Syrian rebel groups to collaborate in attacking the growing Russian military presence.

---

Quote:

---

82% agree “IS [Islamic State] is US and foreign made group.”
79% agree “Foreign fighters made war worse.”
70% agree “Oppose division of country.”
65% agree “Syrians can live together again.”
64% agree “Diplomatic solution possible.”
57% agree “Situation is worsening.”
51% agree “Political solution best answer.”
49% agree “Oppose US coalition air strikes.”
22% agree “IS is a positive influence.”
21% agree “Prefer life now than under Assad.”

---

Quote:

---

I don't suppose it would be too much to ask for links? Or are you jut pulling numbers out of your ass?

---

Quote:

---

BTW, it is possible that more than one nation is responsible for IS.

---

Quote:

---

I'd be curious how they got responses from people living in ISIS controlled areas.

---

Quote:

---

Not surprising people living in gov controlled areas are more pro-asad.

---

Quote:

---

"The Assad regime has perfected the role of being “at once an arsonist and a fireman,”

---

Quote:

---

There are many "conclusions" one could draw from that polling - of course GSTRING and people of his ilk will look for the most flattering for the US (of all the data it's about the only one btw), all the while not realizing (or caring) how like blind stooges it makes them look.

---

Quote:

---

ASSAD is fomenting terrorism in his nation??

---

Quote:

---

Around the beginning of the Syrian uprising, in March 2011, Assad once again released jihadists from the country's prisons. Simultaneously, tens of thousands of Syrian students, liberal activists and human rights advocates began being arrested. Their fates were recently documented by Human Rights Watch, which alleges that many have been detained arbitrarily, tortured and subjected to unfair trials.

Already at the beginning of the uprising, Assad vilified his opponents as members of al-Qaida, which wasn't true at the time. Some critics of the regime now claim that by releasing the jihadists from prison, Assad's intention was to quickly radicalize the opposition, discrediting it in the process. If that was his aim, it has certainly been a success.

---

Quote:

---

ASSAD is fomenting terrorism in his nation?? -SIGNY
No doubt about it that he did initially

---

Quote:

---

Around the beginning of the Syrian uprising, in March 2011, Assad once again released jihadists from the country's prisons. Simultaneously, tens of thousands of Syrian students, liberal activists and human rights advocates began being arrested. Their fates were recently documented by Human Rights Watch, which alleges that many have been detained arbitrarily, tortured and subjected to unfair trials.

---

Quote:

---

the unspoken but obvious alliance between regime forces and IS in 2012-13

---

Quote:

---

GSTRING, the choice is between Assad and ISIS.- SIGNY

No it isn't - it's never as simple as that, not in the ME - or maybe you hadn't noticed any history?- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Only an idiot thinks there are actual answers and solutions in the ME.

---

Quote:

---

According to the Russian Senator Igor Morozov, Beijing has taken decision to take part in combating IS and sent its vessels to the Syrian coast.

Igor Morozov, member of the Russian Federation Committee on International Affairs claimed about the beginning of the military operation by China against the IS terrorists. "It is known, that China has joined our military operation in Syria, the Chinese cruiser has already entered the Mediterranean, aircraft carrier follows it," Morozov said.

According to him, Iran may soon join the operation carried out by Russia against the IS terrorists, via Hezbollah. Thus, the Russian coalition in the region gains ground, and most reasonable step of the US would be to join it. Although the stance of Moscow and Washington on the ways of settlement of the Syrian conflict differs, nonetheless, low efficiency of the US coalition acts against terrorists is obvious. Islamists have just strengthened their positions.

---

Quote:

---

Only an idiot thinks there are actual answers and solutions in the ME.- G

---

Quote:

---

Again, not a trick question, G. _SIGNY
No, it's just a really, really dumb & obvious question

---

Quote:

---

and you're following assumptions are sooooo naive it's hard to have a serious response. Would you even understand if I gave one?

---

Quote:

---

Would you even care? No, you've shown little interest in understanding what other people have to offer.

---

Quote:

---

You've been ignoring my questions for over a year.

---

Quote:

---

Go China!

---

Quote:

---

Again, not a trick question, G. _SIGNY
No, it's just a really, really dumb & obvious question

---

Quote:

---

and you're following assumptions are sooooo naive it's hard to have a serious response. Would you even understand if I gave one?

---

Quote:

---

Would you even care? No, you've shown little interest in understanding what other people have to offer.

---

Quote:

---

You've been ignoring my questions for over a year.

---

Quote:

---

Go China!

---

Quote:

---

It must be said that with all the stories, rumours and misinformation that have been spread around throughout the “War On Syria”, Al-Manar has been a benchmark of credibility.

In order of reliability, there are four Arabic media outlets that have been reporting and “leaking” news. Al-Manar had been the most reliable, followed by the Lebanese daily Assafir, then the Lebanese online daily Al-Akhbar, and Al-Mayadin.

Al-Manar has broken many news, and in our role as pro-Syrian activists, Intibah (my wife) and myself have taken upon ourselves the task of translating some key Arabic reports and relevant articles for the English-speaking world.

One of those stories was about the “secret visit” of Bandar to Moscow and his attempts to both bribe and threaten President Putin. Our translation of the story was initially snubbed until it became widely accepted as public knowledge.

Another big story, perhaps the biggest of them all, was a translation of an Al-Manar/Al-Akhbar report that explained the events following the false flag chemical weapons attack that accused the Syrian Army of using chemical weapons in East Ghouta. ... The justification for intervention therefore had to be very substantial and convincing; a scenario worthy of a false flag, and that false flag was the East Ghouta chemical attack.

Let’s recap those nail-biting days of August 2013. A chemical attack on Syrian civilians was conjured up by Bandar with the help of Mossad. The Syrian Army was accused of the massacre. Photos of dead children were reminiscent of the chemical massacres of Saddam against the Kurds. The Western media news became fixated on the subject, replaying it repeatedly in order to generate a global wave of anti-Assad hostility. ... For the USA, it was THE big opportunity it had been waiting for, and for so long, in order to justify bombing the hell out of Damascus with or without a UNSC mandate. America was finally ready to blast Syria with an unprecedented ferocity that would reflect its hatred, anger and the impatience it exercised in the waiting process.

But again, this was not to happen.

After missing out on being able to bomb Syria in February 1991, in April 2003 (after the invasions of Iraq), and again in October 2011 and February 2012 (after the UNSC Russian/Chinese Vetoes), America was still unable to bomb Syria even after the whole Eastern Ghouta kerfuffle of August 2013.

In fact, in September 2013, America did attack Syria, but this attack ended as soon as it started. When Al-Manar/Al-Akhbar published the news and we translated it into English (1), it was widely discounted. It is still not taken very seriously by everyone, but all evidence on the ground and the changes in the stands of America and its European allies are all indicative that this story holds ground.

America fired two missiles at Syria over the Mediterranean. [This was when Russian ships were athwart the Syrian coast- SIGNY] They were spotted by Russia, and one missile was intercepted and destroyed, and the other was hacked into and diverted into the sea.

Russian diplomacy was quick to report the action of its military to the Americans in an attempt to keep this story hush hush, to prevent further escalation, and to avoid needless embarrassment. [To the USA- SIGNY] As an outcome, Russia brokered the Syrian chemical weapons disposal deal as a face-saver for America, so that America did not seem like it backed down about bombing Syria.

... What is ironic is that even some friends of Syria are unaware of the fact that America has actually been unable to bomb Syria for over two decades...

... No one is claiming that America is yet serious about fighting ISIS, and this has been said before and needs to be said again. The only effective way to fight ISIS militarily is to cut off its supply lines first, and then to work in conjunction with the Syrian Army.

... The Russian role has been extremely significant in avoiding an all-out American attack on Syria. But it has not been the sole factor.

The other perhaps most important factors that have protected Syria from American attacks are Hezbollah and ironically, Israel. The presence of Israel as a southern “neighbour” of both Syria and Lebanon has fortuitously turned, in this instance, into a blessing in disguise by virtue of reprisal-based deterrence.

The attrition guerrilla-style war that Hezbollah waged against Israel from 1982 leading up to the defeat of the latter and its retreat from Lebanon in 2000 has put Hezbollah in the rank of organizations with highly effective guerilla-style warfare, no more.

However, the ensuing 2006 July Israel-Hezbollah war lifted Hezbollah to a whole new echelon. Not only was Hezbollah able to defeat Israeli forces in ground battle, not only it sank a frigate, but its missiles were able to reach deep into Israel, leaving no corner within Israel safe.

The myth of the undefeatable Israeli army was finally and irreversibly broken. This has created a whole new balance of power in which Israel needs to think more than twice before it enters into any new military gamble that directly or indirectly involves Hezbollah.

Nearly a decade later, Hezbollah has a much larger missile arsenal in terms of count and lethality. Hezbollah now has drones, and guided smart bombs, and has proven their effectiveness in the battle of Qalamoun against ISIS. As a matter of fact, Hezbollah drones have been spotted as far as southern Israel.[In other words, they have crossed the entire length of Israel, north to south- SIGNY] Furthermore, in any upcoming confrontation with Hezbollah, Israel is fearful that underground tunnels will enable Hezbollah fighters to infiltrate into the Galilee.

America knows well that any serious attack on Damascus will automatically mean that Israel will be showered by hundreds and thousands of rockets, not only by Hezbollah, but also by the Syrian Army which has been sitting tight on its even larger arsenal of rockets. No place in Israel will be left safe.

Israeli ground to air anti-missile defences (ie Patriot Missiles and the like) will be rendered useless when confronting an endless barrage of rockets. The so-called “Iron Dome” shield was not even able to shield Israel from the limited number of rockets fired from just Gaza. In an all-out war with both Hezbollah and Syria, the anti-rocket defence systems will utterly fail.

So to complete a previously made statement, we must say that unless some serious changes take place, and unless America no longer cares about avoiding a confrontation with Russia, and unless it stops caring about protecting Israel, it will remain unable to bomb Syria.

---

Quote:

---

1. I wonder how free they feel about giving their honest opinion?

---

Quote:

---

2. I wonder if they feel it matters even having an opinion?

---

Quote:

---

3. Or if having an opinion openly expressed is dangerous to them and their family?

---

Quote:

---

YOU NOT ONLY DON'T ANSWER DIRECT QUESTIONS, YOU DON'T ANSWER THE SAME QUESTION MORE THAN ONCE.

---

Quote:

---

4. SECOND ATTEMPT TO GET YOU TO ANSWER:
You also conveniently ignore the question of just how free people in Assad controlled areas feel about expressing themselves honestly. Maybe it's the "honest" part of that you have trouble with?

---

Quote:

---

5, 6. You asked one person? What if that person is the equivalent of a Syria's Auraptor?

---

Quote:

---

7. Again, I think you only prove why your pov can't ever be trusted. Having said that, yes, without Assad there will be a vacuum and more deaths. Maybe that's why we haven't ever stepped over that line and wiped him out?

---

Quote:

---

8. I’m not seeing one thing I've said that flatters the US - please clarify (or make something up).

---

Quote:

---

9. No it isn't - it's never as simple as that, not in the ME - or maybe you hadn't noticed any history?

---

Quote:

---

YOU NOT ONLY DON'T ANSWER DIRECT QUESTIONS, YOU DON'T ANSWER THE SAME QUESTION MORE THAN ONCE.

---

Quote:

---

10. SECOND ATTEMPT TO GET YOU TO ANSWER::
Also:

"I'm not seeing one thing I've said that flatters the US - please clarify (or make something up)."

---

Quote:

---

I see you have chosen deflection from your worn out bag of tricks. Any little bit of truth or honesty hidden away in there?

---

Quote:

---

As to your question, I did answer it, here it is again:
Only an idiot thinks there are actual answers and solutions in the ME. The political landscape shifts as much as the sands of the desert (omg what great metaphor). You're pretty much screwed whatever you do if you are there.

---

Quote:

---

Maybe, as you have shown over and over, you just can't understand the answer?

---

Quote:

---

So yeah, you just flat out suck.

---

Quote:

---

G, you ask stupid questions. I didn't want to bother answering them... - SIGNY

I say you don't answer my questions and you call me a liar. So I prove you wrong ten times in this thread alone - GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

"Maybe it's the "honest" part you have trouble with?"
"maybe you hadn't noticed any history?"
"Any little bit of truth or honesty hidden away in there?"

---

Quote:

---

Only an idiot thinks there are actual answers and solutions in the ME.

---

Quote:

---

If that's the case, should the USA (or the EU, or perhaps anyone from outside of the region) be involved in any way? Should any foreign nation be involved in bombing/ invading/ creating no-fly zones/creating "safe zones"/sending arms and intel to any nation in the ME?

---

Quote:

---

I say you don't answer my questions and you call me a liar. So I prove you wrong ten times in this thread alone - GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

A Syrian opposition activist network, the Local Co-ordination Committees, said Russian warplanes hit five towns—Zafaraneh, Rastan, Talbiseh, Makarmia and Ghanto—resulting in the deaths of 36 people, including five children.
None of the areas targeted were controlled by IS, activists said.

---

Quote:

---

The Islamic State jihadist group executed nine men and a boy it accused of being gay in central and northern Syria on Monday, a monitoring group said.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the jihadists shot dead seven men in Rastan, a town in Homs province of central Syria, “after accusing them of being homosexual.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:
It was darkly amusing to hear Putin on Charlie Rose talking about the need to protect and respect the sanctity of the current Syrian government... #loadedwithobviousandpurposefulirony Who knew he was a stand-up?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:
It was darkly amusing to hear Putin on Charlie Rose talking about the need to protect and respect the sanctity of the current Syrian government... #loadedwithobviousandpurposefulirony Who knew he was a stand-up?

---

Once again SIG's response to you has nothing to do with what you posted. You posted about what Putin said and she posts a subjective response. I wonder how many are ready to admit she is not American. That she is nothing but a troll with the mission of propaganda against the U.S..

---

What's funny is she spouts that endlessly here of all places, where there's like what, 10 people? She's a horrible recruiter. But then again I don't think she needs much if any audience - as long as she can read what she posts that's all that matters.

---

Quote:

---

So, I'm reading my way down, and I gotta ask - what's so good about Libya today?

---