Intelligence officials in the U.S. and Britain believe that they are closer to identifying the terrorist who beheaded American journalist James Foley in the grotesque video released by the Islamic State, formerly known as ISIS. The U.S. continues to follow a policy against such ransoms, though many have charged that the Obama Administration broke that policy in the controversial trade of five Taliban leaders for Bergdahl in addition to violating federal law. Europe has long rejected the policy and, according to media reports, has sent millions to fill the coffers of ISIS, which then uses the money to fill coffins around the world. France alone paid $13.2 million for four of its citizens and Islamic State is now known to have special kidnapping squads looking for Westerners. While we often discuss the financiers of terror in places like Saudi Arabia, we may have to start to look closer to home in the West.
The man shown in the picture with Foley is believed to be part of the operation to kidnap and ransom Westerners. He is part of a group of at least three British-born ISIS fighters known among former hostages as “The Beatles.” They are believed to include 23-year-old Abdel Majid Abdel Bary(left), who we previously discussed. He is the former rap artist and DJ from London. Bary, who only arrived in Syria last year but has been extolling the murder of nonbelievers since his arrival in what he describes as a type of Islamic paradise. He is the son of Adel Abdul Bary, an Egypt-born terror suspect who is in the U.S. awaiting trial for his alleged role in the 1998 Al Qaeda bombings of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
Bary has given up rap in favor of celebratory picture holding the heads of those who do not accept Islam as he and ISIS understand it.
The two other Beatles are Abu Hussain al-Britani, 20, and Abu Abduallah al-Britani, 23, (no known relation). Hostages describe all three as sadists who would torture hostages with tasers and were so cruel that even the homicidally insane ISIS leaders ordered that they could no longer guard the hostages.
While the world has been repulsed by these stories and scenes, some Muslims are clearly attracted to the movement and its blood-soaked history. Thousands of volunteers have flooded into these areas to join the Islamic State. In one surprising story, there are now twice the number of English muslims fighting for the Islamic State than serving in the English military.
It is not only raw recruits that Islamic State is receiving from the West. The New York Times has reported that “Al Qaeda and its direct affiliates have taken in at least $125 million in revenue from kidnappings since 2008, of which $66 million was paid just last year.”
This creates an obvious market for Westerners who are held and often tortured until Western countries buckle. Thus, France rewarded ISIS with over $13 million for four hostages. It is possible to be religious murderous fanatics and be still rational criminal actors. Obviously, with Westerners bringing in millions, Islamic State will go out and capture more Westerners. Given the past payments, they are likely to be even more vicious if countries do not pay. So we have the bizarre appearance of ISIS militants using captured U.S. weapons and operating off European funds. A true Fellinesque moment in history.
Last week, the CEO of GlobalPost, a media organization where Foley had worked, revealed that ISIS had demanded a ransom of $132 million in exchange for Foley.
Given the ambition of the Islamic State to kill scores of Westerners, the payments by France and other countries is truly breathtaking.
83 thoughts on “I$I$: Europe Funding The Islamic State Through Ransoms That Have Already Reaped Millions for the Terrorist Organization”
Annie: “I agree that drone killings are wrong and that it does recruit yet more extremists as do endless wars in the region.”
Yep. That’s why Bush’s dedicated policy of building the peace was critical. President Bush also could have reacted to 9/11 with a narrow focus on hunting down and killing terrorists, like President Obama’s drone-centered campaign. (Bush used hunter-killer drone killings, too, but as one tool in the toolbox, not the centerpiece of his counter-terror strategy.) However, President Bush understood punishment and revenge did not amount to a big-picture, long-term solution.
Our peace operations in Iraq that were succeeding when Bush handed off to Obama was the key piece to our winning the War on Terror. Obama’s decision to discontinue Bush’s peace-building and opt for “endless wars” instead has been a disaster.
Nick Spinelli: “Eric, Of course they work. … most Americans abide using those techniques. I just don’t happen to”.
If you believe they work, how do you morally justify not abiding them?
This isn’t like other areas where a weight is assigned to a term but then the term is defined down while the weight is retained. The decision to omit enhanced interrogation is not victimless. There is a countervailing consideration: the immorality of willfully choosing to omit reasonably accessible measures that might acquire lifesaving intelligence when conventional interrogation is insufficient.
Our morality is skewed when we value the lives of potential terrorist victims, non-American as well as American, less than a blanket prohibition on enhanced interrogation that’s premised on a different kind of war against a different kind of enemy.
If you believe they work, how do you morally justify not abiding them?
PCS, RE: Black Reverend Video Posting
Thank you for supporting the truth and the facts in this single, insignificant matter.
Many want to ignore the truth and the facts in pursuit of individual benefit and advantage.
Bottom line it’s the simple difference between right and wrong.
Of the American thesis, that’s freedom and self-reliance, NOT slavery and state control.
Oops, looks like somebody may have gotten deleted.
Haz, generally when someone makes an assertion here on this blog they link it for more credibility. You have the burden of proving your assertion, not me. And Pat Dollard? LOL. I said CREDIBLE, source.
And Haz, do you think that the Mexicans are going to chop off Tahmooressi’s head anytime soon? Having said that I do hope he gets released soon.
Haz, you’ll need to provide a credible link for that assertion about the order to shoot Bergdahl on sight, lol. And YES, last I looked, Bergdahl’s head was still planted on his neck.
“I’m glad to see the President did the correct thing and Bergdahl got to keep his head.”
Um, no. There was a shoot on sight order issued for those who were searching for Bergdahl because he is a deserter and a enemy collaborator. He should have been shot, but our muslim sympathizer CIC traded him for five really, really bad guys who want in their deepest hearts to kill Americans, millions, if at all possible. This was a horrible trade. But, Barry at least a free feel of Bergdal’s mother’s butt at the WH press conference,a so there’s that.
Meanwhile, President Stompy Foot hasn’t lifted a finger to get Marine Sgt Andrew Tahmooresi out of a prison in Mexico where he is being unjustly held.
“According to US Department of Defense records, al-Baghdadi was held at Camp Bucca as a “civilian internee” by US Forces-Iraq from February until December 2004, when he was recommended for an “unconditional release” by a Combined Review and Release Board. A number of newspapers, in contrast, have stated that al-Baghdadi was interned from 2005 to 2009. These reports originated in an interview of Army Col Kenneth King, the former commander of Camp Bucca, and are not substantiated by US Department of Defense records.” wiki
Comments are closed.