ISIS reaches new depths of barbarism and depravity, as jihadis and U.S. college students take notes.

Link: American Kayla Mueller assaulted by al-Baghdadi.

Recently, while walking through a University campus in Austin, Texas, I stumbled upon an anti-military demonstration involving students. The students were protesting a number of issues, including the presence of the ROTC program in public schools and the U.S. intelligence community's ongoing efforts to combat Islamic terrorism.  One young man with an opposing perspective was engaging the protesters in a polite discussion of the issues, so I stood around on the periphery and listened.  After roughly twenty minutes, I moved on to my appointment.  Honestly, I didn't hear anything new from either side.  But I continue to be amazed at the level of ignorance demonstrated by so many university-level young people today.  These thirty to forty protesters were arguing that the actions of the United States, both past and present, were the root cause of the violence committed by Al-Qaeda, ISIS, El Sendero Luminoso, Abu Sayyaf, Boko Haram, al-Shabaab, and all the rest.  According to these scholars of American history, the United States had a pattern of aggressively exporting its own ideology to foreign lands, sometimes at the end of a gun barrel, and that we were reaping the fruits of prior Administration's efforts at economic colonialism.  What is "economic colonialism" as opposed to regular, ol' colonialism?  Economic colonialism occurs when the modern and wealthy nation with a huge military forces the smaller, developing country to welcome American business and companies.  Before you can say "Dole Pineapples and Bananas", these powerful American companies were exploiting the natural resources of the smaller nation and misusing its labor force.  In Bolivia, we supported the silver mines, which introduced child labor and chronic pulmonary illnesses in the local community.  In Colombia, Bolivia and Peru, our drug-addicted society forced these developing economies to become dependent upon exporting cocaine, until one day we changed our mind and demanded that the governments put the cocoa farmers in jail and burn their crops.  We all know about the poppy fields in Afghanistan, and of course our support of Israel has kept the Arab community from having any chance whatsoever of thriving.  Therefore, its no wonder that the terrorists want to kill us.

I am nobody's apologist, and this blog is not designed to tackle the heavy subject of "American Economic Imperialism".  I do believe, however, that any debt owed by the United States, has been paid in great excess by the blood sacrificed to rid the world of German, Italian and Japanese fascism.  I will also point out the tremendously positive impact of the technological advances pioneered by the United States, and the regular massive amount of international financial aid the is distributed in U.S. Dollars.  It has also been American intellect, ingenuity and money that put a man on the moon and a spacecraft traveling to the very edge of our own galaxy.  But this counts for nothing in the minds of certain people.  They exist solely to search for communal guilt in one form or another.  What really disturbs me is how out-of-touch so many young people are in the United States in Europe, when it comes to the inhuman and criminal actions of ISIS.  In fact, the under-20 years old generation doesn't remember the events of September 11, 2001, when almost three thousand innocent Americans were incinerated by terrorists no-doubt avenging some "wrong" committed against them by the United States.  I can forgive young people for not remembering 9-11, but all you need to do is turn on the news to get a dose of what has to be the most heinous displays of beheadings and executions that I have ever witnessed in my lifetime.  Everyday, the media wing of ISIS gets to work on its latest batch of video releases to the appalled but voyeuristic western nations.  The cancer that grew from the ashes of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq, pretends to be a political movement in search of an Islamic Caliphate.  In truth, it is a killing machine, that has learned how to turn subjugation and torture into an art form.  These people don't represent some "offended" or "abused" community; they exist to spread their brand of vile Islamic extremism to the entire world, not just the Levant.  If ISIS were only interested in the Levant, then why are they in Africa, and in Yemen, and Indonesia and the Philippines?  These students who were "ashamed" that our Air Force was leading the allied air coalition against ISIS, would be the first to lose their heads if ISIS had their way.  But not until they had been tortured as victimized in ways that until now were unknown to our species.

Apologists for terrorism love to compare the actions of Islamic Extremists to the Inquisition conducted by the Catholic Church so many centuries ago, and to the Crusades that were organized and financed for the purpose of keeping Jerusalem and its environs in the hands of Christians, not Muslims.  History is replete with examples of religious conflict in the Christian community. But the point is, we make the point to leave that barbarity in the past, and respect our fellow man's religious choices.  ISIS is attempting to take us back to the middle ages, when people were executed for their religious persuasion.  But lest you start to think that ISIS' motivation has to do with expanding the teachings of the Prophet, take a look at some of the extra curricular activities of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and his flock of Himmlers and Heydrichs.  Anyone accused of homosexual activity will be tortured and executed, many times bring thrown from the roof of buildings.  Single pregnant females are also subject to execution.  All the while, al-Baghdadi and his thugs ignore all the basic tenets of Islam.  Both male and female prisoners and hostages are routinely raped, and the hashish pipe has been known to make an appearance or two during down time.  Any bit of luxury that can be obtained out in the middle of the Syrian desert, has found its way to al-Baghdadi's quarters.  The money that is raised to support ISIS comes from a variety of sources, including oil.  But is also comes from the smuggling of both women (girls, actually) and merchandise.  And there is nothing in the Koran about the continual mass-executions of thousands of innocent people.  There is no forgiveness with ISIS, or the opportunity for repentance, which is a major pillar of the Koran and Islam.

So if they really aren't representing Islam, then who are they?  ISIS is evil incarnate, my friends.  No matter how many years you have on this earth, you will never see anything so black and devoid of compassion and goodness.  I have so much empathy for the Jewish survivors of the Holocaust, who have lived long enough to see the emergence of something worse.  The people who are driving the bus, al-Baghdadi and his supporters, want to see you and your entire family dead.  I'm taking this threat seriously, but is the Obama Administration?  Not by a longshot.  Its all about politics, and President Obama is strictly in "Legacy Mode" right now.  He's gearing up for his last, great use of Executive Action.  Before he leaves office, he will sign into law an Amnesty plan that allows the roughly twenty million ethnic Mexican illegal aliens living in the United States, the opportunity to become citizens.  Not Resident Aliens.  And why not?  Because Green Card Holders can't vote.  President Obama's lasting legacy will be his attempt to turn the United States into a one-party state.  So ISIS has kinda fallen off the radar.  Just let Hillary deal with it.

The expansion of ISIS and its intended future targets.

Link: A.  The expansion of The Islamic State.
          B.  Hamas aiding ISIS in Sinai?
      

This blog has regularly taken the opportunity to provide information regarding the recruitment efforts ands expansionist intentions of the extremist group, The Islamic State (ISIS).  From out perspective, the United States and its European and Arab allies have not been nearly proactive enough regarding the ISIS' ability to establish itself rapidly in almost any part of the world.  In fact, the allies haven't been proactive whatsoever.  Until now, that is.  We are beginning to see a bit more attention paid to the activities of ISIS, and more importantly, groups that have aligned themselves with the Islamic State.  June and July were pivotal months regarding the expansion of ISIS from within the conflict zones of Syria and Iraq, to Egypt, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Kenya, and possibly even the United States itself.  As detailed in our blog posting from July 8 (Link B), ISIS arrived with a bang in Sinai, taking out one Egyptian checkpoint before being dispatched themselves.  Although the international press had published occasional stories regarding certain established terrorist groups pledging allegiance to ISIS, it was the attack in Sinai that sounded the alarm.  From a strictly military perspective, the attack was a disaster.  The ISIS fighters, most of whom were local Palestinian recruits with a few veterans of Syria thrown in for good measure, managed to kill a handful of Egyptian soldiers, but they lost roughly two hundred of their own.  We know from a source on the scene that the Egyptian soldiers, especially the ones attacked at the original checkpoint, exhibited tremendous courage and determination.  No doubt their ability to keep ISIS from quickly moving through the checkpoint and on to larger targets, saved many lives.  In the end, though, the attack achieved its goals.  ISIS wanted to announce to the world that the conflict was no longer limited to Syria and Iraq, and also demonstrate its ability to recruit and utilize dedicated supporters was basically unlimited.

Since the early July events in Gaza, ISIS has not conducted anymore high-profile attacks outside Syria and Iraq, at least not of which we are aware.  In July, an Islamic extremist gunman opened fire on a U.S. military facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee, killing four Marines and a Sailor.  Was this deranged young man connected to ISIS?  Not according to the U.S. government.  He was a frequent visitor to ISIS-friendly websites, message boards and chat rooms, and he recently spent six months in Jordan, which makes the "lone-wolf" declaration by the Obama Administration seem to us to be bizarrely premature and suspiciously political.  We suspect that the shooter probably had some contact with ISIS agents while in Jordan, who ratcheted up the hate and anti-infidel message which was spinning in his head when he returned stateside.  The most difficult question to answer, is what kind of sleeper-cell network has ISIS, and Al-Qaeda beforehand, developed in North America?  From our optic, Al-Qaeda appears to favor the well-planned, highly trained, carefully chosen target, patient approach with regards to its cells, while ISIS seems to have no problem just handing someone a gun or a vehicle full of explosives, and telling them that when the signal comes in, just go out and kill people.  Interestingly enough, Bin Laden, Zawahiri and Al-Qaeda loved a carefully planned, well-resourced operation, and al-Baghdadi and ISIS seem to prefer operations that result in the highest casualty list, regardless of cost.  In the end, though, all three were definite believers in the power of fear.  However the operation comes about, in the end, it must create enough fear in the target communities, to make people consider changing the way they and their families live life.

On a positive note, the new administration in Nigeria seems intent on destroying Boko Haram (BH)once and for all.  The terrorist group has basically been on the run for some weeks, as the joint military efforts of Chad, Nigeria, Benin and Cameroon have left BH very little room to maneuver.  BH achieved a great deal of attention with its announcement of allegiance to ISIS, but ISIS is smart enough to stay out of northern Nigeria, at least for the moment.  The same can't be said for Libya, which seems to become more of a complicated mess everyday.  The fact that Libya hasn't already been united under one Islamic extremist banner is a surprise in itself, because it certainly seems destined to happen.  But for the time being, the United States and Europe continue to utilize some form of diplomacy to effect positive change, while at the same time, ISIS does its business out in the desert, visiting one isolated community after another, and adding them to the cause.  I'm not sure if the current Libyan government sits in Benghazi or Tripoli, or if any government is currently being recognized by the United Nations.  But the U.N. and the United States have been aware of the delicate state of affairs in Libya, since long before the Benghazi incident which killed five Americans.  You could not plan a more advantageous situation for ISIS, as the people are desperate for someone to institute a bit of law and order, and maybe get the water turned back on.  As demonstrated in Iraq, ISIS has learned the art of local government, and is expanding its footprint in Libya by providing communities with some level of organization and relief.

ISIS has also become active in Yemen, but to what degree is still a mystery.  ISIS has also established itself in many of the large, urban township communities in central and southern Africa, which has the potential to be an unlimited source of recruits.  Has ISIS found its way to the townships of Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paolo?  When young people see no future, the color of their skin makes no difference.  They will be a captive audience when the ISIS recruiters show up, with stories of glory on the battlefield, the holiness of killing infidels, and the providing of a wife (in this world, and forty additional ones in the next).  But one of the most important thing that ISIS can provide is something that the planners at the U.N. and the Pentagon haven't really started to notice: ISIS provides these young people with DIRECTION, a cause, a reason to get up in the morning.  One can never overestimate the value of "raison d'etre".  If the various governments in Africa are unable to solve endemic problems of unemployment and homelessness, then we should have a good idea from where the next batch of young recruits will originate.  Maybe the next Gaza-like statement will be in Pretoria, or Nakuru.  One thing is certain: the problem of global youth unemployment will only feed the fire of discontent that continues to provide extremists like ISIS with young people who are willing to die for the cause. 

Sure, the Islamic State has its share of Ex-Ba'athists; but its still a religiously motivated organization at heart.

Links: A. ISIS fighters in Ramadi are ex-Ba'ath Party members.
           B. Ex-Ba'athists helping organize ISIS.

In the past few weeks, I have repeatedly heard a bit of information that is taking on a life of its own.  I have been told by persons I respect and persons whose news sources are dubious at best, that the Islamic State/ISIS, is being controlled and run by ethnic Iraqi former Saddam loyalists and Ba'ath Party members.  Last year I had a long conversation with a good friend who happens to be a retired Iraqi General and a former Ba'ath Party member (his brother and father, now deceased, were both party representatives from Baghdad).  He informed me, almost off-handedly, that some of his former colleagues were involved with ISIS.  He elaborated that these individuals were assisting in the creation and expansion of different departments within the organization, including intelligence and recruitment.  He laughed as he pointed out that like many Iraqis, they were desperate to bring home a paycheck, and at least someone was willing to compensate them for their skills.  So the demographic that is the Islamic State now includes a number of former Ba'ath Party hacks, I thought.  It only strengthened my existing opinion that the Islamic State is determined to develop the characteristics of a conventional military force.  When George Bush (and more importantly Donald Rumsfeld) was considering the best way to defeat Al-Qaeda, the decision was made to force the terrorist organization to fight a conventional war, something it was not designed to do.  Although the insurgency and the Abu Ghraib fiasco dragged things out way longer than should have been necessary, the strategy actually worked, in both Iraq and Afghanistan.  Al-Qaida and the Taliban just did not have the personnel, the equipment, the resources, or the infrastructure to combat the U.S. military.  Interestingly enough, the Islamic State has been successful since it started behaving more as a legitimate armed forces, which requires a plan for resupply and reinforcements, and also must include a transportation and communication network.  When Al-Qaeda works in small units, transportation and communication are much simpler.  But the Islamic State now commands tens of thousands of personnel, and it can be no surprise that former regime elements, Sunni no doubt, have joined the cause, and that ISIS, which had a definite need for that expertise, welcomed them with open arms.

But this development can be easily misunderstood.  In no way does the motivation expressed by the Islamic State dovetail with the Socialist manifesto of the Arab Ba'ath Party that at one time controlled both Iraq and Syria.  Do not read too much into the fact that the intelligence branch of the Islamic State is run in the same manner as the intelligence branch of the Iraqi Army.  Certainly Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State, is ethnic Iraqi.  But he was not a supporter of Saddam Hussein.  Because the roots of the ISIS movement can be traced to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's "Al-Qaeda in Iraq", it should be no surprise that a number of Iraqis are prominent in the organization.  But I am beginning to see this perspective take root that the ghost of Saddam and Ba'ath Party adherents are dictating policy for the Islamic State.  Do not be distracted by this red herring.  Do not forget what the Islamic State represents and exactly what methods it has used to achieve its ends. No doubt Saddam did some heinous things, but is always attempted to cover-up or deny the existence of such government-sanctioned activity.  The Islamic State WANTS you as a first-row witness to its execution of persons because of religious persuasion.  More importantly, don't forget that the Ba'ath Party and Saddam Hussein were interested in political motivation as opposed to religious.  Saddam (and his buddy Bashir al-Assad) were in fear of the Islamic Extremist movement, and directed their security forces to deal with it harshly.  In its inception and at the height of its popularity, the Ba'ath movement was inherently political.  It sought to enfranchise the Arab worker in all nations and create a political movement with Socialist leanings that would sweep the party into power in places like Egypt and Turkey.  The Islamic State exists for the purpose of the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate, a nation ruled by a Caliph (religious leader) with the Quran as the law of the land. 

The former Iraqi Ba'ath Party members who are active in the Islamic State are the ones being co-opted, not vice versa.  And that should have been expected.  When the U.S. arrived in Iraq in 2003 and the Iraqi military has ceased to exist, everyone wanted to become a part of the U.S. military force that now appeared to hold the reigns of power.  In reality, its just a circumstance of survival.  People have families to provide for, and they  will do what is necessary to reach that goal.  What would I do to feed my family?  Just about anything.

The Sunnis of Iraq..what does the future hold? (Part I)

Link: The Sunni of Iraq - caught in the middle again.


Although plenty of Iraqi Shi'a and Kurds would disagree with me, I'm beginning to develop a real sense of sympathy for the Sunni of Iraq.  For half of century, they had one of their own running the show in Baghdad, but Saddam Hussein showed just as much disdain for his fellow Sunni as he did for the Shi'a, Kurds, Christians, Jews and Assyrians in his country.  Sadly, though, the non-Sunni Iraqis will forever associate Saddam Hussein and his rule with the Sunni community.  Its the name of the game in Mesopotamia this century.  While Europeans and Americans many times are never even aware of the particular religious affiliation of their neighbors, in this part of the world, it means everything.  Although the Sunni suffered under Saddam Hussein, it is true that a semblance of a middle class developed in Iraq.....and it was mostly Sunni.  Those who were lucky enough to belong to this small middle class had the opportunity to attend university in Baghdad, and following graduation, join the ranks of physicians, architects, engineers, teachers, and businessmen who kept the country from following any further into chaos.  It was no surprise that by the arrival of the U.S. Army in 2003, the Sunni reputation as being the educated and "established" demographic in Iraq, was well established.  It was an easy assumption to make; the Shi'a seemed to prefer living in the south, and engaging in small-scale agriculture for sustenance (with the exception of the half-million or so living in the squalid slums of Sadr City, in northeast Baghdad).  As for the Kurds, well, they preferred to keep to themselves in the north of the country.  In fact, a large percentage of northern Iraq actually functioned for some time as a separate political entity, run by and representing the Kurdish people.  With a "de-facto" capital city at Sulimaniyah, a functioning economic system and large urban centers in Erbil and Mosul, the Kurds were able to demonstrate to the world, just how ready they were an independent state.  But Turkey absolutely refused to sign-off on the idea, as they always had and probably always will.

The Sunni are spread out in Iraq, as are all the different ethnicities.  There is a substantial Sunni community in Basra in the south and in Mosul in the far north.  But the Sunnis are the dominant ethnic group in central Iraq, west of Baghdad in Anbar Province, and just north of Baghdad in Salah al-Din Province, including the cities of Samarrah and Tikrit.  With the end of the Ba'ath Party, a great deal of influence was returned to the Sunni tribal leaders and the "Shaykh" system of authority.  The United States was well aware of this development following the ouster of Saddam and the emergence of the Sunni insurgency.  The United States military and CIA (and to a lesser extent, Dept. of State) were able to co-opt the Sunni tribal leaders and bring the Sunni community onto the side of the good guys.  It took a great deal of influence and suggestion (read: money), but in the end, the Sunni rose up against Zarqawi and Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and helped bring peace and stability to their nation.  But for a few years following the U.S. entry into Baghdad, the Sunni were connected to the violence caused by Zarqawi just because of their shared religious affiliation.  And Zarqawi played this to the hilt by sending suicide bombers into Shi'a religious gatherings, and then repeating the heinous act at the funeral for the victims.  For a time, the U.S. had to be concerned that open hostilities were going to break put between the Sunni and the Shi'a.  And all the while, the U.S. is trying to help Iraq stand back up on its feet, by rebuilding the transportation network, repairing the electrical grid, refurbishing the international airport, building schools, repairing refineries, and most important, organizing national elections.  These efforts were confounded by Zarqawi because of his daily use of suicide vehicles.  But Zarqawi went to far.  He was killing just as many Sunni as he was anyone else, and the Sunni were tired of the destabilization and the bloodshed.  This fact was a large factor in convincing the Sunni tribes to support the U.S. effort and defeat the insurgency for good.
 

  

Why should the West be concerned with the intentions of the Islamic State in Africa? (Part II)

Links: A. ISIS supporting Al-Shabaab in Africa?
           B. ISIS eager to recruit South Africans.

In Part II we will focus on the Islamic State (IS) in Sub-Saharan Africa.  The Muslim states of West Africa are vitally important, because they will discreetly provide financial and material support to Islamic extremist groups, while publicly disavowing any involvement or knowledge of these organizations.

Mauritania.  To start, Mauritania is a bit of a mystery.  The government gives the appearance of being deeply observant of all Islamic Laws and traditions.  At the same time, Mauritania has steered a very moderate course diplomatically, snuggling up to France in particular.  In truth, Mauritania is a lightly-populated country that consists almost exclusively of SAND.  Eventually, the engineers and researchers will find oil in Mauritania, mark my word.

Al-Qaeda in the Magreb.   Al-Qaeda remains active in West Africa, in Mali and Niger in particular.  In 2013, Al-Qaeda more-or-less surprised everyone by hopping the coat tails of a Tuareg insurrection in northern Mali.  The Tuaregs, who had made repeated complaints to the government in Bamako, were suffering from private French companies occupying oases and disturbing traditional Tuareg trading patterns.  The Tuaregs felt that they had no choice but to take up arms, at least long enough to attract the European press.  But before you can say, "Camel Fart", Al-Qaeda had hijacked the Tuaregs little rebellion.  The Tuaregs quickly faded away, but Al-Qaeda in the Magreb (AQM) meant business, attacking Malian military and government installations as far south as Timbuktu.  In steps the French, who roll up AQM in record time (not many prisoners taken, from what I understand).  In the Fall of 2014, AQM, taking advantage of a government focused exclusively on combating Ebola, popped back up in northern Mali.  And this time, they were better armed and willing to involve others.  AQM repeatedly crossed the border into Niger and conducted raids against simple villages, along with the usual attacks against government and civilian targets in Mali.  Again, the French military has arrived on the scene, and I expect and even more thorough accounting of AQM.  I can hear you now, asking, "why all this AQM bullshit when the post is supposed to be about the IS"?  The answer is simple; the post is about the IS.  Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State are, for all practical purposes, the same organization.  They are both Sunni-based, violent, terrorist groups dedicated to the removal of infidels from their "Holy Land".  They communicate with each other, they assist one another, and they play-up the western media's insistence on separating the two. As always, this is only my opinion.  Come see me in a year and remind me how wrong I was.

Al-Shabaab.  One fact that is not debatable is that the IS was born into the Al-Qaeda family.  In its former life, it was known as "Al-Qaeda in Iraq".  After the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was appointed as the leader of the organization, and a new name, "the Islamic State in the Sham" (ISIS) was chosen.  Folks, I'm leaving out all sorts of important background to the genesis of IS, but this post has to stay within reasonable limits.  Al-Baghdadi really began to make the IS about himself, and let it be known to Al-Qaeda head Ayman Al-Zawahiri, that IS was able to function on its own.  Now this is as close to a complete rift with Al-Qaeda as ever occurred.  Zawahiri didn't have much to bitch about because the IS was kicking ass and taking names all over Iraq and Syria.  More recently, as the organization stretches its legs a bit, relationships have been established with like-minded Sunni extremist groups around the world, including Africa.  Al-Shabaab, that nasty bunch of turds that tried to turn Somalia into an Islamic State ruled by Islamic Courts (sounds wonderful, doesn't it?), have established themselves in the townships of Kenya, which are ripe recruitment areas.  Social Media is the master at bringing people together, and the IS and Al-Shabaab have been expressing support for one another for some time.  These two groups need each other.  Al-Shabaab needs the organizational skills, the discipline, and the funding of the IS, and the IS needs the geographic reach, and the potential recruitment opportunities available to Al-Shabaab.  They are both Sunni based, therefore there will be no trouble finding ideological (read: idiot-logical) common ground.  Al-Shabaab has established a presence as far south as South Africa and as far west as Namibia.

Boko Haram.  Ehen the Nigerian based terrorist organization, "Boko Haram", announced its support for the IS, the news was treated as a truly important development.  During the same week, the combined military forces of Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon and Benin inflicted defeat after defeat on Boko Haram, who was now only in control of four northern communities (from twenty just the week before).  It was no surprise that Boko Haram (BH) wanted to change the headline, and the press obliged.  The poor Nigerian Army; after months of getting raked over the coals by the domestic and international press, they finally have a very successful strong of victories, and they get upstaged by BH's announcement of love for the IS.  The truth is, even though BH has very recently received a black eye and a bloody nose, this organization is built similar to the Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda, and it is more than able to retreat into the jungle and reconstitute itself.  I find BH to be the most dangerous terrorist group on the continent, and that includes north Africa.  Anyone engaged against BH needs to be familiar with its history, as BH is very loyal to its founding principles and the accompanying religious ideology.  The organization was originally established in support of providing Islamic education in northern Nigerian schools.  At the time, there was a need for a bit of a "siege mentality", as the Islamic community in Nigeria had many opponents.  Through concentration of resources and discipline, the Islamic community in northern Nigeria was able to effectively establish a network of Islamic schools.  As is often the case, this well-meaning effort got out of hand.  BH quickly morphed into a organization that allowed no disagreement and enforced the strictest of Islamic codes.  Instead of living peacefully with the Christian community, BH made every effort to either drive them off or convert their children.  When it became apparent that the Nigerian authorities were either unwilling or unable to respond, BH began large-scale forced conversions.  Instead of focusing on education, BH became a para-military organization, bent on proselytizing extremist Islam.  At the zenith of its reach, BH was smart enough to reach out to other like-minded organizations, which will provide a lifeline, if the Nigerian military is successful in forcing BH out of Nigeria.  BH is present in Ghana, in Cote d'Ivoire, and in the Cameroon.  Many of his soldiers are "brainwashed" teens, some not much older than ten, eleven years of age.  In many cases, these young fighters are the most dedicated.  I won't mention the fate of the young girls that are randomly kidnapped.  Suffice to say that the lucky ones are forced into sometimes plural marriages with men usually many years older.

Because of the growing population rate in sub-Saharan Africa, the pressure on the various national economies will only increase.  At the moment, even the most optimistic economies like South Africa, Nigeria, Namibia, Botswana, Gabon and Ghana, have unemployment rates for post-high school males as high as forty percent.  This group of unemployed, bored, many times hungry, unable to afford university fees, young men are the perfect targets for the IS.  Since the Islamic faith has done such an outstanding job introducing Islam to poorer African communities, many of these young men are already halfway home.        

Just How Much Separation Really Exists Between Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State? (Part II)

Links: A. Conflict Between Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.
           B. Are Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State at War?

I believe that Yemen and Iraq, and possibly locations in Pakistan and Africa, are currently being utilized as training locations for the IS foot soldier.  Intelligence services have already located a number of locations in Iraq which are suspected of being training centers of IS, but I believe that Yemen should be added to the list.  Those who disagree with me with point out that AQ already uses Yemen as a "breaking-in" location for its members.  No doubt AQ continues to conduct certain types of training in Yemen, alongside the IS.  In fact, I believe that they are one and the same.  We will know soon enough.  Eventually a few IS prisoners of war from the Iraq and Syria conflict will, during interrogation, mention travel to Yemen for training purposes.  If I'm correct, hopefully this will be the catalyst for the west to stop the damaging and wasteful routine of differentiating between these Sunni Muslim extremist groups.  I do not buy into the narrative that the leader of Khorasan is angry at al-Baghdadi, so the IS and Khorasan can't be friends, or that AQ is embarrassed by the number of young men who were decapitated by IS this week, so AQ can't be tainted by association.  Believe me, at the end of the day, that AK47 will be pointed at you and I and our children, it will not be pointed at another extremist.  I might be a bit more sympathetic to the argument that major rifts exist between various Sunni Muslim extremist groups, if I could be presented with hard evidence.  Social media captures aren't worth a bucket of shit, and neither are rumors that someone from one group shot up a few people from another group.

Islamic extremism is a giant of a beast, but at present, it has only one head, and that is Ayman al-Zawahiri.  Beneath that head, a number of phalanges are jockeying, positioning themselves to move into the void once the sixty-three year old Zawahiri finally floats off to meet his virgins (we might just find him as well).  For anyone who argues that these groups are not fighting together with a unique, singular goal in mind, I would ask them to please have look at the state of affairs in the world today.  I cannot recall a time in my life when terrorism was so rampant and so conventional.  Our military is handicapped by an Administration made up of political appointees and outright amateurs, and every move we make is reactive.  Not surprisingly, the same can be said for our efforts and strategy in the Ukraine.  When IS originally became aggressive in Iraq, our attempt at being an ally resulted in an entire Iraqi Army Corps deserting the field of battle, and people scurrying out of Baghdad as if it were Atlanta before Sherman came to town.  The Iranians step in, and IS appears to be in retreat.  The case is different in Syria, which is almost impossible to evaluate effectively.  The IS (and AQ) are active in Tunisia, Libya, and various other countries in Africa.  Its interesting to note that the Nigerian terrorist group Boko Haram recently declared its allegiance to the IS.  Well guess what folks; Boko Haram has already declared its loyalty to AQ.  Really, what is the difference?  Both groups are working in the same arena towards the same goal: the destruction of the west and Israel.  You can put all that Caliphate bullshit into the backseat.  No doubt Mr. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi envisions himself as the Caliph in such a manifestation, but Zawahiri sees it for what it is: just another story in a sea of distractions, that keep the infidels from unifying their aim at the singular target.

Islamic State Expanding Into North Africa

Link: Islamic State Pushes Into North Africa

For decades, north Africa and the Sahel have always been Al-Qaeda territory, at least as far as butchers and beheaders are concerned.  But as the Islamic State (IS) continues to

exhibit a potent growth rate, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb (AQIM) had better make sure they've collected their dues this month;  the IS is the new extremist bad-boy club on the block, and they intend on co-opting everyone within range of a bullet.  In the link above, I paid particular attention to comments made by Thomas Joscelyn, Senior Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, who believes that we should expect the IS to become more active in north Africa.  Joscelyn is a treasure trove of knowledge regarding events in the Near East, and his real-time analysis is always spot-on.  He is the main reason I am such a devotee of The Long War Journal (www.longwarjournal.org).

So the IS has decided to expand westward.  I'm assuming that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has his own version of Manifest Destiny.  The truth is, the ground is ripe for seeding, especially in the Sudan and Libya.  But lets start in Egypt.  The IS has a variety of scapegoats to drag out in this country, including the traditional whipping boy: the Coptic Christians.  For the life of me I can't fathom how there can be any Christians left in Egypt, let alone Coptic Christians.  They can jump on the "anti-military" bandwagon, but I think that bus is full.  Personally, I don't see the IS finding a receptive audience in Egypt.  I think Morsi was as a religious of a leader as the Egyptian people would like.  Egypt is a country with a modern communications infrastructure.  The people understand the difference between progress and trading in the used Renault for a camel.  I believe the people of Egypt, the vocal young populace in particular, want both a democratic system of government and economic progress.  The IS stands for neither.  On the other hand, Libya is the perfect breeding ground for giant fleas (like the folks we refer to as the IS).  When authority has broken down, and I mean packed up and completely left town, people will look to just about anyone for leadership.  The IS has recently become the governing body for the town of Darna. What the hell is Darna?  It's a start, that's what it is; and the Islamic State will take measures in Darna that will be observed by other communities.  We all know that the Islamic State is well-funded.  All they have to do is feed the people of Darna, maybe get the power turned back on, and keep the muggers and rapists off the streets (and back in the IS camp where they belong).  The IS has used this recipe to co-opt communities in Syria and Iraq, and the formula will work just fine in Libya.  What absolutely amazes me is that western companies are still able to keep their petroleum operations functioning.  I imagine that a huge amount of money is being paid to private security armies, but just how much longer are these operations going to be feasible?  And here comes the IS.  Let Mookie make a prediction.  In roughly six months or less, Libya is going to return to the headlines.  No one wants the IS to take possession of the petroleum set-ups in Libya anymore than the ones they fight for in Baiji, Iraq, where the battle continues on currently.

Let move south to the Sudan.  The government currently sitting in Khartoum would make great badminton partners for al-Baghdadi and his herd.  President Omar al-Bashir, who is wanted by the International Court in the Hague, loves to send his minions on "Christian

slaughtering" expeditions.  The Sudan (force of habit...I say "the Sudan" and "the Cameroon" and a few other left-over examples of colonial bad manners) is no longer what it used to be.  We now have a South Sudan, but don't ask me who is President, or even the name of the capital city (Juba, maybe?).  I believe that the IS would find a warm welcome in Khartoum, as al-Bashir and al-Baghdadi seem to adhere to the same brand of extreme Islam.  I can't imagine that the IS would stretch its Caliphate map to include the Sudan, and al-Bashir would welcome any opportunity to stick his finger in the eye of the EU and the United States.  Khartoum would be an ideal staging ground for an IS expansion into Chad, Niger and Mali.  The people of Saharan Africa would probably welcome the IS, since no one else seems to give a damn about them.  Mali is already dealing with a re-emergence of AQIM (who, interestingly enough, keep stirring up shit in Niger).  With the west focused almost exclusively on Ebola, and AQIM a shadow of its former self, a bit of a vacuum does exist.  North of Boko Haram in Nigeria, west of Khartoum, and east of Mauritania is where the IS will find its most fertile recruitment locations.  Folks will look at the map and say, "Mookie, have you lost your mind?  The only thing east of Mauritania is the Sahara Desert!"  Believe it or not, people live in that desert.  But its the communities on the very periphery of the Sahara that cause me concern.  A strict form of Islam is enforced, which promotes reliance on family ties and inter-dependence.  In many ways, adherence to strict principles of Islam have helped many of these villages and communities survive.  Al Qaeda had no trouble taking route here, and I can't imagine that the IS will either.  The bunch of filthy rich investors with money in the gold and diamond mines of west Africa had better keep an eye on this potential problem.

Its Time To Get To Know Jabhat al-Nusrah

Links: A. Al-Nusrah Claims That U.S. Has Bombed Its Territory
           B. Al-Nusrah Front, Jun al-Aqsa Terrorist Groups In Idlib
           C. Al-Nusrah Forces U.S.-Backed Group From Idlib

We've managed to dissect just about every player in Syria except Jabhat al-Nusrah (Al-Nusrah Front), the regular Syrian Army, and the Free Syrian Army. 

The Regular Syrian Army

The regular Syrian Army consists of whatever Syrian President Bashir al-Assad has been able to patch together from the pre-war Syrian Army.  The Syrian Air Force has been decimated and will have to be rebuilt from scratch (which isn't necessarily that difficult if you have the cash to buy new jets from Russia), but the Army, which has basically been inactive over the past few months, really only needs reorganizing and a strong leader who can inspire men to fight.  Syria continues to have an absurd advantage in armor over all the players in this drama, and I imagine a great deal has been done to repair vehicles/tanks and train new soldiers.  For Assad, the allied air intervention was like water to the man in the desert dying of thirst.  He has been given a reprieve, and I have no doubt that he has been making the most of this down-time.  We can't forget that Russia continues to support the Syrian government in Damascus.  Vlad Putin is also grateful of the allied air campaign because the situation in Syria was becoming dire for Assad and his Ba'athist buddies.  The IS was making preparations for an assault on Aleppo, which would have only been the precursor to an attack on Damascus itself.  The Syrian Air Force, with most of its Air Bases overrun by the IS and other Islamic terrorist groups, had basically collapsed (with the exception of a few helicopter gunships, which Assad loves to call into action).  Without air

support, the army had lost its eyes and was finding itself caught in one ambush after another.  But the regular Syrian Army has been given the opportunity to retreat behind the front lines and lick its wounds, while the Kurds struggle against the IS in Kobani and forces supported by the U.S.(?) are driven out of Idlib (were the elements that were routed in Idlib connected to the Free Syrian Army?).  Make no mistake, when the time is most advantageous to Assad, his military will return to the battlefield, and don't be surprised if Putin has assisted in rebuilding the Syrian Air Force.

The Free Syrian Army

What about the Free Syrian Army (forgive me; for some time I was referring to this group as the "New Syrian Army")?  We digested news reports last week from Idlib (see link C) that detailed the rout of U.S.-backed fighters.  Were these fighters part of the Free Syrian Army that we are supposed to be training and wasn't supposed to be operational for at least another month?  And what about the statement from the Pentagon that the Free Syrian Army would be deployed in a defensive capacity only.  Were "our" fighters in Idlib in a defensive posture before they were run out of town?  Maybe this is a different group, and this is an indication that we are training other military elements that will have a more "offensive" plan of action.  I find this hypothesis to be the most hard to believe, because until now the Obama Administration has been very generous sharing every last detail of its intentions.  I see no reason to believe that the leopard has changed his spots; why train others as offensive pieces on the board, but leave the main body of your forces, the Free Syrian Army, in a purely defensive posture?  I am surprised that we don't have more information regarding the Free Syrian Army, especially regarding its timetable.  I can't help but wonder if this Free Syrian Army, in its effort to be "defensive", is going to get caught between the various Islamic groups in the east, and a reconstituted regular Syrian military in the west.

Jabhat al-Nusrah (Al-Nusrah Front)

The first two links I chose to share provide important details regarding Jabhat al-Nusrah, or the Nusrah Front.  The press, in its daily effort to retweet all the propaganda fed to it by the terrorist groups via social media, continues to remind us that al-Nusrah is the Al-Qaeda representative in Syria and that they are not friends with the IS whatsoever.  Common sense, and a career of working against Islamic terror groups, leads me to suspect that someone is falling hook, line  and sinker for the most obvious of disinformation campaigns.  Khorasan hates al-Nusrah and al-Nusrah hates the Islamic State and since al-Nusrah is the representative of Al-Qaeda in Syria (?), then Al-Qaeda must also hate the Islamic State.  Please, folks....listen carefully and try to see the truth in all its simplicity.  All of these groups are Sunni affiliated and all have historic Al-Qaeda connections of one type or another.  The Islamic State of the Levant was called Al-Qaeda in Iraq not to long ago, for goodness sake.  I think the decision by the Qatari Air Force to only bomb targets selectively (no Al-Nusrah targets, please) was part of the effort to convince us that there is freedom of thought and movement in its each individual group.  I don't accept this; as far as I'm concerned they are all Sunni terrorist groups who prey upon the weak and helpless.  In fact, our military would be best served by keeping all these groups under one header: "THE ENEMY", and let the CTC analysts at Langley worry about the personalities within.

Back to Jabhat al-Nusrah.  This group announced its formation in Syria in January 2012, and states that its end goal is the creation of a Pan-Islamic State under Sharia Law and ruled by a Caliph.  If we switched out "Jabhat al-Nusrah" with "Islamic State of the Levant", who would know the difference?  And yet, according to Twitter, the international media, and the Pentagon, the two groups are at each other's throats.  It is believed that many of the original members of Al-Nusrah are Syrians who were fighting with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's "Al-Qaeda in Iraq" (AQI) group during Operation Enduring Freedom.  The members of Al-Nusrah are believed to be the best trained and the best equipped of all the Sunni Extremist groups in the Syria/Iraq theater.  Al-Nusrah is known for conducting suicide attacks.  The leader of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and the head of Al-Nusrah, Abu Mohammad al-Julani, appear to have had numerous discussions about the merging of the two groups.  According to Al-Jazeera, Ayman al-Zawahiri, the only remaining leader of Al-Qaeda without two bullet holes in his forehead (so far), instructed the two groups not to merge.  Al-Baghdadi ignored this instruction and continued to publicly declare a merger between the two.  Since they appear to be separate today, I'm assuming al-Julani won that argument.  But lets be honest; who really gives a shit about any of the back-and-forth that I just repeated (direct from Wikipedia)?  Al-Nusrah is on the battlefield in Syria, its fighters are well-trained, disciplined, and like to blow themselves up for Allah.  Much of the same can be said for the Islamic State, so as far as I see it, we are looking at two peas in a pod.  When the bullets start to fly, I guarantee that these two groups (and any other Sunni-affiliated armed extremist groups) will join ranks.  To be honest, the war in Syria means very little to me.  The Russians will find a way to protect their interests in the end, so I am forced to accept that Assad isn't going anywhere.  My interest is in Iraq, where we have easily identified allies in the Iraqi military and the Peshmerga/Kurdish regular forces.  Actually, it becomes more apparent everyday that Iranian military units have been participating in the war against IS.  From Assad in Syria to the Iranians in Iraq, we keep ending up with the strangest of bedfellows!  I recognize that the Iraqi Army has been strengthened by groups of both Shia militia and Sunni tribal fighters.  I see a real opportunity in Iraq to defeat Al-Qaeda/IS, solidify the Kurdish homeland, and greatly improve Sunni/Shia relations.  Insha'Allah!