High-Level U.S. Military Official: U.S. Made a "Wilful Decision" to Support Al Qaeda and Other Terrorists

George Washington's picture

An internal Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document produced recently shows that the U.S. knew that the actions of "the West, Gulf countries and Turkey" in Syria might create a terrorist group like ISIS and an Islamic caliphate.

While the powers-that-be have tried to downplay the significance of the document, the former head of the DIA - Lieutenant General Michael Flynn - just confirmed its importance.

By any measure, Flynn was a top-level American military commander. Flynn served as:

  • The Director of the U.S. Intelligence Agency
  • The Director of intelligence for Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the main military agency responsible for targeting Al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorists
  • The Commander of the Joint Functional Component Command for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
  • The Chair of the Military Intelligence Board
  • Assistant director of national intelligence

Flynn confirmed the authenticity of the document in a new interview, and said:

[Interviewer] So the administration turned a blind eye to your analysis?

[Flynn] I don’t know that they turned a blind eye, I think it was a decision. I think it was a willful decision.

[Interviewer] A willful decision to support an insurgency that had Salafists, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood?

[Flynn] It was a willful decision to do what they’re doing.

Background here.

Postscript: We did the same thing in Libya, Chechnya, and many other countriesSad, it is ...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
DuneCreature's picture

See, this is how shit works my fellow country mice. (USSAers, that is.)

When you live in a democracy the government is your representative to the rest of the world.

So when your government goes around whacking people with drones, aerial bombs, little quarter inch holes or death by accidently on purpose mishaps it’s the same as you yourself whacking aforementioned said people.

Get it?


Think about it.

Do you really have a beef with all the people your government has been whacking lately?

Do you?

What’s your beef with al Assad for instance?

Just asking. …… Did Assad do something to you or a friend of yours?

I’m dying to hear your or anyone’s problem with ‘name the Muslim’. .. Any Muslim.

When you whack someone for some trivial reason it’s called murder.

I’ll bet you don’t consider yourself particularly homicidal but yet you let your government whack people in your name daily.

Ok, I’m done, ……….. For now. …….. I gotta go to work for a few days but I expect a few good responses from the legendary and esteemed ZH common-mentors.

I ask some real asshole-like tough questions, don’t I?

~ DC


crazybob369's picture

For his sake, I hope Flynn doesn't own any nailguns.

To Hell In A Handbasket's picture

Anybody who is well read, doesn't need Flynn to confirm the obvious. By any definition used, America's foreign policy if seen through the eyes of promoting freedom, democracy and human rights could only be described as fucking Bi-Polar at best.  If seen through the eyes of national interests, imperialism and Neocon-Israeli national security interests then 95% of her police can be put into context. U.S madness in supporting outright terrorists by our modern definition can be traced back to James Baker's arming the Mujahadeen with Stinger missiles to fight the Russians. The irony of the Russian-Afghanistan war was death merchants like Osama Bin-Laden and Mullar Omar were routinely hacking off the heads of Russian soldiers as far back as 1979, pre-Moscow Olympic boycott and the west never gave a shit. We called them freedom fighters. Muslims hacking off heads only mattered when they started hacking off our heads(western heads). 


The U.S funding of what we now know as ISIS, was common knowledge as far back as 2011 and discussed on political forums in length. The head-chopping, heart eating ISIS general was kept out of the mainstream media for months. It took the video to go viral before the U.S mainstream would cover it. As for our funding of the jihadists in Libya, which is now in full civil war(and not covered by the mainstream media at all) The country is in a complete mess,  a haven for jihadists including an ever growing presence of ISIS and on top of that we now have a belligerent AFRICOM, funding and creating Islamism in sub-Sahara Africa, in our tried and tested divide and rule policy to further rape Africa of her resources. China plunders but at least leaves some infrastructure behind. America plunders, makes money from arms sales by arming both sides and leaves behind no infrastructure, but only death and destruction and the icing on the cake? IMF-World Bank DEBT!

Pancho de Villa's picture
Pancho de Villa (not verified) Aug 8, 2015 1:53 PM

Keep in Mind the Fact that War is the Most Profitable Enterprise ever devised by Mankind and you can See Right Through to the Motives of These Evil Motherfuckers, "at War with Islam"!

LetsGetPhysical's picture

This is the reason there will never be a proper discussion about what happen in Benghazi. Neither side of the isle wants to talk about what exactly we were doing there in the first place. Funneling weapons thru Libya into Syria and Iraq is what I suspect. Everybody is focused on cover stories and emails when they should be asking...WHY? 

Moccasin's picture

The truth seeps out... I wonder how long this video will last on youtube before it's taken down?

techpreist's picture

Actually, this is already taught in INTA (Intl. Affairs) 101 classes.

I remember that class... When communists were 'the enemy' and fascists still in memory as 'the enemy,' we were still entirely willing to back fascist and communist governments if they were loyal to us and not the USSR. It was also revealed, right in the textbooks, that the entire purpose of the soldiers in Berlin was to be the sacrificial lambs if we wanted to kick off WW3. Our prof was also nice enough to show us the pics of Rumsfeld and Saddam back when we put him in power, along with a documentary about how the 'babies torn from incubators' line was crafted in order to kick off the first Gulf War.

It seems today is no different; there is no ideology, no good being pursued or evil vanquished, just pieces of power on the chessboard.


CTG_Sweden's picture



"[- - -] It seems today is no different; there is no ideology, no good being pursued or evil vanquished, just pieces of power on the chessboard."


My comments:

It´s true that the US in the early 1970s chose good relations with China since China had some kind territorial and ideological dispute with the Soviet Union. Later, the US also supported the communist Khmer Rouge in Cambodia which were fighting other communists who ruled the country and were backed by Vietnam and the Soviet Union.

In those days American foreign policy was about fighting communism (but earlier, during the Russian civil war up to 1920, the US ended support for the anti-communist rebels when they controlled most of Russia – US leaders, or at least Jacob Schiff, disliked the Czar more than they disliked communism just like they now dislike Assad more than they dislike Al-Nusra/Al-Qeda).

Today, US foreign policy is not about fighting communism. The US is guided by other objectives. The neo-conservatives have objectives. I don´t know whether it´s correct to label these objectives and the strategies they are implementing as an "ideology". Perhaps not. But enthusiastic followers of various ideologies often tend to be rather naïve and narrow-minded. The neo-conservative approach seems to be less naïve and more efficient.

Furthermore, I have not heard how the neo-conservative objectives would benefit Americans. So far, the neo-conservatives and their supporters in the big media and the super-pacs have not been forced to answer that question. Nobody raises that question in the big media. Who benefits from the neo-conservative objectives? My impression is that 98 % of the Americans, rich Americans as well as poor Americans, do not benefit in any way from neo-conservatism but rather the opposite. It´s true that Americans suffer less because of neo-conservatism than for instance Syrians. But that´s not a good argument for neo-conservatism.


Reaper's picture

All decisions have consequences. Consequences exist in multiple dimensions, not just for or against Assad. We're ruled by a self-selected uebermenschen which promotes based upon obedient servitude. The sheeple want to believe a uniform, a robe, or a high office indicates intelligence that ought be trusted.

The truth, dear sheeple, is that your craved uebermenschen are as dumb as you. Their system weeds out the truly intelligent as enemies of their system. They, like you, emote in one dimension, without comprehension of a multi-dimernsion real world.

To keep it simple: they're speeding along a road and see bridge out ahead sign. They speed up as they turn right to crash through the other bridge out sign on the road heading right.

CTG_Sweden's picture



[- - -] We're ruled by a self-selected uebermenschen which promotes based upon obedient servitude. The sheeple want to believe a uniform, a robe, or a high office indicates intelligence that ought be trusted.

The truth, dear sheeple, is that your craved uebermenschen are as dumb as you. [- - -]"



My comments:

If those who you call "self-selected uebermenschen" are the neo-conservatives and their buddies in the big media and the lobbyists and billionaires who support them, then I think you are wrong.

The neo-conservatives have, unfortunately, the best understanding in the world of how politics and economics work and they also have better understanding about how the general public works than all potential contenders. They also have a goal and a strategy. The Chinese leaders, for instance, don´t seem to have a strategy and a rather poor understanding of how the combination of politics, economics and the big media generate real power in societies. Maybe they got something up their sleeve I haven´t thought about, but I doubt it. I think that they are exposed to tremendous risks due to their dependence on exporting goods to North America and Europe. They have chosen to depend on markets they don´t seem to have any ambition to control or even to the slightest extent influence politically. They have chosen a strategy that makes them very vulnerable although they didn´t have to do that.

I also think that Russia could have influenced the general public and politics in Western Europe far more than they have. They have lent some money to Front National. However, I don´t think that will make much difference. Frenchmen that support Front National would probably have been willing to lend this party the same amount of money. Putin could probably have accomplished more with more sophisticated methods and more money. (On the other hand I´m not so sure that Russia would benefit from better relations with Europe. The sanctions against Russia which legitimize Russias counter-sanctions will enable Russia to replace imports with domestically produced goods. I´m not so sure that Russia in the long term benefits from exploiting all their oil, gas and minerals. It is probably a good idea to save some for the future.)



Edit: I don´t think that the US have benefited from being ruled by neo-conservatives and similar people. Their rule is bad for 98 % of the Americans too, including multi-millionaires and some billionaires.

Reaper's picture

Neo-conservatives = new conservatives. Neo-con would be a better description. What they do is con conservatives into believing they're conservative, when their goal is lead conservatives to support their chosen/exceptional people military adventures. All cons are destructive of their marks. They expect China and Russia to be confined by their machinations.

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." http://www.economist.com/node/18712682 That includes neo-con plans. Neo-cons believe they're cleverer than others. Hubris ends badly.

CTG_Sweden's picture





"[- - -] No plan survives contact with the enemy." http://www.economist.com/node/18712682 That includes neo-con plans. Neo-cons believe they're cleverer than others. Hubris ends badly.






My comments:


Well, at least so far the neo-cons have made no mistake, as far as I can see. My impression is also that they have not taken unnecessary risks or moved too fast. Can you point to any major mistake they have made so far?


The greatest setback so far seems to be the fate of Khodorkavsky. But Putin does not seem to have built a lasting political/economical structure that can survive himself. When Putin is gone it seems likely that those who ruled Russia during the 1990s will return to power. And the Chinese do not seem to have established a structure within Russia that can prevent Yeltsin era rule when Putin is gone.


I would also be surprised if the wide spread corruption among Chinese officials and foreign bank accounts won´t affect Chinese politics in the future. And the fact that Chinese leaders send their kids to the US seems crazy to me if they want future princelings other Chinese leaders can trust.


Russia and China have no similar means to influence politics in Europe and the US. Furthermore, they are not ruled by a core of people in business, media and politics which share a strong solidarity factor and act as a group against others in the society. The solidarity among these people (if there is one) seems to be based on the fact that currently agree to share the prey with each other. But there doesn´t seem anything stronger that holds them together, unlike the neo-conservatives and their backers.

Reaper's picture

The neo-cons are adolescent delinquents. Their faith in their invincibility is immature. http://42051.faithweb.com/FABLE%20CONSTRUCTS%20OF%20ADOLESCENT%20EGOCENT...

Everyone is fallible. Because it has worked before is no guarantee of future success. Why should Russians and Chinese be deemed less able than neo-cons? All neo-con power is fraud.

shovelhead's picture

There you have it.

Flynn: "I have no idea what they're doing. They have no idea what they're doing, so the Administration will double down and do some more of it."

Obama's patented "WTF squared" foreign policy could just result in a brilliant outcome...


lucky and good's picture

Glaring examples of America's lack of a sound strategy in fighting ISIS are presented in articles such as the May 23 Washington Post story that paints a picture of total chaos and mayhem garnered from the accounts of fighters in the city of Ramadi that recently fell. Bottom-line is the Iraqi's remain conflicted and ununited, this makes them unreliable as a fighting force.

No amount of money or training will ever solve this problem. Iraqi security forces lost 2,300 Humvee armored vehicles when ISIS overran Mosul last year. This represents well over $1 billion of American tax payers money. The article below delves into our botched effort and how little progress is being made.


tall sarah's picture

"No amount of money or training will ever solve this problem." They don't want to solve it.

This is why Americans should wake up and demand that the Federal government be constrained. The U.S. Federal government is the problem. They are not inept- they know what they are doing- at least the string pullers do. They are infringing upon state government and will soon find a reason to extingsh it. The Federal government has become a liability to the citizens of the world. No one is safe from this group of terrorists.

Assad has been the "president" of Syria for 15 years, he followed his father who had held the title for 30 years. What has changed that required the U.S. to butt in? The reason for this entire fiasco is that Assad did not support the pipeline from Qatar crossing Syria. Pure and simple America is playing Empire. They want the pipeline to supplant Russia as the major supplier for EU.

Americans should know and understand that our Federal government is the enemy. They are slimeballs who will continue because it's not about the money they spend- it's about money their friends make.

Do I want to see China or Russia replace the U.S. -NO. Citizens worldwide need to curb their national government's power. Government at the local/state level is needed in my opinion. I have yet to see a city or state govt. start a war so their friends can make money.

shovelhead's picture


You thought he Iraqi's surrendering in the thousands before a shot was fired was just a fluke the first two times?

Face it. These ain't yer great, great Grandpa's Babylonians of yore.

Get 3 of em in a room and you'll have a civil war before the surviving 2 will form a unified force.

overmedicatedundersexed's picture

if there is peace, who needs massive military? sad but there it is. some old white guys a bunch a hunred yrs ago..said "no entangling alliances" what the fuck did that mean?? if your society is stable and happy, who needs big .gov programs, so some of us think ..govs main mission is to ensure there is an unstable and unhappy people who they can rule -cause who else will protect you??

SWRichmond's picture

govs main mission is to ensure there is an unstable and unhappy people who they can rule -cause who else will protect you??

And who else will loot you?

SmittyinLA's picture

Ah yes, but there were MOAR economists that predicted net rent revenue increases  and a across the board wage catering effect in the EU from the influx of Syrian refugees, profits were much higher with war, and the losses are almost entirely on Americans, better still the war will trigger a US refugee influx further pushing America to the left.

Able Ape's picture

I think the root cause of all our problems is that people unwaveringly believe that governments, political parties, and taxes are absolutely essential to modern life rather than being inimical.  Think about it, are you comfortable working for a half-year and handing these BOZOS your hard-earned wealth?...  

Ace006's picture

State and municipal employees must be rewarded for their services. What are you? Some kind of mad man?

roodeetoodee's picture

You Yanks need to cheer up a bit. Y'all still the greatest country on Gods green earth. And lets face it, you cats made a Snoop Dog and a Top Gun and there aint nothin ever gunna top that. Far as Im concerned, Yankee Doodles and their Dandies can be my Wingman anytime.

And hell if the Trumpster becomes your elPresidente, then Ima gonna move there, fight me off some brown boys and get me a green card. This has been roodeetoodee sending out  a big woohoo and then a howdy partner on top of a giddi upping YeeHarrr.

God Bless the United States of America.

Conax's picture

You must be seeing us through Professor Peabody's WayBack machine.

50 years have passed since we were half-way great. Snoop Dog (?) notwithstanding.

You're welcome to immigrate anyway, we welcome any immigrant that can read and write English.

God Help the United States of America.

general ambivalent's picture

What about Nicki Manaj, Taylor Swift, and Kanye? They're battling it out for greatest cultural significance of all time, of all time!

dogismycopilot's picture

Interesting, Steven Segal is a supporter of the Second Amendment; thinks most mass shootings are 'engineered', and that the US doesn't know its ass from its hand when it comes to protecting children. He also says,  "the US economy is the worst its ever been, American people are spending every waking moment working..."


OldPhart's picture

Not every waking minute working, some of us stay up at night to 2 am to learn shit.

Vegetius's picture

The actions of the US Government are the failing attempts of a Great Power to retain its position Globally. With our interlocking global trade agreement this behaviour of the US is as close to crazy as you can get and appears to be a policy move approved by the key player in the US elites.

Will their plan work? No it is accelerating the collapse, The outcomes are the destabilisation of Europe and the collapse of the Middle East. The fall of the USA will follow these events,

doctor10's picture

Great. Somebody in ISIS/ISIL?WhatTeHell has the goods on a substantial chunk of the American financial and military oligarchy.

Chupacabra-322's picture

"The actions of the US Government are the failing attempts of a Great Power to retain its position Globally."

That coupled with the fact of a lack of Empathy and decrresed morals is a sure sign of an Empire on the brink of collapse. Amercian "Exceptionalism" at its finest. off.

KnuckleDragger-X's picture

We went from being world leader to world bully and with leadership of Obozo caliber, we can't even do that anymore. The world is going to reset and we'll need to relearn how to behave like civilized people....

shovelhead's picture


We had that moment when Slick Willie "Felt your pain".

How much more empathy do you need?

Obama's still busy making the waters recede and healing the Earth and even that doesn't satisfy you emotionally needy types.

Somebody toss this guy a Care Bear before I cry.

Caleb Abell's picture

"Obama's still busy making the waters recede and healing the Earth and even that doesn't satisfy you emotionally needy types."

I don't understand why barry would need to make the waters recede.  We were told many times in 2008 that he could walk on water.

By the way, slick willie might have felt your pain, but only by accident.  I believe it is well settled fact that his intention was to feel something else.