You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq
Smoking gun: Saudis running jihadists in Syria
2014-06-12
WASHINGTON -- A captured member of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant claims that the ISIL and other Islamic militant groups in Syria not only are supported by a member of the Saudi royal family but that individual actually heads the ISIL.

In a video admission, a captured member of the ISIL said the radical Islamic group actually is led by Prince Adbul Rahman al-Faisal, the son of the late King Faisal of Saudi Arabia and the brother of the current Saudi Foreign Minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal.
A similar article can be found here.

Notice how ISIL was careful to state its independence from Al-Qadea. I speculated that ISIL's attack in Iraq might have the aim of opening a second front against Iran (and BTW Syria). Looks like I might be right.
Posted by:Squinty

#20  While letting the fanatics kill each other off and the common people watching as the two sides exhaust themselves, the fanatics in Islam have this curious ability to blame the US for the state of affairs and focus on us as a common enemy...

If we don't watch out, a lot of those "illegal immigrant" kids coming across the border could wind up being AQ or ISIL and all hell will break loose as the empty suit and his advisors will spend more time trying to blame Bush than respond in a coherent manner.

Typical cowardly liberals who cannot think of anything worth fighting for...not even freedom.

At least the leftists will fight.
Posted by: Bill Clinton   2014-06-12 20:21  

#19  Mr. Obama considered the game to be over six years ago.
Posted by: Pappy   2014-06-12 17:43  

#18  He's not even in the game.

"President Barack Obama has come under fire for failing to do enough to shore up the government in Baghdad before pulling out its troops." Kuwait Times

Ten four Fred.
Posted by: Squinty   2014-06-12 17:31  

#17  
The champ doesn't have his eye on the ball.

He's not even in the game.
Posted by: Fred   2014-06-12 17:21  

#16  It appears that, at this time, Iran is supporting Iraq with Iranian troops.

So Iran & Shia-Iraq vs. ISIL & Iraq-Sunni. What about those Kurds....
Posted by: Squinty   2014-06-12 17:13  

#15  It appears that, at this time, Iran is supporting Iraq with Iranian troops.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2014-06-12 17:10  

#14  Who should we in the West support.

An excellent question. ISIL is bad news. ISIL is competing with Al-Qaeda backed Al-Nusra Front for the title "most effective Islamic terrorist group in the world".

Our enemy's house is divided. It is not in our interest to have either side win. Ideally, they both need to be crushed. I wonder what the Kurds would think of being backed by US air power? In return, they get Mosul back.

On the other hand, where is that popcorn...?
Posted by: Squinty   2014-06-12 17:01  

#13  Who should we in the West support Sunni or Shia or sit back and let them kill each other LOL
Posted by: Slinelet Pelosi7787   2014-06-12 16:36  

#12  swksvolFF,
Iran-Iraq war, round 2.

--

Xi (China has pivoted to Iran) and Vlad (already is Pencilneck's pocket) are backing Iran. ISIL is anti-shia.

The champ doesn't have his eye on the ball.
Posted by: Squinty   2014-06-12 14:38  

#11  Surprise meter, per favor.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2014-06-12 14:35  

#10  Everyone ready for Iranian troops fighting in Iraq?
Posted by: swksvolFF   2014-06-12 12:49  

#9  Or Obama could be Xi or Vlad's cats' paw. Shhh, though, Americans aren't supposed to notice his actions are more supportive of China and Russia than the US.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2014-06-12 09:48  

#8  Or Xi. Or Vlad.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2014-06-12 09:20  

#7  Bright Pebbles,
Exactly. Certainly true in Pakistan. Could come true for the Saudis.

All,
Somebody is paying the Jihadist to be in Syria and now Iraq. War is more expensive than the occasional jacketwala. So the first question is, who has money? Saudi Arabia comes to mind. If not officially then a wink and a nod at the 3rd pillar of Islam, charity.

Christ, even the champ could be paying for this.
Posted by: Squinty   2014-06-12 09:05  

#6  
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2014-06-12 07:15  

#5  Those cellie calls made on State Department instruments by Benghazi attackers.... where did they terminate again ?

Won't the Soodis and other Gulf States who have been bankrolling the Jihadists be surprised when they are overrun as well.
Posted by: Besoeker   2014-06-12 06:28  

#4  Maybe it will go on for another ten years. Can you imagine tens of thousands of dead Moslems and Islam bleeding itself white?

And not a single death will be in Kansas. Just Mustapha and all his friends and the dog. And we don't have to pay a dime, Saudi and Iran can foot the bill. How long did the Iraqis fight Iran? Millions of dead? Yeah, get some...

Graveyards to the horizon all with little crescent thingys on the rows of graves. Poke it with a stick.
Posted by: Big Thromoth3646   2014-06-12 06:22  

#3  I would rail against the Saudi's, but this seems like a cunning move by them. They know Obama isn't going to do a damn thing. Iran is winning in Syria, and they're gaining influence through the Shia in Iraq. Better an Islamic state of Sunni's than Shia's to them. Before they could rely on us to make sure that doesn't happen.

I'm sick to my stomach this is happening, however if Iraq still can't stand up now, it's not ever going to. I mean 30,000 vs 800, and they Iraqi army still fled.
Posted by: Charles   2014-06-12 05:33  

#2  and Iraq now by the looks of things.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2014-06-12 05:20  

#1  The WND article links to a video released by the Iranian FARS news agency. I don't know how to judge whether it is true, partly true, or wholly invented propaganda.
Posted by: trailing wife   2014-06-12 04:51  

00:00