by Finian Cunningham
Writer, Dandelion Salad
Crossposted from Strategic Culture Foundation, Sept. 16, 2014
Sept. 17, 2014
The gruesome beheading of a British aid worker by the ISIS terror group in Syria over the weekend provoked a stern warning from Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron who vowed to “hunt down the murderers” for their “act of pure evil”.
The British victim was named as David Haines, a 44-year-old aid worker, who had been held hostage in Syria for many months. A graphic video released by his killers shows Haines kneeling on the ground dressed in an orange jumpsuit as a masked executioner severs his throat with a knife. The dead man’s prone body is then filmed with a decapitated, bloody head placed on the corpse’s back.
Some analysts have disputed the veracity of the video, saying it is a fake. But Haine’s foreboding demeanor and his final words spoken to the camera tend to verify the recording as genuine. The British government has also stated that it believes the footage to be authentic.
Haines was the third Westerner to be apparently murdered by the ISIS militants in the past four weeks using the same macabre ritual.Earlier this month, on September 3, a video showed American journalist Steven Sotloff also being decapitated in the same grisly manner. Two weeks before that, another abducted American citizen, James Foley, also a journalist, met the same grim fate at the hands of his captors.
A fourth man, another British national named as Alan Hemming, is feared to be the next ISIS victim, with unconfirmed video footage of his execution also posted this weekend.
The shocking scenes of brutality have sparked public outrage in the US and around the world. President Barack Obama addressed the nation in a prime-time television broadcast last week in which he declared that American forces would track down and destroy the ISIS terrorists. The group is also known by the alternative acronyms IS or ISIL, referring ostensibly to an aspired fundamentalist Islamic caliphate that incorporates Iraq and Syria. At the same time that Obama was addressing the nation, US secretary of state John Kerry was in the Middle East drumming up support for an American-led international coalition to launch military strikes against ISIS, whose strongholds are in northern Iraq straddling the border with eastern Syria.
ISIS has been a prominent force among a myriad of militant cohorts that have been waging war against the Syrian state since March 2011. There is substantial evidence that Western governments have been covertly supporting ISIS and other extremists under the guise of assisting the “moderate rebels” for the ultimate purpose of destabilizing the Assad government of Syria and regime change. Assad is a staunch ally of Russia and Iran, and therefore is in the Western crosshairs for regime change.
But latterly ISIS has gained notoriety for its kidnapping and murder of Western citizens.
The newly formed US-led coalition against ISIS includes 10 Arab countries comprising Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq and Jordan as well as the Persian Gulf kingdoms of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman. Paradoxically, it may seem, Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been accused of being leading financial sponsors of the extremist groups fighting in Syria, including ISIS. But this link is not so paradoxical when the covert Western-designated role of the terror group is understood, as we shall see.
Washington has also, not surprisingly, garnered the support of Britain, France, Germany, Canada and Australia for its supposed anti-ISIS coalition.
A meeting this week in Paris will allegedly firm up military tactics on how the US-led coalition will carry out its putative strikes. So far, Washington has said that it will not be committing ground troops as in the previous Iraq War (2003-2012) and the ongoing US-led campaign against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Obama said the modus operandi against ISIS would be like its “counter-terror operations in Yemen and Somalia”, where US air power is assisted by “partners on the ground”.
The fledgling Iraqi government of Prime Minister Haider al Abadi has welcomed the US air strikes. Since last month, American warplanes have launched nearly 150 bombing raids on suspected ISIS positions in northern Iraq. Last week saw the widening of these US air strikes to include western Iraq near Haditha. Because of Baghdad’s approval, the US-led coalition has legal cover to operate in Iraq. But this is not the case in neighboring Syria. The Syrian government of President Bashar al Assad has not given its consent to the American plans, nor has it been consulted. Washington claims that Assad has no legitimacy or right to sovereignty because it alleges his “regime” has been repressing the civilian population – a claim that is contradicted by the re-election of Assad as president in June with a massive 88.7 per cent majority based on a voter turnout of 73.4 per cent.
Damascus has pointed out that any US military action in its territory – even if that action is against the enemy ISIS network – will amount to aggression against the Syrian state.
The objective legal position was also stipulated by the Russian government this week. Moscow said that, without Syrian government consent or a United Nations Security Council mandate, any US-led air strikes inside Syria would be “a gross violation of international law”.
Nevertheless, Obama has unequivocally stated that his proposed military coalition will conduct attacks on ISIS bases inside Syria. The legal implications of that contingency, however, appear to be unnerving the main US NATO allies – Britain, France and Germany.
In Berlin last week both the German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and his British counterpart Philip Hammond issued categorical statements saying that their countries would not be carrying out air strikes in Syria.
Hammond, like Steinmeier, gave full backing to US strikes against ISIS in Iraq, but he told the Reuters news agency: “Let me be clear: Britain will not be taking part in any air strikes in Syria. We have already had that discussion in our parliament last year and we won’t be revisiting that position.” Britain’s top diplomat added that the “legal permissiveness” of military operations in Iraq and Syria was completely different.
Hammond was referring to the vote in the British parliament last year in which MPs voted overwhelmingly against Britain joining a proposed American military intervention in Syria, following the deadly chemical weapons attack near Damascus on August 21. Washington was lining up air strikes on Syria to purportedly avenge the killing of hundreds of civilians from poisonous gas. That incident was blamed on the armed forces of the Assad government but it was subsequently shown to be the covert work of anti-government militants, aimed at contriving as a false flag outrage to elicit Western military intervention.
The British parliament was therefore vindicated in its vote against military intervention in Syria, and that vote put paid to Washington’s plans back then. It signaled a rare British dissent in the “special relationship” with Washington, where Britain is usually a reliable junior partner for American militarism overseas. At the time of the Westminster vote at the end of August 2013, British leader David Cameron was visibly downcast at the rejection of the proposed intervention in Syria. Given that the British government is a major player in the US-led regime-change conspiracy in Syria, Cameron’s dismay was understandable.
This week on the day after Hammond made the announcement in Berlin of non-intervention in Syria, he appeared to be over-ruled by his boss in 10 Downing Street. David Cameron contradicted his foreign minister by telling British media that “nothing had been ruled out” for Britain’s participation in the American-led anti-ISIS coalition. Cameron was clearly indicating that British fighter jets might indeed launch air strikes inside Syria. Such a move would over-turn the British parliament’s landmark vote outlawing military intervention in Syria. It would also negate the majority sentiment of the British public, which has been trending strong opposition to their government becoming embroiled militarily in Syria.
However, graphic videos of extremists slicing off the head of a British aid worker could be a decisive turning point. It’s hard to imagine a more repugnant act of cruel depravity to turn public opinion away from its erstwhile opposition to war toward giving consent for military action to, as Cameron put it, “hunt down this pure evil”.
Note too that in recent weeks Western governments and their mass media have been raising security concerns about Western “jihadists” returning to their home countries to carry out terror missions. Australia’s government of Tony Abbott is the latest to put its country on “high alert”. Abbott told media this weekend that his government was also sending a 600-man military force to the Middle East to join the US-led coalition, and he cited the barbaric beheading of the British national as part of the reasoning for the Australian deployment.
The macabre video executions have also overturned anti-war public feeling in the US. When Obama was planning to launch air strikes in Syria last year following the chemical weapons incident, polls showed that a big majority – 70 per cent – of Americans were opposed to any intervention. That opposition, plus the British parliament’s rejection, was a major factor in why Obama backed down then on his proposed military strikes during September 2013.
But after the latest videos showing two American journalists being brutally slain, US public opinion, according to recent polls, is now strongly in favour of Obama’s anti-ISIS bombing coalition; not just operating in Iraq, but more significantly, the American public wants the coalition to go after ISIS inside Syria too. Thus, where the chemical weapons horror last year failed to convince the American public to give its approval for US air strikes in Syria, the beheading of American hostages has succeeded.
For Washington and its close London ally, the British public is a crucial constituency to also win over. It seems more than a coincidence that ISIS has now carried out the same sickening execution of a British national as it did with the two Americans. President Obama said after the videoed slaying of Briton David Haines that the US “stands shoulder-to-shoulder” with the British people.
The question is this: are these shocking executions, with their highly stylised graphic videos, being used to manipulate public consent for Western military intervention in Syria? In that case, ISIS is not acting in some apparent rogue fashion, turning on its Western intelligence masters, but rather it is obeying orders as usual as part of a macabre charade to facilitate Western military intervention.
Once again, what we are seeing is a variation of “humanitarian pretext” to pave the way for the covert, ulterior agenda of Western-orchestrated regime change in foreign countries. That ploy was used previously by NATO forces in former Yugoslavia at the end of the 1990s and more recently in Libya during 2011.
It is well documented that ISIS, IS or ISIL, is a terror network created by US, British and Saudi military intelligence going back to the early years of the Iraq War beginning in 2003, when the group played a vital role in fomenting sectarian strife in Iraq to the advantage of the Western occupying armies.The network has antecedents in Western collusion with radical Islamist mercenaries in Afghanistan during the 1980s against the former Soviet Union, which led to the formation of Al Qaeda, and also in Chechnya in the mid-1990s.
ISIS leader Abu Bakr Baghdadi is known to be a US intelligence asset, according to a former senior Al Qaeda operative, Nabil Naim, among other sources. Former CIA personnel have also disclosed that ISIS, like Al Qaeda, was set up to further geopolitical goals for Washington and its allies in the Middle East. These goals include regime change in target countries, such as Syria, and perpetuating the money-spinning American military-industrial complex by creating an endless security threat. Officially, the network may be a proscribed terror organization and “an enemy of the state”. But in the underworld of black operations, ISIS is a covert instrument of US government and corporate interests.
Given the strategic importance of the US-led regime-change objective in Syria – and in particular the importance of obtaining public support for military intervention in that country – it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the ISIS network is carrying out beheadings of Western citizens on the orders of its handlers in the CIA and Britain’s MI6. Perhaps even, the outward political leadership in Washington and London, Obama and Cameron, are unaware of their own dark forces at work, which gives their public reactions of indignation an air of authenticity and credibility.
Indeed, the evident political consequences from the latest execution of Briton David Haines and Americans Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff are strongly indicative of a Western psychological operation. That makes Washington and London culpable of murdering their own citizens for geopolitical expediency. These victims are sacrificial lambs in the foulest sense.
Finian Cunningham, is a columnist at Press TV, the Strategic Culture Foundation and a Writer on Dandelion Salad. He can be reached at email@example.com.
[DS added the videos.]
Activists, scholars push back against Washington’s ISIS rhetoric
RT America on Sep 16, 2014
The Islamic State has been making threats towards the West, but there is no credible evidence of an imminent threat, according to Michael Kugelman of the Woodrow Wilson Center. In an interview with RT’s Ameera David, the columnist and scholar said that there are more direct threats to the US, and the country should be weary of getting swept up by fear of ISIS.
Is There a Diplomatic Solution to ISIS Crisis? U.S. Could Turn to Aid, Arms Embargo & Engaging Foes
democracynow on Sep 15, 2014
democracynow.org – An international summit on combating militants from the Islamic State has opened in France, bringing together around 30 countries from a U.S.-led coalition. The Obama administration says several Arab League countries have signed on for airstrikes in Iraq and Syria, but no sustained campaign is imminent. President Obama has already asserted he does not need approval from the Congress to expand U.S. airstrikes into Syria. On Friday, the Obama administration says it derives legal authority for the war on Islamic State from both the 2001 war on terror resolution as well as the 2002 vote authorizing the Iraq War. The White House made the claim despite President Obama’s previous call for repealing the war authorization measures. On Saturday, video was posted online showing a member of the Islamic State beheading British aid worker David Haines, the third Western hostage to be beheaded by the militants in less than a month. In the video, the Islamic State issued death threats against another captive British aid worker, Alan Henning. We are joined by Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies.
U.S. Ground Troops Back in Iraq? General Hints Broader Military Effort May Be Needed to Fight ISIS
democracynow on Sep 17, 2014
democracynow.org – A week after President Obama vowed not to send ground troops into Iraq to fight the Islamic State, Gen. Martin Dempsey, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, admitted ground troops may be needed. “If there are threats to the U.S., I would of course go back to the president and make a recommendation that may include the use of U.S. military ground forces,” Dempsey told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday. President Obama is expected to visit U.S. Central Command headquarters in Florida today to discuss his strategy to confront the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Meanwhile, Congress is voting this week on a request from Obama for authorization to arm and train Syrian rebels. We speak to Rep. Jim McDermott, Democrat from Washington state.
ISIS Jihadism and Imperialism in the post Arab Spring period- an anarchist analysis
Workers Solidarity Movement on Sep 17, 2014
Following on from the rapid spread of Isis in Iraq & Syria Paul Bowman presents an update intended to inform on the contemporary politics of Jihadism and its entanglement with regional and global imperialist power plays.
He starts by looking in detail at the ideological / religious background of the Salafist movements including ISIS and how such movements differ from those of the Muslim Brotherhood / Ikwanite.
Areas covered included
– Introduction to the roots of Salafism
– Geopolitical backers, pre-Arab Spring
– Arab Spring: Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria
– Who or what is the Islamic State?
– The Irish connection (not released on audio/video)
– The Kurds
All this and more will be answered (sort of…)
See also the post meeting text on the origins of the hostility and the split between Al Qa’ida and ISIS at http://www.wsm.ie/c/origins-hostility-al-qaida-isis
The recording was made at a WSM meeting in Dublin, Sept 2014. There is a hiss in the first 6 minutes of the audio that then fades down.
Updated: Sept. 25, 2014
The Covert Origins of ISIS
StormCloudsGathering on Aug 29, 2014
Evidence exposing who put ISIS in power, and how it was done.
Sources and full transcript: http://scgnews.com/the-covert-origins-of-isis
The Geopolitics of World War III + Transcript + US War on ISIL: Barrel of Volatile Lies by Finian Cunningham
Killed by Congressional Cowardice by David Swanson (includes Action Alert)
US creating, backing terror groups for past 30 years: Rozoff
Pingback: US Launches Airstrikes on ISIS Targets in Syria + Stop the Bombing: Bravery in an Evil Cause Is Evil by David Swanson – Dandelion Salad
Pingback: Chris Hedges and Loretta Napoleoni: The Islamic State and the Crisis in US Foreign Policy | Dandelion Salad
Pingback: Noam Chomsky: The Origins of ISIS + Sibel Edmonds: US Cultivated, Financed ISIS | Dandelion Salad
Pingback: Chris Hedges: The Global Culture of Violence: What Is The Path to Peace and Justice? | Dandelion Salad
Pingback: Chris Hedges: The Future Collapse + Perpetual Imperialistic War = Bombs on Subways in the West | Dandelion Salad
Pingback: Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s Speech at the United Nations Assembly September 25, 2014 + Transcript | Dandelion Salad
Pingback: Body of War (must-see) | Dandelion Salad
Pingback: Chris Hedges on Willful Blindness, Climate Corporatism and the Underground Revolt | Dandelion Salad
Pingback: US Launches Airstrikes on ISIS Targets in Syria + Stop the Bombing: Bravery in an Evil Cause Is Evil | Dandelion Salad
Added a link to an Action Alert:
Here also in Australia, the liberal government is to hunt down terrorists, I have heard on American TV, the Obama, administration also is to hunt down, it sounds like a hunt of the beasts, the beheading is all very well, some doubt as to the theatricals, surprising how the Western Allies can make such a big deal on the suffering of those who may be beheaded, interesting enough you do not see the suffering of those who are victims of the manufactured bombs and varied sundry smorgasbord of cruelty created by the Allies.
Very true and very telling. Crimes that are barely spoken of, never mind addressed. The Middle-east is an apocalyptic charnel-house of Western atrocity; peoples and ancient cultures devastated, displaced, dominated, droned, decimated…
Shame..! Shame..!! Shame…!!! And then we are expected to stare aghast at the spectral “caliphate” swarm of (controlled) opposition.
It is all a disgusting and obscene spectacle of human degradation. Our so-called democratic “leaders” have bank-rolled a cataclysmic hell on earth.
So to hell with them.
Yes, David, a florid description of the Middle Eastern blood bath, still their is one omission being outside the list of cultural devastation, Israel, how have they become the shining star of a ordered society? having escaped the atrocities of what otherwise may be called a Hieronymus Bosch, situation, of hell on earth, this curious anomaly, a country that produces no production of exported goods that I know of, can afford the luxury of one of the strongest bastions of a well armed fortress in the world? Are they well connected?
I so agree, Don. As David said, “for shame”.
This Finian Cunningham article is very weak; though many of his conclusions are enticing to those of us who suspect the motives of both ISIS/ISIL and the forces of US and European imperialism seeking to use ISIS/ISIL’s crimes as justification for military intervention, the fact that Cunningham fails to provide any sources for his most significant assertions completely discredits his article.
We have read in several places that ISIS/ISIL’s leader al-Baghdadi is some kind of U.S. intelligence asset. But we have never seen any documents proving this; we have also seen assertions that ISIS/ISIL was set up by the CIA, but again where are the docs and research to back up these statements? If it is true, as Cunningham asserts, that “It is well documented that ISIS, IS or ISIL, is a terror network created by US, British and Saudi military intelligence going back to the early years of the Iraq War beginning in 2003, when the group played a vital role in fomenting sectarian strife in Iraq to the advantage of the Western occupying armies” then, by all means: SHOW US THE “PROOF”! It is so easy to add links to articles now that there can be no justification for any author or organization to withhold their documentary proof of very serious allegations of this kind.
Checking out the website that the Cunningham article comes from (http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/09/16/isis-beheadings-on-cue-from-washington-and-london.html), we looked at one other article and found that it, too, was using the very same bogus method as Cunningham: i.e., make outrageous allegations then fail to back them up with even a single verifiable source: Wayne Madsen’s article “All Factors Point to CIA Aerially Assassinating Brazilian Presidential Candidate” (http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/08/30/all-factors-point-cia-aerially-assassinating-brazilian-presidential-candidate.html). Madsen’s “proof” of his extraordinary assertion is that the “malfunctioning” cockpit voice recorder was built by a U.S. defense contractor – but that is true about the cockpit voice recorders of many thousands of airplanes as well. He also asserts that the “fact” that the plane that crashed was owned by another U.S. defense contractor “proves” that that contractor helped the CIA assassinate the Brazilian Presidential candidate Eduardo Campos – when in fact it “proves” no such thing. Madsen completely fails, like Cunningham, to produce even a single shred of hard evidence to back any of his assertions. Can this be charged to mere incompetence or is something else at work here? The “fact” that Madsen himself was a 20-year veteran of the U.S. Navy who “managed one of the first computer security programs for the U.S. Navy” does not cause us to take everything he says at face value. Likewise, the lack of a comprehensive biography of Finian Cunningham on the major websites he contributes to does not inspire our confidence in his information either.
With all the hard evidence that exists showing that when it comes to “fighting terrorism”, the United States Government is often in the position of fighting organizations that it either created or helped arm and train or helped other governments train and arm (Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, El Salvadoran death squads, Guatemalan death squads, elements of the Taliban), there is absolutely no reason to publicize “journalism” of the likes of that created by Cunningham and Madsen. Either show us your sources so we can check them out and verify them, or your articles and organization will be placed in the same trash bin with the rest of the disinformation spewed by the bourgeois press and U.S. government propaganda operations.
See how easy it is to list a few excellent sources? We found these just now, in 2 minutes’ searching on the Internet:
Sources: Osama bin Laden: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/155236.stm
Al Qaeda: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda
El Salvador, Guatemala, etc.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Hemisphere_Institute_for_Security_Cooperation
The Trotskyist Independent Workers Party of Chicago attempts to fight the lies of US imperialism with truth, not more lies. As Trotskyists we pledge to NEVER lie to the working class, no matter how painful the truth may be; it’s a great principle to stand by. Workers need to have reliable sources of accurate information so they can decide which political groups to support. Leftists who leap at every opportunity to attack US and NATO imperialism and who spread bad information like this Cunningham article discredit themselves by doing so – and that is part of the reason why these unsourced articles exist: to trick activists into spreading this disinformation, thereby discrediting the activists and their organizations and also spreading among the working class the idea that “leftists are just as full of shit as the far right”. Try to take the time to check out articles before you publish them, and remember that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. “The Intercept” backs up its “extraordinary claims” with the “extraordinary evidence” provided by Edward Snowden. WikiLeaks backs up its claims with the extraordinary evidence provided by Chelsea Manning. Their evidence represents the modern “Gold Standard” of journalistic excellence. Accept no substitutes for this type of quality information. We intend to build a better, socialist world on the basis of openness, workers democracy and honesty. We can’t do this if we succumb to using any weapon that comes to hand – no matter how worthless – to beat our enemies over the head with. It is both counterproductive and entirely unnecessary. There are a lot of crackpot journalists on the Internet, as well as a vast number of well-funded propaganda outlets attempting to spread disinformation to the workers and activists of the world. Learning how to distinguish “shit from Shinola” is one of the elements of the education every revolutionary socialist in our organization will acquire as part of their revolutionary education. Make it part of your organization’s curriculum as well.
Workers of the World, Unite!
Independent Workers Party of Chicago
Here’s Finian’s bio taken from Press TV:
That bio is as weak on solid facts as his article above, and also lacks concrete information that would be helpful in establishing its “truthiness”. He was “(born 1963)” – where? Later on the bio states that he is “Originally from Belfast, Ireland”. Was he born there? Why are the two statements separated? “He is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry” – from what university? Most people are proud to acknowledge their alma mater; why is Cunningham so reticent? He went from being a grad student in “Agricultural Chemistry” and from being an editor at “The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent” to being a freelance journalist “located in East Africa”? (Where in “East Africa”?) What a strange trajectory! He “work[ed] as an editor of a business magazine” (which one?). There are more holes than cheese in that “bio”, don’t you think? It was the best one we could find on him as well, when we searched for one. Weird.
Hopefully, Finian will respond with some of your concerns.
He can’t say his exact location due to immigration policy where he lives. I know where he lives.
His email address is at the end of the article, please feel free to email him directly, too.
You’re posting “in the name of…” why not reveal yourself?
Our organization is designed to be a Trotskyist collective – we don’t have “superstar” writers here. And, as we call for the overthrow of the capitalist system worldwide, you could say that it would be unwise to put our actual names out on the Internets. As our group grows and we start having public events, some of our best public speakers and writers will obviously have a higher public profile.
I wrote to Finian to let him know of your comment so he can read and/or respond to it. His Internet connection is sporadic being that he lives in E. Africa.
Your mention of the Madsen article doesn’t have anything to do with Dandelion Salad as I don’t post his articles here.
Agreed on Madsen; our comment regarding him was to show that the website on which both the Cunningham article you did post and Madsen’s article appear indicates a rather poor level of editorial oversight over its “journalists”. Allowing two of their leading writers to make such outrageous and unsubstantiated claims as they do is not the sign of a trustworthy news website.
You would have to take the issue up with Strategic’s website. I can only vouch for Finian’s work which I’ve published for many years.
An eminently plausible analysis by Finian.
His reference to Nabil Naim’s testimony is particularly relevant.
It seems entirely likely that this “caliphate” gambit delivers significant objectives, not the least of which is the kettling of duped international jihadists who will be dispensable and conveniently disposed of once they have served their grizzly and misdirected purpose; which in Arabic is “fitna” or the breaking up of the Levant, to emasculate Syria & redraw the map ~ thus rendering Israel as the only stable regional alternative; completely in control of the gas reserves off Gaza & also assuring that zionist elites will be the inevitable investment beneficiaries of future south stream pipeline profits from Eurasian reserves.
What Finian has not yet discussed is the role of the highly suspect & sinister SITE intelligence group of Rita Katz, that is instrumental in assuring the maximum distribution and most effective delivery of these Wahabist style graphic executions.
While waiting for Finian’s article on the SITE intelligence group, in the meantime perhaps you could fill us in. Saw that name mentioned in another article only in passing, without any relevant details. Beyond the images, which many have questioned as to their fakery, no details have become known (following the posting trail to the source, where the videos were made, etc.). The very small amount of information on SITE is that the group has produced fraudulent videos in the past. And why would ISIS take actions which result in their incurring the wrath of the entire world; actions which guarantee their own destruction? Isn’t it too “convenient” that 20,000 of the 30,000 members of ISIS are in Syria? Keep us posted if you come across info on SITE or other revelations. Take care, friend.
Hi Jerry, it was this post by James Tracy that first caught my attention, I’d be interested in your thoughts http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-is-behind-the-islamic-state-is-beheadings-probing-the-site-intelligence-group/5402082
The article points out the need for an investigation by the US Congress. What stands out (besides the fake Bin Laden video) is the message from Rita Katz where she attempts to explain away the highly questionable action on KITE’s part – posting the Steven Sotloff video BEFORE ISIS posted it.
Reminds one of the BBC on-air announcement that Building 7 collapsed, twenty minutes before it did, while Building 7 was clearly visible in the background.
Tracy is correct in pointing out the very non-rational nature of CNN statement by Katz. “The location from where the video was obtained from is the location where ISIS usually uploads their original videos to”. She states the obvious there. But then Tracy adds emphasis to Katz’ words: “And in fact within a short time after our release, ISIS’ account on social media indicated that within a short time they would be releasing the video, only we actually had the video beforehand and were able to beat them with the release.”
Katz must become forced to state/explain under oath how it was possible for her group to get that video BEFORE it had been posted by ISIS. This is the same as someone obtaining a YouTube video BEFORE it had been posted on YouTube. Apparently Tracy accurately quoted Katz from her CNN appearance, and, if that is the case, as the saying goes, “Houston (Katz/KITE), we have a (really big) problem.”
Besides the multitude of terrorist groups that many can no longer keep track of these groups that seem to flourish at a rate that most cannot keep up with, besides the so called terrorists being so prominent, their would be many who are not any thing to do with Islamic or Muslim, organizations, the demonizing of these so called terrorist organizations baffle the Inquiring mind as the authenticity of the Western Empire, in how they define terrorists, what is pertinent to me is the fact that the colonist structure coming from essentially Europe, were little more than terrorists themselves, what make the Western Alliance capable is the control and power they have, and do not want to share any of the spoils with the rest of the world that is preferential that vast amounts of the spoils are squandered in military operations, refusing regardless of the debt occurs for the taxpayer to pay the bill, whilst a private sector has the glory of money paid into their accounts, the fact that the financial sector can maintain a high profile of the few making vast profits, that is disturbing to so many, who are not in awe of these people, who as the West, informs us so much, ISIS, is not country or having a homeland, but a cult, I suggest through Globalization and the ability of corporations, nothing other but the opposite side of the coin, a cult, whereby, they can operate from any country depending where they get the best deal.
Hi Don ~ I agree with you, this professed “caliphate” is a cult, an imposture, a cult of deceit.
It simply beggars belief (ha, ha) that a coordinated operation like this that is so well organized, can also be stupid enough to profess world domination (!!) in the name of what exactly? an unscholarly, culturally barren, morally bankrupt, insidiously psychopathic & practically illiterate “Islam?” What is their plan for the overthrow of Israel for example?
It is not such an improbable stretch, to impute similar pretensions to the Chicago Trotskyites who seem to be advocating a strategy that is almost a century out of date, not to mention misappropriated ~ insofar as the hijacking of the 1917 anarchist revolution is concerned.
However, to be fair, I should prefer to give them a decent hearing before jumping to any premature conclusions or assuming anything so startlingly radical at the start.
If they can “overthrow” international capitalism, great. Bring it on! Only, presumably they would need to conquer China to fulfil their agenda. Somehow, I find that prospect deeply unrealistic
The Scottish referendum delivered a pretty remarkable result this morning, 44.7% of an 86% turn out voted in favour of independence. Glasgow and Dundee were overwhelmingly in favour. This has completely changed the political landscape of Britain, and is really only the beginning, not the end of the matter in this neck of the woods.
It has opened up an enormous space for envisioning a different future, not just for Britain, but for unique regions all around the world. The problem with the “unified” corporate outlook is that it is a monoculture of excruciating tedium. Reality is more nuanced and complex than this.
Anyone extolling such a unipolar view of life is sadly deluded.
In British history, it is not such a huge time ago when Britain, were doing the same as beheading, interesting enough how a so called civilization can reinvent itself.
How can US power deceive the American people so easily over and over. Anytime Washington wants a war, they can arrange a false flag or dirty op to achieve it. Americans don’t even possess a short range historical sense; we appear to forget the past, deny the present, and ignore the future.
Yes, so unfortunately.
Nation of sheep led by wolves fooled by thieves.
Free Scotland and off the bloody royals !