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.

 

The Covert Origins of ISIS And How " WE " Can Stop Them

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 22 2014 @ 11:26 PM
link   



i was prompted to make this thread because of prior debate in a forum.

the question really being "how do we stop ISIS" ?

a little background on my stance.

firstly i am without a doubt i am a pacifist. and i don't believe that fighting them will in anyway stop them .

I have researched Islamic Extremism for many years .

I am currently working on a book about the history of "extremism in Islam ". My goal is to educate people about Extremism and how it's arises from war , false doctrine and innovation of scripture . i was really blown away from this Doc because it really matched all the dot's that i had connected through my research.

anyway i urge members to give your self 20 min or so to review the Doc. it will help you to understand the truth of what is really going on and give you the knowledge to stop it




The Islamic militant group ISIS, formerly known as Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and recently rebranded as the so called Islamic State, is the stuff of nightmares. They are ruthless, fanatical, killers, on a mission, and that mission is to wipe out anyone and everyone, from any religion or belief system and to impose Shari'ah law. The mass executions, beheadings and even crucifixions that they are committing as they work towards this goal are flaunted like badges of pride, video taped and uploaded for the whole world to see. This is the new face of evil.






Would it interest you to know who helped these psychopaths rise to power? Would it interest you to know who armed them, funded them and trained them? Would it interest you to know why?




you can also read more HERE

Walsh




posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 12:29 AM
link   
It's not a bad doc by any means. But i do think we need to make one point entirely clear:

The Western allies have not directly funded ISIS. Nor have they directly trained them or provided them arms. Such tactics were used to bolster the strength of moderate rebels (yes, they exist). The problem is that many of those moderate rebels who received training, funding and arms, have since defected to ISIS, taking all their knowledge with them. The same # happened in Libya. The providing of arms is increasingly becoming difficult, as ISIS now controls much of the Syrian/Turkish border.

This doesn't mean that ISIS is a direct product of the USA though. Sure, it was formed in response to the invasion of Iraq, and only after the overthrow of Hussein. But they were left in ruins before the USA pulled out. The USA and Iraq waged campaigns against ISIS, before leaving. It was only after Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi came to power, did ISIS actually recover their ground. The Syrian civil war left a power vacuum in the region, and ISIS used this to their advantage by initially sending over a high-ranking official to form Jabhat al-Nusra. After disagreements between the two, ISIS split from Al-Qaeda and disowned al-Nusra, instead opting to move into Syria itself. It gained much power after conquering Raqqa, and has since been the strongest opposition force in Syria.

As is obvious, the USA is not directly involved in ISIS' rise to power. Indeed, they left it in ruin before leaving Iraq. ISIS only gained power after the fact, by pushing into Syria during moments of mass unrest and instability.



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 12:46 AM
link   
The only way to stop the terrorists is to stop the power elite.



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 12:55 AM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital right .....



you can sugar coat it all you want , the US and it's allies are a direct result of the destabilization thus giving rise to ISIS and other factions .


so should the US be held account able for "not directly funding "?


its simple really , "NO US INVASION , NO ISIS" "NO US WEAPONS IN SYRIA,NO FUNDED ISIS"




ever heard of the term guilty by association ?



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Walsh

For someone authoring a book on Islamic extremism and terrorism, your perspectives seem narrow-minded and simplistic.

The US and its allies are intervening in Syria. As is Russia. These larger states have their own interests in the region, and it is logical that they would manipulate the problems to their advantage.

The simple fact is that there is no proof, whatsoever, that the USA has been directly funding ISIS in Syria. Rather, it is general knowledge that they are funding moderate rebels. Look, there is no doubt that US arms have landed in ISIS' hands, but that likely comes through third parties, rather than any US entity. For example, they are more likely to acquire US arms through the capturing of military bases and fighters, than they are actually receiving them from the USA.


its simple really , "NO US INVASION , NO ISIS" "NO US WEAPONS IN SYRIA,NO FUNDED ISIS"


Simple...too simple for someone who should have a well grounded knowledge on the subject.

ISIS' roots go back to Jamāʻat al-Tawḥīd wa-al-Jihād, which was formed in either 1999 or 2002, depending on the sources one looks at. Regardless, it gained greater power during the Iraq war, where it fought against allied troops. Regardless of its founding date, we can all agree that the Iraq war was an important aspect in ISIS' (Jamāʻat al-Tawḥīd wa-al-Jihād's) history. The USA destroyed most of its leadership before leaving Iraq though. So it is logical to assume that the USA wouldn't want to fund it during the Syrian civil war. Your second statement is incorrect though.

ISIS was, and still is, believed to be funded by private donors in the gulf states. Since their increase in power though, ISIS has been able to sufficiently sustain itself in producing oil and other goods. The claim that ISIS wouldn't be where it is without US weaponry is absurd. It was left destroyed by the US, and only saw a chance to gain power in Syria after Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi became the leader of the group.

You are oversimplifying the entire story. The USA isn't responsible for everything. In fact, there is no proof that it has anything to do with ISIS and its horrendous deeds. Yes, the USA is involved in Syria's conflict, as is every other country of power, but it has only aided the moderate rebels. There is no proof to state otherwise.

There is a reason why guilt by association is abhorred:


Guilty by association refers to the attribution of guilt without any proof on individuals solely for the reason that those whom they associate with are guilty.


definitions.uslegal.com...

You are of the position that the USA is guilty by association, even though you have no proof, at all, that the USA has directly armed ISIS or other extremist groups in Syria.
edit on 23-11-2014 by daaskapital because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital


again you are trying to sugar coat this .

Iraq , Destabilized by US, FACT

Syria, Destabilized by US , FACT










The simple fact is that there is no proof, whatsoever, that the USA has been directly funding ISIS in Syria. Rather, it is general knowledge that they are funding moderate rebel



Should the US be held responsible "indirectly" funding ISIS ?



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 02:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Walsh
a reply to: daaskapital


again you are trying to sugar coat this .


I'm not sugar-coating anything, I'm telling you the truth. The fact that this is your only rebuttal proves that you cannot properly combat anything i had to say.


Iraq , Destabilized by US, FACT


Initially, yes. The US left Iraq with a somewhat stable government though. It was the Iraqi government which abused its authority, which led to the disaffection of Sunnis and Kurds, and allowed ISIS to gain sympathisers in the regional areas of the country.


Syria, Destabilized by US , FACT


Wrong.

The US has mostly taken a sideline approach in Syria, and has not directly intervened at all. It has funded, trained and armed moderate rebels, but Syria was already destabilised by inherent conflicts in the country. Jihadists who entered Syria to fight further pushed the instability. By your logic, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and other states are also responsible for the destabilisation of Syria. They have all played a part in the overarching conflict, but none of them are directly responsible for the inherent factors of Syria's instability. Where there is conflict and opposing ideals, there is instability. The aforementioned states are just supporting their preferred forces. The instability was already there from the moment the protests and subsequent civil war kicked off.


Should the US be held responsible "indirectly" funding ISIS ?


It is a matter of debate, because they are not willingly supporting ISIS. ISIS has obtained US arms through seizing Iraqi military bases. They have also received US arms through other means such as absorbing some moderate Syrian rebels into their fold.

edit on 23-11-2014 by daaskapital because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 03:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Walsh

Excellent thread and right on point. I agree with everything OP

Daaskapital is just angry his country ain't what it used to be.

Ain't what it used to be
Ain't what it used to beeeee
edit on 23-11-2014 by WineWithIce5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 03:22 AM
link   
a reply to: WineWithIce5

It's not an excellent thread when the OP takes a simplistic approach of the entire situation.

Oh, i'm not American either.


edit on 23-11-2014 by daaskapital because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 03:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: daaskapital
Oh, i'm not American either.



Doesn't matter, you could be IsraHelli or one of those Canadian Harper lovers,

DISCLAIMER, not that there is anything wrong with any of it LOL

My disclaimer was funny admit it



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 03:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: WineWithIce5

originally posted by: daaskapital
Oh, i'm not American either.



Doesn't matter, you could be IsraHelli or one of those Canadian Harper lovers,

DISCLAIMER, not that there is anything wrong with any of it LOL

My disclaimer was funny admit it


You're an odd bird, I love it, regardless of you obsession with Putins skibbies.



OP: What else is new? Go ahead write your book but if you're looking for sales might I suggest writing about Ufology, if you're looking to educate, don't bother. Liars have cornered the market.


edit on 23-11-2014 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital




It's not an excellent thread when the OP takes a simplistic approach of the entire situation.


Exactly.
And thanks for your well researched and concise comments, Daas. As always, in regards to ISIS, you are right on point and those that have done their research know it to be true.

The over-simplification of a VERY complex issue....well, it's become rather boring.

"Merica done it" has become a catch-all phrase when people fail to understand the complex nature of affairs in the ME and elsewhere throughout the world.

....honestly, it'd be rather funny if it wasn't so damned serious.



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital


The problem is that many of those moderate rebels who received training, funding and arms, have since defected to ISIS, taking all their knowledge with them. The same # happened in Libya. The providing of arms is increasingly becoming difficult, as ISIS now controls much of the Syrian/Turkish border.


Sounds like a bit of an excuse because the USA could not deny that ISIS were running around with M-16 and made in USA hardware so lets blame it on the natives all going rouge.

Will they blame financing the wrong type of Nazi in the Ukraine for all the trouble with Russia too because they have a bit of a history of giving cash to one side and then going to war with them and Saddam in Iraq and Libya are just two more examples.

Just how many little errors do we need before it become obvious that these little mistakes are all part of the plan to enslave the people of the USA using BS terrorist laws and spying as they "Protect us" by removing our rights to privacy and freedoms ?

ISIS seems like a good way for Turkey to kill Kurds and as an excuse for the USA to invade Syria where we now need to bomb both sides in the war that we created in the first place



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 07:38 AM
link   
I don't know how much Islam the IS practices, they are certainly a death cult, though.
From what I gather, the original ishmaili assassins used terror without murder, just
the up close threat of it through infiltration over a period of years. Scary.

Forgive me, I am just a learning American who loves his country!




top topics



 
5

log in

join