Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
MoA
(embedded links)
November 20, 2015
PBS NewsHour Uses Russian Airstrike Footage While Claiming U.S. Airstrike Successes
U.S. media can no agree with itself if Russia is giving ISIS an airforce or if Russia pounds ISIS with the biggest bomber raid in decades. Such confusion occurs when propaganda fantasies collide with the observable reality.
To bridge such divide requires some fudging.
So when the U.S. claims to act against the finances of the Islamic State while not doing much, the U.S Public Broadcasting Service has to use footage of Russian airstrikes against the Islamic State while reporting claimed U.S. airstrike successes.
The U.S. military recently claimed to have hit Islamic State oil tankers in Syria. This only after Putin embarrassed Obama at the G-20 meeting in Turkey. Putin showed satellite pictures of ridiculous long tanker lines waiting for days and weeks to load oil from the Islamic State without any U.S. interference.
The U.S. then claimed to have hit 116 oil tankers while the Russian air force claims to have hit 500. But there is an important difference between these claims. The Russians provided videos showing how their airstrikes hit at least two different very large oil tanker assemblies with hundreds of tankers in each. They also provided video of several hits on oil storage sites and refinery infrastructure.
I have found no video of U.S. hits on Islamic State oil tanker assemblies.
The U.S. PBS NewsHour did not find any either.
In their TV report yesterday about Islamic State financing and the claimed U.S. hits on oil trucks they used the videos Russia provided without revealing the source. You can see the Russian videos played within an interview with a U.S. military spokesperson at 2:22 min.
The U.S. military spokesperson speaks on camera about U.S. airforce hits against the Islamic State. The video cuts to footage taken by Russian airplanes hitting oil tanks and then trucks. The voice-over while showing the Russian video with the Russians blowing up trucks says: "For the first time the U.S. is attacking oil delivery trucks." The video then cuts back to the U.S. military spokesperson.
At no point is the Russian campaign mentioned or the source of the footage revealed.
Any average viewer of the PBS report will assume that the black and white explosions of oil trucks and tanks are from of U.S. airstrikes filmed by U.S. air force planes.
The U.S. military itself admitted that its strikes on IS oil infrastructure over the last year were "minimally effective". One wonders then how effective the claimed strike against 116 trucks really was. But unless we have U.S. video of such strikes and not copies of Russian strike video fraudulently passed off as U.S. strikes we will not know if those strikes happened at all.
Propaganda and reality also collide in the larger U.S. policy on Syria. President Obama claims that the "overwhelming majority of people in Syria" want the Syrian President Assad to leave. But independent British polling in Syria found (pdf) that a strong plurality of Syrians prefers him as president over any of the available alternatives.
And while new research reveals extensive cooperation between NATO member and U.S. ally Turkey and the Islamic State the U.S. is asking for more cooperation with Turkey to shuffle more weapons into the Syria conflict and thereby, inevitably, also to the Islamic State. Some other U.S. allies are likewise deeply involved in financing and equipping the Islamic State.
But Kuwait just arrested a gang that was smuggling weapons from the new U.S. client state Ukraine to the Islamic State. Iraqi military and Shia militia find huge bundles of cash (vid) which were to be smuggled to the Islamic State. How does it come that the otherwise all-seeing (including your emails) U.S. secret services are unable to uncover Islamic State financing and smuggling when smaller states with much less resources can do so?
Does all this sound like the U.S. is really campaigning against the Islamic State? Or is this whole campaign just as fraudulent as the PBS video and Obama's proclamations? Why is the U.S. so deeply lost on the ‘Dark Side’ in Syria?
h/t CHPSTCK
Posted by b
40 comments
03.11.2015 Author: Vladimir Odintsov
ISIS’ Financial Sources
Information published recently by The Independent has revealed that the ISIS terrorist group operating in Iraq and Syria receive substantial funds through a “sophisticated money laundering scheme”. These funds are partly generated by shady transactions carried out in the south of the UK with banking services provided on the phone and the import of cars from England to Africa.
On October 16 this year, The Financial Times told the world about their investigations into ISIS’ financial sources, noting that after more than one year and 10.5 thousand airstrikes since the beginning of the West’s anti-terrorist campaign, the result has been the complete failure of US efforts to undermine the financial income of the terrorist group.
There are many different testimonies regarding the sources of ISIS financing. According to experts, despite the fact that ISIS positions itself as a political and religious organization, in fact, it functions as a criminal organization, and its main sources of income comprise tribute, smuggling, illegal oil sales and other types of crime. It is also mentioned that in Iraq and Syria the organization resorts to bank robberies, kidnapping and extortion after taking hostages as sources of income.
In particular, in June 2014 ISIS gunmen robbed a branch of the Central Bank of Iraq in Mosul, pocketing, according to various estimates, the sum ranging from $900 million to $2 billion dollars. Last week in Mosul, ISIS gunmen captured a branch of the Al-Rafidin bank, and according to witnesses, they drove away with three trucks full of money (the exact amount stolen is unknown, but according to some estimates, ISIS robbed several dozens of USD millions from the bank). In addition, ISIS receives funds from private investors in the Gulf countries, in particular Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, supporting the fight against Bashar Assad’s regime. This is done through Islamic charities, mostly in Qatar, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Thus, a member of Iran’s Majlis (Parliament) Mohammad Saleh Jokar asserts that ISIS has received financial assistance, including from Saudi Arabia, in the amount of USD 4 billion to conduct terrorist activities in Iraq. Now, according to the estimates of some experts, the organization’s budget could reach USD 7 billion, which until recently allowed the terrorist organizations to actively recruit mercenaries to its ranks and to finance various propaganda campaigns.
On February 18, 2015, Mohammed al-Hakim, the representative of Iraq to the United Nations, said that the “Islamic State” has been killing people to sell their organs. According to him, in the mass graves of ISIS victims, bodies of people have been found with signs of surgery. These people were missing kidneys and other internal organs.
ISIS also gains income from drug trafficking. According to Viktor Ivanov, the head of the Federal Drug Control Service in Russia, ISIS’ annual income from the transit of heroin from Afghanistan to Europe is up to one billion dollars.
However, most experts are now inclined to assume that the main source of ISIS’ income is smuggling oil and oil products from the occupied oil fields and refining capacities through Turkish, Kurdish and Jordanian intermediaries. They are sold at the cost 2-3 times lower than the global price. Every day, ISIS receives 3-3.5 million dollars into its budget. The ISIS’ oil business was established as a “National Oil Corporation.” Even warring Syrian rebels do not disdain to purchase ISIS products.
Although the US military continue to report on more and more sorties and attacks on ISIS targets in Iraq and in Syria, in fact, there have been no serious results from these bombings; ISIS oil profits have barely been affected and are now reaching about 500 million dollars a year (or 30-40 barrels per day). This fact alone is a stunning sign of the failure of the US-led fight against ISIS, because there is no serious damage to the terrorists’ financial sources to even speak of.
Against the backdrop of the insignificant damage caused by US air strikes on ISIS, the terrorist group has adapted quickly, delegating the refining process to hundreds of artisanal enterprises, and quickly restoring its minor losses from such activities of the US-led coalition.
Washington’s ineffective measures to cut off ISIS’ oil exports outside the area controlled by the terrorist group did not bring any significant results either: last year ISIS continued to sell oil not only through Turkey, but more recently through the corrupt channels of Kiev authorities in Odessa seaport, as well as through numerous intermediaries in the region.
In addition, ISIS has strengthened its financial position by meeting the needs of the “domestic market”, since ISIS diesel fuel production is in demand not only among the civilian population of Iraq and Syria, but also among rebel groups from the northern regions of the Syrian Arab Republic (SAR), including those formally opposing ISIS. Locals joined this process actively, even those not directly related to ISIS. In view of these circumstances, workflow, logistics, marketing and operational management is well established. In particular, the extent of this “business” is illustrated by the following: at the largest deposits in the Syrian province of Omar al-Hasakah, there is a 6 km long permanent queue of trucks.
The ISIS oil business engages professionals not only from within the region, but also beyond, offering a competitive salary. The Amniyat (ISIS Security Council) provides strict control over oil derricks and product distribution; the oil sector as a whole is on par with other key activities of the terrorist group and under the direct jurisdiction of the “Supreme Council”.
Lack of any radical steps and measures by the West and, above all, the United States to curb ISIS’ oil “business” through Turkey, Ukraine and several other states of the Middle East region, to a certain extent, can be explained by several factors. First of all, the fact that the terrorist organization was “dumping” significant volumes of oil over the past year on the external market is in line with the interests of the White House to use this “tool” to inflict financial loss, first of all, on Russia, whose national budget augmentation is largely dependent on the global oil prices. Therefore, there is little doubt that such ISIS “business” is coordinated from Washington, just as al-Qaeda’s subversive activities against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan were previously coordinated from there as well.
Against the background of the White House’s rhetoric in the Western media about its fight against international terrorism, evidence of Washington’s active tacit support of ISIS is also the fact that there are no sanctions imposed by the United States against countries and institutions that support ISIS.
Under these circumstances, Russia’s assistance requested by the legitimate government of Syria in deploying theAerospace Force of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and hitting not only military, but also the financial infrastructure objects of ISIS is certainly important in the international fight against these terrorist groups.
Vladimir Odintsov, political commentator, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”. Link
Who Rules America?
Szymanski and others, among them Ralph Miliband (The State and Capitalist Society), G. William Domhoff (Who Rules America?), Thomas Ferguson (Golden Rule) and Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page (“Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Internet Groups, and Average Citizens”), have made that case that US society is dominated politically by a wealthy class of billionaire bankers, investors, and corporate titans. Gilens and Page, reviewing a vast empirical literature on the political influence of various sections of US society, have summarized the research this way: “[E]conomic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.” [14] The Gilens and Page analysis comes from academe, but a careful reading of major newspapers furnishes scores of instances that resonate with the duo’s conclusion. For example, The New York Times of October 10, 2015 reported that just 158 families and the companies they own and control, mostly in finance and energy, have contributed half the funds to Democratic and Republican presidential candidates in the 2016 presidential race [15], from which the not unreasonable conclusion can be drawn that just 158 families and the companies they own and control, have an impact on US politics far in excess of their numbers (but not their wealth)—another way of saying that the United States is more a plutocracy than a democracy.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/aspiring-t ... ia/5492433
For example, Chicago hedge fund billionaire Kenneth C. Giffen has contributed $300,000 to Republican presidential candidates in the 2016 race, well beyond the capabilities of an average citizen. But Giffen’s contribution represents less than one percent of his monthly income of $68.5 million.
zh this am. is it wrong to be amused by the macabre? i can just imagine all these tanks planes and troops (if they exist) chasing ghosts! rushing around, looking under rocks, behind trees, he's over here! no, he's over there! where is isis? but oh man the doors that will be kicked in the civvies that will be brutalized used and murdered collateralized. the m-word is of course lexicogriphally incorrect in the context of a tax supported national army. a known known. you know, when we all clock out today, the troops get paid before we do! greatness.Britain May Launch ISIS Strikes "Within Days"; Germany To Join With Warship, Planes, Troops
Elihu » Tue Dec 01, 2015 8:18 am wrote:zh this am. is it wrong to be amused by the macabre? i can just imagine all these tanks planes and troops (if they exist) chasing ghosts! rushing around, looking under rocks, behind trees, he's over here! no, he's over there! where is isis? but oh man the doors that will be kicked in the civvies that will be brutalized used and murdered collateralized. the m-word is of course lexicogriphally incorrect in the context of a tax supported national army. a known known. you know, when we all clock out today, the troops get paid before we do! greatness.Britain May Launch ISIS Strikes "Within Days"; Germany To Join With Warship, Planes, Troops
slimmouse » Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:11 pm wrote:I heard a really concise question on the news today, asking why anyone in their right minds in the Turkish tent would wish to bring down a Russian Jet which is clearly being very effective in destroying some disturbed set of Jihadists.
I wanted to scream out, think Operation Gladio, Think Skull and Bones, think the Global elite who dont particularly care a flying fuck about you and me,or the rest of humanity in general. In fact, theyre fukn lovin it.
Meanwhile , I cant wait to hear Sibel Edmunds take on all of this
backtoiam » 01 Dec 2015 13:49 wrote:Elihu » Tue Dec 01, 2015 8:18 am wrote:I still don't know but that "did not buck the bankers system" usually works for the long term...
"It appears that Allah decided to punish the ruling clique of Turkey by depriving them of wisdom and judgment," he said.
justdrew » Fri Dec 04, 2015 6:40 am wrote:Putin's got a great line in recently:"It appears that Allah decided to punish the ruling clique of Turkey by depriving them of wisdom and judgment," he said.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/russia-turkey-relations_56600dc3e4b08e945fee2209
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 53 guests