Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 22, 2014

Why The Islamic State Announced Retaliation

One Shaykh Abū Muhammad al-‘Adnānī ash-Shāmī, allegedly the number two of the Islamic State, gave a speech today (English translation, pdf) and asked Islamic State followers everywhere to attack the countries that promised to wage war against the IS.

Now the man may be, just like earlier instances of al-Baghdad, fictional. But that does not make the speech irrelevant.

One can argue that this is in attempt by the Islamic State to deter any additional attacks on it. But if that was the intend then it is likely to fail. The "west", i.e. the U.S., is much too aggressive and secure to be deterred and such threats will merely increase the push for another decade of wars. The military machine is already reeving up and by now nearly impossible to stop. The U.S. is rebuilding its former Forward Operating Base Speicher north of Tikrit as operations center for the next phases and coming escalations.

The Obama's administration argument that the IS was a threat to the "west", and those foggy "interests" it always claims to have, was false. The Islamic State did not start this war as a war against the "west". That happened for two reasons. One is obvious - it was attacked and it had to respond:

[E]fforts to establish its version of an Islamic caliphate unsettled the wider region, prompting U.S. airstrikes aimed at stemming its advance.

The Islamic militant group has responded by beheading three of its Western hostages in recent weeks
The killings of Foley and Sotloff took place after the U.S. military began airstrikes against ISIS positions in Iraq ..

Now, after nearly 200 U.S. and French airstrikes against it, a real threat of retaliation for these has been made.

To probably the surprise of many readers I had argued for airstrikes. But I was quite specific. Those airstrikes should have been against the heavy equipment the IS seized from the Iraqi and Syrian armies. It is that mountain of heavy equipment, not the running loons, that make IS dangerous to everyone in the Middle East.

It would take the U.S. air-force supported by special operation groups on the ground only a few weeks to reduce the Islamic State to an infantry force incapable of larger geographic actions.

This video of the recent IS attacks on the (Kurdish) Syrian city of Kobane show the IS fighters successfully using main battle tanks and several pieces of heavy artillery. The Syrian air-force for now stopped that attack on the city by destroying a bridge which the attackers needed. But it is the heavy equipment (and the ammunition for it) that needs to be destroyed.

But back to that speech. Shaykh al-Adnani claims another reason for his call to war:

The starting point of the psychology of ISIS is one of humiliation. The West has humiliated Muslim in all their ‘crusades’. Adnani especially mentions Iraq. The psychological goal of the Islamic State is clearly one of revenge for these humiliations, the feeling that the ‘crusaders’ finally fear them (again).

Allah has given you might and honor after your humiliation.

This feeling of humiliation is combined with one of betrayal. Sunnis have been under attack in Iraq and in Syria and nobody came to help them. Adnani concentrates on Syria, where the West didn’t seem to care about what happened there.

Its sentiments were not stirred during the long years of siege and starvation in Shām, and it looked the other way when the deadly and destructive barrel bombs were being dropped. It was not outraged when it saw the horrific scenes of the women and children of the Muslims taking their last breaths with their eyes glazed over due to the chemical weapons of the nusayriyyah – scenes which continue to be repeated everyday, exposing the reality of the farce of having destroyed chemical weapons belonging to its nusayrī (alawite) dogs, the guardians of the jews. America and its allies were not emotionally moved or outraged by any of this. They closed their ears to the cries of distress from the weak, and turned a blind eye to the massacres carried out against the Muslims in every one of those lands for years and years.

They see the Islamic State as the only real protector of Muslims in Syria and Iraq. And they seem to be surprised by the fact that their barbaric attitude did upset the rest of the world.

The IS has fallen for, or is just repeating, "western" propaganda. There is no difference between a "barrel bomb" and any "western" bombing device. The difference was only made up in the media to put a bad light on the Syrian government. The "chemical attacks" were also very likely false flag operations. But IS has eaten that up.

More important - the motivation of the foreign fighters that came to support the IS and its followers elsewhere has, to a large part, been created by "western" propaganda against the Syrian government. Would someone from Europe, largely secure in his/her environment, ever have thought of joining the IS if the "western" media had abstained from demonizing the Syrian government? I believe the answer is in most cases no.

I believe, like Marcy Wheeler, that the rise of IS in the last few years was a somewhat unintended creation of the "west" caused by letting the Saudi prince Bandar run the military part of the anti-Syria campaign. The people who run IS would have existed and would have fought without that campaign but on a much smaller base.

But another reason for the rise of the IS was the "western" media campaign that demonized the Syrian president and the Syrian government. That campaign now serves as justification for IS to retaliate. The "western" politicians and think tanks who drove that campaign are responsible for the blowback that was announced today and that is coming home soon.

Posted by b on September 22, 2014 at 18:06 UTC | Permalink


Not so much home to USA due to Atlantic Ocean but back home to Europe which is what US intended all the time for purpose of destroying Europe and make it a colony and sell their junk high price.

Posted by: Sierrasverdes1 | Sep 22 2014 18:20 utc | 1

I don't see that there is anything 'unintentional' about the US's creation of IS. It looks to me like all the other creations by US, following the same patterns of propaganda and misdirection, for the continuation of their 'grand plan' or the 'great game' as it was known by the British when they were running this particular kind of show, way back when.

Posted by: carlos | Sep 22 2014 18:21 utc | 2

I cant understand why Russia is not support syria by attacking the ISIS under the same pretext that the US is using.
The ISIS has conveniently done a great job to create a pretext for the US/Turkey to attack ISIS in Northern Syria to reach its real target the Syrian regime!

Posted by: Nini | Sep 22 2014 18:44 utc | 3

Posted by: carlos | Sep 22, 2014 2:21:38 PM | 2


Posted by: somebody | Sep 22 2014 18:54 utc | 4

I'm beginning to think the whole Fake War on Terror business is to distract the people via Neo-liberal governments filling the MSM with incessant, and fanciful FWoT bullshit whilst they're busily selling off every state-owned asset to Private Corporations, and keeping strangely silent, until it's too late, while doing so.

The FWoT makes no sense at all considering that the US military is a Podunk outfit which is still addicted to soft targets and, more often than not, can't get out of its own way when it gets into a jam.

Grover Norquist became the 1%'s poster-boy when he proposed making government "small enough to drown in a bathtub" (full of money with which to buy politicians) 3 1/2 months before 9/11 reared its ugly head and Bush II (counter-intuitively) introduced tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans - in 'war'-time.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 22 2014 19:36 utc | 5

so how do people know whether ISIS is a self created branch of the usa and it's war on terror, or just another means of communicating much the same as the usa - regime change in syria?

to quote b here "The IS has fallen for, or is just repeating, "western" propaganda. (and)....."was only made up in the media to put a bad light on the Syrian government. The "chemical attacks" were also very likely false flag operations. But IS has eaten that up."

have they eaten it up, or are they just another expression of the same power here?

another b quote "More important - the motivation of the foreign fighters that came to support the IS and its followers elsewhere has, to a large part, been created by "western" propaganda against the Syrian government..."

thank you war headquarters central for feeding a monster that happens to regurgitate your talking points 24/7.. why am i having a hard time distinguishing between the war party and ISIS? they look one and the same to me..

Posted by: james | Sep 22 2014 19:47 utc | 6

Alistair Crooke at Conflicts Forum has his usual good sense in this article:- If there are two main protagonists in Syria — the Syrian Army and ISIS — then America has no choice: It must prefer Assad, but it cannot be seen to be doing so, without offending Saudi Arabia. So America enters the conflict with one arm tied behind its back (by its own Gulf allies).

In ISIS’ strategically important Syrian backyard, America has no visible and direct partner – indeed, as former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and Syria Ryan Crocker commented: “We need to do everything we can to figure out who the non-ISIS [Syrian] opposition is. Frankly, we don’t have a clue” – but can only work with Assad in a deniable and indirect way (which it is doing).

Posted by: harry law | Sep 22 2014 19:51 utc | 7

Not to muddy the waters here, but I found this wee video clip from 1990 interesting. ISIS = Israel Secret Intelligence Service.

1990 C-SPAN interview with Brian Lamb, Dan Raviv and Yossi Melman, authors of the book Every Spy a Prince: describe (@ about 2:40) how the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office officially refers to its subordinate organization “the Mossad”–Hebrew for “the institute” and denoting Israel’s most well-known intelligence agency–as the “Israeli Secret Intelligence Service,” or ISIS.

Posted by: TikTok | Sep 22 2014 19:59 utc | 8

The very fact that IS uses the same talking points as US/MSM etc confirms that they're directed by US intel services. Why? because they know the facts, just as everyone else who has paid attention. I keep thinking back to McCain meeting with al-Baghdadi. If I understand correctly he's a key player in the NGO, Repubican Institute for Democracy.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 22 2014 20:14 utc | 9

@5 I'm beginning to think the whole Fake War on Terror business is to distract...


Posted by: rob66 | Sep 22 2014 20:27 utc | 10

@5 When W was increasing the size of the MIC, he was buying off Democratic Congressmen with the new pork. You can say what you will about W, but he understood how to build a coalition for his projects.

The result is the economics of so many blue districts is dependent on war on terror spending. What's funny is the Congress an Senate have put themselves in a position where they can't raise spending which means the areas of MIC growth will be divided up.

Except for turning the agencies under Homeland into a GOP employment program (remember the civil service act was waived here), I think the main purpose was to buy votes from Democrats in safe districts who might mount an opposition to the policy and to make sure no grandstander or true believer in the GOP would hold a majority hostage. The Republicans who competed for the Utah/NSA spying center and similar facilities weren't the usual cookie cutter but we're closer to proto-Teabaggers. Those facilities were in the local press with ribbon cutting ceremonies.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Sep 22 2014 20:47 utc | 11

EU people were fed up with Eurocrats and never wanted to follow the US wars in the first place: they'll get both. And to make it plain clear, let's empty the pockets of the middle class a little more to make sure it won't take to the streets (the taxes in France have just been increased by almost 50 percent for anyone making about 1,500 euros and up (as if that was enought to live in any major European city, to give a scale...)

Posted by: Mina | Sep 22 2014 21:15 utc | 12

Has anyone seen videos of the beheadings of Western journos? (I know that the Foley beheading video met with a lot of skepticism, and the video of the next Westerner was pulled right away, wasn't it?)

Who benefits from a sectarian war against Shia Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah? And how strongly are they motivated to seek that benefit?

How does the 'blowback' view vie with Sy Hersh's reporting of The Redirection in 2007?

In some respect, only time will tell. 'Blowback' is bad enough. That it was intentional policy would be even worse. But will any official lose their job or be inconvenienced in the least over 'policy mistakes', however misguided or deliberate? Judging by Hillary's "At this point . . . what difference does it make" attitude and Obama's feckless "We tortured some folks", the answer is a resounding NO. Sad.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 22 2014 21:32 utc | 13

Actions speak louder than words.

Jihadi internet celebs like Zawahiri/Baghdadi/Ash-shami all talk about coming to the help of Palestinians and fighting the grand crusader (US) but one glimpse at the world map and history books shows that they are and have been doing the complete opposite. The Middle East is literally riddled with US bases yet no attack on them or their host countries has occurred. And where were they during the Gaza onslaught? They were helping it by sucking away attention from it.

In other words, these jihadi celebs are liars, dupes and fakes fulfilling their role for advancing the interests of the empire.

Posted by: bbq | Sep 22 2014 21:36 utc | 14


Those beheading videos looked so goddamn fake they were almost funny.

I mean, who knowingly goes so calmly to his death like that, life cut short senselessly, unless drugged? No kicking or screaming or clawing or...anything? Young guys like that with years left to live? Even if he kicked his captor and was shot dead right there it would have been more real than the eventual Hollywood propaganda tripe.
And the convenient FADE TO BLACK at the moment before the severed jugular would send blood squirting all over the place? Nice touch. We wanna scare the sheep, not get them sick to their stomachs. Johnny Jihad's English accent? Nice touch, you want to communicate with your audience, I get it. All the bad guys in our stupid Hollywood movies have English accents. It scares us simple, honest and upright Murkans.
And then suddenly the decapitated head neatly sitting on top of the guy's torso. No bloody jumpsuit or bloody ground? And that knife didn't look sharp enough to cut soft cheese.
I know everything is not supposed to look like Fangoria, but come on already. I've seen B-movie horror films more realistic. You can definitely fake a beheading better than those.
They must think we're all awfully stupid and gullible.

Posted by: Farflungstar | Sep 22 2014 22:05 utc | 15

more theatre...the US needs wars esp against syria, so it has its muppets give an ultimatum!

Posted by: brian | Sep 22 2014 22:17 utc | 16

both turkey and israel nursemaid ISIS, while turkey claims its people are kidnapped by ISIS...

Posted by: brian | Sep 22 2014 22:19 utc | 17

@14 The Middle East is literally riddled with US bases yet no attack on them or their host countries has occurred.

bak derka derkaallah derka derka muhammadjihad haka sherpa sherpa habakallah

Posted by: rob66 | Sep 22 2014 22:19 utc | 18

A man who is suspected of being a member of the terrorist organization the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), which calls itself the Islamic State, was allegedly admitted to the intensive care unit of Mehmet Akif İnan State Hospital in southeastern Şanlıurfa province.

Posted by: brian | Sep 22 2014 22:22 utc | 19

Another question: how effective has those two hundred or so attacks against ISIS been? Why is it that we hear A LOT about ISIS's evil acts but very little about the actions taken against it?


I don't know if its blowback or intentional. One could make an argument for either. I think that many who closely follow the foibles and machinations (Syria 2013, Ukraine 2014, etc.) of our elites and political leaders are so skeptical that they favor the intentional version.

Those states that follow every event or action in the ME in great detail have plans and goals and enormous resources. When a virtually unknown group 'surprises' these States and instead of a mea culpa we get a big media campaign that, frankly, terrorizes the West (which seems rather much bluster for a new State), that is bound to raise some suspicions. (Note, in contrast, how little the media covered Ukraine, except to further US/Western ends by demonizing Putin.)

Oh yes, I almost forgot, it was all Bandar's fault! Poor management skills. Aging mind. Poor chap. Well that could be, who can say? b has a point when s/he says that skeptics often don't factor in that things don't always go according to plan.

But, in the face of this UNEXPECTED and super-evil entity, which (apparently) kills our journalists, co-opts young Westerners (who could be a threat upon returning), and also threatens the stability of our most important allies in the region, USA acts . . . only conditionally?

- *IF* Maliki resigns

- *IF* we can also bomb Syria

- *IF* we can get kudos for a humanitarian operation

- *IF* Iran will join the effort

- etc.


As I mentioned, time will tell. ISIS will peter out in months if all the nations that abhor it act appropriately (cutting off funding and arms), but if covertly supported it will likely ~ m y s t e r i o u s l y ~ carry on. And that could lead to an ISIS-Iran conflict. An interesting scenario, given that USA, Israel and KSA seem so powerless to stop Iran's nuclear program. Mmmm . . . how else might they be . . . um . . . useful?

But here I am, just musing aimlessly. Nevermind my ramblings. Our fearless leaders have these cartoonish evil-doers in their sights so they will NO DOUBT be vanquished and all will be unicorns and rainbows for evermore.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 22 2014 23:02 utc | 20

The new plan/UN/Sanctions
The bid to sanction people from France, Saudi Arabia, Norway, Senegal and Kuwait coincides with the expected adoption on Wednesday of a Security Council resolution to suppress foreign extremist fighters. U.S. President Barack Obama is scheduled to chair the meeting.

Posted by: TikTok | Sep 22 2014 23:45 utc | 21

"asked Islamic State followers everywhere to attack the countries that promised to wage war against the IS".

The Amerika surveillance state needs an attack to justify its budget. The timing is great.

This is what the wars are for more just smoke and mirrors while the .001% steal what ever Main Street citizens have left. Think Greece.

Sad but the cycle-0-paths running Amerika don't care about the citizens of any nation so long as they are under Amerika type of freedom. Serfs up.

Posted by: jo6pac | Sep 22 2014 23:52 utc | 22

slightly ot.. for a propaganda spin thanks turkish english version media (i will assume they give this out to the turkish folks in turkish as well) you can read this. it is in 'today's' news.

here's a critical quote "Apart from Syrian government airstrikes, the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime has also led to greater concerns over war crimes committed by the Syrian government."

Posted by: james | Sep 23 2014 1:39 utc | 23

Endless Kabuki. Except for the unfortunates caught in the middle of this reality show for the gullible.

Posted by: ben | Sep 23 2014 1:48 utc | 24

Posted by: carlos | Sep 22, 2014 2:21:38 PM | 2

I have come to the conclusion that blowback is nothing but a fallacy.
Blowback-the unintended adverse results of a political action or situation. Key word "unintended." The Elite know what will happen when we supply these "rebels." The military industrial complex needs to keep the wars coming somehow. I find it amusing how the #1 military superpower in the world has been in a country for 10 years and a "terrorist" group like ISIS just comes up out of the sand. Yet the sad part about all of this is the lack of questions being asked by the MSM. Not that I expected differently.....

Posted by: anon | Sep 23 2014 1:55 utc | 25

Bombing of Syria just started. Putin had earlier made a call to UN Sec telling no bombing in Syria without Assad's permission. Obama is scheduled to chair a UN Sec Council session Tuesday to get approval for his violation of international law. I wonder what Russia, Iran and a China are going to do? Get out the popcorn ...

Posted by: Thirsty | Sep 23 2014 1:56 utc | 26

The USG is bombing Aleppo?! Damascus?! Those are the cities highlighted on Megan Kelly's map.

Posted by: ess emm | Sep 23 2014 2:02 utc | 27

Breaking: Huge explosions shook the city in what might be the beginning of US airstrikes on ISIS HQs in Raqqa

— Abdulkader Hariri (@3bdUlkaed6r) September 23, 2014

This guy says Raqqa

Posted by: ess emm | Sep 23 2014 2:03 utc | 28

FWIW, Twitter is how to find out what the USG says is going on right now.

Unconfirmed - US lead air strikes v’s #IS hit Tal Abyad, 93 Brig, 17th Div in Raqqa, Raqqa City, Tabaqa Airport & City, W Aleppo #Syria

— Ian Pannell (@BBCiPannell) September 23, 2014

Posted by: ess emm | Sep 23 2014 2:28 utc | 29

Most reliable source would be the Kurds, not the BBC

Valerie Amos ‏@ValerieAmos
130,000 pple fleeing ISIL in Syria. Thanks to Turkey for their assistance. Largest arrival on their soil since the start of the conflict

@ValerieAmos Local sources put figure more like 12,000! Careful, #Turkey are inflating figures to push for 'buffer zone' #TwitterKurds

Posted by: somebody | Sep 23 2014 2:48 utc | 30

Isn't the information and fear of the Islamic State and so-called ISIS generated by the SITE Intelligence Group and Paula Katz


Posted by: easy e | Sep 23 2014 3:19 utc | 31

I certainly agree about taking out tanks, prime movers, artillery, and munition dumps, which are very hard to hide. The U.S. sent most of that stuff there anyway. If these guys have to fight on a more even battlefield, they will not last long, IMO.

But, of course, that's not going to happen. People in the Village are talking about an enterprise that will last years, a war that will be conducted largely in secret. I haven't seen any solid information about who or what is being bombed now. Guess they'll surprise us...

Posted by: chuckvw | Sep 23 2014 3:22 utc | 32

"They must think we're all awfully stupid and gullible." I wonder how they've gotten that impression? ;)

Bombing Aleppo is a very serious move. You have to wonder what kind of munitions (piloted planes or tomahawks?) and what kind of deal (notifications or nothing at all?) the US has made with Syria.

From the Wheeler piece:

Let me clear: I am not saying the US currently backs ISIS, as the NYT’s headline but not story suggests is the conspiracy theory. Nor am I saying the US willingly built a terrorist state that would go on to found a caliphate in Iraq.

But it is a fact that the US has had a covert op since at least June 2013 funding Syrian opposition groups, many of them foreign fighters, in an effort to overthrow Bashar al-Assad.

I think something we often argue about here is, what the meaning of "is" is, if you will. Okay, we'll do the old "now, I'm not saying they did it on purpose..." but you consider when at each decision point where they could have stopped this - stopped the weapons flow, stopped the Turkish safe havens, stopped the cash flow from the Gulf, supported their opponents when they were strong, put the breaks on when it was clear they were getting out of hand... how can you say it isn't on purpose.

So then it comes down then to negligence? I mean, when a shoddily built building falls down during an earthquake, what is the thinking on criminality there - did he do it on purpose? Well, no, everything would have been fine if there wasn't an earthquake, but these are the professionals. They should know, and when they don't, they should be held accountable. And it hardly matters wether they "willingly built" ISIS or not. The fact is it exists in spite of years of warnings that exactly this would occur - and it is up to the American people to say "you should have known" and that is what a viable anti-war movement would be doing... if, you know, we had one. All out for Climate Change while Obama becomes the 4th US president in a row to bomb Iraq?

The problem is that there is absolutely no accountability, and so no way to hold anyone to account in the Executive branch. Not from the bought and paid for ZioCongress or from the beaten down people. We have to spend decades debating stuff like this until the archives get declassified (if they get declassified).

So instead of acting to end it no matter what and holding our leaders to the "should have known" test, we sit around and debate intentionality while the bombs fall on Syria - completely overturning a victory we had won just one year ago.


...long years of siege and starvation...deadly and destructive barrel bombs...women and children of the Muslims taking their last breaths with their eyes glazed over due to the chemical weapons. America and its allies were not emotionally moved or outraged by any of this. They closed their ears to the cries of distress from the weak...

It's not just exactly what the propaganda of the US, it's the propaganda of the most virulent war hawks - almost to a word. It's "weak Obama" and all that.

As for these scumbags who call the Syrians and Hezbollah "the guardians of the jews" - it doesn't get more ridiculous than that. Jost the lowest "going through the motions" posturing from people who have killed 100,000 Syrians about how much they "hate" the Israelis. Oh if only Assad would fall! THEN they'd attack Israel! Well, after Maliki falls ... THEN.... we'll, after the Houthis are eliminated...THEN

Sure guys. Sure.

Posted by: guest77 | Sep 23 2014 3:50 utc | 33

As predicted

No interference from Assad forces, senior US official tells @JimAcostaCNN

— CNN NationalSecurity (@NatSecCNN) September 23, 2014

Posted by: ess emm | Sep 23 2014 3:59 utc | 34

@33 guest77

how can you say it isn't on purpose.
It's all calculation. Sometimes the results are unintended but they weigh the risks and accept them.

Posted by: ess emm | Sep 23 2014 4:15 utc | 35

@ess emm

Exactly. Presumably the same calculation the shoddy developer makes when he pockets $500k in savings from sandy concrete and hopes that an earthquake won't happen for the next 30 years.

Posted by: guest77 | Sep 23 2014 4:21 utc | 36


The Islamic State is quite busy right now conquering Syria and Iraq but I'm sure they have an online suggestion box for Western advisors like yourself to guide them and explain what they should be doing.

They have only conquered territory the size of the United Kingdom and are fighting on multiple fronts against Syrians, Iraqis, Kurds, Iranian led militias and now are being bombed by the US, France and Iraqi air forces but they should also assist Hamas who they despise.

Give them some time and they will get around to attacking US bases and fulfilling their promise to liberate all of Palestine after Hamas and the PA are swept away.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Sep 23 2014 4:32 utc | 37

for anyone who wanted to read emptywheels article titled "The Covert Operation Undermining US Credibility against ISIS, or steve clemons article which marcy quotes from june 23rd/14, check them out..

i always enjoyed reading marcy, although she is too usa centric for my likes.. it is nice to see her doing an article here more international in scope, then the usual back and forth us politics that i associate her as covering.. i used to follow steve clemons too 4 or 5 years or more ago when he had his own site before he got involved in the american initiative or whatever it was.. i agree with marcy, steve covers the basics on ISIS being a fairly direct result of the usa's relationship with saudi arabia - both working for regime change in syria.. no matter how it gets spun by the usa and MSM, i still see ISIS as a product of the usa..

interesting to see some of the posters from marcy's site posting more regularly here too.. i seem to recall don bacon back at steve clemons site too fwiw.. small world..

Posted by: james | Sep 23 2014 4:35 utc | 38

b posted marcys article, but not steve's.. i must have saw it when i first read it, but missed it when someone was quoting from it down the comments thread.

Posted by: james | Sep 23 2014 4:37 utc | 39

Isis was created to do the only thing which it does: attack fellow Muslims and serve as a pretext for Western intervention in Syria and elsewhere, just like Al Qaeda. Isis cannot exist without funding and cooperation from regional powers who wouldn't dare stand against the US lest they be squashed like a roach. If they were in any way for real, they could easily launch attacks against both the US and Israel.

Just smuggle some mortars into Mexico and fire at your leisure across the border. Unleash a few truck bombs at border crossings and watch trade between Mexico and the US collapse. Have some Jihadis wade across the Rio Grande with the commuting day laborers from Juarez and fan out to bomb shopping malls throughout the US simultaneously. If you get caught blow yourself up.

Pretty simple yet somehow all these "anti-Western" terrorists can't fire so much as a BB gun towards the US and Israel but they are certainly adept at repeating MSM propaganda.

Posted by: Sean | Sep 23 2014 4:55 utc | 40

Supposedly the US-led coalition have striked hundreds of targets in Iraq (and now on Syrian soil)... yet there hasn't been any mention of casualty numbers (civilian or otherwise). At least, I haven't seen any.

Reports on the Syrian airforce dropping "barrel bombs" on bakeries usually follows nicely with a bodycount.

Maybe ít's me, but the numbers seem to be deliberately left out. Maybe there aren't any casualties and these airstrikes are just for show.

Posted by: never mind | Sep 23 2014 5:22 utc | 41

Guardian: US launches air strikes against Isis targets in Syria

Syria’s use of chemical weapons in its protracted civil war had earlier led Obama to consider strikes against the Assad regime.
Once the AngloZionist media promulgates a lie, it can't give it up. (I say AngloZionist because Israel played a major role in that false flag op, producing black propaganda.)

Unsurprisingly, comments are disabled for that Guardian article.

Posted by: Demian | Sep 23 2014 5:30 utc | 42

@42 demian.. the guardian has become a regular channel for the propaganda dept.

Posted by: james | Sep 23 2014 5:36 utc | 43

Syria says Washington informed it before strikes

News in the Turkish media here.

Posted by: Oui | Sep 23 2014 7:53 utc | 44

@Sean, #40

"Pretty simple yet somehow all these "anti-Western" terrorists can't fire so much as a BB gun towards the US and Israel but they are certainly adept at repeating MSM propaganda"

Absolutely right. Al-Nusra, declared as an offshoot of Al-Qaeda, seen hugging up against the fence between Syria and Israel, and yet not so much as the slightest bit of interest in even letting off a fart in the direction of Tel Aviv.

Interesting too, though a separate issue, are recent developments along the border between Syria and Turkey.

As Somebody points out @#30,

@ValerieAmos Local sources put figure more like 12,000! Careful, #Turkey are inflating figures to push for 'buffer zone' #TwitterKurds

We heard recently that Turkey was planning to set up a buffer zone inside Syria, which they denied of course, and yet this was before the present refugee surge caused by the apparent advance of IS. I wonder what's really causing this advance.

Posted by: Pat Bateman | Sep 23 2014 8:08 utc | 45

As a further point, it comes with great relief that the bastion of truth, independence and righteousness - the SOHR - is telling us on its FB page,

Warplanes of the International Coalition against IS went in no less than 20 air strikes around the IS HQs and checkpoints in al-Raqqa city and both of its western and northern countrysides, around areas in Tal Abyad, al-Tabaqa, and Ein Essa, targeted the province building which is a bastion of the IS, confirmed reports of human losses in IS, although, the majority of its HQs have been evacuated earlier, no reports of losses in civilians.

Phew. God bless America. Sorry, "International Coalition"..

Posted by: Pat Bateman | Sep 23 2014 8:48 utc | 46

It seems the US is blaming Turkey for ISIS attacks on Kurds in Syria - I wonder what they think of ISIS attacking Kurds in Iraq. Effectively the attack on Erbil drew the US in - which had been Turkey's aim from the start.

Erdogan said he and Obama had discussed the idea to create buffer zones within Syria to house and feed refugees there. The Turkish military has been working on plans for the buffer zones, but it remains unclear whether Turkey itself would take part in securing the areas militarily. Erdogan said on Sunday that the danger to the Turkish refugees had prevented him from accepting demands by Turkey’s western allies for support for the anti-ISIS alliance that Obama wants to forge. But he did not say whether this position would change now that the hostages are free.

Ziya Meral, the Turkey analyst at the Foreign Policy Centre, a think tank in London, told Al-Jazeera that Erdogan was unlikely to opt for a more active role for Turkey in the movement against ISIS. He said Turkey was expecting the U.S. to come up with a plan for the future of Syria and Iraq once ISIS was defeated militarily. “It would be rather naïve to anticipate Turkey to start partaking in a public campaign against ISIS without a robust plan as to what will happen next,” Meral said.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 23 2014 8:57 utc | 47

"They must think we're all awfully stupid and gullible." I wonder how they've gotten that impression? ;)

Prolly cos their domestic opposition consists of people like you?

Just a thought . . .

Posted by: blowMe | Sep 23 2014 9:16 utc | 48

IDF Intercepts Syrian Fighter Plane in the Golan Heights

The IDF successfully intercepted a Syrian Sukhoi Su-24 fighter/bomber aircraft using a Patriot missile … Syria confirmed the downing of the plane, calling it an "act of aggression". Syrian television quoted a military source, saying the interception happened "within the framework of Israel's support of ISIS' terrorists."

Israel protecting Jabhat al-Nusra fighters at Quneitra checkpoint for the new push towards Damascus in the southern front?

Other sources indicated it was a MIG-21 fighter jet.

Posted by: Oui | Sep 23 2014 9:17 utc | 49

Eight civilians, three of them children, have been killed in the US-led air strikes on Al-Qaeda Nusra front [?] positions, Reuters reported, citing Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

RT: Anti-ISIS coalition bombing terrorist positions in Syria – LIVE Updates

Posted by: Oui | Sep 23 2014 9:27 utc | 50

Russia's position is airstrikes should be authorized either by the Syrian government or the UN Security Council.

"Attempts to pursue own geopolitical goals through violating the sovereignty of other states only escalates tensions and aggravates the situation even further...." "Moscow has repeatedly warned that those who initiated one-sided military scenarios bear full international legal responsibility for the consequences."

Posted by: madisolation | Sep 23 2014 11:21 utc | 51


The emperor has no clothes.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 23 2014 11:42 utc | 52

Interesting story in the nyt about Israel shooting down a syrian fighter after it strayed into the Golan Heights. Seems to me it backs up the story posited here about Israel providing a safe column for groups attacking Damascus from Golan.

The story makes little sense, not suprisingly. As though these slapstick pilots of modern day jets simply loose track of their heading like they might, lost in thought, soaring high above North Dakota and not in a hostile war zone with advanced militaries next door saturated with psychopaths begging for an opportunity to kill something. The photo shows a jet plummeting straight down, but the article says the pilots ejected into Syria and the plane landed in the sea. I took a cursory look at a map, and I have one year of college physics for non-majors. Either the folks shooting the missile are billiards experts, or that doesn't really add up.

Posted by: IhaveLittleToAdd | Sep 23 2014 12:10 utc | 53

Following the US rationale, maybe it is time for Russia to take out all the airfields, army bases, munition stores and weapons factories in Ukraine, in order to protect the rebels from the fascist regime.

Posted by: Yonatan | Sep 23 2014 12:10 utc | 54

Ah, the US strikes hit Jabhat al-Nusra or the Khorasan Group in Idlib, west of Aleppo …

US Averts 'Active Plotting Against Homeland' By Hitting Al Qaeda Cell Khorasan in Syria

The Khorasan Group -- consisting of about 50 or so hardened fighters of mixed past and current jihadi affiliations -- has been holed up in Aleppo, Syria under the protection of al Qaeda's official wing in the country, Jabhat al-Nusra, developing cutting edge weapons of terror with the help of al Qaeda's Yemen affiliate to strike Western civilian aviation targets, according to a half-dozen officials with knowledge of the group who spoke to ABC News.

Posted by: Oui | Sep 23 2014 12:16 utc | 55

Of course, Israel, US, GCC are hitting Syria and killing people as I type- What with their ISIS allies on the ground, along with PKK kurds and peshmerga providing all the boots they need right now

Posted by: Penny | Sep 23 2014 12:33 utc | 56

With all of that's going on in the world, the BBC has an extended interview with the "iron lady" of Hong Kong on the "prodemocracy movement" there (She predicts social unrest if more democratic reforms are not implemented to satify the younger gneration). Interesting particularly since she scoffed at the reporters mention that Mainland China has attributed this prodemocracy movement to hostile foreign agitators. Noteworthy only as a heads up that Hong Kong may be the next attempted "color revolution"

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Sep 23 2014 12:34 utc | 57

b there was no 'attack' in the Kurdish territory by IS..

shakes head.

IS moved into northern Syria. the Kurdish fighters moved into northern Syria "to fight" ISIS, allegedly. But there was no fight. Airstrikes began IS and co are the boots on the ground

shakes head again

order out of chaos-
moving the fighters into place- start the airstrikes
how much more obvious does this stuff have to get

requoting from a post at my place- posted on Saturday

"This is how you hide an agenda in plain sight- And that is exactly what is being done!
As I mentioned previously- the "boots on the ground"

-Soften targets for an onslaught of Islamists, Kurds, Turks and whoever else they have holed up in Northern Iraq

To conclude- The ISIS mercs, PKK terrorists and the Peshmerga are the boots on the ground for the impending airstrikes on Syria- And they are moving into place!
Which is highly suggestive airstrikes are coming sooner rather then later..."

And the airstrikes did indeed come sooner....

Now we even have a new bogus terror group Khorasan which as coincidence would have it is an ancient name for the land known now as Iran, nice way to tie in the next NATO target, right?!

Posted by: Penny | Sep 23 2014 12:43 utc | 58

Ever wonder why, with the IS so intent on striking at "the West", their main bases of support are all client states of the U.S., Saudi Arabia, UAE, Turkey and Jordan? Even Israel shelters them in Western Syria. And how IS military action is always keen to avoid these pro-West backers, yet always seem to target America's strategic enemies, Syria, Iraq and Iran?

Posted by: bondo | Sep 23 2014 12:51 utc | 59

@Penny -b there was no 'attack' in the Kurdish territory by IS..

Yeah, sure. All those Kurds, who have been successfully fighting to protect their area over the last three years, have now suddenly send their families over the border to Turkey because "there was no attack" on them. Sure ...

Posted by: b | Sep 23 2014 12:54 utc | 60

Or did they send their families into Turkey to spare them from the impending airstrikes?

Isn't that just as possible, b?
Of course it is, though you won't even consider that possibility as a reality.

Posted by: Penny | Sep 23 2014 13:01 utc | 61

Agree. The "West" now will face "blowback" from all the violence it has enacted in the Middle East over the last decade. But the reason ISIS now announces retaliation is that ISIS has to face US & French strikes. And that's a serious threat for ISIS. I am not sure ISIS will survive such an attack.

Posted by: Willy2 | Sep 23 2014 13:06 utc | 62

Posted by: b | Sep 23, 2014 8:54:51 AM | 60

Actually, I think it's very likely that they are leaving in anticipation of the American bombing campaign, as happened in Bosnia and in Iraq prior to the "surge" ... large scale, impersonal air raids leave civilian populations no-identifiable-safe-place which is different from the close-to-the-ground rebel fighting where a day or two hiding in a cellar or in a cave might suffice; hence, mass exodus

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Sep 23 2014 13:30 utc | 63

@63 Under Obama's strategy, being near a bombing marks one as a terrorist, so I suspect they will get out of dodge. I imagine the U.S. government will ignore the refugees we created once again, but this time Syria won't take them in.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Sep 23 2014 13:44 utc | 64

French journalist kidnapped in Algeria. The first "blowback" against the US strikes in Syria/against ISIS ???

Posted by: Willy2 | Sep 23 2014 14:39 utc | 65

This is the article Marcy Wheeler linked to:

No, ISIS is simply using the "facts on the ground" (which are REAL) in its (dramatic) propaganda.

Posted by: Willy2 | Sep 23 2014 15:29 utc | 66

@ Willy2#65

The first "blowback" against the US strikes in Syria/against ISIS ???

That hostage taking happened on Sunday - he is the only one taken from his group of hikers .

Posted by: Yul | Sep 23 2014 15:36 utc | 67

@48 Just a thought . . .


Posted by: rob66 | Sep 23 2014 16:12 utc | 68


But the algerians were released and the frenchman not.

Posted by: Willy2 | Sep 23 2014 16:42 utc | 69

@69 There are ample reasons anyone who might be attracted to the ISIS' banner would kidnap a Frenchman in Algeria. Besides the historical ties, the French are active in CAR and we're instrumental in the fall of Libya.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Sep 23 2014 16:46 utc | 70

A very interesting analysis:

Posted by: Willy2 | Sep 23 2014 16:55 utc | 71

@ 69

There is money to be made - French are known to pay up when ransom is demanded. French army is active in CAR and Mali and we don't know whether that Frenchman is really who he said he is - he may be a spook

Posted by: Yul | Sep 23 2014 17:23 utc | 72

Yul, if he's a spook, the French will pay even more.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 23 2014 18:29 utc | 73

I regularly visit the website "War in context"

They recently linked to this article in The Guardian:
"The root cause of extremism among British Muslims is alienation"

Posted by: Willy2 | Sep 23 2014 18:33 utc | 74

'More important - the motivation of the foreign fighters that came to support the IS and its followers elsewhere has, to a large part, been created by "western" propaganda against the Syrian government. Would someone from Europe, largely secure in his/her environment, ever have thought of joining the IS if the "western" media had abstained from demonizing the Syrian government? I believe the answer is in most cases no.'
hallaleuh! finally someone notes the obvious! the continuous effluence from BBC ABC NYT etc demonising President Assad as the 'Butcher of Damscus' is what has been drawing stupid sunnis to join the jihad in syria and aid USrael in their war on syria

Posted by: brian | Sep 23 2014 22:18 utc | 75

RT ‏@RT_com ·53 mins
#Syria is the seventh country that Obama, holder of Nobel Peace Prize, bombs in 6 years

Posted by: brian | Sep 23 2014 22:24 utc | 76

Posted by: Penny | Sep 23, 2014 8:43:55 AM | 58


Posted by: brian | Sep 23 2014 22:26 utc | 77

Posted by: Nini | Sep 22, 2014 2:44:24 PM | 3

russia is not US

Posted by: brian | Sep 23 2014 22:28 utc | 78

I'm beginning to think...
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 22, 2014 3:36:11 PM | 5

its a start!

Posted by: brian | Sep 23 2014 22:29 utc | 79

In ISIS’ strategically important Syrian backyard, America has no visible and direct partner – indeed, as former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and Syria Ryan Crocker commented: “We need to do everything we can to figure out who the non-ISIS [Syrian] opposition is. Frankly, we don’t have a clue” – but can only work with Assad in a deniable and indirect way (which it is doing).

Posted by: harry law | Sep 22, 2014 3:51:49 PM | 7

you mean you believe what american regime personnel say?

Posted by: brian | Sep 23 2014 22:31 utc | 80

Indeed "the" West always commits the same mistakes: first it instigated a Shia rebellion against Saddam Hussein only to leave them to be gassed and decimated. Then when the US intervened and toppled the Sunni regime there, the Sunni were on the receiving end and no wonder they had similar thoughts of revenge. How on earth can one stage two interventions to bring "peace" and only make matters worse with all these Ph.D.s in Washington think tanks?

Posted by: Colm Barry | Oct 1 2014 13:44 utc | 81

The comments to this entry are closed.