|
Media Neglect Turkish False Flag Attack Leak And Its Implications
Some more thoughts on the leaked tape from a meeting in the Turkish foreign ministry which is only very selectively reported in "western" media. A video with recorded voices and English text is available as is the seemingly complete text in two parts.
The setting of the recording is this:
The voices of the illegal recording believed to belong to Davutoğlu, National Intelligence Organization (MİT) Hakan Fidan, Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Feridun Sinirlioğlu, and Deputy Chief of General Staff Gen. Yaşar Gürel. According to the information obtained from sources, the recording consists of a chat between four officials in Davutoğlu’s office before the commencement of the official meeting with the participation of more civil and military bureaucrats in another room at the Foreign Ministry.
It is not clear when exactly the meeting happened. It would fit the situation late last year or early 2014.
The major points from my view:
- Turkey has delivered 2,000 trucks of weapons and ammunition to the insurgents in Syria.
- There are plans for false flag attacks on Turkey or Turkish property to justify an attack from Turkey on Syria.
- The Turkish military has great concerns going into and fighting Syria.
- The general atmosphere between these deciders is one of indecisiveness. Everyone seems to be unclear what Erdogan wants and is waiting for clear orders from above.
- U.S. military has shortly before the meeting presented fresh plans for a no-fly one over Syria.
Then there is the fact in itself that this tape and others leaked. Internal government communication in Turkey and personal communication of Turkish official has been thoroughly compromised. This will hinder future decision making and will erode any trust Turkish government allies may have in it.
It is somewhat astonishing how "western" media avoid the content of the leaked tape. An AP report on it makes a lot of the youtube blocking the Turkish government ordered in reaction to the tape. Of the recording itself the AP only mentions this:
The four are allegedly heard discussing a military intervention in neighboring Syria, a sensitive political issue in Turkey, although the context of the conversation is not clear.
The Washington Post filed that AP report under Technology. This is an incredible disservice to its readers.
The Guardian report based on Reuters is not any better:
The move by the TIB came hours after an anonymous YouTube account posted a leaked audio recording allegedly of a confidential conversation between Turkish intelligence chief Hakan Fidan, foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu, undersecretary of the foreign ministry Feridun Sinirlioglu and deputy chief of the general staff, Yasar Gürel, discussing possible military action in Syria.
There is no mentioning at all of the false flag attack. The Wall Street Journal comes somewhat nearer to the truth:
… a leaked recording published anonymously on the platform purported to reveal a conversation in which Turkey's foreign minister, spy chief and a top general appear to discuss how to create a pretext for a possible Turkish attack within Syria.
For once kudos to the NYT which at least touches one point but leaves out the other important ones:
… the officials were heard discussing a plot to establish a justification for military strikes in Syria. One option that is said to have been discussed was orchestrating an attack on the Tomb of Suleyman Shah …
German media did not do any better.
A NATO ally is planning a false flag attack on its own territory which would implicate NATO Article 5 and other NATO countries' forces and the media do not even touch the issue? This is ludicrous.
Related to the Syria issue is another thinly sourced trial balloon, the tenth or so, by the unofficial CIA spokesperson David Ignatius in the Washington Post:
The Obama administration, stung by reversals in Ukraine and Syria, appears to have decided to expand its covert program of training and assistance for the Syrian opposition, deepening U.S. involvement in that brutal and stalemated civil war.
…
Details of the plan were still being debated Thursday, but its likely outlines were described by knowledgeable officials: …
It follows the list of issues that have been discussed on and on over the last three years, more CIA training for insurgents in Jordan, more weapons, maybe some MANPADs. Ignatius source is here seems to be the CIA friends in the Syrian opposition:
The expanded program would “send a clear message to the Assad regime that there is no military solution to the struggle,” according to a March memo to the White House from the opposition. Assad “has no incentive to talk” now, the memo argued, because he thinks he is winning.
The rationale, bluntly stated, is that to reach an eventual diplomatic settlement in Syria, it is necessary now to escalate the conflict militarily. This has been a hard pill for Obama to swallow, but prodded by the Saudis, he seems to have reached that point.
There are so many caveats in here – "appears to have decided", 2still being debated", "seems to have reached that point" – that I do not believe a word of it. The loudly announced, by Ignatius and others, attack on south Syria has yet to appear and the halfhearted attack by the Turkish supported Jihadists in the north seems to be stuck.
I do not anticipate any bigger action by Turkey or the U.S. especially as the such action right now would likely lead to harsher reaction by Russia.
Tom,
Sorry I have not time to develop (I’ve procrastined too much yesterday and can’t repeat today). What I meant about le Monde article is that the title “the transition is bloody but it is taking place” makes the reader think he is going to read something about agreement processes (such as the ones taking place locally in the last few months). But the content of the interview is the same garbage and wishful thinking, plainly ignoring any fact or actual data. It means, imo, that journalists are just quickly sampling what they are given, and that the headline betrays the real intent…
Interesting comment posted by “M” on Syrper
Hahahahaha, Serbia and Russia catched Barak Obama lying in front of 2000 reporters and guests in Brussels on 26/03/2014. In his speech he said that the Kosovo become independent after an democratic referendum. Only referendum that happened there was in
26th to 30th September 1991
, organized by kosovo albanians against the (then) F.R. Yugoslavian law. The referendum was so democratic that even US haven’t accepted its results. The ONLY country that accepted its results was neighboring ALBANIA, wounder why… Then what really happened;
After (staged-confirmed) “Racak” massacre NATO attacked Serbia. The operation was not authorised by the United Nations and was the first time that NATO used military force without the approval of the UN Security Council and against a sovereign nation that did not pose a threat to members of the alliance. The strikes lasted from
March 24, 1999 to June 10, 1999.
United Nations Security Council resolution 1244, adopted on 10 June 1999 ended NATO bombing end here are the main features of resolution
-Demand in particular that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia put an immediate and verifiable end to violence and repression in Kosovo;
complete verifiable phased withdrawal from Kosovo of all military, police and paramilitary forces according to a rapid timetable, with which the deployment of the international security presence in Kosovo will be synchronized;
-Place Kosovo under interim UN administration (performed by the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo, UNMIK);
-Authorize a NATO-led peacekeeping force in Kosovo (currently performed by the Kosovo Force, KFOR);
Allow for the return of an agreed number of Yugoslav and Serbian personnel to maintain a presence at Serbian Patrimonial sites and key border crossings;
-Direct UNMIK to establish provisional institutions of local self-government in Kosovo (PISG);
-Reaffirm the commitment of UN member states to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (succeeded by Serbia)[note 1] and the other States of the region, as set out in the Helsinki Final Act and annex 2 of UNSCR 1244 (an annex that envisions, inter alia, a Kosovo status process);
-Require the UN to assure the safe and unimpeded return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes in Kosovo and to ensure conditions for a peaceful and normal life for all inhabitants of the province;
-Require that the KLA and other armed Kosovo Albanian groups be demilitarized;
-Authorize the United Nations to facilitate a political process to determine Kosovo’s future status. Kosovo’s future status would take into consideration the Rambouillet Agreement which Serbia refused to sign in 1998, and which calls for the “will of the people of Kosovo” to be one of the guiding principles in defining Kosovo’s status, another being the respective compliance of the disputing parties to the Agreement. The resolution reaffirms calls for
“substantial autonomy and meaningful self-administration for Kosovo”.
Anybody sees any “Independent” country of Kosovo there?
Previous “negotiations” (read ultimatum) called “Rambouillet Agreement”, on 18 March 1999, the Albanian, American and British delegation signed, while the Serbian and Russian delegations refused. The accords called for NATO administration of Kosovo as an autonomous province within Yugoslavia; a force of 30,000 NATO troops to maintain order in Kosovo; an unhindered right of passage for NATO troops on Yugoslav territory, including Kosovo; and immunity for NATO and its agents to Yugoslav law.
It was rejected by both Serbia and Russia because it means factual occupation of Serbia by NATO.
Here it comes now;
17 February 2008
The 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence was adopted by the Assembly of Kosovo. The albanians unanimously declared Kosovo to be independent from Serbia (against Serbian law), while all 11 representatives of the Serb minority boycotted the proceedings. The assembly “decalaration” is used by US to proclame the kosovo as an independent country.
1)The resolution was forced on Serbai (then FR Yugoslavia) by millitary attack, how democratic…
2) US had NO RIGHT under resolution 1244 to take the part of Serbia and call it independent. I have to stress the part of the resolution: “substantial autonomy and meaningful self-administration for Kosovo”
3) The US recognized kosovo independance after their DECLARATION, there was no democratic referendum.
Pure lie, there was no “democratic referendum” like he said. Another possibility is that he is seeing things that don’t exist, in which case – I am sure, they have some appropriate institutions in their country for him.
US is behaving like a classic thug on international scene, but at those times there was nobody to help Yugoslavia against NATO, USSR was gone and balance of powers was gone too…
Conclusion;
According to US if any part of any country becomes overrun by one ethnic minority they can take that part of the country, on a democratic referendum, and proclaim independence.
Why is that wrong? I will just give an example:
According to them, if Turks become majority in Aleppo they can declare independence, because they are majority now, from the rest of Syria.
Do you see how wrong that is?
Posted by: Mina | Mar 29 2014 8:59 utc | 112
|
