After the ISIS psyop, the Syrian-Kurdish “homeland”; plus the threat of real terrorists on UK streets

There is a fat, multi-year long trail in alternative media output that all adds up to show how the Islamist and other opposition in Syria are ultimately created and controlled by the military industrial contingent of US corporate-government (and allies). Amongst the Islamist factions are ISIS – an entity entirely invented by the West to provide a pretext for orthodox military intervention. Another Islamist group, al-Nusra (literally al-Qaeda) are openly tolerated by the US, and in the West portrayed as an unfortunate, but yet somehow legitimate contingent of the US’s anti-Assad “Free Syrian Army”. Russian bombing of these characters used to elicit protests from the US – as naturally it would. The truth was that from the very start of the invasion of Syria, America’s mercenaries had two hats, and wore a tidy one for Western consumption as the FSA as heroes, while the work-a-day headgear was that of demented assassin paid to cause chaos. Some observers say, and the author agrees, that there never was a moderate element to the force that the US injected into Syria.

As the conflict nears its end, so it appears that it is harder to conceal the dirty little secret – see for instance the recent Al-Nusra attack in a “de-escalation zone” to nab a party of Russian military police. Russian forces amassed in response to rout the attackers; moreover, the Russians, via Dmitry Peskov, a Kremlin spokesman, declared to the world that the incident had been instigated by the CIA, and to the author’s knowledge the US hasn’t bothered to deny it. But this is small change. The Russians have also now provided what is perhaps the best proof yet of US collusion with ISIS: aerial photography of a special forces forward operating base (or something like it) in ISIS-held territory with evidently no fear of let or hindrance. Furthermore, the Russians have noted (and let it be known they had) that in this particular part of Syria – a narrow band along the Euphrates running past Deir ez Zeir and between Syrian Government forces (SAA) and the FSA replacement, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) – there is a notable lack of hostility between the SDF and ISIS. This is highly convenient for the SDF who are thus rendered able to rush to occupy oil wells in ISIS territory ahead of government forces.

Events that followed these Russian observations only reinforced the impression that, effectively, ISIS is the SDF, and ISIS is also US special forces. Of course, such information should be of especial interest to the population of the UK who are told that, as they become increasingly frequent, whenever there is a “terror attack” that it has been perpetrated by ISIS. And this is why, hot on the heels of yet another incident that stinks to high heaven (Parsons Green looks like the ultimate state terror hoax – even the patsy might not really exist) any news that comes out of Syria that would smash the mass delusion installed around the “terror” phenomenon is suppressed.

We don’t have to go much further than this very site to find a small portion of that very large alternative media library documenting the invasion of Syria. In 2015 an article appeared at FBEL in which the author proposed that ISIS wasn’t even a credible military force, but was only something that appeared to be one. ISIS was a psyop. At the time there had been what has become touted as being a game-changing victory when an ISIS siege of Kobani was broken by its Kurdish defenders. General Qassem Soleimani of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps said something that he has recently declared again: that ISIS was facing imminent defeat. It appears to the author that ISIS’s survival in the Syrian theatre has been engineered for certain convenience – and it may yet continue to be.

The model for US intervention was predicted at FBEL back then in 2015 – using the Kurds as cover for US air support (that is in Syria illegally, never forget) that would ultimately target Syrian Government forces. Indeed, there have been instances when the US has attacked the SAA, but generally the strategy apparently became unfeasible thanks to the Russians creating their own de facto no-fly zones. The ability to do this – at least as far as the author is concerned – and make the US, UK and other illegal air forces in Syria virtually redundant must lend itself to the same apparent Russian capacity to knock NATO hardware out of the sky if it’s a cruise missile, and render it dead in the water if it’s a cruise missile firing vessel (as a recent FBEL article discusses). One feels that under normal circumstances, if the US had ever been gifted with an opportunity to have an open aerial shooting match with the Russians then they would have taken it on the assumption that the Russians, understanding themselves to be outgunned and vulnerable, would have backed down and left the skies open to the Americans. Hence one feels that normal circumstances don’t apply.

Also suffering from Russian ownership of the air was the US plan to have its “rebels” pour into territory previously occupied by ISIS – like hot metal into lost-wax mould. In actual fact, this is largely what has happened to an extent in the east where this strategy is really going to play out going forward under the guise of a Kurdish territorial entity, but we can be sure that the SAA, having been rampant under Russian-controlled skies, have had much more success than the Americans would have liked. Undoubtedly, the performance of the SAA has been the primary factor in making the mask that hides US-SDF-ISIS collusion slip, as the revival of Syrian government fortunes had to be contended with in a race for territory.

The big implication from all the data is that the SDF clearly isn’t all that it seems, and this is important in the context of what clearly appears to be a ruse to carve Syrian territory out as part of a supposed Greater Kurdistan. The author believes that we are going to find out that Kurdish independence is nothing to do with a national homeland, but cover for creating a US launching pad from which to further destabilise Syria and conduct war upon it (with Iran to follow).

When one rereads the FBEL article on ISIS as a psyop abovementioned, one finds reference to 2012 reports in which witnesses attest to the FSA leadership being comprised of Iraqis. Evidently these were al-Qaeda – from across the border, and the infamous Anbar Province. The reader might also notice the detail in the article about the lifting of the siege of Kobani. It was actually achieved by Iraqi Kurdish peshmerga fighters that joined the fight against ISIS in Syria after the Turks let them cross their territory. Now, we are told that the SDF leadership is largely Kurdish: “mostly composed of, and militarily led by, the People’s Protection Units (YPG), a mostly Kurdish militia” – although Wikipedia then goes on to state that as much as 60% of the personnel are Arabs. If you follow the Wiki link for the YPG, you discover that this is the group who fought at Kobani, and it is supposed to be comprised of fighters from within Syrian borders. And yet we can’t help but notice that the “YPG” magically start to go on an offensive after Kobani, and after previously only being able to guard Syrian-Kurdish areas. Can we assume that this fighting force’s ranks were engorged by Iraqis so that it was then capable of mounting offensive operations? Therefore what right would this group have in carving out a piece of Syria as part of a Kurdish state? Now consider the 60% Arab contingent of the SDF. The fact that there is an Arab component in the SDF suggests that it’s not really just about a Kurdish homeland – although the author senses from his reading around the subject that the SDF Arabs are worried about being betrayed. As far as these people being Syrian – when one starts looking into these groups one finds out where the FSA has melted away to – into the SDF – and any insistence that SDF Arab leadership comes from Syria should be taken with a pinch of salt. Reports such as the one that goes under the title “SDF to Arab villagers: Join us or leave” speak for themselves. That Syrian Arabs are being pressed into the SDF probably suggests that their leadership does not come from amongst them.

So much for the real nature of the SDF and its role in the war: a fake Syrian-Kurdish liberation movement fighting a fake Islamist threat – with an “oppressive” Syrian regime in Damascus that the Islamists and “moderates” are in actuality both aimed at. As stated above, clearly the plan is to fool Western electorates into supporting a future adventure in which orthodox national forces – those that tax dollars pay for – are used to defend a Kurdish homeland in Syria that isn’t really one. It’s an American plan, undoubtedly, and it would be saleable to an emotional American and general Western public that likes its corporate-media and gate-keeping big alternative media†. We already have Infowars, which might as well broadcast out of the Pentagon or Langley, selling the idea of Turkey committing genocide against the “Kurds” alongside the Cult of Trump and the usual snakeoil. The story is about reaction to what looks like a completely bogus referendum held in Iraqi-Kurd territory (and parts of Iraq currently occupied by “Kurdish forces”) where a dubiously high number of people have voted “Yes”.

The question of ultimate leadership of the SDF is the one we need to pursue in order confirm all our suspicions. Frankly, the data points to the Americans. We already knew about cases where they have been caught airlifting ISIS personnel out of tricky situations (see here and here) to spare both them and the SDF. Famously there was the large scale extraction from Mosul so that ISIS could move to the defence of Palmyra, and there has been a similar movement from Raqqa – which can be interpreted as an effort to deal with the SAA’s liberation of Deir ez Zeir. Here is an account of yet another example – this time an escape from Manbij. All of this strongly suggests who it is that is organising the battlefield so that ISIS is managed precisely to be a token against the SDF, and an obstacle against the SAA.

In another development that illustrates the level of inter-operability amongst all of the US ground troops, proxy or otherwise, the Russians, who along with the Syrians, are now bumped up right against the Euphrates in the vicinity of Dei res Zeir and were able to get aerial reconnaissance imagery of ISIS territory thereabouts. This revealed the apparent collusion mentioned at the top of this article – the reader can read about it in full by following this link. After this incident a Russian general was killed by mortar fire out of ISIS territory – which is the story that the Russians told the world. But analysts think it was too lucky a shot not to have been based on intelligence or equipment that ISIS couldn’t have had (moreover, there is understanding that a US statement regarding upgraded monitoring of Russian troops was tantamount to an admission). Russia apparently responded by bombing what it called ISIS targets, but strangely the SDF complained that it was on the receiving end of this assault. The Russians denied this, and at the same time made a pointed comment that they had not registered “any engagements between SDF militants and IS terrorists rearward… that specifically relates to the area of hydrocarbon fields in the province, where the militants fiercely resist the advancing Syrian troops.” The implication is that the SDF has left off fighting ISIS so that ISIS can fight the Syrians. But that’s not even the half of it: if Russia hits ISIS, but the SDF makes the noise out of pain, then the SDF is ISIS.

Now consider the following, which is a May 2016 bulletin from the invaluable SouthFront.org:

Reports confirm that US special operation forces are participating in the clashes against the ISIS terrorist groups, de-facto, spearheading the Kurdish forces. They wear  YPG/YPJ patches, in an alleged attempt to hide the fact of their presense (sic).

Please go and see the images. Are these people taking orders off of a Saddam-era Iraqi al-Qaeda officer? Not a chance. A UK audience in the midst of the times it finds itself in should be interested in this because their own version of psychopathic “soldier” are never ever far away from the American one. In August 2016 reports appeared in corporate-media of SAS at Al Tanaf base. This was the place that the SAA rendered redundant by establishing other contact with the Iraqi border, and so the SAS and US special forces based there were evacuated.

The Mirror story linked to above also tells of the SAS in Iraq, so – as we can well imagine – they weren’t just confined to one place in the entire war zone back then, and we can be sure that they aren’t now. Are they in the vicinity of Deir es Zeir amongst the SDF? Probably. And the Establishment can’t help but give the game away regarding their leadership role, as evidenced by an Express article: “British special forces and spy agencies are being sent to Syria to form elite squads to smash the evil Islamic State”. This surely translates into leading the mercenaries that can be recruited – or victims that can be press ganged. Of course, for a long time the real alternative media has been recording the fact of British intelligence agencies and the SAS being involved in creating opposition forces.

The big concern that British people should have is that these enablers of terrorists and invading forces in Syria (they conspired with the RN and RAF to murder civilians in Libya too) are on the streets of their country. In latest accounts, SAS are disguised as street sweepers or homeless – armed, of course. To what extent the particular modus operandi is real, we should probably fear the worst and suspect that there really are undercover war criminals patrolling the streets of Britain; put there using the same methodology that sees them in Syria: the fake war on terror. As in Syria, in Britain they are on the streets to “guard against ISIS” –- a phony instrument of state craft that the US/UK government directly operates. Therefore they are on the streets as an enemy force pointed at the British people – making the Syrians and Russians our allies. Britons should hope that their allies do all the fighting that needs to be done.

† The usual suspects give this more traction today at Breitbart: “Bolton: U.S. Should Support Independence for Kurds, ‘State of Iraq as We Have Known It Doesn’t Exist Anymore’”. The Iraqi state would not agree – but what matters its sovereignty? Lots of the commenters under the article don’t seem to remotely understand the issue and its ramifications – thus proving the point made in this article that, already gullible, and also caught up in the Cult of Trump as it is, a good deal of the American public will buy the baloney.