This is funny.

The Twitter conservation below started when Borzou Daragahi, a main stream scribe and gullible simpleton, asked about Moon of Alabama. He had been made aware of and disliked the head scarf piece which was posted here yesterday. One Jett Goldsmith volunteered to respond.

Jett Goldsmith (left)

Borzou Daragahi @Borzou – 10:36 PM – 30 Jan 2018
Who’s or what’s behind Moonie Alabama?

Jett Goldsmith‏ @JettGoldsmith – 10:48 PM – 30 Jan 2018
Replying to @borzou
Moon of Alabama is an American conservative/quasi-conspiracy theorist forum. It's run by a German Vietnam veteran named Billmon.

Jett Goldsmith @JettGoldsmith
Replying to @JettGoldsmith @borzou
Out of curiosity, I dived rather deep into his story a few weeks ago. I found a bunch of articles from mutual friends who served with him in Vietnam, referencing his life. Let me try and find them.

Jett Goldsmith @JettGoldsmith
Here we go. Bernhard Horstmann, the founder of Moon of Alabama, is a dual national current resident of Germany who opted to serve in the US Army Corps of Engineers during Vietnam. He's written about at length here. http://www.tombutt.com/pdf/letters%20home.pdf …

Jett Goldsmith @JettGoldsmith
Here's Horstmann pictured in 2012 with local Richmond, CA community member Tom Butt, who served with him in Vietnam. Butt later became mayor of Richmond. pic

Moon of Alabama @MoonofA – 11:22 PM – 30 Jan 2018
You made 9 factual claims in the above of which 8 are completely wrong. That's an F.

Cont. reading: Sleuthhound Puppy Takes ‘Deep Dive’ Into MoA – (Funny)

A U.S. government funded public relation campaign tries to incite women in Iran to break the law. The reporting of the campaign in western media is unproportionate to its effects in Iran. The professional propagandist who runs the campaign on behalf of the U.S. government is introduced as ordinary "women’s rights activist". The larger propaganda scheme and the U.S. government influence in it are willfully ignored.

In June 2017 the CIA created a new "mission center" for attacking Iran:

The Iran Mission Center will bring together analysts, operations personnel and specialists from across the CIA to bring to bear the range of the agency’s capabilities, including covert action, The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.

The first visible results of the new center's work was the hijacking of economic protests in Iran at the end of last year. The slogans and symbols used and the specific western media support lets one assume that exile MEK terrorists and monarchist organizations were involved in the affair. The demonstrations immediately turned violent and lost all public backing. They petered out, as predicted, within a few days.

On December 28, the very same day the demonstrations started, this picture made the rounds:

bigger

A woman in Tehran defied the law by taking off her headscarf. The pictures and a video showed that people around mostly ignored the stunt. Only after the photo made the rounds in "western" media, was the woman taken in for questioning but later released. The picture and video was first posted by @masihpooyan:

Cont. reading: U.S. Runs Headscarf Campaign Against Iran

The U.S. polity and media now acknowledge what we reported on December 21. The U.S. announcement to build up a 30,000 strong PKK army in north-east Syria was a disaster. It prompted Turkey to initiate its attack on YPG/PKK Kurds in Afrin. It threatens do drive it out of NATO and into Russia's open arms. It gives the Syrian government new leverage against the Syrian Kurds.

Under Turkish threats to attack U.S. forces in Syria the Trump administration had to pull back – at least in its rhetoric. Independent of who rules Turkey the country will never acquiesce to an armed Kurdish entity on its southern border. The U.S. should have know this.

This failure of the Trump administration's plan has prompted a new push from neoconservative propagandists for a full U.S. war on Syria and its allies. The lobby shop of the Kagan family, the Institute For The Study of War, had its junior staff pen an op-ed for Foxnews to argue for a new study object:

It's time for Trump to face reality in Syria

The U.S. must rapidly change how it is executing policy in five key areas.

1. Russian military bases. …
2. Acceptance of Bashar al-Assad. …
3. Syrian “de-escalation.” …
4. The “peace” process. …
5. Iran and al Qaeda. …

The hinted at solutions, couched in vague language, are for 1. nuke them, 2. kill him, 3. stop it, 4. who cares, 5. destroy 'em all:

The U.S. must face reality in Syria. It must recognize the threat Russia poses. It must acknowledge the limits of its current partners on the ground. It cannot put faith in a diplomatic charade. It must implement a real strategy against al Qaeda and Iran. And it must recognize the value of American action over American rhetoric.
…
It will take a long time and a hard struggle to achieve any outcome in Syria that the U.S. should be willing to live with. It is time to focus on it, devote resources to it, and prepare to do so for a long time.

"For a long time" sounds to me like a multi decade occupation of the Syrian battlefield and the adjacent areas. I doubt that any politician who wants to be reelected will vote for that.

A second neocon op-ed, this by Josh Rogin, was posted at Jeff Bezos' blog: Team Trump must match its new rhetoric on Syria with action.

It is not useful to quote the nonsense but here are some of the rhetoric figures it uses:

… the will and leverage needed to lead a solution to the Syrian crisis – defend U.S. interests – confronting the ongoing terrorist threat – Iranian expansion – Bashar al-Assad’s brutal aggression – on-the-ground influence – herculean effort – a contingent that wants to cut and run – a real plan – fundamental flaw – a lack of sufficient leverage on the ground …

After having set the scene for a massive U.S. occupation of Syria, Rogin claims that "nobody is advocating" a "large increase in U.S. troops". His advice then is to do more of the stuff that evidently just failed: stick to the Kurds, pay some Arab tribes (aka former ISIS), arm rebels (aka al-Qaeda) in Idleb. But then comes the real blopper:

the Trump administration should raise the pressure on Assad, Russia and Iran, including through sanctions, the credible threat of U.S. force and whatever else might persuade them.

Now what please is a "credible threat of U.S. force" against those three countries? And might they have the capability to credibly threat back? Who will win the thermonuclear war over the Tanf desert base in south-east Syria?

A year into Trump’s presidency, his administration is saying the United States has a long-term interest in Syria. The next step is to match those words with action.

I have no doubt that the two op-eds were coordinated. More of this kind will likely come. The common theme is "action" and – while not openly said – they demand a larger U.S. war over Syria. The unmentioned beneficiary of such a war, next to the weapon producing financiers of those writers, would be Israel and Saudi Arabia.

The neoconservative writers and their op-eds should be ignored. But the war on Iraq has shown that there is some serious political power behind them. Now someone in the White House will have to pick up those arguments and try to convince Trump with them. Who will that be and will s/he be successful?

Robert Parry, the classic investigative journalist, founder and editor of the Consortium News website, has died.

This is a huge loss for everyone who has kept some skepticism about the propagandistic media onslaught on our consciousness. Parry's writing was always fact based, well grounded and beyond the usual claptrap. The Iran-Contra stroy, Reagan's October surprise and dozens of other political crimes would have been buried had Robert Parry not dug into them.

In his last post on December 31, An Apology and Explanation, he offered these closing words of his long career:

[A]s the New Year dawns – if I could change one thing about America and Western journalism, it would be that we all repudiate “information warfare” in favor of an old-fashioned respect for facts and fairness — and do whatever we can to achieve a truly informed electorate.

Robert's son Nat Parry, who also writes and edits at Consortium News, gives an overview of Robert's work in his obituary. There was hardly any large political scandal in the last 40 years, that Robert Parry had not reported on. He truly made a difference.

May he rest in peace.

Jan 15 – Syria – U.S. Traps Itself, Commits To Occupation, Helps To Sustain The Astana Agreement
Jan 18 – Syria – Tillerson Announces Occupation Goals – Erdogan Makes Empty Threats

A few days later those threats turned out to be not so empty – see below.

Jan 20 – Sundry – Shutdown, Ukraine, Omidyar And Syria

Jan 21 – Syria – Turks Attack Afrin, U.S. Strategy Fails, Kurds Again Chose The Losing Side
Jan 22 – Syria – Some Random Oddities

Jan 23 – Calls Upon" Trickery – How Europe Cheats On Iran's Nuclear Agreement
Jan 25 – Why Europe Must Reject U.S. Blackmail Over Iran's Nuclear Agreement – An Update

Tillerson just said that negotiations between the U.S. on Iran's nuclear deal have started:

“The working groups have already begun to meet on efforts to agree principles, what is the scope of what we attempt to address and also how much we engage Iran on discussions to address these issues,” he said.

Oh my …

Jan 25 – Who Lost Turkey?" – The U.S.-Kurdish Project In Syria Endangers NATO

There is trouble with another U.S. ally in its war on Syria. Bread prices in Jordan doubled (fr) today after the state removed subsidies. There will be protests and these may developed into something bigger. The country is nearly bankrupt and under severe IMF restrictions. Under U.S. and Saudi pressure Jordan took part in the war on Syria by hosting "rebels", their refuge families and the U.S. "war room". The war cut off the transit traffic from Turkey through Jordan to Saudi Arabia as well as the local commerce with Syria. The Syrian government will only allow regular traffic if it is in control of the border stations. Attempts to achieve that in a truce and to reopen the border with Syria failed over resistance from the "rebels" in south Syria.

The policy of accommodating the Saudis and the U.S. has failed. The war on Syria created huge damage for Jordan for no gain. The Jordanian Hashemite Kingdom is also responsible for the Haram esh-Sharif and Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. The Trump administration's move to take the issue of Israel control over Jerusalem "off the table" and the Saudi acceptance of it has seriously de-legitimized the Jordanian king. Jordan is looking to reorientate its foreign policy. It is moving nearer to Turkey and also held talks with Iran. The next step is probably an invitation for the king for a visit in Moscow.

Some Iranian Revolutionary Guard commander has said: "Bush gave us Iraq, Obama gave us Syria and Trump will give us Israel."  Maybe not Israel yet, but Jordan looks like a decent mosaic piece in that larger picture.

Please use the comments as open thread …

Back in the 1950s the U.S. political sphere was poisoned by a groundless smear campaign against country-experts in the State Department  who were identified as those who lost China. If the Trump administration proceeds on its current course we may soon see similar accusations. The accused, those "who lost Turkey", will again be the ones who warned of the possibility and not the real culprits.

The Turkish attack on the Kurd held Syrian canton of Afrin (Efrin) is not progressing as fast the Turks had hoped. The infantry component of the operation are Turkish proxy forces in Syria. These Chechen, Uighur, Turkestanis and other Takfiris are cannon fodder in the operations, not a well integrated component of an army.

bigger

The Kurds know their local mountainous territory, are well armed and willing to fight. They can holdout for a while. Politically they will still be the ones who will lose the most in the conflict. The above linked piece noted that the Kurdish YPG/PKK leaders had rejected the Syrian and Russian government offer that would have prevented the Turkish attack. The offer still exists but the conditions will become less favorable as longer the Kurds hold out.

Elijah Magnier just published more details on that offer and analyses the strategic situation:

[T]he US is observing the performance of the Turkish army with interest and wishes to see Erdogan humiliated, broken on the rocks of the Kurds in Afrin. Indeed, the US has delivered anti-tank weapons, already effectively used by the Kurds against the Turkish army (many tanks damaged during the attack on Afrin).
…
The US can’t understand that Ankara is not ready to see a rich and well-armed Kurdish “state” on its borders, disregarding the US’s tempting and generous offer [of a "safe zone" (see below)]. Actually, the US is offering a territory that not only does not belong to the Americans but is actually occupied by the US forces in north east Syria.

The US is one of the losers in this battle, regardless of the results, because Turkey will continue its operations until the defeat of the Kurds, either by military means or if Afrin returns to [Syrian] central government’s control.

I am not convinced that the above prediction will hold. There is still a possibility that Turkey might again change sides and (again) join the U.S. "regime change" efforts in Syria.

This depends on the winner of a conflict within the U.S. military where opposing forces are pulling for the Turkish and respectively the Kurdish side. Should the pro-Turkish side win, Erdogan can be offered a new deal and might be induced to again change sides from his current pro-Russian (pro-Damascus?) position back towards a pro-NATO/U.S. stand. (There is also a tiny chance that Turkey already has a secret back deal with the U.S. administration but I see no indication for it.)

From the very beginning of the conflict in Syria Turkey worked with the U.S., NATO, the Saudis and Qataris, against the Syrian government. It supported the Saudi and U.S. position of "regime change", let ten-thousands of terrorists pass through its borders and delivered ten-thousands of tons of weapons and supplies to the forces fighting the Syrian government. Finally Russia entered the picture, defeated the Takfiris, put harsh pressure on Turkey and offered new economic deals. At the same time the U.S. attempted "regime change" in Ankara and allied with the Kurdish YPG/PKK in Syria and Iraq.

Erdogan, though unwillingly, changed sides and now works with Russia (and Syria) to bring the war to a conclusion. "Regime change" in Damascus has become an unlikely scenario he no longer supports. At the same time he is still willing to invest money and forces to gain something for his failed investment in the war. Taking Afrin to later incorporate it into an enlarged Turkey is one of those plays. He is clearly still aiming for additional territory. The U.S. now offered him some in form of a safe zone in Syria:

Cont. reading: “Who Lost Turkey?” – The U.S.-Kurdish Project In Syria Endangers NATO

The Trump administration has threatened to end the nuclear deal with Iran. In our last post we argued in detail that the attempt of the European 3, the United Kingdom, France and Germany, to soothe Trump by condemning Iran's ballistic missiles is itself a breach of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and the UN Security Council Resolution 2231.

The University of Alabama endorsed Moon of Alabama's legal reasoning :-). Professor Daniel Joyner, author of several books on international law, non-proliferation and the nuclear deal with Iran, responded to the piece:

Dan Joyner @DanJoyner1 – 6:43 PM – 24 Jan 2018
Replying to @MoonofA
Hi, I enjoyed your post and agree with its analysis.
I examined 2231 in a chapter you can download here: Iran's Nuclear Program and International Law: From Confrontation to Accord, Chapter 7
I addressed the missile issue at pg. 240, and reached the same conclusion you do.

Ellie Geranmayeh, a member of the European Council of Foreign Relations (a U.S. aligned institution), is also defending the nuclear deal and warns against endorsing its breach. She argues in Foreign Policy that the Europeans should not soothe Trump but take a strong stand against any U.S. attempt to put Iran back into the bad corner:

Some European officials state in private that the best option is for Europe to muddle through in the hope that Trump will eventually shift his position. But muddling through just won’t do. Trump is likely to continue increasing his maximalist demands unless Europe flexes its political muscle.

In order to protect its economic and security interests, Europe must not only reject Trump’s ultimatum — which would be a kiss of death for the nuclear deal — but also push back. Europe should put in place a viable contingency plan if the United States continues backtracking on the deal and let Washington know it’s ready to use it.

The author puts forward a four point plan which would indemnify European companies which are dealing with Iran but threatened by secondary U.S. sanctions:

Put simply, EU officials must tell Trump: If you fine our companies’ assets in the United States, we will reclaim those costs by penalizing U.S. assets in Europe. This would cause a major trade conflict that the Europeans want to avoid by all means. But the option and the precedent exist.

Pressing Iran on the ballistic missile issue leads to a dead end, and possibly a new conflict that is not in European interest. Europe should  therefore address that issues on a wider, regional base:

Cont. reading: Why Europe Must Reject U.S. Blackmail Over Iran’s Nuclear Agreement – An Update

[An addition to the original piece below was added here: Why Europe Must Reject U.S. Blackmail Over Iran's Nuclear Agreement – An Update]
—

The Trump administration wants to abolish the nuclear agreement with Iran. The big European countries want to keep the formal agreement but are actively looking for other reasons, specifically Iran's ballistic missiles, to put new sanctions on Iran. A detailed look into the issue reveals that those European countries are willfully misreading the relevant UN resolutions and mislead the public about their real motivations.

Elijah Magnier just published an excellent piece on the history of U.S. attempts to restrict Iran in the Middle East and to again put it again under its tutelage. He touches on the nuclear deal with Iran and the Trump administration attempts to abolish it. The deal was cosigned by three European countries, the United Kingdom, France and Germany, as well as by Russia and China. Magnier writes:

Iran will not re-negotiate the nuclear deal and relies on Europe to stand firm, confirming its signature and commitment. Europe is in need of Iran because the Islamic Republic is part of the continent’s national security and an advanced guard against terrorism. Europe has had enough of wars [… .]

[The] Iranians and their allies are the partners Europe is looking for, ready to stand back from the US, that faraway continent that is less vulnerable than nearby Europe to terrorism and terrorists.

That assessment of the European position is wrong.

1. The European governments care about terrorism just as much as the U.S. government does – which means they do not care at all. Remember that the war on Libya, with the help of Qatari paid Takfiris of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, was cooked up by the French President Sarkozy and the Britain Prime Minister Cameron a full year before it happened. Ghaddafi was killed, Libya drowned in blood and terrorism thrived. The blow back came in May 2017 when a Libyan Takfiri blew himself up and killed more than 20 people in Manchester UK. No one was held responsible. Instead the Europeans repeat the same scheme in Syria and are still supporting the terrorist assaults against the legitimate Syrian government.
2. These Europeans want Iran back under a strict sanction regime just like the U.S. wants it. They Europeans do not want to formally break the nuclear agreement. (They might fear that some companies would file for indemnity.) But they are actively looking for ways to circumvent it. They want to provoke Iran into breaking the agreement by claiming that Iran's ballistic missile program is in violation of the nuclear agreement and the relevant UN resolutions. If they use the issue to apply unilateral sanctions or to "snap back" old ones, Iran has little choice but to declare the agreement null and void.

bigger

Some relevant headlines:

Cont. reading: “Calls Upon” Trickery – How Europe Cheats On Iran’s Nuclear Agreement

A tweet:

Asaad Hanna @AsaadHannaa 4:26pm · 22 Jan 2018
Assad army dropped chlorine bombed barrels on Abo Aldhoor military base #Idlib countryside in a big attempt to take control of it.

The above is from an anti-Syrian "Media Adviser, researcher and freelance journalist" previously published or quoted by Al Jazeerah, The Guardian, Business Insider and several other outlets. His twitter account has a "Verified" mark.

There is only a tiny problem with the tweet about the Abu Duhur air base. Since Saturday the base is in government hands. Yesterday the Syrian Ministry of Defense officially announced the full capture of the air base. There are pictures available and videos from a Russian news outlet showing Syrian army soldiers strolling within the base. Meanwhile the fighting has moved several kilometers beyond the base limits. The Syrian Army dropping "chlorine bombed barrels" on an air base that is in the army's hands would be rather curious incident. There are no such reports from anyone else. The claim does not seem to fit reality. Then again – little of what was published from such "activist journalists" ever made any sense.

Quod licet Iovi …

Secretary of State Tillerson on January 17:

The United States will maintain a military presence in Syria … Our military mission in Syria will remain conditions-based.
…
The United States desires five key end states for Syria: …

… non licet bovi

State Dep. Spokesperson Heather Nauert on January 21:

[W]e urge Turkey to exercise restraint and ensure that its military operations remain limited in scope and duration […] We call on all parties to remain focused on the central goal of defeating ISIS.

Today U.S. Secretary of Defense Mattis added this gem of imperial self awareness:

We don't invade other countries, in Russia's case — Georgia, Ukraine. That we settle things by international rule of law, you know, this sort of thing. And so I think that in terms of great power and competition. One point I want to make is we respect these as sovereign nations with a sovereign voice and sovereign decisions, and we don't think anyone else should have a veto authority over their economic, their diplomatic or their security decisions.

So one of the points I will be making just by being there is we respect these countries, and we respect their sovereignty, their sovereign decisions.

The delusions the Syrian YPG/PKK Kurds have of their position is truly amazing:

[Sinam Mohamad, a senior official in the YPG-backed Syrian Kurdish administration in northern Syria and] currently in Washington with fellow Syrian Kurdish representative Nobahar Mustafa, said the Syrian Kurdish people expected the United States to declare a no-fly zone over the Kurdish-controlled north, “including Afrin.” Mustafa, who was present at the interview, concurred that Afrin “presents a very real and immediate test of US commitment to their Kurdish partners.” The United States “must and can stop Turkey,” Mustafa said.

That statement is a real head scratcher. The main U.S. operation base in the area is the NATO airbase Incerlik in Turkey. Should the U.S. fly its jets from Incerlik to fight off the Turkish jets over Afrin which also take off from Incerlik? And what about Syrian and Russian air defenses that cover the area? Do the Kurds expect the U.S. to start World War III over their inability to compromise with the Syrian government?

Is this diplomatic artistry or are these helpless gestures?

U.S. allied Turkish forces invade Syria to kill and "cleanse" U.S. allied Syrian YPG/PKK Kurds in Afrin. The Trump administration immediately steps in to assure the respective allies of its continued support:

• Today the Deputy Secretary General of NATO, the U.S. diplomat Rose Gottemoeller, visited Ankara to tell the Turkish allies that everything is fine. The U.S. will stand with them.
• Today Commander of U.S. Central Command General Votel and U.S. Diplomat Brett McGurk visited Kobane to tell their Syrian YPG/PKK allies that everything is fine. The U.S. will stand with them.

The U.S. also called on ‘both sides for restraint’ after Turkey attacks Afrin.

My hunch is that despite these visits neither the Turks nor the Kurds were happy with their U.S. allies.

—

Bonus:

The New York Times Editors are very concerned. People with lots of money might get undue representation:

• Lobbyists Romp in Trump’s Washington

On the same day the NYT publishes a 6,000(!) word promo-piece about that cute (Wahhabi infested) sheikdom of Qatar. The headline is rather revealing:

• Tiny, Wealthy Qatar Goes Its Own Way, and Pays for It

After negotiations between Russia/Syria and the Kurds of Afrin had failed, the Russian side made a deal with Turkey. Now Turkey attacks Afrin while everyone else looks aside. The main impetus for this development was the announcement of a U.S. occupation in north-east Syria with the help of the Kurdish YPG/PKK. The occupation strategy is already failing. The Kurds made the false choice. They will be the losers of this game.

We had wrongly predicted that Turkish threats against the Kurdish held north-west area of Afrin were empty:

The threat is not serious:

• …
• Afrin is under formal protection of Russian and Syrian forces.
• The real danger to Turkey is not Afrin but the much larger Kurdish protectorate the U.S. publicly announced in north-east Syria.

The Turkish threats and its artillery noise have led to counter noise from Syria and more silent advice from Russia. The Syrian government wants to show that it is the protector of all Syrian citizens be they ethnic Arabs or Kurds. Russia is proud of its role as the grown up who is calming down all sides.

Turkey is now attacking the Afrin canton in full force. With help from one George Orwell the operation was dubbed "Olive Branch"

bigger

The Turkish operation to go after Afrin was triggered by two events. The more important one was the U.S. announcement of a permanent occupation of north-east Syria with the help of a 30,000 men strong SDF "border protection force" consisting of mainly Kurds and some Arabs who earlier fought under ISIS. We had noted at that time:

The Turks were not consulted before the U.S. move and are of course not amused that a "terrorist gang", trained and armed by the U.S., will control a long stretch of their southern border. Any Turkish government would have to take harsh measures to prevent such a strategic threat to the country.

The U.S. move was amateurish. It ignored the security needs of its NATO ally Turkey in exchange for an illegal and unsustainable occupation of north-east Syria. Secretary of State Tillerson tried to calm the Turks by claiming that the "border protection force" was not for border protection. Reports from the training ground expose that as a lie:

Cont. reading: Syria – Turks Attack Afrin, U.S. Strategy Fails, Kurds Again Chose The Losing Side

As I am currently somewhat handicapped in writing a consistent piece (possible reasons: the flu, writers block or temporary burnout) I'll restrict this to some short thoughts on recent issues.

—

The so called government shutdown in the U.S. is no shutdown. It is political theater that pretends a political divide between the two parties that simply is not there. All the bad stuff – the military operations, the spying on you and me, and of course the payments to Congress and the White House are designated as "essential" and will continue. Only the nicer stuff, services for the common people, will be restricted. Adam H. Johnson wrote about this split the last time a "government shutdown" happened: It’s Not a Government Shutdown. It’s a Right-Wing Coup.

—

The Ukrainian Parliament has practically declared the Minsk agreements null and void and decided to militarily "liberate" Donetsk, Lugansk and Crimea from the will of the people living there. Just in time the neo-nazi fanatics of the Azov Battalion received a U.S. military delegation and U.S. arms.

The 2015 Minsk II agreement (full text) demanded that the Ukraine creates a new law for the administration of these regions:

Without delays, but no later than 30 days from the date of signing of this document, a resolution has to be approved by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, indicating the territory which falls under the special regime in accordance with the law “On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts,” based in the line set up by the Minsk Memorandum as of Sept. 19, 2014.

Russia is not a party of the agreement. But when the resolution by the Ukrainian parliament was not forthcoming western propaganda falsely blamed Russia for "not fulfilling the Minsk agreement" and the west has since bound the sanctions on Russia to this fake conclusion.

The National Bank of Ukraine announced that an independent accountant found that PrivatBank, then owned by the coup financier and billionaire Ihor Kolomoyskiy, was plundered of $5.5 billion shortly before it went bankrupt and nationalized by the coup government. In connection with that an IMF loan of $1.8 billion to the Ukraine allegedly went directly into Kolomoyskiy's pockets. How much of this stolen money was paid to U.S. politicians?

While the anti-Trump politicians and media still fret about "Russian influence" on U.S. social media everyone seems to have forgotten that in early 2016 the Ukraine set up a massive troll farm and a Ministry of Truth. Back then even the U.S. ambassador to the Ukraine disliked that. If every troll tweeting in Russian or with Cyrillic letters in its name is under the direct command of Vladimir Putin where then are those Ukrainians trolls?

—

Back in December I described how the Silicon Valley billionaires Bezos and Omidyar helped the Obama administration to privatize and hide the NSA papers leaked by Edward Snowden. Mintpress now took a deeper look into Omidyar's service to the deep state and his active suppression of financial resources for WikiLeaks.

—

The Turkish military has started to bomb the Afrin (Efrin) canton in north-west Syria. "Free Syrian Army" fighters under Ottoman/Turkish flags stand ready to invade it. The canton is held and administrated by YPK/PKK Kurds. Neither I nor Elijah Magnier nor Joshua Landis had expected that Erdogan would really do this. One wonders what deals have been made with Russia and Syria to allow for this invasion.

There was a plausible rumor yesterday that Syria had offered to send its security forces to protect the Afrin area but that the Kurds rejected that. Now Russia and Syria think that the best way to prevent the announced U.S. protectorate of Kurdish held territory in the north-east is to prove to the Kurds that the U.S. is unwilling to protect them and their brethren in Efrin from Turkish attacks. The Kurds had quite good relations with the Russians and to some extend also with the Syrian government. They then changed sides to get U.S. protection with the intent of splitting up Syria and anbing a big chunk for themselves. "Well, here is your payback. Now you will see what your new "allies" are willing to do for you."

I now expect a rather short fight, minor losses of territory to Erdogan's goons and a lot of bloody noses.

For a few days now Turkey has threatened to invade Afrin (Efrin), a Kurdish held canton in the north-west of Syria.

Afrin (topographic) bigger
yellow – Kurdish control, grey – Turks, red – Syrian government, green – al-Qaeda

The threat is not serious:

• Afrin is mostly mountainous.
• Pictures from Turkey showed (scroll down) the unloading of some tanks near to Afrin but within Turkey. These were old M-60 tanks. They have been slightly upgraded by Israel but can be knocked out by modern Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPG) and certainly by Anti Tank Guided Missiles. (ATMG). These tanks would get slaughtered should they enter the tricky Afrin terrain.
• There are several tens of thousands of Kurdish fighters in Afrin. They are well armed.
• Afrin is under formal protection of Russian and Syrian forces.
• The real danger to Turkey is not Afrin but the much larger Kurdish protectorate the U.S. publicly announced in north-east Syria.

The Turkish threats and its artillery noise have led to counter noise from Syria and more silent advice from Russia.  The Syrian government wants to show that it is the protector of all Syrian citizens be they ethnic Arabs or Kurds. Russia is proud of its role as the grown up who is calming down all sides.

The two real issues the wannabe-Sultan Erdogan has are:

• the upcoming meeting of Syrian opposition and government parties in Sochi and
• the U.S. backing of the PKK/YPG terrorists in north-east Syria.

Russia wanted to invite several Kurdish parties, including the YPG, to the big meeting in Sochi. Turkey rejects any official inclusions of Kurds as a distinct constituency. Russia will fudge the issue by inviting certain personalities of Kurdish ethnic who will take part in their 'private capacities'.

The second issue only came up again because of military bombast at CentCom and some uncoordinated and unsound U.S.  policy:

On Sunday, the U.S.-led military coalition battling Islamic State issued a statement trumpeting the creation of the 30,000-strong “Border Security Force.” But the announcement, which triggered Turkish denunciations, caught officials in Washington off guard. On Wednesday, U.S. officials said the coalition’s declaration was misguided—and the Pentagon issued a statement trying to calm Turkish fears.

“This is not a new ‘army’ or conventional ‘border guard’ force,” the Pentagon statement said.

This was not the first time the Central Command in the Middle East acted in a overtly hawkish and bombastic way without considering the wider strategic impact. Turkey is a  NATO member and to announce the installation of a terrorist force to guard a NATO border from the outside is just nuts. For years now the Pentagon has given way too much leash to CentCom and needs to tighten control over it.

The "border guard" force has now been renamed an internal security force which will also make sure that none of the ISIS fighters in the area, which Washington diligently keeps alive in the Syrian east, will escape across the border to  evade their next assignments.

Yesterday Secretary of State Tillerson announced the official "new" U.S. position on Syria. It is essentially a recap of the position the Obama administration had long held and does not make any more sense:

Speaking in a major Syria-policy address hosted at Stanford University by the Hoover Institution, Tillerson listed vanquishing al-Qaeda, ousting Iran and securing a peace settlement that excludes President Bashar al-Assad as among the goals of a continued presence in Syria of about 2,000 American troops currently deployed in a Kurdish-controlled corner of northeastern Syria.

(The real number of U.S. troops in Syria is around 5,000 soldiers plus an equal number of 'contractors'.)

Other listeners detected even wider ambitions :

The United States has five key goals in Syria, Mr. Tillerson said. They are: ensuring that the Islamic State and Al Qaeda never re-emerge; supporting the United Nations-led political process; diminishing Iran’s influence; making sure the country is free of weapons of mass destruction; and helping refugees to return after years of civil war.

These goals are mutually exclusive. Nothing will happen in the UN process in Geneva as long as anyone insists in removing the Syrian President Assad. Al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria are a consequence of U.S. action and (covered) presence in the country. Iran currently has little presence and limited influence in Syria. It would only increase again  should the U.S. try to militarily attack the Syrian government. Refugees will not return as long as the U.S. threatens to again widen the war.

I have yet to read one analyst who believes that the U.S. administration can achieve any of the wishes it announced. It is a hapless policy of "doing something" which will fail when resistance on the ground will ramp up and the political costs of the occupation will become apparent. The YPG Kurds in the north-east, who agreed to their occupation, will be the ones who will have to to bear the wrath. All other parties involved in Syria will hold them responsible.

For now the new announcement and its botched presentation only helped Erdogan to again play to his crowd. None of this will be of much consequence.

The post I worked on today is unsatisfying.

I'll leave you with your own news & views …

The Trump administration policy in Syria is finally coming into daylight. It has decided to permanently separate north-east of Syria from the rest of Syria with the rather comical idea that this will keep Iranian influence out of Syria and give the U.S. a voice in a final Syrian settlement. This move lacks strategical foresight:

The U.S.-led Coalition against Islamic State is currently training a force to maintain security along the Syrian border as the operation against ISIS shifts focus. The 30,000-strong force will be partly composed of veteran fighters and operate under the leadership of the Syrian Democratic Forces, CJTF-OIR told The Defense Post.
…
“The Coalition is working jointly with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) to establish and train the new Syrian Border Security Force (BSF). Currently, there are approximately 230 individuals training in the BSF’s inaugural class, with the goal of a final force size of approximately 30,000,” CJTF-OIR Public Affairs Officer Colonel Thomas F. Veale said.
…
Veale acknowledged that more Kurds will serve in the areas of northern Syria, while more Arabs will serve in areas along the Euphrates River Valley and along the border with Iraq.

The SDF and the Kurds are under control of the PKK/YPK, a terrorist organization that is nearly daily fighting and killing Turkish forces within Turkey. The Arabs which ostensibly shall seal the area off from the rest of Syria are most likely tribal forces that were earlier aligned with the Islamic State.

The Turks were not consulted before the U.S. move and are of course not amused that a "terrorist gang", trained and armed by the U.S., will control a long stretch of their southern border. Any Turkish government would have to take harsh measures to prevent such a strategic threat to the country:

Cont. reading: Syria – U.S. Traps Itself , Commits To Occupation, Helps To Sustain The Astana Agreement

What was behind the false missile attack alarm in Hawaii yesterday. Poynter has some context:

One of the big stories in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser Saturday morning was that military "brass" updated island officials on how the military would respond to a nuclear attack from North Korea. Military authorities warned there was a "real" threat.

At 8:07 a.m. Saturday, Hawaiian residents saw a terrifying alert message on their phones.

It took 38 minutes to correct the "mistake". A missile from North Korea would take 32-35 minutes from launch to impact in Hawaii.

But of interest is the newspaper report hyping the "threat" followed by the false alarm. Coincidence? And the "leaking" of the Draft Nuclear Posture Review this week, in which the military demands hundreds of new "small" nuclear weapons to fight North Korea and Russia, is also just a coincidence? Or is all of this part of a public relation campaign designed to increase the acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare? A preparation for war on North Korea? (Related: Deconstructing the North Korean ‘Threat’ and Identifying America’s Strategic Alternatives (pdf))

Anyway – here are the Moon of Alabama posts of the last week.

Jan 8 – How Mainstream Media Lose Their Reputation – #Fakenews On Iran And Egypt

Jan 9 – Afghanistan – U.S. Special Forces Commit Drive-By Murder (Video)

The reaction to this scoop was quite interesting:

I was criticized for using the word "murder" in the headline even though it is not clear what happened after the gunshot at the truck driver. Well, it is a headline and such have a certain purpose. How do we know this incident did not end deadly? Shooting the driver of a 15 ton truck which is rolling at a decent speed is at least accepting the risk of a deadly accident or even the attempt to cause one. What would a prosecutor accuse the culprit of if such had happened on a U.S. highway?

Only on Friday, after other mainstream media had published about it, did the NYT come out with a piece on the issue. It made several wrong or misleading points. I asked if it was plagiarized from my content as it used several sources that had vanished shortly after I published on January 9. I was told that the NYT had the material since late December but that the piece was held back for unknown reasons. Holding back stuff that lets the U.S.  military or the government look bad seems to be standing NY Times policy.

My tweet announcing my above piece was censored in Germany after someone had contacted Twitter and alleged that its content was illegal. This is a consequence of new law the lunatic social-democratic justice minister Maas had pressed for. Twitter would risk a high fine in Germany if it would not block allegedly illegal stuff. The law is a perfect tool for trolls to suppress any author or content they dislike. (It is also obviously unconstitutional and will soon be discarded by the relevant courts.)

Jan 10 – Syria – Army Gains In Idleb – Insurgents To Challenge Foreign Occupiers

Jan 11 – Syria – Erdogan (Again) Switches Sides – Delivers New Supplies For Terrorist Attacks

Jan 13 – Syria – Volume of Al-Qaeda Propaganda Forecasts Syrian Army Success

Two important Syria pieces by William Van Wagenen had earlier escaped my attention. Both take a long term view back and are well founded, quoting from a large number of media reports. They are:

• Is There a Western Plot to Overthrow Assad?
• There is No FSA, There is Only Al-Qaeda.

These are excellent reference pieces one should recommend to people who were deceived on Syria or have not followed the issue at all. Both are recommended readings.

Please use the comments as open thread …

The success of the current Syrian government operations against al-Qaeda in Idleb governorate can be measured by the volume of U.S. propaganda against it. A similar situation occurred when Aleppo was liberated from al-Qaeda's control. Certain U.S. media, (non-)government-organizations and politicians obviously prefer Takfiri al-Qaeda rule in Syria over control by the legitimated secular government.

According to the various streams of such propaganda Idleb is crowded with hospitals, bakeries and little children who all get "barrel bombed" by the nefarious Iranians and Russians while no Takfiri militant can ever be seen.

Amnesty International, which famously begged "NATO: KEEP THE PROGRESS GOING" in Afghanistan, is again on the forefront:

Amnesty International‏ @amnesty – 3:41 PM – 12 Jan 2018
We’re outraged by the attacks on civilians in #Idlib governorate which hosts thousands of internally displaced people from across #Syria. They now have nowhere else to flee to anymore.

The tweet is decorated with a picture of al-Qaeda's first aid mercenaries, the White Helmets, who are paid by the British and other governments and receive propaganda cover from British media.

The overpaid (more than $450,000 pa) eternal leader of Human Rights Watch, Ken Roth chips in:

Kenneth Roth @KenRoth – 11:47 PM – 12 Jan 2018
Putin-Assad fooled Great Negotiator Trump into believing Syrian "de-escalation zone" would mean a halt in attacks on civilians rather than just a lull to regroup.

Roth links to a Washington Post editorial which finds that fighting al-Qaeda in Idleb is not in the interest of the United States:

Cont. reading: Syria – Volume of Al-Qaeda Propaganda Forecasts Syrian Army Success

Turkey, in line with U.S. services, decided to block the current Syrian advance in south-east Idleb. Yesterday an ad-hoc alliance of jihadi "rebels" launched a counteroffensive to stop the Syrian army from cutting off a big chunk of "rebel" held territory in east-Idleb.

The Syrian army attack

bigger

The area of the "rebel" counterattack (green)

bigger

The Turkish and U.S. supplied "rebels" (see below) made a few local advances capturing some 12 villages of the 150 villages the Syrian army had recently liberated. They were soon beaten back. Some 50 Ahrar al-Sham fighters were killed or wounded after they ran into a trap. Some 10 Syrian soldiers have been captured by the enemy. Syrian and Russian air support is very active in the area and the Syrian army is again moving forward.

There is no mention or picture (yet) of al-Qaeda in Syria, currently labeled HTS, taking part in the "rebel" counterattack. Four days ago HTS published photos of its leader Joulini meeting with his military commanders to assess the situation. It looked bad for them. The squabble with other "rebels" increased. Two days ago Jouliani issued a statement that HTS would stop fighting other factions in Idleb to enable all to confront the advancing Syrian government forces. It seems that this was a condition for the renewed Turkish/U.S. support.

The counteroffensive could only proceed because Turkey (again) delivered hundreds of tons of weapons to the jihadis. New supplies of TOW anti-tank missiles, distributed exclusively by the CIA, have also been seen. (Turkey is also again supplying jihadists in Libya. The Greek navy just caught a ship going from Turkey to Libya with 29 containers full of bomb precursors, detonators and other bomb making parts.)

Here are some relevant tweets from the last few hours:

Cont. reading: Syria – Erdogan (Again) Switches Sides – Delivers New Supplies For Terrorist Attacks

While the U.S. seems to have given up on regime change in Syria it is still trying to sabotage the progress of the Syrian government and its allies.

The recent drone attack on the Russian base Khmeimim in Latakia is just one example. Thirteen sophisticated armed drones with a reach of some 100 kilometers attacked the base at the same time as a U.S. electronic warfare plane was circling off the Syrian coast. The attack was unsuccessful. Russia has sophisticated electronic warfare means and hijacked the command over six of the drones. The other seven were taken down by Russian air defenses.

To claim, as the U.S. does, that ISIS or some "rebels" did this is nonsense. ISIS has made short range weaponized drones flown by remote control in line of sight mode. This attack was by autonomous drones using GPS and barometric sensors to find their way to their targets. This is qualitatively on a whole new level. I doubt that Russia will let this go unanswered. Look out for some "mishap" that may soon hit some U.S. troops or interests abroad.

Three significant military operations took place over the last few weeks.

bigger

Cont. reading: Syria – Army Gains In Idleb – Insurgents To Challenge Foreign Occupiers

Updated below – Jan 11 2018

Additional updated – May 18 2018
—

A recent video mashup provided by some U.S. Special Force soldiers in Afghanistan seems to show evidence of a warcrime.

A military truck passes a civilian truck on a paved road at normal traveling speed. A soldier fires directly and intentionally at the driver of the civilian truck without any discernible reason.

This is the relevant two second long cut (repeated 5 times) from a private video mix of scenes taken during the last few months in Afghanistan.

The whole video is 3:09 minutes long and mostly a mashup of juvenile behaving soldiers wasting lots of ammunition on invisible entities in the Afghan landscape. The scene above is from 19 to 21 seconds into the video. Detailed screenshots are below. The whole clip was available on Youtube on January 7. The account which originally posted it and the original video have since been deleted.

Cont. reading: Afghanistan – U.S. Special Forces Commit Drive-By Murder (Video)

The "western" media like to rant against fake news. But they are indeed the biggest provider of such.

Yesterday the British news agency Reuters claimed: Iran bans English in primary schools after leader's warning

DUBAI (Reuters) – Iran has banned the teaching of English in primary schools, a senior education official said, after the country’s Supreme Leader said early learning of the language opened the way to a Western “cultural invasion”.

Kamenei indeed has made such a remark, early learning of a foreign language opens the people to influence through that language. That conclusion is not particular controversial. But has Iran really banned the teaching of English in primary schools? Why would any non-English country teach English in primary school in the first place? And why would especially Iran do so?

Ali Ahmadi, an Iranian analyst, asked the same question:

Who in Iran studied English in primary schools? Nat curriculum calls for English to be taught from 7th grade to graduation.

The British-Iranian journalist Sanam Shantyaei offers her personal experience:

I was in Iran until 5th grade, and I don’t recall being taught neither Arabic nor English (though that’s a long long time ago.) I picked up a little in private tutorials: “the elegant is big. The ant is little.”

Ahmadi confirms:

Yes 7th grade is the norm. They don't even start teaching Arabic usually until 6th grade – except for a little in context of religion classes.

So, according to Reuters, Iran "banned" something from its school curriculum that was not and is not in there. The Reuters piece quotes an Iranian official who does not confirm what Reuters alleges:

“Teaching English in government and non-government primary schools in the official curriculum is against laws and regulations,” Mehdi Navid-Adham, head of the state-run High Education Council, told state television late on Saturday.

The official only confirms that the official curriculum is binding. As English language is not in the official primary school curriculum it can not be taught as part of that curriculum. It is banal statement: "Yes, the relevant regulations apply as the always have applied." How Reuters can construe that into a new "ban" is beyond me.

But as most readers will only skim the headlines and probably the first sentence of such pieces the British agency will have achieved the intended anti-Iranian propaganda effect.

Another piece of fake news is a recent New York Times report about an alleged Egyptian acceptance of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital. It is based on some mysterious tapes in which an alleged Egyptian government intelligence agent tells TV moderators what they are supposed to say about Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital.

The story is headlined: Tapes Reveal Egyptian Leaders’ Tacit Acceptance of Jerusalem Move

Cont. reading: How Mainstream Media Lose Their Reputation – #Fakenews On Iran And Egypt