Tag Archives: Islamic State

International news

Report: ISIL starting to fray

Can it be happening? Could the Islamic State be feeling the pressure of the intense bombing campaign aimed at “degrading and destroying” it?

The Washington Post is reporting signs are beginning to show that ISIL is starting to come apart amid dissension, tension, frayed nerves … hey, perhaps even fear at being killed by U.S. and allied aircraft?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/islamic-state-frays-from-within/ar-AA9xeOK

According to the Post: “Reports of rising tensions between foreign and local fighters, aggressive and increasingly unsuccessful attempts to recruit local citizens for the front lines and a growing incidence of guerrilla attacks against Islamic State targets suggest the militants are struggling to sustain their carefully cultivated image as a fearsome fighting force drawing Muslims together under the umbrella of a utopian Islamic state.”

Well, how about that?

These monstrous goons are showing some signs of cracking.

The Post reports that the findings are “anecdotal,” and might not be totally accurate.

But think about the impact of the relentless attacks from the air on military targets. Does it not have an impact, even on fighters who’ve built up this aura of invincibility? Sure it does.

ISIL might be on the run near Tikrit, Iraq, where Iraqi forces have launched a major offensive against the terrorists in the birthplace of the late Saddam Hussein, the Sunni Muslim who ruled Iraq with maximum brutality until he was ousted, captured, tried, convicted and executed for crimes against humanity.

Yes, the attacks likely are having their desired effect on ISIL. The threat to its existence, though, might be internal, as the Post reports: “The bigger threat to the Islamic State’s capacity to endure, however, may come from within, as its grandiose promises collide with realities on the ground, said Lina Khatib, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.

“’The key challenge facing ISIS right now is more internal than external,’ she said, using another term for the group. ‘We’re seeing basically a failure of the central tenet of ISIS ideology, which is to unify people of different origins under the caliphate. This is not working on the ground. It is making them less effective in governing and less effective in military operations.’”

Keep bombing ’em.

 

International news

Terrorist group 'pledges' to Islamic State?

As if Boko Haram needed to state a formal “pledge” to align itself with the Islamic State.

That’s what the Nigerian goons did. They have joined ISIL’s “caliphate” and joined with the monstrous Middle East terror group.

What does that mean, then, for Boko Haram? For my money, it puts them in the crosshairs of U.S. and allied military and intelligence forces.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/boko-haram-declares-allegiance-to-isis/ar-AA9v7oe

We’ve already been bombing the daylights out of ISIL military targets, killing ISIL fighters virtually daily.

The same fate should fall on Boko Haram, who burst into international notoriety by kidnapping those 200-plus young women and girls. They’ve kept their captives hidden for a year, despite reports in recent months about some kind of tentative agreement to release them.

The world already understands that Boko Haram is a serious threat to decent human beings everywhere. This group is the Nigerian version of Islamist extremism that is causing havoc throughout the Middle East.

So, this terror group has pledged its allegiance to ISIL. It also should draw a pledge from the United States and its allies to kill its members on sight.

 

national news, political news

Gov. Walker goes to 'war' with unions

Now that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has all but announced his 2016 Republican primary presidential campaign, it is time to examine everything this man says in public.

Such as when he drew a shaky comparison between union protesters and Islamic State terrorists.

Warren dings Walker over comments on unions and ISIS

Speaking to the Conservative Political Action Conference this past week, Walker actually said his experience facing down tens of thousands of angry union members has prepared him to wage war against ISIL.

Union protesters equal monstrous terrorist cult. Get it? One is the same as the other.

Walker has sought to put a bit of distance between himself and those remarks. He told reporters after his CPAC speech, “There’s no comparison between the two, let me be perfectly clear. I’m just pointing out the closest thing I have to handling a difficult situation was the 100,000 protesters I had to deal with.”

Still, the critics make a point of wondering why he would make such a ghastly comparison in the first place.

I’ve covered my share of union disputes over the years, in Oregon reporting and commenting on teacher strikes and in Southeast Texas, where the union movement remains a significant political force. I get that union protesters can be a rowdy bunch, that they actually threaten people with physical harm, particularly those who cross picket lines.

However, whatever preparation a president has in fighting hideous terrorist groups such as ISIL and now, as we’ve learned, Boko Haram, shouldn’t have any relationship with how they handle union employees who have the right under our governing framework to seek “redress of grievances.”

As U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., a friend of the union movement, said in a tweet: “If Scott Walker sees 100,000 teachers & firefighters as his enemies, maybe it’s time we take a closer look at his friends.”

International news

ISIL making a stand in Saddam's hometown

Iraqi forces are launching a major offensive to take Tikrit away from the Islamic State.

Do we see the symbolism here?

http://news.yahoo.com/major-offensive-under-way-retake-iraqs-tikrit-army-081036649.html

Tikrit is the hometown of the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

ISIL is a Sunni Muslim cult that seeks to take Iraq away from the Shiites who now govern the country.

Hussein was a Sunni Muslim.

I would like to think of the battle for Tikrit to be some sort of ISIL’s Last Stand, if you’ll pardon the reference to a 19th-century American military officer.

Sadly, it won’t be a last stand. There will be other stands, other battles to fight, other cities to liberate from these monstrous terrorists.

But the Tikrit battle that is unfolding with a reported 30,000 Iraqi army troops taking part could give us a good indication of just how battle-ready the Iraqi armed forces are for the fight that lies ahead.

If the Iraqis succeed in recapturing Tikrit, they can turn their forces toward where it really and truly matters.

As the news agency AFP reports: “Commanders voiced hope the operation would be a step towards the recapture of Mosul, the jihadists’ main hub in Iraq.”

This is the Iraqis’ fight to win or lose. Their benefactors — the United States of America — need to know they’re up to the task.

 

International news

Why the masks, terrorists?

1 Comment

The thought keeps occurring to me: Why do terrorists keep covering their faces when they make these videos intended for international distribution?

Have you ever wondered?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/how-isis-threatens-europe/ar-BBhZurk

The picture on the link here shows an Islamic State goon waving a knife at the camera. All you see are this fellow’s eyes. Why don’t they show themselves to the public? Why don’t they reveal their identity?

Is it because:

* They believe what they’re doing is wrong?

* They don’t want international cops, spooks, commandos, anti-terror analysts to identify them?

* They’re cowards?

Maybe it’s all of the above. I’m going with the coward angle, kind of like the way the Ku Klux Klan goons cover their faces under hoods.

Terrorists don’t comprehend that they commit criminal acts when they behead innocent victims. They don’t seem to have any understanding of “right” and “wrong” the way you and I do. They’ve perverted every single principle, concept and tenet under which civilized human beings live.

They’re surely hiding from the good guys, which might imply they know what they’re doing is wrong. I believe it’s more akin to the last part. They don’t want to get caught because they’re afraid of the consequence they’ll face.

Fear. Cowardice. Get it?

Some of them have deserted from military organizations in their home country, usually somewhere in the Middle East, to join forces with ISIL, Hezbollah, Hamas, al-Qaeda … whatever. They’re hiding their faces from their former military commanders.

In the end, though, it all seems to smack of cowardly acts. Just as lynchings were the acts of cowards in the United States a century ago, these terrorists have zero sense of honor and courage.

 

International news

Brooks, Shields speak with reason, clarity

If only conservatives and liberals could speak to each other the way these two fellows speak on subjects that have driven the ideologies so far apart.

If only …

David Brooks is a conservative columnist for the New York Times; Mark Shields’s left-leaning column is circulated in newspapers all across the country.

They took on the issue of what to call the terrorists with whom we are at war.

I particularly liked Brooks’s assessment of whether the monsters are “Islamic terrorists.” His view? All religion is open to interpretation. Christians, Jews and Muslims all interpret their faiths differently. He said the terrorists don’t practice mainstream Islam, but they’re Islamic, so why not call them such?

I don’t necessarily think it’s important that we call these terrorists Islamic. We know what they’re doing. As Shields noted, most of the Islamic State’s victims are Muslims. They’re also killing Christians and Jews. They’re evil in the extreme and we need to respond accordingly — which we are doing.

But the discussion on PBS is worth seeing anyway.

If only the two sides could talk to each other the way these fellows do.

 

national news, political news

Ex-Gov. Palin is wrong — again — on Obama

Sarah Palin has cast this remarkable spell over the nation’s political conservative movement.

With so many qualified public officials able to stand and deliver cogent messages, the nation’s Republican Party — particularly its far right wing — is transfixed by the former half-term Alaska governor who simply doesn’t know of which she speaks.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/sarah-palin-president-obama-radical-islam-isil-cpac-115565.html?hp=c2_3_b3

Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Palin stood before the attendees and actually inferred that President Obama is ignoring the threat posed by the Islamic State terrorists.

What in the world is she thinking?

“Wake up, Mr. President,” Palin said on Thursday at CPAC’s gathering. “While Christians bow our heads and pray for you, radical Islamists want to cut off your head.”

Wake up? She wants the president to wake up? Hasn’t she been paying attention?

I know the answer. She hasn’t. She’s been busy listening to the sound of her own voice while ignoring more important voices within her party and certainly ignoring the spoken words and deeds of the incumbent president who’s been fighting the terrorists every day.

Palin parrots the GOP talking points about Obama allegedly not taking the Islamist terrorist threat seriously. Why? Because he’s instructed his administration to avoid using the words “Islamist terrorist.” There you have it. If you don’t say the right words, you’re not actually fighting the bad guys.

What an utter crock of moose dookey!

I had hoped to remain silent about the former governor. I cannot let stand her ridiculous assertions whenever she utters them. Palin did so again today at the CPAC meeting.

Having gotten this little tantrum out of my system, I’ll take another from break monitoring Palin’s rhetorical nonsense.

 

International news

'Jihadi John' gets a name

Now we’re getting somewhere in the hunt for the guy seen in all those ISIL videos.

“Jihadi John” has been identified. The individual wearing all black reportedly is Mohammed Emwazi, a Kuwaiti-born Briton who is known to come from a prosperous family; he earned a degree in computer programming. The world has seen this guy, heard his voice and assumed he’s carried out the gruesome beheadings of captives, some of whom were Americans and Brits.

http://news.yahoo.com/bbc-names-jihadi-john-suspect-islamic-state-beheading-110602366.html

British intelligence officials, naturally, aren’t confirming or denying this goon’s name. It came from The Washington Post, which likely has sources within the UK’s intelligence network.

If the guy comes from a well-to-do family, there likely will be pictures revealing his face released before too long.

A part of me believes the Brits and U.S. intelligence officials are looking for this guy as these words are being written. Another part of me understands the difficulty in finding him and, um, dealing with him once he’s located. Yes, we found Osama bin Laden hiding in plain sight in Pakistan, but that search took nearly a decade after 9/11 to complete. Our spooks located bin Laden and the commander in chief ordered the hit that was carried out by SEALs and CIA commandos.

Will Emwazi meet the same fate as bin Laden?

I surely hope so.

 

International news, military news

Why the fixation over labels?

Conservative media continue to be fixated over the White House’s refusal to refer to the terrorists with whom we are at war as “Islamic terrorists.”

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson got the third degree on Fox News Sunday over that question.

His answer: Islamic State terrorists don’t deserve to be dignified by any reference to Islam.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/02/22/fox_news_sunday_host_vs_jeh_johnson_islamic_state_doesnt_deserve_the_dignity_of_being_called_islamic.html

I’ve long wondered when this silly argument is going to cease. I’m believing now that it will never end.

From my standpoint, it makes no difference if we call these monsters “Islamic terrorists,” or “violent terrorists,” or “garden-variety terrorists.” What matters — or what should matter — is what we’re doing in the field to fight these groups.

We’re stalking them. We’re killing them. We’re taking some of them prisoner. We’re subjecting them to serious interrogation.

Isn’t that enough?

However, it doesn’t seem to be among those on the right who keep insisting that the refusal to label the bad guys as “Islamic terrorists” somehow makes the fight less, well, heartfelt or sincere on our part.

I continue to believe our deep-cover agents, special operations personnel, Homeland Security and CIA analysts are doing all they can do to ensure that we avoid a repeat of the 9/11 attacks. No one anywhere can predict the level of success in avoiding another dastardly attack.

If we get hit once again, it won’t be because the White House doesn’t hang the correct label on the forces of evil with whom we are fighting a war.

 

national news

Father's grief brings criticism of hostage policy

Carl Mueller’s grief is beyond most people’s comprehension.

His daughter, Kayla Jean, was killed in an air strike against her Islamic State captors. Parents aren’t supposed to mourn the loss of their children. Parents throughout the world understand the natural order, and what Carl and Marsha Mueller are experiencing upsets that order.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/slain-us-hostages-dad-slams-us-ransom-policy/ar-BBhR85n

Having laid down that predicate — and stating my own sorrow over Kayla Jean’s death — it is important to put his criticism of longstanding U.S. policy regarding ransom for hostages in some perspective.

Carl Mueller said the U.S. government put policy ahead of his daughter’s safe return.

He believes the government should have paid ransom for her daughter’s release.

“We understand the policy about not paying ransom,” Carl Mueller told “Meet the Press.”

“But on the other hand, any parents out there would understand that you would want anything and everything done to bring your child home. And we tried. And we asked. But they put policy in front of American citizens’ lives.”

Paying ransom every time someone is captured by an enemy, though, puts other Americans at even greater risk. If an enemy knows it can get paid large sums of money whenever it grabs an innocent victim, there can be no limit to the demands the enemy can make.

The U.S. policy that prohibits paying ransom does not make it any easier for those who lose loved ones at the hands of ruthless killers. Carl and Marsha Mueller’s grief is unfathomable.

U.S. no-ransom policy doesn’t diminish the grief we all feel for their horrific loss. The policy, though, is the correct one. Those who commit evil deeds need no additional incentive to exact their terrible vengeance.