Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General Who Is It That Is Confused About ISIS?

Those who are heavily invested in the notion that it is the religion of Islam that is driving much of the terror in Syria and Iraq and beyond will find these new revelations by the German magazine Der Spiegel tough to swallow.

Der Spiegel's man found out, through an analysis of captured documents exhibited in the article, that ISIS is the creation of a former Iraqi Air Force Officer. This officer, Haji Bakr, who along with the many Iraqi officers kicked to the curb after the fall of Iraq, went on to formulate, lead and propagate ISIS as more or less a criminal enterprise, cloak it in religious form for recruitment purposes and launch it on it's way. To date most of the captured leadership of ISIS have been linked to the Baathist Iraqi military of the prior regime.

What's most ironic in all of this is that it the seeds of this problem can be justifiably found in the failures which took place during the Bush / Cheney administration and not with the arrival of Barack Obama in the White House. So much for all the "appeasement" prattle and whether or not the current administration uses the terms "Islamic Terror" or "Radical Islam", which as it turns out in this case would be structurally and conceptually inapplicable.

To wit: "Haji Bakr, wasn't widely known. But that was precisely part of the plan. The former colonel in the intelligence service of Saddam Hussein's air defense force had been secretly pulling the strings at ISIS for years."

"What Bakr put on paper, page by page, with carefully outlined boxes for individual responsibilities, was nothing less than a blueprint for a takeover. It was not a manifesto of faith, but a technically precise plan for an "Islamic Intelligence State" -- a caliphate run by an organization that resembled East Germany's notorious Stasi domestic intelligence agency."

"ISIS has little in common with predecessors like al-Qaida aside from its jihadist label. There is essentially nothing religious in its actions, its strategic planning, its unscrupulous changing of alliances and its precisely implemented propaganda narratives. Faith, even in its most extreme form, is just one of many means to an end. Islamic State's only constant maxim is the expansion of power at any price."

Reference: The Terror Strategist: Secret Files Reveal the Structure of Islamic State; http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 29274.html

an interesting read

seems to fit the known history of the group and would explain their lack of an international terrorists footprint

I do not understand any of this. To me its simple - religious zealots, irregardless of cant, strip or belief, who force others to swear fealty or die are nothing but criminals. ISIS, for instance, has proven their capacity for kidnapping, blackmail, theft, murder, torture and rape. I have not listed them all but that, I think, pretty much defines them (and others of the ilk)

I also, of course, would like to see us completely and utterly out of the mideast. There is nothing there we need or want. They hate us and it has been suggested that one of the main reasons for the hate is our presence in what they consider to be THEIR territory. I say shake their hands and wish them luck and just move on.

That's pretty funny though to find out they murder, rape, and steal because they are criminals first of all, and they just use religion to recruit dupes. Makes me pity all these zealots who are going to Syria to fight for them. My guess is that they quickly discover their commanders are not devout at all, and the organizations aims are more about making certain people very rich than establishing a caliphate.

I suspect their commanders are VERY devout, publicly. Its a little like the Christian preacher with 5000 followers. He has a really big house, several cars, etc. and only gets outed when he is caught doing bad things to women of the night, (or some other equally sinful activity). Even then some of them survive to preach another day. It seems to me that if you can get the right kind of followers they will believe just about anything to keep on believing.

Sometimes I wonder who really is at fault - the preacher/leader or the determined followers.

Organized religion is turning out to be a bigger threat to global stability than communism ever was.

Another question should be asked "Who started the whole Terrorism Subject conveniently times to bring two major parties at war with each other.

My e-mails are now loaded with references to many of my posts who have given full support for Ron Paul and assuming I was very much in favor with Rand Paul. I just received another email reminding me of my financial support for RON Paul and wanting to know why I cannot do the same for RAND Paul. Many other emails seem to want me to send money to stop my support.

I wrote back saying I would contact my sources of articles and back away from any possible reference of my name (Sandra Price) that would ever finance another dime to any Paul running for office. I'm not even certain this post will be accepted.

...or he could have watched PBS' Frontline which did the research and he could have cribbed from them - it would have been way easier.

It turns out that ISIL is Saddam's old army. Who could have predicted that after L. Paul Bremmer fired the entire Army three months into the U.S.'s invasion of Iraq as Provisional Act No. 2 in June 2003.

PBS | The Rise of ISIS

Yup.

...and take their tax-excempt status away too!!!