NOTE: World Affairs Brief delivered weekly via email by subscription - for free copy contact Editor

There has been widespread criticism this week over Obama taking too much time to develop a strategy to deal with ISIS. Now, I think we know why: This week’s NATO summit at Cardiff Castle in South Wales has shed a lot of light on where the US is steering this ISIS debacle which the dark side of government created. Judging by Obama’s remarks at the summit on Wednesday the globalists intend to create an international coalition to fight the latest ISIS “savagery.” It apparently took a week of planning to get all the European leaders on board, and it has become quite obvious they are all now in lock step. The US public has long been predisposed to being railroaded into fighting the eternal war on terror and giving up essential liberties to do so, but this major summit was apparently necessary to get Europeans in line, who are generally much more skeptical of the phony war on terror and the fact that 9/11, which started it all, was a US government operation from beginning to end.

So it seems that 9/11, the most horrific government created terror event to date, was only the first step. It provided the catalyst for the US government to go rampaging through the Middle East in the name of fighting al Qaeda (also a US black ops creation), but now it’s time for the globalists to get all Western nations committed militarily. ISIS was funded and created to become an even bigger threat than the ubiquitous al Qaeda­which had become so overused that people were getting immune to the supposed threat. ISIS gives the terror-mongers a fresh start in the propaganda game.

John McCain meeting illegally in a rebel safe house with the heads of the “Free Syrian Army” in Idlib, Syria in April, 2013. In the left foreground, top al Qaeda terrorist leader Ibrahim al-Badri (aka Al-Baghdadi of ISIS, aka Caliph Ibrahim of the recently founded Islamic Empire) with whom the Senator is talking. Behind Badri is visible Brigadier General Salim Idris (with glasses), the former military chief of the FSA, who has since fled to the Gulf states after the collapse of any semblance of the FSA. (Courtesy

Arizona Sen. John McCain may have let slip a hint of the federal government’s policy towards the ISIS terrorist group Wednesday evening during an appearance on Fox News, according to Mikael Thalen of

At the 1:00 mark in the short clip with Greta Van Susteran, McCain mentions a meeting the President held with his national security team in which all members reportedly “recommended arming ISIS.” “Hillary Clinton has described already the meeting in the White House over two years ago… everyone in the national security team recommended arming ISIS and the President, by himself, turned it down,” McCain said.

The comment follows a question from Susteran regarding the arming of the “Free Syrian Army,” making McCain’s statement appear to be a simple Freudian slip. While some reports have taken the remark out of context, McCain’s unintended comment regarding ISIS still remains completely factual. Despite McCain falsely claiming that the President declined to arm the group, the pairs’ direct involvement in the rise of ISIS, a name simply referring to Al Qaeda in Iraq, is undeniable.

So, it’s not surprising that governments have crafted two beheading videos to drive home the point that ISIS is so savage that the world cannot ignore the threat. Trouble is, the first video of the beheading of James Foley was so contrived and inconsistent with a real beheading, that the establishment delayed letting the public even glimpse the second video of the beheading of Steven Sotloff. They were only showing still shots for the first week.

When it did finally surface, it came through an organization that specializes in promoting the phony war on terror: The SITE Intelligence Group (Search for International Terrorist Entities) apparently “discovered” the most recent video, which is very suspicious. As Kurt Nimmo of points out,

One of SITE’s founders, Rita Katz, is a government insider with close connections to former terrorism czar Richard Clarke and his staff in the White House, as well as investigators in the Department of Justice, Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Homeland Security according to SourceWatch,

Just as in the first video of the Foley Beheading, Sotloff appears too calm leading some to believe he had become a total believer in the ISIS cause and truly condemned US actions in attacking ISIS. This is highly improbable given what Foley and Sotloff’s friends have said about these two. They say Sotloff made Aliya to Israel several years ago and is a Jew. Barry Chamish wrote on Thursday about the high probabilities that Sotloff was actually working undercover for the Mossad­which often uses the “free lance journalism” cover. Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu said, “Journalist Steven Sotloff, beheaded by the ISIS, secretly practiced his Judaism but hid it from his captors, according to a fellow kidnap victim who was among those freed.”

As I pointed out last week, Foley’s calm appearance on the video does not match other examples of captives forced to read a statement under duress. The same applies to Sotloff. I don’t buy that Foley and Sotloff had become such “died in the wool” jihadists that they could be this calm and compliant in the face of such a crude form of killing. Most beheading is done with single heavy sword­which is quicker and easier for the executioner. The small knife shown would take too long and be very difficult. And that is why it never happened that way. This contrived video is simply a staged fraud. As Infowars points out,

.... top British forensic experts concluded that the video was likely staged using “camera trickery and slick post-production techniques.... After enhancements, the knife can be seen to be drawn across the upper neck at least six times, with no blood evidence to the point the picture fades to black,” an analyst said.” I think it has been staged. My feeling is that the execution may have happened after the camera was stopped.” [UK Telegraph interviews]

Few dispute that Foley and Sotloff are dead, but my contention still stands: It’s simply preposterous to believe they became willing martyrs for jihad, and it’s far more probable that “Jihad John,” the Brit who is wielding the knife, is really a British agent who is the front man for an evil and sophisticated government group who may well have “rescued” both men and then talked them separately into doing a helpful video “to raise awareness of the evils of ISIS,” before promising to send them home.

That’s the only logical explanation to how they can be so calm reading the anti-US script they don’t believe in, and they certainly don’t appear to be expecting to die a ruthless death. It’s much more likely they are expecting to be congratulated for a good performance, and be on the next plane home. Instead they are killed so that the video horror has a semblance of truth. It’s real purpose is to drive the public into backing a new world-wide war on terror. As Paul Joseph Watson pointed out,

At the start of the NATO summit in Wales this morning, Cameron cited the video as one of the reasons why air strikes on Syria cannot be ruled out, as he began re-building a case for military aggression that failed last year following dubious claims about who was responsible for the Ghouta chemical weapons attack.

For Cameron, who has been struggling to build political support for air strikes on ISIS, the threat to behead Haines couldn’t have been more timely. And therein lies the completely illogical foundation of the alleged beheading videos. The release of the footage does nothing to encourage the US and the UK to “back off” fighting ISIS, it achieves the exact opposite, creating a casus belli for expanded western military operations in the middle east.

This is a very important point that should not be dismissed out of hand. The dark side of government is utterly ruthless and filled with yes-men with no principles or morals. If the government wouldn’t hesitate to kill over 3,000 people at Pearl Harbor and another almost 3,000 in the WTC through controlled demolition, what’s a couple of reporters to them?

There has been a lot of talk and government warning about another 9/11 terror attack. While it is possible that the government might pull off another high profile attack, they did such a bad job covering up for government involvement in 9/11, they may be reluctant to do that kind of big production again­hence, the two videos of the weird beheadings. They are dramatic enough and revolting enough to get people energized, but do not gibe enough material to drive another 9/11 conspiracy movement, except for those who already smell a rat.

In another related terror threat, there’s a lot of talk on the net about the 11 airliners that “disappeared” from the International Airport in Tripoli (Libya) after Islamic militants took control. Bill Gertz of the Washington Free Beacon said,

Intelligence reports of the stolen “airliners were distributed within the U.S. government over the past two weeks and included a warning that one or more of the aircraft could be used in an attack later this month on the date marking the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against New York and Washington.

The plane pictured with a lot of jihadists standing on the fuselage is a business sized jet. Only a few in the report were medium sized airliners. But, regardless, this is a false narrative. 9/11 wasn’t caused by hijacked civilian airliners directly. They played a role only to set the stage­the real damage was done by pre-set explosives in the buildings.

All of the mainstream news headlines today are shouting the news: “US and Allies Form Coalition With Intent to Destroy ISIS,” “Allies Unanimous in Fight Against ISIS”. Here’s the Agence France Press, dutifully pumping out the same propaganda in Europe we see in the American news:

United States President Barack Obama called on Wednesday (Sep 3) for an international front against jihadists in Iraq and Syria after they beheaded a second American reporter, as Britain and France weighed military action.

I personally don’t think Europeans are really sold on this war yet, but the provocative beheading videos are enough to keep most people silent about France and Britain using the NATO summit as a jumping off point for joining the US in military action. The US is already escalating with 350 more troops, bringing the total of Obama’s “no troops in Iraq” policy to over 1,000­that the government admits to. There are undoubtedly many more doing stealth operations.

"We know that if we are joined by the international community, we can continue to shrink ISIL's sphere of influence, its effectiveness, its financing, its military capabilities," said Obama, referring to the Islamic State (IS). "And the question is going to be making sure we've got the right strategy, but also making sure that we've got the international will to do it," he said in Estonia's capital Tallinn.

That’s twice he pushes the essential concept that whatever “we” do, it must be international in scope. That’s always the pattern globalists use to justify expanding the NWO. Unfortunately, this still does not mean they won’t need a nuclear WWIII to get everyone fully into a binding global government. They will. But this new escalation of the war on terror is helping to make sure the transition to an international military coalition seems perfectly natural to most people. Both Britain and France gave strong hints they were moving toward military participation:

Britain, with one of its nationals also under threat of beheading, said it would not rule out taking part in air strikes if necessary. "I can assure you that we will look at every possible option to protect this person," Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said. And French President Francois Hollande likewise raised the prospect of a military response to the threat posed by IS. "The head of state underlined the importance of a political, humanitarian and if necessary military response in accordance with international law" to fight against IS, the presidency said.

And, to drive the point home, Secretary of State John Kerry “revealed he was working to forge a global coalition to fight the ‘medieval savagery’ of Islamic militants terrorizing a swathe of Syria and Iraq.” And Obama pledged that “justice would be done to the killers of 31-year-old reporter Steven Sotloff, wherever they hid and however long it took.” Sure, just like Bush promised to bring to justice those who pulled off 9/11.

Obama said Washington was determined to halt the IS threat but warned it would depend on close cooperation with partners in the region. The United Arab Emirates voiced its readiness to "take needed measures", as Iraq condemned the beheadings as "an act of savagery and evil" that showed the urgency of defeating the jihadists.

British Prime Minister David Cameron said the beheading video depicted an "absolutely disgusting, despicable act" and chaired a meeting of security chiefs to discuss how to tackle the IS threat. The masked executioner in the video spoke with a London accent and claimed to be the same man, confirmed by UK security services as a Briton, who beheaded Foley.

At the end of the Sotloff video, the militant threatens yet another captive aid worker, David Haines. So they seem to have a constant supply of future victims in reserve depending on how far they have to go to get the public to buy into this ploy for escalation.

As also pointed out, a CIA whistleblower has admitted that the agency has produced false videos before to gin up the war on terror:

A 2010 Washington Post article authored by former Army Intelligence Officer Jeff Stein features a detailed account of how the CIA admittedly filmed a fake Bin Laden video during the run up to the 2003 Iraq war.

The article, which includes comments from multiple sources within the CIA’s Iraq Operations Group, explains how the agency had planned to “flood Iraq with the videos” depicting several controversial scenarios.

“The agency actually did make a video purporting to show Osama bin Laden and his cronies sitting around a campfire swigging bottles of liquor and savoring their conquests with boys, one of the former CIA officers recalled, chuckling at the memory,” the article states. “The actors were drawn from ‘some of us darker-skinned employees.’”

There’s another side story to the NATO summit that deserves comment. A Fox News regular commentator, former Lt. Col Ralph Peters claims inside information from a White House source that President Obama was “out of it” and nearly incoherent as PM David Cameron was trying to communicate with Obama on Air Force One heading to the summit:

Now this information comes via D.C. sources which outline a very brief, troubling, and bizarre phone conversation between British Prime Minister David Cameron and President Obama... The communication from British Prime Minister to the president is said to have been initiated at approximately 5:00 eastern time... According to the published White House schedule for Tuesday, that would have put Barack Obama on Air Force One on his way to Europe. The Prime Minister was said to have to wait for nearly twenty minutes before the call was finally taken by the president. Why would it take twenty minutes for staff to locate the President of the United States within the confines of a airplane – even one as luxurious as AF1?

That is far from the most troubling aspect of the alleged interaction between the two world leaders though. President Obama is said to have been “nearly incoherent”, slurring his words heavily and even at one point “giggling as the Prime Minister struggled to focus the conversation on the terrorist threats in the Middle East.” The President of the United States was said to be “out of it” during a conversation that has staff for the Prime Minister privately describing to their D.C. counterparts as “bizarre.”

Peters is a reliable neocon who has promoted the war on terror for years, but drops back to the position of armchair critic on Fox News so that he can influence conservatives. Who else gets to carry a military rank title that is years old and not relevant today? He is now following the typical Fox News line that “Obama is the problem”­very popular with conservatives, but very naive.

Peters, in my opinion, has too many insider contacts to be in the real opposition, and he’s too smart not to know the real implications of what his sources just revealed­that Obama isn’t psychologically incapacitated as much as he is controlled, and often with mood altering drugs. There were several insiders in the Obama campaign who also noticed that candidate Obama was on mood altering drugs, especially before any big performance. That’s also how they kept Nixon in line so Kissinger could run the White House as pointed out in the book The Arrogance of Power: The Secret World of Richard Nixon by Anthony Summers. Robert Dallek also talks about how Kissinger controlled most of what Nixon did in Nixon and Kissinger, Partners in Power.