They leave a signiature
They leave a signiature…
In UK, it was reported as the Batalan theatre. Wasn’t it the Batalan Cafe with a band member known as the Devil while they were playing “Kiss the Devil”?
ed: 
Going Underground Special: John Pilger on Paris, ISIS and Media Propaganda
Going Underground Special: John Pilger on Paris, ISIS and Media Propaganda
4/12/15 00.25 GMT Pilger: “That’s a ludicrous argument”. Do both of them share knowledge – probably like all real journalists that it’s ludicrous, er, perhaps like a ludicrous diversion?
From Pol Pot to ISIS: “Anything that flies on everything that moves”
by John Pilger
…
Last year, the former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas revealed that “two years before the Arab spring”, he was told in London that a war on Syria was planned. “I am going to tell you something,” he said in an interview with the French TV channel LPC, “I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria… Britain was organising an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer Minister for Foreign Affairs, if I would like to participate… This operation goes way back. It was prepared, preconceived and planned.”
…
READ a 2007 State Department cable published by WikiLeaks about the 2006 declaration of the “Islamic State of Iraq”, the forerunner organisation of ISIS.
READ two US Congressional Research Reports on the emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq under the leadership of Abu Omar al-Baghdadi (the predecessor of ISIS’ Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi), following the death of the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al Zarqawi, in 2006. See here and here.
READ a 2007 cable showing Islamic State presence in Iraq during 2007, and how demographic shifts in response to sectarian Shia-Sunni tensions, directly provoked by the US invasion and installation of a Shia-dominated government, were already playing into the hands of the group.
VIEW 113 Iraq War Logs documenting US forces encountering ISI in Iraq from 2007 onwards.
BROWSE nearly 3,000 documents published by WikiLeaks which mention the Islamic State of Iraq.
READ three US Congressional Research Report on the history of the US-backed “Sons of Iraq” Sunni militias, formed to oppose Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. The failure by the US-backed Shia government to integrate the Sunni militias into the Iraq army later led to many “Sons of Iraq” returning to the jihadi insurgency, swelling the ranks of modern-day ISIS. See here, here and here.
READ a 2009 cable on AQI/ISI in Mosul.
READ in a 2010 State Department cable how Syria’s head of intelligence Ali Mamlouk discussed with US diplomats the migration of foreign “takfiri” fighters, such as the Islamic State, into Syria from war-torn Iraq, and offered the US a military and intelligence partnership to address them. Declining, the US later lent support to jihadi groups as Syria’s “opposition” during the Syrian civil war.
READ a leaked 2010 STRATFOR email containing a private intelligence product documenting the transition of Islamic State leadership to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, after the killing of former-ISI leader, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi in 2010.
4/12/15 00.45 about the Guardian newspaper
http://off-guardian.org/about-2/#comment-5091
I understand the anger and frustration many people have voiced here – and I think that it would be worth posting an explanation of what has actually happened at The Guardian.
In 2013, The Guardian filed some of the worst financial accounts in the newspaper’s history. The publishers were clearly in deep financial trouble, and were forced to sell-off some of their assets, simply to avoid immediately bankruptcy. The financial outlook appeared very grim.
But ‘hope’ was around the corner… although it was a vile kind of ‘hope’ indeed.
The Guardian was (quietly) relaunched, positioning itself primarily in the USA and Australia – whilst aiming to retain as much as possiible from its former days as a left-wing newspaper in Britain. New and mysterious ‘backers’ appeared, who were now controlling the political content of the newspaper. Alan Rusbridger was quickly removed and thrown on the rubbish-heap – the usual nonsense about wanting to develop his career (in retirement?).
It was a very simple idea – “buy up the opposition to neoconservative American ideas – and neatralise it with a daily diet of pro-Pentagon, pro-Washington, shabby indoctrination”. Unwanted old left-wingers were quietly pushed aside. Ambitious Americans like Hadley Freeman were shoved forwards. New right-wing writers were hired, such as “Rafael Behr” (who he?). The screaming voices of the lunatic right, such as TImothy Garbage-Trash, suddenly become Leader Writers..
Let’s just explain what “neoconservative” actually means. It means following right-wing policies and ideas under the apparently acceptable cloak of being socialists, in order to secure public support for these extreme right-wing policies. Tony Blair is the perfect example… a man who found himself in perfect accord with George Bush – a god-bothering war-mongering racist fascist psychopath with the brain of a mollusc.
But it gets worse. The Guardian is now not really written by Guardian journalists any longer. Instead, coverage of all “sensitive” topics has been franchised out to American rightwing organisations. Now we get articles and editorial which have been “sponsored by the John D Rockefeller Foundation” (an extremist rightwing organisation), whose authorship and views chime perfectly with American hard-line exceptionalist Christian white right. Sometimes the sourcing is hidden more carefully… for example, the “Calvert Journal” – an American-funded pile of rightwing trash based in Calvert Street in London…. trailed as an “expert source” on Russia, but actually ghost-written in Washington. A few down-at-heel Russian emigres were hired as the ostensible “authors” of this crap. So now the Guardian’s Russia coverage is written by spooks in Washington under the guise of being written by “Russian opposition voices cowering from Putin in London”. I’ve met these filth – they are pathetic users who are happy to take Washington’s dollars to fund their empty-headed glamorous lifestyles in London. This comes under the heading of “New East”, headed by a new rightwing extremist at the Guardian called Maeve Sheerlaw… a cheap hack who has never been to Moscow in her life, yet was made an Overnight Expert to parrot the opinions of filth like Andrew McFaul, failed American Ambassador to Moscow.
Then there are all the articles ‘syndicated’ from the Moscow Times – another fake newspaper funded by American rightwingers in Washington, via a chain of anonymous holding companies in the Netherlands and Scandinavia. Don’t be fooled by that “Moscow Times” title – it was one they picked on purpose, to make it sound like a serious newspaper. In fact it’s staffed by a team of cheap American journalism students, and there are no Russians working there at all. A few Russian names appear as columnists… but – surprise! – they are all Russian runaways, living in Miami or Brighton Beach, and delighted to have Washington’s cash in exchange for some bitter hatred penned during a drunken lunch-hour.
In summary, then – The Guardian which readers remember from the 1980s and 1990s no longer exists at all. Its exterior appearance and readership has been bought for cash by American fascist organisations… but covertly, so that readers “believe” they are still reading The Guardian. Surprised? You shouldn’t be, because it’s how Tony Blair came to power in Britain – the most Tory leader Britain has ever had. And where are his ‘socialist’ allies? Peter Mandelson, a penniless journalist, is now Lord Mandelson, with a two-million pound house and a seat in the House of Lords. Socialism, my arse.
The Guardian is now more right-wing than the Daily Telegraph. It features articles from Timmy Garbage-Trash saying how Britain should go to war against Russia, to save those jolly, plucky, Right Sector genocidal fascists in Ukraine.
None of this has ever been mentioned in the Guardian itself, of course. You are all still clinging to this rabid pro-American sheet of garbage until the moment they actually write it on the front page. That day will never come. Yet you still think the Guardian is a ‘socialist’ newspaper.
Syria and Daesh/Isil – What the UK parliament daren’t discuss
The UK government is today discussing joining the Western alliance bombing Syria.
After doing an evening’s research last night I almost feel like an expert on Syria and Daesh/ISIL. I also get regular updates from Juan Cole’s Informed Comment which is an excellent resource. It’s important to check internet sources since there are some misleading accounts out there.
There’s the Neo-Conservative ‘Clean Break’ document published in 1996 proposing an aggressive policy in reshaping the Middle East so that Israel is able to “transend” the Arab-Israeli conflict.
We have a 2012 document 2012 Defense Intelligence Agency Document:
West Will Facilitate Rise of Islamic State “in Order to Isolate the Syrian Regime”. This document shows that Daesh/ISIS/ISIL was created and maintained by Western powers.
It is only since Russia recently commenced air strikes supporting Syria that Daesh/ISIS/ISIL’s illicit oil trading business has been targeted. Russia accuses Turkey of facilitating and profiting from this illicit trade while also supporting Daesh/ISIS/ISIL militants. There are accounts of strange deaths of journalists in Turkey and associated support of the Daesh/ISIS/ISIL militants by Turkey’s MIT secret service.
That it is only recently that Daesh/ISIS/ISIL financing has been targeted by Russia suggests that it was accepted by the coalition allegedly fighting Daesh/ISIS/ISIL i.e. Daesh was tolerated as it attacked the Syrian regime.
ed: Aren’t those who engage in terrorism terrorists?
3/12/15 3.40pm I’ve found that Dr Nafeez Ahmed has also considered the2012 Defense Intelligence Agency Document:
West Will Facilitate Rise of Islamic State “in Order to Isolate the Syrian Regime” document and reached similar conclusions that Western governments were creating, supporting and maintaining extremist terrorists while claiming the opposite. As an aside I notice that Daesh was not mentioned in this document and wonder whether the ‘new’ ISIS is to move on from ISIS/ISIL/ISI.
It follows that those that accuse others of being “terrorist sympathisers” are actual, literal terrorists … while – of course – hiding and pointing the finger at others.
Pentagon report predicted West’s support for Islamist rebels would create ISIS
Anti-ISIS coalition knowingly sponsored violent extremists to ‘isolate’ Assad, rollback ‘Shia expansion’
A declassified secret US government document obtained by the conservative public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad.
The document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, and that these “supporting powers” desired the emergence of a “Salafist Principality” in Syria to “isolate the Syrian regime.”
According to the newly declassified US document, the Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of this strategy, and warned that it could destabilize Iraq. Despite anticipating that Western, Gulf state and Turkish support for the “Syrian opposition” — which included al-Qaeda in Iraq — could lead to the emergence of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the document provides no indication of any decision to reverse the policy of support to the Syrian rebels. On the contrary, the emergence of an al-Qaeda affiliated “Salafist Principality” as a result is described as a strategic opportunity to isolate Assad.
…
The newly declassified DIA document from 2012 confirms that the main component of the anti-Assad rebel forces by this time comprised Islamist insurgents affiliated to groups that would lead to the emergence of ISIS. Despite this, these groups were to continue receiving support from Western militaries and their regional allies.
Noting that “the Salafist [sic], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria,” the document states that “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition,” while Russia, China and Iran “support the [Assad] regime.”
The 7-page DIA document states that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the precursor to the ‘Islamic State in Iraq,’ (ISI) which became the ‘Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,’ “supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning, both ideologically and through the media.”
The formerly secret Pentagon report notes that the “rise of the insurgency in Syria” has increasingly taken a “sectarian direction,” attracting diverse support from Sunni “religious and tribal powers” across the region.
In a section titled ‘The Future Assumptions of the Crisis,’ the DIA report predicts that while Assad’s regime will survive, retaining control over Syrian territory, the crisis will continue to escalate “into proxy war.”
The document also recommends the creation of “safe havens under international sheltering, similar to what transpired in Libya when Benghazi was chosen as the command centre for the temporary government.”
…
The conventional wisdom is that the US government did not retain sufficient oversight on the funding to anti-Assad rebel groups, which was supposed to be monitored and vetted to ensure that only ‘moderate’ groups were supported.
However, the newly declassified Pentagon report proves unambiguously that years before ISIS launched its concerted offensive against Iraq, the US intelligence community was fully aware that Islamist militants constituted the core of Syria’s sectarian insurgency.
Despite that, the Pentagon continued to support the Islamist insurgency, even while anticipating the probability that doing so would establish an extremist Salafi stronghold in Syria and Iraq.
As Shoebridge told me, “The documents show that not only did the US government at the latest by August 2012 know the true extremist nature and likely outcome of Syria’s rebellion” — namely, the emergence of ISIS — “but that this was considered an advantage for US foreign policy. This also suggests a decision to spend years in an effort to deliberately mislead the West’s public, via a compliant media, into believing that Syria’s rebellion was overwhelmingly ‘moderate.’”
…
WARNING: Graphic Image. Paris attacks 13 November 2015
WARNING: Graphic Image. For me it was that photo. That was enough. The claim was that it was carefully considered / planned. So would Daesh make a sacrifice to the devil? I have experience of this. Those numbers in the image. Daesh would do that? Hands up? Looks like a different dialect.
ed: a certain dialect. I’ve not ever taken any vows.
ed: J’accuse les NeoCons.
9.15 20/11/15: Who don’t have beards? French culture is anti-stubble – even tramps are clean-shaven FFS. To not have beards is a cultural giveaway. 11.10 21/11/15. This is probably incorrect. They may have had small beards or stubble.
24/11/15 10.15 am
Paris attack witness says black Mercedes pulled up and shooters fired rifles from the hip
Witness describes Paris attackers as clean-shaven, muscular, like soldiers or mercenaries, driving a black Mercedes car.
“He was white, clean shaven and had dark hair neatly trimmed.”
Paris Attack Reported on WIKIPEDIA and TWITTER before it happened
That title is a little misleading. The Wikipedia reports are extremely detailed very soon after the events with one incident reported before it had happened. The twitter report was over two days before the Paris attacks.
…
The 23:18 version includes discussions of the hostage-taking, complete with an approximate number of hostages involved (60), as well as detailed accounts of events at several locations. It even has a detailed bibliography. How could your average Wikipedia author have done this incredible piece of work and in less than two hours? Obviously this was not your average Wikipedia author.
You’re invited to read this early version of the Wikipedia article, which appears at the bottom of this post.
Revisions were subsequently made to the article. But the storyline it established, which is undoubtedly why it was written in the first place and gotten into Wikipedia so quickly, did not change through any of those revisions. It’s the storyline that the article is designed to make stick in the public mind.
As yet (00:41 PM CET), the newspapers are reporting simply bullet lists of events which they’re aware of only very sketchily. But Wikipedia has extensive coverage. within a couple of hours. That just did not sit with me and I continued to investigate.
…
Secret Warfare: Operation Gladio and NATO’s Stay-Behind Armies
…
Chapter One: A terrorist attack in Italy
This chapter describes the discovery of the secret stay-behind army “Gladio” in Italy. The chapter takes the reader back to the Peteano terrorist attack of 31 May 1972. In that year an anonymous phone call after the attack suggested that the left-wing terrorist organization “Red Brigades” had carried out the atrocity, and for many years Italy believed that the crime had been carried out by the political left. Yet in 1984 Italian judge Felice Casson reopened the Peteano case after having discovered large-scale manipulations. The chapter describes how Casson during his investigations discovered the Italian secret stay-behind army “Gladio” hidden within the military secret service and how it had linked up with right-wing terrorist Vincenzo Vinciguerra who confessed to having carried out the Peteano terrorist attack. The chapter focuses on the agitated Italian public debate that followed when Vinciguerra exposed the so called “strategy of tension” through which members of the secret stay-behind armies and the military secret services had manipulated the public through terrorism. The secret armies supplied right wing terrorists with explosives to carry out terrorist attacks on the Italian population who were thereafter blamed on the communist party and the political left in general in order to discredit the political opponent. “The terrorist line was followed by camouflaged people, people belonging to the security apparatus, or those linked to the state apparatus through rapport or collaboration”, Vincenzo Vinciguerra testified. Right-wing organisations across Western Europe “were being mobilised into the battle as part of an anti-communist strategy originating not with organisations deviant from the institutions of power, but from the state itself, and specifically from within the ambit of the state’s relations within the Atlantic Alliance.“
…
Chapter Four: The secret war in the United Kingdom
The chapter takes the reader back to World War Two when British Prime Minister Winston Churchill ordered that under the label “Special Operations Executive” (SOE) a secret army had to be created “to set Europe ablaze”. SOE operated behind enemy lines, and following World War Two the British were widely recognised as the leading experts in secret warfare. The chapter describes how the British foreign secret service MI6 together with the British Special Forces “Special Air Service” (SAS) and the CIA during the Cold War set up and trained the secret stay-behind armies in Western Europe. Among those trained by the SAS ranged Decimo Garau, an instructor at the Italian Gladio base Centro Addestramento Guastatori (CAG) on Capo Marargiu in Sardinia
26/11/15 22.50 Comments are very welcome. There is a comments policy that it needs to be relevant and non-commercial. You are welcome to disagree or take issue. The vast majority of comments to this blog are commercial spam that get caught by Akismet. If you have something to say it will be published although I don’t check that often.
16/11/15 23.00 UK Prime Minister David Cameron is currently banging the drum to have UK military bomb – allegedly IS/ISIS/Daesh in Syria. I am opposed to that for a few reasons; 1. There is not a clear objective
2. Despite what DC says innocent people are clearly going to be killed and injured
3. The situation is hugely complex and I don’t see that UK can or should contribute anything to resolving it
4. I suspect that Cameron is following the NeoCon objective of getting rid of al Assad for greater NeoCon objectives. ed: i.e. bombing who?
later ed: You shouldn’t rush into things in an emotional state. You need to consider things rationally. There’s a real danger that people are manipulated through their emotions.
A decade on …
A decade on I’m starting to feel very much like I did a decade ago – that the state is out to get me personally. Actually, it’s more than just a feeling. It’s the language used about Fascists (individual Fascists?) and Big Cons.
It all seems totally out of proportion as it was a decade ago. Hardly necessary or proportionate for name-calling a couple of Bully-boys and making a probably unfulfilled commitment to get up to speed. I said that I was trying to move on. The trouble is that it should by now be well appreciated that I do defend myself.
I can’t help thinking that perhaps this post would be better made tomorrow.
11.30 edit: I’m going to let this go for a short time to see if there’s confirmation or not.
20.35 edit: Having reviewed things I think that I was prob mistaken and that it’s not directed at myself. It’s taken me a long time to get a handle on Cameron and I think that it’s simply that he’s a big fan of Tonee’s for unknown reasons and – despite achieving good grades – he’s not that bright. For example the (Eton) mess that he made about censoring search engines and now he wants to ban alternative narratives (conspiracy theories) and start a Cameron Youth.
