Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
In yet another example of the infantile nature of NATO propaganda regarding the Syrian crisis, it is now being reported in the mainstream media that that the United States must bomb Syrian oil pipelines in order to defeat the ISIS threat that NATO itself created.
While logically fallacious, the rationale offered to the American public remains that ISIS is making millions of dollars per day via the sale of the oil taken from the fields in its possession on the black market to a number of different states.
Yet, while the U.S. media does not bother to explain just how ISIS manages to extract, refine, and ship the oil, or how it is able to procure deals, and complete their transactions outside of the knowledge of Western militaries, governments, and intelligence agencies to the tune of $2 million per day, these outlets do provide the solution – bomb the oil pipelines belonging to Bashar al-Assad.
Of course, while it is most likely true that ISIS is using their commandeered oil sites to support themselves on a number of fronts, and even attempting (with some success) to sell that oil, the idea that ISIS is somehow able to evade the most sophisticated monitoring network in the entire world during the process of obtaining, refining, selling, and delivering oil across the region is entirely unbelievable. Indeed, it is about as believable as the claim that ISIS was able to seize such large swaths of territory across Syria and Iraq without the knowledge of the United States and NATO.
Regardless, it must be pointed out that, among the countries listed as hosting ISIS customers by mainstream outlets like CNN, Turkey and Jordan are at the top of the list, both close American allies and one a member of NATO. Even more interesting is the fact that ISIS has also allegedly sold “black market” oil to buyers in a number of EU member states.
Activist Post
In yet another example of the infantile nature of NATO propaganda regarding the Syrian crisis, it is now being reported in the mainstream media that that the United States must bomb Syrian oil pipelines in order to defeat the ISIS threat that NATO itself created.While logically fallacious, the rationale offered to the American public remains that ISIS is making millions of dollars per day via the sale of the oil taken from the fields in its possession on the black market to a number of different states.
Yet, while the U.S. media does not bother to explain just how ISIS manages to extract, refine, and ship the oil, or how it is able to procure deals, and complete their transactions outside of the knowledge of Western militaries, governments, and intelligence agencies to the tune of $2 million per day, these outlets do provide the solution – bomb the oil pipelines belonging to Bashar al-Assad.
Of course, while it is most likely true that ISIS is using their commandeered oil sites to support themselves on a number of fronts, and even attempting (with some success) to sell that oil, the idea that ISIS is somehow able to evade the most sophisticated monitoring network in the entire world during the process of obtaining, refining, selling, and delivering oil across the region is entirely unbelievable. Indeed, it is about as believable as the claim that ISIS was able to seize such large swaths of territory across Syria and Iraq without the knowledge of the United States and NATO.
Regardless, it must be pointed out that, among the countries listed as hosting ISIS customers by mainstream outlets like CNN, Turkey and Jordan are at the top of the list, both close American allies and one a member of NATO. Even more interesting is the fact that ISIS has also allegedly sold “black market” oil to buyers in a number of EU member states.
Still, this newly-formed ISIS oil company is now claimed to be one of the US’ “primary concerns” by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian affairs, Julieta Valls Noyes, during her recent trip to London. As usual, the U.S. response to its “concerns” involves the “possibility of airstrikes.”
Of course, having crossed the boundaries of sanity and logic a long time ago, the United States and its media mouthpieces are now pushing the fantasy that Bashar Al-Assad is one of the buyers of ISIS oil.
In other words, NATO and the U.S. in particular are trying to convince the general public that Bashar al-Assad, who has been fighting ISIS and related terror organizations for at least 4 years, is now buying oil from ISIS in order to fight ISIS. Therefore, according to the American government, the U.S. must fight ISIS by blowing up the oil pipelines that rightfully belong to Assad so ISIS does not fund itself by selling oil to Assad.
Of course, this is not merely staggering logic. It is a lie. It is nothing more than a cover to mask the true nature of the funding of ISIS and other takfiri militants operating in Iraq and Syria, namely that the funding is coming from the United States, NATO, and the GCC. Like the ridiculous claims that ISIS was funding itself entirely through secretive private Twitter donations, the “oil sales” argument is one that should be taken with a healthy dose of salt. After all, mainstream outlets are also asserting that ISIS is selling some of this oil to the Syrian government, a lose-win-lose situation for both sides and a rather poor attempt to portray Assad as an ally of ISIS.
In reality, it should always be remembered that ISIS is entirely a creation of the West and that it remains fundamentally under the control of NATO and the GCC.
Another relevant piece of the puzzle that must be kept in mind is the coveted Qatari oil pipeline desired by both Qatar and the United States. This pipeline would run up from Qatar through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, and Turkey and, from there, on to the rest of Europe. The establishment of this pipeline would have provided for a much-needed backup plan for Europe that is currently dependent on Russia for much of its supply. Remember, it was in 2009 that Assad nixed the plan for the development of this pipeline.
In lieu of the Qatari deal, Assad began negotiating a deal with Iran that would have seen a pipeline built across Iraq and Syria that also would have provided gas to Europe.
As Nafeez Ahmed wrote for The Guardian in 2013,
Of course, having crossed the boundaries of sanity and logic a long time ago, the United States and its media mouthpieces are now pushing the fantasy that Bashar Al-Assad is one of the buyers of ISIS oil.
In other words, NATO and the U.S. in particular are trying to convince the general public that Bashar al-Assad, who has been fighting ISIS and related terror organizations for at least 4 years, is now buying oil from ISIS in order to fight ISIS. Therefore, according to the American government, the U.S. must fight ISIS by blowing up the oil pipelines that rightfully belong to Assad so ISIS does not fund itself by selling oil to Assad.
Of course, this is not merely staggering logic. It is a lie. It is nothing more than a cover to mask the true nature of the funding of ISIS and other takfiri militants operating in Iraq and Syria, namely that the funding is coming from the United States, NATO, and the GCC. Like the ridiculous claims that ISIS was funding itself entirely through secretive private Twitter donations, the “oil sales” argument is one that should be taken with a healthy dose of salt. After all, mainstream outlets are also asserting that ISIS is selling some of this oil to the Syrian government, a lose-win-lose situation for both sides and a rather poor attempt to portray Assad as an ally of ISIS.In reality, it should always be remembered that ISIS is entirely a creation of the West and that it remains fundamentally under the control of NATO and the GCC.
Another relevant piece of the puzzle that must be kept in mind is the coveted Qatari oil pipeline desired by both Qatar and the United States. This pipeline would run up from Qatar through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, and Turkey and, from there, on to the rest of Europe. The establishment of this pipeline would have provided for a much-needed backup plan for Europe that is currently dependent on Russia for much of its supply. Remember, it was in 2009 that Assad nixed the plan for the development of this pipeline.
In lieu of the Qatari deal, Assad began negotiating a deal with Iran that would have seen a pipeline built across Iraq and Syria that also would have provided gas to Europe.
As Nafeez Ahmed wrote for The Guardian in 2013,
The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan was a "direct slap in the face" to Qatar's plans. No wonder Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, in a failed attempt to bribe Russia to switch sides, told President Vladmir Putin that "whatever regime comes after" Assad, it will be "completely" in Saudi Arabia's hands and will "not sign any agreement allowing any Gulf country to transport its gas across Syria to Europe and compete with Russian gas exports", according to diplomatic sources. When Putin refused, the Prince vowed military action.
With this in mind, one can clearly see the incentive that Western governments would have in the destruction not only of the potential Iran-Iraq-Syria oil/gas pipeline but also of the existing oil and gas pipeline infrastructure that currently exists. A bombing of Syria’s oil pipelines would subsequently allow the Qataris to rebuild the infrastructure that its allies destroyed and, as a result, weaken Russia even further on the geopolitical grand chessboard.Lastly, it should not be forgotten that the destruction of Syria’s oil and gas infrastructure weakens the Syrian government’s forces. Remember, in instances where the United States has bombed Syrian oil refineries so far, SAA forces were poised to move in to retake control of the oil refineries managed by terrorists funded by Western powers, but the United States initiated airstrikes just in the nick of time to deprive SAA forces of the opportunity to seize some of the oil refinery infrastructure it desperately needs.
It is also important to note that virtually none of the infrastructure being destroyed by the United States airstrikes was built by ISIS. It was built by the Syrian government. The reality of the bombing campaign is that the United States and its allies are destroying important regions of Syria and leaving nothing of real value for the Syrian military to retake after its long-fought battles against ISIS.
In the end, the latest claims presenting ISIS as impenetrable in its secrecy and daunting in its war and financial strategy is nothing more than pure propaganda. It is nothing more than a justification designed to goad the American people into continued complacency in the face of further US military intervention in Syria and the open assault on the Syrian government. Unfortunately, this has become a task which is far too easy.
Recently from Brandon Turbeville:
- How To Stop The Spread Of Ebola Without The Police State
- Mainstream 'Journalist' Reveals Agenda; Calls For Rape, Destruction of Syria
- New York Times FAIL: 'McCain No Connections To ISIS?!?'
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 six books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1and volume 2, and The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria. Turbeville has published over 300 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. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com.
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
No comments:
Post a Comment