The Islamic State (IS) is portrayed as an Enemy of America and the Western world.
With the support of America's indefectible British ally, President Barack Obama has ordered a series of US bombing raids on Iraq allegedly with a view to defeating the rebel army of the Islamic State (IS).
"We will not waver in our determination to confront the Islamic State ... If terrorists think we will weaken in the face of their threats they could not be more wrong." (Barack Obama and David Cameron, Strengthening the NATO alliance, op ed published in the London Times, September 4, 2014, emphasis added)
But Who is behind the Islamic State Project?
In a bitter irony, until recently the rebels of the Islamic State, formerly known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) were heralded as Syria's "opposition freedom fighters" committed to "restoring democracy" and unseating the secular government of Bashar al Assad.
And who was behind the jihadist insurgency in Syria?
Those who ordered the bombing campaign are those who are behind the Caliphate Project.
The Islamic State (IS) militia, which is currently the alleged target of a US-NATO bombing campaign under a "counter-terrorism" mandate, was and continues to be supported covertly by the United States and its allies.
In other words, the Islamic State (IS) is a creation of US intelligence with the support of Britain's MI6, Israel's Mossad, Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Saudi Arabia's General Intelligence Presidency (GIP), Ri'?sat Al-Istikhb?r?t Al-'?mah ( ????? ??????????? ???????). Moreover, according to Israeli intelligence sources (Debka) NATO in liaison with the Turkish High Command has been involved in the recruitment of jihadist mercenaries from the outset of the Syrian crisis in March 2011.
In relation to the Syrian insurgency, the Islamic State fighters together with the Al Qaeda affiliated jihadist forces of the Al Nusrah Front are the foot soldiers of the Western military alliance. They are covertly supported by US-NATO-Israel. Their mandate is to wage a terrorist insurgency against the government of Bashar al-Assad. The atrocities committed by Islamic State fighters in Iraq are similar to those committed in Syria.
As a result of media disinformation, Western public opinion is unaware that the Islamic State terrorists have from the very outset been supported by the United States and its allies.
The killings of innocent civilians by the Islamic State terrorists in Iraq are used to create a pretext and a justification for US military intervention on humanitarian grounds. The bombing raids ordered by Obama, however, are not intended to eliminate the Islamic State, which constitutes a US "intelligence asset". Quite the opposite, the US is targeting the civilian population as well as the Iraqi resistance movement.
The Role of Saudi Arabia and Qatar
Amply documented, US-NATO support to the Islamic State is channeled covertly through America's staunchest allies: Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Acknowledged by the Western media, both Riyadh and Doha acting in liaison and on behalf of Washington have played (and continue to play) a central role in the financing the Islamic State (IS) as well as the recruitment, training and religious indoctrination of terrorist mercenary forces deployed in Syria.
According to London's Daily Express "They [the Islamic State terrorists] had money and arms supplied by Qatar and Saudi Arabia."
US Saudi connection
"The most important source of ISIS financing to date has been support coming out of the Gulf states, primarily Saudi Arabia but also Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates," (According to Dr. Günter Meyer, Director of the Center for Research into the Arabic World at University of Mainz, Germany, Deutsche Welle)
This money was channeled to ISIS terrorists fighting against government forces in Syria:
"Through allies such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the West [has] supported militant rebel groups which have since mutated into ISIS and other al?Qaeda connected militias. ( Daily Telegraph, June 12, 2014)
According to Robert Fisk, the IS caliphate project "has been bankrolled by Saudi Arabia":
...[M]eet Saudi Arabia's latest monstrous contribution to world history: the Islamist Sunni caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, conquerors of Mosul and Tikrit – and Raqqa in Syria – and possibly Baghdad, and the ultimate humiliators of Bush and Obama.
From Aleppo in northern Syria almost to the Iraqi-Iranian border, the jihadists of Isis and sundry other groupuscules paid by the Saudi Wahhabis – and by Kuwaiti oligarchs – now rule thousands of square miles. (Robert Fisk, The Independent, June 12, 2014
Saudi Prison
In 2013, as part of its recruitment of terrorists, Saudi Arabia took the initiative of releasing prisoners on death row in Saudi jails.
A secret memo revealed that the prisoners were being "recruited" to join jihadist militia (including Al Nusrah and ISIS) to fight against government forces in Syria.
Saudi prison
The prisoners had reportedly been offered a deal — stay and be executed or fight against Assad in Syria. As part of the deal the prisoners were offered a "pardon and a monthly stipend for their families, who were allowed to stay in the Sunni Arab kingdom".
Saudi officials apparently gave them a choice: decapitation or jihad? In total, inmates from Yemen, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Jordan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq, and Kuwait chose to go and fight in Syria.(See Global Research, September 11, 2013)
"Volte Face": About Turn
On September 11, 2014, coinciding with the commemoration of 9/11, the King of Saudi Arabia together with the Monarchs of the Gulf States announced their unbending commitment to support Obama's holy war against the Islamic State (IS), which has and continues to be funded by Qatari and Saudi money as part of a carefully engineered intelligence operation.
Read more here: http://www.globalresearch.ca/going-after-the-islamic-state/5401439
I am curious on something, given the suggestion that Western powers knowingly and intentionally created Islamic State or supported the PHD who leads it?
To what end? What benefit would come? Islamic State is what they appear to be. I mean, this isn't a disinfo campaign by a force with very different motives than what they display. Islamic State is a simple, if brutal organization. They want to see the 3rd Caliphate formed to stretch from the Pakistani/Indian border to the Atlantic Ocean on the West Coast of Morroco and Western Sahara. (the maps they have published include India, they don't show stopping at the border...but I can't accept even they could see that as a serious possibility).
When they meet Western or Non-Islamic people, it seems there is a choice to be had. At the moment, a 3-way choice, but in time, that will drop to just 2 options IMO. First, you can convert to Islam and their very specific version of it. Second, you can submit to execution ...or not, and then be forced to submit. Third, and what won't last for long, you can offer them something or some service they desperately need at this moment, and they'll postpone #2 for now, if they get what they need from the arrangement.
The thing is, Non-Islamic means you are walking dead to these folks. Even us, here in America. Their vision is a global Islamic reality that comes out of the early aspirations of the Faith, back when "global" had a very different and much smaller context to it. They seem unmoved by the increase in size or challenge though, and appear to have every intention of giving it the 'good 'ol college try'.
I have no idea what specific and individual elements of our Government are doing. Some have gone totally insane for priorities and sense of self preservation from where I sit. Support outside rogue elements tho? Again...for what gain? To help the very force that will physically remove their heads for a TV camera if IS ever gets far enough to create the opportunity?
Backing the Contras against the Sandinista forces made sense (the fact Ortega is back as a sitting President, totally aside). Backing Saddam Hussein against Iran made sense in the context of the world during the 1980's. Neither of those groups would ever imagine, let alone openly declare their intent, to come to the United States and Europe to convert or kill all of us. These folks in IS do subscribe to that set of ideals and goals, and hence, Western support is the worst and most self defeating form of treason I believe I've ever heard suggested. The life a traitor causes to be lost will, in the end and with this group, be his own IMO.
Wrabbit2000 this should answer most of your questions. I have posted this video a couple of times but the importance of what is discussed on here can not be stressed enough.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SAZ5Dk9mmI
Some excerpts from the interview...
Quote- Back to the question, I understand you're telling me the main structure of Al-Qaeda does not exist anymore.. Are we talking now about schism? Can we say that (Daesh) ISIS is part of Al-Qaeda?
Nabeel Naiem: No, the old commanders have left the whole organization, only Ayman is left and around him a few we call them mentally retarded or crazy, Takfiri people.. But all the founders have left, some died and the others just left..
As for ISIS, it follows the ideology of Al-Qaeda organization, which was founded by Sayyed Imam Sherif and put it in his book Al Jamei Fi Talab Al-ilm Al Sharif (Bible of Seeking Honorable Learning), & it's one of the most dangerous books circulated in the world, and it's translated to all languages by the way, Kurdish, Urdu, Persian, Turkish.. etc.
- You say that ISIS is a branch of Al-Qaeda?
Nabeel Naiem: It adopts the ideology of Al-Qaeda. ISIS was established in 2006, we created Al-Qaeda since 1989.
- Explain to me now the position of Dr. Ayman Zawahri from ISIS and Abu Bakr Baghdadi (head of ISIS), what do they consider him?
Nabeel Naiem: He (Zawahri) asked Abu Bakr Baghdadi to pledge allegiance to him (as the Emir..) but Abu Bakr Baghdadi, since he's basically a U.S. agent, told him: we are the people of cause, the cause of liberating Iraq, Syria and so.. You're the one who should pledge allegiance to us, Ayman (Zawahri) refused so there was a dispute and a fight between them.
- How he is an American agent? Explain to us how?
Nabeel Naiem: It is known that the USA released him from prison and he spent 20 to 30 million US Dollars to establish these ISIS groups and the first ISIS camps were established in Jordan, and Jordan doesn't allow camps for charity, when Jordan establish camps to train terrorist groups, it doesn't do that out of good will and charity, these camps were supervised by the Marines, and the arming of ISIS is all American.. and how do they arrange their expenses? I was in charge of a camp of 120 men, we were spending thousands of thousands (of dollars).. food, drinks, weapons, munition, training..
- Excuse me, you're talking about ISIS? You were in charge of an ISIS camp?
Nabeel Naiem: No, I am telling you I was once in charge of a camp of 120 men and we were spending that time thousands (of Dollars), imagine how much this ISIS is spending?! Let me tell you something.. The wounded from ISIS during (terrorist) operations, are they being treated here in Lebanon? No, neither in Syria, nor in Saudi nor in Egypt, where do they go? They go to Israel. Now as we speak there are 1,500 of ISIS & Nusra (Front) are in Tel Aviv hospitals.
QuoteHenry Kissinger wrote a memo in 1982 or 1984, don't remember exactly, it's titled The 100 Years War. When asked where this 100 years war will occur? He said in the Middle East when we ignite the war between the Sunnah and the Shiites.
So they're working on igniting the war between the Sunna and the Shiites, just like what Abu Mussab (Zarqawi) used to blow up Sunnah mosques then blow up Shiite mosques, to start the sectarian war in the region; and this is of course an American plot, and I tell you ISIS didn't kill a single American.
ISIS didn't behead a single American and didn't play football with his head, they beheaded Muslims and ate livers of Muslims and didn't kill a single American though it's established since 2006..
- You're talking about ISIS's brutality and ideology but it finds popularity among the youth.. and popularity among many sides and it practices the highest level of violence and brutality, can you explain to us what makes all these groups with all its diversities to join this organization?
QuoteThis is the Fourth-Generation Warfare, agents instead of soldiers..
- This is an alternative army, a war by proxy?
Nabeel Naiem: Yes of course.
- Between who (this war)? We are talking about armies on the ground, Al Qaeda and all what branches out of it, these armies work for the account of which battle and between who?
Nabeel Naiem: It works for the US Intelligence (CIA).
- Who it fights?
Nabeel Naiem: The regimes, they put a plan in 1998 called Clean Break (PNAC)..
QuoteThis is a conspiracy against the region, and I told you Netenyahu & Dick Chenney put the Clean Break plan in the year 1998, and it's destroying 4 countries, they start with Iraq, then Syria then Egypt then Saudi Arabia. It's called Clean Break plan (PNAC), well known.. Using radical groups in the region.
The legal case (former Egyptian president) Mohammad Morsi is being tried for, the case of communicating (with the enemy) and contacting Ayman Zawahri was an assignment of Issam Haddad by Obama in person on 28 December 2012, he was at the White House in a meeting with the CIA, he says in his confessions when interrogated by the public prosecution in the case..
QuoteTheir goal is to divide the region in order to achieve Israel's security.
Israel is a weak and despicable state, by the way, geopolitical, Israel is not a state, like Qatar, is Qatar a state? Qatar is only a tent and a man sitting it with his money and that's it..
There are countries like Iran, Saudi and Egypt, in geography it exists until the end of times, and there are countries called the Satanic Shrubs, it's just found you don't know how, like Israel and Qatar, it can vanish in one day and you won't find it..
So for Israel to guarantee its existence, all the surrounding entities around it should be shredded.. Kurds to take one piece, Sunnah take one piece, Maliki takes one piece.. each sect has their own piece just like Lebanon they keep fighting between each other, once they finish beating each other they drink tea then go for a second round beating each other..
For the full transcript of this interview go here:
http://www.syrianews.cc/isis-the-bombshell-interview-to-impeach-obama/ (http://www.syrianews.cc/isis-the-bombshell-interview-to-impeach-obama/)
Clean Break.PDF:
http://www.irmep.org/PDF/3-27-2003_Clean_Break_or_Dirty_War.pdf (http://www.irmep.org/PDF/3-27-2003_Clean_Break_or_Dirty_War.pdf)
I think it's safe to say that on this topic, we'll agree to disagree in the matter of US origins or active support to the same group we're actively hunting and killing.
A similar paradox stood with Al Qaeda/Taliban in Afghanistan. Many insisted and still do, to this day, Al Qaeda was inspired by or supported through the CIA. At the same time, and putting aside Bin Laden's personal hatred for anything related to CIA, we watched several years of Al Qaeda fighters hunting CIA case officers as if it were a sport for score and an audience was judging. One of their last was also one of their most successful in suckering CIA command elements to meeting with a supposed defector or double. Upon meeting, he promptly blew himself up and added a number of Gold stars to the wall in Langley. Not the behavior history has ever seen before for a force acting toward it's benefactors.
In this case. ISIS is continuing and seeking to reestablish something that hasn't existed in a very long time, and whose original formation predates any inkling of the U.S. being located as a land mass, let alone being founded as a nation. We're witness to and meddling into the middle of issues that started many centuries ago, with complexities that only start with nations. Those nations having sprung from arbitrary British and Allied command maps drawn up after the world wars. It's far more a matter of Faith, side of that Faith and tribal alliances down to the village level, across the whole region.
That level of complexity in basic interactions is where I think Western powers, to include the British back to Palestine occupation, have largely ignored and sidelined at their peril. The total lack of appreciation or understanding for what is actually of critical importance to the people there is the single largest reason I don't and never have supported the idea that Al Qaeda, the Taliban or now ISIS are founded or supported by anything in the West. They may be influenced where they choose to be for whatever benefit they gain from a given situation...but not much beyond that, in my personal view.
We're also taking this information in the video from an enemy commander whose literal job and duty is to sow confusion, dissension and overall unrest among not only Western forces but Western civilian populations. That has been a key strategic aim of every force to have faced major Western powers since the world watched Vietnam end. This seems a fair example of the mixing of truth with disinformation to produce that dissension as well as profound mistrust of our own side. Precisely the aims which service ISIS and the remnants of Al Qaeda the best.
(it's also among their previous stated goals for defeat of Western powers..so we're literally watching them follow their own playbook in many ways here.)
Religion, like War; is very much like me sitting down today for two hour's and watching a team I never really follow who I was brainwashed to like because my grandma said so.
I cheered and was happy when they kicked goal's and won back to back grand-final's.
In Reality my cheering was for how much effort they put in..It could have been any team I was cheering along who put the effort in.
My friend at work who is a Muslim has smart arse comment's directed to him from really smug "wash in holy water type" christian's quite often. He is not about to start bombing people or what have you...
There is nothing holy at all about what is going on. Holy people don't act in this way.
Quote from: Wrabbit2000 on September 27, 2014, 07:07:59 PM
That level of complexity in basic interactions is where I think Western powers, to include the British back to Palestine occupation, have largely ignored and sidelined at their peril. The total lack of appreciation or understanding for what is actually of critical importance to the people there is the single largest reason I don't and never have supported the idea that Al Qaeda, the Taliban or now ISIS are founded or supported by anything in the West. They may be influenced where they choose to be for whatever benefit they gain from a given situation...but not much beyond that, in my personal view.
Quoted for posterity.
Today, the line that clearly differentiates a U.S.
asset from that of a U.S.
adversary grows thinner and thinner. In fact, they may not be mutually exclusive anymore. That skews Line-of-operations in the battlespace and has the potential to create new battlespaces in the blink of an eye.
Pimander: Globalresearch.org is full of deceptive material. Albeit, many articles have useful information.
Your words give me a mental image I don't know whether to laugh at or feel concern for seeing develop in real life.
Given the fact we are quite literally training people who later become direct enemies on the battlefield? I do wonder how long it may be before we see battle space blur and merge during a battle.
One recent attack run against ISIS had the American side bragging about it being with other Arab planes in the air, along side ours. That is all well and good, except for one thing. We're a long way past 1991 for clarity of purpose and assuming our allies are like minded. I mean down to individual men and the friendly fire killings that have become more common in Afghanistan come to mind.
Heck... I don't know actual US goals in a way I could explain to someone and feel good about being accurate. If Americans don't even know.....I almost have to say I can't entirely blame others who don't know whether to salute us or shoot us. There is a lot to be said for clarity in leadership.
QuoteIf Americans don't even know.....I almost have to say I can't entirely blame others who don't know whether to salute us or shoot us. There is a lot to be said for clarity in leadership.
This is the beauty of the word games they use. When they use ambiguous terminology they can make it mean anything they want and confuse everyone else.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiHnWGNKHKw
Quote from: Wrabbit2000 on September 27, 2014, 07:07:59 PM
I think it's safe to say that on this topic, we'll agree to disagree in the matter of US origins or active support to the same group we're actively hunting and killing.
It goes like this. The Brits, French and USA did not deliberately create ISIS, but by supporting the cause of Jihadist enemies of Assad (Syria President who are Russian Allies) via Saudi money partly, we allowed this group to gain strength and now they have become a monster.
The same thing happened with the Taliban. "We" backed them in a war against the Russians (proxy war) and then they became inconvenient. Same with Saddam Hussein. We backed him (again against a Russian ally in Iran) and then he became inconvenient.
Unless they are deliberately acting out prophesies from various holy books then it is about time to stop this idiotic foreign policy..
Quote from: Pimander on September 28, 2014, 10:49:55 PM
It goes like this. The Brits, French and USA did not deliberately create ISIS, but by supporting the cause of Jihadist enemies of Assad (Syria President who are Russian Allies) via Saudi money partly, we allowed this group to gain strength and now they have become a monster.
The same thing happened with the Taliban. "We" backed them in a war against the Russians (proxy war) and then they became inconvenient. Same with Saddam Hussein. We backed him (again against a Russian ally in Iran) and then he became inconvenient.
Unless they are deliberately acting out prophesies from various holy books then it is about time to stop this idiotic foreign policy..
Pimander, you nailed it. We have tried to affect regime change also and it blows up in our face. Arm one against the other and eventually that blows up in our face. The one thing we have learned from history is that we haven't learned from history.
Quote from: spacemaverick on September 28, 2014, 11:27:23 PM
The one thing we have learned from history is that we haven't learned from history.
Luckily the for the people in power the electorate never learn a thing.
Quote from: Pimander on September 28, 2014, 10:49:55 PM
It goes like this. The Brits, French and USA did not deliberately create ISIS, but by supporting the cause of Jihadist enemies of Assad (Syria President who are Russian Allies) via Saudi money partly, we allowed this group to gain strength and now they have become a monster.
Now that, I can entirely agree with. At least in the most recent mistakes. I spent a part of my Sunday reading boring history stuff on the Wahhabi sect, the origins of Saud and what is really underlying all this. It's enough to give a think tank a migraine headache. I stopped for the day about 1809 for going back to where the Wahhabis had been working hard to advance their very strict interpretation of things. Conflict that far back, with a virtually unbroken line to follow the outrages and fighting back and forth since.
One thing my afternoon of reading did make clear in my mind. There is no way to consider the modern ISIS without considering Iran and Saudi for the war they are ultimately fighting by proxy for regional hegemony. Really...for the Sunnis, it's for more than mere hegemony, but that depends on how radical the ones running it are at a given period. ISIS seems to exist in the wide gulf (no pun intended), between the two 'real' primary combatants in that region and ISIS is just making a bonanza out of the fact Iranian and Sunni backed forces have both managed to piss off the locals badly, recently enough to be an issue.
ISIS stands near one side, but apart from both...with a real state building approach that puts Hezbollah to shame, and priorities to hold what they take. None of that is good, IMO. It spells effective in ways that can't be countered on the low budget plan.
Quote from: Wrabbit2000 on September 29, 2014, 05:48:40 AM
One thing my afternoon of reading did make clear in my mind. There is no way to consider the modern ISIS without considering Iran and Saudi for the war they are ultimately fighting by proxy for regional hegemony.
But to take that a step further, Iran and Saudi Arabia are proxies for the USA and Russia battling for influence and control of oil in the region.
They know we know that they created and funded the same opposition they are now attacking.
Even Russian Parliament has stated the same.
The fact of the matter is, they are ignoring international law (as always), and words alone will not halt this avenue of action.
Side Note:
The UN illegitimacy has been raised several times in the correct manner..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuMTzyxAuzs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wH0eHekt84g
Quote from: Pimander on September 29, 2014, 11:39:24 AM
But to take that a step further, Iran and Saudi Arabia are proxies for the USA and Russia battling for influence and control of oil in the region.
Yes and No. The important aspect of this is that the United States could vanish enitirely and forever....and the fight over there would barely pause or slow down. The issues and basis for their fight go well beyond anything American (Or Russian for that matter). We're exploiting the situation, like holding a Bengal tiger by the tail and feeling good about it. Of course, the tiger can't be held onto forever, and like we learned in Afghanistan following the disastrous "Been real, been fun, but ain't been real fun! See ya!" approach the US took with them following "victory" and the Soviet withdrawal? Exploiting very complex situations for very shallow goals tends to backfire in ways the idiot politicians barely give thought to at the time.
The mishandling and poor judgement shown in the late 80's and early 90's toward Afghanistan produced the nightmare of the Taliban and Al Qaeda to fill a gaping power vacuum. The very poor judgement and handling of the tail end of the Iraq war has led to an environment ISIS finds perfect for growth as they plot how to kill us and basically merge half a dozen current nations into a single power block NEITHER the U.S. or Russians ever want to see form as a Caliphate. That end is a lose/lose/lose for everyone in the world, except those running it and surrounding the anointed 'Caliph'.
Some folks see everything in the world as orchestrated or actually controlled in some intentional or meaningful way for the outcomes we see. That is a scary but somehow comforting concept to hold, because it means however crazy things get? Someone is in control. Even if the 'someone' is a raving lunatic with an ego problem. Someone still means for a thing to happen, so there is control there. The more scary version and what I find more likely is the old, reliable Chaos theory. Control is an illusion to pacify us while those leading us bumble through their efforts, just damn lucky not to accidentally trigger full blown world wars in the process. Not by design, but by sheer dumb luck and the grace of whatever we each hold for beliefs.
Quote from: Wrabbit2000 on September 29, 2014, 03:30:37 PM
Yes and No. The important aspect of this is that the United States could vanish enitirely and forever....and the fight over there would barely pause or slow down.
I disagree. Without the money and cash to buy them the fighting would slow down.
Quote from: Pimander on September 29, 2014, 05:12:43 PM
I disagree. Without the money and cash to buy them the fighting would slow down.
Money and Cash is coming at the rate of over $2 million per calendar day right now from captured oil facilities alone. Extortion and protection or 'rent' schemes pushed by ISIS command onto the residents of their occupied territory further fills their coffers and supports their efforts. Money wouldn't seem to be their major need. Weapons are all courtesy of the United States and Iraq now, thanks to captured basis in well stocked conditions.
People are flocking to ISIS in some areas of Syria because they stand AGAINST The House of Saud for regional influence...while fiercely against the Shia corruption of the Malaki (Iranian backed) puppet. He was followed by one not quite as accomplished with death squads meant to hunt down every last officer of the Saddam era ..and who form the Officer corps of ISIS now.. but same same in the end, and all politics are local in ways these guys take to entirely new levels.
The Taliban was nationalist to a fault in their goals and efforts. Afghanistan free of outsiders, is their Mantra. At least to their followers that need to hear that before going out to die for the cause.
Al Qaeda was and, to some extent, still is a vengeance based cause largely founded by Bin Laden as a means to exact his revenge and eventual removal of the Saudi Royal Family for the crimes of allowing Infidels to sully the sacred soil of the Arabian Peninsula as well as the lands containing Mecca and Medina. That aspect came entirely from Bin Laden being laughed at and told to vacate the Kingdom after offering to be it's "Desert Shield" in 1990. (They should have let him try. He wouldn't have existed to be the problem later)
ISIS has already stated and in no uncertain terms the value (or lack of) they place on Mecca or Medina. It's not about that for them, and the existence of those places is bordering on blasphemy to their very refined and radical belief system. In fact, even Muslims who aren't their brand of Islam are infidels to them and fit for a choice...maybe. Convert to their way or assume the position for execution.
I think the world is grasping for ways to categorize what hasn't been seen in centuries. We're trying to making sense, in modern terms, of people who are doing nothing by modern rules. Old rules and TRUE terrorism of the Viking and German styles to break morale and destroy resistance before a battle begins...is their tactic and in a world unprepared for it? Even the 'vaunted' American and Russian intelligence services seem left with 'what the heck do we do with this?!' as the best response.
Of course..We may never agree with anything related to this subject too. That's fine and we all take different paths of learning to reach our conclusions, eh?
You missed one of the MAIN elements of funding.... The Muslim Brotherhood.
http://www.do-egypt.com/international-news/link-muslim-brotherhood-isis/ (http://www.do-egypt.com/international-news/link-muslim-brotherhood-isis/)
There is always more to the story than what your being told.
Follow the money and supplies and you will find out who supports what and where. Sometimes (more often that not) some nation states play both ends for the middle and make money of the conflicts.
Quote from: Wrabbit2000 on September 29, 2014, 05:32:05 PM
Money wouldn't seem to be their major need. Weapons are all courtesy of the United States and Iraq now, thanks to captured basis in well stocked conditions.
Yes the weapons and money are there now but when these groups grew they used Saudi and other money to buy arms. We (USA, Britain, France) supported this and that is the reason the group is now so strong.
We basically encouraged the conditions to allow these groups to flourish in an attempt to force regimen change in Syria and to destabilise the region to have a pretext to intervene to secure the oil if required.. It has been a catastrophe in human terms. The policy is fundamentally wrong on moral grounds (it is fundamentally wrong to have war period) and politically idiotic.
I have said this many times. Humanity is still extremely primitive as long as they settle disputes and how to distribute resources by killing each other. Basically War is the legalised murder or genocide by the poor on behalf of the ruling classes.
Vote Pimander for peace and fairness. :P
QuoteOf course..We may never agree with anything related to this subject too. That's fine and we all take different paths of learning to reach our conclusions, eh?
Indeed.
Quote from: Pimander on September 30, 2014, 11:34:57 AM
The policy is fundamentally wrong on moral grounds (it is fundamentally wrong to have war period) and politically idiotic.
Unfortunately, war and conflict have been man's preferred method of conflict resolution since the first caveman brained his buddy over a better spot to sleep in the cave.
It's one thing that is almost shocking to have seen through half a dozen history and soft science courses now, but humanity has been at ANY form of "peace" so rarely, and for such short periods over the last few thousand years combined, that it's actually accurate to say peace is the unnatural exception to mans regular state of affairs.
ISIS will be fighting to the death whether the US withdraws 100% and hides behind its borders or is in there fighting with the best of them. It's not a fight the other side cares whether we join or not as to their own plans. A Caliphate supercedes Western considerations. I just hope we realize that sooner than later, before the people we act to make deals with, run us over like a cartoon.
We've gotten ourselves into a fight that started long before our nation existed and won't end until long after you and I are dead and gone....and we think we can somehow solve what the other side has no desire to "solve". Heck... It's not a problem needing a solution to their thinking. It's what they intend to achieve in life....however much damage is required to get there.
Quote from: Wrabbit2000 on September 30, 2014, 02:15:10 PM
Unfortunately, war and conflict have been man's preferred method of conflict resolution since the first caveman brained his buddy over a better spot to sleep in the cave.
Not really so... For a very long time now the average Human has been manipulated into war to the profit of the war suppliers. The war suppliers use every dirty trick to incite wars: false flags, psyops, propaganda, false rumor, lies, and agents provocateurs. 9/11 is a prime example of how We were manipulated. There are no doubt other examples around the globe, but the useless eliters have most hold here, with the financial strings going everywhere.
If We were not so manipulated for profit (and satanic thrill), We would seldom think war is the best solution.
And yes, darlin', I know the states are not the be-all and end-all. But We do have a lot of influence on the general planetary thinking.
With ISIS/ISIL having been manufactured as first an ally, but then used as enemy, many are duped, but it is clear that amongst Those who see the truth of the matter, there is pretty much zero support for war.
QuoteWith ISIS/ISIL having been manufactured as first an ally, but then used as enemy, many are duped, but it is clear that amongst Those who see the truth of the matter, there is pretty much zero support for war.
I would love to see a source for this claim( not saying I don't believe you )
Man has always had an appetite for destruction, As long as emotions exist WAR/destruction/hate will exist.
When your fellow human is jealous of his neighbor it isn't the government whispering in his ear, its just human flaw. At best you could say tptb are exploiting this flaw in our system.
Quote from: Amaterasu on September 30, 2014, 05:31:45 PM
With ISIS/ISIL having been manufactured as first an ally, but then used as enemy, many are duped, but it is clear that amongst Those who see the truth of the matter, there is pretty much zero support for war.
I am more than a bit confused on this point. How far back or more importantly, how recently do you believe ISIS and the foundation it spawned from, were formed? It sounds like you are considering this as recent developments or at least having it's origins within the last 20-25 years?
In my own case and perspective, I don't disagree a bit to the idea that war is often a manufactured thing for how it starts. Either by design or by omission of clear action that would have prevented it. Either way, the end result is the same by war being an expected and desired outcome among those with the power to determine that.
The Middle East is something a bit different though, and it would almost be amusing if the backdrop didn't include the death from brutal violence. The thing is though...If an Asian nation like North Korea gets worked up..no one thinks to suggest Kim is a puppet of Washington. He is assumed (rightly so) to have intelligence, will and desires of his own. The same applies, generally speaking, with Europe and South America as other examples of where outside influence is acknowledged but rarely seen as the "but for" cause that brought on a war.
In the Middle East though, almost invariably, they are seen as somehow incapable of independent thought, will or assertion of their own ambitions to act outside of the dictates of Western powers. I don't sell the Arabs near that short, and especially when one is fighting to regain a true and proper empire (Persians) while the other is trying to recreate one of the closest examples to "Global Rule" under a single man our planet has come to see with the first two transnational Caliphates.
I give them credit for not only being capable but so thoroughly tired of being used from the outside, that they are past time to do exactly what we're now seeing them do. I just wish this had come in different context and where the Islamists seeking to create their Caliphate weren't looking at it as mutually exclusive to exist along side the Western World.
That last distinction makes war almost impossible to avoid, and a question of time or setting more than the inevitability of it. That dictate comes from their actions. Not ours.
Quote from: Senduko on September 30, 2014, 06:18:52 PM
I would love to see a source for this claim( not saying I don't believe you )
Man has always had an appetite for destruction, As long as emotions exist WAR/destruction/hate will exist.
When your fellow human is jealous of his neighbor it isn't the government whispering in his ear, its just human flaw. At best you could say tptb are exploiting this flaw in our system.
Heh. Seems the solution is to minimize that which One can be "jealous" of (envious of, mostly). TPTB have only the tool of money to implement exploitation.
As to US creation of ISIS/ISIL...
http://www.globalresearch.ca/isis-made-in-usa-iraq-geopolitical-arsonists-seek-to-burn-region/5387475
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/14/america-s-allies-are-funding-isis.html
http://www.businessinsider.com/isis-funding-us-allies-2014-6
http://guardianlv.com/2014/06/isis-trained-by-us-government/
http://www.vox.com/cards/things-about-isis-you-need-to-know/what-is-isis
http://rt.com/op-edge/181068-isis-iraq-violence-us-intervene/
And on and on...
Quote from: Wrabbit2000 on September 30, 2014, 06:55:55 PM
I am more than a bit confused on this point. How far back or more importantly, how recently do you believe ISIS and the foundation it spawned from, were formed? It sounds like you are considering this as recent developments or at least having it's origins within the last 20-25 years?
Isis was Al Qaida which We created initially to fight Russia. Then We labeled Them "bad" and used Them as the excuse to war. They have merely been relabeled ISIS then ISIL...
Quote from: Amaterasu on September 30, 2014, 08:48:23 PM
Isis was Al Qaida which We created initially to fight Russia.
This is far to simplified a statement to be considered accurate.
In reality, The beginnings of Jihad can be traced back to the words of the
Prophet Muhammad and the writings of the Qur'an.
As to whether the West created al-Qaeda; there is much controversy
surrounding that claim; though there could be some truth in there
somewhere. Though, infiltration can hardly be considered the same
as actual "creation".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1670089.stm
Quote from: Amaterasu on September 30, 2014, 08:48:23 PM
Isis was Al Qaida which We created initially to fight Russia. Then We labeled Them "bad" and used Them as the excuse to war. They have merely been relabeled ISIS then ISIL...
I believe I would definitely disagree with the concept that Western powers created Al Qaeda. Even during the 1980's and before Al Qaeda existed, Bin Laden's group of Arabs were an awkward fit among the Afghan Mujaheddin we were supporting and giving Stinger missiles to on a 1:1 trade system. (They brought out the empty tube and got another full one. No empty..no refill. Clever and effective) Bin Laden was public on multiple occasions about how he'd just as soon kill a CIA Officer as a KGB Officer if he could get the shot though. Years later, as we all know, he made a near sport of killing American intelligence officers......or those that some suggest were his friends.
Al Qaeda didn't come to exist until around 1989 though (after the Afghanistan war with Russia was becoming a piece of history), and more properly, 1990'ish when Bin Laden first showed up in Saudi to demand the Infidels be thrown off the sacred soils so Al Qaeda could fight Saddam and protect the Kingdom instead.
No argument from me that the U.S. (and Russia during their Soviet prime) were meddling in every brush fire and back country example of conflict, anywhere in the world. To that end, we certainly did support the Afghans against them. The ones we supported were also there in 2001 when we came back. Al Qaeda murdered the leader of them (General Ahmad Shah Massoud), a couple days before America saw 9/11...and in doing so, likely solidified their position to survive what was about to come from the West. Massoud would have had their lunch and sent them a bill for it...but I digress.
Massoud lead the Northern Alliance though, not Al Qaeda and the 'post-Massoud' Northern Alliance is who assisted us in tracking and chasing the Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters clear up to the Paki border by November of 2001. Of course, the N.A. occupied towns and cities (including Kabul) as they went and that was their side of the benefit. Then of course, Bush told the CIA/Green Beenie teams to stand down and stand aside while he made what could have ended by Christmas into a "good and proper" war by bringing in the Marines. One of whom was my brother in law within the first waves into the Kandahar area. An event that never had to happen and never should have, IMO.
It is amazing though, how many different ways people who (I presume) lived the time period as well, have come to see those things we all watched happen together.
Quote from: Wrabbit2000 on September 30, 2014, 10:03:46 PM
I believe I would definitely disagree with the concept that Western powers created Al Qaeda. Even during the 1980's and before Al Qaeda existed, Bin Laden's group of Arabs were an awkward fit among the Afghan Mujaheddin we were supporting and giving Stinger missiles to on a 1:1 trade system. (They brought out the empty tube and got another full one. No empty..no refill. Clever and effective) Bin Laden was public on multiple occasions about how he'd just as soon kill a CIA Officer as a KGB Officer if he could get the shot though. Years later, as we all know, he made a near sport of killing American intelligence officers......or those that some suggest were his friends.
Hmmmm. Play posturing? Tim Osman (aka Osama BL) was a CIA asset. Part of the script?
QuoteAl Qaeda didn't come to exist until around 1989 though (after the Afghanistan war with Russia was becoming a piece of history), and more properly, 1990'ish when Bin Laden first showed up in Saudi to demand the Infidels be thrown off the sacred soils so Al Qaeda could fight Saddam and protect the Kingdom instead.
The label didn't appear til about then, I agree. But the core group of agents provocateurs are the same. They will fight as "allies" or as "enemy," as TPTB choose, as is most likely to spawn war.
QuoteThe label didn't appear til about then, I agree. But the core group of agents provocateurs are the same. They will fight as "allies" or as "enemy," as TPTB choose, as is most likely to spawn war.
I agree with that, although we see different groups, I believe. I'm looking at the Sunni/Shia war, which dates back a good way and runs parallel in the last couple hundred years with the Wahhabi sect of Sunni vs. the rest of Sunni and Islam as a whole, unto itself. Prior to the West even finding they had oil in 'dem dar dunes' and it might be useful for something, these folks were having the fight we may just live to see the end of, as things are happening now.
I don't mean anything so dramatic as religious end times, but the end of one side or the other (and math doesn't look good for Shia in this one) in that fight across the region there.
Western minds think in simple and linear terms. Its why we couldn't 'run' these guys if we actually wanted to or tried. They live in a world of a virtual onion of everyone hating everyone for strategic and religious issues else unless 'the enemy of my enemy' can put it aside to hate on another party together, but then get back to hating everyone equally again when that passes. Layer upon layer of reasons to fight and blood debts our Government chooses to avoid even taking into consideration as a real factor. Our land fights for a few years and calls it a World War. Those guys fight the
same battles for a century and call it business still left to finish.
I suggest that a great deal of that is used by the agents provocateurs in Their efforts to keep the pot stirred... And Ones who were taught "It's an honor thing" to go slaughter and be slaughtered by the descendents of some People long ago are easy to whip up.
From Albert Pike:-
"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World.
The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion...We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil.
Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time."
As a result of recently rediscovering this, I have realised that the expression of negative emotion towards Islam, or engaging in any hostility towards it whatsoever, directly serves the most unspeakable of possible agendas. Violent Muslims are to be avoided, but Islam itself is not to be hated; and I myself have needed to repent of such.
Don't forget, Al Qaida is a database originally not a single movement. :)
It is also worth remembering that it is affectively US policy to be at war permanently as they have worked out that it makes the economy stronger. After all human lives are worth less than money. Now that IS PSYCHOPATHIC. If you disagree then please explain how valuing money above lives is not.
Of course I know that most Americans are not psychopaths. But however you look at it, the nature of the policy is sick and the work of a collectively psychopathic attitude on the part of TPTB.
I just posted a relevant article.
Bomb Everyone by George Monbiot: Humanitarian arguments, if consistently applied, could be used to flatten the entire Middle East (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=7421.msg103664;topicseen#new)
Quote from: Amaterasu on September 30, 2014, 05:31:45 PM
And yes, darlin', I know the states are not the be-all and end-all. But We do have a lot of influence on the general planetary thinking.
I know you are aware, but American citizens so frequently appear to forget that they are only 4.4% of the population that I can't help wanting to remind you all. You are the minority and strongest capitalist state. That is not a good thing as the US government are the strongest defenders of the fuc4ed up banking system under the current movers and shakers. There are alternatives.
I thought I would add this to the discussion, since the policy being talked about here will likely do more to build the ranks of ISIS than any other single move the United States could make here. (Did we learn absolutely nothing, whatsoever, from Vietnam and HOW the Vietcong kept building numbers like rabbits at an orgy??)
QuoteThe White House has acknowledged for the first time that strict standards President Obama imposed last year to prevent civilian deaths from U.S. drone strikes will not apply to U.S. military operations in Syria and Iraq.
A White House statement to Yahoo News confirming the looser policy came in response to questions about reports that as many as a dozen civilians, including women and young children, were killed when a Tomahawk missile struck the village of Kafr Daryan in Syria's Idlib province on the morning of Sept. 23.
Source (http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-exempts-syria-airstrikes-from-tight-standards-on-civilian-deaths-183724795.html)
I'd call this one of the more depressing notes I've shared with anyone online and I found it from someone bringing it to another site I work at. I couldn't resist sharing tho, as killing civilians among an enemy population has got to be the single most powerful recruiting tool an enemy can be handed to build and consolidate their numbers.
Look at it another way.... If you watch your wife and kids killed by a 500lb bomb of "oops...we thought ....", will it matter what you felt or how you saw politics the day before? I seriously doubt it. Speaking for myself, and with nothing left in the world to lose at that hypothetical point? My entire life would become about seeing pain applied to where that 500lb bomb of doom had come from and who ordered the drop to obliterate my family. Mistakes and apologies are for news broadcasts and election speeches.
This policy of 'damned the civilian deaths! Full speed ahead!" will do more to make ISIS what it becomes now, than anything else, I fear.
I agree Wrabbit - If anyone killed a member of my family and justice wasn't served - I'd most likely serve it myself.
The old:
One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.
I just wish these moronic men involved in all these nasty, disgusting, gut-wrentching brutal murders (ISIS and soooo many others), would grow some fekking brain cells, and grow some actual fookin balls to see that not only have they corrupted their own souls, but the are detroying their own people, and own motherland, and they them selves WILL end up in destruction.
Imagine if thse Middle Eastern groups actually learned to play clever, the Middle East could topple the Western Power struture.
Hell is empty and the devils are here!
Quote from: Sinny on October 01, 2014, 05:07:15 PM
I just wish these moronic men involved in all these nasty, disgusting, gut-wrentching brutal murders (ISIS and soooo many others), would grow some fekking brain cells, and grow some actual fookin balls to see that not only have they corrupted their own souls, but the are detroying their own people, and own motherland, and they them selves WILL end up in destruction.
It is just fear, Sinny. They are all berserk with fear. I've been there, at times. I still am there, at times. This whole thing with Islam is just one giant bad trip, and everyone needs to calm down and take a step back. They won't, though; because they are actually enjoying the drama.
That's the problem. It's all a big, arbitrary game; although I know people will ask how I can possibly call it a game with people dying. I'm not saying that to make light of the deaths, here; what I mean is that the entire rationale
behind the whole thing is completely arbitrary. More than anything else, that is the real tragedy; that real people are really dying because other people demand war as a sick form of stimulation and entertainment. We want politics, and we want war, and we want drama, just to keep our minds ticking over and stimulated and chewing on something, and so that various rich people behind weapons and munitions companies can keep smoking cigars, and eating stuffed lobster and creme brulee, while other people in Third World countries are lucky if they can make mud pies.
QuoteHell is empty and the devils are here!
The veil has been thinner for a number of years now. So yes, negative beings are going to be in closer proximity to us; but it helps to remember that the positive ones are as well.
Quote from: petrus4 on October 02, 2014, 03:51:23 AM
but it helps to remember that the positive ones are as well.
Wish they'd bloody show em selves.
Quote from: Sinny on October 02, 2014, 11:51:13 AM
Wish they'd bloody show em selves.
The positive polarity is more closely associated with quiet; and by that I don't mean complete silence, but definitely less noise and ostentation. As a result, negativity is out there in the foreground, and it is the very first thing you see. The positive stuff can require some effort to notice.