Welcome To The new Global War Of Terror : GWOT 2.0

11 posts / 0 new
Last post
Welcome To The new Global War Of Terror : GWOT 2.0

UN Calls On World To Fight ISIS As Security Council Unanimously Adopts French-Drafted Resolution


"The United Nations has called the states to fight 'a global and unprecedented threat to international peace and security' which is Islamic State (IS, ISIS/ISIL,DAESH).

All 15 members of the UN Security Council voted to adopt the French-proposed resolution. The resolution 'calls upon member states that have capacity to do so to take all necessary measures...on the territory under the control of ISIL in Syria and Iraq.'

IS 'constitutes a global and unprecedented threat to international peace and security,' the resolution says."


Paris and the Soldiers of the Caliphate: More War, More Blowback


"Terrorism is a symptom of a larger disease, the disease of capitalist imperialism. To bring peace to the West, we must treat the disease, not just the symptom. Yet our leaders will never do this.

Why, because every major terrorist attack is leveraged by the West to occupy greater segments of the Middle East and to suppress free speech, organization and protest at home.

Our oligarchic elite must never concede their own role in fomenting terror - by terrorizing vulnerable populations. They are duty bound by the oligarchs that elected them to observe an elite omerta about empire.

We can boil down the problem of terrorism to its purest expression; we kill them, so they try to kill us..."


In the Fight Against ISIS, Russia Ain't Taking No Prisoners


"...The whole process exhibits multiple ramifications of imperial folly, past and future that can be identified like splinters from a suicide bomb; from CIA-trained/weaponized, Wahhabi-drenched mujahedeen ('Reagan's freedom fighters') metastasizing into 'Al-CIAda', to Hillary Clinton admitting Saudi Arabia is a top source of terrorist financing.

Paris 2015 - as well as Sinai 2015 - essentially is a side effect of Baghdad 2003. Putin knows it. For now, the task is to smash these mongrel imperial offspring once and for all."


Tangled Threads of US False Narratives  -  by Robert Parry


"Official Washington's many false narratives about Russia and Syria have gotten so tangled that they have become a danger to the struggle against Sunni jihadist terrorism and conceivably a threat to the future of the planet, a risk that Robert Parry explores..."


John Helmer: The Barbarians At The Gates of Civilization, But Which Empire is Falling?


"The university that taught generations of American leaders that their manifest destiny is to make war on uncivilized peoples around the world is having a bad time of it, now that the US has lost the last four straight; and the losers are streaming in for their take of the manifest. Streaming into Europe that is, but not into Harvard University, nor the state of Massachusetts, nor the United States.

But now comes Professor Niall Ferguson, on Rupert Murdoch's tab, to declaim that the terrorism which has stormed the boulevards and entertainments of Paris is that the French and the European Union (EU), deserve it because they have let their guard down, inviting the barbarians in by 'complacency', 'secularism' and 'decadence.'

Missing from Ferguson's version of history is the 70-year record of the US Government wars which financed and armed the jihadists, and deployed them for regime change from Afghanistan to Bosnia, Kosovo and Russia and then to Egypt, Libya and Syria. As each of these wars have been defeated, their mercenary armies, camp followers and baggage trains have moved on. They are now at the gates of Europe, as Ferguson reports unoriginally.

How the failures of Washington warmaking despatched them there is missing from his tale, and so from the lesson he draws. Since the US is the supreme commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) mounting the defence of Europe, and the military occupier still of Germany, how is it possible not to define the jihadist war against Europe as a NATO threat under Article 4 and Article 5?

These are the treaty provisions requiring the signing states to act in concert when an attack against one means an attack against all. This makes the Jihadist war in Europe a US responsibility, as well as a charge on American taxpayers. But they don't want to pay, and if opinion polls were reported of what they, as well as the Europeans really think, they know where the blame lies.."


What do babblers think of using the term "Daesh", instead of "Islamic State"? Which would you deem more accurate? Also, there has been some issues raised about our use of the term "jihad", which, in fact, has nothing to do with acts of violence? I'd be interested to know what people think, especially our Muslim brothers and sisters.


Geoff wrote:

What do babblers think of using the term "Daesh", instead of "Islamic State"?

Search me. What is "Daesh"?

Also, there has been some issues raised about our use of the term "jihad", which, in fact, has nothing to do with acts of violence?

Really? I thought jihad was struggle. Could be nonviolent, could be violent. I also thought the Muslim wars of conquest (7th to 9th centuries or so) and the expansion of the caliphates was known (by those who waged them) as "jihad". I could be mistaken.

I'd rather hear from historians, Muslims or otherwise, than from people who will give us definitions based on their current personal religious beliefs or cultures. I'm not sure how being an adherent of a particular religion gives anyone an advantage in terms of terminology.

Unless, of course, your question relates to how these terms are seen by Muslims? If that's what you meant, then I await Muslims' comments.



 I've been told, IS hates the term 'Daesh' and prefers 'Islamic State. I've seen all terms used interchangeably, IS/Islamic State/ ISIL/ISIS.  As for jihad or jihadis, couldn't tell you. Not a Muslim.

If you care to review the Islamic State thread, you will find Muslim authors and can check their use of terminology if you wish. Or google Catherine Shakdam, a Muslim woman who writes on this topic.



Here's one explanation of Daesh that I found online:

"The name Daesh, is a "loose acronym" for "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" (al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham). The name also has many negative undertones, as Daesh sounds similar to the Arabic words Daes ("one who crushes something underfoot") and Dahes ("one who sows discord")." http://theweek.com/speedreads/446139/france-says-name-isis-offensive-call-daesh-instead

Also, here's what I learned about "jihad":


  • Jihad is not a violent concept.
  • Jihad is not a declaration of war against other religions. It is worth noting that the Koran specifically refers to Jews and Christians as "people of the book" who should be protected and respected. All three faiths worship the same God. Allah is just the Arabic word for God, and is used by Christian Arabs as well as Muslims.
  • Military action in the name of Islam has not been common in the history of Islam. Scholars says most calls for violent jihad are not sanctioned by Islam."http://islamicsupremecouncil.org/understanding-islam/legal-rulings/5-jihad-a-misunderstood-concept-from-islam.html?start=9


Mr. Magoo

I usually go with ISIS, or ISIS/ISIL.

I don't use the term Daesh, as much as they might resent it, because it's not the most common term for them, and so choosing it to piss them off seems like an unnecessary manipulation of terms.

I don't solely use the term "ISIL" (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) because it inevitably reminds me of Ezra Levant.


Thanks Geoff. So I'll keep referring to them as Daesh..


Terror Sponsors in Saudi Arabia, Qatar Must Beware of Russia: Analyst


"In Qatar and Saudi Arabia, there are those who organize and sponsor terrorist attacks - they are headquartered there. There are well-known people there, who control terrorist activities in Syria and Iraq,' Pravda news agency quoted the CEO of the Institute for the Middle East, Yevgeny Satanovsky, as saying.

Satanovsky warned, ' These people should be very much afraid of Russia.' According to Satanovsky, Moscow has 'stepped on the warpath fallowing the terrorist attack in the skies over Sinai.

Some Western countries, led by the US and their regional allies - mainly Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia - have been widely accused of supporting the militants, such as Daesh in Syria to overthrow the government in Damascus."