ISIS - a geographically and ideologically expanding Muslim terrorist army - has been wrecking havoc for years, and yet the mightiest military power in the world, the USA, has been hesitant to wipe it out. Why?
There is much the US could have done to weaken them into insignificance, but it has chosen not to. The world looks on with astonishment as until recently 75% of US planes came back from bombing runs into ISIS-controlled territory without dropping a single bomb.
And when American pilots do bomb ISIS these days - shamed by Russia - the White House makes sure ISIS receives leaflets with advance notice so that no ISIS fighter (called 'civilians' by the White House) is injured.
Incidentally, Putin is no hero in fighting ISIS. His main interest is to carve out a Middle East area of influence for Russia by preserving the rule of Syria's president Assad.
Putin's actions will ensure the further empowerment of Assad's two other allies: Iran and Hezbullah.
Neither Iran nor Hezbullah are friendly to the West. Iran with its nuclear bombs in the making, often calls for death to America, and threatens Israel with complete annihilation. And the Lebanon-based Shiite terror army Hezbullah has 150,000 rockets aimed at Israel alone.
|Muslim Nazi Hezbullah army - President Assad's ally|
There are no good guys in this conflict.
ISIS and assorted Jihadists on one side, and Hezbullah and Iran on the other. All of them with genocidal intentions against the West and Israel.
There are no perfect solutions either. As long as there is Islam there will be war between Shia and Sunni Muslims (each thinks the other is illegitimate), and between Muslims and everyone else - because the Koran and Hadith mandate good Muslims to conquer the world by jihad and slaughter the Infidel.
What Russia is getting out of meddling into this conflict is a temporary role of influence in the Middle East. Just temporary. The ME is always in flux. All western powers who thought they were manipulating Muslims for their own advantage have been proved wrong, and their efforts have invariably backfired.
Western political elites' insane manipulative schemes can be best illustrated by the fact that the White House still pursues the handing over of the Israeli Golan Heights to Syria.
This area that was liberated from Syria by Israel in the defensive war of 1967 would - according to US and EU policies - be better off in the hands of assorted Jihadi groups that dominate Syria, than under Israel's sovereignty.
The Israeli Golan is an island of peace and civilization for Jews and Arabs living there, while acts of war and terror explode every single day across the border with Syria.
Golan is the area in blue on the map. The grey diagonal lines are an area of separation. If Muslims were to control the Israeli Golan, they could have extraordinarily easy access to Israel by land and by water (Sea of Galilee). A Muslim Golan is what the White House envisions if it can bully Israel into surrendering it.
As you read the following analysis by Prof. Gil-White, please keep in mind the wider context: how the political elites in the European Union and in the White House are facilitating the empowering of Islam in the West (under the cover of tolerance and multiculturalism), AND the Muslim invasion of the West (under the cover of compassion for "refugees").
JUST WHERE DID ISIS COME FROM?
Historical and Investigative Research
Ricardo Sánchez Ambrosi & Arnulfo Quintero)
ISIS attacks Paris, all eyes on ISIS: a gang of terrorists that lord a chunk of the Middle East and claim to be ‘a State.’ Out of nowhere they came, it seems. But any hat trick needs misdirection — the magician’s trade. Now you see it, now you don’t. Case in point: strike terror in Paris, capture the attention, erase history.
ISIS was US policy. It was brewing since 2003, when the US invaded Iraq and ‘gifted’ Iraqis with jihadist terrorism that set the US-military prison system to overflowing, becoming a “jihadi university,” as the general in charge called it.
ISIS was US policy. It was brewing since 2003, when the US invaded Iraq and ‘gifted’ Iraqis with jihadist terrorism that set the US-military prison system to overflowing, becoming a “jihadi university,” as the general in charge called it.
When “jihadi university” graduates produced ISIS, and ISIS produced the Syrian Civil War, the US helped them again.
Pay attention, or you won’t see the next trick coming. After ISIS claimed responsibility for a massive terror attack in Paris, Margot Wallstrom, on Swedish television, explained the radicalization of European Muslims thus: “Palestinians see that there isn’t a future.”
A conditioned response, as old as the West. Something bad happened? Blame a Jew. And don’t you worry about making sense. Wallstrom can do better. It is her job to do better: she is the Swedish foreign minister. If she would only deputize someone from her staff to do a few hours research she would find—in the publicly available sources—the real cause of ISIS and its violence. (But perhaps she’s done that already…)
Cartoon - http://www.barenakedislam.com/2015/11/24/warriors-barack-hussein-obama-and-francois-hollande-have-a-tough-new-strategy-for-destroying-isis/
How the US created ISIS
I shall here briefly summarize what a few hours of research taught me:
Continue reading, including updates including Congressional Benghazi commission results pointing to the White House secret gun-running operation in Libya - all to ISIS benefit.
The American “jihadi university” and the emergence of ISIS
IRAQ - Under Saddam Hussein, Iraq was not the best place in the world but neither was it an apocalyptic cauldron of jihadist terror activity. It became the latter in the wake of the US invasion.
As the Iraqi desert boomed and bloomed in red flames and black plumes, a rather large US-military prison system grew to provide accommodations for the culprits—and many others.
These confused jihadists had obviously never heard the Western media gospel that Islam is the religion of peace.
In August 2007 Newsweek reported that Maj. Gen. Douglas Stone, responsible for US ‘Detainee Operations’ (prisons) in Iraq, had begun trying to ‘re-educate’ his charges at Camps Cropper and Bucca into this kinder, gentler Islam.
Success was improbable: “Even General Stone admits that the jury is out on how well the religious [re-education] classes may work on juveniles.”
Sheik Jabbar, the hapless cleric in charge, spoke with more candor: “If they let them out, they would all become suicide bombers.” He meant his own students!
Jabbar had noticed only a small improvement in “some” of his students, and “he’s not sure it’s going to last.” And what did “some” mean? Just three or four kids, because “the religious education classes target a focus group of 10 young men.” That was out of “approximately 3,800 detainees at Cropper.”
The rival jihadist education program, running concurrently, was more ambitious: “detainees are now being brought into Cropper at the rate of roughly 60 a day. As the detainees come in, the [jihadi] insurgents already in custody fan out, looking for new recruits.”
Poor Jabbar. His reeducation program seems like nothing more than a bit of political correctness, displayed just to give the Newsweek reporter something positive to report. For he was to empty an Islamist ocean with a spoon—in the middle of a jihadi hurricane.
Was that hurricane US policy?
Nazim Al-Juburi, a prominent Al Qaeda defector, seemed to be of that opinion. In a May 2008 interview he said:
“We have spoken to the Americans more than once and told them that they make a big mistake by giving many of our detained people in Camp Bucca and other prisons a chance to be educated on this [jihadist] ideology.”
A month later, Stone told the New York Times that he was now separating ‘extremist’ from ‘moderate’ inmates so as to impede this. But his prison system, he admitted, had been (his words) a “jihadi university.”
That is exactly how another former detainee from Camp Bucca, Adel Jasim Mohammed, described it:
“ ‘Extremists had freedom to educate the young detainees. I saw them giving courses using classroom boards on how to use explosives, weapons and how to become suicide bombers,’ Mohammed said. ‘For the Americans we felt it was normal. They did not stop them [the radicals].’ ”
This “jihadi university” was running from 2003 until the US military initiated the process to dismantle the prison system in late 2008. Five years—a bachelor’s degree.
So even if we believe that Stone really did begin a half-hearted attempt to fix the problem in mid-2008, the damage was already—utterly—done.
And at shut down, the prisoners were simply released!
As that process began in late 2008, the New York Times reported that local Iraqi sheiks, who were universally against the prisoner releases, were warning US officials that dangerous AQI (Al Qaeda in Iraq) murderers were among the freed. Those AQI murderers would soon produce ISIS.
Iraqi government officials, for their part, asked for “access to American intelligence in cases of potentially dangerous detainees so that they could issue arrest warrants and then either hold the detainees themselves or ask the Americans to continue to hold them.” The Americans refused, claiming they had to protect their sources (in order to protect sources, apparently, you allow the murderers they informed on to roam free).[5a]
The outcome? A universal consensus in the mainstream mass media now considers the US “jihadi university” in Iraq as the platform for ISIS.
Mother Jones, for example, published a piece with the title: “Was Iraq’s Top Terrorist Radicalized at a US-Run Prison?”
The New York Times ran the headline, “How America helped ISIS,” charging that “The prisons became virtual terrorist universities: The hardened radicals were the professors, the other detainees were the students, and the prison authorities played the role of absent custodian.”
And the Washington Post had an article titled “How the Islamic State evolved in an American prison,” stating that “nine members of the Islamic State’s top command did time at Camp Bucca,” including Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi, the group’s top leader.
The Post quoted a report by a US soldier that explained how the extremists ran the inmates according to Sharia law, and anybody guilty of ‘Western’ behavior was “severely punished.”
The US prisons in Iraq midwifed an important merger. At Camp Bucca, the fascist but secular Baathists got Islamist religion, and the Islamist but disorganized jihadists acquired Baathist organizational skills. And so, “from the ashes of what former inmates called an ‘al-Qaeda school’ rose the Islamic State.”
On all this, the media imposed the usual ‘mistakes were made’ and ‘impossible choices’ interpretations. But there is one small problem: after releasing its “jihadi university” graduates, the Pentagon directly assisted their offspring, the ‘Syrian rebels.’ But did they know who these ‘Syrian rebels’ were? And where they came from? Yes they did.
The ‘jihadi university’ graduates produced the ‘Syrian opposition’—and the Pentagon always knew this.
As ISIS was massacring opponents and non-Muslims, the Western world used to yawn. Until it hit home.
On August 2012, US military intelligence produced a secret report since obtained and published by Judicial Watch.
The report, which makes clear what the Pentagon knew, states:
“The Salafist[s], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [Al Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria.”
Salafist = influential jihadist, terrorist ideology
Muslim Brotherhood = Salafist organization
Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) = Salafist organization that, in August 2012, was still making public statements “through the spokesman of the Islamic State in Iraq” or ISI, later to call itself Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
According to this Pentagon report, the main sponsor of the “Syrian opposition” was AQI—the “jihadi university” graduates! The report says:
“AQI is familiar with Syria. AQI trained in Syria and then infiltrated into Iraq. AQI supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning, both ideologically and through the media. …AQI conducted a number of operations in several Syrian cities under the name of Jaish al Nusra (Victorious Army), one of its affiliates.” (emphasis added)
What would probably happen? According to the Pentagon,
“If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in Eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want…” (emphasis added)
Who are these “supporting powers to the opposition”? As the same document explains, “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition” (emphasis added). “The West” here means the US, British, and French power elites (at least).
The Pentagon perceived
“…an ideal atmosphere for AQI to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi, and will provide a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it considers one enemy, the dissenters [= Shias]. ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria…” (emphasis added)
What happened? It really is uncanny: exactly what the Pentagon predicted. AQI returned to Mosul and Ramadi and ISI joined with other terror groups and declared an Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Is this what the Pentagon wanted?
One hypothesis—always preferred by the media, and never presented as a hypothesis but as an axiom of correct thinking—says no: this was all a mistake. I call it the ‘Establishment hypothesis.’ The alternative hypothesis, never considered, says yes: this was all quite intentional.
Let us consider the evidence, and then decide.
The CIA was reported to be running a program to arm the ‘Syrian opposition’ as early as June 2012. “The arms themselves,” it was said, “are coming from Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.”
Since Turkey is run by an Islamist party, and the regimes in Saudi Arabia and Qatar are both ‘Wahhabi’—a virtual synonym of ‘Salafi’—it follows that all parties sponsoring this CIA weapons program for the ‘Syrian opposition’—except for the US sponsors—were openly Islamist.
And as the August 2012 report makes clear, the Pentagon knew that the weapons were going mainly to its “jihadi university” graduates.
Of course, officially, it was claimed that the weapons were for “opposition groups seen as most friendly to the U.S.”, which is code for democratic, secular moderates. To be fair, we must consider this claim.
Every time someone in the US power elite made a public call for assistance to the ‘Syrian opposition,’ Ausama (or Osama) Monajed—or some substitute spokesman for something calling itself the Syrian National Council (SNC)—was trotted out to echo agreement and give legitimacy.
For good measure, Monajed or some other SNC stalwart would complain about “ ‘the militiamen of Assad,’ ” who allegedly do nothing but visit terror on Syrian civilians: “ ‘who come and rape their women, slaughter their children, and kill their elderly.’ ”
This supported the US official line because the SNC was “generally recognized” by the Western media as “ ‘the main opposition coalition’ ” and portrayed as a group of pristine, freedom-fighting, liberal democrats.
So the hypothesis that the US really was supporting moderate democrats in Syria would appear to be as good as the democratic purity of the SNC.
First, accusations against the Assad regime always came from the same doubtful source, and were never verified.
Second: “the SNC… includes the Muslim Brotherhood.”
An additional problem is that the CIA program’s weapons for the ‘Syrian opposition’ were “funneled mostly across the Turkish border by way of a shadowy network of intermediaries including Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood.”[11a]
From its inception, the SNC and its powerful US ‘handlers’ acted as a lobbying front in the West for the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which claimed to be a group of former Syrian Army officers fighting the Assad regime in order to stop what they alleged were Assad’s attacks against civilians. And this, I will allow, sounds good, and supports the US official line.[12a]
However, in November 2012, “under Western pressure” (underline those words), the ‘Syrian opposition’ was “reorganized…, into a new National Alliance,” or National Coalition, in meetings held in Doha, Qatar.
One third of the seats went to the SNC; the other two-thirds to committed and proud Islamists.
In December, with “security officials from the United States, Britain, France, the Gulf and Jordan” watching over, the FSA was also reorganized.
“The unified command [of the new FSA] includes many with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and to Salafists… It excludes the most senior officers who had defected from Assad’s military.
Its composition, estimated to be two-thirds from the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies, reflects the growing strength of Islamist fighters on the ground and resembles that of the civilian opposition leadership coalition created under Western and Arab auspices in Qatar last month.”
ISIS posing for a publicity photo.
A pithy summary goes like this:
just three months after the Pentagon recognized in its August 2012 report that the ‘Syrian opposition’ movement was basically an Islamist jihad, US powerbrokers purged non-Islamists from those ‘Syrian opposition’ groups they had pledged themselves to support, pushing to one side the founders of the FSA.
This was no mistake.
There was more money, weapons, and training for the new FSA. And just a few months later, much of the FSA, now chock-full of Islamists, did the natural thing and joined ISIS, taking their US-supplied weaponry and training with them.
“For a long time, Western and Arab states supported the Free Syrian Army not only with training but also with weapons and other materiel. The Islamic State commander, Abu Yusaf, added that members of the Free Syrian Army who had received training—from the United States, Turkey and Arab military officers at an American base in Southern Turkey—have now joined the Islamic State. ‘Now many of the FSA people who the West has trained are actually joining us,’ he said, smiling.”
A good many other ISIS jihadists also received US training during the ‘Arab Spring,’ when US powerbrokers claimed—as they always do—that they were training democratic ‘freedom fighters.’
In light of this evidence, I would not know how to begin defending the Establishment hypothesis. So perhaps the alternative hypothesis, which has the US power elite favoring the growth of violent Muslim radicalism—deserves a fair hearing. Especially since that hypothesis, which HIR has defended for some time, led to predictions, made back in May 2011, now confirmed by the US-sponsored rise of ISIS.
But why did the US power elite create ISIS? That is an interesting question, to be addressed in a future piece.
HISTORICAL AND INVESTIGATIVE RESEARCH
Prof. Francisco Gil-White's website
For footnotes and further reading provided by Prof. Francisco Gil-White (see very end of this page)
Benghazi Commission: Obama Administrtion Gun-Running Scheme Armed Islamic State
The Obama administration pursued a policy in Libya back in 2011 that ultimately allowed guns to walk into the hands of jihadists linked to the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) and al-Qaeda (AQ) in Syria, according to a former CIA officer who co-authored a report on behalf of the Citizen’s Commission on Benghazi (CCB), detailing the gun running scheme.
In Congress, the then-bipartisan group known as the “Gang of Eight,” at a minimum, knew of the operation to aid and abet America’s jihadist enemies by providing them with material support.
So says Clare Lopez, a former CIA officer and the primary author of CCB’s interim report, titled How America Switched Sides in the War on Terror, speaking with Breitbart News.
The ripple effects of the illegal policy to arm America’s enemies continue to be felt as the U.S. military is currently leading a war against ISIS and AQ terrorists in Iraq and Syria, according to Lopez.
In late October, Defense Secretary Ash Carter said that the U.S. would begin “direct action on the ground” against ISIS terrorists in Iraq and Syria who may have reaped the benefits from the gun-running scheme that started in Libya.
“The Obama administration effectively switched sides in what used to be called the Global War on Terror [GWOT] when it decided to overthrow the sovereign government of our Libyan ally, Muammar Qaddafi, who’d been helping in the fight against al-Qaeda, by actually teaming up with and facilitating gun-running to Libyan al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood [MB] elements there in 2011,” explained Lopez.
“This U.S. gun-running policy in 2011 during the Libyan revolution was directed by [then] Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and [the late Libya Ambassador] Christopher Stevens, who was her official envoy to the Libyan AQ rebels.”
To avoid having the funds tracked back to the Obama administration, the arms flow to Libya was financed thru the United Arab Emirates, while Qatar served as the logistical and shipping hub, she noted.
“In 2012, the gun-running into Libya turned around and began to flow outward, from Benghazi to the AQ-and-MB-dominated rebels in Syria,” Lopez added.
“This time, it was the CIA Base of Operations that was in charge of collecting up and shipping out [surface-to-air missiles] SAMs from Libya on Libyan ships to Turkey for overland delivery to a variety of jihadist militias, some of whose members later coalesced into groups like Jabhat al-Nusra and ISIS [also known as IS].”
Jabhat al-Nusra is al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate.
“The downstream consequences of Obama White House decisions in the Syrian conflict are still playing out, but certainly the U.S. – and particularly CIA – support of identifiable jihadist groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, Jabhat al-Nusra, Ahrar al-Sham, the Islamic State and other [jihadists] has only exacerbated what was already a devastating situation,” declared Lopez.
Some of the other weapons that eventually ended up in Syria included thousands of MAN-Portable-Air-Defense-System (MANPADS) missile units, such as shoulder-launched SAMs, from late dictator Muammar Qaddafi’s extensive arms stockpiles that pose a threat to low-flying aircraft, especially helicopters.
“It’s been reported that President Obama signed an Executive Order on Syria in early 2012 [just as he had done for Libya in early 2011], that legally covered the CIA and other U.S. agencies that otherwise would have been in violation of aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war and providing material support to terrorism,” notes Lopez. “Still, such blatant disregard for U.S. national security can only be described as deeply corrosive of core American principles.”
Libya Amb. Stevens was killed by jihadists in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, along with three other Americans.
Echoing a Benghazi resident who provided a first-hand account of the incident, retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Dennis Haney, a CCB member, suggested to Breitbart News that Hillary Clinton’s State Department armed some of the al-Qaeda linked jihadists who may have killed the four Americans in Benghazi.
“The reason the U.S. government was operating in Libya is absolutely critical to this debacle because it reflects where America went off the tracks and literally switched sides in the GWOT,” points out Lopez. “This is about who we are as a country, as a people — where we are going with this Republic of ours.”
“There can be no greater treason than aiding and abetting the jihadist enemy in time of war – or providing material – weapons, funding, intel, NATO bombing – support to terrorism,” she continued. “The reason Benghazi is not the burning issue it ought to be is because so many at top levels of U.S. government were implicated in wrong-doing: White House, Pentagon, Intel Community-CIA, Gang of Eight, at a minimum, in Congress, the Department of State, etc.”
The State Department and the CIA did not respond to Breitbart News’ requests for comment.
Clinton was asked about the gun running operation when testifying before the House Select Committee on Benghazi in October.
The Democratic presidential frontrunner claimed she was not aware of any U.S. government efforts to arm jihadists in Libya and Syria.
Clinton did admit to being open to the idea of using private security experts to arm the Qaddafi opposition, which included al-Qaeda elements, but added that it was “not considered seriously.”
Originally appeared on Breitbart
Drudge Sends the Biggest Secret Viral: “America Has Been Arming ISIS”
The biggest open secret in the world has just been tweeted by the world’s biggest news aggregator.
Matt Drudge drives so much web traffic that he basically has his own gravity, and now the often-reclusive figure has sent out a message that should be a wake-up call for those who have been broadcasting news about the threat that ISIS poses.
Following their mass murder spree in Paris, the terrorist group is supposedly planning attacking inside America, all while taking supposedly also taking on the biggest military powers in the world during their protracted struggle for an Islamic State caliphate inside Syria and Iraq.
What would the world do if it realized the truth – that ISIS is the creation of Western forces, and that the United States has in fact been arming and supporting their own worst enemy?:
A shocking truth is unfolding: America has been arming ISIS…— MATT DRUDGE (@DRUDGE) November 24, 2015
This bombshell tweet echoes numerous reports from inside the alternative media pointing out the sick truth behind the shocking resurgence of terrorism.
Influential conservative news aggregator Matt Drudge issued a tweet on Tuesday acknowledging the growing body of evidence that suggests that the U.S. has participated in arming the terror group ISIS.
Drudge’s realization follows nearly two years of Truth in Media coverage of how U.S. foreign policy is enabling terrorism in Syria and Iraq and has led to the rise of ISIS.
In September of 2013, Ben Swann reported on how U.S. efforts to arm radical Islamist rebel groups against secular Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad were empowering extremists who were planning to create what he described at the time as an “al-Qaeda ‘super state,’ comprised of Iraq and Syria.”
In addition to numerous data points hinting at the U.S. support for terrorists in order to undermine and destabilize Bashar al-Assad, an important memo has come to the surface.The declassified Pentagon/Defense Intelligence Agency memo from 2012 [see PDF] reveals that Turkey as well as the Western and Arab states who are overtly backing the “Free Syrian Army” rebels have also been sponsoring a burgeoning Islamic State that stands to take over Syria and Iraq for the interests of the Sunni Muslim factions that dominate much of the Middle East and who oppose Shiite Muslim strongholds at all costs.
The document should be world news, but has failed to gain headlines and major coverage in any mainstream media news outlets. Perhaps with Drudge’s fresh spotlighting of the important issue, some Americans will understand how their leaders have been breathing life into the ISIS monster, and that “this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want.
“Here is one of Ben Swann’s reports on the secret behind ISIS… and their sponsors:
Entire article about DRUDGE appeared on ISRAPUNDIT:
Check the latest news on Drudge here
Hezbollah has 150,000 missiles pointed at Israel
Hezbollah has been fighting for Iran in Syria to prop up the regime of Bashar al-Assad, in a strategic fight allowing Tehran to keep a channel open through to Hezbollah and the Mediterranean Sea and thereby transfer weapons and expand its regional influence.http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/203304
US GOVERNMENT - A Middle East arsonist
July 2014 - US signs an $11 Billion weapons sale to Qatar, a country accused of fomenting and financing Middle East terror
SO OBAMA CAPITULATED TO IRAN
and the Israeli government is appalled
- But then why does NETANYAHU ignore years of collusion between the PALESTINIAN leadership and IRAN, and continues to offer "LAND FOR PEACE" knowing that a state would be used to destroy Israel?
Israeli PM Netanyahu continues to support an eventual partition of the country (under conditions of "security" for Israel, he says) for the creation of an Iranian-backed Islamic State of Palestine.
Watch video produced by Professor Francisco Gil White, who has been researching the Israeli-Arab conflict for decades, showing evidence of the Iran-Palestinian axis.
VIDEO - Israeli PM Netanyahu is Concealing the PLO/IRAN Special Relationship
Also read in depth by Professor Francisco Gil-White about the very puzzling support for a Palestinian State by the "pro-Israel" White House AND the Israeli government itself, both of them knowing quite well that such state would be a proxy of Iran (if ISIS does not get there first) and use it to destroy Israel
VIDEO BY Professor Francisco Gil White:
THE NAZI ROOTS OF
THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT
White House warns ISIS with leaflets 45 minutes before bombing
White House knew the flight path of the downed Russian Jet, says Putin
Lebanese official claims NATO approved the downing of the Russian jet by Turkey
White House feeding ISIS, not fighting it
WHY DO MUSLIMS HATE YOU?
The reasons are in their sacred religious texts.
WHY DO MUSLIMS SLAUGHTER OTHER MUSLIMS? The answer is in a seventh century dispute over the right of succession to Muhammad - As long as there are Muslims, there will be massacres, whether between rival Muslim factions or against Infidels
SWEDEN BLAMES THE JEWS FOR THE PARIS TERROR ATTACKS - Foreign minister cites "Palestinian Frustration"
|Sweden's FM Wallstrom|
In the meantime SWEDEN SPIRALS DOWN INTO COLLAPSE due to unrestricted Muslim migration and criminality - Police can't cope and tells citizens they are on their own
PAT CONDELL - The rape of Sweden
 “Israel condemns ‘hostile’ Swedish comments linking Paris attacks to Israeli-Palestinian conflict”; Jerusalem Post; 16 November 2015; by Tovah Lazaroff
 “Iraqi Prison Tries to Un-Brainwash Radical Youth”; Newsweek; 8 August 2007; By Babak Dehghanpisheh
 BBC Monitoring Middle East – Political; Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring; May 2, 2008 Friday; “Iraq: TV carries second part of interview with former Al-Qa’idah member”; LENGTH: 2860 words; ["Death Industry" programme, presented by Rima Salihah recorded]
 “U.S. Remakes Jails in Iraq, but Gains Are at Risk”; The New York Times; June 2, 2008; SECTION: Section A; Column 0; Foreign Desk; Pg. 1; LENGTH: 2798 words; DATELINE: BAGHDAD; By ALISSA J. RUBIN; Thom Shanker contributed reporting from Washington.
 “US Iraq jail an ‘al-Qaeda school’ ”; 12 December 2009; Aljazeera.net
[5a] “A Puzzle Over Prisoners as Iraqis Take Control”; The New York Times; 25 October 2008; SECTION: Section A; Column 0; Foreign Desk; Pg. 1; LENGTH: 1665 words; DATELINE: CAMP BUCCA, Iraq; By ALISSA J. RUBIN
 “Was Iraq’s Top Terrorist Radicalized at a US-Run Prison?: A former US military compound commander at Camp Bucca suspects ISIS chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi's extremism was fostered (or bolstered) at the facility”; Mother Jones; 11 July 2014; by Jenna McLaughlin
 “How America Helped ISIS”; New York Times; 1 October 2014; by ANDREW THOMPSON and JEREMI SURIOCT
 “How the Islamic State evolved in an American prison”; Washington Post; 4 November 2014; by Terrence McCoy
 Judicial Watch
 “Report: US Helping Syrian Rebels Arm, Fight”; VOA News; June 21, 2012.
 “The Syrian opposition: who’s doing the talking?”; The Guardian; 12 July 2012; by Charlie Skelton
Question: Were the accusations against Assad true?
The media never bothered to check these allegations, reporting behind the convenient formula of “we cannot confirm,” and basically letting the accusations stand. They didn’t seem to care, either, that such accusations almost always came from one—and only one—source: the august-sounding Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), which turns out to be (mostly) one man, Rami Abdulrahman (who runs a clothes shop in Coventry, UK). [See the above referenced Guardian article.]
[11a] “C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition”; New York Times; 21 June 2012; Page A1; by Eric Schmitt
 “Syria opposition groups agree to coordinate efforts: The Free Syrian Army agrees to scale back its campaign of attacks on Syrian forces after talks with the Syrian National Council, which advocates nonviolence”; Los Angeles Times; 1 December 2011; By Alexandra Zavis and Rima Marrouch
[12a] Monajed and other senior SNC ‘spokespeople’ look every bit the part of US power-elite puppies, often seen at the White House, and shuttling back and forth between the Council on Foreign Relations, the Ford Foundation, the Bilderberg meetings, the Henry Jackson Society, and other powerful think tanks in the US and Britain chock-full of intelligence, military, and diplomatic honchos such as Brent Scowcroft (former National Security Advisor), Zbigniew Brzezinski (same), and James Woolsey (former CIA Director).
“The Syrian opposition: who’s doing the talking?”; The Guardian; 12 July 2012; by Charlie Skelton
 “Syria Rebels Create New Unified Military Command”; The World Post; 8 December 2012; BYLINE: Bassem Mroue and Ben Hubbard, Associated Press
 “Syrian opposition groups reach unity deal”; Los Angeles Times; 12 November 2012; BYLINE: Abdullah Rebhy, Associated Press
 “Syrian rebels elect head of new military command”; 8 December 2012; Reuters
 “FREE SYRIAN ARMY REBELS DEFECT TO ISLAMIST GROUP JABHAT AL-NUSRA: The well-resourced organisation, which is linked to al-Qaida, is luring many anti-Assad fighters away, say brigade commanders”; The Guardian; 8 May 2013; by Mona Mahmood and Ian Black
 “THE TERRORISTS FIGHTING US NOW? WE JUST FINISHED TRAINING THEM: No, the enemy of our enemy is not our friend”; Washington Post; 18 August 2014; By Souad Mekhennet
 “...Some European and Arab intelligence officials also voiced their worries and frustration about what they call the mistakes the United States has made in handling the uprisings in Arab states. “We had, in the early stages, information that radical groups had used the vacuum of the Arab Spring, and that some of the people the U.S. and their allies had trained to fight for ‘democracy’ in Libya and Syria had a jihadist agenda — already or later, [when they] joined al Nusra or the Islamic State,” a senior Arab intelligence official said in a recent interview. He said that often his U.S. counterparts would say things like, “We know you are right, but our president in Washington and his advisers don’t believe that.” Those groups, say Western security officials, are threats not only in the Middle East, but also in the United States and Europe, where they have members and sympathizers.
The official’s account has been corroborated by members of the Islamic State in and outside the Middle East, including Abu Yusaf, the military commander. In several interviews conducted in the last two months, they described how the collapse of security during Arab Spring uprisings helped them recruit, regroup and use the Western strategy — to support and train groups that fight dictators — for their own benefits. “There had [also] been … some British and Americans who had trained us during the Arab Spring times in Libya,” said a man who calls himself Abu Saleh and who only agreed to be interviewed if his real identity remained secret.”
SOURCE: “THE TERRORISTS FIGHTING US NOW? WE JUST FINISHED TRAINING THEM: No, the enemy of our enemy is not our friend”; Washington Post; 18 August 2014; By Souad Mekhennet