American Resistance To Empire

Washington is not America’s brain

With a population that soon will surpass one-third of a billion people, America’s complexity defies the limits of the human imagination. No one, ultimately, can truly understand such a country, in the sense of having detailed insights into the specific needs of all its communities, ranging from tiny villages to neighborhoods in sprawling cities such as Los Angeles. Governments, however, are staffed by people — with all the human limitations that implies.

The United States cannot be well-governed from the center. The federal government can try, of course, but federal agencies and personnel do not possess valid, detailed knowledge regarding local conditions across the country. Prudent leaders remember their inherent human limitations, and understand that such limitations always are reflected in their governance. America, however, is not prudently governed.

The long-popular metaphor that governments are “brains,” while countries are the “bodies” they control, is deeply flawed. Someone stubbing their toe on a rock will recognize their error almost immediately; they feel pain. By contrast, distant bureaucrats can inflict excruciating pain on Americans without even being aware that they are doing so.

For instance, officials regulating the American health care system never planned to create an opioid epidemic, but it is obvious that the twists and turns of federal policy played a critical role in its development.

The United States Government is an abstract noun; it possesses no personality, intuition, or moral sense whatsoever. It is less like a brain than an awesomely powerful “chaos machine.”

Like the U.S. government, the machine would impose its endless whims upon individuals and communities, who would then have to adapt to the machine’s decisions as best they could. Whether they like the decisions is irrelevant — and, regardless of who they vote for, the machine continues operating.


On the market: The most expensive homes in Chesterfield

These are St. Louis’ 50 highest-rated restaurants

Editor in Chief

St. Louis Business Journal

The conceit of the national governing elite is that the machine is not random — that there is a benevolent logic to its actions. If the machine sometimes makes errors, this is unfortunate, but turning it off would, they claim, assure disaster.

A critical question for America is how the machine can be disassembled, transferring its power to communities and individuals. Americans from Maine to Hawaii do not need a government that issues endless commands in the form of laws, regulations, and federal judicial decisions. They need a government that will leave them alone to cooperate freely, building and nurturing their own communities. Americans today face a choice: they can continue to receive the “help” of a distant chaos machine, or they can begin seriously discussing how to comprehensively dismantle it and empower themselves.

C. Dale Walton is associate professor of international relations at Lindenwood University.

The Myth of the Magical American Soldier

The Limits of Power – The Myth of the Magical American Soldier

Americans worship their fighting men and women; but it is dangerous to believe the mere presence of U.S. troops will achieve the miraculous in the Greater Middle East – it won’t!

We aren’t miracle workers. We’re just soldiers after all – kids barely out of their teens and officers in their mid-20s do most of the fighting. Still, policymakers in Washington, and citizens on Main Street both seem convinced that the mere presence of a few hundred or thousand American troops can alter societies, vanquish the wicked, and remake the world.

A colleague of mine refers to this as the myth of the magic soldier: sprinkle US troops in some horrific mess of a country and voilà – problem solved!

It sounds great, but this sort of delusional thinking has led the United States into one failed quagmire after another, killing some 7,000 US troops and close to one million locals. After 17 years of fruitless, indecisive war, its quite incredible that a bipartisan coalition of mainstream Republicans (neocons, mostly) and Democrats (neo-liberal relics) still cling to the idea that American soldiers wield magic powers. It’s long past time to review the record of our over-adulated troopers and reframe the actual – limited – capabilities of military force.

The standard Washington-media-military narrative goes something like this: take any unstable Muslim country that has any presence of Islamists at all; drop in a few thousand US Army advisors, trainers, or combat troops; stay indefinitely – and loudly proclaim that if ever those soldiers should leave said Muslim country it will undoubtedly collapse and the US of A will be directly threatened.

Some version of that exact formula has been tried in, sequentially, Afghanistan (2001-present), Iraq (2003-present), and Syria (2011-present), along with numerous smaller regional locales: Libya, Niger, Somalia, Yemen, etc. Sometimes the troop levels topped out at nearly 150,000 (Iraq), other times the ground forces and special operator teams are smaller (Yemen, Somalia), but the basic blueprint is the same – US airpower, plus commando raids, plus trainers and advisers can somehow stabilize the unstable, secure the insecure, and – ultimately – we hope, craft a “Little America” in the Muslim world. There’re just a couple problems with this veritable religion of US militarism: 1) we rarely consult with the locals before beginning each “crusade”; and 2) It. Has. Yet. To. Work.

Let us enter, then, the world of the absurd – US interventions since 9/11. In Afghanistan, the ultra hawks told (and tell) us, repeatedly, that more soldiers were needed to back up the government in Kabul. Without those magic troops, we’re warned, Al Qaeda will be back and the US Homeland in grave danger. Of course, the fact is there’s relatively few such fighters in Afghanistan, and the Taliban – our primary opponent – has neither the capacity or intent to threaten the US These folks want to conquer Kandahar not Kalamazoo…

Then there was the Iraq invasion, euphemistically titled Operation Iraqi Freedom, which began as a fantastical attempt to craft a liberal democracy between the Tigris and Euphrates – all at the point of a bayonet. By 2006, that adventure had all but fallen apart as the country tumbled into outright civil war. Only then, according the popular, prevailing military and political myth, a new general – David Petraeus – and some 30,000 more “magic” U.S. troopers, turned the tide. In hindsight that was never the case. The US military bought off former enemies with American blood on their hands and temporarilylessened violence. Washington never achieved a more vital political settlement in Baghdad and within three years of America’s departure Iraq was back in chaos. And back to Mesopotamia flew our soldier miracle workers.

This is when a second mainstream – and utterly bunk – myth developed: that if only Obama had left 10,000 “magic” soldiers in country that Iraq would have been just fine and ISIS would never have formed. Such an assertion denies agency to the Iraqis (who ultimately determine their own destiny), overestimates the capabilities of American troops, and ignores the fact that it was the Iraqi government that refused to sign a treaty to keep a US military presence on the ground. In the soldiers-as-miracles narrative, of course, all that is omitted or ignored.

The same goes for the smaller US presence in Syria, Africa, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and on and on. We’re assured that just a bit more airpower, a smidgen more commando raids, and a few more military advisors will turn the tide, stabilize the unstable, and ensure American security. The problem is this: in each case, no one seems able to articulate an exit strategy. That’s because there is none! And there’s the rub – so long as Americans are convinced of the preternatural capabilities of US troops, Washington will be forced to keep them forever deployed. Should they leave (any of these various locales) we’re told that chaos and transnational terror will explode in the region and in American cities. If that’s not a formula for perpetual war, then I don’t know what is!

The various interventions of the “War on Terror” have, at best, a checkered record. Most were, and are, complete strategic failures. They demonstrate the inherent limits of US military power and the need for tough cost/benefit analyses before taking the fateful step of deploying American men and women in harm’s way.

Yet on the wars churn, with no end in sight. And why not? Presidents (from both parties) wield force almost unilaterally; Congress is derelict in its duty to oversee the wars; the politicized Supreme Court demonstrates no intent to rule on the constitutionality of presidential war powers; and the citizenry, well, they could care less. With no conscription, innumerable technological distractions, and regularly fed information from a media focused more on minutiae than substance, how could we expect the American people to take much interest at all?

The truth is the war for the Greater Middle East is over. America already lost – it just hasn’t accepted it yet. The tragedy – and farce – of it all is that some number of US troops and innumerable local civilians are sure to die before Washington comes out of denial and accepts strategic defeat.

I can’t say when that will be; but odds are my own young children will be of military age by then…and so will yours.

Danny Sjursen is a U.S. Army officer and regular contributor to He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge. Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet.

[Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, expressed in an unofficial capacity, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.]

Copyright 2018 Danny Sjursen

Sleepwalking Through Servitude–Propaganda, Consumerism and Perpetual War

Sleepwalking Through Servitude: Propaganda, Consumerism and Perpetual War

Army Secretary Dr. Francis J. Harvey unveiled the effort to tell the Army about the "Army Strong" campaign, a key component of the Army’s recruiting efforts, during an opening ceremony for the 2006 Association of the U.S. Army Annual Meeting Oct. 9 in Washington, D.C

Army Secretary Dr. Francis J. Harvey unveiled the effort to tell the Army about the “Army Strong” campaign, a key component of the Army’s recruiting efforts, during an opening ceremony for the 2006 Association of the U.S. Army Annual Meeting Oct. 9 in Washington, D.C (Image in Public Domain via US Army)

The prevailing orthodoxy of today — an orthodoxy perpetuated by propaganda, PR, the media and the power behind them — is unquestioned obedience to the gods of money, consumerism and perpetual war.

I had the good fortune to hear the Ukrainian folk group Dakha Brakha in London this week.  Their extraordinary set was punctuated with references to the Russian annexation of Crimea, ending with their male singer, Marko Halanevych, holding up the blue and yellow flag of Ukraine.  It was a moving conclusion to a spelling-binding concert that got me thinking about propaganda. 

Ukraine is caught up in the continuing struggle between two power-bases (but no longer two ideologies).  NATO, spearheaded by the U.S, has pushed ever-farther east, effectively backing the Russian bear into a corner.  The policy is the height of folly, yet it is hardly ever questioned or debated in the West.

When Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, a clear message was sent.  Why was it not heeded?  Why was a buffer zone not left between Russia and the West?  Why did we keep pushing?  Because, for NATO to exist and for arms orders to be placed, a threat must exist; real or imagined.  And the paradox is the same principles apply to the other side; for there to be a corresponding elite and the apparatus of war, a corresponding threat is needed. 

Propaganda and PR to Manufacture a Threat

If there isn’t a real threat, it’s easy to manufacture one.  And the key to manufacturing a threat is, of course, propaganda.  What else could make young people march off to slaughter their peers?  To make us believe blatant lies and be hoodwinked again and again? 

The Soviet Union used it, Putin uses it, the United States uses it, corporations use it.  Anyone with power and money can use it.  It goes under different names — public information, public relations or reputation management.  It’s all propaganda, and the end result is the same: manipulation of the masses.

The tactics used by all sides are simple: keep the general populace scared, poorly informed, and in awe of the state.  Mastery and control will follow.  

When the Soviet Union fell, a huge void was created — it was like the boogeyman disappeared overnight.  Without the threat of “commies” under the bed, the West scrambled to find a new enemy.  Enter Al Qaida, WMDs and Isis. 

9/11 and the ideal propaganda platform it produced gave America carte blanche to prosecute her ‘war on terror,’ to expand her empire and to undermine civil liberties and the U.S. Constitution itself.  All the while, Russia was moving laterally, outflanking the West and confounding it, not by force-of-arms, but by digital guile and subterfuge. 

Propaganda takes many forms.  It can be loud, brightly colored, blatant and overt, as it was in the Soviet Union, or it can be beguiling, covert and subtly embedded in the warp and weft of daily life.

In America of late, it’s just been brazen.

Here are Adolf Hitler’s basic principles of propaganda:

  • Avoid abstract ideas — appeal to the emotions
  • Constantly repeat just a few ideas. Use stereotyped phrases
  • Give only one side of the argument
  • Continuously criticize your opponents
  • Pick out one special “enemy” for special vilification

Sound familiar? 

If you can distract, divide, stifle, ridicule and undermine at the same time, all the better. 

Despots, dictators and demagogues use these same principles the world over.  They are simple, easily remembered (that’s helpful…) and extremely effective.

The Illusion of Information and Propaganda

Technology helps them.  We now endure an avalanche of information every day.  Statistics, facts and figures, news events, the three best ways to eat a watermelon.  It gives the illusion of being informed, of being plugged into the pulse, the ebb and flow of daily life on the planet and of life carrying on as per safe, pre-ordained rules.

It’s comforting in a way.  Even when the news is bad, and it does seem to be bad most of the time, feeling like we know what’s going on is reassuring. 

And that simple human frailty, of wanting to feel reassured, comforted and led, is the back door to our psyche.  It has been exploited by our rulers since the time of the Pharaohs, and it leaves us wide open to one of the most powerful technologies known to man.

As Goebbels knew, intelligence and information gathering are key to creating effective propaganda, and there is no more effective intelligence-gathering agent than a smartphone. 

We willingly carry around devices (strange how that word sounds so like divisive…) that have the ability to monitor what we say, how we look when we’re saying it, what our heart rate and blood pressure are, who we are talking to, what we read, buy, listen to, where we go, how we type, how and what we write, how we move and increasingly, how we think and what we are going to think.

2018 is Orwell’s 1984

It’s a nightmarish scenario.  It’s Orwell’s 1984 and Huxley’s Brave New World, all rolled into one — Big Brother is watching us as we greedily guzzle our daily ration of Soma.   It’s terrifying.

Orwell, a prophet if ever there was one, spoke of “every time having its own prevailing orthodoxy”.  The prevailing orthodoxy of today — an orthodoxy perpetuated by propaganda, PR, the media and the power behind them — is unquestioned obedience to the gods of money, consumerism and perpetual war (war for our own security, of course).

In this, we are all aiders and abettors; if people weren’t so human, the system wouldn’t work. But we are. We are suggestible, tribal, lazy, and for that reason, easily fooled.

It is time for us to take back our consciousness: to wake up and to live as dignified human beings, not as pawns in some kind of diabolical dance-to-the-death. 

It’s time to say enough.



With the stated aim of containing “Iran’s malign behavior” and bringing “stability to the region,” the Trump administration has proposed a collective security pact tentatively known as “the Middle East Strategic Alliance” (MESA). The MESA would bring about the six countries from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) along with Egypt and Jordan together under the guise of “Arab NATO” to confront Iran.

There has already been a meeting held on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in New York City in September, where U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gathered with the foreign ministers of Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates to prepare for future plans. While the specific timelines for holding the so-called “Arab NATO” have been fluid and uncertain, October 2018 has been suggested as a possibility.

The proposal for a collective security project is presented amid rising tensions and conflicts across the Middle East and North Africa. Hence, building a collective security pact with the stakeholders in the region seems necessary. But success in building such collective security projects can only be achieved if all the stakeholders in the region participate.Historically, proposals for constructing collective alliances have failed in the region as they were not designed by the regional actors themselves, but imported from outside of the region.

However, there are at least five reasons why the “Arab NATO” initiative has little chance of success given the dynamics of the region.

First, the proposal to build an “Arab NATO” has emerged at the time when the Arab world, including Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, can barely be more divided. From the year-long embargo that Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain have imposed on Qatar, to the bloody inter-Arab conflict in Yemen and Libya that has ravaged these Arab countries, a proposal as such to align these countries seems more like wishful thinking than a practical political strategy.

Hence, the main threat for some member states comes from within the very members of the alliance as much as from the outside. Equally importantly, Oman, Kuwait and Qatar are trying to balance their relation with Riyadh and Tehran. Moreover, Oman—which played the crucial role of “mediator” between Washington and Tehran over the Iran Nuclear Deal—prefers to continue its role during Trump’s era. To bring about sustainable peace and security to the Middle East, the first task would be to address the bilateral issues of concern that GCC countries have among themselves.

GettyImages-917838778Mike Pompeo testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill February 13, 2018 in Washington, D.C.CHIP SOMODEVILLA/GETTY IMAGES

Second, since one of the main security challenges of the region is “sectarian conflict,” the U.S. initiative would heighten the flames of sectarian divide and add much to the already existing climate of bellicosity in the region, since it only pits the Arab and Sunni countries on the southern shore of the Persian Gulf against the Shīʿite Iran, and perhaps Iraq with Shia majority. Furthermore, the “Arab NATO” is reminiscent of the ancient colonial project with the notorious mission to “divide and rule.” Just as the U.K. colonial project was doomed to fail, so is the U.S. idea of the “Arab NATO.”

Third, if the main goal of constructing a collective security project in the region is to ensure long-term stability in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, then Iran must participate as a member, since about 50 percent of coastal area in the Persian are Iranian territories. Iraq, too, is a major stakeholder in the Persian Gulf area given its demographic weight and the significant role it plays in the OPEC. In the absence of Iran and Iraq as two major powers in the region, no collective security project will be effective. The Trump administration has suggested including Egypt and Jordan, whose geographic share of the Persian Gulf is nothing.

Fourth, terrorism led by ISIS and Al-Qaeda is another key security threat for the region and the world. If the aim of the “Arab NATO” is to counter terrorism, its supposed members must not provide support for terrorist organizations. The evidence for the Saudi royal family’s financial support for terrorist organizations such Al-Qaeda and the Taliban since the early 1990s is copious. The top-secret report from the U.S. Treasury Department revealed some important dimensions of the ties that exist between the Saudi royal family and terrorist organizations. The Saudi support, both fiscal and logistic, for radical groups—like the Qaeda offshoot Al Nusra—has continued to date, in the Syrian conflict and far beyond it.

Fifth, the Trump administration’s proposal for an “Arab NATO” is a push for unilateralism as opposed to multilateralism in the Middle East. It simply omits the interests of other world powers in the region, namely, the European Union, China, India and Russia. It also ignores Turkey as another major actor in the region, and the world of Islam more generally. A realistic and effective collective security pact can neither ignore key regional players nor major players in world affairs, whose interests in the region should also be taken into account.

In short, for a collective security project to ensure stability in the trouble-ridden Middle East in a meaningful way, it must be inclusive and welcoming to all stakeholders in the region, including Iran. The U.N. Security Council is the most responsible and legitimate international body to lead such an initiative. The U.N. Security Council Resolution 598 has already requested “the Secretary-General to examine, in consultation with Iran and Iraq and with other States of the region, measures to enhance the security and stability of the region.” At the same time, members of the alliance should first hold bilateral talks (i.e. Saudi Arabia vis-à-vis Iran, and Qatar vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia) in order to address their concerns. Without simultaneous multilateral approaches and bilateral talks, an imported collective security project such as the “Arab NATO” has almost no chance of success. It will only fuel the animosity between the countries in the region along racial and sectarian lines.

Seyed Hossein Mousavian isMiddle East Security and Nuclear Policy Specialist at Princeton University.

“Project Turkey Leg”

İbrahim Karagül

Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s political future is over. Salman’s plans to lead his country, become the regional leader, shape a new Saudi Arabia in accordance with U.S.-Israeli expectations, and design a new region through this project have, for the time being, gone down the drain.

There will be much stronger evidence revealed regarding the connection between Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s brutal murder and Mohammed bin Salman, and the world is going to find out all about this. The news of explosives in the U.S. yesterday is a clear sign of how huge the incident is, the kind of global project the Khashoggi murder has shaken.

He had started a ‘man hunt’ throughout this dual region

We are going to find out a great deal about how the orders to murder Khashoggi came directly from Salman, that they have lists with figures similar to Khashoggi, that they started a sort of “man hunt” not only in Saudi Arabia but throughout the region, that they were following a path similar to the “secret torture centers” introduced post-September 11 and the “CIA jets,” that they are doing this in coordination with U.S., Israeli and Egyptian intelligence, that United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed is the main manager of the traffic in question, and that Salman is acting under Zayed’s control.

Many dirty files will be revealed, with topics ranging from money trafficking to terrorist organizations along the UAE-Saudi Arabia-Egypt-Israel-U.S. line, from civil war and invasion plans to regime change projects, from covert attacks and plans targeting Turkey and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to abduction and murder. They had established a new equilibrium in the region.

Once the documents are revealed, the noose around their neck is going to get tighter

The equilibrium was established on behalf of the U.S. and Israel. They had swiftly started overt/covert operations in all countries in the region. They were going to build a new tutelage, severely harm those against the equilibrium – and as a matter of fact, they were going to dismiss them. This was not their project; they had only received the tender and became the main undertakers in the region.

After this moment onward, the Saudi administration cannot carry this crown prince. The U.S. cannot establish a regional equilibrium through a person who has been tarnished and wounded to this extent. The U.S. and Israel are going to have to give up Salman whether they like it or not. They will lose serious ground in the region if they continue to support him.

Once the records and documents in Turkey’s possession are released, the noose around Salman’s neck is going to get tighter. The Zayed connection is going to become clearer. It is going to be revealed that Zayed, who is behind everything from the Qatar issue to the terror corridor in northern Syria, from the Libya and Yemen wars to the plans of the new front to be opened, is a trap for the region, and that Salman is a trap for Saudi Arabia.

Great regional war plans revealed

The Khashoggi murder revealed a massive plan targeting the entire region, including Turkey. There were those who were in the know, but it was difficult to explain, because much was carried out through covert operations. The likes of Mohammed Dahlan, U.S. mercenaries and security companies, and structures such as the Fetullah Terrorist Organization (FETÖ), the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and Daesh were re-assigned in accordance with this project.

The murder also exposed a major war preparation that would spread through the entire region. As soon as the Syria issue was over, as soon the fate of the project aimed at the east of the Euphrates became clear, as a matter of fact, before these were completed, a massive front was going to be opened from the Persian Gulf.

An Iranian-Saudi war was going to be broken out, an Arab bloc led by Salman and Zayed was going to settle scores with Iran. No country in the gulf was going to be left out of this war. This plan was the plan to carry war to the heart of Islam. Salman’s withdrawal will at least delay this war.

Is it not yet time to question the project’s ‘Turkey leg’?

This is where the clues related to the project’s Turkey leg are revealed. It was obvious Turkey would take a stance aimed at protecting the whole region. This could have ruined plans. Hostility was put between Saudi Arabia and Turkey to prevent Turkey’s areas of intervention, and to prevent the Erdoğan-led political mind’s intervention in this project.

Anti-Turkey sentiment, discourse that “Turkey is a threat” was promoted in the Arab streets. The campaign was again made through Salman and Zayed. If thick walls are erected between Arabs and Turks, it was going to be the Arab world left defenseless, with this war ending in Saudi Arabia’s destruction.

For a few years I have been following how this process was cultivated. I have been following the clues to the Turkey leg of this plan for a few years. I had been following and seeing the “oppositional” formation that was underhandedly carried out, the kind of dialogues made with the masses, and the kind of “multinational intervention” scenario played out under the guise of “opposition.”

Turkey saw the project, and certain groups took action in panic

The parallel between the “Salman and Zayed axis” and this activity was quite interesting. A “multinational attempt” that has a conservative touch, includes crypto Peoples’ Democracy Party (HDP) members, and uses FETÖ logistics could be sensed in every area.

Turkey was quick to realize a comprehensive project targeting Erdoğan and itself that was carried out both in the region and inside the country. The Khashoggi murder unveiled the project. While some continue to discuss the criminal dimension alone, a major regional plan is on the verge of collapse. Turkey is currently the only country that has enough power capable of collapsing this.

I notice that the more the noose around Salman’s neck tightens, the more Zayed’s dirty files start to surface, FETÖ, the PKK, Daesh and those managing the Turkey leg of the said axis are suddenly starting to get active again.

Their first target was the People’s Alliance

1- The most important goal of the Turkey leg of this axis is the collapse of the People’s Alliance. They can do nothing while this alliance exists. The collapse of the alliance will quickly be followed by new steps.

2- After that stage, intervention opportunities in the north of Syria will be eliminated, weakened, and as a matter of fact, the Euphrates Shield and our presence in Afrin will be questioned nationally too.

3- The fight against terrorism will lose its impact in the country and be weakened, it will assume FETÖ-like roles, and Turkey’s national backbone will be severely weakened.

4- The consensus between Turkey and Russia will be ruined, damaged; the Syria file will once again fully turn to the U.S./Israel/PKK/Daesh axis.

There are preparations for a new ‘multinational’ intervention both in the region and in Turkey

5- What’s most important is that the “opposition and intervention” networking that is being carried out underhandedly, which some already see, is going to become blatant, with a serious disintegration being encouraged from politics to NGOs, from the media to capital, and the mind of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) voter will be severely confused.

6- It is true that these are all part of the Turkey leg of the said axis established through Salman and Zayed. Their areas of “operation” in Turkey need to be paid great attention. The more Salman is cornered, the more this plan has sped up.

7- Erdoğan and Turkey should take advantage of the opportunity gained with the Khashoggi murder and negate the anti-Turkey axis established in the region. The forces behind the “setup” carried out in Turkey will also be revealed within this context.

8- Because they are both preparations for the new “multinational intervention.” I will say it loud and clear: The new multinational intervention of the post-July 15 coup attempt has been revealed. I hope it will be prevented.

The bombs in the US: The worse may be yet to come

9- Let us add that the consecutive bomb reports received from the U.S. are not independent from these incidents, that they are adjusted to changing the agenda, to save the great project implemented through Salman and Zayed, and that there are attempts to attack the world’s extraordinary awareness.

I would say that if this does not work, take into consideration that something more serious and shocking will happen. There will be operations carried out locally and from abroad. But we are very strong. They are going to witness another counter-coup.

A Boatload of Anti-Trump Democrats Are Mailed Explosive Gifts With the Same Return Address–Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz

[International Subversive George Soros Lives In Katonah, N.Y…Someone Left A Bomb In His Mailbox]

Suspicious package delivery to Eric Holder returned to Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s office

A suspicious package was mailed to former Attorney General Eric Holder, but was sent to the wrong address.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Law enforcement sources told CNN the package was then sent to Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s office in Florida because that address was on the return label.

[READ: Bombs sent to Trump foes: Here’s what we know]

Police don’t believe the packages originated from the Florida Democrat.

Her office was evacuated on Wednesday when a suspicious package was found.

Holder, who worked under former President Barack Obama, lives in Washington, D.C., with his family.

Among those who were sent the packages were former President Barack Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, former CIA Director John Brennan, and left-wing billionaire George Soros. A suspicious package was also found outside the office of Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., in San Diego.

Pakistan Army To Submit To Saudi Anti-Iranian Warfare Plans?

[Pakistan air chief visits Royal Saudi Air Force headquarters]

[Reports upon Iranian forces in the Sistani-Baloch region normallly have either no depth, or they come from biased (Iranian) websites.  The following report from the Jewish press gives a different slant and more details on the reports about terrorists preparing to execute 14 Iranian soldiers, tying the terrorist action directly to Saudi Arabia and Pakistani intelligence (ISI).  Further developing the history of the new terror outfit called Jaish ul-Adl, showing them to be the latest incarnation of the Jundullah terrorist group, also created by Pakistani ISI, under Saudi sponsorship.  We are seeing the American/Saudi worldwide terror network cells firing in different locations around and in the Middle East, enabling the great game of limited “world war” directed at the enemies of the Zionist state to continue without accidentally, prematurely, starting WWIII.New Saudi reinvestment in Pakistan will come with many strings…chief among them will be the joining of the Pak. Army w/Saudi efforts to create an “Arab NATO,” already being commanded by former Pak. Army Chieftain (SEE: Retiring Pak Army Chief Sharif Becomes Saudi’s Commander of Global Islamist Army).]

Seized by Jihadists: Iranian Soldiers to Be Executed by al-Qaeda Sunni Militia

According to several reliable sources an enigmatic Sunni militia linked to al-Qaeda called Jaish ul-Adl (Army of Justice) recently attacked a patrol of the Iran Revolutionary Guards, composed of Iranian soldiers and local volunteers. They took 14 soldiers into captivity, with plans to summarily execute them. (Photo Credit:

An Israeli news site reported on Monday that an enigmatic Sunni militia linked to al-Qaeda called Jaish ul-Adl (Army of Justice) recently attacked a patrol of the Iran Revolutionary Guards, composed of Iranian soldiers and local volunteers. They took 14 soldiers into captivity, with plans to summarily execute them.

Jaish ul-Adl (Army of Justice) is a Salafist jihadist terrorist organization based in Sistan and Baluchestan province of Iran and has claimed responsibility for several attacks against civilians and military personnel in Iran.

The group was founded in 2012, by members of Jundallah, a Sunni militant group that had been weakened following Iran’s capture and execution of its leader, Abdolmalek Rigi, in 2010. Its first major attack occurred in October 2013. Jaish ul-Adl is a designated terrorist organization by Iran and Japan.

On April 26, 2017, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) reported that nine Iranian border guards were killed by the terrorist group in the Mirjaveh region, in the southeastern province of Sistan and Baluchestan while patrolling at the zero border point. The “Army of Justice” fled to Pakistan’s territories after killing the Iranian border guards. Iran said Islamabad should be accountable for the presence of terrorists on its soil.

“Islamabad should be accountable for the presence of terrorist groups in its soil and for the outlaw groups operation against Iran from its territory,” said spokesman of Iran’s Foreign Ministry, Bahram Qasemi in the aftermath of the attack.

In a November 18, 2013 report that appeared on the Almanar TV web site, the “Jaishul Haq” (Army of Right) launched an attack in the Iranian province of Sistan after a truce that lasted more than three years following the arrest of “Abdul Malik Rigi” by the Iranian authorities. Rigi is the leader of the Jundollah “the Soldiers of God” group, which has worked militarily against Iran from Pakistan before being exterminated by Iran in 2010. The attack resulted in the death of 16 Iranian soldiers, and the group set off from the “Baluchistan” province in Pakistan through the “Khojak” tunnel passing through Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan, Pakistan.

In a December 10, 2013 report on the EA Worldview web site, it was reported that the Sistan Baluchestan-based Sunni Baloch insurgent group Jaish ul-Adl claimed responsibility for an attack against Iranian security personnel in the predominantly-Sunni province, and warned Tehran there would be more to come unless it ended its “crimes against the oppressed peoples of Iran and Syria”.

If Iran did not stop, Jaish ul-Adl warned that its “day-to-day operations would increase” and the group would “burn all the military regime in Balochistan, according to the EA Worldview web site.

Despite the local nature of the Sunni Baloch insurgency in Sistan Baluchestan, the fact that the group specifically mentions Iran’s involvement in Syria in its warning indicates that at least some of Jaish ul-Adl feel that their cause extends beyond Iran and Baluchestan, and that it is part of a wider, sectarian Sunni struggle against oppressors.

In a 2013 post on its Persian-language blog, Jaish ul-Adl talked about their cause as “jihad” and described their fighters as “mujahideen”.

Jaish ul-Adl posted that their aim is to protect the honor and dignity of Muslims, and that the way to do so is to join the Mujahideen. The group also warns that it is ready to train young people so that they can join the jihad.

Also in 2013, the group also issued a warning to the Iranian security forces, calling on Tehran to cease its “crimes against the oppressed peoples of Iran and Syria”,

The post also offers some more information about the claims of the December 2013 attack against Iranian security forces.

The group has claimed that the attack took place near the town of Rasak in Sarbaz County, close to the border with Pakistan. Jaish ul-Adl say that the Shahid (Martyr) Molavi Abdolmalek Brigade planted mines around 5 kilometers outside Rasak, to target a military vehicle.

French sources, well-informed about the profile of the insurgent Salafi groups that are supported by Saudi Arabia, said in an interview with Al-Manar at the time that Saudi Arabia ordered the attack, and that this new group represents the fruits of the Saudi “violent approach” adopted in facing Iran and the regional axis; allying with it in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon.

The said sources also accused the Pakistani intelligence apparatus, in conjunction with the Saudi intelligence operations of creating and activating this group. The sources said that Saudi intelligence had spent large amounts of money to fund the Jaish al-Adl group, but the Saudis employed the Pakistani intelligence units to monitor the group that is controlling Jaish al-Adl and running it. The French sources confirmed that Pakistani intelligence had initiated the establishment of the group as it created, trained, and guided the Jundollah organization in the past, but abandoned it when its interest with Iran required so.

Pakistan, which receives funding from Saudi Arabia, entered into strategic alliance with Riyadh, and thus the leadership of the Pakistani army, which controls the Pakistani intelligence work, cannot reject the Saudi dictation in this regard. The Pakistani army has linked its policy in the region directly to the policy of Saudi Arabia for decades.

Yet, Pakistan is dissatisfied with the Iranian-American convergence and the Russian-American understanding in more than one hot area in the world, especially after the rise of Russia, which is considered by the Pakistani military institution as an important ally of Iran. The Pakistani military institution is concerned over this triple convergence that might affect its influence in Afghanistan and its rank in America, especially because Iran has a good relationship with India, the enemy of Pakistan, and the third largest importer of Iranian oil. The Pakistani military institution at the time was concerned about the return of the Russian influence to the Central Asian region and over the fact that this return might evoke the Pakistani role in the Afghan war against the Soviet Union, as well as the role of the Pakistani intelligence in financing and arming the Salafist groups fighting in Islamic countries, which were part of the former Soviet Union.

This all comes in addition to the Pakistani-Saudi intelligence role in assassinating “Ahmad Shah Massoud”, an ally of Russia and Iran in Afghanistan, and in supporting the Taliban of Moscow. These concerns that meet with the Saudi concerns put Islamabad under the control of Saudi intelligence in this file. This of course translates into the tense relationship that Pakistan and Iran have had and is being further strained by the Jaish al-Adl group against Iranian territory.

In February of 2014, it was reported by the Daily Beast that Jaish ul-Adl has claimed responsibility on a Twitter account for the abduction of five Iranian frontier guards along the Pakistani-Iranian border. They later posted photographs, allegedly depicting the captive guards on Facebook, according to the Daily Beast report.

The report said that this 2014 episode is part of a fledgling Sunni insurgency in which Tehran accuses its arch regional rival Saudi Arabia of stoking. The report indicated that Iran has protested the abductions and leveled accusations that Pakistani authorities are failing in an abysmal sense to police their shared border. They have also been accused of taking no steps in enforcing a bilateral security pact that was forged in 2013 before Saudi ally Nawaz Sharif was elected as Pakistan’s Prime Minister.

The report in the Daily Beast attributed the upsurge in Sunni jihadist activity to a rise in the number of madrasas promoting Saudi-style Wahhabism, according to analysts.

Other than Jaish ul-Adl, which is thought to number several hundred fighters, other Jihadi groups include Harakat Ansar, which says their objective is to secure autonomy for the province. But in their propaganda, both groups also refer heavily to the Syrian conflict and Iran’s role in shoring up Assad. Harakat Ansar has made an appeal on Saudi websites for funding.

The Iranian government is bracing for more problems with jihadist groups such as Jaish-ul-Adl which claims Iran needs to pay a price for its military and materiel support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

By: Jay Evan