When the first ISIS 'beheading' video was released I was immediately struck by how utterly counter-productive it was for the 'Islamic State' to produce a glossy, high-definition video of the event and make it available to Western audiences. If the goal of such a dubious PR campaign was to intimidate the anglo-American Empire into backing off from attacking the alleged Levantine 'rebels', then it failed miserably.

What's most amazing however is that the IS leadership were unable to foresee that lopping the heads off US and UK citizens and producing a made for TV video of the gruesome spectacle would simply gift the anglo-American Empire builders with the justification to launch a bombing campaign against the video makers. I mean, how politically ignorant do you have to be to not realise that? Did they learn nothing from the 9/11 attacks? Western civilian casualties are the US military industrial complex's bread and butter! They use Western civilian casualties of Arab terrorism to justify the invasion and occupation of the Arab countries that the erstwhile Arab terrorists are trying to rid of US occupation!

Even the kids in the schoolyard know it's a bad idea to kick the bully in the shins, he'll just turn around and knock your head off. It's definitely an unequal exchange. So why would anyone in their right mind pursue such a strategy? I'm assuming that the leaders of ISIL are 'in their right minds' because they've shown themselves perspicacious and able enough to mount a successful blitzkrieg through northern Iraq. You don't do that without being somewhat proficient in military strategy. Seems to me we need to look for an alternative narrative about what the role of ISIL really is.

The first idea that springs to mind is an obvious one. The US and UK governments in particular want to remove Assad. Last year they were prevented from doing so by the diplomatic efforts of Russia. Included in those efforts was a warning that an attack on Syria would be no 'cake-walk' because of Russian and Iranian support (military and other) for Syria's political integrity, and the lack of direct overt involvement by Gulf monarchies in such an attack.

The US backed off, but only temporarily. The Gulf monarchies desire stability, both for their reign and the market for the primary source of their wealth - oil. They are mainly concerned therefore with their own survival and who can best ensure it. All Gulf monarchies owe their existence to Western imperialist gerrymandering of borders in the aftermath of WW1, so the monarchs allegiance has, until now, been with their progenitors.


This game is getting boring...
Since the 1980's, US military involvement in S.E. Eurasia has been for the express purpose of preventing Eurasian integration. The Taliban were armed and trained in Afghanistan to prevent the Soviets from forming strategic alliances in the oil and mineral rich 'Middle East' region. The 9/11 attacks were used to justify the direct invasion and occupation of the same region for the very same reason, except this time it was a significantly more potent Putin's Russia that was the target. It's always been about Russia, its location, size and resources is a natural threat to the hegemony of the anglo-American empire.

Iraq was secured as a result of the 10 year occupation. But by the time most US troops left in 2011, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Shia dominated government had already been snuggling up to Iran. Under Maliki, Iraq supported Iran, Iran supports Syria. Syria supports Hizb'allah, Hizb'allah supports the Palestinians, and Russia directly and indirectly supports all five. Israel is not happy and thinks the best approach is to take out the middle, i.e. Iran, hence the hilarious sabre-rattling over the past 10 years from the Jewish State In the Levant (JSIL) about Iran's program to 'get the bomb' in order to annihilate the Jews. The anglo-American empire is not happy either.

In June this year, Iran-ophile Maliki was told to step down by Obama (yaay democracy!). He did so, and was replaced by another 'Iraqi exile' Haider al-Abadi. Like Maliki, al-Abadi is a Shia. From the early 1980s until 2003, both had been in exile from Saddam's Iraq. Maliki was exiled in Iran and Syria, al-Abadi, on the other hand, spent his 20 years in the bosom of the anglo-American empire, servicing the lifts at BBC HQ in London. All Iraqi Shia politicians are not equal obviously, and the anglo-American Imperialists are expecting al-Abadi to pay back the nation that took him in all those years ago. But politics is a dirty business, and nothing is certain, especially with a resurgent Russia already in the game.


Gulf state 'royals' - fond of a bit of head chopping
Russia likes the 'Middle East' (S.E. Eurasia) just as it is. It can do a lot of business there, it's right in its back yard. For this reason, the anglo-American empire fears Russia and has always done so. The Gulf monarchies don't really care who the global mob boss is, they have no ideological convictions in that regard, just as long as the boss has the political, economic and military clout to maintain his position, and theirs. Western powers realise this and are desperate to maintain the allegiance of the monarchies and therefore Western control over the Middle East.

Their strategy to achieve this is with a carrot and a stick rather than a carrot on a stick. ISIL is the stick, it could easily be used to push for 'regime change' in the monarchies. The carrot is the promise of another 100 years of Western-backed rule, if they quit their prevaricating and sign up in full to the anti-Russia/Iran/Syria alliance. The monarchies are currently in the position of having to bet on what the outcome of the renewed great game between Russia and the West will be. So far, they're being swayed by the formidable military prowess of the USA, but they're taking note of the Russo-Chinese alliance, Russia's major weapons sales to Iraq, Egypt, Iran, Syria, not to mention oil deals with all of the above.

So to get back to the point (apologies for digressing, but the whole situation is a bit complex); ISIS - made up of a diverse gang of fighters provided by or poached from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iraq, Libya and Syria, trained, armed and funded by the CIA and the Gulf monarchies - is used as a proxy army to take down Assad, isolate Iran and therefore Russia, and restore 'order' in Iraq in the form of a Western (i.e. not Iranian) aligned government. But as the plan progressed, it became obvious that ISIS couldn't do it all by themselves, not with Russia supporting Assad and muscling in on Middle Eastern politics.

Help was needed from the mob boss in Washington, but, as always, the home guard had to be convinced that Middle East invasion part three was necessary, and as everyone knows, 'useless eaters' are most effectively manipulated by fear. Hence the 'beheadings' brought to you by IStm and that mysterious organisation known as Site (Search for International Terrorist Entities Intelligence Group) run by a committed Zionist and daughter of an ex-Israeli spy in Iraq.


Rita Katz - at the cutting edge of ISIL videos
Funded by various US federal agencies, Site is dedicated to "monitoring Islamic extremist websites and exposing terrorist front groups" and released the obviously fake 2007 bin Laden video "before al-qaeda could" (pretty impressive!).

Most recently, Site has been releasing the IS 'beheading' videos. Katz is on record as saying that she finds the 'beheading' videos online and releases them (to the US media) and "within a short time after our release ISIL's account on social media indicated that they will be releasing the video only we had that video beforehand and were able to beat them with the release". Is it just me or does that make it sound like Katz is essentially a promoter of ISIL's beheading videos with the goal of beating ISIL to the punch? Why doesn't she just pass details of the offending web sites and videos to the NSA and have them take the sites down and destroy the videos? If ISIL is making these videos as part of a 'propaganda war' against the West, doesn't it make sense to thwart their intentions in that respect?

Katz and her activities are certainly strange, especially in light of British PM David Cameron's closing speech at the 69th session of the United Nations General Assembly last week, where he said:
"We must work together to take down illegal online material like the recent videos of ISIL murdering hostages."
Maybe someone should give him Katz's phone number? Wouldn't Western audiences be happier if they knew nothing about the 'beheadings' of their fellow citizens? Surely they could do without Katz offering them the evidence in full HD on the internet?

One other point made by Cameron at the UN caught my eye:
"As evidence emerges about the backgrounds of those convicted of terrorist offences, it is clear that many of them were initially influenced by preachers who claim not to encourage violence, but whose world view can be used as a justification for it. We know this world view.

The peddling of lies: that 9/11 was a Jewish plot or that the 7/7 London attacks were staged. The idea that Muslims are persecuted all over the world as a deliberate act of Western policy. The concept of an inevitable clash of civilisations"
Apart from terrorists like me who question 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings, if Dave has a problem with the concept of the inevitable clash of civilizations, he really should address his concerns to the ideological descendants of US political scientist and White House Coordinator of Security Planning for the NSC in the

Found him! He's in Qatar! You can invade now!...
Carter administration, Samuel P. Huntington, for it was he who proposed the 'Clash of Civilizations' in a 1992 lecture at the American Enterprise Institute, which was then developed in a 1993 Foreign Affairs article titled "The Clash of Civilizations?".

And if Dave and his US masters really want to deal with the "mortal threat we all face from the rise of ISIL" maybe they should focus on the leaders of such groups and the states that harbor and fund them. After all, Afghanistan was 'harboring' bin Laden and 'we' invaded to 'get him', right? Well it just so happens that there's a 'Jihadi' of note who is not only financing ISIL in Iraq and Syria, but is responsible for bankrolling nothing less than the 9/11 attacks! He's gotta be a high value target, right? Well, sort of. Like the 7 alleged 9/11 hijackers of Saudi origin, this guy is from Qatar and, like the Saudis, the Qatari government doesn't have too much of a problem with America's most wanted 'Mooslim t'rrrists'. In fact, they give them lenient prison sentences and then let them go, with money, and weapons.
According to the official US report issued in 2008, al-Subaiy was identified as "a Qatar-based terrorist financier and facilitator who has provided financial support to, and acted on behalf of, al-Qaeda senior leadership, including senior al-Qaeda leader Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) prior to KSM's capture in March 2003".

"The scope of Qatar-based terrorist fundraising is astonishing," said Dr Weinberg, "According to current US officials, tiny Qatar has displaced its much bigger neighbour Saudi Arabia as the number one source of private donations to Isil and other violent extremists in Syria and Iraq."

Dr Weinberg added: "Qatar has a long history of turning a blind eye to backers of al-Qaeda in its midst. Now the Qataris are repeating history all over again, refusing to arrest blacklisted terror financiers right under their noses. The known al-Qaeda funders whom they let out of jail have gone on to become some of terrorism's top moneymen, boosting Isil, Khorasan, and other al-Qaeda linked groups."
So, when can we expect Qatar and Saudi Arabia to be shocked and awed and occupied in the name of the war on terror? Right after the US gets the final remittance of that $60 billion arms deal they made with head-choppers Я Us.

So, you get the picture. Big Lies, massive manipulations and unbelievable insanity reign supreme in our world run by psychopaths, and while Western citizens are being either terrified or turned off by ISIL head chopping, our planet is in a state of geological and climate chaos, and no one seems to be noticing.