673 ISIS leader "al Baghdadi" is Jewish and a Mossad agent; his real name is Simon Elliot

ISIS leader "al Baghdadi" is Jewish and a Mossad agent; his real name is
Simon Elliot

Newsletter published on 17 August 2014

(1) ISIS: CIA unable to foresee "blow back"?
(2) Israel is behind ISIS; don't fall for "British" claim
(3) ISIS: "British" goals vs Yinon Plan
(4) ISIS leader "al Baghdadi" is a Jew and a Mossad agent; his real name
is Simon Elliot
(5) ISIS/ISIL leader/'Caliph' is a Jewish Mossad agent named Elliot Shimon
(6) Mossad not calling the shots
(7) The Yinon Plan and the role of the ISIS
(8) Gareth Evans (former head of Soros' ICG) back attacks on Isis in the
name of RTP
(9) Why Obama is Bombing the Caliph - by Pepe Escobar

(1) ISIS: CIA unable to foresee "blow back"?

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 12:20:58 +0200
From: Joe <joe@sott.net>
Subject: Re: CIA trained ISIS in Jordan (against Syria) - David Stockman

This "blow back" claim is so old and tired it has lost all credibility.
To believe it, you have to believe that the CIA is so feckless that they
are unable to foresee the "blow back" that happens every time they arm
and train some fundamentalist nut jobs.

Joe
Sott.net

(2) Israel is behind ISIS; don't fall for "British" claim

Subject: Re: CIA trained ISIS in Jordan (against Syria) - David Stockman
From: subiesisters@aol.com
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:35:50 -0400 (EDT)

Peter,
Don't let this guy back you down.  Your research IS research.  His is
the BBC.  Wow.

"The object was to get rid of The Syrian regime and install a pro EU and
pro Turk regime. If that had been successful, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and
other oil mags would have established an Islamic Financial Center in
London."

He is partially correct on the Financial part but it is the U.S., Saudi
Arabia, Qatar and Turkey that want to put a natural gas line through
Syria and put Putin out of business.  Obama loves this idea.  The U.S.
has the most natural gas in the world.  That is why Syria must fall.
The cities bombed in Syria are on that proposed gas line path.

You never insult.  You present the information and let people think.
This guy, Frank Verderber, is condescending in his 'argument' about your
information.  You've struck a nerve.

I believe the Muslims are on the verge of uniting and ousting the
Islamic terrorists.  Frank should be plenty concerned about that.

Susie

(3) ISIS: "British" goals vs Yinon Plan - by Peter Myers, August 17, 2014

The "blow back" claim is based on the notion that ISIS/ISIL is a
CIA/"British" ie Anglosphere creation.

But the "British" were tools of a Zionist agenda. The CIA/"British" and
the Zionists co-operated in launching rebel movements, but they had
different goals. The CIA/"British" goal was to preserve the state (Iraq,
Syria), but make it "democratic", ie amenable to the West. The Zionist
goal - the Yinon Plan - was to fragment the Islamic states and sow
dissension within and between them.

In the initial phases of the operation, the two groups worked ostensibly
in unison. But further down the track, they parted and became enemies.

Israel's aim is to make ITS war against Islam OUR war bewteen
Christendom and Islam. Promoting extremist Islamic groups, such as
ISIS/ISIL, fits this policy, because it creates revulsion among
Christians, and the notion that Islam is barbaric.

Thus, from the Yinon/Mossad point of view, the recent actions of
ISIS/ISIL - eg the genocide of Yazidis and other groups - are not Blow
Back at all, but on target, in line with the goal of making Israel's war
against Islam OUR war against Islam.

It's only from a CIA/ "British" point of view that these recent actions
seem "blow back".

(4) ISIS leader "al Baghdadi" is Jewish and a Mossad agent; his real
name is Simon Elliot

Subject: Re: CIA trained ISIS in Jordan (against Syria) - David
Stockman......got a
  good reply to this email
From: subiesisters@aol.com
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:51:14 -0400 (EDT)

Peter,
I sent this email around and one guy (a jazz guitarist that found out
out about 'the jews' FROM Jews, just as I did and now is poor) replied this:

"oh for sure! ISIS's leader, "al Baghdadi" is a jew and a Mossad agent.
his real name is Simon Elliot. There are lots of corroborating reports.
http://www.ascertainthetruth.com/att/index.php/911-a-false-flag-operations/false-flag-operations/1165-news-digest-isis-leader-al-baghdadi-jewish-mossad-agent

also the Battalion in Ukraine that is running amok and shelling Donetsk
is run by an Israeli jew.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/ukraines-secret-weapon-feisty-oligarch-ihor-kolomoisky-1403886665
The illegitimate regime out of Kiev is very jewish and is an IMF puppet
regime, but Kolomoisky does not even take orders from them, he is a
rogue element within a rogue regime, but both are victimizing the
population.

he even looks like a monster.

There are jewish fingerprints all over everything bad that is happening
in our world! Surprise surprise!

Trevor"

(5) ISIS/ISIL leader/'Caliph' is a Jewish Mossad agent named Elliot Shimon

From: "Ken Freeland diogenesquest@gmail.com [shamireaders]"
<shamireaders@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 09:16:34 -0500
Subject: [shamireaders] Fwd: French Report: ISIS Leader is Not Arab

The unfortunate fact about most English-speakers, many of whom have
ample access to do so, never bother to learn a second or third language.
Therefore the "official" information which circulates within the
Anglosphere remains highly- controlled.

But, thanks to the Internet and to YouTube, what's not on government-
sanctioned TV can be shown here.

This clip is an automated text-to- voice of a French article, translated
into English with a slideshow of corroborating images originally
published here.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/04/french-report-isil-leader-mossad/
http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/562727/20140814/isis-zionist-plot-theory.htm

"Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, so-called 'Caliph,' the head of ISIL (Islamic
State in Iraq and the Levant) [aka ISIS] is, according to sources
reputed to originate from Edward Snowden and from Iranian intelligence,
a Mossad- trained operative named Elliot Shimon.

"Elliot Shimon, aka Al-Baghdadi was born of two Jewish parents and is a
Mossad agent...trained in espionage and psychological warfare against
Arab and Islamic societies.

"This information has been published by other newspapers and websites
with claims that the Leader of the "Caliphate," "al-Baghdadi" is working
with the intelligence agencies of the US, UK and Israel to create an
organization capable of attracting terrorist extremists   from around
the world. (Source: Radio ajyal.com).

"Another source corroborating this statement is the site, Egy-press:

"With photo support, Iranian media reveals the true identity of the
"Emir Daash", a trained Zionist agent.

"Iranian intelligence discovered the true identity of the Emir Daash,
known under the name Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi; his real name is Elliot
Shimon...His false 'real' [cover] name is Ibrahim ibn Awad ibn Ibrahim
Al Badri Arradoui Hoseini.

"The plan: get into the military and civilian heart of the countries
that are declared as a threat to Israel, in order to destroy same, in
order to facilitate the takeover by the Zionist state of a large swathe
of the Middle East, in order to establish 'Greater Israel.'

"These are the borders of this Zionist project, the 'Greater Israel' or
'Eretz Israel' for short.

[This image, by the way is published on Britam.org, a sitewhich espouses
"British Israelism: (aka Anglo-Israelism), a doctrine based on the
hypothesis that people of Western European descent, particularly those
in Great Britain, are the direct lineal descendants of the "Ten Lost
Tribes of Israel." (I thought there were supposed to be 12?)

[Although these tenets have been refuted by evidence from modern
genetic, linguistic, archaeological and philological research, this
belief continues to have a significant following, particularly within
the former British Empire, where it was introduced in the 1870s].

"These statements strongly suggest that ISIS/ISIL was deliberately
created to sow chaos in countries surrounding Israel and recently, ISIS
announced that it will soon take down the 'barbarians Jews' [referring
to the Israel] for their recent razing of Gaza.

"After devastating an area of Israel [in what would be the Mother of all
False Flag Operations], this will then allow the Americans and the
Israelis to...shoot faster, in order to defend the Zionist state - after
having rather conspicuously let them [ISIS/ISIL] proliferate and to act
with impunity for over two months [to recruit and train], while the
worlds' attention has been diverted by the Malaysian Airlines crash in
Ukraine in addition to the Ebola scare, they've been busy causing the
complete destabilization of Iraq.

"After gathering the most fanatical of the world in one place [largely
seething Arabs and other homicidal non-Arabs from all over the world], a
veritable Army of the Devil has been created, filled with bloodthirsty
murderers without mercy for their [now, largely Christian] victims,
murdering with a vengeance and in cold blood, filming their atrocities
and immediately relaying these on social networks [to ensure the
justified outrage of the West against this bogus, Sharia   'Caliphate'],
which most definitely must be stopped; a consummate False Flag Operation
of epic proportions."

Video (almost 2 and a half mins):

- Alexandra Bruce

(6) Mossad not calling the shots

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 08:06:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: "peter.sault@odeion.org" <peter.sault@odeion.org>
Subject: Re: CIA trained ISIS in Jordan (against Syria) - David Stockman

Hi Peter

I have begun to suspect the existence of secret global powerbase
controlling all religions and all sides of all conflicts. Not Zionism
because Zionism is no secret. Ditto Freemasonry, Kabbalah, the Crown and
the Banking System. One cannot ask who benefits (cui bono) when some
players are invisible. I believe the channel of control is the so-called
'Intelligence Community', which is far more integrated globally than we
are led to believe (i.e. totally). Mossad may well be a hub but that is
all it is. I do not have a clue *who* or *what* is running things.

Kindest Regards
Peter

Comment (Peter M.):

 > Not Zionism because Zionism is no secret.

A small cadre of internet dissidents are awake to it - a BIT of it.
Surely there's much we don't know. Take this latest info about the ISIS
leader being Jewish: will it be published in the major media?

 > the so-called 'Intelligence Community'

I would say that it, too, has its factions. Mossad is a law unto itself.

(7) The Yinon Plan and the role of the ISIS

Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:57:41 +0100
Subject: The Yinon Plan and the role of the ISIS - The Daily Star
From: Martin Webster <martinwebstir@virginmedia.com>

{this article gets it wrong; it fails to perceive the divergence between
British and Zionist goals.  - Peter M.}

http://www.thedailystar.net/the-yinon-plan-and-the-role-of-the-isis-31469

The Daily Star (Bangladesh) – Saturday 16th August 2014

Isis: A Deceptive Tool Of US-Israel For “The New Middle East”

The Yinon Plan and the role of the ISIS

by Sultana Afroz*

LIVE messages and pictures of Sunni ISIS fighters dressed in Islamic
attire circulated through social media network such as You Tube
ostensibly authenticate the hostile agenda of the ISIS fighters to
dismember Iraq by carving out a Sunni Islamic Caliphate stretching from
Syria to the western Sunni heartlands in Anbar Province in Iraq. The
usage of the state seal of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) on the ISIS flag
as well for its Coat of Arms seemingly validates that ISIS are Sunni
fighters.

  The rapid march of the ISIS towards Baghdad and its swift takeover of
Mosul and Tikrit, and Baiji oil refinery, Fallujah and Ramadi in the
Anbar Province, and seizure of border crossings into Syria and Jordan
are presented by political analysts as a “civil war” fought along
sectarian lines, Sunni Arabs versus Shiia Arabs. Added to this is the
ethnically different Iraqi Kurds who have enjoyed semi-independence
under the US patronage and are now on the verge of declaring complete
independence from Baghdad.

  Through the powerful lenses of the Western media houses, the global
village watch with horror and agony the unfolding blitzkrieg in Iraq
carried out by ISIS fighters calling for the creation of the Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria also referred to as the Islamic State of Iraq
and al-Sham (the Levant). The picture thus being unfolded to the world
is that Iraq is on the verge of being divided into three small states:
Sunni Iraq, Shiia Iraq and an independent Kurdistan.

  Similar to the deceptive US-UK call for the invasion of Iraq on
grounds of Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction, western media
reporters are now engaged in misleading and deceiving global public
opinion as to the real perpetrators of this ISIS project. Like the
western manufactured “Arab Spring” in North Africa, the ISIS project is
a deception at its worst designed with hateful intentions to cause
horrendous regional mayhem and destruction with military might for the
creation of a “New Middle East” with Israel as the regional power in
control of the region's oil, gas and water resources.

  The present ISIS lightning war in Iraq is the creation of an illusion
to initiate the fulfillment of a pre-planned agenda of the West in close
alliance with Israel to redraw the map of the entire region as the “New
Middle East.” This is the Yinon Plan at work, which aims at the
balkanisation of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region into
smaller and weaker entities or states in order to ensure the dominant
position of Israel in the region and the control of its oil, gas and
water resources by the US-Israel nexus. In the process of balkanisation,
the facets of ethnicity, religion and race from within the region are
engaged for destruction, causing alarm for the UN and international
military intervention to “protect innocent civilians,” thus paving the
way for the ultimate achievement of the designed goals of creating the
“New Middle East.”

  The chaos, destruction and devastation caused by the ISIS in its
process of establishing the Sunni Islamic Caliphate in Iraqi and Syrian
territories is the realisation of the intended policy of the US and the
West to change public perception that the “War on Terror” was never a
war waged by the West against Islam but a “war within Islam” along
religious, ethnic and sectarian lines in the Islamic world. The Islamic
State of Iraq and al-Sham's Sunni Caliphate project coincides with a
longstanding US agenda to carve up both Iraq and Syria into three
separate territories: A Sunni Islamist Caliphate, an Arab Shiia
Republic, and a Republic of Kurdistan.

  The division of Iraq into three separate entities had also been
strongly advocated by US Vice-President Joe Biden. Biden's heritage and
an analysis of his electoral constituents will help understand better
his support for the fragmentation of Iraq under the Yinon Plan.

  Iraq, which was not only the most mechanised and urbanised state in
the Middle East, possessing the largest oil reserve in the Middle East
(tapped and untapped), but also cohesively united as a state with
diverse ethno-linguistics and sectarian groups was the biggest strategic
challenge to the plotters of this balkanisation plan.

  The destruction of Iraq began from within the region with Iran as the
adversary. The eight-year war between Iraq and Iran left both the oil
rich countries economically exhausted and militarily weak. In order to
thwart the Khomeini Revolution, Iran, to the proponents of the Yinon
Plan, became the logical choice from within the Middle East region to
fight against Iraq. Although Iraq has been represented to the world as a
Shiite-majority state, Sunni Iraqis form the majority since the Kurds in
Iraq are also Sunnis. The existence of the two major ethno-linguistics
groups, the Arabs and the Kurds and the two major sectarian groups
within the Islamic faith, the Sunni and the Shiia in Iraq allowed the
balkanisation planners to foment tensions leading to total
disintegration of the social fabric of the Iraqi society since  the
US-UK led invasion in 2003.

  Prior to the invasion, Iraq enjoyed a 50-50 Shiia-Sunni marital
alliance and the Kurds enjoyed autonomous power within the Iraqi state
under President Saddam Hussein's leadership. The no-fly zones imposed by
the West in northern Kurd Iraq and southern Shiia-held regions between
1993 and 2003, following the first Gulf War solidified the lines of
demarcation for the impending three divisions of Iraq to be finally
carried out by the ISIS. The intentions of the US-Israel nexus for the
implementation of the Yinon Plan was clear to Saddam's regime before the
impending US-UK led invasion of Iraq in 2003 as expressed by the former
Prime Minister of Iraq, Tariq Aziz: “This is not regime change but
regional change.”

*The writer has taught at the University of the West Indies, Mona
Campus, Jamaica.

(8) Gareth Evans (former head of Soros' ICG) back attacks on Isis in the
name of RTP

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/gareth-evans-defends-barack-obama-s-decision-to-launch-us-air-strikes-against-the-islamic-state

Gareth Evans

Gareth Evans, former Foreign Minister of Australia (1988-1996) and
President of the International Crisis Group (2000-2009), is currently
Chancellor of the Australian National University. He co-chairs the New
York-based Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect

AUG 14, 2014

The Right Iraqi Intervention

CANBERRA – US President Barack Obama deserves unconditional support for
his decision to use military force to protect the persecuted Yezidi
minority from threatened genocide by marauding Islamic State (IS)
militants in northern Iraq. The United States’ action is completely
consistent with the principles of the international responsibility to
protect (R2P) people at risk of mass-atrocity crimes, which was embraced
unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly in 2005. The US
military intervention touches all of R2P’s bases of legality,
legitimacy, and likely effectiveness in meeting its immediate objectives.

In contrast to the original military intervention in Iraq – which
touched none of these bases – the current US action, though lacking
Security Council authorization, is being taken at the request of the
Iraqi government, so there is no question of a breach of international
law. And it would clearly seem to satisfy the moral or prudential
criteria for the use of military force, which, though not yet formally
adopted by the United Nations or anyone else, have been the subject of
much international debate and acceptance over the last decade.

The criteria of legitimacy are that the atrocities occurring or feared
are sufficiently serious to justify, prima facie, a military response;
that the response has a primarily humanitarian motive; that no lesser
response is likely to be effective in halting or averting the harm; that
the proposed response is proportional to the threat; and that the
intervention will do more good than harm.

The available evidence is that the many thousands of men, women, and
children who have sought refuge in the Sinjar mountain range of northern
Iraq are indeed at risk. They face death not only from starvation and
exposure, but also from genocidal slaughter by the rapidly advancing IS
forces, who regard the Yazidis as apostates and have already perpetrated
atrocities unrivaled in their savagery. The US motive in mobilizing air
power to protect them is unquestionably humanitarian. It is clear that
no lesser measures will be sufficient, and the only question about
proportionality that arises is whether the air strikes and supply drops
will do too little, rather than too much, to address the emergency.

Unlike the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, it cannot be argued that
external military intervention will be likely to cause more harm than
good. It should be at least as effective in protecting the Yezidis (and
Kurds and others in nearby Erbil) as was the intervention in Libya in
2011 to stop the threatened massacre by Muammar el-Qaddafi’s forces of
the people of Benghazi.

Whether it will contribute to reversing the major gains already made by
IS forces in northern Iraq, and to re-establishing the territorial
integrity of the Iraqi state, is a different question. As the Obama
administration has made clear, that will depend, above all, on whether
the disastrously divisive leadership of Nouri al-Maliki, Iraq’s Shia
prime minister, gives way to a more inclusive regime, and whether, in
that context, the ineffectual Iraqi army can regroup and rally.

Though some conservative American voices are already calling for more to
be done, no compelling case can be made in the US, Europe, or my own
country for sacrificing further blood and treasure in an effort to prop
up a regime so demonstrably unable and unwilling to help itself hold the
country together. As I have argued previously, the only possible
justification – moral, political, or military – for renewed external
military intervention in Iraq is to meet the international
responsibility to protect victims, or potential victims, of mass atrocities.

It is a little frustrating to those of us who have worked to embed R2P
principles in international policy and practice that US leaders remain
reluctant to use that terminology – a reluctance that partly reflects
the perceived domestic political risk in relying on anything that comes
from the UN. But it would be churlish to complain when, as here, Obama
talks of “upholding international norms,” and in practice moves to do
exactly what the R2P norm requires.

There are also, of course, American voices – like that of the
foreign-policy realist Stephen Walt – arguing for less to be done, on
the ground that US interests are insufficiently engaged to justify any
military intervention, however limited. But this is to adopt a narrowly
traditional view of the national interest – focusing only on direct
security and economic advantage – and to ignore a third dimension,
reputational advantage, which increasingly determines the extent to
which countries respect and relate to one another. It is in every
country’s national interest to be – and to be seen as – a good
international citizen.

There can be no better demonstration of good international citizenship
than a country’s willingness to act when it has the capacity to prevent
or avert a mass atrocity crime. Obama has recently been criticized, in
the context of his attitude toward the Palestinian-Israeli peace
process, as being “cerebral in part of the world that’s looking for the
visceral.” His response to the plight of the Yezidis in Iraq has been
both cerebral and visceral, and both America and the world are better
for it.

(9) Why Obama is Bombing the Caliph - by Pepe Escobar

From: Paul de Burgh-Day <pdeburgh@lorinna.net>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 12:33:36 +1000
Subject: Pepe Escobar: Why Obama is Bombing the Caliph

Why Obama is Bombing the Caliph

By Pepe Escobar

August 14, 2014

http://rt.com/op-edge/179716-why-obama-bomb-caliph/
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39409.htm

This is the way the multi-trillion dollar Global War on Terror (GWOT)
ends: not with a bang, but with a bigger bang.

The GWOT, since its conceptualization 13 years ago, in the aftermath of
9/11, is the gift that keeps on giving. And no gift is bigger than a
Transformer Al-Qaeda on steroids – bigger, brasher, and wealthier than
anything Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri had ever dreamt of; the
IS (<https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-part-1>Islamic State,
formerly known as ISIS) of Caliph Ibrahim, former Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

US President Barack Obama, before deploying his golf holidays in
Martha’s Vineyard, casually dropped that bombing the Caliph’s goons in
Iraq will take months. One may interpret it as another layer of the
Obama administration’s self-avowed “Don't Do Stupid Stuff” foreign
policy doctrine, not so subtly mocked by prospective presidential
candidate Hillary Clinton. Shock and Awe in 2003 destroyed the whole of
Baghdad’s infrastructure in only a few hours.

Obama also confirmed the US was showering Iraq again with humanitarian
bombing “to protect American interests” (first and foremost) and, as an
afterthought, “human rights in Iraq.”

One could not possibly expect Obama to declare the US would now
<http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-how-saudi-arabia-helped-isis-take-over-the-north-of-the-country-9602312.html>bomb
“our” allies the House of Saud, who have supported/financed/weaponized
IS, in Syria and Iraq. The same erstwhile ISIS that thoroughly enjoyed
the marvels of US military training in a secret base in Jordan.

Obama also could not possibly explain why the US always supported ISIS
in Syria and now decides to bomb them in Iraq. Oh, the
<http://www.panarabiaenquirer.com/wordpress/us-just-sure-bomb-middle-east-anymore/>perils
of ‘Don’t Do Stupid Stuff’.

So a quick translation applies.

Obama’s bombing of the Caliph’s goons has absolutely nothing to do with
US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power’s much beloved R2P
(‘responsibility to protect’) doctrine – as in the responsibility to
protect up to 150,000 Yazidis, not to mention Kurds and remaining
Christians, from a ‘potential’ genocide carried out by the Caliph’s goons.

The whole fighter jets + drones bombing exercise, lasting ‘months’, has
to do with the Benghazi syndrome.

The Caliph’s goons were dead set on conquering Irbil - the capital of
Iraqi Kurdistan. The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) is led by the
wily Massoud Barzani – a long-time US client/vassal.

The US maintains a consulate in Irbil. Crammed with CIA types. Or, as
the New York Times so lovingly
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/09/world/middleeast/iraq.html>puts
it,“thousands of Americans.”

Enter Benghazi. This is an electoral year. Obama is absolutely terrified
of another Benghazi – which Republicans have been trying non-stop to
blame on his administration’s incompetence. The last thing Obama needs
is the Caliph’s goons killing ‘diplomats’ in Erbil.

That would certainly raise a tsunami of questions all over again about
the shady CIA weapon-smuggling racket – as in arming Syrian ‘rebels’
with weapons from Libya - at the time Benghazi took place. As secretary
of state, Hillary Clinton, of course, also knew about it all. But then,
and especially now, no one should know that the CIA was weaponizing the
bulk of the future Caliph’s forces.

Regime change or bust

Obama said this humanitarian bombing adventure could last “months,” but
in fact it could last only days.

The price is cheap: regime change. As in former Iraqi Prime Minister
Nouri al-Maliki blocked from having a third term.

That explains why all hell broke loose in Baghdad, as Iraqi
parliamentarians clearly saw which way the wind is blowing. Haider
al-Abadi was chosen by new President Fuad Masoum, a Kurd, as the new
prime minister – hours after Maliki positioned Special Forces in
strategic sites in and around the Green Zone and may (or may not) have
tried to stage a coup. Maliki maintains that Masoum violated the Iraqi
constitution by not selecting him to form a new cabinet; after all, his
State of Law bloc got the most votes in last April’s parliamentary
elections.

Obama, predictably, was
<http://time.com/3101530/obama-iraq-maliki-abadi/>delighted. But
whatever happens next, Maliki won’t go down quietly – to say the least.
Even as the predominant narrative among Sunnis, a substantial number of
Kurds and even some Shiite political blocs is that Maliki antagonized
Sunnis all-out; and that’s what drove them to support the Caliph en
masse (although now many are having second thoughts.)

As for the KRG and Barzani, in the Obama administration scheme of
things, what matters is that they should not declare independence. As
long as Barzani promises to Obama that Kurdistan stays inside Iraq, the
KRG will get more bombs and drones and the ‘humanitarian’ operation will
speed up. US Special Forces are already deployed all over the huge area
where the Caliphate borders the KRG, in so-called desert forward
operating positions. And the US for all practical purposes is now the
Iraqi Air Force against the Caliph.

Watch ‘the Hillarator’

This Obama administration warped R2P – protection for Americans first,
refugees second – will accomplish nothing for a key reason; no bombing –
‘humanitarian’ or otherwise - exterminates a political/religious
movement, even one as demented as IS. The Caliphate prospers, somewhat,
and expands, because unlike that pathetic Free Syrian Army (FSA) it’s
winning territory, desert and urban, in both Syria and Iraq; an area
bigger than Great Britain already, holding at least 6 million people.

As for the much-peddled Washington myth of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ jihadists,
the Caliphate also exploded it. Virtually every jihadi Washington - and
Riyadh – weaponized and trained in Jordan and in the Turkey-Syria border
is now among the Caliph’s goons, wallowing in cash raised from oil
smuggling, hardcore blackmail and ‘donations’, and weaponized to their
teeth after looting four Iraqi divisions and a Syrian brigade.

As for the GWOT gift, it will keep on giving in a bigger and bigger bang
because of the dream narrative now displayed for every aspiring
multinational jihadi; we are now defending our Caliphate from the mighty
Crusader Air Force, no less.

The US lost the war in Iraq, miserably, only nine days after the fall of
Baghdad, in April 2003. No ‘humanitarian’bombing will turn it into a
victory. And no ‘humanitarian’ bombing will finish the Caliphate off.

As for prospective presidential candidate
<http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/?single_page=true>Hillary
Clinton, she’s taking no prisoners. She insists the US should have
bombed Syria in the first place; then there would be no Caliphate. But
now she worries the Caliph will attack Europe and even the US (“I’m
thinking a lot about containment, deterrence and defeat”).

Predictably positioning herself, Clinton could not but totally dismiss
Obama’s foreign policy doctrine, a.k.a. ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’: “‘Don’t
do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle.” So the world will have
to wait until 2017, when she’s finally able to implement her own
doctrine/organizing principle: “We came, we saw, he died.”