Thread: Horrible! Islamic Terrorism Not Mentioned in FBI Threat Assessment

#ISIS



How America Made ISIS
Their Videos and Ours, Their “Caliphate” and Ours
byTom Engelhardt

http://www.commondreams.org/views/20...rica-made-isis










How America Made ISIS

Published on

Tuesday, September 02, 2014


by
TomDispatch

How America Made ISIS

Their Videos and Ours, Their “Caliphate” and Ours



by
Tom Engelhardt

ISIS fighters in a truck convoy, pictured on a militant website. (Public domain)

Whatever your politics, you’re not likely to feel great about America right now. After all, there’s Ferguson (the whole world was watching!), an increasingly unpopular president, a Congress whose approval ratings make the president look like a rock star, rising poverty, weakening wages, and a growing inequality gap just to start what could be a long list. Abroad, from Libya and Ukraine to Iraq and the South China Sea, nothing has been coming up roses for the U.S. Polls reflect a general American gloom, with 71% of the public claiming the country is “on the wrong track.” We have the look of a superpower down on our luck.
What Americans have needed is a little pick-me-up to make us feel better, to make us, in fact, feel distinctly good. Certainly, what official Washington has needed in tough times is a bona fide enemy so darn evil, so brutal, so barbaric, so inhuman that, by contrast, we might know just how exceptional, how truly necessary to this planet we really are.
In the nick of time, riding to the rescue comes something new under the sun: the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), recently renamed Islamic State (IS). It’s a group so extreme that even al-Qaeda rejected it, so brutal that it’s brought back crucifixion, beheading, waterboarding, and amputation, so fanatical that it’s ready to persecute any religious group within range of its weapons, so grimly beyond morality that it’s made the beheading of an innocent American a global propaganda phenomenon. If you’ve got a label that’s really, really bad like genocide or ethnic cleansing, you can probably apply it to ISIS's actions.
It has also proven so effective that its relatively modest band of warrior jihadis has routed the Syrian and Iraqi armies, as well as the Kurdish pesh merga militia, taking control of a territory larger than Great Britain in the heart of the Middle East. Today, it rules over at least four million people, controls its own functioning oil fields and refineries (and so their revenues as well as infusions of money from looted banks, kidnapping ransoms, and Gulf state patrons). Despite opposition, it still seems to be expanding and claims it has established a caliphate.
A Force So Evil You’ve Got to Do Something
Facing such pure evil, you may feel a chill of fear, even if you’re a top military or national security official, but in a way you’ve gotta feel good, too. It’s not everyday that you have an enemy your president can term a “cancer”; that your secretary of state can call the “face” of “ugly, savage, inexplicable, nihilistic, and valueless evil” which “must be destroyed”;that your secretary of defense can denounce as “barbaric” and lacking a “standard of decency, of responsible human behavior... an imminent threat to every interest we have, whether it's in Iraq or anywhere else”; that your chairman of the joint chiefs of staff can describe as “an organization that has an apocalyptic, end-of-days strategic vision and which will eventually have to be defeated”; and that a retired general and former commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan can brand a “scourge... beyond the pale of humanity [that]... must be eradicated."
Talk about a feel-good feel-bad situation for the leadership of a superpower that’s seen better days! Such threatening evil calls for only one thing, of course: for the United States to step in. It calls for the Obama administration to dispatch the bombers and drones in a slowly expanding air war in Iraq and, sooner or later, possibly Syria. It falls on Washington’s shoulders to organize a new “coalition of the willing” from among various backers and opponents of the Assad regime in Syria, from among those who have armed and funded the extremist rebels in that country, from the ethnic/religious factions in the former Iraq, and from various NATO countries. It calls for Washington to transform Iraq’s leadership (a process no longer termed “regime change”) and elevate a new man capable of reuniting the Shiites, the Sunnis, and the Kurds, now at each other’s throats, into one nation capable of turning back the extremist tide. If not American “boots on the ground,” it calls for proxy ones of various sorts that the U.S. military will naturally have a hand in training, arming, funding, and advising. Facing such evil, what other options could there be?
If all of this sounds strangely familiar, it should. Minus a couple of invasions, the steps being considered or already in effect to deal with “the threat of ISIS” are a reasonable summary of the last 13 years of what was once called the Global War on Terror and now has no name at all. New as ISIS may be, a little history is in order, since that group is, at least in part, America’s legacy in the Middle East.
Give Osama bin Laden some credit. After all, he helped set us on the path to ISIS. He and his ragged band had no way of creating the caliphate they dreamed of or much of anything else. But he did grasp that goading Washington into something that looked like a crusader’s war with the Muslim world might be an effective way of heading in that direction.
In other words, before Washington brings its military power fully to bear on the new "caliphate," a modest review of the post-9/11 years might be appropriate. Let’s start at the moment when those towers in New York had just come down, thanks to a small group of mostly Saudi hijackers, and almost 3,000 people were dead in the rubble. At that time, it wasn’t hard to convince Americans that there could be nothing worse, in terms of pure evil, than Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda.
Establishing an American Caliphate
Facing such unmatchable evil, the United States officially went to war as it might have against an enemy military power. Under the rubric of the Global War on Terror, the Bush administration launched the unmatchable power of the U.S. military and its paramilitarized intelligence agencies against... well, what? Despite those dramatic videos of al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan, that organization had no military force worth the name, and despite what you’ve seen on “Homeland,” no sleeper cells in the U.S. either; nor did it have the ability to mount follow-up operations any time soon.
In other words, while the Bush administration talked about “draining the swamp” of terror groups in up to 60 countries, the U.S. military was dispatched against what were essentially will-o’-the-wisps, largely representing Washington’s own conjured fears and fantasies. It was, that is, initially sent against bands of largely inconsequential Islamic extremists, scattered in tiny numbers in the tribal backlands of Afghanistan or Pakistan and, of course, the rudimentary armies of the Taliban.
It was, to use a word that George W. Bush let slip only once, something like a "crusade," something close to a religious war, if not against Islam itself -- American officials piously and repeatedly made that clear -- then against the idea of a Muslim enemy, as well as against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and later Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. In each case, Washington mustered a coalition of the willing, ranging from Arab and South or Central Asian states to European ones, sent in air power followed twice by full-scale invasions and occupations, mustered local politicians of our choice in major “nation-building” operations amid much self-promotional talk about democracy, and built up vast new military and security apparatuses, supplying them with billions of dollars in training and arms.
Looking back, it’s hard not to think of all of this as a kind of American jihadism, as well as an attempt to establish what might have been considered an American caliphate in the region (though Washington had far kinder descriptive terms for it). In the process, the U.S. effectively dismantled and destroyed state power in each of the three main countries in which it intervened, while ensuring the destabilization of neighboring countries and finally the region itself.
In that largely Muslim part of the world, the U.S. left a grim record that we in this country generally tend to discount or forget when we decry the barbarism of others. We are now focused in horror on ISIS’s video of the murder of journalist James Foley, a propaganda document clearly designed to drive Washington over the edge and into more active opposition to that group.
We, however, ignore the virtual library of videos and other imagery the U.S. generated, images widely viewed (or heard about and discussed) with no less horror in the Muslim world than ISIS’s imagery is in ours. As a start, there were the infamous “screen saver” images straight out of the Marquis de Sade from Abu Ghraib prison. There, Americans tortured and abused Iraqi prisoners, while creating their own iconic version of crucifixion imagery. Then there were the videos that no one (other than insiders) saw, but that everyone heard about. These, the CIA took of the repeated torture and abuse of al-Qaeda suspects in its “black sites.” In 2005, they were destroyed by an official of that agency, lest they be screened in an American court someday. There was also the Apache helicopter video released by WikiLeaks in which American pilots gunned down Iraqi civilians on the streets of Baghdad (including two Reuters correspondents), while on the sound track the crew are heard wisecracking. There was the video of U.S. troops urinating on the bodies of dead Taliban fighters in Afghanistan. There were the trophy photos of body parts brought home by U.S. soldiers. There were the snuff filmsof the victims of Washington’s drone assassination campaigns in the tribal backlands of the planet (or “bug splat,” as the drone pilots came to call the dead from those attacks) and similar footage from helicopter gunships. There was the bin Laden snuff film video from the raid on Abbottabad, Pakistan, of which President Obama reportedly watched a live feed. And that’s only to begin to account for some of the imagery produced by the U.S. since September 2001 from its various adventures in the Greater Middle East.
All in all, the invasions, the occupations, the drone campaigns in several lands, the deaths that ran into the hundreds of thousands, the uprooting of millions of people sent into external or internal exile, the expending of trillions of dollars added up to a bin Laden dreamscape. They would prove jihadist recruitment tools par excellence.
When the U.S. was done, when it had set off the process that led to insurgencies, civil wars, the growth of extremist militias, and the collapse of state structures, it had also guaranteed the rise of something new on Planet Earth: ISIS -- as well as of other extremist outfits ranging from the Pakistani Taliban, now challenging the state in certain areas of that country, to Ansar al-Sharia in Libya and al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen.
Though the militants of ISIS would undoubtedly be horrified to think so, they are the spawn of Washington. Thirteen years of regional war, occupation, and intervention played a major role in clearing the ground for them. They may be our worst nightmare (thus far), but they are also our legacy -- and not just because so many of their leaders came from the Iraqi army we disbanded, had their beliefs and skills honed in the prisons we set up (Camp Bucca seems to have been the West Point of Iraqi extremism), and gained experience facing U.S. counterterror operations in the “surge” years of the occupation. In fact, just about everything done in the war on terror has facilitated their rise. After all, we dismantled the Iraqi army and rebuilt one that would flee at the first signs of ISIS’s fighters, abandoning vast stores of Washington's weaponry to them. We essentially destroyed the Iraqi state, while fostering a Shia leader who would oppress enough Sunnis in enough ways to create a situation in which ISIS would be welcomed or tolerated throughout significant areas of the country.
The Escalation Follies
When you think about it, from the moment the first bombs began falling on Afghanistan in October 2001 to the present, not a single U.S. military intervention has had anything like its intended effect. Each one has, in time, proven a disaster in its own special way, providing breeding grounds for extremism and producing yet another set of recruitment posters for yet another set of jihadist movements. Looked at in a clear-eyed way, this is what any American military intervention seems to offer such extremist outfits -- and ISIS knows it.
Don’t consider its taunting video of James Foley's execution the irrational act of madmen blindly calling down the destructive force of the planet’s last superpower on themselves. Quite the opposite. Behind it lay rational calculation. ISIS’s leaders surely understood that American air power would hurt them, but they knew as well that, as in an Asian martial art in which the force of an assailant is used against him, Washington’s full-scale involvement would also infuse their movement with greater power. (This was Osama bin Laden’s most original insight.)
It would give ISIS the ultimate enemy, which means the ultimate street cred in its world. It would bring with it the memories of all those past interventions, all those snuff videos and horrifying images. It would help inflame and so attract more members and fighters. It would give the ultimate raison d'être to a minority religious movement that might otherwise prove less than cohesive and, in the long run, quite vulnerable. It would give that movement global bragging rights into the distant future.
ISIS’s urge was undoubtedly to bait the Obama administration into a significant intervention. And in that, it may prove successful. We are now, after all, watching a familiar version of the escalation follies at work in Washington. Obama and his top officials are clearly on the up escalator. In the Oval Office is a visibly reluctant president, who undoubtedly desires neither to intervene in a major way in Iraq (from which he proudly withdrew American troops in 2011 with their “heads held high”), nor in Syria (a place where he avoided sending in the bombers and missiles back in 2013).
Unlike the previous president and his top officials, who were all confidence and overarching plans for creating a Pax Americana across the Greater Middle East, this one and his foreign policy team came into office intent on managing an inherited global situation. President Obama’s only plan, such as it was, was to get out of the Iraq War (along lines already established by the Bush administration). It was perhaps a telltale sign then that, in order to do so, he felt he had to “surge” American troops into Afghanistan. Five and a half years later, he and his key officials still seem essentially plan-less, a set of now-desperate managers engaged in a seat-of-the-pants struggle over a destabilizing Greater Middle East (and increasingly Africa and the borderlands of Europe as well).
Five and a half years later, the president is once again under pressure and being criticized by assorted neocons, McCainites, and this time, it seems, the military high command evidently eager to be set loose yet one more time to take out barbarism globally -- that is, to up the ante on a losing hand. As in 2009, so today, he’s slowly but surely giving ground. By now, the process of “mission creep” -- a term strongly rejected by the Obama administration -- is well underway.
It started slowly with the collapse of the U.S.-trained and U.S.-supplied Iraqi army in Mosul and other northern Iraqi cities in the face of attacks by ISIS. In mid-June, the aircraft carrier USS H.W. Bush with more than 100 planes was dispatched to the Persian Gulf and the president sent in hundreds of troops, including Special Forces advisers (though officially no “boots" were to be "on the ground”). He also agreed to drone and other air surveillance of the regions ISIS had taken, clearly preparation for future bombing campaigns. All of this was happening before the fate of the Yazidis -- a small religious sect whose communities in northern Iraq were brutally destroyed by ISIS fighters -- officially triggered the commencement of a limited bombing campaign suitable to a “humanitarian crisis.”
When ISIS, bolstered by U.S. heavy weaponry captured from the Iraqi military, began to crush the Kurdish pesh merga militia, threatening the capital of the Kurdish region of Iraq and taking the enormous Mosul Dam, the bombing widened. More troops and advisers were sent in, and weaponry began to flow to the Kurds, with promises of all of the above further south once a new unity government was formed in Baghdad. The president explained this bombing expansion by citing the threat of ISIS blowing up the Mosul Dam and flooding downriver communities, thus supposedly endangering the U.S. Embassy in distant Baghdad. (This was a lame cover story because ISIS would have had to flood parts of its own “caliphate” in the process.)
The beheading video then provided the pretext for the possible bombing of Syria to be put on the agenda. And once again a reluctant president, slowly giving way, has authorized drone surveillance flights over parts of Syria in preparation for possible bombing strikes that may not be long in coming.
The Incrementalism of the Reluctant
Consider this the incrementalism of the reluctant under the usual pressures of a militarized Washington eager to let loose the dogs of war. One place all of this is heading is into a morass of bizarre contradictions involving Syrian politics. Any bombing of that country will necessarily involve implicit, if not explicit, support for the murderous regime of Bashar al-Assad, as well as for the barely existing “moderate” rebels who oppose his regime and to whom Washington may now ship more arms. This, in turn, could mean indirectly delivering yet more weaponry to ISIS. Add everything up and at the moment Washington seems to be on the path that ISIS has laid out for it.
Americans prefer to believe that all problems have solutions. There may, however, be no obvious or at least immediate solution when it comes to ISIS, an organization based on exclusivity and divisiveness in a region that couldn’t be more divided. On the other hand, as a minority movement that has already alienated so many in the region, left to itself it might with time simply burn out or implode. We don’t know. We can’t know. But we do have reasonable evidence from the past 13 years of what an escalating American military intervention is likely to do: not whatever it is that Washington wants it to do.
And keep one thing in mind: if the U.S. were truly capable of destroying or crushing ISIS, as our secretary of state and others are urging, that might prove to be anything but a boon. After all, it was easy enough to think, as Americans did after 9/11, that al-Qaeda was the worst the world of Islamic extremism had to offer. Osama bin Laden's killing was presented to us as an ultimate triumph over Islamic terror. But ISIS lives and breathes and grows, and across the Greater Middle East Islamic extremist organizations are gaining membership and traction in ways that should illuminate just what the war on terror has really delivered. The fact that we can’t now imagine what might be worse than ISIS means nothing, given that no one in our world could imagine ISIS before it sprang into being.
The American record in these last 13 years is a shameful one. Do it again should not be an option.



© 2014 TomDispatch.com






Tom Engelhardt, co-founder of the American Empire Project, runs the Nation Institute's TomDispatch.com. His latest book, co-authored with Nick Turse, is Terminator Planet: The First History of Drone Warfare, 2001-2050. His other most recent book is The United States of Fear (Haymarket Books). Previous books include: The End of Victory Culture: a History of the Cold War and Beyond, The American Way of War: How Bush's Wars Became Obama's, as well as of a novel, The Last Days of Publishing. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/20...rica-made-isis

Muslim Family Tree: Woman Raped by Father-in-Law - Clerics Rule Her Husband is Now Her Son


Dean Garrison 15 hours ago


What a very sick world we live in. How can a father disrespect his own son so much as to covet his wife? Furthermore, since the feeling is not mutual, what Father would go so far as to rape his own daughter-in-law and do it multiple times?

People keep making excuses for Islam and preach their politically correct tolerance but they fail to look at what is going on around them. This is not the religion of peace. It is the religion of pieces.
Not only did this man rape his son's wife, but the local clerics have ordered that the victim must now act as the wife of a man who raped her multiple times, at gunpoint, while she treats her own husband as a son. This is not from one of those 98% Muslim states either. This happened in India which is roughly 80% Hindu. This is another case of the Muslim minority trying to take over. How's that working out in Minnesota?
IndiaTVNews reports:
New Delhi: In a chilling reminder of the Imrana case, yet another young woman from Muzaffarnagar who allegedly fell victim to her father-in-law's sexual assault faces a bleak future after mullahs declared that the husband of the victim will be treated as her son.

The 28-year-old victim alleged that her husband has been working in Dubai for the last two years and her father-in-law has been sexually assaulting her at gun point since 2013.

She remained silent because he used to threaten to kill her. He also video recorded his act and threatened to make it public if she opened her mouth.

When she told her husband about it, he blamed her for making a false allegation against his father.

When she finally told her parents, they suggested her to take legal action against her rapist father-in-law.

She created ruffles in the local administration and the Muslim community on Thursday by moving an application before District Magistrate Kaushal Raj Sharma to arrest her father-in-law and allow her to abort her seven-month pregnancy.

After the application by the victim, clerics jumped into the case and declared that the husband of the victim will be treated as her son.

This woman is now just another piece of Muslim meat to be passed around.
There you have it. This is what is known as Islamic justice. This is sharia law. This is sick and it is not compatible with the American way of life. Justify this with hugs and compassion all you want because they will be coming to rape your daughters and cut off your heads.
These things will happen more and more here unless Americans wake up. What is going on in Britain is a perfect example. Yesterday, an elderly woman was beheaded in her own garden by a Muslim man. Local authorities are slow to call it a terrorist act. The man was running around with a machete for Pete's sake. He was just looking to take someone's head. But that is what is going on in the U.K. They keep making excuses and pretending the problem is not real.

It sounds a lot like America.
So where does America go from here? States that pass anti-sharia laws have them overturned by judges and get fined in the process. The Obama administration is letting more and more of these idiots in through immigration policies and failure to secure the border.
Joe Biden says that he will follow ISIS to the gates of hell. Why would he have to when he and his boss are leaving the front door wide open for them?
We are hearing of various terrorist threats and that ISIS is operating right across the border. Yet a guy dressed as an ISIS fighter carries a fake human head right across the border and there is nothing to stop him from doing so. Welcome to America.
I don't know what is real and what is not anymore. A republican is now pushing to make Obama a dictator and eliminate the War Powers Act.
In all of this confusion, when so few seem to be on your side, I think it is important to keep things simple.
Make sure you have guns and ammo because none of us really know what evils might be coming our way.
We will not submit to this. This does not belong in America any more than it belongs in India, or anywhere else.
This cannot become common place in America. You cannot remain complacent any longer. The fight is coming to you and you can no longer hide from it.
Be ready.
Source

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.



Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/09/mu...wkHIzjOH3cF.99


What part of sick makes this any kind of life that deserves respect from anyone in the world.....

#ISIS: #Allah LOVES #Bacon!



Published on Sep 5, 2014
#ISIS: #Allah LOVES #Bacon
Oh yes I have no doubt that completely insults Islamic Jihadists, but guess what... I could care less!

Call me an Infidel. I don't mind. ISIS doesn't scare Me.
What does frighten Me is the masses of people falling once again for the propaganda of the

Mainstream Media as they bang the Drums of War! DOES ANYONE REMEMBER AL QAEDA? Oh

yeah, they "good guys" now right? Its time for people to wake the hell up and get out of the damn

bed.
========================
contact The Anonymous Patriot by calling
480-420-8743
(leave a message after the beep)
========================
Follow The Anonymous Patriot on Twitter:
http://bit.ly/1pwyjN1

On Facebook:
The Anonymous Patriot Facebook Page:
http://on.fb.me/1t2u6Qd

Visit The Anonymous Patriot Blog:
http://theanonymouspatriot.wordpress.com

The Anonymous Patriot Contact Email:
murinarpanterac03@gmail

Contact The Anonymous Patriot on ZELLO 2-way:
user name Anonymous0407
===========================
:::NOTICE TO TROLLS, SHILLS, AND THE MHC:::
The Anonymous Patriot (0407) reserves the RIGHT to ban "trolls, shills, and general assholes" from

The Anonymous Patriot Youtube Channel, if required. 0407 also reserves the right to block such

individuals from his Facebook and Twitter social media accounts.
Any voice mails left at Google Phone are recorded and downloadable, and 0407 reserves the right to

use such voice recordings in videos.
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED
===========================

Anything to get us into war, a media hoax by the industrial military complex. Wake Up America!!!!!

"Volunteer" for USAID
Was US victim James Foley a Spy?



Look, USAID - which is a covert arm of the CIA - has more money than god.

The idea that anyone would "volunteer" to work for them is ludicrous.

Why would "journalist" "volunteer" to help USAID.

Here's a theory: James Foley knew too much and needed to be gotten rid of.

What better way to get rid of him than to hand him over to ISIS, a group you funded, armed and trained to behead him publicly to create a hysteria in the US to justify the re-igniting of war in Iraq?

===================
BrasscheckTV Report
===================

More than meets the eye

A US journalist was captured
and executed by ISIS.

The story gets a little more
complicated when you discover
the origins of ISIS and the
journalist's "volunteer" work
for the CIA front USAID.

Video:

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/27157.html

- Brasscheck TV

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV with your
friends and colleagues.

Son of Imam to Obama: “Mr. President, You Are Wrong, ISIS/ISIL/IS Does, in Fact, Represent Islam in Every Way”

Dean Garrison 2 hours ago
0 Comments

Brother Rachid is a former Muslim who grew up in Morocco and, despite living in a "moderate" Muslim country, was taught to hate Jews and Christians. Last week Brother Rachid went on record to clear up the misconceptions (I call it blatant propaganda) that those like Barack Obama and John Kerry would seem to have about Islam.

Video Description:

Brother Rachid addresses President Obama about ISIL and Islam; he explains to him how ISIL is imitating the prophet Muhammad in every detail they do. ISIL represents Islam.

A Message to President Obama from a former Muslim



Yesterday we published a Daniel Greenfield article that was outstanding. Greenfield pointed out that "moderate Islam" is not something that Muslims believe. It is simply a fabrication of the leftists who desperately want to believe, or maybe want everyone else to believe, that Muslims are as interested as multiculturalism as they are.


This is not at all true.
It is simply a dangerous fantasy that will leave many being slaughtered by the same people they stick up for, just like James Foley.
Source
Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.
You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/09/so...TTwexx6Yf2I.99

Obama’s Long ISIS War: It Will Take Years and Kill Thousands


Continuation of "creative destruction" under the war on terror banner

by Kurt Nimmo | Infowars.com | September 8, 2014

The New York Times, long the preferred conduit for war propaganda, has laid out Obama’s plan to defeat ISIS, aka the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.




The administration warns the effort will take years to complete and continue after Obama has left office. The first phase a sustained air campaign will, the Times claims, roll back ISIS gains in northern and western Iraq. Details on how this will work minus ground troops is not explained.
Next, the United States will shuffle around the government in Iraq to make it “more inclusive.” This is total blue sky.

Following the U.S. invasion and the toppling and eventual execution of strongman and former CIA operative Saddam Hussein, Iraq predictably descended into sectarian violence. This was planned. “What is unfolding is a process of ‘constructive chaos,’ engineered by the West,” writes Julie Lévesque. “The destabilization of Iraq and its fragmentation has been planned long ago and is part of the “Anglo-American-Israeli ‘military road map’ in the Middle East,” an effort introduced during the Bush administration and coined the “New Middle East” by then U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
The final element of Obama’s supposed plan to deal with ISIS calls for a de facto invasion of Syria. The Pentagon estimates this part of the plan will take at least 36 months.
Of course, the Pentagon is notorious for issuing such off the wall figures. Back in 2002, as the U.S. prepared for an invasion of Iraq — ultimate death toll, over a million people — then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declared the invasion would be mercifully short. “The idea that it’s going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990,” he said, making a reference to the previous invasion of Iraq. “Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn’t going to last any longer than that,” he said. “It won’t be a World War III.”
Following the official timeline the Iraq War lasted nearly nine years, making it the third longest war in U.S. history. The War in Afghanistan lasted just over 13 years and the Vietnam War nearly 11. By contrast, U.S. participation in the Second World War ended after 3.7 years.
The U.S. admits the obviously unworkable plan to get rid of ISIS is unprecedented.
From the Times:

The military campaign Mr. Obama is preparing has no obvious precedent. Unlike American counterterrorism operations in Yemen and Pakistan, it is not expected to be limited to drone strikes against militant leaders. Unlike the war in Afghanistan, it will not include the use of ground troops, which Mr. Obama has ruled out.
Unlike the Kosovo war that President Bill Clinton and NATO nations waged in 1999, it will not be compressed into an intensive 78-day tactical and strategic air campaign. And unlike during the air campaign that toppled the Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, in 2011, the Obama administration is no longer “leading from behind,” but plans to play the central role in building a coalition to counter ISIS.

Like the so-called “Kosovo war” and the first Iraq invasion, the war against ISIS, an enemy created by the United States and its partners in the Middle East, will be a war against civilians.
ISIS Will Live to Fight Another Day

Faced with U.S. air power and sustained bombing raids, ISIS will melt back into the civilian population. “A Reuters examination of three weeks of U.S. air strikes reveals significant changes in the way the ISIS operates since the U.S. joined the struggle against them, with fewer militants on the streets of Mosul the clearest sign,” Isabel Coles and Peter Apps reported for Reuters last week.
“ISIS cannot hide the heavy equipment it captured (like howitzers, trucks and tanks) if it uses them in battle, and it can’t hide them or protect them from attack unless perhaps it brings them into populated areas,” notes Michael S. Rozeff. “ISIS is also spread thin and vulnerable to an opposition force that relies on maneuverability and operational initiative. These weaknesses suggest that ISIS will pull in its horns for a while and go back to hit and run truck bomb tactics. This means that a conventional victory against ISIS won’t be possible… ISIS cannot be defeated militarily as Obama’s rhetoric suggests.”
The U.S. ran out of military targets within the first few days of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It then concentrated on civilian infrastucutre and so-called “dual-use” targets — electrical power, media, and telecommunications installations. The targeting of civilian infrastructure was more extensive during the first Iraq invasion and included a wide range of civilian targets from electric power generation and water treatment to food processing and distribution facilities and markets and even historical sites.
A Continuation of “Creative Destruction” in the Middle East

Reducing nations to failed state status is a specialty of the U.S. military and the process of “constructive chaos” will continue and likely be amplified during the ISIS phase of the clash of civilizations war.
In addition to further balkanizing Iraq along religious and sectarian lines, the ISIS war will strive to take down the al-Assad government in Syria and import balkanization and, through poverty and thirdworldization, finlandization (pacification).
The ultimate objective was outlined by the World Tribunal on Iraq. Its conclusions, reached in 2005, were ignored by the war propaganda media, including The New York Times. The tribunal argued from Istanbul that the U.S. and its partners had engaged
“…in policies to wage permanent war on sovereign nations. Syria and Iran have already been declared as potential targets. In declaring a ‘global war on terror,’ the US government has given itself the exclusive right to use aggressive military force against any target of its choosing. Ethnic and religious hostilities are being fueled in different parts of the world.”

http://www.infowars.com/obamas-long-...ill-thousands/

Can ISIS Enter America Through Canada?

SEP 08, 2014

Last month I crossed the border dressed as Osama bin Laden. Today we released a follow-up investigation.
It was so easy to cross into the United States from Mexico, we began asking questions about the Northern border. After all, British intelligence believes more than 500 British citizens have joined ISIS, and British citizens can enter Canada without a visa.
Frankly, we were disheartened by what we found. Watch for yourself.


"ISIS terrorist" crosses Canadian border on Lake Erie into the United States
veritasvisuals


Published on Sep 8, 2014
ORDER Breakthrough by James O'Keefe -- Now out in Paperback! http://goo.gl/fgUuKO. In a Project Veritas investigation released Monday, James O’Keefe exposed the lack of security along our border with Canada. In the follow-up to the investigation that featured O’Keefe crossing the Rio Grande disguised as Osama bin Laden, the latest investigation illustrates the lack of border security by simulating a terrorist infiltration across Lake Erie and into Cleveland.

https://www.projectveritas.com/can-i...merica-canada/

TheAmericanPatriotNation

Shared publicly - Yesterday 3:45 PM
#ISIS

BREAKING: Government Leak Reveals ISIS Is In Mexico And Preparing For Attack On U.S.

Read more at http://threepercenternation.com/2014/09/isis-el-paso-2/


BREAKING: Government Leak Reveals ISIS Is In Mexico And Preparing For Attack On U.S.
threepercenternation.com
“It’s coming very soon…” By B. Christopher Agee B. CHRISTOPHER AGEE, Western Journalism According to Judicial Watch, Ciudad Juarez, Mexico is serving as a base for Islamic terrorists planning an imminent threat against the United States.

BREAKING: Government Leak Reveals ISIS Is In Mexico And Preparing For Attack On U.S.

Posted by Thomas Madison / September 8, 2014


“It’s coming very soon…”


By B. Christopher Agee B. CHRISTOPHER AGEE, Western Journalism
According to Judicial Watch, Ciudad Juarez, Mexico is serving as a base for Islamic terrorists planning an imminent threat against the United States.

Although few specifics are available, sources cited by the site indicate that militants are “planning to attack the United States with car bombs or other vehicle born improvised explosive devices (VBIED).”

Federal intelligence officials from multiple agencies are reportedly on alert regarding the threat.

“It’s coming very soon,” one source confirmed, adding that intelligence points to the possibility that terror organizations ISIS and al Qaeda could be involved in “an attack on the border.”

A leaked document published by Breitbart confirms that agents tasked with securing the Mexican border have received such alerts and are taking the warnings seriously.

Recent events have shown that the threat posed by Middle Eastern terrorists is not confined to that region as American citizens have been captured and murdered in Syria. Meanwhile, the domestic issue of securing our southern border and enforcing immigration laws continues to be a high priority for Americans worried about the threat to our safety and sovereignty as a nation.

These two concerns seem to have collided in what is now being described as an imminent threat by Islamic terrorists positioned near the U.S.-Mexico border.

Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/u-s...e3fo38Xsilx.99

Okay so where on the border shouldn't American's know that, I'm just say'in????