In many countries, including Turkey, the media-press organs made countless news, comments and analyses that are stating that “ISIL/Islamic State” is of the U.S. mind and that the U.S. at least uses/encourages ISIL in their plans directed at the Middle East… Those news, comments and analyses were labeled as conspiracy theories until now.

ISIL's bizarre growth… Their capture of the U.S. military inheritance in Iraq, the revenue it gains over petroleum… Despite the fact that it's impossible for the high-tech intelligence machine of the U.S. to overlook every step they take… The Western armies', who has the opportunity and capability to hit anywhere anytime it fancies, failure in stopping ISIL...

Just recently, Washington and Baghdad's statements that accuse each other over ISIL's capture of Ramadi, or the General of Iran-Jerusalem Forces, Qasem Soleimani's “ The U.S. did nothing to counter ISIL. Does it amount to anything other than being an accomplice in this conspiracy” statement and many others…

As for now; we have official and secret documents taken from the U.S. Ministry of Defense and U.S. Ministry of Foreign Affairs. These documents are revealing the internal evaluation of the Defense Intelligence Agency that ISIL might be “a strategic gain” for the U.S.'s regional plans. ('2012 Defense Intelligence Agency document: West will facilitate rise of Islamic State in order to isolate the Syrian regime' 19/05. The DIA is the U.S.'s essential military intelligence. It's connected to the Ministry of Defense and is the essential element of the U.S.'s global and huge intelligence community. They provide the administration with critical information on the countries' military qualifications and intentions.)

The dates of these documents are also important; it's the beginning of 2012, rather, the beginning of ISIL's story. Way before the organization's capture of Mosul. These documents are giving the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency and the institutions, who had been involved in the construction of the country's safety, the suggestion of “ISIL might come handy for Washington in overthrowing the Damascus administration and segregate the Syrian regime….

Even this limited state of the display shows us that the U.S. is repeating the method, used by Russia during their invasion of Afghanistan, for their own political benefits in the region. This clears the doubts about the identity of the ones who were responsible for the heavy humanity dramas experienced in Iraq and Syria, and requires others to be added to this list. (This plan of the U.S. had destabilized Afghanistan and Pakistan. It also formed a gate for the U.S.'s existence in those countries and in the Middle East. Today, all these complications are still ongoing. We need to include the ex-President of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai's following words in the past “The U.S. doesn't think that the Taliban is honest in the war”.) Since they encouraged them, it seems that Washington was sincere when they put forth the “we cannot make out who will replace him, the country might be captured by radicals” against the human slaughters in Damascus!

When we approach the matter like this; the possibility of ISIL's transmission to Saudi Arabia is causing a rightful fear. It's not only in Riyadh. We can assume that the Gulfian countries, Pakistan, and even Turkey are observing this possibility carefully. The reaction of Saudi Arabia towards the U.S.'s regional policies, and, Saudi Arabia's feelings towards Iran and view on Syria, will make it difficult for them to be welcomed by the White House with the “King is dead, all hail the new king” exclamations. Fundamentally, King Salman's announcement of his successor, by obeying the tradition, and announcement of his successor's successor, by disobeying the tradition, can also be included to this context....

As you know, the “famous” New York Times has written an article entitled “Dark Clouds over Turkey” and published it both on their website and in the May 23rd edition. Generally, the article is criticizing the rulership and President Erdoğan heavily while praising the American democracy and freedom of press.

I approach this type of text from two angles; timing and simplification of the context… Presenting this type of text to the global readers right before the general elections is showing that they have “issues”. In the simplest form, their desire is for the rulership to change hands. Then, what's with rejecting another country's rulership by calling your own government and even NATO to action?

The NYT's article is not news on the matter of politics or foreign politics… It's a political text and is based on the ballot box. Naturally, Ankara will be asking “who are you?” and will be curious of the people behind this article…

Two; when the sides existing between the lines and the segment addressed by the newspaper are evaluated over the partnerships in the region, the “usual suspect and their usual partners in the U.S. and Turkey” reveal themselves…

After all, this is what I meant by saying simplification; if you want to observe the New York Times “in detail”, then just list the names and institutions by putting a “+” in between…. That is the network and the political expectation partnership…

For example; Reuters + Konda + Hürriyet + Today's Zaman + TGC +Reporters Without Borders + Fethullah Gülen + Labor Unions + NATO, etc…