.
.
.
BBC investigation exposes US, UK protecting IS in Syria
By the Economic Times
A BBC expose, with graphic visuals, is quite emphatic: The US and British-led coalition forces enabled hundreds of IS jihadists escape from Raqqa after the headquarters of their self-declared Caliphate was bombarded out of recognition. This will set the cat among the pigeons.
The matter will surely come up in the British Parliament and Congressional hearings in Washington. More such mischief is surfacing.
The Defence Ministry in Moscow stated. "The US refused to bomb a military convoy retreating from Abu Kamal (in Raqqa). The coalition's aircraft also attempted to prevent Russian Aerospace Forces from carrying out air strikes against militants." There is considerable evidence of "direct cooperation and support for ISIS terrorists by the US-led International Coalition", the Defence Ministry said.
In a separate incident "Americans peremptorily refused to conduct airstrikes on ISIS terrorists". The reason given was that the militants were agreeing to surrender as prisoners of war and were "therefore subject to the provisions of the Geneva convention". US aircraft obstructed "Russian aerospace from taking action".
Stratfor, an establishment think tank, offers almost an apology for terrorism perpetrated by returning jihadists. "Looking at recent cases involving fighters returning from Iraq and Syria, they have tended to conduct attacks against soft targets instead of making more complex attacks against harder, more significant targets. Some examples include a Jewish museum and the soft side of the airport in Brussels; a concert in Manchester in the UK; and a café, concert venue and sports stadium in Paris." Is it not too sanguine a tone on the theme of returning jihadists who destabilise Western societies?
The matter will surely come up in the British Parliament and Congressional hearings in Washington. More such mischief is surfacing.
The Defence Ministry in Moscow stated. "The US refused to bomb a military convoy retreating from Abu Kamal (in Raqqa). The coalition's aircraft also attempted to prevent Russian Aerospace Forces from carrying out air strikes against militants." There is considerable evidence of "direct cooperation and support for ISIS terrorists by the US-led International Coalition", the Defence Ministry said.
In a separate incident "Americans peremptorily refused to conduct airstrikes on ISIS terrorists". The reason given was that the militants were agreeing to surrender as prisoners of war and were "therefore subject to the provisions of the Geneva convention". US aircraft obstructed "Russian aerospace from taking action".
Stratfor, an establishment think tank, offers almost an apology for terrorism perpetrated by returning jihadists. "Looking at recent cases involving fighters returning from Iraq and Syria, they have tended to conduct attacks against soft targets instead of making more complex attacks against harder, more significant targets. Some examples include a Jewish museum and the soft side of the airport in Brussels; a concert in Manchester in the UK; and a café, concert venue and sports stadium in Paris." Is it not too sanguine a tone on the theme of returning jihadists who destabilise Western societies?
