BIGGER THAN ISIS - There's a hidden power behind ISIS and it's so big and so powerful, you won't believe this MASSIVE SHOCKING fact about it!

Evidence suggests Obama is the head of the world's most powerful terrorist organization, and ISIS is only a branch.

If you were asked, what is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated in human history, how would you answer? Global warming? Vaccines? The Moon Landing? Entire religions?  (Not that we agree with these). But what would you say? In a moment, we're going to offer an answer with one irrefutable piece of evidence that may convince even the toughest skeptics. And the answer will keep you awake at night, even more than the gripping fear of terrorism that's spreading across our nation.

LOS ANGELES, CA (California Network) - In a moment, we're going to make an incredible proposition. It will be so preposterous, that you may be tempted to click on another article. But bear with us. We'll be offering proof throughout this piece. And at the end, we will provide the final bombshell evidence that we think may convince even the hardest skeptic that all is not what it seems.

Hang on Toto, we're about to leave Kansas.

President Obama is the ultimate hidden cell terrorist. It is likely that he heads an unholy alliance between various intelligence services, big business and the world's most fearsome terrorist organizations. We're not the enemy of the Islamic State, but bedfellows, and the war that is literally being staged in Syria and Iraq is the ultimate in public theater.

Although the bombs and the beheadings are real and the attacks are authentic and bloody, all this gruesome spectacle is intended to terrify the public, obtain our consent for heavy policing and other government intrusions, and to secure a greater American empire in the Middle East to protect the flow of oil and bring a forced stability to a region that is fraught with division.

While Obama may just be the titular head of this literal terror cell, he is solely responsible for signing orders and calling shots that have been crucial to the rise of the Islamic State and their retention of power. The Islamic State terrorists, the U.S. military, and We the People, are pawns in a game that's so big that we cannot easily comprehend it.

In a moment, we will examine the agenda behind all these movements. It's not a particularly unsettling agenda in itself, it does not end with global domination or with Obama becoming a dictator for life. In fact, we can almost sympathize with what our leaders are trying to achieve, but their methodology is so sick and twisted, so fundamentally evil, that we can only be shocked with the depravity of it all. But first, let's take time to examine our proofs and build the case.

The United States built Al Qaeda between 1982 and 1992. This is common knowledge. Our goal was to stop Soviet hegemony in Afghanistan. The USA provided substantial support including money, training, weapons and intelligence with the mujahedeen, or "freedom fighters" as Regan dubbed them. At the time, it was a winning proposition for us. We avoided direct participation in war, the good guys defeated the bad guys, and all was right in the world. We chilled Soviet enthusiasm for militant expansion.

However, we also created a well-networked organization of fighting men, without work to do afterwards. After the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 1991, Osama bin Laden took offense at the presence of Americans in Saudi Arabia and it was easy for the disaffected young man to find a new purpose for himself, organizing and directing a ready-made terrorist organization. The rest is history.

Except, instead of learning our lesson, we've since repeated and compounded the mistake.

ISIS was itself an Al Qaeda offshoot, originally labeled as "Al Qaeda in Iraq." That organization was cobbled together from various minor factions of anti-American terror gangs. However, the U.S. eventually found a way to co-opt the organization into doing our bidding. 

By the time of the Obama administration, the agenda had developed into one of perpetual war and the need to maintain an American presence in the region. This of course, could not happen if peace broke out, so constant terrorism and factional strife were actually promoted.

ISIS was originally a minor player. They really were "Al Qaeda's jayvee team," although by the time Obama uttered his infamous quote, they had already made a liar out of him.

Both ISIS and Al Nursa, another Al Qaeda affiliate (which curiously is now labeled as "moderate" by the Obama administration), were aided by recruiting efforts linked to Turkey and NATO. Many of the people who lead ISIS today were once in American custody in Iraq. Were they recruited somehow to serve an agenda even they could not fully comprehend, turned into pawns?

Many of the soldiers in ISIS were recruited from Saudi Arabian prisons, escaped from massive jailbreaks in Iraq, or were recruited from overseas.

Most of the military leadership of ISIS is drawn from Saddam Hussein's former military commanders. What else do you do with career generals who once commanded a ruthless dictator's army? You give them a new command!

The known field commander of ISIS forces is a Chechen, Abu Omar al-Shistani, who was at least partially trained by the U.S.

Perhaps the most striking evidence of ISIS's covert pedigree was the way the organization engaged in a massive covert operation to infiltrate cities and take them over, long before their soldiers arrived. In Mosul, ISIS thugs entered the city days before the main force arrived. They shook down businesses, took inventory of what was there, including any threats. They used fear and intimidation to seize power even before the troops arrived.

Notably, U.S. intelligence knew about this tactic, and the U.S. did absolutely nothing. The world watched in horror as columns of terrorists rode into Mosul in massive convoys of Toyota trucks. They were an easy target, but they went entirely untouched. We then watched as Christians were driven from their homes and terrorists summarily executed thousands of young men. Truckloads of men were killed, and for anyone paying attention, the executions were often carried out with American-made firearms.

ISIS also seized over $400 million in cash at various banks in Mosul. With ISIS infiltrating the city, why was no attempt made to whisk the money away, or even to simply destroy it?

The tactic of infiltrating the city before conquering it is an advanced tactic, and not the behavior of a brute terror organization. ISIS has continually impressed observers with their sophistication and the sheer efficiency of their organization. Is ISIS "professionally" handled?

Russia continues to claim that the U.S. is supporting ISIS. They point to a number of suspicious facts. First of all, how is it that ISIS has so much American equipment? We know it was seized from Iraqi forces, which fled and abandoned their equipment as ISIS advanced. But why was so much equipment left behind?

President Obama signed the order to leave the equipment behind.

This is different from previous wars, where U.S. planners have often deliberately destroyed equipment at the end of a military campaign to prevent that material from falling into the hands of another state. Even friendly states have been denied the use of this surplus equipment. Whether it's tanks and helicopters thrown off the side of ships into the sea, or ships nuked in the Pacific, the equipment is not normally left behind.

Did Obama deliberately leave the equipment in the hands of an incompetent force so ISIS could seize it? Only he could sign the order to leave it there.

There's other evidence as well. When the U.S. claimed to bomb hundreds of ISIS fuel trucks, laden with oil for sale to middlemen. A full 45 minutes before the strike aircraft arrived, other aircraft delivered leaflets ordering the truck drivers to abandon their vehicles. This was ostensibly done to "avoid civilian casualties." Never mind the fact that it's not customary to warn an interdiction target of an imminent strike.

There's three more curious facts surrounding that strike. Why did the strike planes find the trucks parked in rows, instead of widely dispersed, as would make better sense for the defender? Why did they only destroy a hundred or so trucks instead of the over 500 that Russia was able to destroy just days later? And why didn't ISIS, knowing the strike was coming, attempt to shoot down the helicopters and low-flying jets?

Why has the United States pussyfooted with ISIS from the beginning? We've long appreciated the importance of oil to their operations, we've known the locations of wells, refineries, headquarters, training camps and more, yet we haven't struck any of these places before recently. Only after the Nov. 13 Paris attacks, when public outcry was too great to ignore and other countries like France and Russia were prepared to upstage the United States and release their attack footage, did the US seem to get serious about hitting ISIS.

How does such an evil organization operate with virtual impunity for over a year? How do we abide genocide, slavery, and a host of other evils for so long?

If all this seems bizarre and far-fetched to you, don't worry. It's about to fall into place.

In a moment, you'll see the most convincing evidence. But before that, you deserve to know the agenda behind all this.

The United States, Great Britain, and much of the western world, aligned with big money interests, wants to bring control (theirs) and stability to the region. That doesn't seem like a particularly dark agenda, and indeed it isn't. We can argue that control is not entirely a benevolent thing, but nature abhors a vacuum, and if control doesn't come from the West, it will just come from the East. 

Whoever controls Syria and Iraq also controls a massive supply of oil, which is a major economic commodity and strategic resource. It can be translated into money and power very easily, so it's a natural target.

Control over the region should bring stability. Western troops can be stationed there and the region can provide a buffer between states like Iran and Israel, protecting an important ally.

The plan is simple. Divide the region into no less than three new states. A Republic of Kurdistan, a larger Saudi state, with control over more oil-rich territory, and a Sunni state. The three states would cater to their religious majorities, and this would create stability since each could have their own territory and govern themselves according to their whims. This would help to correct some of the errors made by the British who established the original boundaries and split otherwise homogeneous populations in two.

These plans are not entirely secret. In 2007, Gen. Wesley Clark mentioned these plans in an interview, explaining that the U.S. government had a controversial agenda going into motion. The plans was, in five years to overthrow seven states. "We're going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran" he told Democracy Now.

The plan has long been to balkanize the region, and to create new boundaries. The plan has worked before, in the Balkans. Today, the Balkan states are relatively stable and there is no more risk of conflict in the region since each ethnic group has their own country.

It was always expected the plan would be traumatic, certainly, but the locals would do most of the fighting. It would also allow the West to sell arms to both sides, which is why the regions seems to be awash in American-made weaponry. The War on Terror is great for business.

It also serves a couple of other convenient purposes. It gives Muslim fanatics an outlet for their frustration while also setting them up to be killed. And it serves as a playground for new military technology. Win-win.

The plan also explains why some states, such as Israel, Jordan, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia have gone remarkably untouched by ISIS.

The War on Terror is also useful at home. Americans who are worried about traveling and visiting crowded, public places, are far less interested in issues like income inequality, political integrity, and the host of other issues that normally concern voters. The imminent threat of terrorism makes Americans single-issue voters, allowing those in power to otherwise govern with impunity -as long as they keep us safe.

So if ISIS is American-made, why the threats? Why the terror attacks? Who are we bombing?

The Islamic State may be American made, and it may be American handled, to some degree, but the organization is fairly autonomous. They likely respect some boundaries, for example, they have not invaded Jordan or Turkey, but they have plenty to do in the territory they occupy. Their followers are true believers and devoted to the point of death.

It is unlikely that their mass executions, genocidal activities, enslavements, the destruction of antiquities is condoned by anyone outside of ISIS itself. However, this unpredictable, violent chaos is part of the cost of using Islamic extremists to do your bidding. It's a classic problem, seen time and again throughout the American history of covert operations. The agents we recruit don't always cooperate fully and once they feel they have the power to do as they please, they simply do otherwise.

A textbook example of this is Klaus Barbie, the SS Nazi who the CIA smuggled to South America to help fight communism. He did our bidding, then proceeded to set himself up as a gun smuggler and a liaison for the drug cartels, outside of CIA control.

Finally, we come to the last pieces of evidence that the US is aiding and abetting ISIS.

ISIS is funded through no less than 40 countries. With our ties to the international banking system, why have we not moved to freeze all of these assets?

ISIS makes fantastic use of the internet for propaganda and recruiting purposes as well as for handling their global network of assets and cells. Yet, the fundamental internet infrastructure is controlled entirely by the United States. Without getting into technical details, we can say that the entire world uses the internet at our pleasure. Why does such an enemy of the United States still have internet access at all?

And finally, and this is the one that will keep you awake, how many terror attacks claimed by ISIS have occurred on US soil? It's easy to count them because the number is zero.

Yes, Muslims have attacked the US, or attempted attacks, but none of these have been ISIS. Is ISIS, with its sophisticated ability to infiltrate targets, being restrained from actually biting the hand that's done so much to feed it? Was Paris merely a false flag operation, staged by ISIS but intended to keep the world in fear? 

Perhaps an attack will come. Or more likely, an attack will be "foiled," and trumpeted in the news. But none of that would disprove the evidence offered here. Instead, it's just more of the same, keeping people afraid so they sacrifice liberties and become single-issue voters, drawn to the strong candidate.

The simple fact is that the West has an agenda in the Middle East. The agenda is to bring stability to the region and to control the people and resources there. Russia knows this and they have gotten into the mix to protect their interests in the region. They will not permit the West to control everything, hence the risk of a much wider conflict. This is why Russia actually bombs ISIS while we pretend to do so. And it's why we aren't cooperating against a common enemy as logic would dictate we do.

While the agenda is simple, the methodology is complex and there is an abundance of variables. ISIS may be the greatest one, because they are not very well controlled, just somewhat restrained. They believe in their cause, and our marriage is one of convenience. It's also on the rocks, for as ISIS grows in confidence, they will see less need to cooperate. They will become harder to control. That's when we will finally get serious about putting them down.

The titular head of this scheme is President Obama at present. He signed the orders, he has restrained the bombers, and he continues to orchestrate from the safety of the Oval Office. His dealings could spark a Third World War. He is terrorizing the country, and much of the world, with the semi-fabricated threat of terrorism. This allows him to enact his unholy agenda without resistance. In times of danger, we will follow anyone who promises to save us.

But we don't need to be saved from ISIS. We need to be saved from Obama and his network of elites and covert operations that are orchestrating the greatest threat to human civilization since the end of the Cold War.

Think about this and share this with your family and your friends. America deserves the truth, and the people deserve integrity in the Oval Office.

---

The California Network is the Next Wave in delivery of information and entertainment on pop culture, social trends, lifestyle, entertainment, news, politics and economics. We are hyper-focused on one audience, YOU, the connected generation. JOIN US AS WE REDEFINE AND REVOLUTIONIZE THE EVER-CHANGING MEDIA LANDSCAPE.