According to the SVR (Russian Foreign Intelligence Service - Служба внешней разведки), the CIA is in the process of renewing ties with the jihadists in northern Syria for the purpose of recruiting them to carry out sporadic attacks against the Syrian Arab Army.

At the Geneva summit with President Vladimir Putin in June 2021, the US President admitted his country’s defeat in Syria and vowed not to intervene there again, recognizing that this country was now under Russian protection. In addition, he accepted the start-up of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline with a gas price slightly higher than that usually practiced by Russia as a means of compensating for the war damages in Syria.

However, in the face of the Russian proposal for a Treaty crafted to maintain peace and stability, Washington plans to turn off the gas pipeline and relaunch jihadist operations.

The attack on a prison held by Kurdish mercenaries, in January, in an area northeast of Syria illegally occupied by the United States and inhabited by jihadists, was likely to have been the first step in the US recruitment plan.

The elimination of the second caliph of the Islamic State, Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurashi, by a US commando, on 3 February, made it possible to replace him with a more compliant leader.

Only two days later, on 5 February, a meeting was held in Qatar, chaired by the former president of the Syrian Council of Ministers Riad Hijab and leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, which saw a distribution of roles between different jihadist groups and various US think tanks.

Read more:

https://www.voltairenet.org/article215693.html

READ FROM TOP.

Note: info from the Voltaire Network is usually 99.9 per cent correct... (even coming from the SVR)

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BY Glenn Greenwald

When it comes to distant and adversarial countries, we are taught to recognize tyranny through the use of telltale tactics of repression. Dissent from orthodoxies is censored. Protests against the state are outlawed. Dissenters are harshly punished with no due process. Long prison terms are doled out for political transgressions rather than crimes of violence. Journalists are treated as criminals and spies. Opposition to the policies of political leaders are recast as crimes against the state.

When a government that is adverse to the West engages in such conduct, it is not just easy but obligatory to malign it as despotic. Thus can one find, on a virtually daily basis, articles in the Western press citing the government's use of those tactics in Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela and whatever other countries the West has an interest in disparaging (articles about identical tactics from regimes supported by the West — from Riyadh to Cairo — are much rarer). That the use of these repressive tactics render these countries and their populations subject to autocratic regimes is considered undebatable. 

But when these weapons are wielded by Western governments, the precise opposite framework is imposed: describing them as despotic is no longer obligatory but virtually prohibited. That tyranny exists only in Western adversaries but never in the West itself is treated as a permanent axiom of international affairs, as if Western democracies are divinely shielded from the temptations of genuine repression. Indeed, to suggest that a Western democracy has descended to the same level of authoritarian repression as the West's official enemies is to assert a proposition deemed intrinsically absurd or even vaguely treasonous. 

The implicit guarantor of this comforting framework is democracy. Western countries, according to this mythology, can never be as repressive as their enemies because Western governments are at least elected democratically. This assurance, superficially appealing though it may be, completely collapses with the slightest critical scrutiny. The premise of the U.S. Constitution and others like it is that majoritarian despotism is dangerous in the extreme; the Bill of Rights consists of little more than limitations imposed on the tyrannical measures majorities might seek to democratically enact (the expression of ideas cannot be criminalized even if majorities want them to be; religious freedom cannot be abolished even if large majorities demand it; life and liberty cannot be deprived without due process even if nine of out ten citizens favor doing so, etc.). More inconveniently still, many of the foreign leaders we are instructed to view as despots are popular or even every bit as democratically elected as our own beloved freedom-safeguarding officials. 

As potent as this mythological framework is, reinforced by large media corporations over so many decades, it cannot withstand the increasingly glaring use of precisely these despotic tactics in the West. Watching Justin Trudeau — the sweet, well-mannered, well-raised good-boy prince of one of the West's nicest countries featuring such a pretty visage (even on the numerous occasions when marred by blackface) — invoke and then harshly impose dubious emergency, civil-liberties-denying powers is just the latest swing of the hammer causing this Western sculpture to crumble. In sum, you are required by Western propaganda to treat the two images below as fundamentally different; indeed, huge numbers of people in the West vehemently denounce the one on the left while enthusiastically applauding the one on the right. Such brittle mythology can be sustained only for so long:

READ MORE:

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-neoliberal-war-on-dissent-in?utm_source=url

READ FROM TOP.

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!