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

« previous page

Now Holefield is postulating Formidable Conspiracy, inferentially.

And from JS.

"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."

Except bevin has never said there is "no" evidence of it, nor would he necessarily call a revenge attack a war crime.
Nor it is the least convincing the pavlovian assumption that that Truthers have presented a "reality-based" paradigm,and one which would pave the way for Americans to eventually adopt a revolutionary attitude toward the oppressive Police State more so than the paradigms offered by
certain of those who believe 9-11-2001 was an incidence of blowback.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jul 10 2014 0:21 utc | 101

Re: #1, I also think it's the third option. A tool, just not exactly "created".

Posted by: Colinjames | Jul 10 2014 1:03 utc | 102

@ Harry 88: I explicitly said, DO click those links in the articles and READ them before you write some nonsensical answer...

The research of Jared Israel is absolutely sound, his sources are sound and he is the only guy anywhere who gave such a comprehensive and completely truthful account of the war in Yugoslavia. And since I was living there and know the situation and many details first-hand, I have a strong reason to trust him. Especially since my research mostly confirms what he wrote (on variety of topic, not only this one.

So if you think you know better, feel free to present me your refutals, with sound sources and references. Then we can talk. But your "stupid T, I won'r read your shite, yadda yadda" is nothing we could discuss reasonably.

And as for "zionists", Israel was the only country who actually helped us fight the jihadis in Bosnia, who were pimped by AlQaida mercenaries brought by the US from Afghanistan and trained by Iranian intelligence and instructors. So much about your hear-say nonsense and obviously, there is no need for me to talk to you at all - I was just being friendly here. It's not like I give a fuck if you read my posts or not, you don't pay my rent.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 10 2014 6:04 utc | 103

Oh people, please... it's just words, a theory about a possible conspiracy is a conspiracy theory. Nothing more, nothing less. The negative connotation was only attached to it by the over-usage in the media.

Most of our history is based on conspiracies (every revolution, medieval fights for power etc.), so we should just treat this as a normal term and not let us be distracted by semantics.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 10 2014 6:13 utc | 104

Published on Jul 9, 2014
Interview with Syrian FM Bashar Al Jaafari on ISIL/ISIS

Posted by: Paty Kerry | Jul 10 2014 6:48 utc | 105

Nah, they are just so stupid they think they can control them.

The US is working on the 'the enemy of Israel's enemy is my friend' theory.

Not that Syria is or ever was much of an enemy, but from Israel's pint of view (and that is the only one that counts) Hezbollah is and the Israelis can't take it out so destroying Syria and getting Sunni jihadists attacking Hezbollah is their ultimate wet, but rather stupid, dream. But no one has ever accused the Israelis of being intelligent or far sighted.

Saudi Arabia, the other main player, just wants all moderate Sunnis and Shiites killed...the Christians being killed are a bonus.

So they are all playing silly games and have succeeded in creating, what seems like, a Sunni Hezbollah (albeit without the moderation and political nous), that is a well organised group that can fight...With a key important difference they are offensive in nature while Hezbollah is defensive.

A case of 'be careful what you wish for'.... If I was Jordon or Saudi Arabia I'd be absolutely crapping myself because they are serious targets too.

Let's assume, nutjobs that they are, that ISIS (or Daash or DI or whatever it is called this week) are not stupid. So what would they do about the West....have they already got their cells and squads in place? Maybe with sarin (nice of the Turks to show them how to make it)... something really dramatic to get the west to bow out of Iraq?

That's my greatest fear at the moment. The ultimate blowback. My worst case scenario is actually that they make a strike at some serious oil production areas in Kuwait or SA. They have demonstrated the ability to make deep strikes and move very fast and have shown the ruthlessness to sacrifice people to get the job done. You take out a couple million barrels per day production and the whole world is in deep do-do economically.

So we have supported them, we continue to support them in the vain hope that we will get them under control...go and attack Iran and Syria (and please, please Hezbollah) and be good little jihadists and do what the US, Israel and SA want....can't see it happening somehow...

Posted by: oldskeptic | Jul 10 2014 8:00 utc | 106

@ oldsk.: as I already explained multiple times, Salafis and Wahhabis are NOT Sunni but clearly heretics form the Sunni POV. It is a perversion of Islam.

You can read the long explanation here:

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 10 2014 8:50 utc | 107

I can go with panzer’s no 3. But would not exclude 4...

ISIS is an agressive, criminal, militarised quasi-state Organisation.

It is not someone’s (or a collection of someone's) proxy army.

In fact it would be very interesting to study it in depth. Let’s take it bottom-up instead of top-down (aka, US funds and controls ISIS!)

Where does ISIS get it’s money?

- stealing and selling oil. Northern Syria. ISIS controls part of oil fields. Also refining according to one source. (?)

In the vicinity of Raqqah, its most strongly entrenched position, Isis rebels extract as much as 30,000 barrels daily according to one intelligence official.

- looting, smuggling. Antiques and other - *at least* 30 millions worth

- extortion (protection money...) 8 million a month according to one estimate, this can also be seen as a form of taxation.

- kidnapping for ransom (no longer frequent, it is said)

- counterfeit currency (??)

- theft (not only bank in Mosul!)

- taxes (10% zhakat for ex.)

- donations

- other

I’d estimate Isis’s operating cost of probably being over $10m. It is thought to pay its fighters around $400-$500 per month, so even that amounts to at least $5m over a month, without even considering more considerable operating costs of managing entire cities and towns. Isis runs a big operation, and largely by itself.

As far as spending goes, ISIS also funds social services and public works.

See articles like: FT and business insider. (italics are from FT.)

for the social aspect, the Atlantic:

Posted by: Noirette | Jul 10 2014 13:49 utc | 108

Good point T2015. The correct term then would be 'real' Sunnis, rather than 'moderate', since the Salafis and Wahhabis are a minority extremist sub-group, bit like some of the extremist Christan groups around which are long on sound and fury but a tiny minority compared the the mainstream Christians.

Posted by: oldskeptic | Jul 10 2014 19:57 utc | 109

@ Noirette, who BUYS that oil? And how much oil can you get in Syria anyway?

The crazier part is the story that they found $ 1 billion laying around in some bank in Mosul. Surely after two wars and in that corner of total poverty, there will be 1 bio. in cash there in every bank. Mhm, yeah.

And then the yesterdays nonsense about them "finding" 40-something kg uranium in some Mosul university. Surely because every friggin' university in every third-world war-torn land will have tens of kg of uranium laying around. Mhm, yeah.

And then we all wake up.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 11 2014 5:54 utc | 110

Oh yeah, and those "social services" will probably be (false) islamic schools for indoctrination, supplying the "friendly" mosques, "culture clubs" like the Moslem Brotherhood is now being declared in the middle of friggin' London and such stunts.

Surely very "social", of course only if your vision of society is an islamo-fascist dictatorship.

Posted by: T2015 | Jul 11 2014 5:57 utc | 111

They sell it on the black market to anyone who wants it. Mostly local. And to Turkey.

For ex.

snippet: In eastern Syria, oil “markets” have popped up across opposition-held territory. Large tanks of crude are auctioned to smugglers who head to Turkey or to middlemen who sell them to government-controlled regions in the west.

Rebels have designated special units to provide armed escort services to oil traders for a fee. Locals say they guard clients right up to Syrian army checkpoints without a shot fired by either side.

from FT, again.

Well the technique of supporting poor families with bread is well known! But education (Islamist schools, etc.) doesn’t form part of the equation here, for now.

The emphasis is on food, basic med care, medication, help with building / infrastructure, spiritual comfort. (Which is also accompanied by repression, women’s dress, etc. etc.)

T2015, you seem a little innocent to me.

Posted by: Noirette | Jul 11 2014 16:25 utc | 112

Saudis and a Bahreini, who's who in the IS?

But nothing on the caliph's rolex...

Posted by: Mina | Jul 11 2014 17:59 utc | 113

The guy who posts Iraq SITREPs over at the Saker is upset at what ISIS is doing to Shia Muslims. Given that Islam is a Christian heresy, the obvious solution for Islam's problems is for all Muslims to convert to Eastern Orthodox Christianity, which a lot of them belonged to before they were forcibly converted to Islam.

My impression is that the only country that has been able to tame Islam and make it fit into modern society is Russia. The US, with its religious tolerance, may be another country where Muslims are able to live without causing problems. Everywhere else, both in Europe and in the Middle East, Islam just produces dysfunction and misery. (Actually, I should qualify that. Islam has also been tamed in secular states like Syria. But the US and Israel are doing their best to bring sectarian and fundamentalist Islam to wherever Islam has more or less managed to live with modernity, Afghanistan and Iraq being the two prime examples.)

Posted by: Demian | Jul 16 2014 2:04 utc | 114

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.