...and appear to have funded ISIS since 2007.. [Link]

Kuwait and Saudi probably see a Sunni ISIS power influence in Iraq as preferable to a Shia one, that has close ties to Iran. The Iranian backed Shia groups hold a lot of sway in Iraq, and ISIS represent a means of reducing that.

Similarly, an end of Syrian influence in the middle east favours the Saudi's as well.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

'Kin ell, they're beheading Christian children now.

I agree with you it is complex. But I would say that (1)its far from clear the USA (directly or indirectly) weren't encouraging the Jihadi groups (even if the jihadis were unaware)

see, for example 1998 pre 9/11 link from NBC (hardly an anti US source):

[Link]

and (2) we ,at the very least, did not hinder their development and arguably were happy for them to develop so long as they seemed a useful tool in keeping with our overall strategic plan at the time.

BBC News website 26 September 2001:

"Britain's relationship with Bin Laden dates back to the 1980s when Whitehall and Washington pumped billions of dollars to Muslim fighters fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Arab volunteers recall fondly passing through Britain en route to Bin Laden's processing centre near the Afghan front.

With victory against the Soviets in 1989, many of the "Afghan Arabs" headed back to Britain.

Cash for Jihad

Like Beirut in the 1970s, London became a safe haven from which to broaden the Jihad armed struggle from Afghanistan to the secular regimes of the Arab world.

Libyan, Tunisian and Egyptian Islamists, many of them ex-fighters, all made London their base and some 2,000 Middle East dissidents a year poured into Britain. "

There is zero chance MI5 and MI6 did not know exactly what was going on and could have been instructed to clamp down any time had their political bosses wished.

Edited by legaleagle (08 Aug 2014 10.35pm)

Certain, the part on the role of the UK is something known so well in Jyhadist circles that these movements actually forbid attacks that might draw the UK's wrath.

How far the CIA were aware of what the pakistani's were distributing from their funds to the Islamist groups isn't clear, and certainly Al-Qaeda weren't accepting weapons and cash from US sources after 1990 but there's almost certainly some crossover, as the pakistani' ISA were being partially funded by the CIA and funnelling weapons, training and cash into the Mujahedeens' and likely much of that was going through Bin Ladens group (which was more involved in logisitics than the conflict).

Indeed prior to the stationing of troops in Saudi Arabia, Al-Qaeda probably weren't even that anti-US.

Its really post Gulf war that the escalation begins with the US and Al-Qaeda.

MI5 and 6 were probably quite attentive, as they were keen on these groups ability to provide foreign sources, and their issue with Iran, Libya, Syria and Iraq (all hated by the Islamic Jyhad - so much so that Libya even offered to set up Al-Quead's leader ship for the CIA and MI6).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

How the chickens come home to roost.1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter's National Security Adviser.

[Link]