Is Turkey the Real ISIS?
by Brandon Turbeville , Activist Post The Syrian crisis has just seen a drastic escalation in the potential for what could essentially turn...
The Syrian crisis has just seen a drastic escalation in the potential for what could essentially turn into World War 3 with the Turkish military’s downing of a Russian jet over Syria under the guise of protecting Turkish airspace.
The Turks have argued that the Russian jet violated Turkish airspace, a claim which the Russians deny.
While some evidence exists suggesting that the plane was indeed within Turkish airspace (only 9 seconds worth of traveling time if the coordinates are indeed correct), the Russian Defense Ministry has stated that:
“We are looking into the circumstances of the crash of the Russian jet. The Ministry of Defense would like to stress that the plane was over the Syrian territory throughout the flight.”At this point, the Russians are responding with cool and level heads.
But, if the evidence available suggests that the jet was indeed safely within Syrian air space, it is unclear what repercussions face the Turks … but there will undoubtedly be repercussions.
Reports suggest that death squad fighters on the ground began firing at the soldiers on their way down, suggesting that the dead Russian soldier may have been killed before he ever reached the ground.
The status of the other pilot is not yet confirmed but it is clear that the jihadists have either killed, captured, or are intent on doing both to him in the very near future.
Russian President Vladmir Putin has since labeled the downing of the jet as a “stab in the back by accomplices of terrorism” and that is exactly what it is.
Now, an emergency meeting of NATO has been called by Turkey.
“The aim of this extraordinary NAC meeting is for Turkey to inform allies about the downing of a Russian airplane,” said Carmen Romero, NATO’s deputy spokesperson.
Turkey’s actions come as Russian and Syrian forces continue their march across Northern Syria and Aleppo and as terrorist targets in places like Raqqa are finally being destroyed from the air.
While the attack on the Russian jet shows, to some extent, the lengths to which NATO and particularly Turkey’s Erdogan will go to defend and support ISIS terrorists, we have now entered frightening new territory when NATO is willing to risk nuclear war over geopolitical interests and Neolithic savages in Syria.
Turkey’s Support For Terror
Turkey’s undying support for ISIS and other related terror organizations should also be given honorable mention in the discussion of the possibility of war between the Russian and NATO alliance since it was Turkey who has attempted to fire the first shot of World War 3.
Turkey has long been known as one of the most fervent supporters of terror in Syria since the beginning of the crisis.
It has consistently allowed its territory to be used as a staging ground for ISIS, Nusra, and others to enter Syria for the purpose of destroying the secular government of Bashar al-Assad.
Dr. Nafeez Ahmed has recently summed up many (but certainly not all) of the Turks’ connection to ISIS in his recent article for Insurge Intelligence, “NATO Is Harbouring The Islamic State,” when he writes,
"President Hollande wants European Union leaders to suspend the Schengen Agreement on open borders to allow dramatic restrictions on freedom of movement across Europe.
He also demands the EU-wide adoption of the Passenger Name Records (PNR) system allowing intelligence services to meticulously track the travel patterns of Europeans, along with an extension of the state of emergency to at least three months.
Under the extension, French police can now block any website, put people under house arrest without trial, search homes without a warrant, and prevent suspects from meeting others deemed a threat.
Mass surveillance at home and endless military projection abroad are the twin sides of the same coin of national security, which must simply be maximized as much as possible.
Conspicuously missing from President Hollande’s decisive declaration of war however, was any mention of the biggest elephant in the room: state-sponsorship.
Syrian passports discovered near the bodies of two of the suspected Paris attackers, according to police sources, were fake, and likely forged in Turkey.
Earlier this year, the Turkish daily Today’s Zaman reported that “more than 100,000 fake Turkish passports” had been given to ISIS. Erdogan’s government, the newspaper added, “has been accused of supporting the terrorist organization by turning a blind eye to its militants crossing the border and even buying its oil… Based on a 2014 report, Sezgin Tanrıkulu, deputy chairman of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) said that ISIL terrorists fighting in Syria have also been claimed to have been treated in hospitals in Turkey.”
This barely scratches the surface. A senior Western official familiar with a large cache of intelligence obtained this summer told the Guardian that “direct dealings between Turkish officials and ranking ISIS members was now ‘undeniable.’”
The same official confirmed that Turkey, a longstanding member of NATO, is not just supporting ISIS, but also other jihadist groups, including Ahrar al-Sham and Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria.
“The distinctions they draw [with other opposition groups] are thin indeed,” said the official. “There is no doubt at all that they militarily cooperate with both.”
In a rare insight into this brazen state-sponsorship of ISIS, a year ago Newsweek reported the testimony of a former ISIS communications technician, who had travelled to Syria to fight the regime of Bashir al-Assad.
The former ISIS fighter told Newsweek that Turkey was allowing ISIS trucks from Raqqa to cross the “border, through Turkey and then back across the border to attack Syrian Kurds in the city of Serekaniye in northern Syria in February.” ISIS militants would freely travel “through Turkey in a convoy of trucks,” and stop “at safehouses along the way.”
The former ISIS communication technician also admitted that he would routinely “connect ISIS field captains and commanders from Syria with people in Turkey on innumerable occasions,” adding that “the people they talked to were Turkish officials… ISIS commanders told us to fear nothing at all because there was full cooperation with the Turks.”
In January, authenticated official documents of the Turkish military were leaked online, showing that Turkey’s intelligence services had been caught in Adana by military officers transporting missiles, mortars and anti-aircraft ammunition via truck “to the al-Qaeda terror organisation” in Syria.
There is no “self-sustaining economy” for ISIS, contrary to the fantasies of the Washington Post and Financial Times in their recent faux investigations, according to Martin Chulov of the Guardian. As a senior ISIS member recently revealed to him:
“They need the Turks. I know of a lot of cooperation and it scares me. I don’t see how Turkey can attack the organization too hard. There are shared interests.”
Meanwhile, NATO leaders feign outrage and learned liberal pundits continue to scratch their heads in bewilderment as to ISIS’ extraordinary resilience and inexorable expansion.
Some officials have spoken up about the paradox, but to no avail. Last year, Claudia Roth, deputy speaker of the German parliament, expressed shock that NATO is allowing Turkey to harbour an ISIS camp in Istanbul, facilitate weapons transfers to Islamist militants through its borders, and tacitly support IS oil sales.
Instead, Turkey has been amply rewarded for its alliance with the very same terror-state that wrought the Paris massacre on 13th November 2015. Just a month earlier, German Chancellor Angela Merkel offered to fast-track Turkey’s bid to join the EU, permitting visa-free travel to Europe for Turks.
In his testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee in September 2014, General Martin Dempsey, then chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, was asked by Senator Lindsay Graham whether he knew of “any major Arab ally that embraces ISIL”?
General Dempsey replied:
“I know major Arab allies who fund them.
In other words, the most senior US military official at the time had confirmed that ISIS was being funded by the very same “major Arab allies” that had just joined the US-led anti-ISIS coalition.
These allies include Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, and Kuwait in particular — which for the last four years at least have funneled billions of dollars largely to extremist rebels in Syria.
No wonder that their anti-ISIS airstrikes, already miniscule, have now reduced almost to zero as they focus instead on bombing Shi’a Houthis in Yemen, which, incidentally, is paving the way for the rise of ISIS there.
ISIS, in other words, is state-sponsored — indeed, sponsored by purportedly Western-friendly regimes in the Muslim world, who are integral to the anti-ISIS coalition.
Which then begs the question as to why Hollande and other Western leaders expressing their determination to “destroy” ISIS using all means necessary, would prefer to avoid the most significant factor of all: the material infrastructure of ISIS’ emergence in the context of ongoing Gulf and Turkish state support for Islamist militancy in the region.
There are many explanations, but one perhaps stands out: the West’s abject dependence on terror-toting Muslim regimes, largely to maintain access to Middle East, Mediterranean and Central Asian oil and gas resources.
Tony Cartalucci has also written extensively about Turkish connections to ISIS such as in his article “Implausible Deniability: West’s ISIS Terror Hordes In Iraq,”
Beginning in 2011 – and actually even as early as 2007 – the United States has been arming, funding, and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and a myriad of armed terrorist organizations to overthrow the government of Syria, fight Hezbollah in Lebanon, and undermine the power and influence of Iran, which of course includes any other government or group in the MENA region friendly toward Tehran.
Billions in cash have been funneled into the hands of terrorist groups including Al Nusra, Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), and what is now being called “Islamic State in Iraq and Syria” or ISIS.
One can see clearly by any map of ISIS held territory that it butts up directly against Turkey’s borders with defined corridors ISIS uses to invade southward – this is because it is precisely from NATO territory this terrorist scourge originated.
ISIS was harbored on NATO territory, armed and funded by US CIA agents with cash and weapons brought in from the Saudis, Qataris, and NATO members themselves. The “non-lethal aid” the US and British sent including the vehicles we now see ISIS driving around in.
Cartalucci states in a separate article, “NATO’s Terror Hordes In Iraq A Pretext For Syria Invasion,”
In actuality, ISIS is the product of a joint NATO-GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] conspiracy stretching back as far as 2007 where US-Saudi policymakers sought to ignite a region-wide sectarian war to purge the Middle East of Iran’s arch of influence stretching from its borders, across Syria and Iraq, and as far west as Lebanon and the coast of the Mediterranean.
ISIS has been harbored, trained, armed, and extensively funded by a coalition of NATO and Persian Gulf states within Turkey’s (NATO territory) borders and has launched invasions into northern Syria with, at times, both Turkish artillery and air cover.
The most recent example of this was the cross-border invasion by Al Qaeda into Kasab village, Latakia province in northwest Syria.
Cartalucci was referring to a cross-border invasion that was coordinated with NATO, Turkey, Israel, and the death squads where Israel acted as air force cover while Turkey facilitated the death squad invasion from inside its own borders.
Keep in mind also that, prior to the rapid appearance and seizure of territory by ISIS in Syria and Iraq, European media outlets like Der Spiegel reported that hundreds of fighters were being trained in Jordan by Western intelligence and military personnel for the purpose of deployment in Syria to fight against Assad.
The numbers were said to be expected to reach about 10,000 fighters when the reports were issued in March, 2013.
Although Western and European media outlets would try to spin the operation as the training of “moderate rebels,” subsequent reports revealed that these fighters were actually ISIS fighters. Those fighters were ultimately funneled into Syria via Turkey.
In addition, on October 2, 2014, Turkey’s parliament passed a resolution to allow the Turkish military to enter the sovereign territory of Iraq and Syria under the pretext of battling Western-backed IS militants.
The resolution also allowed foreign troops to use Turkish territory for the same purpose suggesting that the Incirlik air base may soon be used by the United States for its airstrikes against Syria.
Only recently, it was reported by Turkish media that a formal agreement was reached between the United States and Turkey for the use of Incirlik in the faux American campaign against ISIS.
The vote on the resolution regarding foreign troops on Turkish soil (to be used in Syria) was 298 in favor of the motion and 98 opposed.
Turkey’s Real Enemy – The Assad Government
Despite its claims that the vote was centered around defeating ISIS on its borders, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan, perhaps inadvertently, admitted that the real target of NATO aggression is the Syrian government.
As the BBC reports:
“Speaking in parliament earlier on Wednesday, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan urged the West to find a long-term solution to the crises in Syria and Iraq, pointing out that dropping “tonnes of bombs” on IS militants would only provide a temporary respite.Turkey has also been front and center in the promotion of Uyghur terrorism in both Syria and Asia as well as other locations.
“While he said “an effective struggle” against IS would be a priority for Turkey, “the immediate removal of the administration in Damascus” would also continue to be its priority.
“Erdogan also called for a “buffer zone” on the Turkey/Syria border – which would be enforced by a no-fly zone – to 'ensure security.'”
Turkey has repeatedly violated Syrian territory and engaged in “limited” military action against the Syrian military in support of ISIS terrorists and jihadist connected to some of the hundreds of smaller groups and factions.
Turkey has long advocated for a “No-Fly Zone” over Syria. A buffer zone, of course, has been part of the NATO agenda against Syria since the beginning of the Western-controlled crisis in the country.
Remember, it was under the guise of a humanitarian corridor or buffer zone in Libya, that NATO bombing took place which ultimately led to the destruction of the Libyan government, the murder of Ghaddaffi, and the subsequent expansion of chaos, anarchy, and genocide across the entire North African country.
Turkey, Brookings, and the “Safe Zone”
Indeed, public discussion of the implementation of a “buffer zone” began as far back as 2012 when the Brookings Institution, in their memo “Assessing Options For Regime Change” stated:
An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under Annan’s leadership. This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power.
This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts.
The Brookings Institution went further, however, describing a possible scenario that mirrors the one currently unfolding in Syria where Turkey, in coordination with Israel, could help overthrow Assad by establishing a “multi-front war” on Syria’s borders.
In addition, Israel’s intelligence services have a strong knowledge of Syria, as well as assets within the Syrian regime that could be used to subvert the regime’s power base and press for Asad’s removal.
Israel could posture forces on or near the Golan Heights and, in so doing, might divert regime forces from suppressing the opposition.
This posture may conjure fears in the Asad regime of a multi-front war, particularly if Turkey is willing to do the same on its border and if the Syrian opposition is being fed a steady diet of arms and training.
Such a mobilization could perhaps persuade Syria’s military leadership to oust Asad in order to preserve itself. Advocates argue this additional pressure could tip the balance against Asad inside Syria, if other forces were aligned properly.
As Tony Cartalucci commented in his own article “Turkey Preparing For Syria Occupation?”
Of course, with US airstrikes carving out a vacuum soon to be filled with extremists uncontested by the Syrian Arab Army forced to back off in fear of provoking further Western aggression, the situation will undoubtedly “deteriorate.”
Just as Turkey staged false flag operations along its border last year in attempts to trigger a war with Syria directly, and by supporting terrorists resulting in a predictable humanitarian catastrophe now spilling over into Turkey’ territory, the vacuum the US is intentionally creating is meant to be filled with terrorist mercenaries and NATO forces to protect them as the front is inched ever closer to Damascus in the form of a “buffer zone.”
Clearly, the Turkish agenda is not focused on combating ISIS. If it was, the Turks would have long ago sealed their borders with Syria as well as ceased their training and facilitation of terrorist groups flowing into Syria from Turkish territory.
The Turks do not need NATO Buffer Zones to end terrorism within their own country. They need to seal the borders with Syria, immediately cease funding, training, and facilitation of terrorists operating inside Turkish borders alongside a massive sting operation netting and eliminating these organizations.
Turkey would also greatly benefit by backing away from Erdogan, his idiotic policies, and his equally idiotic Islamist government. Turkey must put aside “political Islam” and return to a culture of secular governance. Lastly, Turkey must pursue a reasonable and fair policy toward the Kurds in its Southeast.
Of course, Turkey has sent every signal possible to announce that they intend to stick with the NATO line of destroying the secular government of Bashar al-Assad and replacing it with a government or governments beholden and favorable to Washington and the Anglo-American oligarchy.
Obviously, a “buffer zone” and/or a “no-fly zone,” is tantamount to war and an open military assault against the sovereign secular government of Syria because the implementation of such a zone would require airstrikes against Assad’s air defense systems.
With the establishment of this “buffer zone,” a new staging ground will be opened that allows terrorists such as ISIS and others the ability to conduct attacks even deeper inside Syria.
The Context Of The Russian Jet Incident
Turkey’s most recent actions come as Russian and Syrian forces continue their march across Northern Syria and Aleppo and as terrorist targets in places like Raqqa are finally being destroyed from the air.
The SAA is currently poised to cut off a major supply route of ISIS near Kassab in the form of the M4 Highway.
According to sources close to some reports:
“The access of Turkish military and terrorists to Latakia province is now 100% dependent on the M4 [highway] and from there to minor roads. Should the terrorist defenses collapse on all positions north of M4, which is not very far from happening, then the Syrian Army will have artillery control over M4 and the terrorist rebel rats inside Latakia province will be doomed.”If NATO does not respond soon, it will be the end for the geopolitical plans of the Anglo-Americans and the end for their trained terrorist monkeys who have raped and beheaded their way across the Middle East.
Thus, NATO is indeed responding by attempting to call Russia’s bluff, an incredibly dangerous and stupid move, and either bully the Russians out of Syria or risk a direct confrontation with them in the process.
While Russia does not appear willing to rush headlong into World War 3 just yet, the question remains how far NATO will escalate the situation before Russia has no alternative.