TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) announced that the US Army has established seven military bases in regions controlled by the Kurds in Eastern Syria.
Siban Hamou was quoted as saying by al-Sharq al-Awsat that the US army has established six military airports and a base on the Eastern bank of the Euphrates River, adding that a modern large airport in Kobani (Ein al-Arab) is the most important one of them.
“The US has set up two airports in Hasaka, one airport in Qamishli, two airports in al-Malekiyeh (Dirik), and one more airport in Tal Abyadh at border with Turkey in addition to a military squad center in the town of Manbij in Northeastern Aleppo,” Hamou said.
Hamou went on to say that 1,300 forces of the US-led coalition are deployed in the airports and center.
Political advisor of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) Abu Yaqoub disclosed days ago that the US-led coalition was to set up a military base for militants in Southwestern Hasaka near the provincial border with Deir Ezzur.
Abu Yaqoub said that the coalition led by the US decided to establish a military base for the militants of al-Maqawir al-Thorah in al-Shadadi region, adding that the coalition’s move to relocate al-Maqawir to the new base was aimed at taking control over Deir Ezzur city.
He further said that al-Shadadi was near the oil wells in Deir Ezzur province.
Yaqoub went on to say that the US declared its readiness to transfer 100 al-Maqawi al-Thorah fighters to the new base along with their equipment.
In the meantime, the new base that would be the third, after the two bases of al-Tanf and al-Zakaf 70km away from each other, where al-Maqawir al-Thorah and coalition forces were present.
Two regional intelligence sources disclosed mid-June that the US military moved a new truck-mounted, long-range rocket launcher from Jordan to a US base in al-Tanf in Southeastern Homs, near the Iraqi and Jordanian borders, stepping up its presence in the area.
The sources said the (High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems – HIMARS) had moved into the desert garrison, which saw a buildup in recent weeks as tensions escalate after the US-led coalition struck positions of the Syrian forces to prevent them advancing toward the al-Tanf base.
“They have arrived now in al-Tanf and they are a significant boost to the US military presence there,” one senior intelligence source said, without elaborating.
The HIMARS had already been deployed in Northern Syria with US-backed forces battling ISIL militants, he added.
The missile system’s deployment at al-Tanf would give US forces the ability to strike targets within its 300-kilometer range.
Moscow stressed that the United States’ military build-up in Southern Syria violates the norms of international law.
“This is an active US build-up of its military presence in the southern regions of sovereign Syria in violation of international law,” Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told reporters after the United States transferred two high mobility multiple-launch rocket systems from Jordan to the US special operations forces base at Al-Tanf.
As Washington increased its military movement across the country in recent months, a Syrian fighter jet engaged in operations against the ISIL in Raqqa was downed by the US-led coalition warplane mid June.
It was not the first time that the US-led intervention in Syria led to standoffs and violence against pro-government forces.
As Washington claims that it fights against the ISIL group, US warships fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles from two warships in the Mediterranean Sea at the Shayrat airfield in Homs province on April 7, following a chemical weapons incident in Idlib province which the Western countries blamed on the Damascus government.
The Syrian government has fiercely denied using or even possessing chemical weapons since the country’s compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention was certified by international observers in 2013, as the world is still waiting for the US and its allies to provide any proof for its claims of Bashar al-Assad government involvement in the alleged chemical attack.
Also on May 18, the US-led coalition struck pro-Bashar Assad forces near al-Tanf in the area of an established de-confliction zone. The coalition air raids occurred near al-Tanf, where US’ and British special operations forces had been training militants near the border with Iraq and Jordan.
On June 6, the Pentagon announced the coalition conducted a new strike on pro-Syrian government forces as they entered the de-confliction zone with Russia and posed threat to its personnel. The force comprised of a tank, artillery, anti-aircraft weapons, armed technical vehicles and more than 60 soldiers. At least two Syrian servicemen were killed and more than 15 injured as a result of the attack.
On June 8, the US-led coalition bombed pro-Damascus forces near al-Tanf in the area of a de-confliction zone following an alleged attack by a combat drone resulting in no coalition forces’ casualties. This was the third attack by the coalition on Damascus’ allies in the area. The coalition targeted a drone and trucks with weapons.
Furthermore, on September 16, US-led coalition aircraft carried out four strikes against the Syrian Army near the Deir Ezzur airport, killing nearly 100 people.
Foreign policy – European Union/fight against terrorism – Excerpts from the speech by M. Emmanuel Macron, President of the Republic, to the Parliament meeting in joint session
Versailles, 3 July 2017
As we know, the world in which we’re mapping out a path for France – both a new one and one in keeping with its ancient tradition – is a dangerous world. There are growing threats to our environment, including our immediate environment. With each new crisis, the shadow of war itself looms. A global deflagration is no longer the bogey raised by pessimists: it’s a serious possibility for realists. Assertions of power are returning or emerging. Terrorist movements are developing in many regions, with capabilities that increase their ability to do harm. They are there in our societies. Regional wars are reaching new levels of barbarity. Yesterday’s alliances are crumbling away, the multilateral order is unsure of itself, and authoritarian regimes and “illiberal” democracies are flourishing.
Cyberspace is spreading and amplifying the instruments of this dog-eat-dog war. The world’s downward slide is imposing its erratic pace, its excesses of all kinds, destroying mankind, uprooting it, wiping out its memory, disrupting its imagination. That’s the world we’re living in today! It’s not about understanding this in a defeatist way – no! It imposes duties on us – no doubt the most serious ones a nation can bear: to keep open everywhere the path of negotiation, dialogue and peace in the face of the most sinister endeavours.
France’s role and being true to its history mean being able to build peace and promote human dignity.
This is why we must take action everywhere, firstly to protect our interests and, first and foremost, our security. This is what led me to reaffirm our engagement in both the Sahel and the Levant, to combat terrorism and all fanaticism, not only in our interests but also in those of the peoples concerned. And on this point I’m aware of the daily commitment our armed forces have been making for so many months. But such action can be effective only if it’s over the long term and therefore seeks to build political solutions enabling crises to be overcome, and therefore [we must] be able, in all those regions, to talk to all powers, including those which don’t share our own ultimate goals or our own values, in order to find a solution and build it!
In this framework, I won’t propose that we usurp the role of other peoples because we’d like to impose our principles or values elsewhere, because I don’t want new failed states to appear.
France must always be respectful. At the same time as combating terrorism and all excesses, at the same time as protecting its own security and values, it must respect peoples’ sovereignty. But wherever freedoms are not respected, we’ll work, through our diplomacy and our development actions, to help minorities, work to support societies to ensure rights are respected. This requires demanding, sometimes lengthy and thankless work, which is necessary in order to put France back at the heart of dialogue between nations. I’ve been busy doing this for several weeks, from Mali to Ukraine, from Syria to the Gulf, talking in depth to all the world’s leaders. France must help build or rebuild many different balances everywhere, even if they sometimes remain fragile.
In this context, our military tool takes on major importance. I’ve already ordered a strategic defence and security review. With the guiding principles of independence and autonomous decision-making, our armed forces will carry out the missions I’ve entrusted them with: deterrence, the cornerstone of our security; protecting our fellow citizens and our interests; and intervention wherever compliance with the law and international stability are under threat. The prevention and resolution of crises will be handled comprehensively, never forgetting that only stabilization and development will allow us to create the conditions for lasting peace.
This ability for dialogue, this French credibility and this ability to build peace everywhere depend on our armed forces. And yet, this independence I aspire to doesn’t mean solitude. France will be loyal to all its alliances.
Our armed forces will undergo strategic and tactical modernization over the coming years. I know they’re ready for this, because they’re at the forefront of today’s world, showing a vigilance and commitment that are a credit to our country.
As you see, the threats have never been so great, and the multilateral order is no doubt more fragile than it’s ever been, divided, shaken, at a time when it’s probably more necessary than ever.
In the coming years, France’s role will be to defend security and equality in the face of excesses, defend freedoms, defend the planet against global warming – defend everything which makes up our common universal good and which today, in too many places, is being undermined!
Let me highlight the unprecedented time we’re living in. Since the 18th century we’ve built ourselves [a society] on a balance we thought was everlasting, between democracies, liberal values, our freedoms and a market economy that enabled the middle classes to move forward. All this has now been fundamentally shaken, transformed, threatened.
Authoritarian regimes succeed in the market economy. Democracies which we previously thought were allies forever are threatening the international order and beginning to doubt their own rules. Our destiny, our role today – even more than yesterday – is precisely to reiterate them, promote them, create them and stick to them. This will be my goal, our goal, and no other.
These developments in the world are, in a way, testing our endurance and cohesion. For example, it’s what we’re experiencing with the major migration crises currently gripping Africa, the Mediterranean and, once again, Europe. In the coming months we’ll have difficult decisions to take, and we must anticipate them more effectively by means of an ambitious security and development policy covering all fragile conflict zones. We must explain again and take action everywhere, when there’s war and when there’s global warming, which so destabilize those regions.
But we must also curb this major migration more effectively through a policy to monitor and combat people-trafficking. To this end, in a coordinated way in Europe, we must take effective and humane action enabling us to take in political refugees, who are in genuine danger – because those are our values –, without confusing them with economic migrants and giving up the essential maintenance of our borders.
To stick to this course successfully, we need a stronger, overhauled Europe. More than ever, we need Europe. But then again, it’s no doubt more weakened than ever by divisions and by the doubt that has taken hold of our people.
However, Europe is in our country as much as we’re in Europe, because it’s impossible to think of our continental destiny other than through the European project. We are Europe. It’s a project of peace, of freedom, of progress, which was conceived and implemented bravely by the generations who preceded us and lived through the war. Today we’d like to forget all that! To believe that the response to divisions, to Brexit and to so many upheavals in history is even further diminution, a kind of renunciation, a faltering of history.
To neglect Europe, to get used to making do with it, to blame it for all our misfortunes is to betray those generations who went before us. It is to betray what enables us today, in our current position, to freely debate Europe, to love it or not.
But to neglect Europe, to get used to making it solely the focus of technical negotiations is also, in a way, to abdicate our history and diminish France.
The European enterprise today is also – we really must say and see this – weakened by a proliferation of bureaucracy and the growing scepticism that stems from it.
I firmly believe in Europe. But I don’t always find that scepticism unjustified. That’s why I’m proposing to you that we step back, escape the tyranny of timetables and calendars, the technical maze.
The decade which has just ended was a cruel one for Europe. We managed crises. But we’ve lost our way. This is why it falls to a new generation of leaders to take up Europe’s original idea, which is in essence political, a voluntary, realistic and ambitious association of states determined to ensure useful policies prevail on the movement of people and goods and particularly young people, on security, on monetary and fiscal matters and also on political and cultural ones.
The European countries – for which Europe can’t simply be reduced to a market, but forms an area where a certain idea of mankind’s value and the requirement for social justice are acknowledged as pre-eminent –, those states, those countries must once again seize a decisive project and organize themselves accordingly – even if this means examining unsparingly the way we currently operate.
We have a daily task to carry out, humbly – I’ve started it, thanks to the mandate from the people –, to have a Europe which affords greater protection, to undertake essential reforms and to uphold Europe’s ambition on the many subjects which are part of our everyday lives. But this won’t be enough. It’s up to France to take the initiative and I’d like to do this, in the coming months, through the close work I’ve already begun, with the Chancellor of Germany in particular.
By the end of the year, on these foundations, throughout Europe we’ll be launching democratic conferences to radically reform Europe precisely on the basis of this essential political project, on the basis of this essential ambition which unites mankind. Everyone is then free to subscribe to them or not.
But gone are the days of tinkering around the edges. We must go back to where Europe started, if I can put it like that, to its very beginning, and in doing so revive the desire for Europe, not letting demagogues or extremists monopolize people and ideas or making Europe a crisis-management body which daily tries to extend its domestic regulations because the neighbours don’t trust it any more.
We’ve got to rediscover the initial inspiration for the European commitment. The certainty found in the visionaries of past centuries and the founding fathers of Europe that the finest part of our histories and our cultures would express not through rivalry, still less war, but through a uniting of powers. Not through the hegemony of one party, but through a respectful balance which makes us all succeed.
The times we live in need this union. Because it’s this union alone that will enable us to take up the challenges of modernity. Because clearly it’s in this Europe that we share a common view of the world and mankind, a view steeped in the same beginnings and forged by the same trials of history.
These challenges are the environmental transition, which puts the relationship between mankind and nature on a new footing, the digital transition, which rewrites social rules and forces us to reinvent continental law, whereby for so many centuries we’ve wanted rules to respect mankind.
Finally, there’s the challenge for contemporary humanism faced with the dangers of fanaticism, terrorism and war, which we’ll respond to through more European defence, which is being built, and also a Europe of culture and innovation.
Peace isn’t just Europe’s foundation stone. It is its ideal, always to be promoted, and only Europe, and France in Europe, can achieve this today.
So yes, we’ll make a break from the easy ways out that we’ve given ourselves in previous years, so that we’re equal to what the times demand of us. (…)./.
By Henry Bauer
The evidence that “HIV” did not and does not cause “AIDS” is overwhelming, and has been set out in dozens of books. The point is also demonstrated in The Case against HIV, which lists >900 publications, most of them mainstream sources.
It’s no secret that HIV/AIDS dogma nevertheless remains hegemonic among official institutions, national and international.
I’ve come to believe that this will not change until a large enough proportion of people stop accepting automatically whatever official sources claim about scientific matters.
The necessary skepticism about seemingly authoritative statements about science can only be learned by coming to understand how science is done, and in particular how it is done nowadays. That means coming to realize how drastically science has changed since about the middle of the 20th century, from largely believable to automatically and uncritically believable only at one’s peril.
I’ve set out the pertinent history of science on my other blog: How Science Has Changed — notably since World War II.
By Michael Shrimpton, June 25, 2017
It was ISIS
Ever since Grenfell Tower blew up at a cost of over 100, possibly 200, lives, people have been demanding answers. Brain-dead left-wingers, oblivious to the fact the estate was run by a tenants-controlled organisation and that the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea is controlled from the Cabinet Office, not the town hall, have been blaming ‘Tory cuts’.
As I foretold last week, a fridge is being blamed. The police, of course, are gleefully blaming it on a British-made fridge, a Hotpoint FF175BP, which allegedly caught fire in a flat on the 5th floor (US numbering). Our police, who are also controlled from the Cabinet Office, sadly lack patriotism and would never pass up on an opportunity to damage the good name of a British company.
The media are lapping up the police’s silly fridge story, without stopping to ask themselves how an electrical fire in a fridge-freezer could possibly burn down an entire 24-storey block of flats. The police are also sitting on the casualty figure, to the point where their figure of 79 is being treated with open contempt.
Some of the smarter journalists, smart at any rate by comparison to the rest of their profession, are querying why Hotpoint are not recalling all the 60,000 or so FF175BP fridge-freezers out there. The answer is obvious – there never was a problem with the fridge, thus there is no need for a recall.
More to the point, recalls cost money. The police are frantically trying to keep Hotpoint engineers away from the fridge in question. No British manufacturer would commit shareholder funds to an expensive recall on the say-so of the sleaziest police force in the UK, no offense to the Metropolitan Police intended. The rozzers are obviously engaged in a cover-up. They are running away from the truth.
In the meantime there are panic evacuations of tower-blocks in London, which cannot be justified solely by the fire-hazard, not least with 24/7 fire marshals. There’s something more here than an ordinary fire hazard.
The Bomb Factory
The awful truth, awful at any rate for the Cabinet Office and the rozzers, is that there was an ISIS cell in Grenfell Tower, running a bomb factory. My analysis is that TATP was being stored in the freezer compartment, which failed in response to the heat generated. TATP generates a lot of heat and needs to be kept cool.
Unlike 7/7 there were no convenient commercial premises with industrial cooling equipment. A domestic fridge-freezer simply would not be up to the job. There’s no point in ISIS sending in a complaint to Hotpoint. I’m sure that Hotpoint would say that their domestic fridges are not designed to store high explosives!
TATP is more unstable than nitro-glycerine. It will cook off with even a slight rise in temperature. Being difficult to store, it also needs to be mixed close to the point of use. One consequence of that is that terrorist cells will have little experience in storing it.
Terrorists also tend not to be the sharpest knives in the box. ISIS is controlled from Dachau. The actual terrorists are seen as cannon-fodder. As on 7/7, 21/7 and at Manchester Arena GO2, the DVD’s London operation, are not above rigging the timers so that the terrorists manage to blow themselves up.
The rozzers are well aware that the 7/7 and Manchester terrorists were not suicide bombers. They have engaged in a sustained campaign of deception over 12 years, but with Grenfell Tower it’s threatening to blow up in their faces.
Whilst the judge-led inquiry will be a Piper Alpha style musical comedy proceeding, the explosive (no pun intended) growth in social media since 2005 means that it’s becoming more difficult for the rozzers and the Cabinet Office to suppress the truth.
What was the target?
You don’t want to transport TATP very far, not unless you’re a very silly terrorist, and ISIS’s targets in the UK are assigned by GO2 in any event. We are therefore probably looking at a target in or near London. You also want to leave mixing your TATP as late as possible.
This suggests targeting an event no later than last weekend. Best guess is Trooping The Colour. They wouldn’t have got close to HM the Queen, thank God, but they might have blown up a number of Her loyal subjects. Terrorists are cowards, so they would have been looking to murder unarmed civilians, preferably women and children, as at Manchester.
© Stephen Lam / Reuters
Police in Ukraine have seized the servers of one of the largest accounting software firms in the country, after it was suspected that a malware virus which hit dozens of global enterprises last week had spread via its malicious update.
As part of an investigation into one of the largest recent cyber attacks, the servers of Ukraine’s most popular accounting software, M.E.Doc were seized by Ukrainian police Tuesday, Reuters reported, citing the head of Ukraine’s Cyber Police, Sergey Demedyuk.
Cyber Police spokeswoman Yulia Kvitko confirmed an ongoing investigation into M.E.Doc’s offices.
Ukrainian intelligence officials and security firms experts believe initial infections, which affected thousands of computers worldwide, might have been spread via the accounting firm’s updates, Reuters reports.
While it is still unclear who inserted a vulnerability into the M.E.Doc program, the Kiev-based firm whose software is used by around 80 percent of companies in Ukraine is under investigation itself and will face criminal charges, AP reported citing Demedyuk.
M.E.Doc’s employees had dismissed repeated warnings about the security of their information technology infrastructure, Demedyuk said in an interview with the news agency.
Chernobyl nuclear power plant’s radiation checks knocked out by mass cyberattack https://on.rt.com/8g8t
Ukraine cyberattacks disrupt some Chernobyl radiation checks — RT News
The Chernobyl nuclear power plant, where a huge meltdown occurred in 1986, has had its radiation monitoring equipment knocked out by the mass cyberattack sweeping Ukraine, though most other systems…