Islamic State jihadists have worked hard to establish the image of murderous extremists who slaughter innocent people and destroy ancient religious temples and shrines. However, various newspapers are reporting, the group appears to be eager to show on social media that they are also domesticated as well as hip in recruiting new followers. Appearing across social media are images of Islam Yaken, a young Egyptian law student who left his affluent family in Cairo to become a soldier for Islamic State with signature sword and slaughterous slogans. At the same time, the ladies of Islamic State are recruiting Western and European women to come and hook up with jihadi in a bizarre version of eHarmony or JDate. JihadDate is a bit different. It promises that, if lucky, you can watch your loved one martyr himself — I kid you not.
Yaken is a product of the best schools in Egypt and lived what seems a Westernized life, which makes his emergence as an extremist all the more unnerving. The “hipster jihadi” was educated at the French Lycée in Heliopolis and speaks English and French as well as Arabic. He then went on to the prestigious Ain Shams University to study law. He was then obsessed with his body and, while a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, seemed largely secular in his outlook. After graduating law school, he appears to have taken a turn that none of his friends now understand. The student who once loved Western music and posting about how many calories are consumed by kissing is now trumping the “Caliphate” of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and posting gory pictures that Islamic State seems to relish of its victims. In one posting, Yakin showed two heads in a basket and jokingly compared to the heads of sheep that can be ordered for the table in some Egyptian restaurants.
He has been trying to convince his family to come to Raqqa, a city in Syria that the Islamic State has controlled and cleansed according to its view of Islam. When he told her that she could stay in this flat on the Euphrates and eat and drink and study,” he says she responded: “My son, what would happen if the owners of the flat came back? What will you do then?” Yaken then told her “not to worry – they are dead and gone.” A real hunkocidal catch.
Mothers are not the only people being recruited. Islamic State women are trying to recruit Western and European women and girls — apparently at the request of Islamic State men. Notably, these social websites targeting women do not show the signature gore of the Islamic State of hacked off body parts and corpses. That apparently is a turn-off for JihadDate. Instead it describes the paradise for women to be married to Jihadi and to be part of the community of “sisters” within Islamic State. They are told that they are not excepted to be martyrs but mothers. The “Bird of Jannah” explains: “Women are not equal to men. It can never be. Men are the leaders & women are [so] special that Allah has given them entire chapter in the Qur’an.”
One supposed English woman named Umm Layth gushes with delight about how “I will never be able to do justice with words as to how this place makes me feel.” She adds “Allahu Akbar, there’s no way to describe the feeling of sitting with the Akhawat [sisters] waiting on news of whose Husband has attained Shahadah [martyrdom].” The pitches have succeeded. Two teenage girls, 15 and 16, from Austria have gone to Syria for Jihadi marriages as did two 16-year-old British twins.
Just as a tip, girls, homicidal hunks like Yaken appear to prefer decapitating swords as gifts and their favorite subject is the Caliphate followed closely by the slaughtering of non-believers. As for the standard “likes”: beheadings, Shrine desecrations, and martyrdom. As for standard “dislikes”: Shia, human rights, and most art and music. Under the Islamic State’s view of Islam, you very incompatibility with with modern world makes you compatible — if not ideal — for a Mujahideen match up.
According to press and internet sources author david irwing received a three year sentence for anti-semitic and anti muslim offences .Albert smith irish independent journalist can be found upon david irwings disturbed reichsmarschall web site promoting “banned” fascistic publications where such items can be purchased .in his own words smith callously qand insensitively introduces irwings goring diaries with the most medically inept and horrific of introductions gorings biography is unlikely to raise hackles
ALBERT SMITH MI6
Mike Appleton: “The truth is that the invasion of Iraq effectively carved a cross in the forehead of every Christian in that country.”
The terrorists did take advantage of the post-war window to replace Saddam’s persecution with their brand of persecution, but that was only temporary until Iraq was secured and stabilized. Our efforts to secure and stabilize post-Saddam Iraq were succeeding at the point we left Iraq in 2011.
To wit, in May 2011, President Obama marked Iraq’s “promise of a multiethnic, multisectarian democracy … poised to play a key role in the region if it continues its peaceful progress”:
However, our leaving Iraq prematurely – thereby removing the necessary American protection from Iraq at the same time an acute danger was growing next door – is the proximate cause, in terms of American error, for the current crisis.
To clarify the date discrepancy in my comment at August 8, 2014 at 1:35 pm, the UNMOVIC Cluster Document is dated March 6, 2003. UNMOVIC presented the Cluster Document to the UN Security Council on March 7, 2003.
Annie: “[President Obama] has authorized an air strike. … I hope it doesn’t escalate to a full blown war again, with our own troops being involved.”
Technically (grudgingly admitted 😉 ), Navy and Air Force pilots are troops, too. We already have Marine and Army on the ground in limited capacity, the ones we know about anyway.
It’ll be interesting to see how Obama approaches the air campaign with ISIS in light of the air campaign with Libya. Obama stretched the already novel and controversial international legal theory of Responsibility to Protect past its breaking point to effect regime change in Libya. So, although Obama described a limited pretext with ISIS, it’s not at all a sure thing that the campaign will be limited to that pretext.
fiver: “I could point out that none of the weapons inspectors. . . . Oh heck. Why point out anything? ”
Because the UNSCOM and UNMOVIC inspectors had a central role in the compliance test for Iraq’s weapons-related obligations. The relevant input from UNMOVIC for OIF is the inspectors’ reports from the UNSCR 1441 inspection period that culminated in the March 6, 2003 UNMOVIC report to the UN Security Council. This informed President Bush’s final decision for OIF:
http://www.un.org/depts/unmovic/new/documents/cluster_document.pdf
If you rather not slog through the 175 pages, here’s the State Department summary of the Cluster Document:
http://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2003/18513.htm
fiver: “I’ll just let you keep digging.”
Thank you. Following is the rest of the “Q: Did Bush lie his way to war with Iraq?” section of my OIF FAQ. This part fell a bit outside of the scope of your 1st comment but your response opens the door.
Excerpt:
Two, it is undisputed that Iraq was noncompliant at the decision point for OIF. Inspectors’ reports throughout the UNSCR 1441 inspection period made clear Iraq had failed to sufficiently account for documented NBC stocks and cooperate to the mandated standard along with other violations. On March 7, 2003, UNMOVIC reported to the UN Security Council that Iraq presented “about 100 unresolved disarmament issues”.
The public controversy is over Bush’s presentation of intelligence on latter Iraqi NBC stocks and programs. However, in the context of the Saddam problem, Clinton and Bush officials were obligated to judge the intelligence in an unfavorable light for Iraq, and 9/11 compelled US officials to increase their wariness due to Saddam’s belligerence and guilt on terrorism. Again, the “clear and present danger” (Clinton) of Saddam was imputed from Iraq’s noncompliance, not Iraq’s demonstrated possession of WMD stocks, due in part to the proven success of Saddam’s “denial and deception operations” (Duelfer Report), which included hidden stocks.
The pre-war intelligence that Bush presented was the intelligence that was available. Congressmen, Democrats and Republicans, who independently reviewed the pre-war intelligence largely shared Bush’s determination. A partisan Democrat-slanted Senate Select Committee on Intelligence later analyzed pre-war statements by Bush administration officials and concluded they were largely “substantiated by intelligence”.
Bush’s mistake was presenting the pre-war intelligence to the public inapposite of its actual, circumscribed role in the operative enforcement procedure. The imprecision of intelligence due to Saddam’s deception was a known issue from the beginning and accounted for with Iraq’s presumption of guilt, burden of proof, and standard of compliance. For Operation Desert Fox, President Clinton had cited only to Iraq’s noncompliance in terms of insufficient cooperation and deficient account of weapons when he declared “Iraq has abused its final chance” and imputed the “clear and present danger” of Saddam. Clinton’s citation of noncompliance as the reason for bombing Iraq matched the operative enforcement procedure. When Clinton endorsed Bush’s Iraq enforcement, Clinton stayed consistent with his compliance-based justification for ODF by citing to the threat, heightened by the 9/11 attacks, of Saddam’s “unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons”.
Bush cited properly to Iraq’s noncompliance as Clinton had done for ODF, but Bush also cited to the intelligence, despite that the intelligence could not trigger enforcement. Propagandists pounced on Bush’s error of presentation to shift the burden of proof from Iraq to the US, but the mistake does not change that Saddam was noncompliant at the decision point for OIF and Bush properly applied the operative enforcement procedure.
Three, albeit irrelevant to the enforcement procedure at the decision point for OIF, the post-war findings in the Duelfer Report corroborate Iraq was in violation of its weapons obligations. Although Bush improperly characterized the pre-war intelligence as “evidence”, the normal and proper role of intelligence is indicators, and the pre-war intelligence correctly indicated Saddam was in breach of Iraq’s weapons obligations.
Four, it is undisputed that Saddam was in violation on non-weapons issues, such as illicit trade outside the Oil for Food program (which funded Saddam’s weapons procurement) and humanitarian and terrorism standards. They were also triggers for the military enforcement. Saddam’s non-weapons obligations are often overlooked, yet they were as serious as Iraq’s weapons obligations. For example, the no-fly zones were the most visible, dangerous, invasive, and provocative component of the ‘containment’, yet the no-fly zones were not part of weapons-related enforcement. Rather, they helped enforce UNSC Resolution 688, which demanded an immediate end to the repression of the Iraqi civilian population.
The truth is Saddam was rearming and noncompliant on the weapons and non-weapons mandates of the UNSC resolutions.
Mike Appleton: “Do the policies issued by Caliphate Life contain suicide exclusions?”
Worker’s comp.
Eric – that is an interesting legal problem. If you work for a company that requires suicide bombing can you or your heirs claim worker’s comp for death or injury during the bombing?
Well, the warmongers should love President Obama today, not only is he authorizing emergency food and water drops, he has authorized an air strike. Well I agree with it, as ISIS was aiming shots at those providing the relief. I hope it doesn’t escalate to a full blown war again, with our own troops being involved.
Nick – you’re being a riot again.
(though – I do wish to say – we ALL should be less condescending and more considerate – of the lesser informed {not that I’m saying fiver is lesser – as I do concur with his snipe about oil, etc.,})
I’m just sayin………
can’t we all get along
Arguably so ( 🙂
And may I add that it looks like the man in the photo can’t ride worth a darn, which makes him even more annoying. 🙂
fiver:
ISIS is the ruling party of the cities they conquered. If you do not think they are in charge of those cities, then you are sadly misinformed. You also seem to be unaware of the persecution of Christians in the Middle East under extremism, although you did use the opportunity to do a little Christian bashing yourself.
Nick:
I am glad that they’re going to drop food. I hope we don’t stand by and watch a massacre. What is the red line for military intervention, and will we actually stand by the red line, unlike Syria? I hope we can give them a military evacuation out of the region.
Two missions authorized: 1) Supplies, food etc, humanitarian aid; and 2) military support for other things if needed….
Well, I just read Obama authorized dropping food and water to the people trapped by ISIS. Hopefully, no one has a problem w/ that.
Sorry for trying to engage you in intelligent dialogue, fiver. But, I never make the same mistake twice. Ciao.