ISIL executions ordered from US, UK?

If the ISIL terror group is indeed a Western military intelligence proxy, then that begs the question: are the beheadings of Western hostages being carried out on orders from Washington and London?
The presumption is that ISIL, also known as IS or ISIS, is somehow out of control, having turned on its covert masters in American and British military intelligence. However, when you note the political consequences from these very public executions of American and British citizens, it appears that the terror network is in fact carrying out orders to facilitate geopolitical objectives.
The immediate political consequence is that American and British public opinion is now being mobilized to support military intervention in the Middle East – under the guise of avenging the murder of Western citizens by knife-wielding fanatics. In particular, Washington and London are preparing the American and British public to acquiesce to air strikes inside Syrian territory. This would fulfil the long-held objective of Western regime change against the Syrian government of President Bashar al Assad – the real target – not going after ISIL, as we are being led to believe.
This weekend saw the release of a graphic video showing the first execution of a British man by ISIL. David Haines, a 44-year-old aid worker who was taken hostage in Syria last year, is seen kneeling on the ground dressed in an orange jumpsuit as a masked militant severs his throat. The dead man’s body is then filmed lying prostrate with a bloody head placed on the corpse’s back.
Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron reacted with horror at the slaying, vowing to “hunt down the murderers” for their act of “pure evil.”
Earlier this month, American journalist Steven Sotloff was also decapitated by ISIL militants using the same barbaric ritual. Two weeks before that, James Foley, another American journalist was executed on camera in the same grisly manner, with his ISIL killers declaring that their actions were revenge for American air strikes against their bases in northern Iraq.
A fourth Western citizen, another Briton named as Alan Hemming, is also feared to have been slain after an unconfirmed video of his imminent execution was posted this weekend along with that of Haines’.
Some analysts have cast doubt on the veracity of these videos, claiming that they are fakes. But the foreboding demeanour of the victims and their final words spoken to the camera lend authenticity to the recordings.
With several other Western citizens believed to be held hostage by ISIL in Syria the disturbing outlook is that more such horrific videos will be released over the coming weeks.
The gruesome images of American and British citizens having their throats slit have had a huge impact on public opinion around the world. It is in this context of widespread public revulsion and anger that US President Barack Obama last week announced on prime-time television the formation of an international military coalition to “destroy ISIS”. Obama said the US-led coalition would carry out air strikes against the militants in their strongholds of northern Iraq and inside Syria’s eastern territory.
The Iraqi government has given its consent, but Damascus has not. The Syrian government has said that any such US-led military action would be tantamount to an act of aggression against a sovereign nation. Nevertheless, the Western public – shocked by the execution videos – appear to be giving the US-led coalition approval for its exceptional abrogation of international law to carry out air strikes inside Syria without the latter’s consent.
Before the execution videos started to appear, the majority of American and British public were adamantly against any military intervention in Iraq and more significantly in Syria.
Last year, Obama was forced to back down on plans to launch military strikes on Syria during September 2013 following the deadly chemical weapons attack near Damascus on August 21. The public was not convinced then that the incident was not a false flag provocation carried out by militants aimed at eliciting Western military intervention. The British parliament, heeding widespread public opposition in Britain, also voted against proposed military action. Without its crucial “special partner”, Washington was thus obliged to abandon its militaristic plans for Syria.
That public opinion obstacle to Washington and London’s desire for military intervention in Syria seems now to be eroding in light of the brutal executions of American and British citizens by ISIL.
But ISIL is a creation of American, British and Saudi covert intelligence, stemming from the early years of US-led occupation in Iraq from 2003 when the network stoked sectarian strife to the advantage of the occupying armies. As with the Al Qaeda terror network, ISIL serves the geopolitical objectives of Washington and its allies in the Middle East. These objectives include waging proxy war for regime change in target countries, such as in Syria, and the
perpetuation of American arms sales by fomenting a constant security threat.
The ISIL link to covert Western intelligence is confirmed by several informed analysts and former CIA personnel, as well as former Al Qaeda operatives, including Nabil Naim. Iranian military intelligence has also judged ISIL to be a Western psyops asset.
It is thus logical and plausible that secret government forces in Washington and London have given orders to ISIL to murder Western hostages. The political consequences fit the geopolitical agenda of military intervention and regime change in Syria. Political figureheads like Obama and Cameron may not be even aware of their own dark forces at work. Their public reactions of horror and indignation then assume an air of credibility.
But that does not lessen the grim conclusion that Washington and London are complicit in murdering their own citizens in order to facilitate geopolitical objectives.