Terror’s Alliance: U.S. Alliance with FSA & Daesh-ISIL in Photos & Video

Originally posted on the real SyrianFreePress Network:

The following six photographs confirm that a favorite “moderate rebel” leader, Abdel Jabbar al-Okaidi, is allied with ISIL.

by Rick Sterling – Dissident Voice

The first photograph is from Spring 2013 and shows Okaidi with the American who has been the principal coordinator of US policy on Syria. The last two photographs are from a meeting days ago when Congressmen Adam Kinzinger (Rep Illinois) and George Holding (Rep. North Carolina) met with Okaidi and other “moderate rebels” in Turkey.

Other photos show Okaidi with ISIL fighters and being interviewed about his relationship with ISIL. The photographs are from videos identified at bottom.


Photo 1 / May 2013/ Okaidi with Robert S. Ford, US Ambassador and Coordinator of the “Friends of Syria”


Photo 2 / August 2013 / Okaidi with ISIL fighters at Menagh Air Base, Syria.  ISIL leader is Abu Jandal to Okaidi’s left.


Photo 3 / August 2013 /…

View original 250 more words

US War against the People of Syria and Iraq

EDITOR’S CHOICE | 03.10.2014 | 00:48

US air strikes in Iraq and Syria will kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians, and the White House and Pentagon are fully aware of this fact. That is the only conclusion to be drawn from a remarkable public statement Tuesday by a top White House aide.

The statement coincided with the heaviest attacks so far in the air war in Syria and Iraq, with US and allied countries launching 24 strikes, 12 in each country on Tuesday, with British warplanes making their first attacks.

National Security Council press spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden, in an e-mail to Yahoo News, confirmed that the targeting restrictions announced by President Obama for US drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen do not apply to the war launched against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Obama announced those restrictions in a speech to the National Defense University, claiming that the US would only conduct drone strikes against supposed Al Qaeda targets if there was a “near certainty” of no civilian casualties, which he called “the highest standard that we can meet.”

“The specific standards at issue in the NDU speech apply only when we take direct action ‘outside areas of active hostilities,’ as was noted at the time,” Hayden wrote. “That description—outside areas of active hostilities—simply does not fit what we are seeing on the ground in Iraq and Syria right now.”

Hayden was responding to concerns over casualties in the village of Kafr Daryan in Idlib Province, in northwestern Syria, where a Tomahawk cruise missile killed as many as a dozen civilians, including women and young children. The US Central Command confirmed the September 23 strike, saying it targeted the “Khorasan group,” the US-invented label for members of the Al Qaeda affiliated Al Nusra Front, one of the main Syrian “rebel” groups fighting the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

The Pentagon’s top spokesman, Rear Admiral John Kirby, confirmed the more permissive standard for air strikes against targets in Syria and Iraq when questioned by reporters Tuesday. “When we say we’re going to go after them, we mean it,” Kirby said.

The restrictions that Obama claimed he was applying to drone missile strikes did not significantly limit the carnage inflicted by 500-pound warheads smashing into the huts of tribal villagers in rural Pakistan and Yemen. Pakistani officials and outside organizations like Amnesty International estimated the civilian death toll from more than 300 drone strikes in these areas as ranging from the high hundreds to many thousands.

After a series of studies on civilian casualties in drone missile strikes were published last year, the WSWS wrote, “The reports, in fact, provide prima facie evidence for a future war crimes tribunal whose defendants would include Obama and top officials at the National Security Council, the Pentagon, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency.” (see: Report documents US slaughter of civilians in drone strikes).

In addition to the direct toll of dead and wounded, there is the effect of such constant attacks on the whole society. An April 2014 article in Rolling Stone observed:

“The people of Yemen can hear destruction before it arrives. In cities, towns and villages across this country, which hangs off the southern end of the Arabian Peninsula, the air buzzes with the sound of American drones flying overhead. The sound is a constant and terrible reminder … Over half of Yemen’s 24.8 million citizens—militants and civilians alike—are impacted every day.”

The statements of the White House and Pentagon spokesmen indicate that the death and destruction inflicted on the people of Iraq and Syria will dwarf the horrific impact of drone warfare on Pakistan, Yemen or Somalia. And not a single voice of protest against such mass killing has been raised in official Washington, in either the Democratic or Republican parties.

Representatives of US-backed Syrian groups allied to al-Nusra briefed members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the Kafr Daryan strike. One Republican congressman who attended the briefing, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, dismissed concerns about civilian deaths, telling Yahoo News, “Nothing is perfect,” and arguing that any collateral damage from US strikes was “much less than the brutality of the Assad regime.”

The death toll from bombs and missiles is only the beginning. As US officials were at pains to emphasize this week—most prominently Samantha Power, the US ambassador to the United Nations — the main goal of American imperialism in Syria remains that of the overthrow of Assad and his replacement by a US-backed puppet regime in Damascus.

That goal inevitably requires the deployment of tens of thousands of ground troops — whether American, British, French, Turkish, Saudi or some combination — and the military conquest of Syria. The invasion and occupation of Iraq led to a million deaths from 2003 to 2011. A crime of even greater dimensions now looms in both Iraq and Syria.

Patrick Martin, globalresearch.ca

Maxim Gorky: Only time to train cannon fodder, not soldiers

Originally posted on Stop NATO...Opposition to global militarism:


Anti-war essays, poems, short stories and literary excerpts

Russian writers on war

Maxim Gorky: Selections on war


Maxim Gorky
From The Specter (1938)
Translated by Alexander Bakshy


The streets and squares of the city had long since been in use for drilling soldiers, and everywhere rang the command:


The command lingered in his memory from childhood, when, in the tranquillity of a provincial town, it had rung assured and imperious, although coming from a distance – from the field. Here in the city which commanded the forces of the enormous country, the life of a hundred and fifty million souls, this command sounded irritable, hopeless, sometime actually despondent and futile, like an appeal or a cry of despair.

Samghin, listening to the order, shook his head incredulously, and came to a stop. Before him, striding along the cobbled pavements of the street, he saw small men in…

View original 475 more words

#USA ~ List of Congressmen who voted to arm the baby killing terrorists in Syria and attack school children with Obama’s airstrikes

DAASH-MADE-IN-USADear Americans,

Your President has created ISIS via his rogue wars on Libya and Syria.  For the past four years he has been sending your money to the Islamic State terrorists who have been raping, and beheading children, and then eating them.  This is not a lie, this site is full of documented proof of these facts.


Now in order to attack President Assad and the Syrian people he has asked the public for airstrikes on ISIS, when in reality Congress voted to further arm the terrorists in Syria and Iraq.  Wasting your tax dollars NOT FIGHTING ISIS but attacking innocent civilians, mainly children.  Proof is again documented here at this site.


Here is the list of treasonous Representatives in Congress who voted for this act of aggression for Greater Israel on Syria and Iraq.  ISIS serves Israel’s agenda as they are already stealing and selling Iraqi and Syrian oil via their zionist puppet state Turkey. Help me make sure these rat bastards are not re elected … and just for fun let’s add on and see how many of these traitors want to take Americans guns away while arming terrorists for their King.

Senate Votes to Fund Syrian Rebels Against ISIS [sic]


Video of the “Rebels” alliance with “ISIS” (which btw Congress knew of this before they voted)


Text of Authorization for Use of Military Force Against ISIL Resolution




What have we learned from the last decade of war?

Those years should have taught us that when going to war, our government must:

(1) be careful when defining a military mission,

(2) speak forthrightly with the American people about the sacrifices they will be called to make,

(3) plan more than one satisfactory end to the conflict, and

(4) be humble about what we think we know.

These lessons should be at the front of our minds when Congress votes today on whether to arm groups in Syria.

Today’s amendment ostensibly is aimed at destroying ISIS—yet you’d hardly know it from reading the amendment’s text. The world has witnessed with horror the evil of ISIS: the public beheading of innocents, the killing of Christians, Muslims, and others.

The amendment’s focus—arming groups fighting the Assad government in Syria—has little to do with defeating ISIS. The mission that the amendment advances plainly isn’t the defeat of ISIS; it’s the defeat of Assad.

Americans stood overwhelmingly against entangling our Armed Forces in the Syrian civil war a year ago. If Congress chooses to arm groups in Syria, it must explain to the American people not only why that mission is necessary but also the sacrifices that that mission entails.

The Obama administration has tried to rally support for U.S. involvement in the Syrian civil war by implying that our help would be at arm’s length. The amendment Congress will vote on broadly authorizes “assistance” to groups in Syria. It does not specify what types of weapons our government will give the groups. It does not prohibit boots on the ground. (The amendment is silent on the president’s power to order our troops to fight in the civil war; it states only that Congress doesn’t provide “specific statutory authorization” for such escalation.) It does not state the financial cost of the war.

As we should have learned from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we must plan for multiple satisfactory ends to military conflicts before we commence them.

If the Syrian groups that are “appropriately vetted” (the amendment’s language) succeed and oust Assad, what would result? Would the groups assemble a coalition government of anti-Assad fighters, and would that coalition include ISIS? What would happen to the Alawites and Christians who stood with Assad? To what extent would the U.S. government be obligated to occupy Syria to rebuild the government? If each of the groups went its own way, would Syria’s territory be broken apart, and if so, would ISIS control one of the resulting countries?

If the Syrian groups that we support begin to lose, would we let them be defeated? If not, is there any limit to American involvement in the war?

Perhaps some in the administration or Congress have answers to these questions. But the amendment we’ll vote on today contains none of them.

Above all, when Congress considers serious actions—especially war—we must be humble about what we think we know. We don’t know very much about the groups we propose to support or even how we intend to vet those groups. Reports in the last week suggest that some of the “appropriately vetted” groups have struck deals with ISIS, although the groups dispute the claim. The amendment requires the administration to report on its efforts to prevent our arms and resources from ending up in the wrong hands, but we know little about those precautions or their effectiveness.

Today, I will vote against the amendment to arm groups in Syria. There is a wide misalignment between the rhetoric of defeating ISIS and the amendment’s actual mission of arming certain groups in the Syrian civil war. The amendment provides few limits on the type of assistance that our government may commit, and the exit out of the civil war is undefined. And given what’s happened in our country’s most recent wars, our leaders seem to have unjustified confidence in their own ability to execute a plan with so many unknowns.

Some of my colleagues no doubt will come to different judgments on these questions. But it’s essential that they consider the questions carefully. That the president wants the authority to intervene in the Syrian civil war is not a sufficient reason to give him that power. Under the Constitution, it is Congress’s independent responsibility to commence war.

We are the representatives of the American people. The government is proposing to take their resources and to put their children’s lives at risk. I encourage all my colleagues to give the decision the weight it is due.


Justin Amash
Member of Congress


Now here are the aholes who want to take away your weapons as they arm terrorists … let freedom ring !!!!

This is Your Representative on Guns … 



one last note …

Legal Definition of Treason ~ Can Elected Officials Be Arrested For Knowledge Of Treasonable Plots?





Kurdish fighters can beat Daesh-ISIL terrorists without foreign help

Originally posted on the real SyrianFreePress Network:


RT’s Paula Slier reports from the front line in Northern Iraq where Kurdish resistance fighters say they can beat Islamic State forces without help from foreign boots on the ground.



the real SyrianFreePress.NETwork at



NOTE: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The team and the editor of SyrianFreePress.NETwork do not necessarily subscribe every point of view expressed and are not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.


View original

‘Terror Backers’ Can’t Defeat Terrorists: Syria’s Assad

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad meeting with Ali Shamkhani, Iranian secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, on September 30, 2014 in Damascus.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad meeting with Ali Shamkhani, Iranian secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, on September 30, 2014 in Damascus.

Extremists cannot be defeated by countries that have “spread terrorism”, Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad said.

Speaking during a meeting with Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and senior Iranian officials in Damascus, the Syrian president said:”Fighting terrorism can never be done by those countries that helped create terrorist groups, giving them logistical and financial help and spreading terrorism around the world,” SANA quoted.Today Syrian President Bashar al-Assad met with Ali Shamkhani Iranian secretary of the Supreme National Security Council who arrived in Syria earlier Tuesday.

The comments target the United States and other members of the coalition now carrying out air strikes against the IS group on Syrian territory and in Iraq.Damascus has long accused Washington and Arab nations that back the Syrian unrest and supporting terrorism by their support for the Syrian armed opposition groups.

Assad and Shamkhani warned that the United States was approaching the issue of defeating extremists with “covert agendas that do not serve the people of the region.”

Syria insisting any action of foreigners against ISIL in Syria should be coordinated with its government.

- See more at: http://en.alalam.ir/news/1636933#sthash.8woQKRE8.dpuf

The Khorasan Group: Anatomy of a Fake Terror Threat to Justify Bombing Syria

Originally posted on the real SyrianFreePress Network:


The Fake Terror Threat Used To Justify Bombing Syria

By Glenn Greenwald and Murtaza Hussain

As the Obama administration prepared to bomb Syria without Congressional or U.N. authorization, it faced two problems. The first was the difficulty of sustaining public support for a new years-long war against ISIS, a group that clearly posed no imminent threat to the “homeland.” A second was the lack of legal justification for launching a new bombing campaign with no viable claim of self-defense or U.N. approval.

The solution to both problems was found in the wholesale concoction of a brand new terror threat that was branded “The Khorasan Group.” After spending weeks depicting ISIS as an unprecedented threat – too radical even for Al Qaeda! – administration officials suddenly began spoon-feeding their favorite media organizations and national security journalists tales of a secret group that was even scarier and more threatening than ISIS, one…

View original 335 more words

White House exempts Syria airstrikes from tight standards on civilian deaths ~ With US Congress gone, Obama Reconsiders Attacking Assad

White House exempts Syria airstrikes from tight standards on civilian deaths


Amid reports of women and children killed in U.S. air offensive, official says the ‘near certainty’ policy doesn’t apply

The White House has acknowledged for the first time that strict standards [sic] President Obama imposed last year to prevent civilian deaths from U.S. drone strikes will not apply to U.S. military operations in Syria and Iraq.

A White House statement to Yahoo News confirming the looser policy came in response to questions about reports that as many as a dozen civilians, including women and young children, were killed when a Tomahawk missile struck the village of Kafr Daryan in Syria\’s Idlib province on the morning of Sept. 23.

The village has been described by Syrian rebel commanders as a reported stronghold of the al-Qaida-linked Nusra Front where U.S officials believed members of the so-called Khorasan group were plotting attacks against international aircraft.

But at a briefing for members and staffers of the House Foreign Affairs Committee late last week, Syrian rebel commanders described women and children being hauled from the rubble after an errant cruise missile destroyed a home for displaced civilians. Images of badly injured children also appeared on YouTube, helping to fuel anti-U.S. protests in a number of Syrian villages last week.

“They were carrying bodies out of the rubble. … I saw seven or eight ambulances coming out of there,” said Abu Abdo Salabman, a political member of one of the Free Syria Army factions, who attended the briefing for Foreign Affairs Committee members and staff. “We believe this was a big mistake.”


Asked about the strike at Kafr Daryan, a U.S. Central Command spokesman said Tuesday thatU.S. military “did target a Khorasan group compound near this location. However, we have seen no evidence at this time to corroborate claims of civilian casualties.” But Caitlin Hayden, a spokesperson for the National Security Council, told Yahoo News that Pentagon officials “take all credible allegations seriously and will investigate” the reports.

At the same time, however, Hayden said that a much-publicized White House policy that President Obama announced last year barring U.S. drone strikes unless there is a “near certainty” there will be no civilian casualties — “the highest standard we can meet,” he said at the time — does not cover the current U.S. airstrikes in Syria and Iraq.

The “near certainty” standard was intended to apply “only when we take direct action ‘outside areas of active hostilities,’ as we noted at the time,” Hayden said in an email. “That description — outside areas of active hostilities — simply does not fit what we are seeing on the ground in Iraq and Syria right now.”

Hayden added that U.S. military operations against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) in Syria, “like all U.S. military operations, are being conducted consistently with the laws of armed conflict, proportionality and distinction.”

The laws of armed conflict prohibit the deliberate targeting of civilian areas and require armed forces to take precautions to prevent inadvertent civilian deaths as much as possible.

But one former Obama administration official said the new White House statement raises questions about how the U.S. intends to proceed in the conflict in Syria and Iraq, and under what legal authorities.


“They seem to be creating this grey zone” for the conflict, said Harold Koh, who served as the State Department’s top lawyer during President Obama’s first term. “If we’re not applying the strict rules [to prevent civilian casualties]to Syria and Iraq, then they are of relatively limited value.”

Questions about civilian deaths from U.S. counterterrorism operations have confronted the Obama administration from the outset, after the president sharply ramped up drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen, resulting in sometimes heated internal policy debates.

Addressing the subject last year in a speech at the National Defense University, Obama acknowledged for the first time that U.S. strikes have resulted in civilian casualties, adding: “For me and those in my chain of command, those deaths will haunt us as long as we live.”

Sources familiar with the new “near certainty” standard Obama announced at the time said that, as a practical matter, it meant that every drone strike had to be signed off on by the White House — first by Lisa Monaco, Obama’s chief homeland security adviser, and ultimately by the president himself. The policy, one source said, caused some Pentagon officials to chafe at the new restrictions — and led to a noticeable reduction in such strikes by the military and the CIA.

While the White House has said little about the standards it is using for strikes in Syria and Iraq, one former official who has been briefed on the matter said the looser policy gives more discretion to theater commanders at the U.S. Central Command to select targets without the same level of White House oversight.

The issue arose during last week’s briefing for two House Foreign Affairs Committee members and two staffers when rebel leaders associated with factions of the Free Syria Army complained about the civilian deaths — and the fact that the targets were in territory controlled by the Nusra Front, a sometimes ally of the U.S.-backed rebels in its war with the Islamic State and the Syrian regime.

But at least one of the House members present, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, an Illinois Republican who supports stronger U.S. action in Syria, said he was not overly concerned. “I did hear them say there were civilian casualties, but I didn’t get details,” Kinzinger said in an interview with Yahoo News. “But nothing is perfect,” and whatever civilian deaths resulted from the U.S. strikes are “much less than the brutality of the Assad regime.”

Source: Michael Isikoff / Yahoo News



Obama Reconsiders Attacking Assad

Sometimes bad ideas die slowly. It was only one year ago that Obama announced he would bomb the Syrian government, only to change his mind at the last minute. Now the same fetid war talk is sprouting fresh roots in the ever-fertile U.S. military. Various media outlets reported that Obama might “enforce a no fly zone in Syria to protect civilians from the Syrian government.”

This just weeks after the U.S. public was told that ISIS was the reason the U.S. military was now in Syria. The 2014 media sound bites mimic the 2013 scare tactics, copying the “humanitarian motives” behind the push towards war with the Syrian government. For example, in 2013 The New York Times blandly discussed the “no fly zone” option:

“To establish buffer zones to protect parts of Turkey or Jordan to provide safe havens for Syrian rebels and a base for delivering humanitarian assistance would require imposing a limited no-fly zone and deploying thousands of American ground forces.”

Fast forward to September 27th 2014, where The New York Times published an article called, “U.S. Considers No Fly Zone to Protect Civilians,” where we read:

“The Obama administration has not ruled out establishing a no-fly zone over northeastern Syria to protect civilians from airstrikes by the Syrian government…Creating a buffer, or no-fly zone, would require warplanes to disable the Syrian government’s air defense system through airstrikes.”

A no-fly zone would also require that the U.S. prevent the Syrian air force from flying over Syrian airspace by destroying Syrian fighter jets, i.e., full scale war with the Syrian government and possibly its allies. This last part is always left out, so as to not anger the American public.

Under international law no country has any legal right to carve out a “buffer zone” within another country, even if the no-fly zone was actually well intended. For example, even Canada cannot legally create a buffer zone in Ferguson, Missouri to protect civilians from police violence.

The Syrian government is not bombing random civilians near the Turkish border; they are attacking ISIS and its ideological cousins. These are the same groups that Obama says that he’s waging a war on.

Do civilians die when Syria attacks with bombs? Yes, which is one reason that a lot of popular anger is channeled towards the government in these areas, the same way that anger is now mounting against the U.S. bombings that kill civilians in Syria.

If Obama truly wanted to target ISIS he would have included Syria, Iran, and Russia in his anti-ISIS “coalition.” These nations were excluded because Obama’s coalition is the exact same one that only months before was a U.S.-led coalition against the Syrian government. The grouping maintains its original purpose but puts on a new shirt to fool a media that’s content with surface explanations.

But as soon as the newly dressed U.S. coalition started bombing ISIS, various “partners” announced, unsurprisingly, that Assad was “the real problem.” Obama’s Gulf state monarchy partners never had the stomach to fight ISIS, because they and the U.S. are primarily responsible for its growth, as countries like Qatar dumped money and extremist fighters into the arms of ISIS. Qatar recently reiterated that the Syrian government was the “main problem,” not ISIS.

When Obama announced his strategy to fight ISIS, he snuck in a plan to further invest in the Syrian rebels, whom politicians claimed would be used against ISIS. But these rebels are rebelling against the Syrian government, not ISIS.

Obama even discussed his intent at the UN to use the Syrian rebels against the government:

“…America is training and equipping the Syrian opposition to be a counterweight to the terrorists of ISIL and the brutality of the Assad regime.”

The public talk of a no-fly zone is accompanied by no explanation as to the possible repercussions, including the real danger of an even larger regional war that would likely kill an additional hundreds of thousands and create millions more refugees.

Any U.S. attack on the Syrian government would likely happen sooner than later. The “coalition” of Arab monarchies has lost its patience. The members of this coalition blindly followed Obama into attacking Syria a year ago and were enraged that the president backed out. Saudi Arabia protested by refusing a seat at the UN Security Council.

Obama’s regional follower-allies have invested in an expensive war for three years and have taken on millions of Syrian refugees, creating a destabilizing effect across the region among nations already politically fragile. These shaky regimes cannot support — and would not survive — another three years of war as they wait for Obama to deliver the Syrian deathblow. They demand decisive action, and soon.

History is already condemning the U.S.-led destruction of multiple civilizations in the Middle East, reducing the once-functioning and modern nations of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria to dysfunction and chaos, where millions of people flee violence and lose their dignity to the hopelessness of refugee camps. Funding rebels or imposing no fly zones in an already-demolished region will inevitably create more war and backlash.



Kurds Continue IS Battle Without Coalition Air Support


Kurdish militias in northern Syria continued to clash with Islamic State militants on Monday as coalition forces capped off their first week of airstrikes with fresh attacks on militant positions in Syria and Iraq.

U.S. jets and drones, along with Arab-allied planes, hit a staging area near a Syrian grain storage site, officials said Monday, one of 11 targets hit as part of the effort to rollback Islamic State battlefield victories. The Britain-basedSyrian Observatory for Human Rights reported civilian casualties in the attack on the grain silo near the town of Manbij. Coalition forces appeared to also hit Islamic State targets in Aleppo, Raqqa, Hassakeh and Deir el-Zour provinces, the group said. U.S. Central Command said in a statement that among the Islamic State sites and equipment Sunday and Monday was an armed vehicle, an anti-aircraft artillery transport vehicle and an airfield in northwest Syria near Aleppo. The Manbij attack targeted a training camp and vehicles within a staging area adjacent to a grain silo that was controlled by Islamic State, it said.

Coalition Airstrikes Sept. 29

Coalition Airstrikes Sept. 29

Col. Patrick Ryder, a spokesman for Central Command, told Reuters that military officials had no evidence to corroborate the allegations of civilian casualties in the Manbij attack. In Iraq, airstrikes hit two vehicles near Kirkuk and another two near Sinjar destroyed two armed vehicles, the military said.

Coalition Airstrikes

The airstrikes Sunday and Monday were the latest in nearly a week of daily attacks in Syria, and followed similar strikes that began last month in Iraq. They are part of the effort to stem the tide of the extremist militants from the Islamic State, who control vast territory in Iraq and Syria. The U.S.-led coalition includes Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Jordan. Several European countries are also contributing in targeting sites in Iraq, including France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Belgium and Britain. More raids Monday struck the town of Tel Abyad on the Syria-Turkey border, The Associated Press reported. Mehmet Ozer, who lives on the Turkish side of the border told AP that the raids hit an empty school and an abandoned military base Islamic State fighters cleared out of the base about four months ago, he said.Human Rights Watch said Sunday it had confirmed the deaths of at least seven civilians from apparent U.S. missile strikes on Sept. 23 in the village of Kafr Derian in Idlib province. Two men were also killed in the strikes, but that they may have been militants, the U.S.-based group said.

Rise of Islamic State

The Islamic State, a Sunni militant group which broke off from al-Qaida, alarmed the West and the Middle East after sweeping through northern Iraq in June, slaughtering prisoners and ordering Shiites and non-Muslims to convert or die. Not only is it battling Shiite-backed governments in Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State is fighting other Sunni groups in both countries, part of a complex multisided civil war in which nearly every country in the Middle East has a stake. The head of Syria’s al-Qaida branch, the Al-Nusra Front, which has also been targeted by U.S. strikes, said Islamists would carry out attacks on the West in retaliation for the campaign. “Muslims will not watch while their sons are bombed. Your leaders will not be the only ones who would pay the price of the war. You will pay the heaviest price,” Abu Mohamad al-Golani said in an audio message posted on pro-Nusra forums. The air war has failed to halt an advance by fighters on the Kurdish town of Kobani in northern Syria. This past week’s battles near the town, also known as also known as Ain al-Arab, has sent 140,000 people fleeing over the border in Turkey. Reuters reported that Turkish tanks and armored vehicles took up positions on hills overlooking Kobani on Monday as shelling by Islamic State insurgents intensified and stray fire hit Turkish soil.

Turkey’s Reaction

At Mursitpinar, a border crossing near Kobani, scores of young men were returning to Syria, many saying they would join the fight. Turkey, which has tried to walk a fine line in responding to the crisis, has not permitted its own Kurds to cross to join the battle, only Syrians. Meanwhile, Turkey’s government said Monday it was moving forward to get parliamentary approval to join the coalition against the Islamic State militants, Agence France-Presse reported.

Obama TV Interview

blah blah blah



U.S., NATO Troops To Remain In Afghanistan Indefinitely

Originally posted on Stop NATO...Opposition to global militarism:

Xinhua News Agency
September 30, 2014

Afghan gov’t signs agreements with U.S., NATO

KABUL: The government of Afghanistan and the United States inked the Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) here on Tuesday to allow limited number of troops to remain in Afghanistan after 2014 pullout of the NATO-led troops in the country.

Afghan Presidential Advisor on National Security, Mohammad Hanif Atmar and U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan James B. Cunningham signed the agreement on behalf of their respective governments.

Under the agreement, the United States would keep around 10,000 military service members in Afghanistan to train and advice the Afghan security forces.

Speaking after inking the agreement, Afghan president Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai described the agreement as a milestone in enhancing bilateral relations between Kabul and Washington, saying in the wake of inking the agreement, the international community would support Afghan national security forces.

Allaying the concerns of the neighboring states, the Afghan…

View original 136 more words

It looks like sanctions are not enough for Obama to starve the Syrian people ~ U.S-led raids hit grain silos in Syria, kill civilian workers

U.S-led raids hit grain silos in Syria, kill civilian workers

BY ~ SEPTEMBER 29, 2014

U.S.-led air strikes hit grain silos and other targets in Islamic State-controlled territory in northern and eastern Syria overnight, killing civilians and wounding militants, a group monitoring the war said on Monday.

The aircraft may have mistaken the mills and grain storage areas in the northern Syrian town of Manbij for an Islamic State base, said the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. There was no immediate comment from Washington.

The United States has targeted Islamic State and other fighters in Syria since last week with the help of Arab allies, and in Iraq since last month. It aims to damage and destroy the bases, forces and supply lines of the al Qaeda offshoot which has captured large areas of both countries.

The strikes in Manbij appeared to have killed only civilians, not fighters, said Rami Abdulrahman, who runs the Observatory which gathers information from sources in Syria.

“These were the workers at the silos. They provide food for the people,” he said. He could not give a number of casualties and it was not immediately possible to verify the information.

Manbij sits between Aleppo city in the west and the town of Kobani on the northern border with Turkey, which Islamic State has been trying to capture from Kurdish forces, forcing tens of thousands of Syrian Kurds to flee over the frontier.

Syria’s army also carried out air raids in Aleppo province overnight, targeting areas east of Aleppo city with barrel bombs and other projectiles, the Observatory said. The army also carried out air strikes in Hama in western Syria.

Forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad have been battling Islamist fighters around Aleppo, which is held by a number of groups in Syria’s war

In eastern Syria, U.S.-led forces bombed a gas plant controlled by the Islamic State outside Deir al-Zor city, wounding several of the militant group’s fighters, the Observatory said.

The United States has said it wants strikes to target oil facilities held by Islamic State to try to stem a source of revenues for the group.

The raid hit Kuniko gas plant, which feeds a power station in Homs that provides several provinces with electricity and powers oil fields generators, the Observatory said.

U.S.-led warplanes also hit areas of Hasaka city in the north east and the outskirts of Raqqa city in the north, which is Islamic State’s stronghold.

Source: Reuters



US Sponsored Genocide Against Iraq 1990-2012. Killed 3.3 Million, Including 750,000 Children

we do not even have the body counts from Libya and you baby killers are onto Syria already …. who will help stop you and rid the world of YOUR terrorism …

750,000 Dead Children in Iraq alone!!!!

Source – by Sherwood Ross

bitchbabyeaterFrancis Boyle quotes M. Albright who said that 500,000 dead Iraqi’s was worth it

Approximately 3.3 million Iraqis, including 750,000 children, were “exterminated” by economic sanctions and/or illegal wars conducted by the U.S. and Great Britain between 1990 and 2012, an eminent international legal authority says.


The Madeleine Albright Commemoration: Iraq Genocide Memorial Day ~ by Felicity Arbuthnot


“Get some new lawyers.” (1999: Then US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to UK Foreign Secretary Robin Cook on his assertion that the bombing of Balkan States was illegal under international law.*)

In this sixteenth anniversary year of Madeleine Albright stating her endorsement of half a million child sacrifices at the alter of the UN Embargo on Iraq as a “price worth it”, this silent holocaust is to be commemorated annually.



Lytton Strachey: After the battle, who shall say that the corpses were the most unfortunate?

Originally posted on Stop NATO...Opposition to global militarism:


Anti-war essays, poems, short stories and literary excerpts

Robert Graves: Men at arms and men of letters, the birth of English pacifism in the First World War



Lytton Strachey
From Eminent Victorians (1918)
Florence Nightingale

Miss Nightingale arrived at Scutari – a suburb of Constantinople, on the Asiatic side of the Bosphorus – on November 4th, 1854; it was ten days after the battle of Balaclava, and the day before the battle of Inkerman. The organisation of the hospitals, which had already given way under the stress of the battle of the Alma, was now to be subjected to the further pressure which these two desperate and bloody engagements implied. Great detachments of wounded were already beginning to pour in. The men, after receiving such summary treatment as could be given them at the smaller hospitals in the Crimea itself, were forthwith shipped in batches of two…

View original 948 more words

Victims of ISIS brutality ‘waiting on us to act’, Syrian Foreign Minister tells UN

BY   ~ SEPTEMBER 29, 2014

As the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISISL) militant began carrying their slaughter in the Middle East, “they might have surprised many of the countries present here, but not…us,” the Deputy Prime Minister of Syria told the United Nations General Assembly, underscoring today that the time has come for the world to stand united and tackle the threat head-on.

“We have spoken on more than one occasion and on more than one international platform about the grave danger of the terrorism striking Syria,” said Walid Al-Moualem, who is also Syria’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates, recalling that his country had long stressed that terrorism and extremist ideologies do not recognize borders.

Telling the Assembly that ISIL is “unrivalled in funding and brutality”, he said that in Syria and Iraq, the group is enslaving women, raping them and selling them in slave markets; it is cutting heads and limbs, and it is teaching children slaughter and murder; and destroying historical and cultural monuments, as well as Islamic and Christian symbols.

And all of this has been happening before the entire world and the countries that have always said they are fighting terrorism, Mr. Al-Moualem said, asking the world body: “Is it not due time…for all of us to stand as one in the face of this serious menace of terrorist Takfiri ideology worldwide?”

“Has not the moment of truth arrived for us all to admit that ISIL, A1-NusrahFront and the rest of A1-Qaeda affiliates, will not be limited within the borders of Syria and Iraq, but will spread to every spot it can reach, starting with Europe and America?” he asked, calling on the world to rally against the groups as those organizations themselves had “rallied extremists from all comers of the earth and brought them to one spot to train and aim them, and later to re-disseminate their ideology and terrorism through those extremists back to wherever they originated from?”

Mr. Al-Moualem said some might recall that the Security Council in mid-August had adopted a resolution to stem the flow of extremists and eventually eliminate them. “It is true that to arrive late is better than [to never arrive at all]. Indeed, this UN resolution… came too late.” The question now is whether everyone is serious and resolute about its implementation.

“But since its adoption, we have not seen any serious move to implement this resolution. Furthermore, we have not felt any real sense of the danger to work on its basis on the part of regional States that were and are still providing…support to these terrorist organizations,’ he said, adding that Syria is also witnessing on the part of the United States administration “a double standard policy and alliances to score certain political agendas, particularly through supporting with money, weapons and training of groups they call moderate.”

“This is a real recipe for the increase of violence and terrorism, shedding of Syrian blood, prolonging of the Syrian crisis and demolishing of the political solution at its basis. This behaviour creates a fertile ground for the growth of these terrorist groups that commit the most heinous crimes on the Syrian territory,” said Mr. Al-Moualem, emphasizing that the “the enslaved women are looking forward to us to see what we will do for them, their sisters and their children. The sons and daughters of the victims beheaded by [ISIL] are waiting for our actions, and for our reaction in the face of the atrocities committed daily by this terrorist organization, A1-Nusrah Front and others.”

He said that while military strikes must coincide with the implementation of Security Council resolutions, the international community must also work hard to disrupt and drain the resources of terrorist organizations. “Striking terrorism militarily while some States are continuing their support of terrorist groups will create a whirlpool of which the international community will not exit in decades.”

As for the ongoing Syrian crisis, he said that his Government had agreed to attend the UN-backed peace talks, known as “Geneva II”, “although we are convinced that the crisis is a Syrian one and should be resolve don Syrian territory.” Yet, when Syrian authorities had arrived in the Swiss city, they were confronted by a delegation that was not negotiating on behalf of nor supported by the Syrian people, but which was negotiating on behalf of its “Western masters.”

In any case, Syria continues to believe that the process cannot fully move forward until the terrorism in the country is rooted out. Now of course, the entire international community considers terrorism the most pressing threat of the day. “Once again, we emphasize that we are ready, and even are striving, for a political solution in Syria and in dialogue with all honourable national opposition members opposing terrorism in Syria, and among Syrians themselves and on Syrian territory.”


Syria hails UN resolution banning support for militants

syrian-logo-govnm The Syrian government has welcomed a UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution that prohibits providing support for the foreign-backed militants.

Regarding the move as a victory for the war-torn Arab nation, Syrian Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi expressed on Sunday his government’s support for the UNSC Resolution 2178.

The Security Council members voted unanimously to approve the resolution that intends to tighten the grip on foreign fighters in conflict zones.

The resolution further prohibits efforts to recruit, organize, and offer supplies and funding to foreign militants.

The binding resolution also calls on all countries to prevent the movement of militants on their soil.

The development comes as Western countries and their regional Arab allies have expressed concerns that foreign fighters entering Syria and Iraq may eventually pose a threat to their homeland once they return to native countries.

Press reports estimate that more than 12,000 foreign militants have joined the foreign-sponsored militancy in Syria over the past three years.

Syria has been gripped by deadly violence since 2011. The Western powers and their regional allies — especially Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey — are reportedly supporting the militants operating inside Syria.

Over 190,000 people have been killed during more than three years of Takfiri violence in the war-ravaged country, according to reports.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has pledged to strike terror “with an iron fist.”

Source-Press TV


Iraqi forces kill 80 ISIL terrorists in al-Anbar Province

DAASH-MADE-IN-USA Iraqi security sources have announced the killing of at least 80 ISIL Takfiri terrorists in the restive al-Anbar Province at the hands of the country’s army soldiers.

The Iraqi troops killed the ISIL Takfiri elements on Sunday during intense fighting in some areas in the capital city of the restive province, al-Ramadi.

Ramadi’s police chief also stated that army troops have succeeded in securing a key route in the western province and expanded their control over a greater area.

Al-Anbar Province, which borders war-ravaged Syria, has been a major stronghold of the ISIL Takfiri elements and continues to be largely controlled by the terror group.

This is while the army has recently scored major gains in the province with Iraqi troops repelling a significant attack by the terror group on a strategic town of Amriyat al-Fallujah, 40 kilometers west of the capital, Baghdad.

An ISIL terrorist leader was among those killed in the Iraqi army operation.

Over the past weeks, Iraqi army troops and volunteer forces have killed a large number of Takfiri terrorists in their mop-up operations across the Arab country.

The ISIL terrorists currently control large swathes of territory across Syria and Iraq. They have carried out heinous atrocities in both countries, including mass executions and beheadings of people.

Source-Press TV


Israel continues providing support to terrorist organizations in Syria

The Occupied Jerusalem, SANA The Israeli occupation continued providing support to the armed terrorist organizations in Syria through admitting the injured terrorists to its hospitals and offering the necessary treatment to them.

Two injured terrorists on Sunday were submitted to Nahariya Hospital in Galilee which has offered treatment to about 371 terrorists until now, according to Israeli mass media.

Israeli Walla website said that today dawn, two injured terrorists were hospitalized to Nahariya Hospital in Galilee, one of them in a critical condition.

The Israeli forces admitted hundreds of terrorists to the Israeli hospitals to be treated , which proves the Israeli complete support to the terrorists and their leaders in Syria.

H. Zain/ Ghossoun



For Resistance axis, US war on ISIS presents an opportunity

The vision which guides the Resistance axis regarding the new US war could be summarized thusly: “We will deal with the new invasion piece by piece, making use of the objective intersection of interests in the elimination of ISIS.” However, this begs the question: what comes after ISIS?

As the US launched its air strikes against takfiri positions in Syrian territories on Tuesday, Damascus seemed to take a distinct position from its allies. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad clearly supported “all international efforts to fight terrorism.” Moscow, on the other hand, warned that “a unilateral formal notification of airstrikes” is not consistent with international law. However, the more hardline position came from Tehran, which considered that “the raids are without any legal basis, since they are launched in the absence of a UN mandate.”

“America is the mother of terrorism,” Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah declared on Tuesday. It is “not qualified ethically or morally to present itself as a leader of a coalition to fight terrorism,” he added.

“These are all different variations of the same position,” an informed source told Al-Akhbar. “Syria’s words are a clear indication that there are no real fears, until now, that the war on terrorism will be sidetracked into a war against the regime.”

Despite Washington’s denials, “coordination” between the US and Syria did take place, albeit at a minimal level. Damascus was informed of the timing of the operation prior to the first US raid. This is the first sign. The second sign of cooperation was the visit by Iraqi national security adviser Faleh al-Fayyad – who works on the line between Washington and Damascus – to the Syrian capital, where he met Assad.

A third sign, pointing to coordination on another level, could be that areas targeted by the first wave of raids are traditionally under Russian radar supervision. News about attacks on an ISIS position near Ain Arab (Kubani) close to the Turkish border on Wednesday could be the fourth sign. It also meant that Turkey will be far from achieving its ambitions to create a buffer zone controlled by the opposition along its borders with Syria.

The statement by the Russian Foreign Ministry was clear in this respect. It warned of “attempts to achieve private geopolitical objectives through the violation of the sovereignty of nations.” Ankara’s only choice is to become modest. Although Turkey is the primary beneficiary and the actual sponsor of ISIS, ultimately, it cannot stray too far from the US flock and risk its strategic alliance with the West.

Two additional signs come from Turkey in this respect: the barring of 1,000 fighters from entering Syria and the declaration by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of his country’s possible participation in the military campaign, even if only through logistics.

But why the distinction in the positions within the “Resistance axis”?

Sources indicated that everyone in this alliance feels threatened and are not pleased about the US return to the region under the guise of fighting terrorism. The axis believes that the threat posed by ISIS cannot be compared to the risks of direct US presence in the region or even at the borders of any of its countries.

The main concern is the next step, what comes after ISIS. Waiting for the answer, the Resistance axis will attempt to transform the threat into an opportunity, taking advantage of the objective intersection of interests with Washington in eliminating ISIS. This is exactly what it did after the war on Taliban and on Saddam Hussein in the previous decade. The axis will deal with the US attack in each sector.

The Resistance axis will lose nothing by eliminating ISIS. It can reap benefits from the fact that the war enjoys a wide Arab Sunni cover, which could defuse the Sunni-Shia sectarian strife threatening to engulf the region. Even more beneficial is that the war on ISIS coincides with overt signs of Iranian-Saudi flirtation. This is in addition to unforeseeable factors, which could appear with the progress in military operations.

Although it is too early to discern the outcomes of the situation, it seems to be happening at a preset rhythm. Washington keeps repeating it will not be sending troops for a ground operation. Early Wednesday morning, Reuters quoted a senior Iranian official saying that the US had informed his country in advance of the intentions to attack ISIS in Syria. “Assad and his government will not be targeted by any military operations,” he said.

Reuters also quoted a senior US State Department official confirming that the “intentions” were communicated with the Iranians. In principle, this meant that the same thing happened between Washington and Moscow. To begin with, Iran and Russia did not reject a war on terrorism as long as it was compatible with international law and coupled with the approval of the Syrian government, which does not seem to be too worried. Washington, on the other hand, had utilized “international legitimacy” to an extent when it informed Damascus of the strike deadline through Syria UN representative Bashar al-Jaafari.

As for Hezbollah, Nasrallah clearly stated that their history with the US does not allow them to be in the same alliance. Lebanon cannot be part of an alliance with consequences and commitments that it cannot handle. This is a position based on principles. However, eliminating or weakening ISIS will not hurt the party, whose best fighters are engaged in battle against them. Hezbollah will not hesitate to exploit the outcomes of the US military operation on the field and in politics. This is what is meant by “turning a risk into an opportunity.”

Source: Al Akhbar


Obama’s Illegal Airstrikes Are Prelude To “No Fly Zone”???…and…The UN withdrawal from the occupied Golan was also caused in such a way that the Zionist entities can bring down Syrian airplanes without witnesses???

Originally posted on the real SyrianFreePress Network:


It is no co-incidence, that at the start of a U.N General Assembly, this week, the U.S government has begun what the -evidence- below shows they know, are illegal airstrikes in Syria.

The illegal U.S. led airstrikes are designed to make it impossible for the Syrian air-force to operate, so a U.S. led ‘coalition’, can illegally overthrow the Syrian government.

It is equally clear that the U.N. withdrew from the Golan Heights specifically so that the Israeli government could illegally shoot down Syrian planes.

Indeed, it is notable that there was not and has not been an official peep out of the British Prime Minister or Foreign Office.



  • 1. Crucially the -evidence- is the U.S. President notified the British…Press yesterday afternoon, a very many hours in -advance- of the intended illegal air-strikes in…

View original 2,550 more words

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah: “Int’l Coalition to fight ISIS a US cloak to re-occupy region”

Originally posted on the real SyrianFreePress Network:


Secretary General of the Lebanese Hezbollah Party Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said that the US is not morally qualified to lead an alliance against terrorism because it is the origin of terrorism in the world and the ultimate supporter of Israel.

In a televised speech aired Tuesday by al-Manar TV channel on the latest developments in the region, Nasrallah said “the US is not morally qualified to lead an anti-terrorism coalition because it is the mother of terrorism as it supports the terrorist entity (the Israeli entity).”

“The US has participated itself in creating terrorist groups in Syria, Iraq and in other countries,” Hezbollah chief said.

He added that all nations have the right to question the US intentions regarding what is called “International coalition for fighting ISIS” because it is a pretext for the USA to re-occupy the region.

“Lebanon must not be part of this US-led international coalition because…

View original 241 more words

Raghead: Red and Ted Fight Evil


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,377 other followers

%d bloggers like this: