Countering the Call: The U.S., Hizb ut-Tahrir, and Religious Extremism in Central Asia by the Brookings Institution: My Thoughts

I have come across this report that was written in July 2003 regarding the policy the U.S should take on countering the call of 'extremist' groups, of which Hizb ut-Tahrir is classed as by the West. It is a particularly interesting read and proves that the call of the Hizb is far threatening to the West, and possibly more-so than violent extremism.

This article sheds a light on how the West are constantly fighting against the Islamic narrative and does not leave any group, no matter how big or small, out of their scope of focus. It is worth noting that this report is targeting the Hizb that was headed by Abd al-Kalim Zallum at the time and currently Ata Abu Rashta, this is why it quite rightly so agrees that the students of this Hizb hold contradictory views and cannot explain their position nor method when prompted. Quite contrast to the students under the correct leadership after the redress in 1997 due to fundamental differences on the method of resuming the Islamic way of life.

It begins by highlighting that the Hizb calls to "restoring the Ottoman Era caliphate" and that "it has been able to harness public popularity primarily through a commitment to nonviolence and an appeal for social and economic justice."

The report interestingly suggests the West's policy towards Hizb ut-Tahrir will set a framework for all other Islamic groups who call for non violent social change:

"Hizb-ut-Tahrir also represents a challenge for broader U.S. policy towards Muslim states and movements. How the United States chooses to respond to the emergence of HT in conjunction with governments in the region, as well as more broadly, sets a framework for how the United States will deal with Islamist groups nominally committed to nonviolent social change, who enjoy increasing grassroots support"

It goes on to suggest that moderating and modernising the Hizb's call to political Islam by including them into the secular and democratic framework "may provide key lessons for crafting a well-informed policy". This is exactly what we are seeing today, whereby Hizb Ata are enjoying platforms with non-Muslims as well as supporting armed groups in the Middle East, which drastically diverts the party from its originally stated method.

It is clear that this report is targeted at Hizb Ata as it states that "This worldwide organization is presently headed by Abd al-Kadim Zallum, also an ethnic Palestinian."

It quite rightly points out that "HT members strongly adhere to the belief that only the formation of an Islamic state regulated by Shariat, Islamic law, can address the ills of society. HT sees the process of modernization and secularization in many Muslim-populated countries as a Western plot against the umma, the Muslim community of believers as a whole."

It suggests that the growth of Hizb ut-Tahrir is partly due to "to underlying economic, social, and political issues that have made Central Asia fertile soil for the introduction of radical ideas." as this report focuses on Central Asia rather than the West. Although we can see that this statement is far from the truth as membership of Hizb ut-Tahrir, whether that be the correct leadership or the misled Hizb Ata has grown in many prosperous countries, such as the West. However it begs the question, whether students studying under the Hizb Ata leadership are serious students or just numbers filling out stadiums and rallies due to their incoherent and contradictory views on the prophetic method to re-establish the Caliphate.

The report has recognised correctly that both Hizb ut-Tahrir and Hizb Ata "calls for a return to Islamic values. In its most extreme political manifestation, the party’s goal is to establish a united Islamic caliphate that would spread from the Middle East through Central Asia to Muslim areas of South Asia."

It also distinguishes Hizb ut-Tahrir different to other 'extremist' Islamic groups by recognising that "an extremely significant factor in HT’s popularity is the party’s rejection of violence as a political means" - which was true in 2003, however the change in tact by Hizb Ata would make one think that there are serious issues internally after they back Jihadi factions in Syria in 2013, and claiming that the 'blessed revolution' has been hijacked.

The report by Khadimov notes that the Hizb's campaigns and leaflets have definitely been a factor in "minimal political participation of the population, the growth of distrust of authority, and skepticism about the utility of democratic institutions".

It goes on to say "growing appeal of its extreme views is a cause of concern for local, national, regional and international actors, including the U.S. government. HT’s rhetoric is often aggressive. It frequently incites anti-Semitic and anti-American sentiments. Following the events of September 11, 2001, HT has focused on casting itself as the voice of all Muslims in Central Asia, while presenting the cooperation of Central Asian governments with the U.S.-led anti-terrorist campaign as treason and tantamount to a war against Islam and Muslims"

It seems to suggest that one way of pushing Hizb members into militant and terrorist activity would be to 'demonize' and 'repress' them so that they feel 'disillusioned' into joining Al-Qaeda or IMU in Uzbekistan where Hizb Ata enjoys a large group of members. 

Quite unsurprisingly, the Brookings Institute has studied the method Hizb ut-Tahrir follow and briefly explained the three stages; the cultural, interaction and the establishment stage. However it is according to Hizb Ata methodology whereby each country has a difference in progress, it mentions that "In Central Asia, HT appears to be in its initial stage". 

Here is how the Brookings Institute has understood the method:

"The first stage is mainly a proselytizing or recruitment phase in which the party reaches out to Muslims in an effort to persuade them to accept the idea, mission, and goals of the party. Convinced individuals are invited to join the party and assume its methods and strategies. They are then expected to join the outreach effort."

"The second stage involves interaction with the umma, taking the message to the broader Muslim community. In this stage, HT attempts to persuade the umma to embrace its view of Islam so that the Islamic way of life becomes an everyday practice for each Muslim and encompasses all affairs of his/her life."

"The third stage sees the establishment of an Islamic government that will implement the norms and practices of Shariat, generally and comprehensively, and will carry it as a message to the world."

It is important to note that the East and West are trying to infiltrate Hizb ut-Tahrir by "planting agents into new HT cells" but are failing to achieve results due to the "veil of secrecy" behind its activities:

"Hizb-ut-Tahrir operates in Central Asian republics in small secretive cells of usually five to seven people called “doiras” or “halkas,” which make-up a large pyramidal structure. Headed by a mushrif (group leader), each group member knows only the members of his/her circle and only the mushrif knows the next stage superior. This arrangement also adds to both HT’s security and the veil of secrecy about its activities and motives. For example, it has made the attempts of the Uzbek police to plant agents in new HT cells and to penetrate the chain of command nearly impossible."

It seems that Hizb Ata have started to "enjoy handsome financial awards and incentives" for new members joining the party according to the report - not surprising to say  the least.

As mentioned earlier I have claimed that members of Hizb Ata fail to explain the method of the Hizb and the same frustration has been noted in this report when it mentions that it is "of particular concern are the vague future plans of HT in Central Asia. HT members often cannot explain how the caliphate would be achieved, what economic or social policies it would pursue, and what the role of other religious traditions and ethnicities in a truly Islamic society would be"

The report admits its frustration with the way in which Hizb ut-Tahrir works by distributing "leaflets and books that often contain scathing criticisms of regional governments. Party activists also rely on underground meetings rather than public speeches. These techniques make Hizb-ut-Tahrir operatives hard to find and to silence. They also let Hizb-ut-Tahrir members send messages more quickly than the government can suppress or discredit them." 

The "challenge is to create mechanisms under which HT could cease its aggressive rhetoric and become involved in the official political process" according to the report. The use of state-supported Imams or clergy is being used to "counter HT's message", however the are "incapable of presenting any credible arguments to counter HT doctrine in mosques" due to being "self-educated individuals with no higher religious education".

It recognises HT members to "enjoy a reputation as highly honest, incorruptible, and determined individuals" 

Finally the report advises the U.S government not to "designate HT as a terrorist organisation" as this would be a "a simplistic move that could legitimize the repressive measures of Central Asian governments" and "Branding Hizb-ut-Tahrir as a terrorist organization will have serious implications for regional security. It will further embolden the ongoing official harassment of ordinary believers and lead to widespread public outcry. Such a measure will also be seen by local religious factions as an U.S. effort to support oppressive governments in the war against terrorism. As such, it will undermine U.S.-led efforts to counter Islamic extremism among local populations."

It also advises the U.S to "reconsider encouraging any blanket policy by Central Asian governments of viewing Islamic parties to be the enemy and instead work to bolster Islamic parties’ involvement in political process. The general lesson appears to be that while exclusion of such groups leads to violence, inclusion forces them to compete for voters and offer real governing options, leading them to moderate. Principled support of democracy and human rights, in this regard, is key to moderating radical Islamists."

It finishes off to suggest more backing for moderate imams to counter the Hizb's call. 

The full report here: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2003/7/asia-khamidov/khamidov20030701.pdf

The confederal and autonomous zones of Syria - Master Plan by the U.S.

In June 2015 Brookings Institution released a  paper titled Deconstructing Syria: Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country that detailed the policy that the U.S. should take in solving the Syrian crises that was unsurprisingly fomented by them. In this short post I will look at some of the key actions that was suggested and see whether they are being played out today.

In the introduction to the paper it mentions the overall strategy being:

The new approach would seek to break the problem down in a number of localized components of the country, pursuing regional stopgap solutions while envisioning ultimately a more confederal Syria made up of autonomous zones rather than being ruled by a strong central government. It also proposes a path to an intensified train and equip program. Once that program had generated a critical mass of fighters in training locations abroad, it would move to a next stage. Coupled with a U.S. willingness, in collaboration with regional partners, to help defend local safe areas using American airpower as well as special forces support once circumstances are conducive, the Syrian opposition fighters would then establish safe zones in Syria that they would seek to expand and solidify.

At the time, this sort of solution seemed far fetched and ambitious, but we can see today that with the help of Russia, and "U.S. willingness" to this, they can indeed target those factions unfavourable to a permanent solution for Syria after Assad is deposed. It also serves in segregating the Islamic world further by smaller nations already divided on lines in the sand, to a more aggressive sectarian division that is not only based on culture, colour or language but on fundamental religious values and war.

The paper goes on to mention how the confederal arrangement for Syria could be merged using Kurdish region and Jordan:

The strategy would begin by establishing one or two zones in relatively promising locations, such as the Kurdish northeast and perhaps in the country’s south near Jordan, to see how well the concept could work and how fast momentum could be built up. Over time, more might be created, if possible. Ultimately, and ideally, some of the safe zones might merge together as key elements in a future confederal arrangement for the Syrian state.

This may not be apparent right now but certainly is leading up to such a scenario after reports from the Institute of Study of War (ISW).

It is clear that without the support of Turkey and Jordan, these autonomous regions cannot be sustained and therefore they both will have a big role to play in dividing Syria, the report suggests:

Creation of these sanctuaries would produce autonomous zones that would never again have to face the prospect of rule by either Assad or ISIL. They would also constitute areas where humanitarian relief could be supplied, schools reopened, and larger opposition fighting forces recruited, trained, and based. U.N. agencies and NGOs would help in the effort to the extent possible, focusing on health, education, and basic economic recovery in the first instance. Governing councils would be formed, more likely by appointment than election, to help international agencies make decisions on key matters relevant to rudimentary governance. Regardless of details, relief could certainly be provided far more effectively than is the case today. At least one such area should be contiguous to Jordan and one to Turkey, and be created in cooperation with Amman and Ankara. These locations would allow secure transportation lines for humanitarian as well as military supplies. They would also provide bases from which to attack ISIL in its strongholds, a mission that western forces could carry out in conjunction with local allies. 

In the end, the Alawites will be given a zone whereby they can control, leaving Russia and Iran a part of the cake so that they take something away from this end-game. 

The ultimate end-game for these zones would not have to be determined in advance. The interim goal might be a confederal Syria, with several highly autonomous zones. One of those zones might be for Alawites. But none could be for ISIL, al-Nusra, or Assad and his inner circle

The report interestingly goes on to say what Russia and Iran get from this plan of action:

This strategy might soften the opposition to the basic approach by Iran and Russia as well—perhaps reducing their inclination to escalate support for Assad and also possibly even enlisting them in a future negotiated deal about Syria’s ultimate future. Indeed, the strategy strikes a balance in its approach to Iran and Russia. It would grant neither a major role. But it would seek to mitigate the risks of escalating rivalry with them by holding out political hope and the prospect of an autonomous region for Alawites (even those previously associated with the Assad regime, as long as they were not from his inner circle). This approach may appeal even more to Moscow and Teheran to the extent that battlefield dynamics go clearly against Assad in a sustained way, as they have been already in the spring of 2015. 4 Damascus and Moscow would be much more likely to support a confederal Syria to the extent they believe that the alternative had probably become the complete overthrow of Assad and his government—and the elimination of meaningful Alawite influence in a future government—or, in a best case, protracted civil war of indefinite duration. 

Is this not the case today? The invisible handshake between America and Russia clearly states that there is an agreement in place. Iran has also become a major player in the region.

It's worth reading the full PDF here: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2015/06/23-syria-strategy-ohanlon/23syriastrategyohanlon.pdf

Al Saud's Fitna in Yemen - Includes lots of links for further reading

A collection of news articles on the fitna caused by Saudi's destructive war on Yemen, urged also by the U.S. using their intelligence and arms

Statistics since March 2015:
5000+ Killed (Conservative figures, local sources claim triple-fold more)
Targeted schools, markets. factories and refugee camps
80% of 25 million population on brink of famine

There are many Saudi casualties but they are all military personnel and not civilians. This blog lists Saudi's murder of civilians and not just the Houthi's.

(Most recent links at the top)

1. "While so much international attention is again focused on Syria because of the refugee crisis in Europe, another less noticed war, less commented on, yet equally vicious, especially for the civilians who bear its brunt, continues to tear at the Middle East."
   http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/13/the-guardian-view-on-yemen-remember-the-forgotten-war
2. "And the war is really about getting control of Yemen, wresting control from the Houthi Ansarullah movement and bringing that whole region under US control, because the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait is of enormous strategic importance to the United States and Israel."
   "The port of Aden, which connects the Indian Ocean to the Red Sea, is of enormous importance for Saudi Arabia as well, because they fear that conflict between Iran and the United States will close the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf. They depend a lot on that. So, there’s also of course a question of oil. There’s quite a lot of oil in Yemen that has been actually undeveloped and the Saudis want to get their hands on that as well. The war has pretty much been ignored by the Western press." Colmain - Political Commentator
   http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/09/14/429102/Yemen-Saudi-Arabia-US-UNSC-Gearoid-O-Colmain
3. "The airstrike slammed into Al-Sham water-bottling plant at the end of the night shift, killing 13 workers who were minutes away from heading home." The owner, Ibrahim al-Razoom, searched in vain for any possible reason that warplanes from a Saudi-led military coalition would have attacked the place.
   http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/13/world/middleeast/airstrikes-hit-civilians-yemen-war.html?_r=0
4. "The bodies of six Indian nationals reported missing after their boats were hit by airstrikes off Yemen on Tuesday have been found, Indian officials say."
   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-34217410
5. "58 civilians dead in Yemen fighting"
   http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/21/58-civilians-dead-in-yemen-fighting
6. "UN officials have been warning for months that Yemen is facing a dire humanitarian situation. How bad has the situation become?"
   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34011187
7. "Yemen already looks like Syria after five years of war"
   http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/yemen/11813169/Yemen-already-looks-like-Syria-after-five-years-of-war.html
8. "Banned cluster bombs used in Syria, Ukraine, Yemen, Sudan, Libya"
   http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/03/banned-cluster-bombs-syria-ukraine-yemen-sudan-libya
9. "Nearly 400 kids killed in Yemen since late March: UNICEF"
   http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/08/19/425358/Yemen-Saudi-Arabia-UNICEF-Julien-Harneis
10. "The United States has more than doubled the number of its military staff “providing intelligence, munitions and midair refueling” for Saudi Arabia’s airstrikes on Yemen."The number of so-called American advisors working at joint military operations centers in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain has risen from 20 to 45, The Los Angeles Times reports.
    In addition, US warships have also helped enforce a naval blockade in the Gulf of Aden and southern Arabian Sea.
    US officials stress the sea cordon is intended to prevent weapons shipments to Ansarullah fighters.
    However, human rights groups say the blockade has hindered imports of basic commodities, including food and fuel, to the impoverished nation.
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/08/19/425356/US-expands-role-in-Saudi-war-on-Yemen
11. Yemen turning into an open graveyard - RED CROSS
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/08/18/425320/Yemen-ICRC-Red-Cross-Nourane-Houas
12. "The US Defense Department has awarded major weapons maker Raytheon to provide the Persian Gulf Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with 355 air-to-ground missiles amid its persisting campaign of aerial strikes against civilian and economic targets in neighboring Yemen."
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/07/25/421791/Middle-East-Saudi-Arabia-US-arms-sale-AGM154-airtoground-missiles-Yemen-war
13. Mark Weber: Saudis enjoy US support in military campaign against Yemen
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/07/21/421227/Yemen-US-suWeapons-Saudi-Arabia

YouStink campaign in Lebanon is covertly headed by the U.S

The YouStink movement is allegedly due to the dysfunctional garbage collection services in Lebanon, but like all 'color revolutions' conducted by America, they start off based on domestic issues before they brew into a far more game changing scenario. This is why the placards being raised not only want the issue of garbage collection to be resolved but also a complete overhaul of the government, calling for new and fresh elections based on participatory democracy.

How do we know that the Americans are behind these movements? Well if we look at this movement in a superficial manner we would see that they often start off with a prominent and catchy hashtag that trends fairly quickly across the country, a symbol or logo is shared amongst the masses without any obvious coordination and rallies are held with high media coverage.

However the more telling signs are those who head the movement and coordinate it.

Imad Bazzi - The coordinate of the YouStink movement who is a trainee of the Serbian NGO Optor, an organisation linked to the USIP (United States Institute of Peace). Optor was instrumental in toppling  Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic. It trained, under the tutelage of executive director Sergio Popovic at the CANVAS centre in Belgrade, hundreds of activists in more than 37 countries to spearhead and oversee coup d'états and "soft" and "colour" revolutions by instigating civil and peaceful protests.

Asaad Thebian - an alumni of the US State Department's U.S.-Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI). In 2014 he stood in front of American flags with US State department seal fixed on the podium at a MEPI dinner event.

Here is the Youtube link for it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2D2G_edbYk

He was quoted by Al Jazeera saying:
"We started as dozens of protesters and now we're thousands," Asaad Thebian, an activist with the You Stink! campaign, said during Friday's press conference. "We are demanding parliamentary elections."
Link: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/08/lebanon-anti-government-protests-150829112717978.html

Michel Elefteriades - helped co-organize the US-backed mobs in Lebanon in 2005's "Cedar Revolution" and worked for years to expel Syrian troops from Lebanon.
Business Times conducted a lengthy interview with him regarding the YouStink campaign in Lebanon.

Here is the link: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/lebanon-you-stink-protests-we-are-not-egypt-claims-activist-michel-elefteriades-1517010

On his comment in regards to a power vacuum after getting a political change he said:
"There is a leadership that is ready to take over and there will not be a vacuum," Elefteriades explained. "There are many people, with great capacities, but that are still suffocated by this political elite and this new class will never be able to lead this country because those in place don't want to give them space. So, as soon as that old political class will have left, there will be the emergence of a new political class, from one day to the next."

It would seem that there is clearly a sketched out plan in place with all those in charge linked back to the U.S. State Department. 

Sources:
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/revolution-in-lebanon-from-piles-of.html

Engineered Refugee Crisis to Justify "Safe Havens" in Syria

Engineered Refugee Crisis to Justify "Safe Havens" in Syria

September 7 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - 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.

Image: Even Western "international" organizations find it difficult to hide NATO's role in the refugee crisis with most migrants transiting through NATO-destroyed Libya, and NATO-member Turkey. 

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."

Image: The Western media ensures that articles discussing the possibility of using the refugee crisis as justification to further decimate Syria includes lots of pictures of desperate refugees struggling to burst into Europe. 

It state (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 from attack by the warring parties in Syria's bloody civil war.  

The Huffington Post's report would also state (emphasis added):

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. 

How the US Can Stop ISIS Without Setting Foot in Syria

Source: http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/how-us-can-stop-isis-without-setting.html

How the US Can Stop ISIS Without Setting Foot in Syria

September 1, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Increasingly difficult to cover-up or spin, it is becoming apparent even in Western media coverage that the so-called "Islamic State" (ISIS) is not sustaining its fighting capacity from within Iraq or Syria, but rather through supply lines that lead to and from adjacent nations. These nations include Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, and most obviously, NATO-member Turkey.

It was in Germany's international broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW)'s report, "'IS' supply channels through Turkey," that hundreds of trucks destined for ISIS held territory were videotaped waiting at Oncupinar, Turkey to cross over into Syria with apparently no oversight by the Turkish government. Later, TIME magazine would admit ISIS' dependence on the Syrian town of Tal Abyad, just across the border from Turkey, for supplies and the significance of its loss to Kurdish fighters in sustaining their fighting capacity both at the border and beyond.

AP's June 2015 report, "Kurds move to cut off ISIS supply lines in Syria," would state:

Syrian Kurdish fighters closed in on the outskirts of a strategic Islamic State of Iraq and Syria-held town on the Turkish border Sunday, Kurdish officials and an activist group said, potentially cutting off a key supply line for the extremists' nearby de facto capital.  

Taking Tal Abyad, some 50 miles from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) stronghold of Raqqa, would mean the group wouldn't have a direct route to bring in new foreign militants or supplies. The Kurdish advance, coming under the cover of intense U.S.-led coalition airstrikes in the area, also would link their two fronts and put even more pressure on Raqqa as Iraqi forces struggle to contain the group in their country.

And while US airstrikes are credited for Kurdish advances against ISIS, one wonders why the US, whose military including a US airbase at Incirlik, Turkey and US special forces as well as the CIA are operating along and across the Syrian border in Turkey - hasn't done more to interdict ISIS supply lines beforethey reach Syria and awaiting terrorists.

The Kurds and Syria's military both realize the importance of stemming terrorist armies within Syria by cutting them off from their supplies at Syria's borders. However, both the Kurds and Syrian forces are increasingly limited from securing these borders due to an ever-expanding "safe haven" the US and its regional allies are carving out of Syrian territory. Turkey and Israel have both attacked Syrian forces in these "safe havens" creating a virtual sanctuary for Al Qaeda affiliates including Al Nusra and ISIS.

Efforts to "assist" the Kurds appear only to have been a pretext to violate Syrian airspace first, then Syrian territory on the ground second. America's meager "Division 30" of less than 60 fighters trained in Turkey then sent to fight the thousands upon thousands of terrorists the US and its allies have been arming, training, and sending over Syria's borders for years was yet another attempt to make ISIS and Al Nusra's gains appear a result of Western folly rather than of Western design.

How the West Can Stop ISIS Without Setting Foot in Syria 

An old military maxim states: "an army marches on its stomach." Logic dictates that an army with empty stomachs is unable to march. Napoleon Bonaparte who is credited with this quote, found out first hand just how true these words were when his army found itself deep within Russia without supplies, leading to its ultimate and catastrophic defeat.

Likewise, ISIS' fighting capacity depends entirely on its supply lines. Cutting these supply lines will lead to its inevitable defeat. For the United States, who is either allied with or has troops operating in all nations bordering Syria, cutting ISIS' supply lines would be a simple matter - that is - if the United States was truly interested in defeating ISIS and other Al Qaeda affiliates.

While the United States has assisted Turkey in erecting missile defenses along its border with Syria in order to create a defacto no-fly-zone providing Al Nusra and ISIS with an invaluable sanctuary, little to no effort has been spent in increasing border security - specifically the searching for and interdiction of terrorist fighters, weapons, and other supplies. As German DW's report illustrated, it appears Turkey's borders are not only dangerously wide open, but intentionally so, with little or no effort at all by Turkey to stem the torrent of obvious ISIS supply convoys from passing through.

DW would likely videotape a similar situation unfolding in Jordan near its border with Syria, close to Syrian cities like Daraa which have become battle-torn as Syrian forces desperately try to stem the torrent of fighters and weapons flowing over the borders there, aimed ultimately at Damascus.

The US Can Stop ISIS in One Month... If it Wanted

By cutting off ISIS from its money, supplies, additional fighters, weapons, and essential equipment, it would quickly be overwhelmed by Syrian and Iraqi forces. Without cash to pay fighters, and without new fighters to replace those lost in fighting, morale would quickly falter. Without a constant torrent of weapons, ammunition, and fuel, ISIS and other Al Qaeda affiliates would quickly lose their tactical capabilities. Fighters unable to flee would be encircled and destroyed as has happened deep within Syria's interior where Syrian forces have been able to cut supply lines to key cities and starve out terrorist armies.

Syria is intentionally prevented from securing its borders through an increasingly overt "buffer zone" or "safe haven" the US and its regional allies are creating for the purpose of sheltering clearly non-existent "moderate rebels." What these "safe havens" are in actuality doing, is ensuring ISIS' supply lines remain intact. With the Kurds - the only effective force near the Turkish-Syrian border able to threaten ISIS' supply lines - now being attacked by Turkish forces directly, what little obstacles supplies had in reaching ISIS through Turkey is being swiftly negated.

The US and its allies could easily increase security along Syria's borders and permanently cut ISIS and other Al Qaeda affiliates supply lines without having to enter Syrian airspace or cross onto Syrian soil. Just as easily as the US built a line of missile defenses facing Syria, it could create border checkpoints and patrols within Turkey to interdict and effectively stem all weapons and fighters flowing to ISIS. It could, but it intentionally doesn't.

The implications are obvious. ISIS is both a creation and intentional perpetuation of US foreign policy. Just as the US so many years ago colluded with Saudi Arabia in the creation of Al Qaeda in the mountains of Afghanistan in the first place, it to this day colludes with its regional allies to use Al Qaeda and its various rebrandings - including ISIS - to fight wars Western troops cannot fight. This includes dividing and destroying Syria - the overtly stated, true objective of US policymakers.

Could Syria and its allies create their own "buffer zone" in northern Syria? Could international troops be brought in, with the inclusion of UN observers to secure the Syrian border and put in check attempts by both Turkey and the US to engage Syrian and Kurdish fighters attempting to restore order there?

The incremental strategy of carving out northern Syria, claiming to shelter "moderate rebels" while in reality securing further ISIS' supply lines and providing them an increasingly unassailable safe haven from which to launch operations deeper into Syria, is inching along and will inevitably pay off at the expense of Syrian territorial integrity, stability, and perhaps even its existence as a functioning state if no measures are taken to counter this conspiracy.

The basics of logistics and the simple fact that the US can both fight and defeat ISIS by simply securing Turkey and Jordan's borders must be repeatedly brought up by non-Western media and diplomatic circles - highlighting the fact that Syria's conflict is one of foreign invasion, not civil war. The conflict can be brought to an end, along with all the horrors associated with it, by simply checking ISIS' bags at the Turkish border. If the US and Turkey refuse to do this, someone must check them on the other side, someone the US and Turks may hesitate to attack as they have the Syrians and Kurds.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.   

The US are joint perpetrators of the Yemen invasion

Source: http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/08/19/425356/US-expands-role-in-Saudi-war-on-Yemen

This article sums up the Saudi aggression on Yemen. It comes as no surprise to see that it is American intelligence that gives Saudi the locations in which to drop its bombs (that were also bought off America to aid in their economy).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The United States has more than doubled the number of its military staff “providing intelligence, munitions and midair refueling” for Saudi Arabia’s airstrikes on Yemen.

The number of so-called American advisors working at joint military operations centers in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain has risen from 20 to 45, The Los Angeles Times reports.

In addition, US warships have also helped enforce a naval blockade in the Gulf of Aden and southern Arabian Sea.

US officials stress the sea cordon is intended to prevent weapons shipments to Ansarullah fighters.

However, human rights groups say the blockade has hindered imports of basic commodities, including food and fuel, to the impoverished nation.

Saudi Arabia launched its military aggression against Yemen on March 26 – without a UN mandate – in an effort to undermine Yemen’s popular Houthi Ansarullah movement, whose fighters had forced the US-backed president, Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi, into exile.

A US special operations team was deployed at al-Anad, the country’s largest airbase, to collect intelligence and launch drone strikes in southern Yemen, until it was driven out in March as Ansarullah fighters advanced.

American officials said last week that they will not deploy the team back to Yemen until Hadi, the fugitive former president, is restored to power.

The humanitarian situation has become critical in Yemen, with many international aid organizations seeking a safe passage into the country to supply medical and humanitarian supplies to the most affected people.

Human rights group Amnesty International said in a report that the Saudi airstrikes have mostly pounded populated areas with no identifiable military targets nearby, leaving a "bloody trail of civilian death."

The onslaught has claimed more than 4,300 lives and forced more than 1.3 million others from their homes since March, according to United Nations agencies.