Skip to content or view screen version

Black Op Mujahideen Shura Council Declares Islamic State in Iraq

Kurt Nimmo | 16.10.2006 21:46 | Anti-militarism | World

The precisely timed statement was devised, with western intelligence connivance, not only to “stir up hatred between the Sunnis and the Shiites,” but break the country into three pieces based on ethnic and religious affiliation, a plan formulated in Israel, adopted by the neocons, and approved by the bankster global elite.

Iraqi speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani is on to something. “Everyone who believes statements made by [the Mujahideen Shura Council] know nothing. All the followers of this organization are fools. It is obvious that the purpose of the council is to stir up hatred between the Sunnis and the Shiites.”

The precisely timed statement was devised, with western intelligence connivance, not only to “stir up hatred between the Sunnis and the Shiites,” but break the country into three pieces based on ethnic and religious affiliation, a plan formulated in Israel, adopted by the neocons, and approved by the bankster global elite.

The Mujahideen Shura Council has declared the establishment of the “Islamist Republic of Iraq,” consisting of “six central Iraqi provinces, including Baghdad and several districts of two southern Iraqi provinces,” according to NewsLab. “Mujahideen Shura Council posted the video with such a statement on a website, RBC news agency reports. A man who read a message out told about necessity to struggle against ‘betrayers’ and suggested all Sunni Muslims should support ‘the new government headed by Abdullah Rashid al-Baghdadi, a militant reported to be Mujahideen Shura Council leader by US and Iraqi special services.’”

In the “Ministry of Information” video, a man with a white circle imposed over his face declares: “Your brothers announce the establishment of the Islamic State in Baghdad, Anbar, Diyala, Kirkuk, Salah al-Din, Ninawa, and in other parts of the governorate of Babel, in order to protect our religion and our people” and fealty to “Emir of the Believers,” Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, is demanded, as well as “financial support, men, and prayers,” according to the SITE Institute. As the newly declared Sunni Islamic state includes Shi’ite areas of Iraq, conflict is assured to continue, as planned.

Abu Maysarah al-Iraqi—supposedly the former “media coordinator” for “al-Qaeda jihad organization in the Land of the Two Rivers,” that is to say the al-Zarqawi black op in Iraq—is a prominent figure in the Mujahideen Shura Council and for this reason the above declaration is highly suspect.

It appears the “umbrella group led by Iraq’s branch of al Qaeda,” as CNN characterizes the Mujahideen Shura Council, specializes in abducting and murdering embassy employees and issuing death threats against Pope Benedict XVI, guaranteed to outrage Christians and others, a required element of the “clash of civilizations” forever war planned by the neocons, their Zionist collaborators, and the military-industrial complex that stands to profit handsomely from interminable war and destruction. “We shall break the cross and spill the wine…. God will (help) Muslims to conquer Rome…. God enable us to slit their throats, and make their money and descendants the bounty of the mujahideen,” declared a Mujahideen Shura Council communiqué last month after the Pope quoted a 14th-century emperor regarding Muslims. Of course, incendiary comments about invading Rome and slitting the throats of infidels are useful in the on-going propaganda effort to portray Muslims as butchers who will one day be on the streets of America, killing toddlers with blood-caked scimitars.

It is hardly a mistake all of this dovetails nicely with the “three state solution” proposed by the Council on Foreign Relations and others. “For decades, the United States has worshiped at the altar of a unified yet unnatural Iraqi state. Allowing all three communities within that false state to emerge at least as self-governing regions would be both difficult and dangerous. Washington would have to be very hard-headed, and hard-hearted, to engineer this breakup. But such a course is manageable, even necessary, because it would allow us to find Iraq’s future in its denied but natural past,” writes Leslie H. Gelb, CFR President Emeritus and Board Senior Fellow and, not surprisingly, a Pulitzer Prize winner, former correspondent for the New York Times, and senior official in state and defense departments.

No doubt, when Gelb mentions Iraq’s “natural past,” he is talking about Iraq under Ottoman rule. “For administrative purposes Ottoman Iraq was divided into the three central eyalets of Mosul, Baghdad, and Al-Basrah, with the northern eyalet of Shahrizur, east of the Tigris, and the southern eyalet of Al-Hasa, on the western coast of the Persian Gulf. These provinces only roughly reflected the geographic, linguistic, and religious divisions of Ottoman Iraq,” notes Encyclopedia Britannica. As Oded Yinon noted in his A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties, a “division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times” is the plan. “[T]hree (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi’ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north.”

Likewise, for “administrative purposes,” the globalists, under the direction of the neocon faction currently in sway, are determined to impose a “three state solution” in Iraq, a recycling of Sir Cyril Radcliffe’s “partition” of the Indian sub-continent, a “colonial finale.” As for the “solution” imposed on India, “[p]erhaps one million people died in the turmoil following the sub-continent’s partition, and millions more were uprooted,” writes Drew Hamre. “Fifty years later, the border remains the world’s most dangerous nuclear flashpoint. Whatever odds you give our damnable occupation, it would be a moral disaster to bomb, and then partition, and then run.”

Of course, the United States will not “run,” as, upon implementing the “three state solution,” the Pentagon will “pull back” to “permanent bases” located in Balad, al-Asad, and Tallil, all “in line to receive substantial chunks of the 2006 emergency budget,” according to the BBC earlier this year. “The United States may want to keep a long-term military presence in Iraq to bolster moderates against extremists in the region and protect oil supplies, the army general overseeing US operations in Iraq has said,” Aljazeera reported in March.

In other words, the United States will maintain three massive Fort Apaches in Iraq, part of an effort to “prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals” and “keep tributaries pliant and protected,” as Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote in The Grand Chessboard.

Naturally, the Mujahideen Shura Council—read, “al-Qaeda”—declaration of an Islamic state underscores the threat of “collusion” and, as well, maintains the neocon assertion that Iraq is the frontline of the generational war against terrorism. Part of the “three state solution” is the emergence of a terrorist state requiring vigilance, well-stocked “enduring” military bases built by Cheney’s Halliburton, and never-ending “commitment,” that is to say continuous profit for the war profiteers.


On October 15, Zaman Online reported the “United States is allegedly planning to construct a big military base in northern Iraq as part of its military plans for the Middle East.” According to “the Firat News Agency website, which is known to have close connections to the Kurdish Workers Party,” the Pentagon has started construction of “a military airport in the Arbil region. A small model of the base will be established in Suleymaniya.”

Kurt Nimmo
- Homepage: