By now there is no doubt where Turkey’s Prime Minister Sunni ideology is resting…
EGYPT – President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s insistent criticism of Egypt’s Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who was elected president after ousting a democratically elected president via a military coup, may well come with a price tag for Turkey on various fronts ranging from the economy to diplomacy, according to concerned analysts.

“There will be a price for this [attitude of Erdoğan]. Turkey should not expect to get the support of Egypt at the election for the UN Security Council,” Faruk Loğoğlu, a deputy of the Republican People’s Party (CHP), told Sunday’s Zaman.
Turkey is among the countries competing to get a seat as a temporary member in the UN Security Council for the two-year term of 2015-2016, and it is obvious Turkey will not enjoy Egypt’s support for its bid. (more…)

Joe being Joe, hits the truth strings – but misses the finger board.
Joe being Joe, outs “his friend” Recep Erdogan as being complicit to the rise of ISIS in Syria.
Joe being Joe, doesn’t quite understand Erdogan’s ideological comfort therein. Apparently Joe is easily fooled.
Joe out’s Hillary as being naïve to arm the fictional Syrian Moderates 2011, 2012, 2013.
Joe might not know about Operation Zero Footprint.
Joe is out. Joe is speaking. Joe is off the range.

It appears the fulcrum of Turkish sensitivity and support for ISIS has been identified.  The tipping point reached.

As we previously outlined, the action of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan reflected a tacit alliance with the overall goals of ISIS. However, also as previously discussed, we anticipated a forced political shift as the Kurdish populations continued to be driven in greater numbers toward the Turkish borders.

Our educated hunch was the quid-pro-quo (which led to the quiet release of the 49 Turkish hostages) included an acceptance by Erdogan to allow the Sunni jihadists, ISIS, a certain amount of, well, ‘Islamic discretion in genocide’, consequently creating refugees that Turkey would have to deal with.

However, eventually as ISIS killed more and more Kurds, the Sunni campaign was going to force too heavy an exodus of Kurdish people toward, and into, Turkey. 
Ideally if ISIS could kill the Kurds off quickly, Erdogan would not have to face a difficult decision; at least that appeared to be the overall strategy the western media was avoiding.
In order for our analysis to be correct the question became: “how many Kurds Erdogan would accept, and how long those attacks against them -which created the border crisis- would be accepted”? The answer therein would be the tipping point to a change in Erdogan’s position.
It appears -much to the dismay of Erdogan- the ISIS fighters have been unable to kill off the Kurds quick enough, and now his internal political dynamic, his parliament, has stepped in to debate and allow military intervention. (more…)

Will Erdogan be forced to push back against ISIS by his own internal political forces?  Or will his Sunni sensibilities overpower any political pressure.

Irbil, Iraq (CNN) — A day after Britain’s military launched its first airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq, the question is who will be next to join the U.S.-led coalition in its air campaign against the extremists who have seized a swath of Iraq and Syria.
As Turkish soldiers and tanks took up position along the border with Syria on Tuesday, Turkey’s government put a motion before Parliament asking for authorization to take military action against ISIS.
Lawmakers are expected to debate the measure in a special session on Thursday before voting, according to Anadolu, Turkey’s semi-official news agency. (more…)

https://twitter.com/Blazingcatfur/status/516639082798010368
(Reuters) – Turkish tanks and armoured vehicles took up positions on a hill overlooking the besieged Syrian border town of Kobani on Monday as shelling by Islamic State insurgents intensified and stray fire hit Turkish soil, a Reuters correspondent said.
At least 15 tanks were positioned, some with their guns pointed towards Syrian territory, near a Turkish military base just northwest of Kobani. Plumes of smoke rose up as shells hit both the eastern and western sides of Kobani. (more…)

If anyone has sources in Turkey, or knowledge of current dynamics in Turkey, or insight we would really like to hear from you.
The intents, inclinations, sympathies and motivations of Recep Erdogan are brutally obvious. What’s lesser known is how far the underpinning of Turkish politics is willing to allow his ideology to advance. After all, Erdogan is one man – leading one party – and there are opposition forces within Turkey which could, if pressured, become a danger to him.

Our current working theory, given known players, ideology and research into actual behaviors, is this:
The ISIS trade for the 49 Turkish hostages was made without payment. So what would the Quid-pro-quo involve?
Given all of the sympathies and tendencies two things are obvious. Erdogan is essentially more adverse to Bashir Assad then he is to ISIS, and ISIS is politically savvy – far more so than al-Qaeda was, and more in line with the political expertise of The Brotherhood (founded in 1928).
Given that, would the quid pro quo involve an acceptance of, and unwillingness to stop (per se’), the ISIS driven exodus of Kurdish refugees upon the nation of Turkey? If so, how far -and how many refugees- would Turkey allow ISIS to drive into the border region, before Turkey would view the inbound masses as a risk to the societal constructs and domestic objectives of Erdogan? (more…)

Having recently given safe haven to the leadership of Muslim Brotherhood terrorists exiled from Qatar, Turkey’s President Erdogan delivered a speech at the United Nations in defense of the Sunni extremists ISIS and The Brotherhood – while simultaneously attacking Egypt and Fattah El-Sisi.

Let there be no doubt the NATO member Turkey is not only willing to stand on the sidelines, but is, in actuality, supporting the Sunni extremists with direct support (financial and military).  Erdogan is also supporting with non-action, such as refusing to allow coalition forces to use NATO bases in Turkey.   The reasoning is not complex Erdogan is supporting his ideological ally ISIS against his arch nemesis, Syria’s Bashir Assad.
To deflect attention away from his actual support of ISIS Erdogan chooses another target for his attack.
Defending his friend, jailed and former Egyptian President – Muslim Brotherhood leader – Mohammed Morsi, President Erdogan removed the sheep’s cloak, yet most of the western media avoid peering into the dark eyes of the wolf laying underneath.
Perhaps the media avoid because it is too brutal a reality to admit, or perhaps because Western media suffers from a severe case of willful blindness, you will find few news outlets actually getting to the heart of the reasoning for Turkey’s unwillingness to support the removal of The Islamic State of Iraq and Syrian, ISIS.
Erdogan supports the overall ISIS objective. President Erdogan hates Bashir Assad beyond all else; and the Sunni ISIS methods, while concerning, are, in his mind, effective. (more…)

I would like to thank the only other website/blog -I have found- wise enough to connect the dots, and brave enough to talk about them.
Before doing so I must share a daily prayer we have repeated for two years:

Father please afford Your strength and protection; guide our naked journey; sharpen our insight; strengthen our influence; accept our willingness; be confident in our faith; afford us the ability of unguarded vision; and deliver us to the highest place where we may look over the horizon.
Guide us there to see, and remove our fear and nervousness so that we may accept and bear witness – Amen.

From a position of faith we have traced all the connections we can find, and we are now beginning to notice we are not alone.
There are others who have followed their own journey, from separate directions, and are destined to arrive at the same overlook.

SEE HERE

Tomahawks into Syria as Turkey remains chicken

Just so we are clear on this – There is a HUGE difference between President George W. Bush attacking al-Qaeda (‘War on Terror’) within Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen, and what President Obama is doing now.
The most notable difference is President Bush had authorization and agreement, with each sovereign nation, to attack the terror entity within it’s border; Obama has no such agreement with Syria.
And remember, according to President Obama 2013, the “2003 George Bush war on terror is over“.   OVER!   Not to mention the post 9-11 AUMF was specifically only for al-Qaeda, and ISIS is admittedly, by Obama and al-Qaeda, not al-Qaeda.   So what exactly is the “legal authority” President Obama is using?

Secretary of State John Kerry would not answer that question to congress last week. Senior White House National Security and Foreign Policy advisor Susan Rice would not answer that question last Friday. White House spokesperson Josh Earnest would also not answer that question last Friday.  President Obama’s chief of Staff, Denis McDonough, would not answer that question on Saturday, and U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power would not answer that question on Sunday.
The mysterious “legal authority” is said to exist, but has never been outlined.
Yet on Monday the attacks began.
Under what legal authority? We are not under attack, this is not a defensive decision. This is 100% offensive. (more…)

Washington DC thinks we are stupid, they really do.  The professional political class has yet to grasp the understanding that “WWW” as a prefix in the internet stands for “World Wide Web”.   We are quite capable of connecting, collecting and digesting information directly from the heart of the issues being debated.
Despite all the DC pontifications, obfuscations, and professional talking points to the contrary, we know in Syria there are two options, support Bashir Assad or support radical Islamists, that’s it.   There is no mysterious “moderate” third option; the “rebels” are radical islamists.
President Obama and  Republican Senator John McCain are making the same argument in 2014 toward Syria they both made in 2011 toward Libya.   2014’s Secretary of State, John Kerry, is merely repeating the 2011 meme sold by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – the difference is within the audience.

In Libya 2011 there were two options, support Moamuar Kaddafi, or support radical Islamists under the nom de plume “rebels“.   The White House supported the “rebels“, Kaddafi was killed, and as a consequence right now in Libya chaos reigns as the islamists, now collected under the banner “Libyan Dawn”, are destroying the country.
(more…)