Secret Pentagon Report Reveals US "Created" ISIS As A "Tool"
Secret Pentagon Report Reveals US
“Created” ISIS As A “Tool” To
Overthrow Syria’s President Assad
From the first sudden, and quite dramatic, appearance of the fanatical Islamic group known as ISIS which was largely unheard of until a year ago, on the world’s stage and which promptly replaced the worn out and tired al Qaeda as the world’s terrorist bogeyman, we suggested that the “straight to beheading YouTube clip” purpose behind the Saudi Arabia-funded Islamic State was a simple one: use the Jihadists as the vehicle of choice to achieve a political goal: depose of Syria’s president Assad, who for years has stood in the way of a critical Qatari natural gas pipeline, one which could dethrone Russia as Europe’s dominant – and belligerent – source of energy, reaching an interim climax with the unsuccessful Mediterranean Sea military build up of 2013, which nearly resulted in quasi-world war.
The narrative and the plotline were so transparent, even Russia saw right through them. Recall from September of last year:
If the West bombs Islamic State militants in Syria without consulting Damascus, LiveLeak reports that the anti-ISIS alliance may use the occasion to launch airstrikes against President Bashar Assad’s forces, according to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. Clearly comprehending that Obama’s new strategy against ISIS in Syria is all about pushing the Qatar pipeline through (as was the impetus behind the 2013 intervention push), Russia is pushing back noting that the it is using ISIS as a pretext for bombing Syrian government forces and warning that “such a development would lead to a huge escalation of conflict in the Middle East and North Africa.”
But it’s one thing to speculate; it’s something entirely different to have hard proof.
And while speculation was rife that just like the CIA-funded al Qaeda had been used as a facade by the US to achieve its own geopolitical and national interests over the past two decades, so ISIS was nothing more than al Qaeda 2.0, there was no actual evidence of just this.
That may all have changed now when a declassified secret US government document obtained by the public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad.
According to investigative reporter Nafeez Ahmed in Medium, the “leaked document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, despite anticipating that doing so could lead to the emergence of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
According to the newly declassified US document, the Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of the strategy, but described this outcome as a strategic opportunity to “isolate the Syrian regime.”
And not just that: as we reported last week, now that ISIS is running around the middle east, cutting people’s heads of in 1080p quality and Hollywood-quality (perhaps literally) video, the US has a credible justification to sell billions worth of modern, sophisticated weapons in the region in order to “modernize” and “replenish” the weapons of such US allies as Saudi Arabia, Israel and Iraq.
But that the US military-industrial complex is a winner every time war breaks out anywhere in the world (usually with the assistance of the CIA) is clear to everyone by now. What wasn’t clear is just how the US predetermined the current course of events in the middle east.
Now, thanks to the following declassified report, we have a far better understanding of not only how current events in the middle east came to be, but what America’s puppermaster role leading up to it all, was.
From Nafeez Ahmed: Secret Pentagon report reveals West saw ISIS as strategic asset Anti-ISIS coalition knowingly sponsored violent extremists to ‘isolate’ Assad, rollback ‘Shia expansion’, originally posted in Medium.
Hypocrisy
The revelations contradict the official line of Western government on their policies in Syria, and raise disturbing questions about secret Western support for violent extremists abroad, while using the burgeoning threat of terror to justify excessive mass surveillance and crackdowns on civil liberties at home.
Among the batch of documents obtained by Judicial Watch through a federal lawsuit, released earlier this week, is a US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document then classified as “secret,” dated 12th August 2012.
The DIA provides military intelligence in support of planners, policymakers and operations for the US Department of Defense and intelligence community.
So far, media reporting has focused on the evidence that the Obama administration knew of arms supplies from a Libyan terrorist stronghold to rebels in Syria.
Some outlets have reported the US intelligence community’s internal prediction of the rise of ISIS. Yet none have accurately acknowledged the disturbing details exposing how the West knowingly fostered a sectarian, al-Qaeda-driven rebellion in Syria.
Charles Shoebridge, a former British Army and Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism intelligence officer, said:
“Given the political leanings of the organisation that obtained these documents, it’s unsurprising that the main emphasis given to them thus far has been an attempt to embarrass Hilary Clinton regarding what was known about the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi in 2012. However, the documents also contain far less publicized revelations that raise vitally important questions of the West’s governments and media in their support of Syria’s rebellion.”
The West’s Islamists
The newly declassified DIA document from 2012 confirms that the main component of the anti-Assad rebel forces by this time comprised Islamist insurgents affiliated to groups that would lead to the emergence of ISIS. Despite this, these groups were to continue receiving support from Western militaries and their regional allies.
Noting that “the Salafist [sic], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria,” the document states that “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition,” while Russia, China and Iran “support the [Assad] regime.”
The 7-page DIA document states that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the precursor to the ‘Islamic State in Iraq,’ (ISI) which became the ‘Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,’ “supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning, both ideologically and through the media.”
The formerly secret Pentagon report notes that the “rise of the insurgency in Syria” has increasingly taken a “sectarian direction,” attracting diverse support from Sunni “religious and tribal powers” across the region.
In a section titled ‘The Future Assumptions of the Crisis,’ the DIA report predicts that while Assad’s regime will survive, retaining control over Syrian territory, the crisis will continue to escalate “into proxy war.”
The document also recommends the creation of “safe havens under international sheltering, similar to what transpired in Libya when Benghazi was chosen as the command centre for the temporary government.”
In Libya, anti-Gaddafi rebels, most of whom were al-Qaeda affiliated militias, were protected by NATO ‘safe havens’ (aka ‘no fly zones’).
‘Supporting powers want’ ISIS entity
In a strikingly prescient prediction, the Pentagon document explicitly forecasts the probable declaration of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria.”
Nevertheless, “Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are supporting these efforts” by Syrian “opposition forces” fighting to “control the eastern areas (Hasaka and Der Zor), adjacent to Western Iraqi provinces (Mosul and Anbar)”:
“… 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, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).”
The secret Pentagon document thus provides extraordinary confirmation that the US-led coalition currently fighting ISIS, had three years ago welcomed the emergence of an extremist “Salafist Principality” in the region as a way to undermine Assad, and block off the strategic expansion of Iran. Crucially, Iraq is labeled as an integral part of this “Shia expansion.”
The establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, the DIA document asserts, is “exactly” what the “supporting powers to the [Syrian] opposition want.” Earlier on, the document repeatedly describes those “supporting powers” as “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey.”
Further on, the document reveals that Pentagon analysts were acutely aware of the dire risks of this strategy, yet ploughed ahead anyway.
The establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, it says, would create “the ideal atmosphere for AQI to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi.” Last summer, ISIS conquered Mosul in Iraq, and just this month has also taken control of Ramadi.
Such a quasi-state entity 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. ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of territory.”
The 2012 DIA document is an Intelligence Information Report (IIR), not a “finally evaluated intelligence” assessment, but its contents are vetted before distribution. The report was circulated throughout the US intelligence community, including to the State Department, Central Command, the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, FBI, among other agencies.
In response to my questions about the strategy, the British government simply denied the Pentagon report’s startling revelations of deliberate Western sponsorship of violent extremists in Syria. A British Foreign Office spokesperson said:
“AQ and ISIL are proscribed terrorist organisations. The UK opposes all forms of terrorism. AQ, ISIL, and their affiliates pose a direct threat to the UK’s national security. We are part of a military and political coalition to defeat ISIL in Iraq and Syria, and are working with international partners to counter the threat from AQ and other terrorist groups in that region. In Syria we have always supported those moderate opposition groups who oppose the tyranny of Assad and the brutality of the extremists.”
The DIA did not respond to request for comment.
Strategic asset for regime-change
Security analyst Shoebridge, however, who has tracked Western support for Islamist terrorists in Syria since the beginning of the war, pointed out that the secret Pentagon intelligence report exposes fatal contradictions at the heart of official pronunciations:
“Throughout the early years of the Syria crisis, the US and UK governments, and almost universally the West’s mainstream media, promoted Syria’s rebels as moderate, liberal, secular, democratic, and therefore deserving of the West’s support. Given that these documents wholly undermine this assessment, it’s significant that the West’s media has now, despite their immense significance, almost entirely ignored them.”
According to Brad Hoff, a former US Marine who served during the early years of the Iraq War and as a 9/11 first responder at the Marine Corps Headquarters in Battalion Quantico from 2000 to 2004, the just released Pentagon report for the first time provides stunning affirmation that:
“US intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as an enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a US strategic asset.”
Hoff, who is managing editor of Levant Report — ?an online publication run by Texas-based educators who have direct experience of the Middle East?—?points out that the DIA document “matter-of-factly” states that the rise of such an extremist Salafist political entity in the region offers a “tool for regime change in Syria.”
The DIA intelligence report shows, he said, that the rise of ISIS only became possible in the context of the Syrian insurgency?—?“there is no mention of US troop withdrawal from Iraq as a catalyst for Islamic State’s rise, which is the contention of innumerable politicians and pundits.” The report demonstrates that:
“The establishment of a ‘Salafist Principality’ in Eastern Syria is ‘exactly’ what the external powers supporting the opposition want (identified as ‘the West, Gulf Countries, and Turkey’) in order to weaken the Assad government.”
The rise of a Salafist quasi-state entity that might expand into Iraq, and fracture that country, was therefore clearly foreseen by US intelligence as likely?—?but nevertheless strategically useful?—?blowback from the West’s commitment to “isolating Syria.”
Complicity
Critics of the US-led strategy in the region have repeatedly raised questions about the role of coalition allies in intentionally providing extensive support to Islamist terrorist groups in the drive to destabilize the Assad regime in Syria.
The conventional wisdom is that the US government did not retain sufficient oversight on the funding to anti-Assad rebel groups, which was supposed to be monitored and vetted to ensure that only ‘moderate’ groups were supported.
However, the newly declassified Pentagon report proves unambiguously that years before ISIS launched its concerted offensive against Iraq, the US intelligence community was fully aware that Islamist militants constituted the core of Syria’s sectarian insurgency.
Despite that, the Pentagon continued to support the Islamist insurgency, even while anticipating the probability that doing so would establish an extremist Salafi stronghold in Syria and Iraq.
As Shoebridge told me, “The documents show that not only did the US government at the latest by August 2012 know the true extremist nature and likely outcome of Syria’s rebellion”?—?namely, the emergence of ISIS?—?“but that this was considered an advantage for US foreign policy. This also suggests a decision to spend years in an effort to deliberately mislead the West’s public, via a compliant media, into believing that Syria’s rebellion was overwhelmingly ‘moderate.’”
Annie Machon, a former MI5 intelligence officer who blew the whistle in the 1990s on MI6 funding of al-Qaeda to assassinate Libya’s former leader Colonel Gaddafi, similarly said of the revelations:
“This is no surprise to me. Within individual countries there are always multiple intelligence agencies with competing agendas.”
She explained that MI6’s Libya operation in 1996, which resulted in the deaths of innocent people, “happened at precisely the time when MI5 was setting up a new section to investigate al-Qaeda.”
This strategy was repeated on a grand scale in the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, said Machon, where the CIA and MI6 were:
“… supporting the very same Libyan groups, resulting in a failed state, mass murder, displacement and anarchy. So the idea that elements of the American military-security complex have enabled the development of ISIS after their failed attempt to get NATO to once again ‘intervene’ is part of an established pattern. And they remain indifferent to the sheer scale of human suffering that is unleashed as a result of such game-playing.”
Divide and rule
Several US government officials have conceded that their closest allies in the anti-ISIS coalition were funding violent extremist Islamist groups that became integral to ISIS.
US Vice President Joe Biden, for instance, admitted last year that Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Turkey had funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to Islamist rebels in Syria that metamorphosed into ISIS.
But he did not admit what this internal Pentagon document demonstrates?—?that the entire covert strategy was sanctioned and supervised by the US, Britain, France, Israel and other Western powers.
The strategy appears to fit a policy scenario identified by a recent US Army-commissioned RAND Corp report.
The report, published four years before the DIA document, called for the US “to capitalise on the Shia-Sunni conflict by taking the side of the conservative Sunni regimes in a decisive fashion and working with them against all Shiite empowerment movements in the Muslim world.”
The US would need to contain “Iranian power and influence” in the Gulf by “shoring up the traditional Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan.” Simultaneously, the US must maintain “a strong strategic relationship with the Iraqi Shiite government” despite its Iran alliance.
The RAND report confirmed that the “divide and rule” strategy was already being deployed “to create divisions in the jihadist camp. Today in Iraq such a strategy is being used at the tactical level.”
The report observed that the US was forming “temporary alliances” with al-Qaeda affiliated “nationalist insurgent groups” that have fought the US for four years in the form of “weapons and cash.” Although these nationalists “have cooperated with al-Qaeda against US forces,” they are now being supported to exploit “the common threat that al-Qaeda now poses to both parties.”
The 2012 DIA document, however, further shows that while sponsoring purportedly former al-Qaeda insurgents in Iraq to counter al-Qaeda, Western governments were simultaneously arming al-Qaeda insurgents in Syria.
The revelation from an internal US intelligence document that the very US-led coalition supposedly fighting ‘Islamic State’ today, knowingly created ISIS in the first place, raises troubling questions about recent government efforts to justify the expansion of state anti-terror powers.
In the wake of the rise of ISIS, intrusive new measures to combat extremism including mass surveillance, the Orwellian ‘prevent duty’ and even plans to enable government censorship of broadcasters, are being pursued on both sides of the Atlantic, much of which disproportionately targets activists, journalists and ethnic minorities, especially Muslims.
Yet the new Pentagon report reveals that, contrary to Western government claims, the primary cause of the threat comes from their own deeply misguided policies of secretly sponsoring Islamist terrorism for dubious geopolitical purposes.
Dr Nafeez Ahmed is an investigative journalist, bestselling author and international security scholar. A former Guardian writer, he writes the ‘System Shift’ column for VICE’s Motherboard, and is also a columnist for Middle East Eye. He is the winner of a 2015 Project Censored Award, known as the ‘Alternative Pulitzer Prize’, for Outstanding Investigative Journalism for his Guardian work, and was selected in the Evening Standard’s ‘Power 1,000’ most globally influential Londoners.
Nafeez has also written for The Independent, Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Scotsman, Foreign Policy, The Atlantic, Quartz, Prospect, New Statesman, Le Monde diplomatique, New Internationalist, Counterpunch, Truthout, among others. He is the author of A User’s Guide to the Crisis of Civilization: And How to Save It (2010), and the scifi thriller novel ZERO POINT, among other books. His work on the root causes and covert operations linked to international terrorism officially contributed to the 9/11 Commission and the 7/7 Coroner’s Inquest.
——————————————————————————————————————————————
How Government Created the Three Worst Terror
Groups in the World
TJ Brown
Saturday, September 03, 2016
Every politician promises to destroy terrorism: from teenage hackers busting through firewalls to Islamist radicals decapitating American journalists. But as much as the American government boasts about its intolerance of terrorism, you would be shocked at how much it contributes to its existence. In fact, the US government actually created the three most notorious terrorist organizations that currently exist.
1. Islamic Extremism
Chaos-inducing regime change, perpetual warfare, and economic assault have transformed much of the region into a battleground.The only people who still deny the involvement of the US government in breeding Islamic extremism are neocons, politicians, and Lockheed Martin executives. This isn’t to imply that without the government, Islamic nations would transcend all conflict and violence. But hard to deny that the US government has directly and indirectly facilitated this violence. Chaos-inducing regime change, perpetual warfare, and economic assault have transformed much of the region into a battleground.
The most notorious Islamic terrorist organization, ISIS, began to emerge in the aftermath of the U.S. government’s intervention in Iraq (with origins that trace back even to Cold War days), and rose to conquest out of the chaos of the Syrian civil war, which the U.S. fomented. In pursuing weapons of mass destruction that turned out to be non-existent, the US government created the largest terror group facing western civilization today. The US also left behind millions of dollars worth of military equipment and even proactively supplied modern armaments to so called “rebel allies” (who are actually allies of Al Qaeda).
The resulting failure of these endeavors can be chalked up to mere unintentional incompetence if you’re feeling generous. But there are other examples of overt and intentional centrally planned malfeasance.
The coordinated overthrow of secular Arab governments in Syria and Libya — admittedly not a bunch of sweethearts — led to the rise of fundamentalist militias. Huge numbers of civilian deaths at the hands of aerial drone assaults have made ordinary citizens vengeful towards the west and caused them to embrace jihadi martyrdom.
Isolationist sanctions throughout the 1990s and 2000s contributed to social segregation from the rest of the world. Combining that segregation with regional poverty and strong ideological propaganda from Islamist organizations, it’s not hard to understand why groups like ISIS, Boko Haram, and the Taliban have spread so rapidly across the region.
2. Prohibition Cartels
It is prohibition that brought them into existence, especially legislation against marijuana and other drugs in America.ISIS isn’t the only radical religious terror group threatening America. Some of these groups completely disagree with Sharia and Jihad and have a deep faith in Christ and the Bible. The terror groups I’m referring to are the Mexican drug cartels: or as I like to call them, “prohibition cartels.”
I prefer the term prohibition cartel because their criminal activities aren’t limited to drug dealing. They also engage in fulfilling many voluntary services that have been banned or regulated by government, including prostitution, undocumented travel, firearm sales, etc.
But another reason I call them prohibition cartels is because it is prohibition that brought them into existence, especially legislation against marijuana and other drugs in America.
This all started with the the International Opium Convention and Uniform State Narcotic Act in 1925. Essentially, it was the free trade agreement for hemp. Ostensibly, the goal was the fair and safe trade of marijuana, but the effect was to lay the groundwork for state control of markets. America began its first war against marijuana in the 1930s with the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937. This law was later declared unconstitutional, but it reemerged in the 1970’s within the Controlled Substances Act, which ranked marijuana as a Schedule I narcotic: the highest possible ranking in terms of dangerousness and addiction.
To no one’s surprise, 10 years later in the 1980’s, the first Mexican Drug Cartel known as the Guadalajara Cartel was founded. And the thing is, both progressive and traditionalist mindsets were complicit in this.
The ideological left praises governmental efforts to regulate and manipulate the market. The ideological right praises cultural determinism and praises the efforts of government that further ends they deem morally superior.
It makes you wonder how many lives could have been saved from drug violence, cartel disputes, imprisonment, etc. if these people had simply respected individual freedom and adopted a liberal approach to the market for narcotics. How many lives could be saved in the future if we ended state prohibition now?
3. The US Government
Surprised? Well you shouldn’t be. The most notable organization to bear responsibility for substantial worldwide suffering and misery over the last century is the United States government.
US culture and philosophy have in many ways been a wonderful gift to the world, inspiring liberation from oppression and promoting opportunity for all. The US government is another matter. With bureaucratic supremacy, militaristic impunity and economic manipulation, the US government has made itself into a global goliath that dominates the market of all things evil. Maybe I’m exaggerating, but I don’t think so.
Not only has the government facilitated the operations of both of the terrorist groups mentioned above, but it has also embarked on its own terroristic ventures.
The definition of terrorism is “the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.” When you consider that all the state does is use violence for political aims, it shouldn’t be surprising that government operations have a lot in common with terrorist organizations.
With the largest estimated prison population in the world, the highest number of laws in the world (the majority of which are direct infringements of fundamental human rights to life, liberty, and property), the largest and most well-funded government in the world, and the most interventionist foreign policy of any government entity in modern history, how could one argue that today’s overweening state is anything less than a well polished distributor of western ideological terrorism?
So next time a politician tells you their plan to combat terrorist organizations, maybe ask them why they’re working for one that contributes to much to its existence?
TJ Brown
Taleed J. Brown is a content intern at FEE and hosts the popular YouTube channel “That Guy T“.
——————————————————————————————————————————————–
The United States government has
become “the world’s most dangerous
terrorist organization,” warns former
Reagan official
Monday, September 28, 2015 by: J. D. Heyes
Tags: NATO, terrorists, nuclear war
(NaturalNews) A former top member of the Ronald Reagan administration has issued a dire warning about the current state of American government: it’s evil and will become even more evil in the years ahead as the world itself becomes more dangerous.
“The United States [military policy] has destroyed seven countries,” he says. “The populations there are subject to ongoing continual violence either from the U.S. or these Jihadists or from the Islamic State. In Libya there’s various factions, no government – just warlords fighting and nobody’s safe anywhere so the populations are getting out. You can’t live in that type of situation.”
Early in the interview, the hosts ask Roberts about a recent column he penned in which he states that all current Republican presidential contenders are essentially in favor of war. The hosts then ask him about the potential of nuclear war with either Russia or China, “because we seem to be moving in that direction.”
“I think what it will take is the European countries to realize that they’ve been enabling American aggression in the 21st century, and aggression that is now brought them millions of refugees particularly from Syria and Iraq, and they can’t cope with these refugees,” said Roberts in reference to the fighting between ISIS, Syrian rebels, and Iraqi and Syrian government forces that has caused a wave of migration out of the war zones into Europe.
War hawks are also warning
He also said that Europe’s blind pursuit of American-led goals was putting the entire continent in potential conflict with Russia, which has established bases in Syria and has deployed men and material there in support of Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, including tanks and combat aircraft. The Obama White House opposes Assad and wants him to step down.
“All of this is nonsensical for Europe, so it’s possible that they will come to the conclusion that being a vassal of Washington doesn’t pay,” Roberts said.
As further noted by Investment Research Dynamics, commenting on Roberts’ interview:
Lost in the rivers of humanity that have been streaming out of Africa and the Middle East and flooding into Europe is the fact the U.S. military is responsible for this crisis. Not only has the U.S. destroyed several countries around the globe, the U.S. Government now appears to provoking Russia into a military conflict in both Ukraine and Syria that risks escalating into a nuclear war. Even Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski – two notorious warhawks – have both recently stated that the U.S. Government is pushing Russia too hard.
In his interview, Roberts said that he believes the only way to avoid an eventual nuclear conflict is to break up the European Union and the NATO military alliance, the latter of which was formed at the opening of the Cold War as a counterbalance to the former Soviet Union-led Warsaw Pact. He says the U.S. uses NATO as “cover” to implement unilaterally dangerous, aggressive military policies around the world.
No peaceful candidates
In his cited column regarding the Republican candidates, Roberts added:
There is not a peaceful person among the Republican candidates. Even the female is heartless. Carly Fiorina positioned herself along side the macho men as a warmonger. She let the military/security complex know that she, too, was for sale. Send in the campaign donations, and she will see that the money flows back to the military/security complex in the buildup of fleets and armaments that will send the Russians a message.
He also says that the EU is essentially addicted to U.S. money and that it might be virtually impossible for the nations within the coalition to act on their own, which he adds is their own fault.
You can hear the entire interview here.
Sources include:
InvestmentResearchDynamics.com
YouTube.com
Evil.news
PaulCraigRoberts.org
——————————————————————————————————————————————–
US Intelligence Officer: “Every Single
Terrorist Attack In US Was A False
Flag Attack”
Apart from documents that have outlined supposed terrorist threats, like Al-Qaeda, and their connection to US intelligence agencies, like the CIA, there are a number of whistleblowers that have come out adding more fuel to the fire. Because not many are even aware of these documents, letting people know about a truth that can be hard for people to accept, let alone ponder the possibility is very important. It’s just one aspect of the veil that’s been blinding the masses for quite some time now.
The latest whistleblower is David Steele, a 20-year Marine Corps intelligence officer, and the second-highest-ranking civilian in the U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence. He is a former CIA clandestine services case officer, and this is what he had to say:
“Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services. In the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag, or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI. In fact, we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum.”
What Is A “False Flag Attack?”
A great example of a false flag attack is 9/11, something that many people believe to be a creation of US intelligence agencies, or some entity above the government (one that controls what Eisenhower called “the military industrial complex”). The idea is that these so called terrorist attacks are created by this group, in order to justify the infiltration of other countries, and to justify a heightened state of “national security.” As a result, in the eyes of the citizenry, war and mass murder are justified, when the intentions behind these actions are something the citizenry has no idea about. This is why we see a false sense of patriotism programmed into many people, especially in the United States. Men and women join this massive military machine with good hearts, thinking that they are serving their country and fighting terrorism, when they are doing the complete opposite. They are only participating in a fabricated war based on lies and misinformation.
“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al-Qaeda, and any informed intelligence officer knows this. But, there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an intensified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive TV watchers to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the United States.” – Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook
Today, we might be seeing the same thing with ISIS. Although there are no verified documents like there are when it comes to Al-Qaeda, given what that information shows us, combined with Wikileaks documents and statements from insiders, we could be looking at the same thing.
Not long ago, FBI whistleblower stated that:
“The US is reviving terror scare with ISIS to promote the terror war industry.”
You can read more about that story here
Again, 9/11 is a great example and you can find out more information about that here.
——————————————————————————————————————————————–
How this FBI strategy is actually
creating US-based terrorists
Trevor Aaronson
0:12 The FBI is responsible for more terrorism plots in the United States than any other organization. More than al Qaeda, more than al Shabaab, more than the Islamic State, more than all of them combined.
0:26 This isn’t likely how you think about the FBI. You probably think of FBI agents gunning down bad guys like John Dillinger, or arresting corrupt politicians.
0:36 After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the FBI became less concerned with gangsters and crooked elected officials. The new target became terrorists, and the pursuit of terrorists has consumed the FBI.
0:47 Every year, the Bureau spends 3.3 billion dollars on domestic counterterrorism activities. Compare than to just 2.6 billion dollars combined for organized crime, financial fraud, public corruption and all other types of traditional criminal activity.
1:01 I’ve spent years pouring through the case files of terrorism prosecutions in the United States, and I’ve come to the conclusion that the FBI is much better at creating terrorists than it is at catching terrorists.
1:14 In the 14 years since 9/11, you can count about six real terrorist attacks in the United States. These include the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013, as well as failed attacks, such as the time when a man named Faisal Shahzad tried to deliver a car bomb to Times Square. In those same 14 years, the Bureau, however, has bragged about how it’s foiled dozens of terrorism plots. In all, the FBI has arrested more than 175 people in aggressive, undercover conterterrorism stings.
1:43 These operations, which are usually led by an informant, provide the means and opportunity, and sometimes even the idea, for mentally ill and economically desperate people to become what we now term terrorists.
1:57 After 9/11, the FBI was given an edict: never again. Never another attack on American soil. FBI agents were told to find terrorists before they struck. To do this, agents recruited a network of more than 15,000 informants nationwide, all looking for anyone who might be dangerous. An informant can earn 100,000 dollars or more for every terrorism case they bring to the FBI. That’s right, the FBI is paying mostly criminals and con men six figures to spy on communities in the United States, but mostly Muslim American communities.
2:29 These informants nab people like Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif and Walli Mujahidh. Both are mentally ill. Abdul-Latif had a history of huffing gasoline and attempting suicide. Mujahidh had schizoaffective disorder, he had trouble distinguishing between reality and fantasy. In 2012, the FBI arrested these two men for conspiring to attack a military recruiting station outside Seattle with weapons provided, of course, by the FBI. The FBI’s informant was Robert Childs, a convicted rapist and child molester who was paid 90,000 dollars for his work on the case. This isn’t an outlier.
3:04 In 2009, an FBI informant who had fled Pakistan on murder charges led four men in a plot to bomb synagogues in the Bronx. The lead defendant was James Cromitie, a broke Walmart employee with a history of mental problems. And the informant had offered him 250,000 dollars if he participated in that plot. There are many more examples.
3:25 Today, The Intercept published my new story about a counterterrorism sting in Tampa involving Sami Osmakac, a young man who was living near Tampa, Florida. Osmakac also had schizoaffective disorder. He too was broke, and he had no connections to international terrorist groups. Nonetheless, an FBI informant gave him a job, handed him money, introduced him to an undercover agent posing as a terrorist, and lured him in a plot to bomb an Irish bar.
3:51 But here’s what’s interesting: The lead undercover agent — you can see him in this picture with his face blurred — would go back to the Tampa field office with his recording equipment on. Behind closed doors, FBI agents admitted that what they were doing was farcical. A federal judge doesn’t want you to hear about these conversations. He sealed the transcripts and placed them under a protective order in an attempt to prevent someone like me from doing something like this. Behind closed doors, the lead agent, the squad supervisor, described their would-be terrorist as a “retarded fool who didn’t have a pot to piss in.” They described his terrorist ambitions as wishy-washy and a pipe dream scenario.
4:29 But that didn’t stop the FBI. They provided Sami Osmakac everything he needed. They gave him a car bomb, they gave him an AK-47, they helped him make a so-called martyrdom video, and they even gave him money for a taxi cab so that he could get to where they wanted him to go. As they were working the sting, the squad supervisor tells his agents he wanted a Hollywood ending. And he got a Hollywood ending. When Sami Osmakac attempted to deliver what he thought was a car bomb, he was arrested, convicted and sentenced to 40 years in prison.
5:04 Sami Osmakac isn’t alone. He’s one of more than 175 so-called terrorists, for whom the FBI has created Hollywood endings. U.S. government officials call this the War on Terror. It’s really just theater, a national security theater, with mentally ill men like Sami Osmakac unwitting actors in a carefully choreographed production brought to you by the FBI.
5:29 Thank you.
5:30 (Applause)
5:40 Tom Rielly: So, those are some pretty strong accusations, pretty strong charges. How can you back this up?
5:47 Trevor Aaronson: My research began in 2010 when I received a grant from the Investigative Reporting Program at U.C. Berkeley, and a research assistant and I put together a database of all terrorism prosecutions at the time during the first decade after 9/11. And we used the court file to find out whether the defendants had any connections to international terrorist groups, whether an informant was used, and whether the informant played the role of an agent provocateur by providing the means and opportunity. And we submitted that to the FBI and we asked them to respond to our database. If they believed there were any errors, we asked them to tell us what they were and we’d go back and check and they never challenged any of our findings. Later, I used that data in a magazine article and later in my book, and on appearances on places like CBS and NPR, they were offered that opportunity again to say, “Trevor Aaronson’s findings are wrong.” And they’ve never come forward and said, “These are the problems with those findings.” So the data has since been used by groups like Human Rights Watch on its recent report on these types of sting operations. And so far, the FBI has never really responded to these charges that it’s really not catching terrorists so much as it’s catching mentally ill people that it can dress up as terrorists in these types of sting operations.
6:56 TR: So The Intercept is that new investigative journalism website, that’s cofounded by Glenn Greenwald. Tell us about your article and why there.
7:05 TA: The Intercept seemed to be the most logical place for this because my article is really leveraging the fact that a source had leaked to me transcripts of these private FBI conversations that a federal judge had sealed based on the government’s claim that their release would irreparably damage the U.S. government’s law enforcement strategy. So a place like The Intercept was set up to protect journalists and publish their work when they’re dealing with very sensitive matters like this. So my story in The Intercept, which was just published today, tells the story of how Sami Osmakac was set up in this FBI sting and goes into much greater detail. In this talk, I could only highlight the things that they said, such as calling him a “retarded fool.” But it was much more elaborate, they went to great lengths to put money in Sami Osmakac’s hands, which he then used to purchase weapons from the undercover agent. When he went to trial, the central piece of evidence was that he paid for these weapons, when in truth, these transcripts show how the FBI orchestrated someone who was essentially mentally ill and broke to get money to then pay for weapons that they could then charge him in a conspiracy for.
8:05 TR: One final question. Less than 10 days ago, the FBI arrested some potential ISIS suspects in Brooklyn, saying that they might be headed to Syria, and were those real, or examples of more of the same?
8:18 TA: Well so far, we only know what’s come out in the court file, but they seem to suggest it’s another example of the same. These types of sting operations have moved from flavor to flavor. So initially it was al Qaeda plots, and now the Islamic State is the current flavor. What’s worth noting about that case is that the three men that were charged only began the plot to go to Syria after the introduction of the FBI informant, and in fact, the FBI informant had helped them with the travel documents that they needed. In kind of a comical turn in that particular case, one of the defendant’s mother had found out that he was interested in going to Syria and had hid his passport. So it’s unclear that even if he had showed up at the airport, that he ever could have gone anywhere. So yes, there are people who might be interested in joining the Islamic State in the United States, and those are people that the United States government should be looking at to see if they’re interested in violence here. In this particular case, given the evidence that’s so far come out, it suggests the FBI made it possible for these guys to move along in a plan to go to Syria when they were never close to that in the first place.
9:17 TR: Thanks a lot, that’s amazing. TA: Thank you.
9:19 (Applause)
Anyone can join.
Anyone can contribute.
Anyone can become informed about their world.
"United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.
Please Help Support BeforeitsNews by trying our Natural Health Products below!
Order by Phone at 888-809-8385 or online at https://mitocopper.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST
Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomic.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST
Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomics.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST
Humic & Fulvic Trace Minerals Complex - Nature's most important supplement! Vivid Dreams again!
HNEX HydroNano EXtracellular Water - Improve immune system health and reduce inflammation.
Ultimate Clinical Potency Curcumin - Natural pain relief, reduce inflammation and so much more.
MitoCopper - Bioavailable Copper destroys pathogens and gives you more energy. (See Blood Video)
Oxy Powder - Natural Colon Cleanser! Cleans out toxic buildup with oxygen!
Nascent Iodine - Promotes detoxification, mental focus and thyroid health.
Smart Meter Cover - Reduces Smart Meter radiation by 96%! (See Video).
| Online: | |
| Visits: | 1,599,018,476 |
| Stories: | 8,137,817 |
Whistler Blowers, Insiders
