Turkey's "Apology" to Russia to be Tested on Syria's Border

June 29, 2016 (Ulson Gunnar - NEO) - The Washington Post summarizes the recent apology offered to Russia by Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in its article, "Turkish president apologizes for downing of Russian warplane last year." It reports:
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan apologized Monday for the downing of a Russian warplane in November and called for Russia and Turkey to mend a bilateral relationship that has become openly hostile over the incident. 

One Russian pilot was killed last year when two Turkish F-16s shot down a Russian Su-24 warplane over Turkey’s border with Syria in an unexpected clash that Russian President Vladi­mir Putin called a “stab in the back administered by the accomplices of terrorists.”

 Additionally, the Washington Post would note:
In a statement, Erdogan’s press secretary said Russia and Turkey “have agreed to take necessary steps without delay to improve bilateral relations,” specifically noting regional crises and the fight against terrorism. 
Indeed, the fight against terrorism does truly require Turkey's aid. And its aid in this fight, particularly along the Turkish-Syrian border will serve as the true measure of Ankara's sincerity regarding its apology and regret for Russia's downed SU-24 warplane.

Turkey Has Enabled this Conflict, It Can Prove It's Sorry by Ending It  

As revealed by Turkey's own foreign minister in a Washington Times article titled, "Turkey offers joint ops with U.S. forces in Syria, wants Kurds cut out," it was admitted that:
Joint operations between Washington and Ankara in Manbji, a well-known waypoint for Islamic State fighters, weapons and equipment coming from Turkey bound for Raqqa,would effectively open “a second front” in the ongoing fight to drive the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, from Syria’s borders, [Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu] said.
In other words, Turkey's own government admits that Islamic State (IS) fighters, weapons and equipment are coming from Turkey, bound for Raqqa, which should make pundits, the press, politicians and the general public alike wonder why then Turkey along with its partners in the Persian Gulf, Europe and North America are fighting the Islamic State in Syria, rather than simply interdicting them within what is essentially NATO territory before they even reach Syria to begin with.

Hezbollah Wages an Existential Battle in Syria

June 27, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah has announced his intentions to reinforce positions within Syria, particularly in Aleppo. Al-Manar in its article, "S. Nasrallah: Hezbollah Will Reinforce Troops in Aleppo to Achieve Major Victory," would report that:
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah confirmed on Friday that the party will send more troops to Syria's Aleppo where a major battle goes on in order to defeat the takfiri-terrorist project backed by Saudi and the US.

Nasrallah would add that the US and its regional allies were preparing to flood Syria with thousands of additional terrorist proxies in a bid to seize Aleppo. He also pointed out how the so-called "ceasefire" was used by various US-Saudi backed terrorist groups to retrench and prepare for the next phase of fighting.

Nasrallah Warned the World in 2007 of Syria's Coming Catastrophe  


In 2007, Nasrallah would give an interview to Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his article "The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?"

In it, Nasrallah would state the following while discussing the ongoing civil war in Iraq, years before the onset of the current Syrian crisis:
Nasrallah said he believed that America also wanted to bring about the partition of Lebanon and of Syria. In Syria, he said, the result would be to push the country “into chaos and internal battles like in Iraq.” In Lebanon, “There will be a Sunni state, an Alawi state, a Christian state, and a Druze state.” But, he said, “I do not know if there will be a Shiite state.” 
He believed that attempts would be made to drive Shia'a from Lebanon and Syria as far as southern Iraq, which may explain why the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" (ISIS) finds itself operating conveniently in both Syria and Iraq, serving as a tool to influence not just Syria, but the entire region geopolitically.

Hersh's 2007 article would also reveal another important aspect of US foreign policy evident at the time and now prophetic in retrospect. The article stated that (emphasis added):
To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
In essence, Hersh's research and interviews revealed that even as early as 2007, the US was working together with regional allies like Saudi Arabia to bolster armed terrorist groups and their political networks, including the Muslim Brotherhood, in preparations to divide and destroy the region, including Syria, as well as Lebanon.

The National Endowment for Democracy: Not National and Not for Democracy

June 24, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Using a front to hide illegal or immoral activities has been a feature of human criminality since the beginning of human civilization itself. Facades, both ideological and economical, have helped criminal enterprises conceal the true nature of their activities for centuries.



In ages past, organized religion would often take systems of legitimate philosophy and spirituality, and transform them into a means of organizing the masses for the benefit of an elite few, often those heading empires, kingdoms, or nation-states. More recently, patriotism and now the notion of "democracy" have been used successfully by similar cadres of special interests to conceal their self-serving agendas behind notions likely to recruit support from large segments of a population that would otherwise be disinterested.

There is no example of this more transparent than that of the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED). According to its own website, it claims:
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is a private, nonprofit foundation dedicated to the growth and strengthening of democratic institutions around the world. Each year, NED makes more than 1,200 grants to support the projects of non-governmental groups abroad who are working for democratic goals in more than 90 countries.
"The growth and strengthening  of democratic institutions around the world" sounds noble enough. One would expect, then, that the NED would be led by a collection of some of the most notable activists involved in the empowerment of "the people." Instead, upon NED's board of directors, we find people representing corporate-financier interests notorious for instead, exploiting and subjugating "the people."


Unfortunately, for those receiving the millions upon millions of dollars the NED hands out annually to "nongovernmental organizations" (NGOs) around the world, few bother to actually check who it is underwriting their daily activities, and fewer still have the integrity to both turn down the money let alone inform the people they claim to represent just who is attempting to reach into their respective nations and subvert their political systems, and to what end.

Quite literally, each and every member of the NED's board of directors represents Fortune 500 corporations, insidious corporate-financier funded policy think-tanks, and a wide variety of other obvious conflicts of interest unbecoming of an organization truly interested in, "the growth and strengthening of democratic institutions around the world." 

GT200: How London Sold Fake Bomb Detectors and Got People Killed

The UK proves that power and profits come before the lives of even its own allies' soldiers and police.

June 23, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - The GT200 is an otherwise useless plastic box that does nothing with equally useless "sensor cards" that serve no discernible function.

Image: Faced with mounting violence in Thailand's deep south, the government in Bangkok placed its trust in its British allies. It is clear that this trust was not only misplaced, but shamefully used and abused by London in a multi-million dollar scam involving the British military, government, and diplomatic corps.
Despite this fact, UK-based Global Technical and an array of salesmen ranging from experts in the British military serving as equipment export support teams, to British ambassadors, to even the British government's Department of Trade and Industry (now renamed the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills) peddled the useless item as a "bomb detector," putting lives at risk in the nations they were peddled in, and even costing the lives of hundreds including dead police and soldiers in both Iraq and Thailand.

In Thailand, amid the wake of the scandal, US and British backed media services have attempted to capitalize on the political fallout, laying the blame squarely on the Thai government, never mentioning the central role of the British government in promoting the useless and ultimately deadly device.

Critics of the Royal Thai Army and the current government have seized upon the scandal to opportunistically and dishonestly undermine both, with some even going as far as blaming the soldiers who risked their lives in the restive southern provinces of Thailand while employing the fraudulent British-made GT200.

The BBC and Guardian Expose the UK Government's Role 

While the BBC's Jonathan Head in Thailand politically wields the GT200 scandal against the Thai government and its military exclusively, the BBC itself has exposed the breadth and depth of the UK government's involvement.


US Seeks Direct Confrontation with Russia in Syria

June 21, 2016 (Ulson Gunnar - NEO) - The US has recently accused Russia of bombing what it calls "US-backed rebels" in southern Syria. CBS News in their article, "Russia ignores warnings, bombs U.S.-backed Syrian rebel group," would claim:

On Friday, Defense Secretary Ash Carter called out Russia for bombing a Syrian rebel group that's backed by the U.S.

The attack by Russian fighter bombers on American-backed opposition forces appeared to be deliberate and to ignore repeated U.S. warnings.

  More alarming is what the US claimed happened next. CBS News would further claim:

Two American F-18 jet fighters were dispatched to provide air cover for the troops on the ground as they tried to evacuate their casualties. By the time the F-18s arrived, the Russian planes were headed away, but were still close enough to see.
But when the F-18s broke away to refuel, the Russians returned for a second bombing run. Another call went out to the Russian command center in Syria, demanding that the planes wave off.

The crew of an airborne command post tried to contact the Russian pilots directly but got no response. The Su-34s conducted another bombing run, leaving a small number of opposition fighters dead on the ground.
Neither CBS News nor the US Department of Defense ever explained why the US believes it is entitled to send armed militants over the borders and into a sovereign nation, or why it believes a sovereign nation and its allies are not entitled to confront and neutralize them or why US aircraft are entitled to fly over Syrian airspace without the authorization of the Syrian government.

In other words, the US is vocally complaining about its serial violations of international law and norms finally (allegedly) being confronted and put to an end by Russian military forces.

But Did Russia Even Attack America's Armed Invaders? 
Russia however, has denied US accusations. CNN's article, "Russia denies bombing U.S.-backed Syrian rebels near Jordan border," states:
Russia's Defense Ministry denied bombing U.S.-backed Syrian opposition forces in a recent military operation near the Jordania border, according to a statement released on Sunday. 

The Kremlin response comes after U.S. and Russian military officials held a video conference to discuss Thursday's strikes. 
As is characteristic of all US claims regarding its multiple, ongoing foreign acts of military aggression, the most recent row in Syria is heavy on rhetoric and light on evidence. Had Russia attacked armed militants invading Syrian territory, it would have been well within its rights to do so, however it has claimed it hasn't. The burden of proof is on the US.