Noam Chomsky is a slippery character.
1. Chomsky just now admits, after five years of mass murder:
“[stopping weapons] to the monstrous ISIS, which has been getting support tacitly through Turkey, through—to the al-Nusra Front, which is hardly different, has just the—the al-Qaeda affiliate, technically broke from it, but actually the al-Qaeda affiliate, which is now planning its own—some sort of emirate, getting arms from our allies, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.“
2. Just a month ago he was spinning the situation differently.
What changed? Is he reading my pieces? Worried about his loss of credibility and his legacy?
Probably the entrance of Russia, and their turning the war completely around is what finally prompted Chomsky to pipe up. When the terrorists were winning, where was Noam? Now that Russia and the government forces have the upper hand suddenly we have a problem?
I’ve been calling out this fraud on Syria since 2012, Seymour Hersh since 2013. I suppose Chomsky found it finally impossible to obfuscate away the covert CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY support to terrorists. He is quite a bit late to the party though. Someone should ask him why his grand proclamations take five years to arrive.
3. Chomsky mentions, now in 2016, “getting arms from our allies, Qatar and Saudi Arabia,” without any delving into what that means. They certainly aren’t “our” allies, for starters, but Washington’s. This is material support for international terrorism, a grievous crime, the sort of thing Bush launched a global Jihad against (supposedly, although I’m not convinced it was ever real).
4. So if “our allies” are supporting radical Islamic terrorists that means Washington and Obama are supporting radical Islamic terrorists. The US supports “allies.” These “allies” support the terrorists. It’s a very simple proxy war formula that Chomsky is unwilling to cross the t’s and dot the i’s on. Again, I’ve been writing about this for years, and I have found Obama on the record supporting Erdogan and the “foreign extremists” who flocked to Syria to wage Jihad:
“The President [Obama] and Prime Minister [Erdogan] discussed the danger of foreign extremists in Syria and agreed on the importance of supporting a unified and inclusive Syrian opposition.”
Arrest the President.
But that would involve that taboo word, the one Chomsky dares not utter: conspiracy. Noam still manages to contort the language (his specialty) to avoid the distasteful logical conclusions of all this atrocity and covert support.
5. Everyone who has seriously studied the issue knows the terrorist/freedom fighters of Syria are partners who work together. Claiming to support one faction is a meaningless distinction and is support to the entire horde. It’s a package deal. These terror armies admit to cooperating on the ground.
6. Chomsky absurdly turned to decades-long CIA “strategist” Graham Fuller, an architect of using radical terrorists as proxy armies, notably in Afghanistan:
“Actually, there’s an interesting interview with Graham Fuller. He’s one of the leading Middle East analysts, long background in CIA, U.S. intelligence. In the interview, he says something like, ‘The U.S. created ISIS.’ He hastens to add that he’s not joining with the conspiracy theories that are floating around the Middle East about how the U.S. is supporting ISIS. Of course, it’s not. But what he says is, the U.S. created ISIS in the sense that we established the background from which ISIS developed as a terrible offshoot. And we can’t overlook that.”
Why not? You’re overlooking most everything else, Noam. The entire “war on terror” paradigm is a glaring fraud, with “allies” creating terror armies as Washington cheers on and sends more money, and arms, and lies about it 24/7.
Chomsky just sided with Fuller’s CIA spin about what’s going on. When Chomsky glosses over what “supporting ISIS” might entail, he ignores how the oil smuggling was condoned for OVER A YEAR, while US fighter/bombers flew overhead. More than 60 terrorist training camps were never touched and churn out a steady 1,000 radical fighters per month, some of them now returning to Europe to blow things up and perpetuate the “Strategy of Tension” into the foreseeable future.
The Strategy of Tension is another topic which Noam Chomsky doesn’t address. Terror is a valuable commodity and often allowed to proceed by governments that would like to shake things up, make new moves. A half century of documentation on this, and on Operation Gladio, is never mentioned by Chomsky or anyone else in the American press.
7. The most twisted part of Noam Chomsky’s Syria spin is that he ignores what the actual American strategy is, the motives for the US and partners to destroy the Syrian government, to kick out the Russian base on the Mediterranean, and to pretend they value “freedom” and “democracy.”
Wesley Clark already told us about the hit list of 7 nations, and Syria is glaringly a proxy war waged on behalf of America’s grand global strategy. Where is this analysis from Chomsky? He provides no context, no motive for the criminal actions of the Obama regime, and the net effect is to champion the Graham Fuller line that it was all Bush’s fault–the ‘mistakes were made’ garbage–no current culpability. So there’s nothing we can do but more of the same. Hand wringing: not action and accountability for war criminals.
Chomsky casually mentions CIA support:
“Our own [proxy army]—the CIA is arming them. We don’t know at what level; it’s clandestine.”
But nothing on the illegality of arming a foreign insurgency, a clear breach of the UN Charter, the “supreme international crime.” Chomsky loves to cite UN findings when they are in line with his opinions, but the entire UN system of international law rests on the sovereignty of nations. The CIA flagrantly violating this sovereignty gets no mention. It is crime, conspiracy, wanton and egregious. It’s also now normalized, the complete end of international law. Not even Noam Chomsky finds it worth his breath to state that the US is violating international law in Syria, as are its so-called “allies.”