A Brief History Of The U.S. Relationship To Jihadists And al-Qaeda Across The World

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
March 22, 2018

Major hat tip to Washington's Blog for its article "“Sleeping With the Devil: How U.S. And Saudi Backing Of Al-Qaeda Led Directly To 9/11,” Tony Cartalucci of Land Destroyer Report. 

To many Americans who pay only a small portion of their time to what is happening in Syria, the claim that the United States is funding and supporting ISIS sounds like absolute insanity. After all, the corporations who feed them their news incessantly inform them of the threat of ISIS at home and abroad and remind them how hard their government is working in order to keep them safe. Even when many Americans can clearly see that the United States is funding extremists in order to destroy Assad, it is difficult for them to grasp that the most frightening enemy of all, ISIS itself, is also being directed by Western intelligence, the GCC, and Israel.

It is important to point out that the Islamic State is not some shadowy force that emerged from the caves of Afghanistan to form an effective military force that is funded by Twitter donations and murky secretive finance deals. IS is entirely the creation of NATO and the West and it remains in control of the organization.

As Tony Cartalucci writes 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.

Trump Administration Apparently Heading For War As Iran Dumps U.S. Dollar,

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
February 7, 2017

While many were hoping against all odds that a Trump administration would live up to some of its campaign rhetoric and begin to back away from imperialistic foreign adventures, it seems those hopes are being dashed by the day as Trump and his team are giving every indication that they are moving toward war with Iran.

Even on the campaign trail, Trump expressed irrational anti-Iran sentiment suggesting that the Iran nuclear deal signed with the Obama administration was “terrible” and that the United States was essentially forced to pay Iran not to build a bomb. Of course, this rhetoric was nothing but fantasy since the only loser in the deal was the Iranians, who were never in violation of any international provisions against nuclear proliferation, did not have a nuclear weapon, a nuclear weapons program, or even the ability to create one. In reality, Iran never should have had to sign any deal with the world’s self-appointed guard dog. Still, Trump represented the release of Iran’s frozen assets as extortion (against the United States no less). For those who are unaware, the money that was allegedly “paid” to Iran was actually Iranian money the United States had frozen in the past as a result of prior fits of war hysteria.

This anti-Iran policy came to the forefront a week ago when National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, rabid anti-Iran warmonger, gave a surprise performance of typical Western war froth in front of the cameras about the “emboldened” Iran and the danger it presents to America and its allies. He also suggested that Iran has not been “thankful” to the United States for apparently not invading them as it has done to Iran’s neighbors and allies over the past sixteen years.

Flynn stated that the United States is officially “putting Iran on notice.” Thus, it seems that the United States is setting its sights on the next piece of the geopolitical puzzle before the ultimate goal of Russia and world hegemony is to be recognized.

Clashes Between Syrian Army, Kurds Pushes Brzezinski Plan Forward In Syria

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
July 11, 2016

It was only a matter of time before the Syrian military and Kurdish organizations butted heads in Syria over who controls specific territory in the north. Over the past few months and as both the Kurds and the SAA push forward against the ISIS and related Western-backed forces operating near the Turkish border, these confrontations have become increasingly frequent, requiring the help of outside negotiators to defuse the situation and implement a ceasefire.

For instance, as far back as April 20, a heavy firefight was ignited when Kurdish police (Asayish) would not stop at a Syrian border checkpoint in Qamlishi. The fight lasted three days, taking the lives of 10 Kurdish fighters and 22 SAA soldiers as well as 17 civilians. Many innocent lives lost and much time and equipment wasted that could have been spent on ISIS.

On April 22, the Russians were able to secure a ceasefire which was respected by both sides, despite remaining tensions. In Qamlishi, all joint Syrian-Kurdish roadblocks and checkpoints were dismantled as a result. Still, a prisoner swap was organized and taken advantage of almost immediately by both sides.

At the end of the battle, YPG forces found themselves in control of a formerly government-held prison on the outskirts of Qamlishi and the NDF took control over several locations in Qamlishi’s central districts. Government troops still maintain control over about 50 villages on the southern border of the city, despite being effectively surrounding by Kurdish fighters. It is expected that the YPG will eventually attempt to take the city since it is the “capital” of the “Rojava Government” also known as “Syrian Kurdistan.” Such an attempt would result in a fierce battle, however.

Another incident took place in Hasakah on July 3 when the city became the site of sporadic clashes between the SAA and the YPG. Like the result of the Qamlishi deal, a ceasefire was struck between the two sides and a prisoner exchange was made. The SAA will soon hand over control of the Literature College and two other sites recently seized by their forces to the YPG and Asayish.

Brandon Turbeville On The Corbett Report - April 3, 2016 - "Federalizing Syria" and The NATO "Plan A" For The Region

Brandon Turbeville
CorbettReport.com
April 3, 2016

Brandon Turbeville of BrandonTurbeville.com joins us to discuss his recent article, “Kurdish Federalization Reminiscent Of Kerry’s Plan B, Brzezinski, NATO’s Plan A.” We break down the Kurdish groups that are involved in the plan and the globalist institutions that have shaped it.

SHOW NOTES:

BrandonTurbeville.com

Kurdish Federalization Reminiscent Of Kerry’s Plan B, Brzezinski, NATO’s Plan A

Syrian Kurds declare new federation in bid for recognition

Kerry’s Plan B For Syria Equals Brookings, Brzezinski Plan A

Syria’s one hope may be as dim as Bosnia’s once was

Deconstructing Syria: A new strategy for America’s most hopeless war

Imagining a Remapped Middle East

“Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East

Kurdish "Federalization" Reminiscent Of Kerry's Plan B, Brzezinski, NATO's Plan A

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
March 17, 2016

Kurds in Northern Syria have declared a federal system in Syria, with the areas they have seized in the northern part of the country designated to act as an autonomous zone. The official declaration came on March 16, with reports like those coming from the BBC reaching western audiences on March 17. According to reports, the conference at which the federation of three Kurdish entities in Syria took place was located in Rmeilan.

Kurdish journalist Barzan Iso confirmed the initial rumors surrounding the Kurdish declaration to RT earlier on March 16 when he stated that “Now the conference has just started in Rmelan, about 200 representatives of Rojava have joined [the event]. They represent different ethnicities and nationalities. There are Kurds, Arabs, Assyrians, Syriacs, Turkomans, Armenians, Circassians and Chechen. Also we have representatives from the Syrian democratic forces, YPG, women defense units. This conference is supposed to announce a federation as a political project for Rojava region in northern Syria.”

The “new project” is designed to replace the currently autonomous zone of Rojava by formally creating a Federation of Northern Syria incorporating the 250 miles of Kurdish-held territory along the Syria-Turkey border with the section of the northwestern border near the Afrin area. At least, this is the plan as relayed by Idris Nassan, an official working in the Foreign Affairs Directorate of Kobane (Ayn al-Arab). The new system entails “widening the framework of self-administration which the Kurds and others have formed,” he said.

Rojova only received a degree of autonomy in 2013, when Syrian forces were overwhelmed by Western-backed terrorists and were forced to abandon much of the territory now occupied by Kurdish militias such as the YPG and others. In place of the SAA, the NDF and other Syrian patriot militias, as well as Kurdish forces, remained and fought terrorists gallantly to the point of securing large swaths of border territory.

Kerry's Plan B For Syria Equals Brookings, Brzezinski Plan A

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
February 26, 2016

In his testimony to a U.S. Senate committee regarding the Syria ceasefire agreement brokered by the United States and Russia, Secretary of State John Kerry didn’t express much optimism for the success of the plan. That is not surprising, however, since no informed observer has any real hope for the success of the ceasefire because the agreement seems to lie largely in the hands of the Western-backed terrorists, of which none of whom are moderates.

Despite the lack of enthusiasm in his presentation, Kerry went through the motions of Congressional testimony when an agreement has already been made and a public show is required for mass consumption. What was telling about his testimony, however, is Kerry’s allusion to a mysterious “Plan B” if the ceasefire agreement does not work.

“There is a significant discussion taking place now about a Plan B in the event that we do not succeed at the [negotiating] table,” Kerry said. But he did not go into specifics as to exactly what that Plan B would look like. That is, except for a slight comment suggesting that the U.S. may have to shift its policy from the total destruction of the Assad government and Syria as a whole to almost total destruction of the country in the form of partitioning and dividing the country into separate principalities.

To this end, Kerry only stated that it could be “too late to keep as a whole Syria if we wait much longer.”

Yet Kerry’s “Plan B” sounds very much like the “Plan A” of a number of other strategists, policy makers, and imperialist organs.

Brandon Turbeville on the Tim Denis Morning Show; 610 CKTB Ontario, Canada, November 26, 2015.

Brandon Turbeville

BrandonTurbeville.com

November 26, 2015

Brandon Turbeville on the Tim Denis Morning Show on 610 CKTB Ontario, Canada, November 26, 2015.

Brandon and Tim discuss the Turkish involvement with ISIS, the shoot down of the Russian jet, and the Syrian crisis.

Brzezinski’s “Retaliation” Agenda: Break Up Russia And Absorb It

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
October 9, 2015

When the dark lord of the Anglo-American empire, Zbigniew Brzezinski, stated that the United States should retaliate against Russia as a result of the latter ruining the former’s credibility in the Middle East (which the U.S. needed no help in doing), the world got a glimpse into just how far the ruling elite is willing to take the world’s population in its quest for total hegemony.

After all, Brzezinski is no mere talking head or media mouthpiece. He is the architect of al-Qaeda and controller of much of the American geopolitical strategy. When he states that retaliation must be part of U.S. strategy, there is a very real possibility that it will be.

Indeed, in order to understand much of the U.S. geopolitical strategy at work today, it might serve us well to consult the work Brzezinski in his book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives.

It should be remembered that it was in this very book that Brzezinski uttered the famous statement that “America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America’s power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public’s sense of domestic well-being.”[1]

The book, written in 1997, seemed to lament the fact that the public would not support such blatant imperialism unless they truly viewed the crusade to be in their own immediate self-interest. Only fours year later, the public would receive such a “sudden threat or challenge” to their “sense of domestic well-being” in the form of the 9/11 attacks.

Brzezinski Calls For ‘Retaliation’ Against Russia For Fighting ISIS

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
October 6, 2015

The leading anti-Russian figure of the Anglo-American establishment and geopolitical chess player, Zbigniew Brzezinski, has recently declared in an op-ed for the Financial Times that the United States should “retaliate” against Russia for its actions in Syria, even going so far as military action to do so.

Brzezinski argues that the recent Russian involvement in Syria puts American credibility and global reputation at stake and suggests that such a situation is intolerable. Brzezinski wrote that Russian attacks against what he and the U.S. State Department have labeled as the “non-ISIS” targets and “rebels backed by the United States” at best reflects “Russian military incompetence” and at worst signals “evidence of a dangerous desire to highlight American political impotence.”

"In these rapidly unfolding circumstances the U.S. has only one real option if it is to protect its wider stakes in the region: to convey to Moscow the demand that it cease and desist from military actions that directly affect American assets," he wrote.

"But, better still, Russia might be persuaded to act with the U.S. in seeking a wider accommodation to a regional problem that transcends the interests of a single state," he added later.

Brzezinski hinted that Russia was engaged in a “new form of neocolonial domination” and offered up his assessment of the geopolitical situation when he stated

NATO Membership For Ukraine – Another Move On The Grand Chessboard

image source

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
September 2, 2014

As the geopolitical tug of war continues to take place over the ravaged country of Ukraine, both sides of the conflict – NATO and Russia – have begun taking steps toward a more solidified structure of alliances that will no doubt have massive reverberations across the world and possibly lead to direct confrontation between nuclear powers.

Indeed, as further evidence that the Western NATO bloc desires an ultimate conflict with Russia and the BRICS powers, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has indicated that Ukraine is firmly on the path to become an eventual member of the NATO alliance.

Simultaneously, West Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniyuk submitted a bill to the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada that would cancel Ukraine’s “non-aligned” status and restart Ukraine’s official attempt to become a member of NATO.

Yatsenyuk also revealed that the ultimate goal of Ukraine is to become a member of the European Union. For that reason, the bill would also ban Ukraine from “joining any political unions which would prevent it from eventually achieving” membership in the EU. The “political unions” which Yatsenyuk and his NATO backers are most concerned with are the Eurasian Economic Community and the Eurasian Customs Union; both political unions created and maintained by Russia which many see as the tentacles of the old Soviet Union.

Yatsenyuk asked Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to classify the bill as urgent and to fast track a vote on the legislation as soon as possible.

Zbigniew Brzezinski: The Decline Of The US And The End Of The American Empire

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
June 26, 2014

Ever since 9/11, it has been apparent that the American empire is living on borrowed time. In more recent years, the inevitable collapse of American world hegemony and the unipolar world is one that very few informed observers can continue to ignore.

Riddled with massive unemployment, an overextended military, entrenched police state, crumbling infrastructure, and the ever-present threat to the US dollar, it is clear that the United States is merely the shell of its former self. Indeed, in 2014, the concept of long-term American primacy is only a fantasy maintained by the mainstream media with its constant repetition of meaningless and absurd notions of recoveries, humanitarian interventions, and national security.

More credible researchers, however, are well aware of the fact that the United States, as an empire as well as a nation, is headed the way of every empire before it. There is little doubt that the United States will soon run out of steam in its march across the world and a crackdown at home while reckless economic policy continues to be dictated from the halls of Wall Street.

Yet the decline of the United States is not simply the result of a few years of stupid mistakes made by the ruling class. The truth is that the end of America is nothing more than a waypoint in a script that was written long ago.

Brandon Turbeville on Truth Traveler with Erin Dakins, May 29, 2014.

Brandon Turbeville on Truth Traveler with Erin Dakins, May 29, 2014.

Vince Finelli of USAPrepares.com appears as guest and co host.

Brandon discusses Syria, Ukraine, Zbigniew Brzezinski, radiation, fluoride and the culture industry among a host of other topics as well.

HOUR 1

HOUR 2

ACCESS THE TRUTH TRAVELER ARCHIVES HERE (Locate the May 2014 archives, then the May 29, 2014 archives. Brandon's appearance is both Hour 1 and Hour 2.)

  

The Role of NATO and the EU on Brzezinski's Grand Chessboard

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
May 28, 2014

On the first of May, 2014, Tony Cartalucci of Land Destroyer wrote an article entitled “Ukrainian Crisis Was Always About Containing Russia,” where he argued that “NATO's continued existence is hegemonic in nature - its meddling in Ukraine an act of war against Russia.”

In addition, Cartalucci also wrote that “what we have witnessed over the past several months is not ‘Russian aggression,’ but the premeditated destabilization and overthrow of the elected government of Ukraine, and a resulting, and continuously escalating confrontation with Russia as Moscow reacts to the reappearance of Nazis along its borders, backed by NATO and the EU.”

Cartalucci also discussed the importance of the expansion of NATO, particularly in the context of Ukrainian membership into the organization as a method of expanding the Anglo-European empire to the doorstep of Russia on yet another front.

As Cartalucci writes,

So what is NATO doing with Nazi militants in Ukraine? The same thing Adolf Hitler was doing - establishing "breathing room." While the West attempts publicly to portray the crisis in Ukraine as Europe reacting to Russian aggression, behind semi-closed doors they are very open about their agenda in Ukraine and elsewhere along Russia's peripheries - it is and always was about the expansion of Europe and the containment of Russia. 

Recently the corporate-funded NATO think tank, the Atlantic Council, celebrated what it called, "anniversaries of crucial importance to the transatlantic community, including the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, the 15th anniversary of NATO's first post-Cold War enlargement, and the 10th anniversary of the "big bang" enlargements of both the European Union and NATO." These "enlargements" all took place after the fall of the Cold War - in other words, after NATO's mandate for existing expired. Yet the alliance continued to grow, and not only did it grow, in tandem with the European Union, it did so directly toward Moscow's doorstep with every intention of eventually absorbing Russia as well.

Truth on the Tracks with Brandon Turbeville 5-26-2014 - Video

Truth on the Tracks with Brandon Turbeville - May 26, 2014

Truth on the Tracks with Brandon Turbeville - May 26, 2014

Brandon discusses Gun rights, Hilary Clinton, Syria, Ukraine, Chad, Japan, China, US Geopolitics, and the Brzezinski doctrine as well as providing quotes from The Grand Chessboard.



ACCESS THE PROGRAM HERE

ACCESS THE TRUTH ON THE TRACKS ARCHIVE HERE

 

Ukraine And Its Position on Brzezinski's Grand Chessboard

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

May 15, 2014

Throughout the conflict currently taking place inside Ukraine, it is often a frustrating ordeal to attempt to explain the hidden mechanisms at work in the battle for the strategically vital European nation.

Indeed, to convey the fact that the initial Euromaidan protests were instigated by the United States and Anglo-European powers in order to gain a strategic advantage over and antagonize Russia is difficult enough.

To further explain that Russia, who has geopolitical and imperial aspirations of its own, is acting defensively in its response to the destabilization efforts while, at the same time, attempting to extend its own level of control over Ukraine, is an equally difficult task.

However, assuming that the complex nature of the Ukrainian situation can be accurately conveyed, one question that almost always arises is “Why?” “Why is Ukraine so important?”

In order to answer this question it might serve us well to consult the work of powerful insider Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives.

It should be remembered that it was in this very book that Brzezinski uttered the famous statement that “America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America’s power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public’s sense of domestic well-being.”[2]