ISIL fabricated by US!: Says Former CIA contractor. Whistle Blower Steven D. Kelly

originally posted by: thishereguy
a reply to: PrivilegedPeasant

so, let's just use the twin towers logic with this.

in order to pull something off like this , you would need a lot of personnel .

do you think they could keep something like this a secret without someone coming forward?

What would any of those people be able to tell about it?
"Hey I joined up to kill infidel in the west, but now I am suspicious the CIA tricked me??"

Read up on compartmented secret operations for some insight on how you can get people to do things and they just think it was ISLAM Cleric Bob telling them to strap on some bombs and go burn down a coffee shop. They weren't told ISLAM cleric Bob is getting paid 100k a month by the NSA to pretend to hate America and sit in his Mosque and recruit guys with no money who are already to join up when old cleric Bob goes to work on them.
Old Cleric Bob is not going to say jack and is happy to be driving that flashy new Benz, or maybe he sends his 100 relatives a bunch of money so they can live well compliments of the NSA/CIA joint operation that no one is going to squeal on.

No one even knows they are being played by a con game, and anyone who does knows he better keep quiet and collect that fat check or watch his entire family burn in a cloud of white phosphorus if he suddenly grows a conscious.

a reply to: thishereguy

Compartmentalization. Only a handful of people would even have a need to know, intelligence agencies and military have been perfecting their methods for a long time in the modern world now.

Besides, what's up with the circular logic?

Someone does come forward and blows the whistle. Skeptic goes: "do you think they could keep something like this a secret without someone coming forward?"

I mean come on now. You can see the same kind of circular logic when dismissing UFO reports and ET witnesses/contactees:
Someone presents circumstantial evidence and the knee-jerk response is; "well there's no evidence of it so without any corroborating evidence there's no evidence". And each case of circumstantial evidence is only ever scrutinized in isolation and thus easily dismissed and added to a heap that is in all reality a mountain of circumstantial evidence.

I don't know what glitch this is but it's interesting, and maybe a little amusing.





P.S. Don't get the sarcasm at all?! Either way, I've seen examples of this faulty logic around here before so no harm in pointing it out.

originally posted by: thishereguy
in order to pull something off like this , you would need a lot of personnel .

do you think they could keep something like this a secret without someone coming forward?

Aaaaahaha

Dude IT DID LEAK OUT

you can't keep this a secret just like 9/11

a reply to: PrivilegedPeasant

Because it's only logical to spend billions of dollars overthrowing the governments you've spent billions of dollars to install.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: PrivilegedPeasant

Because it's only logical to spend billions of dollars overthrowing the governments you've spent billions of dollars to install.

Isn't playing both sides with somebody else's money
GREAT?! You have to give it to the overlords, they
really know how to play with their food.. win-win.

Back to the thread, it wouldn't surprise me too much if the
money trail for ISIS went right to the BIS. After all, the
Muslim Brotherhood was invented by the City of London.

originally posted by: derfreebie

it wouldn't surprise me too much if the
money trail for ISIS went right to the BIS

You are getting warmer.

a reply to: thishereguy

ummmm....

Isn't this about someone coming forward?

Using the Twin Towers mentality, points to the same thing... People have come forward with evidence, and just like this situation you will have the same results... Two groups seeing opposing viewpoints, and a third group that doesn't know what to think. If you have already decided that this guy is not credible then you're not going to believe what he says, therefore in your hypothesis this does not count as someone coming forward. Yet to others this might be enough evidence to say yes it is fact and they take that viewpoint.

It is best for those in power to keep us confused it makes us easier to control.

a reply to: thishereguy

Well it's not a total secret. There are whistle blowers, documents, contradicting news reports, ect.

Up until Edward Snowden actually released the files people said the same thing. Even thou Wikileaks & others had said for years that there was massive breach of every Americans personal liberties. They said if you use Google, Yahoo, ect. your emails, phone records, gps coordination, and so on are being stored into a massive database. People asked the same question your asking now about the NSA conspiracy ..... "

Do you think they could keep something like this a secret without someone coming forward"?
Answer is: People have & are coming forward.
and Yes they kept it secret in the manner that people don't want to believe it's True when others do come forward.

Until this day some people when questioned on how they feel about our own government spying on us? answer it with Ed Snowden is a traitor. Which isn't an answer to the question, but their own way of deflecting the scary realization that it's really happening.

For a classic example:

originally posted by: nullafides
a reply to: PrivilegedPeasant

I'm cool with everything being stated here...but truthfully, when I read anything originating from Project Camelot, my spidey sense tends to start tingling.

Not saying flat out it's bogus...just saying it gives me reason to be cautious.

I totally agree with you being skeptical from anything associated with Camelot. If you read on he also says they are working on weapons to fight aliens. and The Bilderbergers building deep underground bases.
“Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.” Mark Twain.

This has to be looked at objectively. Let’s look at some of the indications that something regarding ISIS is very fishy:

1. Turkey: The Middle man in the ISIS OP

There is no doubt at this point that the ISIS tragic episode is the exact same operation that the US played in Afghanistan where the CIA backed intelligence agency of Pakistan, the ISI, was used to create and support the Taliban to give the US a viable enemy.

Here in the ME Turkey is playing that role towards ISIS that Pakistan played in Afghanistan towards the Taliban as the protector and middle man for ISIS

ttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/23/did-turkey-cut-a-deal-with-isis-to-save-soldiers.html#

Turkey is the only country that ISIS didn’t threaten when they had Turkish hostages


2. The Strange actions of Obama

Of course if this were a massive black operation Obama’s actions would be just what he is doing: holding back the American troops to destroy this heinous enemy, ISIS.

Obama is clearly pulling his punches regarding the American “war” of ISIS
Obama is erecting straw man arguments in order to divert the attention of the fight against ISIS

This is clear


3. Reports in alternative media of US and UK support of ISIS
english.farsnews.com...

Certainly some of the reports naming the allied NATO partners of the US and UK as the surreptitious supporters of ISIS and their creation by countries such as Iran, Sudan, and even Iraqi sourced should be looked at objectively if possible.

As well, the actions of John McCain regarding the opposition forces in Syria, which includes ISIS and other AL Qaeda allies.


4. The US has a ready ally and strategic partner in Syria, the obvious choice as the designated ground army. Why does the US ignore Syria in the supposed battle with the notorious ISIS?

All these points and more may spell an American, western intelligence force surreptitiously behind the ISIS phenomenon

a reply to: Willtell

This has to be looked at objectively. Let’s look at some of the indications that something regarding ISIS is very fishy:

1. Turkey: The Middle man in the ISIS OP

There is no doubt at this point that the ISIS tragic episode is the exact same operation that the US played in Afghanistan where the CIA backed intelligence agency of Pakistan, the ISI, was used to create and support the Taliban to give the US a viable enemy.

You need to brush up on your history; the United States backed the Taliban in order to give the Soviet Union a viable enemy.

Turkey is the only country that ISIS didn’t threaten when they had Turkish hostages

Give them time.

2. The Strange actions of Obama

Of course if this were a massive black operation Obama’s actions would be just what he is doing: holding back the American troops to destroy this heinous enemy, ISIS.

Obama is clearly pulling his punches regarding the American “war” of ISIS
Obama is erecting straw man arguments in order to divert the attention of the fight against ISIS

This is clear

Funny, I thought it was because Obama is pusillanimous and afraid to commit American troops to combat. That's why he keeps promising "no boots on the ground" in North Africa, the Levant and Eastern Europe. For an imperial power, the United States doesn't fight much any more.

3. Reports in alternative media of US and UK support of ISIS
english.farsnews.com...

There's that pesky "Freedom of the Press" again.

Certainly some of the reports naming the allied NATO partners of the US and UK as the surreptitious supporters of ISIS and their creation by countries such as Iran, Sudan, and even Iraqi sourced should be looked at objectively if possible.

In fact any crazy allegation is worth taking seriously, so long as the United States and Britain look culpable.

As well, the actions of John McCain regarding the opposition forces in Syria, which includes ISIS and other AL Qaeda allies.

I think John McCain is an idiot myself, but the claim that he supports IS and al Qaedi is based on innuendo, not evidence.

4. The US has a ready ally and strategic partner in Syria, the obvious choice as the designated ground army. Why does the US ignore Syria in the supposed battle with the notorious ISIS?

Why does Syria buy the weapons it uses to kill its own citizens from Russia instead of the United States. Maybe if Assad switched dealers, the United States could reach some sort of understanding.

All these points and more may spell an American, western intelligence force surreptitiously behind the ISIS phenomenon

May... but don't. All you have is innuendo.

Evil's evil - who cares which block of land they cash their cheques on.

They were determined to get into Syria, Kerry put his foot in it and Putin called his bluff. They gave you ISIS and now they are in Syria.

originally posted by: CallYourBluff
They were determined to get into Syria, Kerry put his foot in it and Putin called his bluff. They gave you ISIS and now they are in Syria.

So... what's the end game?

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: CallYourBluff
They were determined to get into Syria, Kerry put his foot in it and Putin called his bluff. They gave you ISIS and now they are in Syria.

So... what's the end game?

Topple Assad. Then move onto Iran.

a reply to: DJW001

The Taliban came along AFTER the Soviets were beaten and took over Afghanistan

Also Pakistan was originally the sponsors and protectors of the Taliban. Now look at the situation.

So was Turkey, NATO and the gulf sates helping ISIS and other extremists in Syria

Two Frankenstein creations that now the US and Pakistan are at war with

a reply to: Willtell

Got it! In your parallel universe, the mujahadeen simply disappeared and the Taliban materialized out of thin air.