Declassified DIA document shows US supported founding of ISIS, supports Trump policies

US did indeed support the founding of ISIS

By Don Hank

I just now dug up an older article from Zero Hedge that is more relevant today than ever because it shows that the US was one of the supporters of ISIS and it also contains confessions of the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) that they support the same pro-terrorist policies that Trump is now putting in place – even as he pretends to oppose ISIS. The fact is, anyone opposed to Assad wants Syria to be controlled by US-supported terrorists. Ask any Syrian Christian.

“Safe havens” are suggested in areas conquered by Islamic insurgents along the lines of the Libyan model (which translates to so-called no-fly zones as a first act of ‘humanitarian war’; see 7.B.)

One of the first foreign policy ideas floated by Trump was “safe zones” ie, no-fly zones. This is the US’s first step to ousting a national leader, as the US did with Ghadaffi, using extreme violence. Trump was preparing the way for removing Assad, the only Syrian leader sincerely fighting ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Syria. I keep getting infantile emails trying to show that Trump really wants peace but that the deep state is standing in his way.

However, this notion is contradicted by things he said even during his campaign. For ex, while he promised not to interfere in Syria, he also stressed repeatedly that the US must build up its armed forces so that “no one will ever mess with us again.” But there were only 2 countries that had superpower-grade military forces that would require more US military might and they were Russia and China. There would not have been any need to build up to take on, say, Iran or N Korea. Therefore, he was most likely thinking about Russia in Syria. To him, despite his intention to be friendly with Russia, that country was “messing with” the US by bombing “our” terrorists in Syria and thereby protecting Assad. He thought that, because of his popularity among patriots, he could get away with this.

He also said in his speech before AIPAC in 2016:

“When I’m president, I will adopt a strategy that focuses on three things when it comes to Iran. First, we will stand up to Iran’s aggressive push to destabilize and dominate the region.”

Woa! Iran, via its army and Hezbollah (declared a terror group by the Neocon Establishment, hoping you were not very smart), was fighting terror in Syria. Only a member of the Deep State establishment – or a deeply disturbed person – would call that “destabilizing the region.” It is a contradiction in terms to say that fighting Al-Qaeda – the group that killed 3000 of us on 9-11 2001 – plus ISIS is a destabilizing action. Only rank Neocons say this. Trump was a Neocon at heart even then and we should have seen that. The goal is a confrontation with Russia, which the article below says the US hoped to be friends with while ousting Assad. Indeed Trump’s secretary of state Rex Tillerson naively tried in his visit to Moscow to persuade the leadership there to back away from Assad based on the groundless accusation that Assad had ordered the use of Sarin gas against his own people at Khan Sheikhoun. It failed then (whereupon Israel assumed its role as proxy) and will always fail. Anyone who knows Putin’s modus operandi knows he is determined to see the US-dominated unipolar world give way to a more fairly distributed power balance, ie, the multipolar world where each nation asserts its sovereign right to self-determination without consulting Washington.

He also said during his campaign that Edward Snowden should be jailed, even though this whistleblower is popular among conservatives, libertarians and many other patriots including Trump supporters, and Snowden’s revelations were helpful in getting Trump elected. Only a sympathizer with the Deep State would rail so bitterly against Snowden. Trump knew which of our buttons to press but his heart was never with us and he was never truly anti-Establishment.

Ominously, in the above-referenced campaign speech to AIPAC, Trump repeated the lie that Iran is the biggest state sponsor of terror – even though Shiite Iran not only has never supported the SUNNI terrorists of Taliban, Al-Qaeda or ISIS and is in fact fighting the latter two in Syria that the US pretends to be fighting. (let me remind you again: it would be theologically impossible for a Shiite country like Iran to support the 100% Sunni terror (ISIS, Al-Qaeda and offshoots such as Al-Nusra). The truth is that the US and Saudi Arabia have always been the biggest terror supporters by far, and the US’s shameful role is confirmed by the below linked article. Trump’s pronouncements sounded like war rhetoric even then, and today we are seeing the anti-Syrian policies expressed early in his presidency.

Keen observers noted these ominous signs, but many supported Trump to prevent Hillary from being elected. Now it is no longer at all clear which of these 2 is the more warlike or the more sympathetic to the Establishment.

So please stop misleading the public into believing that Trump has good intentions but is being thwarted by the Democrats or the Neocons. He himself talked like a Neocon in his campaign. The argument that Trump wants peace but is being hamstrung is the same kind of argument used by Bush supporters to excuse his missteps.

Secondary source and analysis:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-23/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-us-created-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad

Primary source:

https://levantreport.com/2015/05/19/2012-defense-intelligence-agency-document-west-will-facilitate-rise-of-islamic-state-in-order-to-isolate-the-syrian-regime/

I had seen in 2014 that the US was the “seat of the Caliphate”

https://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/InspectorSmith/forum/main-forum/topics-of-interest-to-concerned-american-patriots-general-discussion/7542-washington-the-seat-of-the-caliphate-gulag-bound-don-hank

QUOTE:

“Having watched our military policies in action, with the msm sound muted, I have come to an unshakable conviction: there is no hope that the anti-Christian and anti-American leadership of the GOP and Democratic Party in Washington will loosen its grip on power or change its mind and stop supporting terror. No hope whatsoever. If you think there is, you are deluded and contributing to the success of evil. At some point, I believe our military will realize that they are literally fighting a false flag war to destroy America. There is no other way to see it or say it.”

The above linked articles show I was right.

PS:

After sending some of you the wrong link yesterday, I sent you a good link to my article on Putin adviser Sergey Glazyev’s remarks on the collapse of the dollar as a means of eliminating US aggression. The correct link worked yesterday but was gone this a.m. Not to fear. It is now restored. Seems there was some work in progress last night that blocked it temporarily.

Here it is again:

http://laiglesforum.com/putin-adviser-glazyev-us-aggression-can-be-stopped-only-by-ditching-dollar/4183.htm

 

Our fear is killing us

Before we begin today’s commentary, I want you to listen to a part of the below linked video and let me know what you think. This video

https://ccisf.org/videos/

was produced by a group that says it wants to improve US-Russian relations. Start at minute 30 and listen to this man’s suggestions for improving US-Russian relations.

Then please send me your thoughts on the following:

In your opinion, does this man have a sensible idea for how to improve Russian-US relations?

Does he understand Putin, his philosophy and his MO? That is, does he have reasonable expectations for Putin based on what you know about Putin? (I am assuming most of you have read my articles on Putin and Russia here, hereherehere and elsewhere. If not, it would be good to read some of this before responding).

Keep in mind that the group that posted this video has the avowed goal of making Russians and Americans understand each other. Earlier in the video the speaker says he does not like Putin. Do you think the Russian people will sympathize with this man because they too have misgivings about Putin or do you think Russians generally like Putin and will be put off?

I will appreciate your taking the time to respond to at least part of this.

We have various groups that say they want to end war. I wanted you to see what some of these groups are doing so that you can assess their work and their approaches to the problem they are attempting to solve.

I would prefer if you would take the time to provide your answer below at the forum, but you may also write me directly. Thank you!

Don Hank

Now back to today’s business:

Our fear is killing us:

by Don Hank

Let me start off with an anecdote. Today I was walking in our neighborhood with my wife when a young dog, an obviously very playful and gentle female, came up to us and started rearing up and putting its paws on our legs to be petted. I petted its head and fell in love with it right away. But my wife started getting nervous and declared “I’m afraid it will bite us.” What was the source of her irrational fear? She had heard the old myth that if an animal smells your fear, it will attack you. Try as I might, I could not calm her or convince her that this myth does not apply to gentle dogs that do not bite.

This encounter with the gentle dog reminded me of Westerners and their irrational fear of Russia, Assad, Iran, all far-away places that we are supposed to fear and hate and that we are trying to destroy because of the fear ginned up daily by the press and the political class.

The following email from our friend JB is a clue as to why Trump is even more dangerous than GW Bush.

My email correspondent JB, a staunch fiscal conservative with a Master’s from a prestigious university, would agree that the msm are not reliable. But now Trump is president, and Trump is in agreement with the same msm that falsely accused him of being a Kremlin spy, so his followers now suddenly believe the press. This kind of thinking would seem silly to any unbiased rational person. But many Americans do not question the leaders we have chosen. To do so would be embarrassing and make us feel guilty. So we blindly let the tail wag the dog, and pray.

Why do we do this? In fact, both sides focus on their evidence, but this exchange with JB shows that evidence is not the issue here. The real issue is found in the fields of anthropology and mass psychology – that is, the mindset of the average American and what makes him tick.

The most solid evidence that the US citizen lets the tail wag the dog is the fact that after Donald Trump sided 100% with the Establishment, the US people kept siding with him thinking that they were being anti-Establishment. In fact they were now being Trump Establishment, of course. No different from the run-of-the-mill Establishment.
They were in fact suffering from a bad case of group-think, and what they believed to be thought processes were nothing more nor less than a monkey-see-monkey-do slave mentality. They were looking over their shoulders to see what other “anti-Establishment” people were doing and saying, and they were imitating them as best they could – for warmth, the same reason cows huddle together in the winter time. For the most part, they simply let Trump do the leading and switched off their brains. After all, they shallowly reasoned – if it could be called reasoning – since Trump has proven himself as the anti-Establishment leader, then we can trust him (OMG!). Yet Trump had never been a political leader before he began siding with the Establishment that he claimed to oppose. He had been a candidate. Candidates are not leaders. They are just basically car salesmen, some selling decent cars, some selling lemons. They become leaders only once they assume the presidency. But once Trump entered the White House, he almost immediately switched sides and let the Neocon / Neoliberal Establishment lead HIM. Now he is clearly selling lemons and the public is buying them without question.

Tragically, very few noticed this, and aside from a few bloggers like myself, who are not ambitious to land important positions in msm or politics, no one has any interest in exposing the ugly reality. Only by following and supporting a powerful movement can an activist succeed in the West-osphere In fact, let me tell you something personal.

Two writers and activists, who purport to be in favor of getting along with the Russians recently contacted me and complimented me on my work. But I noted that they only praised me for forwarding the work of other authors, never my own personal writing. I admit, I am utterly incendiary and no one knows what to do with me (because, while my writing often stings, I carefully document everything I say). Few up and coming Western activists or authors would dare quote me (though I often see the ideas expressed at my humble web site finding their way into their writings). Their narrative is that I am too pro-Russian, and on top of that, pro-Assad and, —gasp!—pro-Iran! But our president has commanded us to hate and fear Iran. So I am dangerously out of step and for now they won’t touch me. Eventually, they will cautiously let me know I was right, but only after the current administration has led them over the cliff and it becomes fashionable to disagree with Trump.

Therefore, the legions who are currently following Trump into WW III would not dare express support for my opinions. Not yet.

But who loses here? Is a warmonger who fails to see the risk of provoking a nuclear power not the real danger and not a little guy with no skin in the game who is only trying to warn America of a grave danger?

I guess WW III is no big deal. I have even had close friends tell me that human beings have no business trying to prevent wars using reason because – are you ready? – only God makes wars and only government “experts” are qualified to discuss war-related issues in detail. I kid you not. I have been told that by friends!

This commentary is a hard lesson in American anthropology. And this is one very important reason why more than 50% of Americans now agree with Trump’s attack on the Shayrat airbase, despite the fact that no investigation was conducted – or even called for – by the administration. We watched GW Bush do the same sort of thing in Iraq, we saw it fail catastrophically in the long run, and yet, it is the adrenaline rush, the emotion of the moment, and the desire to please powerful people who are in fact our enemy, that drives us. No rational considerations need apply. So what are the chances now of us shaking off our emotion-induced stupor and realizing that we are buying one more lemon from the car salesman-in-chief du jour? Does America stand a chance? Well, perhaps about as much chance as we have of the FED and Congress spontaneously ending deficit spending before we fall over the debt cliff. America – both official and private – is a creature of habit, and so far shows no sign whatsoever of abandoning ingrained deadly habits. It is my humble conclusion that any change in our thinking must come from outside the country. The US is not yet capable of governing itself.

Giving ISIS a boost, “for the children”

Giving ISIS a big boost “for the children”

by Don Hank

Trump said recently:

“When you kill innocent children, innocent babies — babies! — little babies,” … “that crosses many, many lines. Beyond a red line, many, many lines.”

Let’s see. Was Trump condemning the attacks by terrorists in Syria, as described here?

Or was he talking about the US bombing raids in Mosul, described here?

Did he perhaps read this headline?

‘The house literally collapsed on us’: Mosul airstrikes [by US forces] that killed hundreds of civilians condemned  

He must have because there had to be numerous precious little children among those hundreds of civilians killed by those American weapons of mass destruction known as aerial bombs, right?

Or was he referring to this report?

Mosul’s children were shouting beneath the rubble. Nobody came

Coalition [US coalition] bombs buried more than a hundred people in the ruins of three houses and raised fresh questions about US rules of engagement

Or was it this headline?

UNDER TRUMP, U.S. MILITARY HAS ALLEGEDLY KILLED OVER 1,000 CIVILIANS IN IRAQ, SYRIA IN MARCH

QUOTE: U.S.-led coalition airstrikes in Iraq and Syria may have already killed 1,484 civilians in just Iraq and Syria this month alone, more than three times the number killed in President Barack Obama’s final full month in office

No? He wasn’t saddened and angered by those reports?

Oh, wait. It was an unconfirmed allegation of a chemical attack supposedly committed by Syrian President Bashar Assad, even though Assad had  no  motivation whatsoever for such an attack and there was no evidence to indict Assad. Indeed, following the bombing of a terrorist nest in the area in question, a Russian team discovered a lab in which terrorists had been preparing chemical weapons.

This ties in with a report that chemical weapons were used in Mosul, where the US was bombing. Oddly, that report got little press and no one in the world accused the US or its allies of facilitating the chemical attacks.

Despite the Russian report of this evidence of terrorist involvement in the chemical attack in Syria, no media outlet in the West was interested in the report. Almost in unison, the Western press condemned Assad, thereby clearing the path for Trump’s attack using WMDs known as Tomahawk missiles, which took the lives of heroic ISIS-fighting Syrian pilots, leaving precious children fatherless.

It is important to note that world leaders had called for an investigation into the allegations against Assad, as reported here.

Now a call for an investigation indicates that there is no unanimity as to the cause and perpetrators. Right? And a retaliatory action for something that is clearly not sufficiently investigated is rash and uncalled for, at least if we are to consider ourselves civilized.

Just think. Suppose a witness in court claimed he heard someone say a defendant killed someone. And the judge, before cross examination of the witnesses, before hearing the defendant and his lawyer, before hearing the forensic expert, immediately sentences the defendant to death for murder, even though the suspect had no motive for the murder and there was credible testimony to the effect that someone else who had a motive committed the crime. And this judge, when asked by reporters after the trial why he had not allowed the defendant to defend himself, replied: “I was afraid he’d get away with it. What would that have done to my reputation?”

This absurdity is essentially what his Honor judge Donald J. Trump did on Thursday April 6, 2017, sending 59 weapons of mass destruction to attack an air base in Syria from which heroic pilots and Russian advisors had been flying sorties against terrorists for over a year, risking their lives for the Syrian people and to rid the world of the scourges of civilization called ISIS, and Al-Qaeda and its metamorphoses – groups that Trump himself claimed to oppose. Because Judge Trump, based on no evidence but the opinion of US intel agencies that had falsely condemned him no less, based on false allegations, of being a Russian spy. Now tell me, Folks, did he really believe this intel or was this attack on the sovereign Syrian people something that he had planned perhaps during his campaign, even as he promised us he would not intervene in the Middle East?

Just how intelligent is our intel? Well, some years ago, someone “disappeared” trillions of dollars at the Pentagon, and our brilliant sleuths have not yet identified this person or group and no one can find the money. Yet, a few minutes after learning of a chemical attack in a region in which terrorists are known to use chemical weapons, these same leaders know who committed the attack and it was not the terrorists.

It smells of GW Bush, and back on December 1 of last year, I warned you here of what I suspected was about to come.

Here’s the thing: Trump is a gambling man (after all, he used to build casinos). He gambled on you wanting an anti-Obama. But emails from my readers indicate that this is not quite all you wanted and that many of you will now wake up and stop the cheering.

You see, I remember many of my readers endorsing Trump because they figured Hillary was a warmonger but Trump, who had said he could get along with Putin, would bring about peace on earth, and in fact this image of Trump induced a lot of voters to switch affiliations, some because they feared a confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia.

But Trump may have fatally misjudged his voters. After all, what is anti-Obama to some is not anti-Obama to others. Like the stopped clock that tells the correct time twice a day, Obama did not always do the wrong thing. No one does. Now Obama had returned money that belonged to Iran and had been held in escrow in the US. To some, being anti-Obama would be getting tough on Iran. But softness on Iran was not Obama’s big sin. His big sin was failing to lift a pinky to stop ISIS back when that group was invading Syria and Iraq in broad daylight and its long rows of white machine gun-equipped Toyota pickups presented a perfect target. This inaction allowed the terrorists to infiltrate villages and mingle with civilians, enabling the terrorists to hold them hostage in deadly situations. Many voters were hoping Trump would brook no nonsense from ISIS but would cooperate with Russia to take down these terrorists.

But his choice of a Neocon cabinet did not fit this narrative and it cast doubt on his sincerity to fight the Establishment that had done nothing to stop terror.

In fact, Trump as president kept bad mouthing Iran even though Iran was doing a commendable job of fighting ISIS in Syria. He also told AIPAC that he would stand by Israel. Which is fine if all he meant was that he defended Israel’s right to exist and live in peace. But coinciding with this US attack, Israel is now asking for a buffer zone in Syria. Which is odd. Israel already occupies the Syrian Golan Heights. Many keen observers think they are just grabbing more elbow room, which is their MO.

Now if Americans just simply acquiesce to this illegal and irrational action on the part of the man they elected, he will, like Dubya after the Iraq war, most likely simply stay the course, believing that you support him. The most important mission of every American today is to show you do not support this attack, which provides assistance to ISIS. These terrorists are already feeling their oats and taking full advantage of the cover kindly provided by the administration, as described here.

SYRIA: SOMETHING IS NOT ADDING UP IN IDLIB CHEMICAL WEAPONS ATTACK

White Helmets [this group has already been identified as a fake, as detailed here and here] are handling the corpses of people without sufficient safety gear, most particularly with the masks…as well as no gloves… a doctor in a hospital full of victims of sarin gas has the time to tweet and make video calls.

 

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46801.htm

SYRIA: IT’S WMD ALL OVER AGAIN. WHY DON’T YOU SEE IT?
Two points occur. One, the western power, by consorting with such people, demonstrate that their exaggerated disgust at the Assad government is selective and unreal. Two, they demonstrate that our continuing desire to be on good terms with Saudi Arabia lies beneath our whole foreign policy in this region. And which state loathes President Assad more than anyone? Why, Wahhabi Saudi Arabia, which despises Assad for his Alawite heresy, and hates him for his alliance with Shia Iran.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46812.htm

 

A friend alerted me to a NYT op-ed that is out of keeping with that outlet’s general viewpoint and correctly identifies the source of the problem.

QUOTE: What hardly any Israelis will consider, though, and virtually no influential voices in the West will publicly suggest, is that Israel — not Hezbollah in Lebanon, nor Hamas in Gaza, nor the government of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria — is provoking the next war. Counterintuitive though it may be to Israeli and most Western minds, Israel, not its militant Islamist or brutal Syrian enemies, is the aggressor in these border wars.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/28/opinion/israels-next-war-is-always-inevitable.html?_r=0