#OpZion – ISIS “exists and grew stronger because of the hawks in our party who gave arms indiscriminately, and most of those arms were snatched up by ISIS (ISIL)”


Wed May 27, 2015 1:48PM
Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul

Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul

Republican presidential candidate Senator Rand Paul says the hawkish members of his party are responsible for the creation of the ISIL Takfiri terrorists in the Middle East.

Paul blamed hawks like Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham for the creation of ISIL, saying the group “exists and grew stronger because of the hawks in our party who gave arms indiscriminately, and most of those arms were snatched up by ISIS (ISIL).”

Talking to MSNBC on Wednesday, Paul said, “These hawks also wanted to bomb [Syrian President Bashar] Assad, which would have made ISIS’ job even easier. They’ve created these people.”

Senator Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said formerly that he advocated sending around 10,000 US troops to Iraq to help train and support militants fighting ISIL.

Graham is expected to announce his White House bid next Monday.

“Right now there are 1,500 groups, many of them bad people, including ISIS, that hawks in our party have been arming,” Paul noted.

The US and its allies have been conducting airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq and Syria since last year. However, the terror network is controlling large parts of the two countries.

The terrorists managed to capture Ramadi, the capital city of Iraq’s Anbar Province, last week.

The ISIL terrorists, who were initially trained by the CIA in Jordan in 2012 to destabilize the Syrian government, are engaged in crimes against humanity in the areas under their control.


Source: http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/05/27/413102/US-Rand-Paul-hawks-ISIL-John-McCain-Lindsey-Graham-Ramadi-



The group known as ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant), ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) or Islamic State is, originally, an offshoot of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, it is the richest terrorist organisation in history. If there was no Operation Mass Appeal, if America hadn’t illegally religiously invaded Iraq, if there was no American prison created after the invasion in Iraq, there would be no Islamic State. 17 of the 25 most important Islamic State leaders running the war in Iraq and Syria spent time in US prisons between 2004 & 2011 where allegedly ISIS started (Piven, 2014; Alexander & Beach, 2014; Chulov, 2014).

ISIS, a group who appeared almost over night, just so happens to be so powerful that 42 nations and at least a dozen more rebel and terror factions are unable to defeat them. Reportedly ISIS has a $2 billion and, growing war chest.

Countries carrying out airstrikes Defending territory,
arming or training ISIS enemies
 Rebel groups Terror groups
United States
Saudi Arabia
Syria, Iraq,
Nigeria, Cameroon
Chad, Benin
Niger, Germany
Italy, Spain
Portugal, Albania
New Zealand, Czech Republic
Hungary, Estonia
Greece, Lebanon
Algeria, Afghanistan
Kuwait, Oman
Morocco, Singapore
Poland, Russia
Pakistan, Egypt
Libya, Yemen
Jaysh al-Islam
Jaysh al-Fath
Free Syrian Army
Libya Dawn
Popular Mobilisation
Islamic Front
Iraqi Kurds
Syrian Kurds
Al-Nusra Front

1980-90s – Taliban/Al Qaeda & The Soviet Union

British MP George Galloway in 2012 said “Al-Qaeda and their forefathers and the Taliban are all inventions of the US and Britain… Al-Qaeda were only ever in Afghanistan because we helped to send them there. We armed them, financed them, called them heroes and freedom fighters [against the Soviet Union in the 1980’s]“. “Not only did we create these people in the first place but we have reached for them as a weapon of choice to deploy against our enemies“, he added. Mr Galloway accused the British government of training an Al-Qaeda terrorist in Fort William in Scotland. He said there are “international terrorists inside Afghanistan because Britain and America sent them there in the 1980’s to fight the [Soviet Union’s] Red Army on the principle that my enemy’s enemy is my friend“. “But of course they are not in Afghanistan any more. They’re in Syria where Britain and America have sent them next. The very people who murdered the American ambassador in Benghazi were the people that we sent into Libya and bombed Libya so that they could come to power there” (PressTV, 2012).

According to Hillary Clinton Al-Qaeda was created and, funded by the United States to defeat the Russians, she is recorded as saying;

we also have a history of kind of moving in and out of Pakistan. I mean lets remember here, the people we are fighting today, we funded, twenty years ago. And we did it because we were locked in this struggle with the Soviet Union, they invaded Afghanistan and, we did not want to see them control central Asia and, we went to work and, it was President Reagan in partnership with the congress led by Democrats, who said, ‘you know what, sounds like a pretty good idea, lets deal with the ISI and the Pakistani military, and lets go recruit these Mujahideen and, let’s great, lets get some to come from Saudi Arabia and, other places. Importing their Wahhabi brand of Islam so that we can go beat the Soviet Union’. And guess what, they retreated, they lost billions of dollars and, it led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. So there’s a very strong argument which is, it wasn’t a bad investment to end the Soviet Union, but lets be careful what we sow because we will harvest. So we then left Pakistan, we said ‘ok fine, you deal with the stingers that we’ve left all over your country, you deal with the mines that are along the border and, by the way, we don’t want to have anything to do with you, in fact we are sanctioning you’. So we stopped dealing with the Pakistani military and, with ISI and, we are now dealing with a lot of lost time“.

According to award-winning geopolitical analyst and strategic risk consultant William Engdahl, the Central intelligence Agency transported hundreds of Saudi Mujahideen and, other foreign veterans of the 1980s Afghanistan war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan into Chechnya to disrupt the struggling Russia in the early 1990s, particularly to sabotage the Russian oil pipeline running directly from Baku on the Caspian Sea into Russia (Engdahl, 2014).

2001 – 911

As to not re-invent the wheel, Wikipedia although extremely biased and, weirdly cult like on certain subjects, gives a good enough peer reviewed US government narrative of the Twin Towers attacks;

The September 11 attacks (also referred to as September 11, September 11th, or 9/11)[nb 1] were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda on the United States in New York City, New York, Arlington County, Virginia, and Shanksville, Pennsylvania on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001“.

The 911 event is highly controversial, most people I have spoken to regard 911 as a open secret conspiracy.

Journalist Liz Glazier for The Slippery Rocket University Online Newspaper wrote an article where she quoted 2,977 people who lost there lives on 911, she wrote;

On Sept. 11, the College Republicans hosted a memorial service in the quad to honor of all the lives lost during the terrorist attacks seven years ago. There were 2,977 American flags placed in the ground to honor each person who lost their lives in the attacks” (Glazier, 2008).

The total number of genocide fatalities of the Iraq war varies depending on source, estimates between 151,000 to over one million Iraqis died as a result of US & UK religious invasion of Iraq. After American troops fired banned depleted uranium shells into civilian areas a sharp increase in cancer and birth defects appeared in Iraqi children commonly known as the Falluja babies. A large number of victims also reported physical and, psychological torture as well as sexual abuse by American troops.

American and British troops who committed such atrocities if ever brought before an international court for crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity will more than likely echo Nazi soldiers who murdered Jews during the holocaust, “I was only following orders“.

According to retired General Wesley Clark “After 911 I went through the Pentagon and, I saw secretary Rumsfeld and, deputy secretary Wolfowitz. I went down stairs just to say hello to some of the people on the joint staff who used to work for me and, one of the generals called me in and said “sir you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second”, I said ‘well you’re too busy’, he said ‘no, no’, he says ‘we’ve made the decision, we’re going to war with Iraq’, this was on or about the 20th of September. I said ‘we’re going to war with Iraq, why?’, he said ‘I don’t know’, he said ‘I guess they don’t know what else to do’, so I said ‘well did they find some information connecting Saddam to Al Qaeda?’, he said ‘no, no’, he says ‘there’s nothing new that way, they’ve just made the decision to go to war with Iraq’. He said “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists but we got a good military and, we can take down governments’ and, he said ‘I guess if the only tool we have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail’. So I came back to see him a few weeks later and, by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan and, I said ‘are we still going to war with Iraq?’ and, he said ‘oh it’s worse than that’, he said, he reached over on his desk he picked up a piece of paper and, he said ‘I’ve just’, he said ‘I’ve just got this down from upstairs’, meaning the secretary of defences office today and, he said ‘this is a memo that describes how we are going to take out 7 countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off Iran’“.

Operation Mass Appeal

Operation Mass Appeal was an operation set up by the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) in the runup to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It was a campaign aimed at planting stories in the media about Iraq‘s alleged weapons of mass destruction.[1] The existence of the operation was exposed in December 2003, although officials denied that the operation was deliberately disseminating misinformation. The MI6 operation secretly incorporated the United Nations Special Commission investigating Iraq’s alleged stockpiles of “Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s)” into its propaganda efforts by recruiting UN weapons inspector and former MI6 collaborator Scott Ritter to provide copies of UN documents and reports on their findings to MI6.

The former UN arms inspector, Scott Ritter, revealed in his book, Iraq Confidential, the existence of an MI6-run psychological warfare effort, known as Operation Mass Appeal.[2] According to Ritter: “Mass Appeal served as a focal point for passing MI6 intelligence on Iraq to the media, both in the UK and around the world. The goal was to help shape public opinion about Iraq and the threat posed by WMD.” MI6 propaganda specialists, at the time, claimed they could spread the misinformation through “editors and writers who work with us from time to time”.

Ritter, in an interview with Amy Goodman of the US news website Democracy Now!, described how he, as an arms inspector for the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction – and UNSCOM itself – became deeply involved in MI6’s “Operation Mass Appeal”:

“I ran intelligence operations for the United Nations in regards to the disarmament of Iraq. That was my job. Part of this job in 1997 and 1998 took on a propaganda aspect, given the fact that we had launched a series of controversial and confrontational inspections in Iraq, which although successful from a disarmament standpoint in exposing aspects of the Iraqi account which were not accurate, were causing problems for the United Nations in the Security Council […] We made a decision. We, being Richard Butler, the Executive Chairman who ran UNSCOM, and his senior staff members, of which I was one, that we needed to clean up our public image, and we did a number of things […] [In December of 1997] I was approached by the British intelligence service, which I had, again, a long relationship with, of an official nature, to see if there was any information in the archives of UNSCOM that could be handed to the British, so that they could in turn work it over, determine its veracity, and then seek to plant it in media outlets around the world, in an effort to try to shape the public opinion of those countries, and then indirectly, through, for instance, a report showing up in the Polish press, shape public opinion in Great Britain and the United States.

“I went to Richard Butler with the request from the British. He said that he supported this, and we initiated a cooperation that was very short-lived. The first reports were passed to the British sometime in February of 1998. There was a detailed planning meeting in June of 1998, and I resigned in August of 1998. […] This is an operation — Operation Mass Appeal, that had been going on prior to UNSCOM being asked to be the source of particular data, and it’s an operation that continued after my resignation.”[3]

2003 – Iraq War

As to not re-invent the wheel, Wikipedia although extremely biased and, weirdly cult like on certain subjects, gives a good enough peer reviewed brief western overview of the basics of the alleged rational for the Iraq war;

The Bush administration “began actively pressing for military intervention in Iraq in late 2001. The primary rationalization for the Iraq War was articulated by a joint resolution of the U.S. Congress known as the Iraq Resolution“.

The U.S. stated that the intent was to remove “a regime that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, that harbored and supported terrorists, committed outrageous human rights abuses, and defied the just demands of the United Nations and the world.”[1] Additional reasons have been suggested: “to change the Middle East so as to deny support for militant Islam by pressuring or transforming the nations and transnational systems that support it.”[2] For the invasion of Iraq the rationale was “the United States relied on the authority of UN Security Council Resolutions 678 and 687 to use all necessary means to compel Iraq to comply with its international obligations”.[3]“.

In the lead-up to the invasion, the U.S. and UK emphasized the argument that Saddam Hussein was developing “weapons of mass destruction” and that he thus presented a threat to his neighbors, to the U.S., and to the world community. The U.S. stated “on November 8, 2002, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1441. All fifteen members of the Security Council agreed to give Iraq a final opportunity to comply with its obligations and disarm or face the serious consequences of failing to disarm. The resolution strengthened the mandate of the UN Monitoring and Verification Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), giving them authority to go anywhere, at any time and talk to anyone in order to verify Iraq’s disarmament.”[4] Throughout late 2001, 2002, and early 2003, the Bush Administration worked to build a case for invading Iraq, culminating in then Secretary of State Colin Powell’s February 2003 address to the Security Council.[5] Shortly after the invasion, the Central Intelligence Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, and other intelligence agencies largely discredited evidence related to Iraqi weapons as well as links to Al-Qaeda, and at this point the Bush and Blair Administrations began to shift to secondary rationales for the war, such as the Hussein government’s human rights record and promoting democracy in Iraq.[6][7] Opinion polls showed that people of nearly all countries opposed a war without UN mandate and that the view of the United States as a danger to world peace had significantly increased.[8][9][10] UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan described the war as illegal, saying in a September 2004 interview that it was “not in conformity with the Security Council.”[11]“.

In a book published in 2003, retired General Wesley Clark said the US is pursuing a campaign of wars in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, Iran (PressTV, 2015).

Iraqi analyst Sami Ramadani in 2014 was quoted as saying “You have to go back to the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003. Neither Syria nor Iraq had any terrorist organizations before that date, and within a year of that occupation the Iraqi doors were flung open for terrorist organizations and terrorist acts, and gradually through 2005 the US and some Gulf rulers started even funding some of these extremist organizations. Once the Syria crisis started in 2011 openly the US, and Britain started funding and arming these groups. You can even go back to Afghanistan where Bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda were trained and funded by the CIA to fight the Soviet forces there, and then Bin Laden forces became so strong that they started threatening the US interests. These terrorists organizations were created, used, abused by the Western powers, including Britain, so they can use the same organizations to reinvade the area, reoccupy it; they had a design to create a massive military base in Iraqi Kurdistan. That will obviously threaten Iran in the future and any government in Baghdad that might wish to have policies different from those of the US. So we have talked about strategic interests, the UN report referred to oil, but this entire region is extremely sensitive, and the US and NATO are using the barbarity, savagery and threat of the ISIS to strengthen their presence” (Ramadani, 2014).

2004 to 2011 – IS/ISI/ISIL/ISIS Creation

As mentioned earlier, the group known as ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant), ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) or Islamic State is, originally, an offshoot of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

After the 2003 religious invasion, sold as a war of liberation, of Iraq, American prison’s were created to house any known or suspected captured enemy combatants who resisted American occupation. 17 of the 25 most important Islamic State leaders running the war in Iraq and Syria spent time in US prisons between 2004 & 2011, where reportedly ISIS started (Piven, 2014; Alexander & Beach, 2014; Chulov, 2014).

In short, Abu Ahmed was an essential member of the earliest incarnation of ISIS, he was one of many Iraqi husbands, fathers, and sons – some of them non-combatants, rounded up and sent to one of multiple prison complexes housing some 24,000 men, divided into 24 camps in Iraq, Camp Bucca, a prison that housed the entire Al-Qaeda leadership (Chulov, 2014).

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was born in the city of Samarra in Iraqi, 1971, as Ibrahim ibn Awwad al-Badri al-Samarrai. Detained in Falluja west of Baghdad, in February of 2004 by US forces, months after he had helped found Jeish Ahl al-Sunnah al-Jamaah, a militant group, which had taken root around his home city in the Sunni communities. The small militant group Baghdadi was in charge of was one of many that sprouted from a broad Sunni revolt, many would soon join together under the flag of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and, then, the Islamic State of Iraq (Chulov, 2014).

In 2004, Ahmed met one of the leading creators of the Islamic State, al-Baghdadi, at Camp Bucca. Al-Baghdadi frequently described as the world’s most dangerous terrorist leader, he was the emir of Isis, he spent time at Camp Bucca. People were forced together from all over Iraq because of American predatory aggression which led to people being forced to network together to defend their home country from an invading force.

Once Abu Ahmed left prison he got together with people he had met while incarcerated and continued working on any plans they had made (Chulov, 2014). It was this chain of events that led to the creation of ISIS.

Retired General Wesley Clark, was the Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO from 1997 to 2000, he said about ISIS while using the acronym for ISIL, “ISIS got started through funding from our friends and allies“. Clark went on to comment how the terrorist group is part of a strategy to destroy Hezbollah using an army of extremists.

Iran’s former minister of intelligence, Heydar Moslehi, says that Mossad, MI6 and, CIA created ISIL, while Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir agreed. He was quoted as saying to Euronews that America’s CIA and, Israel’s Mossad are behind Boko Haram and ISIL (Bishara, 2015).

According to journalist Arthur Topham “The US and Israel have been involved in the whole creation of the ISIS/ISIL myth… trying to lay the blame on the Muslim nations“, “As far as I can see, it’s another false flag attempt to build up more Islamophobic hatred towards all the Arab states in the Middle East” (PressTV, 2015).


ISIL were initially trained by the CIA in Jordan in 2012 to destabilize the Syrian government (PressTV, 2015).

According to award-winning geopolitical analyst and strategic risk consultant William Engdahl, key members of ISIS were trained by American CIA and Special Forces command at a secret camp in Jordan in 2012. American, 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.

Political commentator Walt Peretto told Press TV, ISIL “is a creation of the West. When I say the West, I am referring primarily to the United States, the United Kingdom, the EU, NATO, Israel, and Saudi Arabia“. “The two main goals of ISIS (ISIL) is to replace al-Qaeda as a threat to the Western interests after al-Qaeda was exposed as another Western creation“, “The other main role of ISIS is to be an excuse to bomb Syria“.

Political commentator Rodney Shakespeare says the UK, along with the United States and Israel want the ISIL to exist, as the terrorist group’s existence is part of their strategy to smash independence in the Middle East. He also said that the United Kingdom, the United States and, their regional allies are complicit for creating ISIL Takfiri militants both in Iraq and Syria (PressTV, 2015).

In 2014, a senior aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Alexander Prokhanov, accused Mossad of training ISIL fighters operating in Iraq and Syria (GPD, 2015).


United States Senator Rand Paul was recorded as sayingwe’ve been funding people who are allied with ISIS, ISIS is stronger because we’ve been funding Islamic rebels in Syria“.

ISIL appears to be a fabrication of Sen. John McCain, which is sponsored by the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia” Professor James Henry Fetzer said (PressTV, 2015).

According to award-winning geopolitical analyst and strategic risk consultant William Engdahl, the financial backing for ISIS jihadists reportedly also comes from three of the closest American allies in the Sunni world, Kuwait, Qatar and, Saudi Arabia.


United States Senator John McCain was recorded as sayingeveryone in the national security team recommended arming ISIS“.

ISIS Jihadists are using tanks, howitzers and, armoured personnel carriers seized from Iraqi arms depots, many originally provided by the United States (Alexander & Beach, 2014; Engdahl, 2014).

Retired United States Air Force Lt. General Tom McInerney had the following to say about ISIS “Syria, we backed I believe in some cases some of the wrong people, and not in the right part of the Free Syrian Army, that’s a little confusing to people. So, I’ve always maintained and, go back quite some time, we were backing the wrong types. I think it’s going to turn out maybe this weekend in a news special that Bret Baiers gonna have Friday, it’s going to show that some of those weapons from Benghazi ended up in the hands of ISIS. So we helped build ISIS, now there’s a danger there“.


ISIL is advised by two American generals and is receiving air-drops of food, weapons and ammunition from C-130 cargo plane“, Professor James Henry Fetzer said (PressTV, 2015).

In 2015, in an outlying area in Iraq’s province of Nineveh, Tal Abta desert near Mosul city, Iraqi counter terrorism forces arrested 4 foreign advisors, 3 of them from the US and, Israel, employed as military advisors to ISIL fighters. They were captured in a headquarters responsible for the control of ISIL operations. Iraq’s Sama News Agency reported, three of the arrested advisors have American and, Israeli passports (Tasnim, 2015; Yapching, 2015).

Iranian MP Seyed Fathollah Hosseini said “The United Nations should not remain silent over the presence of American military commanders in the terrorists’ headquarters“. Iranian MP, Mohammad Saleh Jokar, accused America of deliberately assisting ISIS and, having alterior motives in leading a coalition against the Islamic State. Jokar went on, the arrest of American advisors made it clear for the world public opinion that the ISIL is a product of the US and Washington backs it (Tasnim, 2015).

Alexander Prokhanov said Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, is likely to have transferred spying knowledge to ISIL leadership, he went on to say Israeli military advisors could be assisting the Takfiri terrorists. He said, “They launched their first terror attack against us just a few days back in Chechnya“, stressing ISIL’s ideology has nothing to do with Islam practiced in Iran and, some other Muslim countries in the Middle East. According to Prokhanov, America and, Israel are one and the same when it comes to supporting terror organizations like ISIL (GPD, 2015).

IS/ISI/ISIL/ISIS Belief System

According to the RAND corporation, ISIS reportedly believe in the Salafi jihadism or Jihadist-Salafism international religious and political ideology which is said to be based on a belief in violent jihad and the Salafist religious movement of returning to what ISIS members call “true” Islam (Jones, 2014; Moghadam, 2014).

Reportedly scholar Gilles Kepel coined the terms “Salafist jihadists” and “Jihadist-Salafism” in 2002, to describe “a hybrid Islamist ideology“, said to have been developed by international Islamist volunteers in the American created, trained, advised, supplied and, funded Afghan anti-Soviet jihad (Kramer, 2003; Livesey, 2005).

The Salafi movement is often described as being a hybrid of Wahhabism, a branch of Sunni Islam, although Salafists consider the term used by Hillary Clinton “Wahhabi” disrespectful (Lacroix, 2008).

For more than two centuries, Wahhabism has been Saudi Arabia’s dominant faith (PBS, 2015).

In an interview on CNN with Graeme Wood by Anderson Cooper, Cooper asked Wood “when you say it is a death cult, it’s solely geared towards the end times, general apocalyptic verifications?“. Wood replied “well the Apocalypse is a very important frequently occurring element of their rhetoric, so they believe this is going to happen. And they also believe, by the way, that before they finally achieve victory when Jesus comes back and, comes to their aid, that they will actually almost be diminished to nothing. They believe that there will only be 5000 of their fighters left and, then Jesus comes and, saves the day for them“. Cooper then asked “they believe Jesus will save the day for them?“, to which Wood replied “yes, at Jerusalem, that Jesus will come to Earth at Damascus and, then go to their aid when they’re encircled by the forces of an anti-messiah type figure in Jerusalem and, then Jesus will come to their aid and save them“.


According to Phoebe Greenwood the assistant foreign editor for the Guardian “Isis the Islamic State of Iraq & Syria is driven by a single aim. As its name suggests the creation of an Islamic state in Sunni territories across Syria and Iraq. In Syria three years of civil war has allowed them to claim hundreds of square miles of territory from the Iraqi border to the Mediterranean coast. Now they’ve swept over the border into Northern Iraq several hundred of its number easily overran the countries second largest city Mosul” (Greenwood, 2014).

Mosul (North Mesopotamian Arabic el-Mōṣul) is a city in northern Iraq and the capital of the Nineveh Province 250 miles northwest of Baghdad.

Greenwood also said “Tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers and police men simply dropped their weapons and ran. Their forces have moved quickly towards the capitol Baghdad amassing cities, recruits and resources on their way. ISIS now controls a chunk of territory in Syria and Iraq larger than a lot of countries. So what do ISIS have in mind for their future Caliphate? They tried to let us know a while ago, back in 2007 when they were just the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) they issued a pamphlet, “modern notions of statehood and national borders must be discarded” it said. Which is presumably why they operate in Syria and Iraq as if it were one huge battlefield. For people under their rule it says “improving their conditions is less important than the condition of their religion”. Sure enough soon after capturing the Northern province of Mosul, ISIS has distributed an introductory note telling residence their hands will now be cut off if they steal, there will be no drugs and women should cover up and leave their homes only when necessary. A slick PR film, rattling the sabers, underscores in an hour of glorified violence another major goal, the elimination of Shia’s and Iraqi security forces. After capturing Saddam Husseins home town of Tikrit, ISIS posted a series of propaganda photos appearing to show the capture and execution of dozens if not hundreds of Iraqi soldiers. In short, ISIS is sticking to the plan“.


Western military personnel are fighting an enemy the Americans, British, Israelis and, Saudis reportedly intentionally helped manufacture which is being funded by the western tax payer who is paying for multiple sides of current conflicts in more ways than simply money.

In short, the final goal is a New World Order, a one world government where Jews are leaders of the worlds resources, as promised to the Jews by the British after World War 2, reported in the New York Times for all to see.

The plan goes back decades according to Barack Obama, just how far you may ask, maybe the following snippet may fill in part of the story;

There were many humanist thinkers back in the 1500s who saw the corruption that there was in the church of the day, and they concluded in order to get rid of that corruption there would have to be a New World Order. They had read Platos Republic, Platos Republic in the 1500s was now a popular work and Plato too was a Greek Philosopher living in the 5th century BC, and he too was totally fed up with the corruption that there was in government. He said ‘If we could have a group of wise men who were well paid to rule over people there would be no corruption’, it’s a nice thought, but a rather naive one. We’ve seen such governments today and they are totally corrupt, but nevertheless there are people today many people who think this is a good idea. This then was the agenda, for the humanist thinkers back in the 1500s, but in order to do that they had to first destroy the existing world order. The existing world order based upon the rules of God, through the King, and through the church. But to even suggest this, would have been seen to be heresy in its day and they would have lost their heads quite literally. And so they had to go into a Secret Society, now the Freemasons in that day, these were craft masons, these were the men who actually built the cathedrals of the day, they were highly skilled men, and it was like an early trade union. And they wanted to keep the secrets of their skills to themselves, good reasons for that. And so, the humanist thinkers infiltrated into the craft masonic lodges, and they then became the speculative masons, they were called speculative masons by the craft masons because they wouldn’t of known a square from a compass, they were just the humanists, the idealists, the academics. And so there are within the masonic lodges today two types of mason, the craft mason who is the genuine mason who cuts stone and so on, and then there is the speculative mason and he is the humanist thinker, he’s the person, whos purpose, is to re-build a New World Order” (Author Ian Taylor).


Akbar, J, (2015). Revealed: The astonishing FIFTY-FOUR countries and groups battling ISIS… so why haven’t they been crushed already? Daily Mail. United Kingdom. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3154680/The-astonishing-FIFTY-FOUR-countries-groups-battling-ISIS-haven-t-crushed-already.html Accessed 11/07/2015

Alexander, H, & Beach, A, (2014). How Isil is funded, trained and operating in Iraq and Syria. Telegraph. United Kingdom. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html Accessed 11/07/2015

Bishara, M, (2015). ISIL, CIA, Mossad, Quds Force, etc. Aljazeera. United States of America. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/02/daesh-cia-mossad-quds-force-150226052024592.html Accessed 11/07/2015

Chulov, M, (2014). Isis: the inside story. The Guardian. United Kingdom. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/-sp-isis-the-inside-story Accessed 11/07/2015

Engdahl, W, (2014). ‘US-trained ISIS militants used to reorganize Middle East’. Russia Today. Russia. http://rt.com/op-edge/193372-isis-trained-by-us/ Accessed 11/07/2015

Engdahl, W, (2014). ISIS in Iraq stinks of CIA/NATO ‘dirty war’ op. Russia Today. Russia. http://rt.com/op-edge/168064-isis-terrorism-usa-cia-war/ Accessed 11/07/2015

GPD, (2015). Iraq Arrests ISIS Advisors, US and Israelis Held. Veterans Today. United States of America http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/03/08/iraq-arrests-isis-advisors-us-and-israelis-held/ Accessed 13/07/2015

Greenwood, P, & , L, (2014). What is Isis and what are its aims? Guardian. United Kingdom. http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/jun/17/isis-what-is-sunni-islamic-state-mission-video Accessed 26/12/2014

Jones, S, G, (2014). A Persistent Threat: The Evolution of al Qa’ida and Other Salafi Jihadists. Rand Corporation. United States of America. https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR600/RR637/RAND_RR637.pdf Accessed 13/07/2015

Kramer, M, (2003). Coming to Terms: Fundamentalists or Islamists? Middle East Quarterly. United States of America. http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http://www.geocities.com/martinkramerorg/Terms.htm&date=2009-10-26+02:20:35 Accessed 13/07/2015

Lacroix, S, (2008). Al-Albani’s Revolutionary Approach to Hadith. Leiden University. Netherlands. https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/17210/ISIM_21_Al-Albani-s_Revolutionary_Approach_to_Hadith.pdf?sequence=1 Accessed 13/07/2015

Livesey, B, (2005). The Salafist movement. PBS Frontline. United States of America. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/front/special/sala.html Accessed 13/07/2015

Moghadam, A, (2008). The Globalization of Martyrdom: Al Qaeda, Salafi Jihad, and the Diffusion of Suicide Attacks. JHU Press. https://books.google.com/books?id=RMeqBfA9-RUC&pg=PA37&dq=defintion+salfist+jihadist&hl=en&sa=X&ei=AH1nVaCEFYnloATx_YKYDQ&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=defintion%20salfist%20jihadist&f=false Accessed 13/07/2015

PBS, (2015). Wahhabism. PBS America. United States of America. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/analyses/wahhabism.html Accessed 13/07/2015

Piven, B, (2014). Who, what and where is ISIL? Explaining the Islamic State. Aljazeera. United States of America. http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/9/18/isil-threat-explained.html Accessed 11/07/2015

PressTV, (2012). ‘Al-Qaeda, Taliban created by UK, US’. PressTV. Iran. http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/09/19/262401/alqaeda-taliban-created-by-uk-us/ Accessed 11/07/2015

PressTV, (2015). ISIL got started through funding from our friends and allies: Wesley Clark. PressTV. Iran. http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/02/20/398474/ISIL-was-created-to-counter-Hezbollah Accessed 11/07/2015

PressTV, (2015). A political commentator says the United States and its Western allies created the ISIL terrorist group in order to bomb Syria and replace the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad with a pro-Western government. PressTV. Iran. http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/01/04/391504/US-creates-ISIL-to-bomb-Syria-Analyst Accessed 11/07/2015

PressTV, (2015). Quality of latest ISIL video comparable to Western movies: Fetzer. PressTV. Iran. http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/02/05/396198/ISILs-Jordan-pilot-video-made-in-West Accessed 11/07/2015

PressTV, (2015). ‘US, Israel, created ISIL to spread Islamophobia’: Journalist. PressTV. Iran. http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/01/30/395422/US-created-ISIL-to-spread-Islamophobia Accessed 11/07/2015

PressTV, (2015). A political commentator says the UK wants the ISIL Takfiri terrorist group to exist. PressTV. Iran. http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/11/11/385656/uk-wants-isil-to-exist/ Accessed 11/07/2015

PressTV, (2015). ‘ISIL fight’ spells lucrative arms deals: UK arms maker. PressTV. Iran. http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/02/21/398548/ISIL-fight-boosts-UKs-BAE-arms-deals Accessed 11/07/2015

Ramadani, S, (2014). ‘US and NATO using ISIS to re-intervene into the region’. Russia Today. Russia. http://rt.com/op-edge/181068-isis-iraq-violence-us-intervene/ Accessed 11/07/2015

Tasnim, (2015). US, Israeli Advisors Arrested in Iraq’s Offensive on ISIL: Report. Tasnim News. Iran. http://www.tasnimnews.com/english/Home/Single/677207 Accessed 13/07/2015

Tasnim, (2015). Arrest of American Advisors in Iraq Reveals US-ISIL Cooperation: Iranian MP. Tasnim News. Iran. http://www.tasnimnews.com/english/Home/Single/678699 Accessed 13/07/2015

Yapching, M, (2015). Iraqi officials arrest American, Israeli military advisors on suspicion of aiding ISIS. Christian Today. United Kingdom. http://www.christiantoday.com/article/iraqi.officials.arrest.american.israeli.military.advisors.on.suspicion.of.aiding.isis/49660.htm Accessed 13/07/2015


New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile

Recent studies by psychologists and social scientists in the US and UK suggest that contrary to mainstream media stereotypes, those labeled “conspiracy theorists” appear to be saner than those who accept the official versions of contested events. The most recent study was published on July 8th by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent (UK). Entitled “What about Building 7? A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories,” the study compared “conspiracist” (pro-conspiracy theory) and “conventionalist” (anti-conspiracy) comments at news websites. The authors were surprised to discover that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventionalist ones: “Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist.” In other words, among people who comment on news articles, those who disbelieve government accounts of such events as 9/11 and the JFK assassination outnumber believers by more than two to one. That means it is the pro-conspiracy commenters who are expressing what is now the conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters are becoming a small, beleaguered minority. Perhaps because their supposedly mainstream views no longer represent the majority, the anti-conspiracy commenters often displayed anger and hostility: “The research… showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals.” Additionally, it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well. According to them, their own theory of 9/11 – a conspiracy theory holding that 19 Arabs, none of whom could fly planes with any proficiency, pulled off the crime of the century under the direction of a guy on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan – was indisputably true. The so-called conspiracists, on the other hand, did not pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11: “For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account.” In short, the new study by Wood and Douglas suggests that the negative stereotype of the conspiracy theorist – a hostile fanatic wedded to the truth of his own fringe theory – accurately describes the people who defend the official account of 9/11, not those who dispute it. Additionally, the study found that so-called conspiracists discuss historical context (such as viewing the JFK assassination as a precedent for 9/11) more than anti-conspiracists. It also found that the so-called conspiracists to not like to be called “conspiracists” or “conspiracy theorists.” Both of these findings are amplified in the new book Conspiracy Theory in America by political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, published earlier this year by the University of Texas Press. Professor deHaven-Smith explains why people don’t like being called “conspiracy theorists”: The term was invented and put into wide circulation by the CIA to smear and defame people questioning the JFK assassination! “The CIA’s campaign to popularize the term ‘conspiracy theory’ and make conspiracy belief a target of ridicule and hostility must be credited, unfortunately, with being one of the most successful propaganda initiatives of all time.” In other words, people who use the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” as an insult are doing so as the result of a well-documented, undisputed, historically-real conspiracy by the CIA to cover up the JFK assassination. That campaign, by the way, was completely illegal, and the CIA officers involved were criminals; the CIA is barred from all domestic activities, yet routinely breaks the law to conduct domestic operations ranging from propaganda to assassinations. DeHaven-Smith also explains why those who doubt official explanations of high crimes are eager to discuss historical context. He points out that a very large number of conspiracy claims have turned out to be true, and that there appear to be strong relationships between many as-yet-unsolved “state crimes against democracy.” An obvious example is the link between the JFK and RFK assassinations, which both paved the way for presidencies that continued the Vietnam War. According to DeHaven-Smith, we should always discuss the “Kennedy assassinations” in the plural, because the two killings appear to have been aspects of the same larger crime. Psychologist Laurie Manwell of the University of Guelph agrees that the CIA-designed “conspiracy theory” label impedes cognitive function. She points out, in an article published in American Behavioral Scientist (2010), that anti-conspiracy people are unable to think clearly about such apparent state crimes against democracy as 9/11 due to their inability to process information that conflicts with pre-existing belief. In the same issue of ABS, University of Buffalo professor Steven Hoffman adds that anti-conspiracy people are typically prey to strong “confirmation bias” – that is, they seek out information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs, while using irrational mechanisms (such as the “conspiracy theory” label) to avoid conflicting information. The extreme irrationality of those who attack “conspiracy theories” has been ably exposed by Communications professors Ginna Husting and Martin Orr of Boise State University. In a 2007 peer-reviewed article entitled “Dangerous Machinery: ‘Conspiracy Theorist’ as a Transpersonal Strategy of Exclusion,” they wrote: “If I call you a conspiracy theorist, it matters little whether you have actually claimed that a conspiracy exists or whether you have simply raised an issue that I would rather avoid… By labeling you, I strategically exclude you from the sphere where public speech, debate, and conflict occur.” But now, thanks to the internet, people who doubt official stories are no longer excluded from public conversation; the CIA’s 44-year-old campaign to stifle debate using the “conspiracy theory” smear is nearly worn-out. In academic studies, as in comments on news articles, pro-conspiracy voices are now more numerous – and more rational – than anti-conspiracy ones. No wonder the anti-conspiracy people are sounding more and more like a bunch of hostile, paranoid cranks. KB/HSN

Source: http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/07/12/313399/conspiracy-theorists-vs-govt-dupes/


The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets“.

(Church Committee, Book I, p.455)


Are people who think 9/11 was an inside job suffering from pathological delusions?

That is what the mainstream media tell us. But a recent study published in Frontiers of Psychology suggests the contrary. It found that 29 of 30 research subjects – 97% of the sample – turned out to be “9/11 conspiracy theorists.” And it concluded that questioning the official version of 9/11, and constructing an alternative explanation, is a sign of psychological health.

The article’s title “Thirty shades of truth: conspiracy theories as stories of individuation, not of pathological delusion” summarizes its key finding: People who doubt the mainstream media’s version of 9/11 are not deluded. Quite the opposite: They are notable for “individuation,” a term coined by Carl Jung which he defined as: “The better and more complete fulfillment of the collective qualities of the human being.”

Are 9/11 truthers and other independent-minded skeptics really better and more fulfilled human beings? That is the exact opposite of what mainstream propaganda has been telling us.

The term “conspiracy theorist” was launched into wide circulation in the 1960s by the CIA ‘s Document 1035-960. That memo, entitled  “Countering Criticism of the Warren Commission Report,” ordered the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird media assets to smear people asking questions about the JFK assassination by labeling them “conspiracy theorists.” Since then, “conspiracy theorist” has served as a weaponized term. Whenever defenders of an official myth cannot argue convincingly on the basis of facts and logic, they resort to the ad hominem “conspiracy theorist” insult as a weapon of last resort.

So the good news is that the explosion of “conspiracy theories” in the wake of 9/11 is not a symptom of collective insanity or mass delusion. On the contrary, it is a sign that people are growing psychologically healthier.

And if the study’s sample is any indication, more and more people are becoming psychologically healthy. Psychologist Marius H. Raab and his four co-authors discovered that 29 of the 30 participants in their “constructing 9/11 narratives” experiment refused to swallow the official version of 9/11; only one participant fully endorsed the official story (and that person admitted to having no interest whatsoever in 9/11). Perhaps the public is becoming saner, better-adjusted, and better-informed than even the most wild-eyed conspiracy optimist would have believed.

Why are alternative 9/11 conspiracy theories psychologically healthier than the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT)? The obvious answer is that the OCT is transparently false. Believing something that is self-evidently highly improbable, and contradicted by all available evidence, is virtually a textbook definition of “pathological delusion.” The “two planes took down three skyscrapers” claim is ridiculous on its face; and the notion that “radical Muslims” who relished pork chops and debauchery, and could not even fly Cessnas, could achieve stunt-flying feats beyond the abilities of the world’s best pilots, is bizarre beyond belief.

Another obvious answer is that the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) is paranoid, racist, and murderous. Believers in the OCT have murdered more than one million Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan based on the paranoid delusion that “radical Muslims” carried out 9/11. If killing one person on the basis of their religion or skin color is a hate crime, what shall we call the murder of more than a million?

Unsurprisingly, Raab and his co-authors avoid these all-too-obvious, all-too-controversial points. Instead, they suggest that the process of developing an Alternative Conspiracy Theory (ACT) is a sign of individuation, meaning psychological health and fulfillment.

Why is it psychologically beneficial to construct one’s own narrative about what really happened on 9/11 by assembling facts, including those that do not fit the Official Conspiracy Theory?

The study’s authors cite French philosopher Jean-François Lyotard’s claim that people no longer swallow the grand, mythic narratives of the past. Today, people create their own individual “little stories” to help them understand what is going on, and to give meaning and purpose to their lives. Jung saw this kind of individualized creativity as a healthy sign of what he called individuation: The self-fulfillment of the individual.

According to the study’s authors, constructing one’s own 9/11 narrative in opposition to the OCT is “an attempt to emphasize a personal set of values and thus to organize and regulate one’s life experience in a meaningful way.” Each 9/11 skeptic’s explanation of what really happened on 9/11 is “a dynamic narration reflecting an individual’s values” such as concern for individual liberty and morality. Unlike former Obama information Czar Cass Sunstein, who wants the government to infiltrate, disrupt, and “disable the purveyors of conspiracy theories,” Professor Raab and coauthors seem to welcome the spread of 9/11 skepticism and the self-fulfillment it brings.

While the article’s authors avoid passing judgment on the 9/11 Official Conspiracy Theory, they do admit that so-called conspiracy theories can awaken people to the reality of actual conspiracies: “Narratives about dystopian developments make us aware of such developments in the first place.” Decrying government officials’ unethical behavior can “make us (and others) cautious about the violation of ethical standards.” In short, discussing conspiracies such as 9/11 can help raise awareness of the dystopian elements of today’s world, and discourage power elites from staging more false-flag attacks.

But wait a minute – aren’t “conspiracy theorists” a bunch of pathetic losers who invent preposterous, paranoid tales to justify their own feelings of powerlessness? The answer, according to the study’s authors, is a definitive “no.”

Some scholars, echoing the CIA’s ad hominem campaign against “conspiracy theorists,” have posited that those who believe in Alternative Conspiracy Theories should score low on the scale of self-efficacy – a psychological measurement of a person’s sense of healthy confidence in their own abilities. But it turns out that this is not the case.

Professor Raab and the four co-authors were surprised by this finding: “In accordance with the premise that supporters of conspiracy theories share some kind of cognitive or emotional disposition, we expected people with a low level of self-efficacy to be more susceptible for any kind of conspiracy theory than people who reported a high level of self-efficacy….(but)…The relation between self-efficacy and belief in conspiracy theories turned out to be non-significant…The data did not justify—or even suggest—the assumption that self-efficacy is related to endorsement in common conspiracy theories.”

In short, the study found nothing negative – and much that is positive – about “conspiracy theories” and “conspiracy theorists.”

The article also “New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile” reported on scholarship challenging mainstream assumptions that “conspiracy theories” are a bad thing and “conspiracy theorists” are defective. As we learn more about such events as 9/11 and the competing stories they generate, it becomes increasingly clear that the so-called “conspiracy theorists” are not just right about the facts; they are also psychologically better-adjusted than the dwindling legion of brainwashed dupes and shills who oppose them.


Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/05/17/363020/new-study-were-all-conspiracy-theorists-now/


Learn more about ISIS & 911 https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2014/11/26/911-was-an-inside-job-the-jews-responsible-for-911/



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s