Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 08, 2014

The ISIS Is A U.S. Tool "Conspiracy Theories"

Is ISIS a creation of the United States government?

I do not have enough data to judge on that question. My gut instinct on this trends towards "no." But there is some data that points into the "yes" directions and it seems that many people have judged "yes" on that basis.

In 1957 the CIA and MI6 conspired for regime change in Syria:

The plan called for funding of a "Free Syria Committee", and the arming of "political factions with paramilitary or other actionist capabilities" within Syria. The CIA and MI6 would instigate internal uprisings, for instance by the Druze in the south, help to free political prisoners held in the Mezze prison, and stir up the Muslim Brotherhood in Damascus.

Starting from that confirmed conspiracy Mohsen Abdelmoumen suggests with some current data that a similar plan, with the endgame of breaking up Syria and Iraq, is in motion and that ISIS is an instrument in this.

Al-Maydeen TV, a Lebanese channel allegedly financed by Iran or Syria or Hizbullah or someone else, interviewed the Egyptian Sheikh Nabeel Naiem. The 40 minutes interview with English subtitles and a transcript can be found here. Sheikh Nabeel Naiem (the transliteration of the name may be wrong) claims to have been with Bin Laden in Afghanistan and explains why he believes that ISIS is a U.S. project using Jihadis to incite a "100 year war" between Sunni and Shia in the Middle East. The sheikh is very critical of the Muslim Brotherhood and I am not sure about some of his more propagandistic claims but he is well read and connects some well known U.S. documents to the current situation on the ground. He also alleges that there is a U.S. plot against the Saudi regime.

Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a Lebanese academic and resistance supporter, just adds the facts and concludes on her blog:

[S]everal developments this week reveal that ISIS has effectively become the US’ (and of course Saudi’s) new weapon of choice in confronting the Iran- Hizbullah-Syria-Iraq Axis:

Obama acknowledges that the notion of a “ready-made moderate Syrian force that was able to defeat Assad” was a “fantasy”, and only days later, requests $500 million from Congress to fund this fantasy; the following day, the leader of one of the leading “moderate” Islamist groups Obama was alluding to, the Syrian Revolutionary Front, tells The Independent that the fight against al-Qaeda was “not our problem” and admits that his fighters conduct joint operations with al-Qaeda’s representative in Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra; a Kurdish intelligence source reveals to The Telegraph that his people had informed the US and British governments of an imminent ISIS takeover of Mosul but that the warning “fell on deaf ears;” PM Maliki blames the US’ delayed delivery of 36 F16s Iraq had purchased for ISIS’ advance into northern and western Iraq; Netanyahu warns Obama against military intervention in Iraq, arguing “when your enemies are fighting one another, don’t strengthen either one of them. Weaken both;” ISIS declares war on Lebanon.

The facts speak for themselves.

Well? Are these all the facts and do they speak for themselves? I am not ready to decide.

Posted by b on July 8, 2014 at 18:22 UTC | Permalink

next page »

Well, let's assume hypothetically ISIS is an American creation, then who would be responsible for training this quasi-insurgency? That's right — people like TTG over at Mustard's hang, and maybe even Mustard himself. Maybe you can talk to them about it if any of you don't like this subterfuge rather than quoting them as authorities in prognosticating about Ukraine and the fate of the pro-Russian insurrectionists/secessionists.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Jul 8 2014 18:45 utc | 1

As you said it's possible and there's a range of potential possibilities:

1. ISIS is completely a tool of the US (or the Saudi's or the Israeli's) and will follow its master's orders without question. It's leaders are fake, co-opted, or otherwise are sock puppets for the west or the Saudi's / Israeli's.
2. ISIS is mostly funded and controlled by the US (or Saudi Arabia or Israel)but its leaders are independent enough to be playing their master's for chumps until they can go independent and do as they please.
3. ISIS is a Frankenstein that's a result of blowback in the region and is the unintended uncontrollable results of empowering jihadis and destabilizing secular regimes in the region. But it's original roots stem from a US (or Saudi or Israeli) plan to create a "tame" jihadi fighting force in the region to contain the Shia generally, Iran in particular, etc. However the US did not intend for ISIS specifically to gain arms and wasn't in their playbook. (if it's Saudi or Israel instead of the US then they could have meant for ISIS specifically)
4. ISIS wasn't intentionally funded but has been able to steal, lie, bribe, threaten, and cajole enough supplies and support over the last few years to gain momentum.

With the limited facts so far and the amount of chaos in the region I find 3 to be most likely personally.

2 I find far less likely due to the risks involved, especially after the blowback from the muhajideen in Afghanistan post 9/11, but I can't discount it. Especially if the Israeli's or especially the Saudi's where/are the primary backers.

4 seems pretty improbable but who knows.

1 I think is frankly completely insane and firmly in tinfoil hat territory.

Posted by: thepanzer | Jul 8 2014 18:52 utc | 2

The facts speak for themselves.

The facts presented by the author lead to the plausibility the U.S. is using the organic presence of ISIS, indirectly without overt aid and control, for its own purposes when it suits those purposes and right now it perhaps suits those purposes. Still, even with that plausibility the facts as presented are a stretch and there is still way too much conjecturing.

That being said, even if the above plausibility were to be proven true with more "data," everyone else including Syria does the same thing, it's just a matter of who can do it best and at the right time. Let anyone here deny Syria hasn't used ISIS to its own ends on various occasions up to and including direct, overt collaboration at lower operational levels.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Jul 8 2014 18:52 utc | 3

Until ISIS attacts Israel or KSA, we can only assume, as someone did on the last thread about al CIAda, that US/KSA are arming and training them.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jul 8 2014 18:54 utc | 4

And as for my list above, that's only a subset of the possibilities. We could slice the situation many, many, many more ways depending on which factions are thought to be involved, level of independence in ISIS from backers, and a whole host of other variables.

Posted by: thepanzer | Jul 8 2014 18:58 utc | 5

I find it difficult to reconcile the contradiction between the US being opposed to ISIS and its giving $500 million to rebels in Syria, knowing full well that much of the aid will almost certainly end up in ISIS hands.

The only way I can resolve that contradiction is to assume that the US intends for much of the aid to go to ISIS, reducing its apparent opposition to the usual deceptive blather.

The other interesting issue is the timing--right after elections. Most of the color revolutions took place around elections, with the aggrieved loser taking to the streets with US approval. ISIS' rebellion could just be a more violent version of the standard taking to the streets ploy of introducing "democracy" via the mob.

Posted by: JohnH | Jul 8 2014 19:03 utc | 6

One of my reservatns abt the "IS = US op" is that IS seems much more capable tactically and strategically than the crude gambits that the US/KSA/Isr habitually unleash on the Middle East, example being the FSA. And it seems nobody knows the IS backstory & no foreign power has stepped up to champion them. There are also accusations that IS is an Iranian plot. Is there a precedent for so sophisticated a transnational insurgency 2 spring up with limited popular support & an exclusionary/conservative ideology? Currently one of the major mysteries IMO

Posted by: China Hand | Jul 8 2014 19:05 utc | 7

When Bandar was replaced as intelligence chief, the new chief announced KSA intended to train and equip "a professional fighting force, with 40,000 fighters". ISIS is simply a more professional version of al Queda.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jul 8 2014 19:06 utc | 8

@6 It would be interesting to know how the paymasters operate. How do the various commanders get their slice of cake? Bank accounts in Damascus? Truckloads of cash from Turkey?

Posted by: dh | Jul 8 2014 19:22 utc | 9

@6 It would be interesting to know how the paymasters operate. How do the various commanders get their slice of cake? Bank accounts in Damascus? Truckloads of cash from Turkey?

Posted by: dh | Jul 8, 2014 3:22:29 PM | 9

Barely pubescent virgins from Russia?

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Jul 8 2014 19:26 utc | 10

From Ukraine more likely Cold. The place has a history of slave trading. I'm guessing all the rank and file get is fake a Rolex and some Nike trainers.

Posted by: dh | Jul 8 2014 19:38 utc | 11

An important aspect of this phenomenon is the role that ISIS, and other 'jihadi' groups play in soaking up muslim youths radicalised by the racism and immiseration affecting them in Europe.
The obvious response to mistreatement and semi-official islamophobia is NOT to get on a plane, travel a thousand miles or more and join in battles against your enemy's enemy-such as Assad or Maliki.
But that seems to be what hundreds of young European muslims are choosing to do.
Why? The simplest answer is that the money and other rewards are very tempting, and that the money comes either from the US or one of its auxiliaries.
Has anyone heard of 'jihadis' making their way to Egypt, for example, to fight those persecuting the Brotherhood? Or, as the agriculturalist from Oklahoma, @6, notes pouring into Gaza to fight the fascist butchers?
The money, and organisation, not to mention the air cover and modern arms and ammunition, just aren't there.
thepanzer @2's #3 explanation seems very close to me. And I suspect that, if he were still around, William of Ockham would choose it too.

Posted by: bevin | Jul 8 2014 19:43 utc | 12

Beyond the fact that I personally DO believe that ISIS et al are creations/tools of the US/Zionists to further their ME balkanization plans - don't want to sound like a broken record, y'know? ;) - under cover of the ridiculous mitigations of "negligence/incompetence" there are these further ideas:

Why - after all the death/maiming/raping/displacement of MILLIONS and MILLIONS of innocent people during America's current war of aggression in the ME and elsewhere - why are intelligent people STILL giving the US the benefit of the doubt? Why are not suspicions as to the cause of the present crimes and atrocities not REFLEXIVELY focused upon the US/Zionist war criminals who - after all the blatant damage/murder they have caused - still freely walk around more powerful and wealthy than ever?

Really, what are the roots of the LUDICROUS and EMBARRASSING lengths that seemingly intelligent people go to make themselves appear objectively analytical when analyzing said events and the meme "the US isn't involved" etc comes up over and over again?

Let's see, I'm a detective investigating the murder of innocent people in a given area that has a HISTORY of murder in said area. I KNOW that one STILL UNAPPREHENDED criminal who has been directly responsible for near IDENTICAL crimes in the EXACT SAME AREA of nearly the EXACT SAME nature in the past is still on the loose. What do/should I do?

Waste EVERYBODY'S fucking time and start the investigation afresh/from scratch OR maybe use a little fucking common sense and start the investigation with the KNOWN killer that is still running free around the planet?

I mean for fucking fuck's sake it's bad enough to have to sit here in War Crimes, Inc. and listen to the fucking nonsense propaganda try and deflect attention away from US culpability but to see people OUTSIDE the US buy into said fucking nonsense - because, make no mistake about it, that's what giving the US/Zionists the benefit of the doubt is a buying into the horseshit alibis and rationalizations of proven murderous war criminals - is almost too much.

What is blaming the US/Zionists too trite? Not complex/subtle/clever enough a reason explanation for the refined analytical minds of analysts?

Well excuuuuuuuuussssseeee me. Sometimes life presents people with situations where - especially when involving stopping murder/war crimes etc - discussions of nebulous nuance ONLY PREVENT people from seeing what is in front of their fucking faces.

Trust me on this one. If people REFLEXIVELY and INSTINCTIVELY laid the blame for the continuous litany of war crimes at the feet of the US/Zionists where it DESERVES TO BE no one's feelings/egos would be hurt and - gasp! - we might actually start saving people's fucking lives.

Look at the OP. Even though in quotes, b felt the need to include the term "conspiracy theories"! THAT'S a great measure of just how FARRRRRRRRR away the world is from stopping the war criminal American state, we're still using language which connotes that there is a MAYBE involved in thinking that the US/Zionists COULD be POSSIBLY guilty when the blood of the murdered and screams of the maimed - going on DECADES - already fully knows where the guilt lies.

Really, what will it ever take to get the "intelligent" crowd to drop their pretenses, abandon their worry about being wrong and fully lay the blame for AT LEAST this century's war crimes where they belong?


Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 8 2014 19:43 utc | 13

I have to agree with thepanzer (#3) that the best explanation is his point 3. However, this hypothesis fails to explain why Obama is going to send another $500 million to the rebels in Syria. Could the Obama admin really be that stupid and not learn from experience? I would say yes to that question.

Posted by: ToivoS | Jul 8 2014 19:45 utc | 14

Interesting that ISIS has not attacked any Israeli targets to my knowledge and is doing nothing to help Palestinians. Something rotten in the state of ISIS. Very peculiar for a so called militant Islamic group.

Posted by: Andoheb | Jul 8 2014 19:51 utc | 15

Jesus fucking Christ.

"Blowback" inherently connotes that what we are witnessing is an UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE probably the result of - you guessed it - every criminals FAVORITE alibi - TADA!! - INCOMPETENCE!!!

Funny, how when REAL CRIMES need reporting - e.g., Ukraine - Establishment propaganda mouthpieces like the NYT are NOWHERE to be found. However, when it concerns the INCOMPETENCE-FUELED "blowback" of a jihadist group the NYT was there from DAY FUCKING ONE telling everyone just how rich, powerful and well-connected said terror-boys are and how well all should get ourselves ready for a partitioned Iraq.

Blowback my fucking ass.

Derp, derp, but 9/11 was blowback, derp derp.....

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 8 2014 19:52 utc | 16

#16 yes 9/11 was blowback. Your continuous assertion that there was some deep conspiracy inside the US government that carried out those attacks, simply discredits what else you have to say.

Posted by: ToivoS | Jul 8 2014 20:00 utc | 17

I think the consensus is on the "#3" option. The only thing I would add is that it's probably likely the US was somewhat supporting these people in the fight against Assad (i.e., the flow of weapons out of Libya via Benghazi) expecting that these people would get wiped out by the Syrian army. Why on earth would the State Department go that route? Because the FSA was all but driven out of Syria proper and there really wasn't anyone left and these bureaucrats just can't leave any open unresolved jobs. So, they looked around, realized they can flood Syria indirectly with weapons via Libya but had to find a group of people who throw themselves against the Syria government. Can't fund al-Nusra and the FSA was a total joke. A bunch of guys who were lining up to merely replace the "Assad" portion of the "Assad regime."

It's as if SoS and the White House can't stand the fact that they keep losing wars. They keep going on and on never realizing that if you don't want to lose a war, DON'T WAGE THEM.

Posted by: P Walker | Jul 8 2014 20:06 utc | 18

Yep, it's just FUCKING INSANE to think of blaming the war criminal US/Zionists in this instance because.....hmmm, why would it be so "insane"?

Let's see, do the US/Zionists have:

1) a long history of aiding/abetting/creating/funding mercenary groups: check
2) near unlimited resources and pliant proxies to funnel said resources through: check
3) motives/plans/strategies for engaging in said destabilization: check

Yup, it's just totally fucking INSANE and tinfoil hat territory to look for the still AT LARGE serial killer with history/ability/motive to commit said crimes when investigating events on the ground. Totally fucking nuts!!!

But, JSore, we can't come up with a good reason yet as to WHY EXACTLY they would be doing detail X and/or detail Y.

Gee, could that be because you are just fucking peons like me and the rest of us and NOT privy to the exact designs of the war criminal elite, doofuses? That maybe if you were billionaire war criminal with access to US intel/resources THEN you might have a better grasp of what you were seeing? That maybe once you realize that since there is seemingly no punishment for/stopping any of the past and future war crimes that time-frames that might constrain more mundane criminals DON'T APPLY in this case? That these criminals aren't in danger of "going anywhere" and are thus free to wait years and decades to see their nefarious plans fulfilled?

But but but.....

Holy shit.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 8 2014 20:10 utc | 19


And the best part is that people like yourself have the audacity to then wonder just why oh why we can't stop the US War Machine.

Hint: look in the fucking mirror.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 8 2014 20:12 utc | 20

JSorrentine I can see the veins bulging from your forehead from here. LOL. I'm right there with you.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 8 2014 20:15 utc | 21

Oh, btw, looks like the apartheid genocidal state of Israel is about to level the Gaza Strip once again.

It's probably just an ISIS stronghold, right?

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 8 2014 20:19 utc | 22

I agree with Sorrentine. Its not goddamn blowback. Blowback is when bad things happen and these are all very good events for the United States.

When good things happen for the united states IT IS PROBABLY THE DOING OF THE UNITED STATES. Apples dont fall into their lap.

If ISIS were to invade saudi arabia, THEN it would be blowback, but as it is it seems obvious theyre US proxies.

And guess what? Even with this proclaimed caliphate, they are not going to invade saudi arabia, EVER. If they do I will be proven wrong, otherwise I am right.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jul 8 2014 20:21 utc | 23

The beauty of the Islamic State being under US control nonsense is that it feeds two pathologies, one is guilt about our Hegemony and the other is our arrogance and exceptionalism. We can feel bad about out government's machinations while at the same time celebrate the myth that no other people can control their fate without our approval and backing.

Liberating Palestine is the highest goal of the Caliphate and the Palestinians in Acre are chanting "Oh revolutionaries, come down in the streets and let the world burn" while Israel attempts to crush the growing uprising. IS vanguard cells are being activated in the KSA, Jordan, Lebanon and elsewhere, the world will never be the same.

Ho Chi Min took training and arms from the US during WW2 so he must have been a US tool also.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jul 8 2014 20:32 utc | 24

@6 Why do you assume the money is going to anti-Assad forces? The President says so? Given Obama's reliance on SOP, my guess is he needs cash to pay off old Sunni partners in Iraq from Petreus' efforts to salvage the surge. Politically, he can't go back into Iraq in any form, and just because the MIC budget is massive doesn't mean they can't be cash poor. To cover his tracks, it has to be anti-Syrian in nature. He can't fund the Kurds or Maliki without scaring Senators.

The U.S. is already in Syria, so maybe he thinks can pass it. Also, there were probably explicit promises made and he needs to buy whistle blowers from the FSA off who might feel abandoned.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Jul 8 2014 20:32 utc | 25

This is comical, really, watching so many avoid the obvious. Sorrentine is on it, though, smoking everyone out. Perhaps one of you smart guys who have such contempt for us tin-hats can explain how the US knows when Merkel takes a piss but is utterly surprised by ISIS.

Posted by: Carsonite | Jul 8 2014 20:35 utc | 26

Nato military advisers (French among others) working with ISIS in Syria have been arrested by the Syrian army, as Chussodovsky points out, together with boatloads of other evidence. To imagine that ISIS could emerge independently of state sponsorship (and no, Iran is not a plausible sponsor) is only possible for someone who hasn't spent much time in that part of the world. The only thing that functions in those states is the Mukhabarat.

Posted by: Cu Chulainn | Jul 8 2014 20:36 utc | 27

Not buying the hegemony argumentation, the USA has all the agency and the Jihadis have none because POWER and SHUT UP if you don't agree with me while I YELL the TRUTH(although it is entertaining)
Unfortunately, because who doesn't want his very own ANSWERS and TRUTH machine, it's too convenient and neat and down right RELIGIOUS as an ILLOGIC system. Not convincing, frankly a denial of human nature, like its ideological parents and grand parents Marxism and Hegelian-ism, and its ancestor Millenarianism. Always fitting messy facts and realities into categories, beautiful passionate lie more then they reveal categories.
Ptooey. Camus was right about this shit.

Posted by: Northern Observer | Jul 8 2014 20:41 utc | 28

Its funny how some call "blowback" when events go exactly as US/Israel wants. Have some already forgotten US/Saudis were the creators of Al Qaeda, and used them extensively throughout the region? Judge by the actions on the ground and who benefits, not words of politicians.

Call me when ISIS (or any other US/Saudi created Al Qaeda offshoot) attacks Israel or surrounds Riyadh. Until then, everything (and I mean, everything) points to the same guilty parties. What else is needed to convince its not a "conspiracy theory", written confession by Obama and co-signed by Saudis, Israelis and Turks?

Posted by: Harry | Jul 8 2014 20:53 utc | 29

You need to factor in Queen Elizabeth and the Jews.

Posted by: Louis Proyect | Jul 8 2014 21:02 utc | 30

How hard is it to imagine that the USA doesn't control the universe. Seemingly impossible.
And the 9/11 conspiracy thing, so silly.

If you want to blame someone, blame the Bush W era Saudi Israeli axis. Sunni fundamentalists funded from gulf, check, insane sectarian leanings, check.

The US already had its go with death squads in iraq. The Saudis are here to try and end Iraq as a Shia Polity, and Israel is happy to lend, how do you say, "blocking" "screening" support as it it can.

Posted by: Crest | Jul 8 2014 21:05 utc | 31

Northern Hasbarista, perhaps you'd clue us in on the jihadis' so-called agency. I mean, like any jihadi, present day. All roads lead to Rome, as it were.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 8 2014 21:06 utc | 32

I also agree that thepanzer’s possibility #3 is the most likely. This assumes that the American paymasters are sane and they know what they are doing and things just fell apart.

However, starting a civil war next door to a nuclear power who can destroy Washington DC and the Northern Hemisphere at a push of a button plus proposing to pay $500 million more to Jihadists in Syria now that the Islamic State is up and running are both flat out insane.

Posted by: VietnamVet | Jul 8 2014 21:08 utc | 33

He also alleges that there is a U.S. plot against the Saudi regime.

What could possibly go wrong with this idea not that I wouldn't like to see the house of saud go away. The replacement players are ?

Posted by: jo6pac | Jul 8 2014 21:16 utc | 34

Do you think a convoy of spanking new Toyota trucks, more than a mile long, loaded with artillery could move across the sands, without USG noticing? But that is what the USG claims... Do you think the USG would allow this group to move in and take over oil resources?

ISIS is a CIA tool, funded by KSA, trained in Jordan by US military. Do some homework and exercise your 'little grey cells' --- It is Israel's plan to break up all the Middle East so that their security is increased. It is to the Empire's benefit to create instability and have the natives killing each other. ISIS fits this plan to a "T" ~ See

William Engdahl is an award-winning geopolitical analyst and strategic risk consultant whose internationally best-selling books have been translated into thirteen foreign languages.

"ISIS in Iraq stinks of CIA/NATO ‘dirty war’ op"

"... Key members of ISIS it now emerges were trained by US CIA and Special Forces command at a secret camp in Jordan in 2012, according to informed Jordanian officials. The US, Turkish and Jordanian intelligence were running a training base for the Syrian rebels in the Jordanian town of Safawi in the country’s northern desert region, conveniently near the borders to both Syria and Iraq. Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the two Gulf monarchies most involved in funding the war against Syria’s Assad, financed the Jordan ISIS training.

Advertised publicly as training of ‘non-extremist’ Muslim jihadists to wage war against the Syrian Bashar Assad regime, the secret US training camps in Jordan and elsewhere have trained perhaps several thousand Muslim fighters in techniques of irregular warfare, sabotage and general terror. The claims by Washington that they took special care not to train ‘Salafist’ or jihadist extremists, is a joke. How do you test if a recruit is not a jihadist? Is there a special jihad DNA that the CIA doctors have discovered? "

... " Very revealing is the fact that almost two weeks after the dramatic fall of Mosul and the ‘capture’ by ISIS forces of the huge weapons and military vehicle resources provided by the US to the Iraqi army. Washington has done virtually nothing but make a few silly speeches about their ‘concern’ and dispatch 275 US special forces to allegedly protect US personnel in Iraq."

full article at link

Posted by: crone | Jul 8 2014 21:20 utc | 35

"Iraq has WMD"

Posted by: crone | Jul 8 2014 21:23 utc | 36

sorry, hit wrong button! senior moment!

"Iraq has WMD" - that's a conspiracy theory
"Ghadifi is bombing his own people" - that's a conspiracy theory

and on and on...

ISIS is CIA tool - NOT a conspiracy theory

Posted by: crone | Jul 8 2014 21:25 utc | 37

Right, because when a proven murderer and fucking all-around war criminal - like the Zionist US - with a long track record tells you that he's planning on committing some future crimes and then - surprise, surprise - those EXACT SAME events/crimes start happening, why, yup Cletus, it looks like we got ourselves are real-life fucking "Murder She Wrote" filled with all sorts of messy and complex twists and turns to unravel....

I mean, if only a very small and select group of nations had the war criminal experience, resources/capacity and plans/designs for future crimes all drawn up why THEN it would be easy!!! Too bad.

Well, we'll just have to run down the long list of nations that MIGHT have the proven capacity/resources for said actions and then cross-off the ones that maybe HAVEN'T explicitly stated that they want the ME broken up into a chaotic mess for their own benefit.


Afghanistan....No. Wait a second....let's not be too hasty and discuss this for a minute or a week. There might be a tie-in here. BREAK-OUT SESSION!!! While that goes on....

Albania...hmmmmm...are you thinking what I'm thinking? BREAK-OUT SESSION!!!!

to be continued....

Oh, so, it's hard to imagine the US doesn't "control the universe", huh? Note: Nice fucking straw man.

Hey, would you like to ask Putin and Assad and Maduro and all the other world leaders who AS WE SPEAK have to fucking deal with the murderous US constantly fucking with their shit?

What the fuck kind of stupid fucking reasoning/straw man is that, the "U.S doesn't control the world" because from my vantage point it may not control the world but it sure is doing its damn finest to fuck up A LOT of shit around the ENTIRE FUCKING PLANET right now.

I mean, how is this line of asinine argumentation any DIFFERENT from the alibis used by the American/Zionist war criminals as they absolve themselves from ANY responsibility a la "it's a complex situation which we are closely monitoring?

Yup, we US/Zionist war criminals bear NO RESPONSIBILITY for any of the recent war crimes the world over because we were just as surprised by events as you Spectators were - that's the ticket! - and, thus, are just REACTING to the unfolding of events.

We're just one tiny democracy among many. We don't control the planet, y'know, silly person.


Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 8 2014 21:28 utc | 38

Exposing Obama Regime's Support to Al Qaeda

It shows Daash/ISIS being a proxy of US interests. It's Rolex wearing Caliph America's man. A subversion similar to the government backed Islamists during the Algerian Civil War.

Posted by: crone | Jul 8 2014 21:33 utc | 39

Do you think a convoy of spanking new Toyota trucks, more than a mile long, loaded with artillery could move across the sands, without USG noticing? But that is what the USG claims... Do you think the USG would allow this group to move in and take over oil resources?

To the first question no, and to the second question yes. What you say isn't proof America is behind ISIS (meaning its creation), although it's more than likely America's been aware of ISIS and monitoring its movements and so far, hasn't intervened to neutralize or otherwise address this blossoming opportunity disguised as a burden. Maybe America is allowing ISIS to run roughshod because Iraq must not be allowed to ramp up oil production, because if it does, the artificially high oil prices look too suspect. I mean hell, they're already ridiculously suspect, but full-on Iraqi oil production, something we've really never seen, would put the charade of artificially high oil prices on a neon billboard, but who knows, even then perhaps the rubes still wouldn't notice as brainwashed as they are about the cover of supply and demand.

America can ride ISIS's wake without directly supporting it and it appears that's the case. By the way, Russia also benefits when Iraqi oil production is squashed, so don't expect Russia to aid Iraq in any substantial way.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Jul 8 2014 21:38 utc | 40

It depends on what the meaning of IS, IS.

Posted by: MRW | Jul 8 2014 21:43 utc | 41

"Is ISIS a creation of the United States government?"
When you ask the question that way, the answer is NO

When you ask the questions this way..
"Is ISIS a creation of multiple ( more then 1) intelligence agencies colluding together?

The answer is YES! YES and Yes!!!!

Posted by: Penny | Jul 8 2014 21:46 utc | 42

Limited hang outs are useful for curtailing a thorough flushing out of the deitrus
Limited hang outs only favour the powers that shouldn't be and their immoral objectives.

Posted by: Penny | Jul 8 2014 21:49 utc | 43

@24 If ISIS wanted to free Palestinians, they would be shooting Israelis, not Iraqis.

Golly gee willikers, I havnt seen ISIS do that, have you? Maybe thats because THEY DONT WANT TO HELP PALESTINIANS?

Posted by: Massinissa | Jul 8 2014 22:12 utc | 44

Whats all this nonsense about us 'denying the jihadis agency'? Was it their agency that trained them and financed them? Oh wait, no, it wasnt. Its proven 100% they were trained by NATO and given weapons by NATO. So then why is it assumeed that, having been given training and weapons by an outside source, how is it assumed by some of you that they have some kind of 'agency' to be 'denied' by Jsorrentine? I just dont understand. When it is proven they received US training and weapons it is only logical to assume US control. They have done this before in Afghanistan in the late 80s.

Oh wait, maybe im denying Al Qaeda's 'Agency' in resisting the Russians in Afghanistan a few decades ago. My bad! Cant deny Al Qaedas agency just because we gave them training and weapons, I might hurt the feelings of some liberals!

Posted by: Massinissa | Jul 8 2014 22:17 utc | 45

"Politically, he (Obama) can't go back into Iraq in any form," says

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Jul 8, 2014 4:32:44 PM

This is a sane comment, an honest comment and a true comment. And Obama can't go back in BECAUSE Bush-Cheney-Perle's-Wolfowitz (Israel-m.i.cmplex sponsored) Iraq War did not go as planned and the most fallible conspiracy did NOT get its way, various insurgencies having exhausted the will of the American people and the Elite unwilling to test that meager will with war extension.

This otoh is typical Formidable Conspiracy sophistry:

"Yup, we US/Zionist war criminals bear NO RESPONSIBILITY for any of the recent war crimes the world over because we were just as surprised by events as you Spectators were - that's the ticket! - and, thus, are just REACTING to the unfolding of events...."

If American imperialism wreaks havoc through failed gambits, it is not relieved of responsibility. Nor are the
Formidable Conspiracy cranks offering appreciable propaganda which would help mobilize the American masses to deal to their their masters punishment of any kind.

That punishment, due to the people's lack of character, will doubtless eventually be mustered by the tipping point of imperial overextension,
blowback and/of Arab-Iranian-Eurasian Resistance/solidarity.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jul 8 2014 22:23 utc | 46

Published in 2007 – a full 4 years before the 2011 “Arab Spring” would begin – Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh’s New Yorker article titled, “”The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” stated specifically (emphasis added):

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

Posted by: crone | Jul 8 2014 22:23 utc | 47

In 2007 Seymour Hersh in "The redirection" outlined US policy in the region thus.
“To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.” This is what is happening now, the resistance Hez, Syria,the Shia in Iraq and finally Iran are being attacked, without one American casualty, and all with the backing of the perverted Kings and Emirs of the GCC, what could possibly go wrong?

Posted by: harry law | Jul 8 2014 23:02 utc | 48

Sorry [email protected] I did not notice your perceptive comment, it was not there when I was busy composing mine.

Posted by: harry law | Jul 8 2014 23:07 utc | 49

crone @ 37

It is a bit bigger then the CIA, certainly encompassing MI6 and Israeli intelligence, with the help of the usual GCC toadies
And Turkey.

b's use of the term of "conspiracy theory" in the derogatory sense suggests much about b, but, not anyone else

Posted by: Penny | Jul 8 2014 23:16 utc | 50

Except he didn't use it in the derogatory sense.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jul 8 2014 23:35 utc | 51

@48 not to worry Harry... some things need saying twice ;-)

@49 I agree with you Penny that Brits & Israelis are involved, but then they are joined at the hip w/ CIA, aren't they? As for the addition of "conspiracy theories" to the title of b's piece... rattled me a little. I think perhaps b is getting pressured a lot these days by some of the trolls... who knows?

In other news, Gaza is burning ~

Posted by: crone | Jul 8 2014 23:42 utc | 52

re Gaza:

And this is only the World Cup SEMIFINALS, I wonder what the apartheid genocidal Israeli scum have in store for the last few games. Fucking war criminal scum.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 9 2014 0:10 utc | 53

Anbar Sunni Tribal Leader: "ISIS is a supported by Iran"

Sheikh Hatem al-Suleiman: ISIS’s growth in Iraq is very dangerous and they don’t believe in the political process. Iran contributed to and has supported ISIS’s expansion in Iraq; Iran’s intelligence has clearly played a role in promoting ISIS.

Posted by: Virgile | Jul 9 2014 0:11 utc | 54

We all face a long and troubling time while the Army OF Islam grows and consolidates its power. As borders disappear and the Islamic State expands to encompass all of the Muslim World we and Israel will have to face the reality that all the plans we made are illusions. The only way the Muslim World can resist the Hegemon is to unite under the Caliph and that is what is happening today.

We can bomb them back to the Stone Age and they will crawl from under those stones and fight. I doubt the US or Europe have the stomach to send troops to fight and without a huge force there is nothing to stop this idea whose time has come. If a token force is sent all that will do is spread rage throughout the region and invite attacks around the world.

If there are any intelligent people with power in the West they should be making evacuation plans for Israel and drawing up oil supply agreements with the Islamic State.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jul 9 2014 0:41 utc | 55

Voltaire Network | Damascus | 8 July 2014

Kurdistan and the Caliphate

by Thierry Meyssan

"In a few weeks, two entities to which few people gave a future are taking shape: Kurdistan and the Caliphate. Thierry Meyssan’s analysis indicating these two entities are being propelled by Washington is confirmed by events. He examines the latest developments.

Starting with the fall of Mosul, I stated that the current war in Iraq should not be interpreted as an action by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, but as a combined jihadists and local Kurdish government offensive to implement the US map for remodeling the country. [1] I was quite alone and this view went against the current. Three weeks later, it has become evident."

... Snip (huge piece on Kurdistan)

"... Meanwhile, the Islamic State of Irak and the Levant (renamed Islamic Emirate) proclaimed the Caliphate. In a long, lyrical text, peppered with quotations from the Koran, it announced that, given its ability to impose Sharia in the vast territory under its control in Syria and Iraq, the time for the Caliphate had come. It announced that its chief elected Caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and every believer, wherever he is, has the duty to submit. [5] No photograph of the new head of state has been released, nobody knowing if al-Bagdhadi really exists or if the name of "Caliph Ibrahim" is just a scarecrow.

Though the seizure of northern Iraq has been welcomed by some of the Muslim world, we doubt that this claim to govern the whole has been appreciated in a general sense.

Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) has supported "the heroes of the Islamic Emirate." While Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) has sent its best wishes for success and victories. Others affiliated with Al-Qaeda groups such as Boko Haram in Nigeria and the Shabaab in Somalia should demonstrate their allegiance shortly. So we would be witnessing an Al Qaeda mutation from status as an international terrorist network to that of an unrecognized State.

Be that as it may, the IE continues its progression cautiously. It knows how to fight within certain limits and is careful not to offend the interests of Washington and its allies, including those who are of consequence. Thus, in Samarra, it carefully avoided attacking the mausoleums of Shiite Imams so as not to provoke Iran.

Henceforth, many voices in Washington rise up to confirm the remodeling of Iraq. Thus, Michael Hayden, former director of the NSA and CIA, renders the following verdict on Fox News: "With the conquest by the insurgents of the major part of Sunni territory, Iraq has virtually ceased to exist. Partition is inevitable." His statements are accompanied by calls for intervention. The former adviser to George Bush, then Barack Obama’s ambassador to Iraq, James Jeffrey said: "[The Jihadists] have never let up, even when I was there in 2010 and 2011. They were totally defeated and they lost their population. We were on their heels and the did not rise up. There is no way to reason with them, no way to contain them, you must kill them."

The Atlanticist press interprets these positions as a debate between supporters of the division of Iraq and supporters of its unity by force. In fact, the Washington program could not be clearer: first let the jihadists partition Iraq (and possibly Saudi Arabia), then crush them once their job is done.

In this perspective, President Obama consults and drags on. In violation of Iraqi-US defense agreements, he has dispatched only 800 men, of which only 300 are to mentor Iraqi forces, the others being assigned to protect his embassy."

Posted by: crone | Jul 9 2014 0:51 utc | 56

J Sorrentine @52.
After the semi-finals J. there is only one more game:the Final.

Is there really much disagreement here?
Most people seem to agree that the US, the CIA in particular-the Director being an old Saud family crony-and related intelligence agencies, plus, of course, the Special Forces such as SAS played a major part in putting what is now ISIS together.
And that the usual suspects, the Gulf, Saudi and the US (the US always picks up Israel's tab) have supplied the weapons and made sure that every one of the recruits is doing way better than the average worker.

The question that is hard to answer is: how much control does the US have over ISIS's current operations?

For some of us this is not clear: on many occasions in the past operations such as ISIS have slipped out of control. The Taliban was one of them. It could be argued that the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas were others. That is in the nature of such bargains.

For others there is no mystery: ISIS are doing what they are ordered to do. Anything suggestive of another course is merely designed to mislead us.
The reasoning of those who believe this would seem to be that, because ISIS has been US supplied and its founding US assisted, it is therefore always going to be a US agency. It cannot be out of control because such things never happen, because, if they did, the US would never risk starting them.
Is this because muslims are sharp enough to engage in double dealings? Or because they understand that it is suicidal to go against the US? Or is it because the US really wants what ISIS wants?

It would be tedious to enumerate the things ISIS seems to do- including retreating from the front line in Syria, which is where the US is desperate for help, and co-operating with baathists in Mosul- because the clinching argument is always that all evil actions in the world are attributable to the US, so that if ISIS does something nasty it must be doing so at Washington's behest.
I'm inclined to agree with Wayoutwest @24.

But does it really matter? If the US is responsible for everything, what more should we do than we are doing now? Does it make any difference if ISIS is acting according to its own lights or as a secret agent of the CIA?

Would anyone argue that the American people would rise up in anger and march on Washington if word slipped out that Cheney gave the order for 9/11 and Obama initialed the plans for the assault on Mosul?

The sad truth about those who deny the very concept of "blowback" is that they are denying the ability of Arabs, for example, to take any initiatives, to make history except as grunts in Amerika's serpentine campaigns.

Posted by: bevin | Jul 9 2014 0:57 utc | 57

As expected, ISIS is now kicking the naive Sunni opposition who thought they could use ISIS to topple Al Maliki.

Islamic State rounds up ex-Baathists to eliminate potential rivals in Iraq's Mosul

In the past week, Islamic State Sunni militants who overran the city of Mosul last month have rounded up between 25 and 60 senior ex-military officers and members of former dictator Saddam Hussein's banned Baath party, residents and relatives say.
The move echoes Islamic State tactics in neighbouring Syria, where the group, an offshoot of al Qaeda, entrenched itself in the rebel-held east by eliminating other opponents of President Bashar al-Assad.

Posted by: Virgile | Jul 9 2014 1:16 utc | 58

The formation of ISIS requires no particular genius on the part of the US. It requires:

1) lots of money, which they have or can get from the Saudis

2) Lots of intelligence services with long reach...CIA, MI6, KSA can do it. Mossad is probably letting the others do the heavy lifting for them.

3) Lots of military power.

It is clear they have all that. They do NOT control everything and don't need to. They control enough to cause lots of misery to lots of people. And yes, they WILL suffer blowback, but not in the sense of ISIS turning against KSA or Israel (see foot note.*) Rather the blow back will be in the form of ever greater cooperation between Iran and Russia (two countries with a history of distrust,) Increased Russian influence in Iraq and the Persian Gulf and lastly, a greater distrust of the US by everybody as more and more people begin to see the link between the US and radical terrorism. Though the latter would happen faster if commenters who should know better did know better.

* Notice I didn't include Jordan in that list, because I think it is entirely possible that ISIS could be directed to attack Jordan. Crazy??? Not at all. Eventually the Israelis need to ethnically cleans the Palestinians into Jordan and ISIS provides the perfect cover. No doubt they will pretend to be concerned about Jordan and the US/ISrael will promise their puppet all sorts of aid. And Likely King Abdullah will think the decades of loyal service provided by him and his collaborator father will spare him...maybe they have a villa for him in KSA. If he were smart, he would start reaching out to Iran, Syria and Russia right now, if it's not too late already.

Posted by: Lysander | Jul 9 2014 1:30 utc | 59

For starters:

There are actually 3 - a few - games left: one more semifinal, the consolation match and the final. More than enough time for the genocidal Israelis to really do some more damage.

"But does it really matter? If the US is responsible for everything, what more should we do than we are doing now? Does it make any difference if ISIS is acting according to its own lights or as a secret agent of the CIA?"

So, abandoning every pretext as to your previous analyses/web presence etc NOW it just DOESN'T MATTER (!???) what's really going on? After all the storm and stress of attempting to piece together the true motives and actions of our overlords, you're done? So, we will be seeing a lot less of you around here?

Would anyone argue that the American people would rise up in anger and march on Washington if word slipped out that Cheney gave the order for 9/11 and Obama initialed the plans for the assault on Mosul?

Obviously one couldn't get the mostly fat and lazy brainwashed American people to rise up for free chicken wings but YES if those few remaining conscientious American people actually began seeing things in a clearer light, where the blinders of propaganda have begun to fall away, they realized that nearly EVERYTHING they've been told - especially concerning epochal events - was a gross fiction and thus became LESS SUSCEPTIBLE to every NEW instance of fairy-tale narrative spinning by TPTB, then YES it may not be an angry rush on Washington but AT THE VERY LEAST the beginning of a truer more reality-based mindset as those created/held by other populations living under the oppression of past totalitarian regimes with massive propaganda batteries at their disposal would be a direct benefit to themselves and the planet as a whole.

You have to stop being incessantly played for a fucking fool day in/day out before you can even begin to THINK about doing/changing something.

The sad truth about those who deny the very concept of "blowback" is that they are denying the ability of Arabs, for example, to take any initiatives, to make history except as grunts in Amerika's serpentine campaigns.

This type of reasoning is simply the most dishonest load of politically correct horseshit ever and anyone who has any regard for the investigation of 9/11 truth and other movements has seen it in spades. So, even though there is DIRECT AND AMPLE evidence that the US/Zionists create/perpetrate false flags against their own people etc it would just be POLITICALLY INCORRECT to NOT elevate innocent Arabs/Muslims et al to a level of war criminality EVEN THOUGH there's no evidence to do so. Got it. Again, the strawman cometh. No one has said that Arabs et al. don't have the ability to do this that or the other but in the case of ISIS, in the case of 9/11 and in other specific cases to say that there is NOT more than enough evidence to point the finger AWAY from sole Arab et al creation/instigation is really just silly.

Moreover, it would be one thing if just ONE US/Zionist war criminal had been prosecuted for ANY of the crimes they have committed in instigating false flag terror just ONCE in the history of Western civilization. Just one.

However, it's quite another load of utter tripe to sit there and make arguments to the effect that the increasing - but nevertheless ineffectual - number of comments by posters on the Internet etc as to the guilt of said US/Zionist false flag/operations perpetrators constitutes anything OTHER than the wish/need for justice by those who have to wallow in watching said criminals commit crime after crime and walk around scott free and more powerful than ever.

Won't someone think about the Arab war criminals, ffs?!!!

Leave the Americans/Zionists alone!!! They can't stand to read anymore insightful Internet commentary regarding their crimes, people!!!

Lastly, it's enjoyable to see how the ever present US/Zionist "incompetence" meme thus becomes/dovetails with the Arab/Muslim diabolical GENIUS meme, huh?

Is that you Rummy? Are you going to show us the OBL's mountain fortress again? What about those failed Cessna classes and all that fancy jetliner flying?

Fuck it. Out.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 9 2014 1:40 utc | 60

Run-on sentence should be:

...regimes with massive propaganda batteries at their disposal AND THIS would be a direct benefit to themselves and the planet as a whole.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 9 2014 1:43 utc | 61

OMG, this is so stoopid that I couldnt resist posting it here---luckily it's ISIS-related. Read the responses too, Goldberg has the audacity to spellcheck a comment rather than admit he completely misrepresents the story.

Posted by: ess emm | Jul 9 2014 2:41 utc | 62

@2 panzer.. i go with door # 2.

@6 - john.. ditto. the part about obomber sending 1/2 a bil to continue to press for regime change in syria is more of the same hypocritical bullshite and supports panzer #2 position..

@9 dh.... bank accounts in kuwait and qatar would be more my guess.. this article from 3 weeks ago is partial support for my comment.. other articles i have read the past few weeks have led me to this position..

@15 Andoheb.. indeed! only shia holy sites are being targeted, although isis talked yesterday of going to mecca to blow up the holy kobba.

the last article appears to weaken my support for panzer #2 idea, however i think saudi arabia leadership is foolish enough to think they can control this double edged sword, when in fact they can't..

@29 harry.. i agree - ditto your view.

@30 Louis Pro-yuck.. the moron is back!

@31 crest. ditto..

@35/37 crone / @49 penny. i agree for the most part.. b isn't saying these ideas are conspiracy theories as i read it.. maybe i am wrong.. he seems to be asking an open question and hasn't come to a firm position.

@46 crone.. the highlighted words are how i see it too.. and i think saudi arabia and israel are in on this same agenda too.. i said the same thing on the previous thread.. thanks for sharing that..

@56 Lysander.. perceptive comments as always.. thanks.

basically i agree with jsore.. isis is a useful tool for the same crew that would be interested in supporting this type of bullshite - usa /saudi arabia /israel.. it ain't no conspiracy theory. the double edged sword can cut a few ways here and they are playing with fire as is typical..

Posted by: james | Jul 9 2014 2:50 utc | 63


Weird, this story is like 3 weeks old. Funny, that known Zionist propganda asshat Mr. Goldberg and the AP are resurrecting it. How timely.

Watch fucking FIFA or be scared or something. Whatever you do, do NOT pay attention to Israeli atrocities in Gaza!

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jul 9 2014 2:53 utc | 64

in how to win friends and influence people.. ot news, that wonderful little country israel continues to spread murder and mayham in it's open air prison @ gaza..

Posted by: james | Jul 9 2014 2:57 utc | 65

Be they a US "creation" or not, they're certainly using "plundered" US weapons. A little unforseen oopsie probably... or something that drives one to think along the lines of JohnH:

I find it difficult to reconcile the contradiction between the US being opposed to ISIS and its giving $500 million to rebels in Syria, knowing full well that much of the aid will almost certainly end up in ISIS hands.

The only way I can resolve that contradiction is to assume that the US intends for much of the aid to go to ISIS, reducing its apparent opposition to the usual deceptive blather.

There is no way that the US simply doesn't see the possibilities of what is occurring here, where their weapons will end up, or see the risk that ISIS would try and move to restive and relatively friendly Iraq after having been slowly but surely squeezed out of Syria.

I don't think anyone here is suggesting the US has complete control over them like they call Obama every morning and as for instructions. But you can be sure there are deep connections with the CIA/Saudo/Israeli intelligence consortium, after all, they've been working for at least three years to topple Assad. These guys know each other by name. And anyway, where is the downside for the US? They offer a counterbalance to Iran and the "uncooperative" Maliki in Iraq, they are a regional outlet for the machinations for increasingly restive but absolutely key US allies, KSA and Qatar, and they further Israeli plans to sever the Shia crescent. And despite all the media hype, they have yet to threaten a single interest of the West.

We can't ignore either that these fundamentalist groups have long been favored by the US to do its dirty work - not the least of which reason is the US alliance with the KSA. To expand upon Jsorrentine's analogy: when a string of bank robberies occur and they all involve 4 guys in Nixon masks, you begin to suspect they are related. And the use of fundamentalist groups in this way is becoming the MO of the US.

One of the key memes in Sen. Bob Graham's embarrassing pot boiler "Keys to the Kingdom" was that "we had to go back into Iraq" (for unspecified reasons). We have to consider that there must be a fall back plan to the failure of the SOFA, and ISIS fits the bill in every way. It is another media rationalization for the American people that US re-involvement is "necessary" in a country it was so thoroughly ejected from.

Posted by: guest77 | Jul 9 2014 3:17 utc | 66

Abbas calls on international community to guarantee Palestinian security

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas appeared on Palestinian TV on Tuesday to appeal for international help as the conflict between Israel and Hamas continued to escalate.
22 mins ago: Abbas

"I have been in communication with many different parties during the last few days, regionally and internationally, and especially with the Palestinian factions and leaders from the Hamas movement, warning them that the Israeli government wants to take the situation to a violent circle, and all those I have spoken to reiterated that they are for the continuation of the truce and against escalation.

What's happening in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem is not a war between two armies.

The Palestinian people are an unarmed people, people who live under occupation. It's time now for the international community, and especially the Quartet and the Security Council, to take their responsibility to guarantee the international protection of our people."

A nightmare in the making

Posted by: crone | Jul 9 2014 3:19 utc | 67

The leaders of the Sunni tribes met and reaffirmed their allegiance to the Islamic State for the coming battles. There is nothing unusual about this statement but where they met, in Erbil the heart of Kurdistan, is very telling.

For this public meeting and statement to take place in the heart of Kurdistan there must be some agreement or negotiations between the Kurds and the Islamic State. A few battalions of battle hardened Peshmerga fighters would make a valuable addition to the Caliph's Army.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jul 9 2014 3:55 utc | 68

@34 "The replacement players are ?"

I imagine the Hashemites would love to receive an invitation from Uncle Sam to return to the Hejaz.

After all, they *did* own the joint before that nasty House Of Saud elbowed its way in, and as far as Washington is concerned the Hasemites *are* all warm and cuddly compared to the wahhabis.

Not as rich, of course, but an invitation to come off the bench as replacement players for the Saudis would soon fix that little problem.....

Posted by: Johnboy | Jul 9 2014 7:26 utc | 69

@ Bevin #55

The sad truth about those who deny the very concept of "blowback" is that they are denying the ability of Arabs, for example, to take any initiatives, to make history except as grunts in Amerika's serpentine campaigns.

Perhaps by defending "blowback," you yourself are irrationally denying Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi, acting as Arabs', ability to take any initiatives against the Empire.

I'm sure you are bright enough to compile a long list of other Arabs assassinated for crossing the Empire, off the top of your head -- thus reducing your own ridiculous straw man argument to dust for us.

Posted by: Al Cazar | Jul 9 2014 9:11 utc | 70

Thank you b for this interview link. I'm happy that the guy confirmed pretty much all of the points I made here several times and got bashed for by the imperial gatekeepers and the idiotic "it's the Jews" bunch.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 9:22 utc | 71

This is also a great bit of info:

"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..

- How did you get it?

Nabeel Naiem: These public prosecution confessions are published and are available.. Obama entered (the meeting room) and gave the CIA team a paper and left, they read it and told him: it’s required by the Muslim Brotherhood to contain the radical groups in the region starting with Hamas & Al-Qaeda, so he called Ayman Zawahri through Rifa’a Tahtawi, head of presidential court, who happens to be Ayman’s cousin from Rifa’a Tahtawi’s phone.
Ayman (Zawahri) talking to Mohammad Morsi and Morsi says to him: Peace be Upon You Emir (Prince) of Believers, we need your people here in Sinai, and I will provide them with expenses, food and water and prevent security from pursuing them..
This was recorded and sent to the public prosecutor and this is what Mohammad Morsi is being tried for.
If you ask how I got to know this? I was in Channel 2 of Egyptian TV, and with me was General Gamal, 1st secretary of Egyptian Intelligence, who recorded the call and written it down and based on it the memo was written and handed to the Public Prosecutor.

The TV presenter asked him: Is it allowed for the Intelligence Services to tap the telephone of the president of the republic?

He replied: I’m not tapping the president’s phone, I was tapping Ayman’s (Zawahri) phone and found the president talking to him, telling him Peace be Upon You Emir of Believers, so I wrote down the tape, wrote a report and submitted to the head of intelligence..

She asked him: Did you inform the president? He replied: It’s not my job, I do not deal with the president (directly), I deal with the head of intelligence and that’s my limits.

She asked him: What did you write in your investigations and your own report, what did you write after you wrote down the tape (contents)?

I swear to God he told her, & I was in the same studio,: I wrote that Mr. Mohammad Morsi Ayyat president of the republic is a danger for Egypt’s National Security.
So the ignorant should know why the army stood by the side of the people on 30 June, because the president is dealing with Al-Qaeda organization, and it’s recorded, and he’s being on trial for it now, and head of intelligence wrote that the president of the republic is a danger on Egypt’s National Security."

Does anyone have the references to those public hearings from Egypt or this mentioned TV-show? Are there transcripts available? I just want to check if it is real, because if it is, it is indeed a real bombshell.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 9:30 utc | 72

It does look like Israel is implementing the final solution to its 'Palestinian problem'.

There seems to be no help for the Palestinians from any quarter of the world.

Can this whole ISIS business be cover for the final Palestinian genocide at the hands of the Zionists?

It must seem very much to the Palestinians right now as it must have seemed to the Jews themselves at the hands of the NAZIs.

Posted by: john francis lee | Jul 9 2014 10:33 utc | 73

I also love how he always references London as the place where all the dirt comes from...

".. and I sat with people who came from London to fight in Syria, they sat with me and thanks to God they went from Egypt back to London.
They came to ask me, and I told them, let’s assume that Bashar (Assad) died in the morning, would I be saying: Why God did you take Bashar while the war is not over yet? Who will replace Bashar?

They replied: (Ahmad) Jarba..

I said: Jarba is worth of Bashar shoes only.. They said: true. And they went back.

I told them you are going to fight in favor of America and Israel, will you be the one to rule Syria?
If you were the one who will rule Syria I will come and fight on your side, I swear by God I’ll come and fight on your side..

But are you going to rule Syria after Bashar? He said no, I told him you are being used to remove Bashar and then Jarba, Salim Idress, Issam Hattito will come, all of those are being raised in the spy nest in London, it’s not you who will rule."

From the horse's mouth... and he should know what he's talking about.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 10:37 utc | 74

@ john francis lee - just as you mention them trained idiots who scream "it's all the Jews"...

Are you really so naive? Israel is about to be destroyed by the Empire. The current game down there is only about securing the interests of British Petroleum.

Highly recommended reading, including all the links in the articles:

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 10:42 utc | 75

@ cold in #3:

"Let anyone here deny Syria hasn't used ISIS to its own ends on various occasions up to and including direct, overt collaboration at lower operational levels."

Syrians are fighting against<7b> Takfiris (which were just recently regrouped and renamed to "ISIS") all the time since these attacked Syria. Syrians now managed to push them out, which is why they shifted to Iraq, it being an easier prey. Also, read the interview linked above, might help you understand the differences between those groups you're so generously mixing up all the time.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 10:47 utc | 76

Meh, formatting gone wrong... sorry.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 10:48 utc | 77

bevin: "An important aspect of this phenomenon is the role that ISIS, and other 'jihadi' groups play in soaking up muslim youths radicalised by the racism and immiseration affecting them in Europe."

They play exactly the same role that the "green" parties play in the west - fake, controlled opposition used to suck up all the potentially dangerous real opposition and anarchists.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 10:53 utc | 78

@ P Walker #18: "It's as if SoS and the White House can't stand the fact that they keep losing wars. They keep going on and on never realizing that if you don't want to lose a war, DON'T WAGE THEM."

Do you seriously think that the objective in these wars was to "win" anything?

@ Cuculainn: "Nato military advisers (French among others) working with ISIS in Syria have been arrested by the Syrian army"

No. They worked with "Al Nusra", FSA and whatever, but in Syria, the term ISIS was never used until just a mere few weeks ago.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 11:03 utc | 79

"All roads lead to Rome, as it were."

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 8, 2014 5:06:59 PM | 32

Yes. And the current seat of the formerly roman Empire is in Londonium.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 11:06 utc | 80

directly or indirectly, there's no doubt. Isolate Lebanon and Hezbollah, marginalize if not remove Assad--all to further isolate Iran. Let Eastern Iraq align with Iran, and peel off the Sunni and the Kurds, which further buffers Syria, Lebanon and Israel. That's our plan, it puts the oil and water resources in the greatful hands of the Kurds.

Posted by: scottindallas | Jul 9 2014 12:03 utc | 81

"directly or indirectly, there's no doubt. Isolate Lebanon and Hezbollah, marginalize if not remove Assad--all to further isolate Iran. Let Eastern Iraq align with Iran"

Can't you see the contradiction in the bold part?

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 12:56 utc | 82

Be they a US "creation" or not, they're certainly using "plundered" US weapons. A little unforseen oopsie probably... or something that drives one to think along the lines of JohnH:

But then you have to reconcile this with the withholding of the jets. Also, if ISIS is an American creation, where's the Ford or Chevy pick-ups? Toyota? Apparently, the Japanese are also in on the action — those sneaky devils from The House of the Rising Sun.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Jul 9 2014 12:58 utc | 83

@T2015 | 79

Can't you see the contradiction in the bold part?

There is no contradiction in meaning what he was saying, do you really want to be technical about words?

Iraq is already aligned with Iran, therefore USrael is doing n(th) iteration of Balcanization - breaking up disobedient countries into more pliant statelets. Even if one part of it stays non-subservient, its good enough for Usrael if its significantly weakened, while other parts become puppets to do the bidding of the empire.

Posted by: Harry | Jul 9 2014 13:29 utc | 84

Of course there is a contradiction there. If they would want to isolate it, they wouldn't let it grow bigger and stronger. Nor would they let a single Iranian into Iraq.

The trouble is only that most of you guys are so easy to fool. Iran always was and still is a completely controlled entity.

Mind you, these articles are years old. Noone "knew" about ISIS etc. theater back then.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 13:58 utc | 85

This one is especially enlightening, from 2003:

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 14:01 utc | 86

And this too:

"It is obvious from the list of participants that the IDLO Roundtable took as its starting point that Muslim religious law, Sharia, should govern Afghanistan.

Thus among the 60-odd participants were *none* of the teachers, professors, lawyers, judges or government officials who worked in the *secular* government that ran Afghanistan throughout the 1980s.

Instead there were officials from the current US-installed Muslim fundamentalist government, riddled with former mujahideen terrorists.

There were IDLO and UN officials.

There were government representatives from the US, Japan, Germany, Italy, *and Iran*! (Germany and Japan sent one representative each but Iran got three!)

There was a large group of pro-Sharia scholars, mainly from the Middle East. But not only. For example, the participant from Harvard Law School was one Frank E. Vogel, the "Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques Adjunct Professor of Islamic Legal Studies." (!) He runs a Saudi-funded program at Harvard Law. (Just for the record, the Saudis do not fund educational programs out of love of learning. They spend their petrodollars to push Salafi Islam, the Muslim extremism known in the West as Wahabbi.) [H]

The Iranian wing of Muslim fundamentalism was represented by two Sharia judges, Mahmood Akhondy and Mohammad Reza Zandy, and by Ali Gholampour, Third Secretary in the Iranian Embassy in Rome. (The third secretary is often an intelligence post.) However, the Iranians had no representatives from U.S. Ivy League schools.

Clearly the conference was not aimed at encouraging Afghanistan to adopt a secular legal system or even to debate the issue. It was organized with an eye to making Sharia respectable in Afghanistan. And not just there:

[Excerpt from the AP dispatch starts here]

The conclusions of that meeting were that Islamic law has "all the elements that are really required to underpin a human rights agenda and a modern state agenda which are completely compatible with international standards," said William Loris, director-general of the International Development Law Organization, which trains lawyers and judges in developing countries.

[Excerpt from the AP dispatch ends here]

Please notice that Mr. Loris did not confine his comments to Afghanistan. According to the IDLO chief, the conference ruled that Islamic law, or Sharia, has all the elements needed for *any* "modern state agenda"!"

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 9 2014 14:07 utc | 87

@T2015 | 82

Iran always was and still is a completely controlled entity.

I've read your several comments with questionable logic and misunderstood facts, but this takes the cake. I wont bother reading your comments anymore, but I'll do last favor for you and hint what you misunderstand in this case: cooperation in specific areas in specific matters doesnt mean "completely controlled entity", try to understand. Plus quoting and accepting zionists articles rationale at the face value is also hardly wise, you should know better than that by now.

Posted by: Harry | Jul 9 2014 14:14 utc | 88

Part of the problem in determining ISIS independence is their likely funding sources are not monolithic entities. As an example, when we say "the Saudi's" we over generalize and turn potentially tens or even hundreds of smaller sub-factions into one abstraction. These gradations are very important. So in reality "the Saudi's" can be members of the top echelons of the royal family, sub-elements within the govt and military, associated powerful families, business factions, religious factions,etc. Granted their can be a lot of overlap with a single individual affiliated with one, more, most, or even all of a group of factions. But their can also be very large differences in interests between and even within factions.

Just as important as who is the when. For analyzing any groups independence and C2 it's possible they received a faction's support previously but the faction ceased or ceases support in the future. When the break happens you can longer attribute control to faction.

Currently in Iraq we have the Americans, the Iranians, all of the other gulf states, the Israelis, the Kurds, the Russians, the Chinese, which is to say damn near everyone with a stake in the region. With each group made up of various sub-factions, some working together, and some working at cross-purposes. And with each faction starting, adding, decreasing, and ending support as it suits there interests.

So trying to attribute ISIS control to a specific group at this time is not only a hasty jump to conclusions but is also very naive over-generalization of a lot of complex actors.

Posted by: thepanzer | Jul 9 2014 14:26 utc | 89

My opinion is that it's sort of an intelligence agency creation. What we know is that Bagdadi was once of prisoner in US custody. What we also know is that the US has seperate facilities for detainees at Guantanamo Bay who in one way or another are intended to serve US foreign policy. So what I think is that when you have a whole group of fanatics, and you nurture (by sprinkling them with funds, weapons and the right intelligence) those that show a certain desirable behaviour (like also hating your own enemy) while weeding out (killing) the ones that don't, the result is a tool serving your goals.

So ISIS doesn't work directly for US, Israel, KSA, Qater, Turkey or UK but they were inderectly created by them.

Posted by: 2 | Jul 9 2014 14:30 utc | 90

Afghan "conspiracy theories" for a change?
"Over and above, the propensity of the US to use Islamist groups as instruments of geo-strategy - combined with the fact that a Ghani presidency is willing to accommodate the Taliban in the top echelons of power in Kabul with the tacit backing of a US-Pakistani-Saudi condominium - will unnerve many capitals in the region, which are already stunned by the Caliphate emerging out of the fog of war in Iraq and Syria. "

Posted by: Mina | Jul 9 2014 15:25 utc | 91

Thanks to ISIS, is the end of the Syrian Rebel movement imminent?

INSKEEP: So if Aleppo were to fall to the forces of Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad, what would be left of the rebel movement?

RAMSAUER: It will be finished. Many of the rebels I've talked to are very depressed. They have a passionate hatred against ISIS. They believe Isis has destroyed the revolution. When they talk about Assad, they say it's a criminal and they are very cold-blooded. But when it comes to ISIS, they say they have destroyed the revolution and this is what it is, the end of the revolution.

Posted by: Virgile | Jul 9 2014 15:36 utc | 92

Northern Observer: "frankly a denial of human nature"

Another know-it-all self-appointed expert on "human nature". Rather like Americans who know all about "freedom".

Tell us, N.O., into what crappy little category do you cram "human nature" into? Adam Smith's "truckers and barterers"? Homo Economicus? I know: You'll claim ignorance; Human nature is "unknowable". How's that for unreal categorization?

Here's a clue: What makes us precisely human? It is that we have no fixed "nature". We can change our own nature. I know how much you must hate to hear that.

So you are left to continue your stagnation in this profoundly retrograde era we are living through.

Posted by: Matt | Jul 9 2014 16:01 utc | 93

Are ISIS, Bashar Al Assad and Qatar in collusion to fight Saudi Arabia?

One wonders if there is some kind of tactical agreement between Bashar Al Assad and some factions within ISIS.
Bashar al Assad seems to allow, at least temporarily, ISIS to continue controlling the North East of Syria where the rebellion against his regime was very popular and where the majority is Sunni, while ISIS seem to facilitate the Syrian army to regain control of Aleppo and the Kurdish region by squeezing the Saudi funded 'moderates' rebels and Al Nusra fighters.

It is certainly in Syria's interest that ISIS dislodges the rebels from these areas and eventually moves further North into Iraq to threaten directly Jordan and Saudi Arabia. It is also in Syria's interest that ISIS becomes the internationally recognized enemy number one. Thus boosting it to a a certain degree can be very useful to change the perception about who is of the real danger and to obtain military advantages.
One wonders too if there isn't another tacit agreement between Syria and Qatar to inflict as much pain and anxiety to Saudi Arabia. For Qatar , Saudi Arabia has to pay for having persecuting the Moslem Brotherhood and stolen the SNC. For Syria, Saudi Arabia has to pay for having send hordes of Islamist terrorists and funded al Nusra and the SNC.

Israel-Hamas conflict, part of Qatar's revenge on Egypt and Saudi Arabia?

One can interpret the current war as a direct threat to Egypt.
Let us remember that Qatar has been humiliated by Al Sisi who jailed not only the Moslem Brotherhood leaders but also Al Jazeera journalists.
Qatar wants its revenge on Egypt and Saudi Arabia. It is probably pushing Hamas, its Moslem Brotherhood operator, to confront Israel and put Al Sisi in a difficult position.
The aim is to give back to the Moslem Brotherhood the role Qatar ( and Turkey) want it to have in the Arab World.
Al Sisi must take a firm stand against Israel, thus putting it at odds with the USA administration.
It is also a convenient diversion to hide the moves of ISIS toward the Saudi borders.

Is Qatar the major manipulator of these events?

Posted by: Virgile | Jul 9 2014 17:15 utc | 94

Virgile @92

The fragmented and competing rebel factions in Syria were doomed to fail. The Islamic State is subsuming these groups and preparing for a united front that is self funding and well organized before it moves on the Assad Regime. The Saudis, Turks, US and others may have guided and supplied these rebel groups but the Islamic State is their master now or will soon be.

From what I have read the IS has had little direct conflict with the Syrian Army but that will surely change once this consolidation is complete. I thought that Assad was winning this conflict with the recent successes that were reported but this appears to be a calm before the real storm breaks.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jul 9 2014 17:31 utc | 95

If ISIS is a U.S. tool, did the intel agencies let Obama know? The Hill: White House frustrated CIA kept it in dark:

White House officials are frustrated that the CIA didn’t immediately inform them that a German intelligence officer spying for the U.S. had been captured by Germany, according to a report Wednesday in The New York Times. President Obama was unaware of the arrest a full day after it occurred, administration officials told the paper, putting him in a precarious position when he phoned German Chancellor Angela Merkel to discuss the situation in Ukraine.

Posted by: lysias | Jul 9 2014 18:45 utc | 96

It will be finished. Many of the rebels I've talked to are very depressed. They have a passionate hatred against ISIS. They believe Isis has destroyed the revolution. When they talk about Assad, they say it's a criminal and they are very cold-blooded. But when it comes to ISIS, they say they have destroyed the revolution and this is what it is, the end of the revolution.

Kind of flies in the face of ISIS being an American creation, doesn't it? Unless the theory is that America now wants Assad to stay in power and thus created ISIS to thwart the revolution it helped inculcate. That wouldn't be convoluted, would it? Nah.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Jul 9 2014 19:28 utc | 97

james @ 63

using the term 'conspiracy theory' when one can simply use alternative opinion or non state sponsored theory or anything other then 'conspiracy theory'

this is the lingo of the ptb's
It is a term straight out of RAND and should not be used at all
It only reinforces the psychopaths manipulations of society.
b is savvy enough to be aware of all derogatory associations to this meme

Posted by: Penny | Jul 9 2014 19:35 utc | 98

I think that "conspiracy theory" was originally used for theories about the JFK assassination that dissented from the official lone nut theory, and that that original use has been tied to the CIA.

Posted by: lysias | Jul 9 2014 20:26 utc | 99

@lysias, that is correct. I feel it's irresponsible to let the term "conspiracy theory" appear without a pointer toward Ginna Husting's several sociological publications on the term and how it is used to protect the status quo from doubt or critique. People who use the term "conspiracy theory" as a pejorative have no other purpose than derailing any challenge to their submission to authority. They don't want to think of themselves as the impotent infants with poopy diapers that they are and are allowed to be by a system that makes participation in others' realities completely optional.

Bourgeois society's belief that all viewpoints are entitled to be aired (only their own, as it conveniently happens in practice) needs to be discredited as the arrogant sophistry that it is.

Posted by: Jonathan | Jul 9 2014 21:14 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.