by Brandon Turbeville
September 11, 2015
from
BrandonTurbeville Website
Brandon Turbeville
is an author out of
Florence, South
Carolina.
He has a Bachelor's
Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author
of several books.
Turbeville has
published over 500 articles dealing on a wide variety of
subjects including health, economics, government
corruption, and civil liberties.
Brandon
Turbeville's podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found
every Monday night 9 pm EST at
UCYTV. He is available
for radio and TV interviews. |
In his new book,
The Wikileak Files,
Julian Assange
confirms what myself and others such as,
-
Webster Tarpley
-
Ziad Fadel
-
Tony Cartalucci
-
Mimi al-Laham
-
Eric Draitser,
...have
been stating for some time - that not only was there a
coordinated Western attempt to destabilize and ultimately
destroy Syria and the secular government of Bashar
al-Assad, but that such an attempt was devised much earlier than
2011, when the "Arab Spring" color revolution protests began in
earnest.
In his book, Assange reveals that the Syrian destabilization plan
goes back as far as 2006:
Assange on 'US Empire', Assad govt overthrow
plans
and new book 'The WikiLeaks Files'
He references a 2006 diplomatic cable
from US Ambassador to Syria, William Roebuck where the
official discussed plans to create a situation where the Syrian
government would be enticed to "overreact" to false or manufactured
threats posed by "radical jihadists" crossing back and forth between
Iraq and Syria.
The plan would have portrayed the Syrian
government as weak in the eyes of the Syrian people, presumably
encouraging protests and social unrest while, at the same time,
causing the Assad government to crack down and jump the gun on its
reaction to the perceived threat.
In an interview (above video) with Going Underground, Assange stated,
"...That plan was to use a number of
different factors to create paranoia within the Syrian
government; to push it to overreact, to make it fear there's a
coup... so in theory it says,
'We have a problem with Islamic
extremists crossing over the border with Iraq, and we're
taking actions against them to take this information and
make the Syrian government look weak, the fact that it is
dealing with Islamic extremists at all'."
In addition, he suggested that a major
part of the Western plan was to,
foster tensions between Shiites and
Sunnis.
In particular, to take rumors that are known to be
false... or exaggerations and promote them - that Iran is trying
to convert poor Sunnis, and to work with Saudi and Egypt to
foster that perception in order to make it harder for Iran to
have influence, and also harder for the government to have
influence in the population."
Assange's revelations are yet more
confirmation of what informed observers have already known for quite
some time.
For instance, Seymour Hersh
writing for the New Yorker in his article "The
Redirection,"
To undermine Iran, which is
predominantly Shiite, the
Bush Administration has
decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the
Middle East.
In Lebanon, the Administration has
cooperated with Saudi Arabia's government, which is Sunni, in
clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah,
the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran.
The U.S. has also taken part in
clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A
by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni
extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are
hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
Even earlier, an article written by
Michael Hirsh and John Barry of Newsweek entitled "The
Salvador Option," in 2005 revealed a different plan.
Hirsh and Barry wrote,
Following that model, one Pentagon
proposal would send Special Forces teams to advise, support and
possibly train Iraqi squads, most likely hand-picked Kurdish
Peshmerga fighters and Shiite militiamen, to target Sunni
insurgents and their sympathizers, even across the border into
Syria, according to military insiders familiar with the
discussions.
It remains unclear, however, whether
this would be a policy of assassination or so-called "snatch"
operations, in which the targets are sent to secret facilities
for interrogation.
The current thinking is that while
U.S. Special Forces would lead operations in, say, Syria,
activities inside Iraq itself would be carried out by Iraqi
paramilitaries, officials tell NEWSWEEK.
Obviously, the plan detailed by Hirsh
and Barry is different from the one detailed by Seymour Hersh.
It is also different from the one
revealed in the Assange cable revelation.
However, both the theme
and the ultimate goal are identical - use radicalized sectarian
fighters inside Syria for the purposes of destabilizing and
destroying the secular government of Bashar al-Assad.
In the end, blaming "American foreign policy failure" for the
successful march of ISIS across Iraq only serves to obfuscate and
cover up the true nature of terrorism as well as its historical and
recent roots.
Indeed, it is not foreign policy failure
that is responsible for the growth and preponderance of terrorism in
Iraq and Syria, it is foreign policy success.
The CIA's arming, funding, training, and
directing of al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other so-called "moderate"
terrorists is the only reason these organizations even exist in Iraq
and Syria at all, much less the reason that these organizations have
become so powerful so as to have the ability to launch full-scale
war.
The way out, of course, is simple.
Peace in Syria does not require
reinvading Iraq and it most certainly does not involve invading
Syria. Nor does it involve continuing to arm the Syrian death
squads.
It merely requires the United
States, NATO, and the GCC to stop funding and directing ISIS as
well as the other terrorist organizations under their purview
and allow the Assad government, the Kurds, and other rational
actors to finish the rest.
|