It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

5 overlooked Questions we SHOULD be asking about ISIS/ISIL/IS...

page: 2
50
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   
People will always find a way to beat the system... The same way prisoners get phones and drugs into high security prisons... I get what your all saying but at the same time don't think tptb are as smart or power full as people think or make out...
There are 7 billion people on this planet they can't watch all of them..




posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: thesmokingman

I completely agree with you and nothing to add to your op!

As a footnote though on CNN this morning they were discussing what name we should really be calling this group, how precious. They went back and forth over the few choices saying the usual rhetoric; they are not Islam, they are not a state, yada yada yada but then they turned to France of all places to congratulate them for a perfect choice for a name.

"Daese Cutthroats" (probably spelled it wrong)

I watched the entire news crew joking and laughing stating on about how much ISIL will cut the tongues off anyone that breathes this name in their presence and they are finally glad they have a way to 'get' to them psychologically. They even went as far to state France should get an award for this.
Yes, I turned off the TV at that point!

Unfortunately that action by CNN does not surprise me...they need to do ANYTHING they can to boost those ratings. If it were not for the propaganda they spew for the US, they would have been off the air long ago.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman

1. They control a large region the size of Israel in between both Syria and Iraq. They have offered drone strikes, they have done some drone strikes, but are waiting on someone to take up the cause with them.

2. The NSA is an intelligence gathering agency, they rarely use their services for anything beyond gathering intelligence. Some of which is not always reliable if there are measures to provide false information.

That being said, they probably have a large file on them, not to say that everything IS does is online though. They found computers with an encrypted information packets and others that were not encrypted which had massive databases. Not everything they have will be connected online.

3. IS is using smuggling networks which were in place beforehand. Cash deals, smuggling trade routes, it's quite easy for them to do business up to a certain point. They will have trouble if they get any bigger but at the relatively small operation with oil they currently have they can get something out of it.

So far the listed problems for IS with their oil is: They have no one to maintain or properly work the operations they've taken over. They can't sell it on the open market. They have no one to replace people in key positions.

4. Meh, I was one of the first people to post on the forum how convenient IS is as a US boogeyman. But at the same time they fill a certain need of fundamentals for Islam in the ME that is well received by some.

5. IS is focused on building a Caliphate, Israel is a future problem for them not a current one. And Israel has their own problems to focus on.

Keep in mind IS grew rather quickly, the attention they are receiving now is because of how fast they grew, but technically they haven't gone far enough to illicit as much attention as their future plans will get.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: misscurious
People will always find a way to beat the system... The same way prisoners get phones and drugs into high security prisons... I get what your all saying but at the same time don't think tptb are as smart or power full as people think or make out...
There are 7 billion people on this planet they can't watch all of them..

I appreciate your reply, however, I will disagree. The USA is several years ahead of the times on most everything that happens. This is a corrupt country being ruled by the world banking system, and the US is a puppet of Saudi Arabia,(all about the petro dollar). The goal is total world domination...Once we get the middle east out of the way, its on to Russia and China. The US is weeding out any possible allies that would stand in their way. This is a very smart country, to raise to the most powerful country, all while being the YOUNGEST country on earth. Their power and reach are something that cn never and will never be stopped....and quite frankly that scares the hell out of me.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Regarding Israel I have been thinking the same thing. ISIS seems hell-bent on destroying America, when Israel is right up the road, a lot closer than the US. I just figured that perhaps ISIS will not attempt anything where Israel is concerned until they've solidified their power in Iraq and Syria, which is the right move, but another potential explanation is western involvement. I will not say I believe it is true at this point, but is a possibility.

Regarding US systems such as drones and spy satellites, these types of technologies are highly localized. For instance, a drone pilot cannot readily identify a person, and they are not going to just shoot everybody. And even a drone would have to fly around a lot to even identify a possible target, and there would have to be many, many drones to get meaningful results that justify the cost and expenditure of resources. Usually the drones go in, acting on intelligence information, and bomb a specific target. They also worked with troops on the ground when the troops would are engaged or could identify target locations or areas. And besides, drones are more effective at going after strategically important targets rather than being used to annihilate enemy forces. It is just not feasible to use drones in the latter sense, especially without intelligence information. Instead, they are better used for attacking high value targets, leadership, etc., again based on intelligence.

And even pilots have to get permission to engage. There are just so many factors to consider. And with satellites and drones there are not enough of them to watch everything all the time. Satellites are used for intelligence gathering. They can specifically look at an area of interest, or an analyst can look at what the satellite saw on an earlier pass, looking for targets and anomalies or any other information that can be acted on in the near future. So they cannot feasibly use them to track every potential member of ISIS, or even the leadership. It just doesn't work that way.

Using phones and stuff is more feasible, at which point you can bomb targets where ISIS leadership are located, but I imagine that processing the vast amounts of information is one of the problems. Another problem is actually identifying such people, and what phones they're using. And if they use multiple phones it gets more difficult. They can use methods like voice matching and whatnot, but this requires time and effort, and you have to have info to go on in the first place. All methods require resources and personnel as well. And we don't even know if the US can intercept all cell signals in Iraq or Syria. The ISIS leadership is probably not in Iraq in my opinion, where the US has more control and freedom of action. So without knowing the US's ability to collect electronic communications in Iraq and Syria, which probably have sparse cell coverage anyway, I cannot accurately determine why they may or may not use such methods. I would also expect ISIS to behave sort of like Bin Laden did.

The use of phones was not widespread at all. Rather, go-betweens would use phones within a city, well away from the area of operations in most instances, and there would barely be any people using phones. Rather the comms were done in person or between couriers of information. That is a simple way to bypass the US's sophisticated systems for electronic interception. I would also expect them to use radios for shorter distance communications, or battlefield comms. Obviously this would allow interception of such transmissions on the battlefield, which is why militaries encrypt such communications, and ISIS probably does this as well. It is not that difficult, and the necessary information can be taught to those who need to know the information.

So even though it sounds counter-intuitive, the US doesn't have enough intelligence to use these particular intelligence-gathering and combat assets. That is my take on it anyway, in a broad sense. Such methods definitely could prove useful in certain contexts, but where eliminating ISIS is concerned such methods are only tools to help the situation along in certain ways, rather than actually being the main tools. I mean we couldn't use such technology to defeat Al Qaeda either, and they were not as sophisticated as ISIS in terms of communications, encryption, or anything really. And they have more resources in general, and you can bet they've learned from the war on terror as well, and will not make any mistakes that Al Qaeda made.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: boncho




Keep in mind IS grew rather quickly, the attention they are receiving now is because of how fast they grew, but technically they haven't gone far enough to illicit as much attention as their future plans will get.

You dont believe they grew rather quickly due to the MSM, mainly CNN(the governments propaganda machine), shoving it down our throats 23 hours a day? Funny how the number so quickly grew from about 3 or 4,000, to last I heard 30, 40,000. If this were a credible threat to the US, not a single person would be able to land a flight to Iraq OR Syria without an extensive screening. Seems to me, they keep trying to make it seem like the "cool" thing to do for young, angry people, to entrap themselves trying to get "recruited" by FBI/CIA agents acting as ISIS members. The target here is likely not ISIS, but radical minded angry young people taking the bait.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: JiggyPotamus
Regarding Israel I have been thinking the same thing. ISIS seems hell-bent on destroying America, when Israel is right up the road, a lot closer than the US. I just figured that perhaps ISIS will not attempt anything where Israel is concerned until they've solidified their power in Iraq and Syria, which is the right move, but another potential explanation is western involvement. I will not say I believe it is true at this point, but is a possibility.

Regarding US systems such as drones and spy satellites, these types of technologies are highly localized. For instance, a drone pilot cannot readily identify a person, and they are not going to just shoot everybody. And even a drone would have to fly around a lot to even identify a possible target, and there would have to be many, many drones to get meaningful results that justify the cost and expenditure of resources. Usually the drones go in, acting on intelligence information, and bomb a specific target. They also worked with troops on the ground when the troops would are engaged or could identify target locations or areas. And besides, drones are more effective at going after strategically important targets rather than being used to annihilate enemy forces. It is just not feasible to use drones in the latter sense, especially without intelligence information. Instead, they are better used for attacking high value targets, leadership, etc., again based on intelligence.

And even pilots have to get permission to engage. There are just so many factors to consider. And with satellites and drones there are not enough of them to watch everything all the time. Satellites are used for intelligence gathering. They can specifically look at an area of interest, or an analyst can look at what the satellite saw on an earlier pass, looking for targets and anomalies or any other information that can be acted on in the near future. So they cannot feasibly use them to track every potential member of ISIS, or even the leadership. It just doesn't work that way.

Using phones and stuff is more feasible, at which point you can bomb targets where ISIS leadership are located, but I imagine that processing the vast amounts of information is one of the problems. Another problem is actually identifying such people, and what phones they're using. And if they use multiple phones it gets more difficult. They can use methods like voice matching and whatnot, but this requires time and effort, and you have to have info to go on in the first place. All methods require resources and personnel as well. And we don't even know if the US can intercept all cell signals in Iraq or Syria. The ISIS leadership is probably not in Iraq in my opinion, where the US has more control and freedom of action. So without knowing the US's ability to collect electronic communications in Iraq and Syria, which probably have sparse cell coverage anyway, I cannot accurately determine why they may or may not use such methods. I would also expect ISIS to behave sort of like Bin Laden did.

The use of phones was not widespread at all. Rather, go-betweens would use phones within a city, well away from the area of operations in most instances, and there would barely be any people using phones. Rather the comms were done in person or between couriers of information. That is a simple way to bypass the US's sophisticated systems for electronic interception. I would also expect them to use radios for shorter distance communications, or battlefield comms. Obviously this would allow interception of such transmissions on the battlefield, which is why militaries encrypt such communications, and ISIS probably does this as well. It is not that difficult, and the necessary information can be taught to those who need to know the information.

So even though it sounds counter-intuitive, the US doesn't have enough intelligence to use these particular intelligence-gathering and combat assets. That is my take on it anyway, in a broad sense. Such methods definitely could prove useful in certain contexts, but where eliminating ISIS is concerned such methods are only tools to help the situation along in certain ways, rather than actually being the main tools. I mean we couldn't use such technology to defeat Al Qaeda either, and they were not as sophisticated as ISIS in terms of communications, encryption, or anything really. And they have more resources in general, and you can bet they've learned from the war on terror as well, and will not make any mistakes that Al Qaeda made.

Thanks for weighing in, great points there. As far as the Israel not being threatened, well it is because everyone knows that if a real threat, Israel would be on the ready, to drop bombs. IF, like I think ISIS is a creation SA/US/Israel, this would explain why Israel is/has not been involved. If the US is faking this, they threaten Israel, they cannot act.
As to the point of the drone operators needing permission to engage, well that has never stopped them from arbitrarily bombing innocent women and children many times before. These guys cant be to hard to pick out in my opinion.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman
I think ISIL is designed to scare nosey Journalists out of Reporting what is going on in the Middle East, it seems laughable that they haven't attacked Israel.


edit on 18-9-2014 by ugmold because: typo



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: thesmokingman
I think ISIL is designed to scare nosey Journalists out of Reporting what is gong on in the Middle East, it seems laughable that they haven't attacked Israel.


Great point. While not the main reason for ISIS, definitely one very possible way it benefits them as well.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:31 PM
link   
We're told by our government and media that we've been shown "beheading" videos. That's not true. If you look hard enough online, you can find the RAW "beheading" videos. But in NONE of the three "beheading" videos (Foley, Sotloff, and Haines) does it show a head being cut off. As "Jihad John" ostensibly starts to saw their necks at least 5 times with his knife, not a single drop of blood appeared and the video fades to black. When the video comes back on, it shows a "headless body" with the purported head of the victim resting on the back.

It reminds me of the alleged Saddam Hussein "hanging" video. NOWHERE did it ever show Saddam hanging. It showed him with the noose around his neck, then the trap door opens and he falls through. BUT THEN THE VIDEO AGAIN GOES BLACK! When the video comes back, we see the ostensibly lifeless body of Saddam laying on the floor with the noose around his neck.

Seeing a pattern?

And where's the video of the raid that allegedly killed Bin Laden?

It's amazing that we can be TOLD what we are actually SEEING with our own eyes, and have our own observation be "overridden" by what our government & media tell us. They had tp simulate a video showing the Bin Laden raid on his compound, later to tell us that they had buried his body in sea. Think about it. The most wanted man in US history, public enemy #1 had his body buried in sea immediately. No evidence provided. Somehow, the team that apparently killed Bin Laden was also killed in a helicopter crash.

Edward Bernays would be proud.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:44 PM
link   
CNN may have miserable ratings, but the Christians and the like show the exact same news feeds repeatedly over and over.

Trust me, the people they want seeing and fearing the devil wherever he may be are completely seeing it all.

I feel it deeply saddening all the people who really have no idea in the world how to think for themselves.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Boeing777

You are absolutely correct. These videos have no more credibility in my mind than grainy video footage of Bigfoot, or of the Lochness monster. Not to mention this ridiculous new MOVIE TRAILER they "put out"...very laughable indeed.
edit on 18-9-2014 by thesmokingman because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Found this on twitter, a tweet by Michael Krieger
(Booz Allen Hamilton)
We raised our target price to $28 from $25 as gov't services leader BAH is approaching a revenue /EPS upturn, bolstered by likely ISIS-driven upward pressure on US intelligence spending. We expect 8-10% EPS gains starting in FY'1

In case you wondered who benefits from ISIS war. Booze Allen Hamilton upgraded on Wall Street due to ISIS earnings:


3:22 PM - 15 Sep 2014

The Carlyle group owns Booz Hamilton
tweet link
Follow the money!


edit on 18-9-2014 by aboutface because: forgot link



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman

I get what your saying and agree with a lot of your points generally when I see you posting.. The usa has achieved a phenomenal rise to power on a global stage.
They fought wars but the real reason for their rise was the bankING system and gaining control of the money.. which is currently tied in with the oil
But they are not the youngest country on earth by a long shot, the USA may have been discovered later than the rest but have had hundreds of years since independence working on this plan, which is no different from other great civilisations such as rome or the British empire.. just remember one thing, all great civilisations always rise and inevitably fall.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman

You're certainly asking all the right questions... it makes one wonder if ISIS seems to exist solely to facilitate the US/Israel desires to wage war up and down the Mideast.

Take a look at who is fanning the fears over ISIS the most, they are those closest to the defense related industries and stand the most to benefit from non-stop war:

In Case You Missed This... 'Who’s Paying the Pro-War Pundits?' - Lee Fang/TheNation

Who’s Paying the Pro-War Pundits?
Talking heads like former General Jack Keane are all over the news media fanning fears of ISIS. Shouldn’t the public know about their links to Pentagon contractors?
Lee Fang - TheNation
September 12, 2014

If you read enough news and watch enough cable television about the threat of the Islamic State, the radical Sunni Muslim militia group better known simply as ISIS, you will inevitably encounter a parade of retired generals demanding an increased US military presence in the region. They will say that our government should deploy, as retired General Anthony Zinni demanded, up to 10,000 American boots on the ground to battle ISIS. Or as in retired General Jack Keane’s case, they will make more vague demands, such as for “offensive” air strikes and the deployment of more military advisers to the region.

But what you won’t learn from media coverage of ISIS is that many of these former Pentagon officials have skin in the game as paid directors and advisers to some of the largest military contractors in the world. Ramping up America’s military presence in Iraq and directly entering the war in Syria, along with greater military spending more broadly, is a debatable solution to a complex political and sectarian conflict. But those goals do unquestionably benefit one player in this saga: America’s defense industry.

Keane is a great example of this phenomenon. His think tank, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), which he oversees along with neoconservative partisans Liz Cheney and William Kristol, has provided the data on ISIS used for multiple stories by The New York Times, the BBC and other leading outlets.


Keane has appeared on Fox News at least nine times over the last two months to promote the idea that the best way to stop ISIS is through military action—in particular, through air strikes deep into ISIS-held territory. In one of the only congressional hearings about ISIS over the summer, Keane was there to testify and call for more American military engagement. On Wednesday evening, Keane declared President Obama’s speech on defeating ISIS insufficient, arguing that a bolder strategy is necessary. “I truly believe we need to put special operation forces in there,” he told host Megyn Kelly.

Left unsaid during his media appearances (and left unmentioned on his congressional witness disclosure form) are Keane’s other gigs: as special adviser to Academi, the contractor formerly known as Blackwater; as a board member to tank and aircraft manufacturer General Dynamics; a “venture partner” to SCP Partners, an investment firm that partners with defense contractors, including XVionics, an “operations management decision support system” company used in Air Force drone training; and as president of his own consulting firm, GSI LLC.


You could also go full tin-foil hat here and speculate that ISIS' leader, "Al Baghdadi" is a fictitious character, invented to be the mysterious "terror leader" as some have speculated ever since his first appearance in 2003, his name is acknowledged as fake and he seems to be fulfilling the role of bogeyman for the war hawks in the Pentagon, while doing absolutely nothing for Islam.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: aboutface

Nice. A stock price based on bodies dropped. You can blame presidents or other politicians as much as you want, but just go back to Eisenhower's comments about the military industrial complex to see how powerless a president or politician is. It's like the movie Moneyball only with people dying.

"Fat Jonah Hill" will keep us looking at the numbers. "Not as cool as Fight Club Brad Pitt" will go along with it since it makes a 'crazy' kind of sense. Eventually, everyone is implementing the "Fat Jonah Hill" ideas since they work for the string pullers. "Not as cool as Fight Club Brad Pitt" who cared about the players isn't so special any more and notices this system only benefits the owners/dicks that make all the money. Owners get richer, "Fat Jonah Hill" and "Not as cool as Fight Club Brad Pitt" fade into the woodwork and regret all their decisions (other than the movie deal) since it only benefited the dickhead owners.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 09:58 PM
link   
I think Americans are growing rather weary with being the "go-to" superpower. Some evidence of this might be our current request of other nations to join in this fight, rather than just the usuals-- UK and Canada. It's a good idea. To have some kind of "global army" to intervene in these type crises. I hope they will build on that. A global army has much potential to intervene, and likely with much more success than we have experienced in the past. Seems like this administration is trying to develop alternatives to the US being the answer for every crisis. I personally appreciate it. I'm rather sick of it too.

I was thinking this morning about our continuing to call all these various psychopaths "terrorists". That term seems to have outlived it's usefulness. If you think about it, They have all the makings of cults. The recruitment lies, the difficult to get out once you get in, the brain-washing. The giving the 'homeless' a home. The promise of room, board, a wife, and the everlasting gratitude of the great Allah. All nine yards.

A cult for killers and psychopaths, seems to me.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

The recruitment lies, the difficult to get out once you get in, the brain-washing. The giving the 'homeless' a home. The promise of room, board, a wife, and the everlasting gratitude of the great Allah. All nine yards.

Not sure if you're talking about the american military here or something else?

Their (IS) tactics are obviously working. They're more successful than most have been in that region, or the media has convinced me they are. If you're winning you don't change tactics and they're apparently winning. If america cares so much about the people over there then the military would have been there already assuming that protecting these people is their goal. As soon as it effects the rich politicians that matter then they will jump in. They can appeal to the rest of the world all they want but I'm sure the rest of the world knows who it benefits and aren't having it... yet.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 10:24 PM
link   
ISIS deliberate targeting of journalists is an effective deterrent to those whom would investigate or approach the group.
Conspicuous it is, as a device to warn the world to not look further into ISIS origin or mechanisms.
As western influence and interest in ISIS becomes more apparent, it can be seen that the "beheadings" specifically of journalists, would be yet another convenience granted the shadowy powers behind ISIS.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: wtf2008

Interesting take. Please note that the ME countries had no interest whatsoever in contributing anything, until they started targeting other muslims.

The American military are paid government employees.



new topics

top topics



 
50
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join