ISIS – Can they target American Military Personnel on U. S. Soil ?

ISIS recently issued a global 'order' to target American military members, publishing a list of 100 names along with a variety of personal details. Undoubtedly by now, the U.S. Defense Department has provided security assistance for those named in the publication. Additionally, they have issued a list of instructions to all military families to effectively do what they should have been doing all along which boils down to: keep private and personal information off of social media. There is no simple long term solution to this potential problem.

Additionally, this is not the first time this has happened. The self-proclaimed Islamic State made this request about a year ago on Jihadi social media sites asking Muslims to attack military personnel, and determined that their families were acceptable targets as well. This attempt to extol the followers of Islam to do violence against military members and their families has resulted is ZERO attacks. I am not saying there is no risk, nor that all American military families should not start to be more careful with the amount of personal information they display on Facebook. What I am saying is that the threat from ISIS here in the United States is rather remote.

When ISIS calls for Muslims to commit acts of violence globally on their behalf, we have a precedent for who responds. Men like Aaron Alton and Zale Thompson, Man Haron Monis, and Martin Roulea respond. These are individuals with extensive criminal backgrounds (all but one violent), who had been recently "radicalized" (converted to Islam), and decided to act out. Is it terrorism when a criminal acts out in the name of Islam, or is just an extension of there penchant for violent behavior? That is the question analysts will study and likely never be able to answer fully; but from a practical perspective, it doesn’t really play into solving the problem.

What ISIS specifically provides violent criminals is an excuse to act out. The emotional appeal of supporting the establishment of a global caliphate probably has less appeal then the sensational media reports that are likely to ensue. Acting under the banner of Islam provides a higher purpose, then just attacking as a local cop. How much that justification plays into the actions of long-term criminals on the outskirts of society remains to be seen.

What we do know is these Islamic converts are, in these four examples, is ostracized from social opportunity by virtue of their criminal past. They have poor social skills, and were all grossly uneducated. These are the types of people who are attracted to a random call for violence in support of a far off cause. They are quite different from the Boston Bombers, the Charlie Hebdo attackers and other comparatively educated Islamic Extremists. These individuals had received training and support from Muslim Terrorist organizations. These people developed a specific plan and executed it reasonably well.

It is the latter type of Muslim terrorist that has the ability to mount a successful attack against a specific target, not the former.

When you look at the impact of a successful attack against military members, it would be significant. While most people are intelligent enough to differentiate between the two types of attacks, the ignorant criminal type of Islamic terrorist is probably not. Meanwhile ISIS takes credit for every criminal follower of Islam who does violence against the West.

What we can expect to see is more of the same. Socially inept, disenfranchised, ignorant criminals committing violent acts under the banner of Islam. Those are hard to predict, difficult to identify, and nearly impossible to prevent. Conversely, those capable of planning, waiting, and executing an act of terrorism requires training, support, and intelligence. In seeking this information and skills, they often identify themselves to national and international security forces. This is where we catch and prevent attacks from occurring – and occasionally fail to prevent.

American military families probably have nothing more to fear this week then they did last week or the week before. Yes, they are targets, but the random criminal attracted to Islam is unlikely to successfully pull it off. The Muslim terrorists have yet to pull it off in the United States, and probably not due to a lack of effort. In short, the media frenzy over the threat to U. S. military personnel is not well thought out. It espouses a capability that ISIS has yet to demonstrate and who has largely touted that ability for years.

In closing, ISIS requesting more attacks has not changed the threat profile of their intended target. Hopefully it has raised the awareness of responsible social media use among potential targets (and everyone else).

Author: Patrick Henry (President)

Patrick received his operational training and experience from the U. S. Government, 22 years of which were spent in the Marine Corps where he served in the Reconnaissance, Infantry, and Intelligence fields. Patrick has worked as a contractor and as the Director of Operations at a private paramilitary firm specializing in training military special operations forces and providing protective services to select private clients. His education consists of an MBA from the University of Southern California (USC), and a BS from San Diego State University in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology and a minor in Psychology. He holds an extensive list of security and training related certifications. He is an active member of Infraguard and the American Society of Industrial Security (ASIS). He has been a guest speaker at ASIS, the San Diego Industrial Security Awareness Council, The Counter Terrorism Symposium hosted by New York’s Mobile Trauma Unit, and other private organizations on physical security, travel security, and competitive intelligence collection counter-measures.

Source: http://aegisacademy.com/community/isis-can-they-target-american-military-personnel-on-u-s-soil/

The Beheading of Colleen Hufford – Workplace Violence or Terrorism?

Alton Nolen is the man accused of beheading 54-year-old Colleen Hufford at Vaughn Foods. By accused we mean shot by the CEO (who is also a reserve Oklahoma County Deputy) as he was in the process of stabbing a second victim. He had recently been fired from a separate Vaughn foods store in the local area. The initial classification of the crime is as a workplace violence incident, which it is. The local police have requested the assistance of the FBI due his relatively recent conversion to Islam, but officially we have yet to call this a terrorist act.

Alton Nolan is exactly the type of person ISIS and Muslim terrorist recruiting efforts are focused on. He is grossly uneducated. This lack of education makes him incapable of discerning a logical argument from a fanciful one. He is on the outskirts of mainstream society (due to his extensive criminal past) and therefore desperate for acceptance. He is exploitable, as he has little alternatives in society. He certainly became more convinced that he understood the tenants on Islam over the past year. That said, this does not appear to be an attack conducted in accordance with the campaign of terror ISIS or Al-Qaeda or their affiliates are pursuing.

What we see here the combination of a semi-radicalized Muslim and an angry black man lashing out at anything and everything on which he can blame his problems. Were he acting in support of terrorist objectives we would see a string of justifications for his actions based on the treatment of Muslims blaming the American government. Instead what we see is a man acting largely in response to his termination from his employment. While his method certainly goes beyond what we typically see in workplace violence incidents, this probably falls well short of what we should consider a terrorist attack.

Who is Alton Nolan

 

Mr. Nolan served time in the Oklahoma Prison system for drug and assault charges. While in prison in 2011 (convicted after roughly ten arrests over the previous five years), he converted to Islam and began referring to himself as Jah’Keem Yisrael. His Facebook page claims he graduated from high school in 2003, and Langford University (an all Black College in Oklahoma) in 2007 with a degree in Business Management. There is no evidence he attended, let alone graduated from Langston or any other university. He posted a photo “Tooken by Shariece Pettiss at LU – 2009” (SIC) as his opening photo to his Facebook page, which is now listed under the name of Jah’Keem Yisrael.

There are a few gaps, however he is “JST GETN OFF WRK..FINST 2 HEAD 2 DA BEL TO SEE DIS PRETTY LIL GURL SHAWTY SAY IZ MINE…1 DWN 1 TO GO LOL” which means, in my best translation from Idiot to English – he is going to meet a woman and her child whom she claims is his daughter. Throughout 2010 we see a number of religious posts referring to the lord blessing him. Of note he indicates his mother attends church weekly. There is another gap during which he was incarcerated and on August 23, 2011, he claims (in the same grammar and spelling consistent with the complete lack of education he has displayed in nearly all of his posts) that he has been released from prison and is going to the halfway house. Throughout 2012 and part of 2013, his posts consist of relatively innocuous and irrelevant commentary on work and football.

His last post without reference to Allah was made on April 16, 2013. “Feel Like Lil Wayne Wish I Kld Fuk EveryGurl N DA World If Thinkin Bout Her Beautiness And Is A Sin Then Lrd Why Mke So Pretty Of Gurlz lol Yung Kuntry Niccccca!!!!” (SIC). The approximate translation is “I want to sleep with pretty girls because god made them pretty and I don’t understand why that is a sin”. He follows that up later with acknowledgement that the referenced behavior may in fact be considered a sin.

Alton Nolan was simply a grossly uneducated product of the prison system who found Islam as means of coping with his incarceration. Religion is quite frequently the last refuge of a scoundrel. He has no apparent goals in life save self gratification and displays no real concern in any of his posts for anything other than his plight or his personal opinions. He is simply an ignorant, somewhat arrogant narcissist.

Was he a radicalized Muslim?

 

From April 28, 2013, his post frequently reference Allah, the appropriate or inappropriate behavior standards for women and some significant historical revisionism about the Moor’s, the presidency, and plight of the black man in America. On October 31, he made his first post denigrating Christians and other religions, and from this point forward, his posts start to take a much more pro-Muslim tone, and begin to focus on racism referencing out of context historical references to neo-Nazi’s, Jews and Whites. He consistently attempts to make a historical connection to blacks as the “True Jews” and indicates their suffering was due to their abandonment of Islam.

The bulk of his posts are at this point typical of a Malcolm X interpretation of Islam, where the white man is evil and is the root of all oppression of the black man. In 2014, his posts become more frequent and, anti any religion save Islam, and he seems fixed on converting Christians. Interestingly enough his spelling and grammar have improved significantly between 2013 and his final posts. That would indicate to me that someone, somewhere was working with him. His posts start to take on a more international flavor and his historical misinterpretations start to appear to be a combination of southern prison system Islam with a sprinkling of Middle Eastern extremism.

In February 2014, he begins to end all his post with a signature “****InfoFromAMuslim****”. His photos all contain the skullcap and beard commonly associated with conservative Islam at this point. Despite his frequent racial posts, it would appear he claims to have guided a white youth to the Islamic faith on May 30. In addition, his lifestyle and posts begin to take a more eastern theological approach to Islam. Throughout Ramadan (a Muslim holy period), he appears to be proud of his adherence to Islamic principles of fasting and has posted photos of himself at social outing and at a mosque with Moroccan Muslims.

Why Behead Colleen Hufford

 

Undoubtedly, his exposure to international Muslims would have peaked his interest in the events in Syria, Iraq and around the world. His inability to intellectually make sound judgments, and desperation to be a part of something make him highly susceptible to suggestion. Beginning in July and August he begins to post quite frequently about the misdeeds (as he see’s it) of women. Early in September he begins to reference Muslims requirements to do their work to avoid hell. His final public post is on September 23 warns about masturbation and it being a sin.

Once terminated from his job, Mr. Nolan was likely to act out. He chose to act out against two women, as that was the focus of his recent fixation as part of his pursuit support of the Islamic faith as he understood it. He chose to behead Colleen quite likely because of the attention given the recent actions of ISIS and his interpretation that is how Muslims punish the guilty. What we have here appears to be a criminal act influenced by a grossly ignorant interpretation of Islam.

As indicated earlier, Alton Nolan is exactly the type of person ISIS and Muslim terrorist organizations are trying to recruit for their lone wolf attacks. He is uneducated and therefore incapable of discerning a logical argument from a fanciful one. He is on the outskirts of mainstream society, desperate for acceptance and susceptible to suggestion. He has limited social options, and can easily be sucked into a cell like structure and segregated from the rest of society. In this case however, they probably got to him too late to make him an effective tool in their strategy.

Alton Nolan was not a terrorist yet, in my opinion he was simply a murderer. Certainly the culture of violence that surrounds segments of Islam played a significant role in his behavior. That is what we need to focus on eradicating. There are simply elements of Islam that are incompatible with basic humanity, and although those same references exist in many religions, it is Islamists that frequently act on them. You can find more on the extremist culture of Islam in the article Is ISIS the future of Islam?

Stay Safe.

About Author

 

Patrick Henry - President and Firearm Trainer

Patrick Henry received his operational training and experience from the U. S. Government, 22 years of which were spent in the Marine Corps where he served in the Reconnaissance, Infantry and Intelligence fields. During his active service, he spent more then seven years deployed overseas in combat, operational and training assignments. After the military, Pat worked as a contractor and as the Director of Operations at a private paramilitary company, specializing in training special operations forces and providing protective services to select private clients. His education consists of an MBA from the University of Southern California (USC), and a BS from San Diego State University with an emphasis in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology and a minor in Psychology. He holds an extensive list of security and training related certifications from a variety of government and nationally recognized entities. He currently sits on the advisory committee at USC’s Master of Veterans Business Program, and is an active member of Infraguard and the American Society of Industrial Security (ASIS). He has been a guest speaker at ASIS, the San Diego Industrial Security Awareness Council and other private organizations on physical security, travel security, and competitive intelligence collection counter-measures.

First Published at Aegis Academy

Obama’s ISIS Strategy

An ISIS Strategy – From “Don’t Do Stupid Stuff” to American Leadership

 

Barak Obama laid out his strategy for dealing with ISIS on Wednesday, and it was a massive improvement from what we have seen in the past. Aside from the irrelevant political spins, what he made was the clearest statement on foreign policy we have heard from this administration to date. He appeared confident and energetic. He did not waste time blaming the past administration, or lamenting the situation. Most importantly it was not about what he and America would not do. What he said that struck me as effective is that ISIS is unacceptable to America and the rest of the world – in that order.

Our Strategy – Destroy ISIS! 

 

He said that America would lead a coalition to destroy ISIS. He threw in a fair amount of Syrian, Iraqi and Muslim support rhetoric to appear that a coalition of Muslim states was being established. The reality is that the coalition will consist of Western military force with enough locals to put a Muslim face on it. We can call ISIS a Muslim problem all we want, but the fact is that this is a largely American created Muslim problem, and they are incapable of solving it without American leadership and direct military intervention.

Despite my joy over having a strategy, there are some significant shortfalls with the approach. The president explicitly stated that ISIS is not Islamic. As we saw in the article ISIS – The future of Islam, extremist groups are the fastest growing segment of Islam. ISIS is but a symptom of the real problem. To recap, extremist groups are not opposed by nearly half of all Muslims and actively supported by more than 25%. Al-Qaeda, ISIS and extremist factions represent somewhere between a quarter and half of what all Muslims claim to be Islam. So whether it is ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Jemaah Islamiya or the next extremist faction on the NCTC’s list, the support for Sunni Extremism is what must be addressed to be effective. The key shortfall in this strategy is that any strategy that separates ISIS from the culture of Islam that creates Jihadists, is ultimately fruitless and will result in a Whack-a-Mole approach to the problem.

Is the strategy achievable despite of the constraints?

 

There are also some technical shortfalls with the presidents’ approach to Whack-a-Mole. Delivering on the promise to destroy ISIS is potentially a logical first step in attacking the real problem. In support of the destruction of ISIS, we are expanding our footprint in Iraq by another 475 advisors. The president was very careful to claim the advisors would not have a combat role, but the reality is that they will be on the frontlines with marginally trained Iraqi and Free Syrian Army soldiers directing airstrikes. I won’t bother to mince words, but the last time I called in an air strike, it felt pretty much indistinguishable from the other combat operations in which we engaged.

The 475 advisors are grossly insufficient numbers, but once committed, those numbers will expand as necessary to give the Iraqi Army the spine to fight in the short term, and to give the Syrian Free Army the equipment and backing to do the same. Perhaps with sufficient SOF support these forces can regain control of the oil facilities that are funding ISIS’s existence. Cutting the revenue stream will be a major step forward in achieving the president’s operational goal of destroying ISIS.

And then what? Do we depart again creating yet another power vacuum? When a power vacuum exists in the middle east, it will be filled by the most violent thugs in the immediate vicinity. Toppling Hussein’s Army in Iraq and routing Al-Qaeda was child’s play for the U. S. military and once committed, destroying ISIS will be no different. Military prowess was never a problem. The problem has always been what to do with it once we conquer it. Destroying ISIS is not a strategy, it is an operation.

Does this operation Sunni Extremist Strategy?

 

Another problem with this “strategy” that will not play into our favor is the reliance on air power. The concept of a surgical airstrike is a media driven fantasy. Air strikes and indirect fire are anything but surgical and both create substantial collateral damage. Collateral damage is a nice way of saying dead women and children. No matter how much the average Muslim detests the action of ISIS, it is nothing compared to their hatred of what they see as the wholesale slaughter of Muslims at the hands of indiscriminate American airpower. Dead women and kids splashed across Al-Jazeera will not assist our PR problem in the Middle East.

I first walked across some of this region in 1991, and then again in 2003, and here we are in 2014 paying for the same ground a third time. My question is to what end? A Strategy must define an end state, which the destruction of ISIS is a relatively simple, politically feasible end state with no real value to long term U. S. interests in the region. Without a strategy to definitively stabilize the region, we are wasting time, money, resources and lives. The concept that ISIS controlled territory will somehow coalesce into anything acceptable to the rest of the world is delusional thinking on par with U.S. forces being welcomed as liberators after the 2003 invasion.

That is the problem with the American “strategy” in the Middle East and more specifically the ISIS strategy laid out by the president. First it is numerically inadequate to achieve the stated goal – the destruction of ISIS. Further, the destruction of ISIS gains us nothing in the long term. As advisors become casualties, this war-weary country will demand progress and progress will require the deployment of more troops. The cycle will continue until we reach another breaking point. Perhaps in seven to ten years, we will choose to commit to the region and stabilize it – which is quite likely a 25 year prospect. Perhaps we will shortsightedly and prematurely pull out again, and by default choose for out children to fight this war a fourth time.

What if we just walked away?

 

As we look to the stated goal of the strategy, it is massively shortsighted, and far too limited in scope to be effective. It is yet another recipe for ineffective intervention in the Muslim world. We have two strategic options in dealing with ISIS and the problem of Islamic extremists. The first is to stand aside and let them work it out amongst themselves. At the extreme, standing aside would undoubtedly result in the destruction of Israel who cannot exist without our support. Further it will result in significant growth in the preeminence of Iran as the dominant power structure in the region. That is unlikely to be something we can live with, in even the short term. Over the long haul, the growth of extremism will force us intervene at some point for self preservation.

The second option is to commit the military force and political reconstruction effort to the region for a generation if not longer, which is what it will take to achieve an internationally acceptable stabilized region. We did not allow a conquered Japan anything but unconditional surrender. We established the conditions under which they could regain independence, and those conditions were in line with our national interests. The same can be said of Germany after World War II. In this case, we are not fighting a government; we are fighting a religious structure that is masquerading as a government, and our politically correct penchant for religious freedom is hamstringing our efforts at crafting a strategy that meets American and western interests in the region.

To end this war, we will have to mandate the religious, educational and cultural components that lead to a moderate Muslim society. That will require draconian measures initially and the willingness to force theological changes onto the second largest religion in the world. We, the American people and the international community, are probably several terrorist attacks on Western nations, and millions of Muslims murdered in the name of extremism, from committing the considerable resources, time and effort required to eradicate the culture of extremism from the Islamic faith. Ultimately, until we are ready to name the disease we are facing we are stuck playing Whack-a-Mole with the symptoms.

This strategy is worthy of the most improved award – and little else…

 

While the strategy laid out by the president was a massive improvement from the child-like approach to the past six years of “Don’t Do Stupid Stuff”, it is still grossly insufficient. That insufficiency will prove counter-productive in the relatively short term. The teenage approach of relying on brute force has been tried and failed, and yet here we are – trying it again. As American air power causes collateral damage, we are stoking the fires of extremism in the Muslim world and ultimately empowering the recruiting efforts of our adversaries. Perhaps the next administration will take the adult approach to the issue and make the significantly difficult choices to avoid paying for this ground a fourth time.

About Author

 

Patrick Henry - President at Aegis Academy
 

Patrick Henry received his operational training and experience from the U. S. Government, 22 years of which were spent in the Marine Corps where he served in the Reconnaissance, Infantry and Intelligence fields. During his active service, he spent more then seven years deployed overseas in combat, operational and training assignments. After the military, Pat worked as a contractor and as the Director of Operations at a private paramilitary company, specializing in training special operations forces and providing protective services to select private clients. His education consists of an MBA from the University of Southern California (USC), and a BS from San Diego State University with an emphasis in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology and a minor in Psychology. He holds an extensive list of security and training related certifications from a variety of government and nationally recognized entities. He currently sits on the advisory committee at USC’s Master of Veterans Business Program, and is an active member of Infraguard and the American Society of Industrial Security (ASIS). He has been a guest speaker at ASIS, the San Diego Industrial Security Awareness Council and other private organizations on physical security, travel security, and competitive intelligence collection counter-measures.

First Published at Aegis Academy

DOS vs. ISIS – The war of Ideas

The U.S. Department of State vs. ISIS - The war of Ideas

 

While I was still on active duty, I witnessed some of the severely incompetent planning, policies and execution by the Department of State (DOS). De-Baathification, disbanding the Iraqi Army, rebuilding Fallujah and the use of contractor vice uniformed military details for standard security operations are but the tip of the iceberg. Their inability to adapt over the course of a decade at war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and their arrogant adherence to bad policy was, and continues to be staggering. Their latest foray into anti-ISIS propaganda was a video titled, Welcome to Islamic State Land. Like much of the entire Think Again, Turn Away program, it waivered between sarcasm, attempts and humor and grisly depictions of inhumane activity. It is indicative of the colossal gap between how the DOS views ISIS and what ISIS is actually trying to achieve. Here is their anti-recruiting video, and below are some samples of ISIS recruiting videos.

Warning Graphic Content:



Most young males in their early life, rightly or wrongly, grow up judged to a large extent based on their physical prowess. Those who are not physically skilled have to find others means of competing. Humor, intelligence, emotional IQ, etc.. become more important as we age especially into the teenage years and on to adulthood. Over time, raw physical ability becomes less and less important. Some successfully make the transition, some spend their lives competing in the physical area, and some do a bit of both. In the gap between those who create their identity via physical prowess and those who create their identity based on other skills is subset of the population who simply does not fit. Some of them will find their path later in life and be truly impactful; others will simply accept their place with resigned frustration.

A small subset of that population will come to resent what they see as a society that does not value them as individuals. This particular subset of young adult males is likely to feel powerless against what they view as an oppressive society. Some will independently lash out at home and commit petty crimes or worse (Elliot Rodger, Adam Lanza, etc…). Others drift to the fringes of society and live out a comparatively isolated existence. These fringes are the population of society that ISIS is targeting with its western recruiting efforts.

The Department of State’s Message to would be Jihadists:

 

The video starts with people being shot, tossed from a cliff and beheaded while the leader of ISIS proclaims “Syria is no longer for Syrians, Iraq no longer for Iraqis”. What the Majority of Americans see is brutality at the hands of a terrorist organization, and human beings who need to be defended from oppression and abuse. That video may be an effective means of raising awareness of the brutality to ISIS, but to those who are considering ISIS as a means of lashing out at the society who has shunned them, it is exactly the opposite. What they see is a minority of righteous followers who have seized power from an oppressive society and are exacting their revenge under the banner of a higher cause. ISIS is largely depicted in the video as acting at will and as all powerful in their area of control.

The scenes of abuse continue, and cements in their minds that ISIS can do whatever it wants to not just people, but religious institutions, organizations and governments. Worse yet, they take an almost sarcastic approach to closing in saying “Travel is cheap because you won’t need a return ticket”. I am not sure if that is intended as a threat – but all the would be recruit hears is sarcasm… Just like the sarcasm and the bullying that that they feel has marginalized them in society. “Think again, Turn Away” is the final message which will be perceived as a society, which has rejected them, attempting to keep them in their current condition – marginal and irrelevant. This video practically does ISIS’s job for them.

The ISIS message to would be Jihadists:

 

When we contrast that with the videos produced by ISIS, they communicate a very different message. First, there are no messages of what not to do, but messages of joining a cause that is larger than yourself. It is an inclusive message of acceptance. The choice of western recruits is also well made. This is not the captain of the football team, these are smiling young men, who could be anyone. Every day people who may even be exactly the the type of people who might not fit in at home. Below are some short samples from There is no life with Jihad, one of the ISIS recruiting videos targeting westerners to which you can compare the messages.



When we view the clip of western males talking about their experience, these are not the popular kids in school. The speakers do not appear exceptional in any way. The subtle message is – Any of you, can be one of us. They visually display the symbol of power they possess with the constant images of a gun in the frame. They are positive in their choice of words and message. Join us, come to us, fight for something that matters. The message is: join our team; we will accept you, everyone is capable. They are not communicating a message of what not to do, they are communicating a vision of what you can be a part of.

Through most American’s eyes, we see ISIS behavior as twisted. ISIS is not recruiting most of America. We have recently taken a look at the execution videos of James Foley and Steven Sotloff. There we see an even starker image portrayed to the Muslim world and both speak volumes to potential recruits. To review the highlights: both theses videos convey that ISIS is the victim of western aggression, ISIS is firmly in control of its lands, even American ISIS victims agree with their “punishment”, and that ISIS is energetically moving forward, while American leadership is portrayed as defeated.

When we contrast the ISIS message of “You can join a successful cause, greater than yourself, that will give you the power to exact revenge on the society that does not value you” with “Think again, Turn away” it does not take rocket science to understand who is winning the war of perception – in the eyes of the target population.

As long as we view ISIS through an American lens, we will fail to check their pursuit of their goals. The intelligence community has experts who could produce videos that could both insulate the target population from infection, and deter potential recruits. Clearly the DOS in its arrogance did not bother to seek them out. They continue to steadfastly view the world and ISIS through an American lens. That view is as ineffective at checking ISIS goals as is the video they produced. In the U.S. Department of State Vs. ISIS – the war of ideas is what fills their armies, and the DOS is grossly unprepared to fight it.
We are not at any more significant risk from ISIS in America than we were six months ago, however, if this ineffective bumbling approach to dealing with ISIS does not change, we one day will be.

About Author

 

Patrick Henry - President at Aegis Academy

Patrick Henry received his operational training and experience from the U. S. Government, 22 years of which were spent in the Marine Corps where he served in the Reconnaissance, Infantry and Intelligence fields. During his active service, he spent more then seven years deployed overseas in combat, operational and training assignments. After the military, Pat worked as a contractor and as the Director of Operations at a private paramilitary company, specializing in training special operations forces and providing protective services to select private clients. His education consists of an MBA from the University of Southern California (USC), and a BS from San Diego State University with an emphasis in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology and a minor in Psychology. He holds an extensive list of security and training related certifications from a variety of government and nationally recognized entities. He currently sits on the advisory committee at USC’s Master of Veterans Business Program, and is an active member of Infraguard and the American Society of Industrial Security (ASIS). He has been a guest speaker at ASIS, the San Diego Industrial Security Awareness Council and other private organizations on physical security, travel security, and competitive intelligence collection counter-measures.

First Published at Aegis Academy

Is ISIS the future of Islam?

Western leadership has denounced the beheading of James Foley, and both Obama and Blair have referred to ISIS as a “cancer”. Cancer is probably the most accurate analogy of what Islamic extremism really is to Islam as whole. The real question we need to ask is if we can treat it? In making that determination in a cancer patient, we would look at the location of the cancer, the growth rate and the degree of metastasis of the infection. For diseases, we would also like to know the vector (or mechanism by which it spreads). We have metrics to measure these all of these components of extremist Islam.

The National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC) released an unclassified version of their 2011 Report on Terrorism, which shows that 56% of total attacks can be attributed to Sunni Islamists. They are also responsible for more than 70% of total global terrorist attack deaths, which tells us that on average their attacks are considerably more violent than other terrorist groups. If we do not face the fact that there is strong correlation between terrorists, terrorist attacks and Islam, then we are choosing to ignore the statistical reality of the problem. If we continue to ignore the causal factors of the problem, we have very little chance of solving it.

Neither Islam nor the Quran independently create terrorists

 

Neither Islam nor the Quran is the cause of terrorism. One of the often-cited myths about Islam is that the Quran has Suras (Verses) which justify terrorism and that those equivalent versus are lacking in the bible. The first part of that sentence is true, the Quran is rife with instructions to do violence against non-Muslims. For example Sura 9.5, “God instructs his Muslim followers to kill unbelievers, to capture them, to ambush them…”. Sura 4.34, 5.33, 8.12 and 8.6 are pretty commonly used as examples directing what western society today would call torture.

The falsehood arises in the second part of the sentence when Christians conveniently ignore the equivalently violent passages in the Bible, (and the Jews in the Torah, specially the Tanakh). The passages are equally descriptive and direct the extermination of the Canaanites – effectively advocating genocide. Certainly there are many other references that could be select and used to justify cruelty and violence. To say that the justification for violence is more present in the passages of the Quran than in the bible or the Torah is simply false. Extremism is no more rooted in the holy book of Islam, than any other religion. We need to look to the culture of Muslim nations and determine how their interpretation of these versus creates such a high percentage of global terrorists.

Sunni terrorism is the primary driver of global terrorism

 

The NCTC report does not break out the Shi’a based terrorist attacks by groups from the total sum of “other” attacks. Shi’a Islam makes up only about 12.5% of the global population of Muslims. Therefore their total contribution to global terrorism is relatively low compared to their Sunni counter parts. Further, Shi’a based terrorism is typically associated with much more targeted attacks like political assassinations, kidnapping or car bombs. This is probably due to the controls imposed by Iran, the state sponsor of Shi’a terrorist groups like Hezbollah and others. As such, this is a significantly different driver of extremism and it should be treated separately.

According to a recent Rand study, (June 2014) “since 2010 there has been a 58% increase in Salafist Jihadi Groups” (One branch of Sunni Islam that advocates violence), “a doubling in the number of fighters and a tripling in the total number of attacks”. The total Muslim growth global rate is approximately 2.5% per year, but the growth rate of Salafist Jihad’is based on those metrics is nearly 20% per year. What we can take away from those two reports is that Sunni Islam is the main vector by which extremism is spread, and that it is spreading almost 10 times faster than the potentially healthy elements of Islam.

The attitudes of Muslims can be and have been tracked

 

When we look at the 2013 Global Pew Poll titled The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society, I want to point out the range of responses is wide. Different cultures certainly influence how Islam is practiced, and how extremism is viewed. It does however identify some significantly frightening points on the compatibility of Islam with other religions.

One key difference is highlighted in Appendix A which shows that American Muslims are considerably different from their global counter parts in their tolerance of other religions (They are off the scale and considerably more tolerant). In all other aspects of their religion, they are within the range of responses from their global counter parts. Religious tolerance is both a legal necessity to live in America and the only socially accepted position in American society.

That said, this uncharacteristic American Muslim tolerance of other religions, provides Americans with a distorted view of Muslim tolerance as a whole. American culture demands acceptance of other religions and this fact coupled with American Muslims being exceptionally tolerant undoubtedly helps create the American misconceptions that Islam is a tolerant religion and that acts of terrorism are not highly correlated with the Islamic faith. The fact is that Islam is generally intolerant, and Islam is highly correlated with terrorism, but that is socially unacceptable to say in America. These misconceptions created the illusion that there is no link, and the social norms stop Americans from identifying and discussing the root of the problem.

When we look at all other measures in the reported poll data, American Muslims are consistently similar to their global counter parts. One example of that similarity (which could be a measure of extremism as well) is their support for suicide bombing. Nineteen percent of American Muslims express support for its use. In the Muslim community at large 28% express support for suicide bombing. The American response falls well within the global range of responses.

As we saw in the video “A Message to America” which showed the beheading of American journalist James Foley, we can clearly see that influence in how it is practiced does not provide immunity from the infection. Another example is the Russian news agency requested poll from ICM research asking Europeans about their support for ISIS. Germany, the UK and France have about 2%, 7% and 15% respectively, of their total populations (Muslim and non-muslim alike) expressing support for ISIS. We can make the assumption that this support is coming primarily from the Muslim population, but clearly that is a surprisingly high number for western nations.

Next we can look back to the Global Pew poll, which looks at Muslim support for extremist groups. The global median of all Muslims who express an unfavorable view of specific terrorist groups in 2013 was as follows:
Al-Qaeda 57% / The Taliban 51% / Hamas, 45% / Hezbollah 42%
The question evoked responses of positive support, which globally ranged between of 13% – 32% of respondents. Very close to 25% of respondents refused to answer or stated they did not know. Less than half of the global population of Muslims sees the activities of those organization as incongruent with their religion. That tells me less than half of the Muslim population opposes the actions of the extremists.

Using our cancer analogy, if the cells of a human body were 25% cancerous and increasing at 20% rate per year, the chances of survival would be low. Applying those same growth metrics to the Ebola virus, if infections were growing at the same rate as extremist Islam, with its current slightly over 1,000 cases worldwide today and its two-week incubation, period we would have nearly 100,000 cases a year from now. Islam is neither a cancer nor a disease, but the extremist elements certainly have cancerous effect on the populations they engage with.

Can we stop the spread of extremist Islam?

 

Only recently, as ISIS started to threaten the political power in both Iraq and Syria, do we see Muslim governments starting to condemn their actions. It is neither surprising nor impressive that they are speaking out to preserve their power structures in the face of what is now a credible threat. The real power in the Middle East has always been tribal alliances followed by religious authority and only then do national governments and political power structures come into play. From a cultural perspective, Islamic governments have little or no ability to stem the tide of extremism.

Religious leadership would be the appropriate place from which to drive change. We can make the assumption that the Muslim population takes its cues and opinions from the religious leadership and the survey data largely reflects those views. Less than 50% state they are actively opposed to the actions of the extremists, so at best a consolidated push by Muslim Religious leadership would result in a draw… They are simply not on the same page.
ISIS on the other hand has clearly stated their goal. ISIS is in the media and on TV. ISIS is fighting a war with America to establish an Islamic State. ISIS confidently proclaims its leadership of the Muslim world. For many young Muslims, ISIS fighters are the war hero’s of their generation.

Conversely, Muslim religious leadership is talking, debating and arguing amongst itself. While a number of Muslim scholars have openly condemned ISIS actions, very few, if any, have condemned their goal of an Islamic State. Further, their messages are disjointed and they are simply not speaking to the Muslim community or world with a cohesive message. It is unwise to bank on religious leadership driving a successful shift in Muslim culture to one where radicalization and extremism is not tolerated. I see absolutely no indicators that a change of that magnitude is within their capability.

Barak Obama naively stated a few weeks back that ISIS is a Muslim problem and that Muslims must take the lead in solving it. In actuality this is a problem America created in 2003 by deposing Saddam Hussein. Until 2011 we were managing the problem we created and there was a chance to mentor the fledgling democracy that we had spent 9 years and 4,488 lives creating. In December of 2011, Obama’s “end” of the Iraq war left an incompetent military, and a disjointed, ineffective, non-representative government to figure it out on its own. ISIS was born in the Syrian conflict that Obama failed to engage in. It has swept aside the Iraqi Army he abandoned in 2011 and filled the power vacuum he created. ISIS is the surrogate son of Barack Obama and failed American foreign policy.

Setting aside blame, lets assume for a minute that Muslim governments do have the desire to solve the problem that America dumped in their laps. The only tool they have at their disposal is military force. We have seen how effective the Iraqi Army is, and quite frankly despite their clear incompetence in the face of ISIS; they are some of the better-trained and equipped soldiers in the region. Name one Muslim nation that credibly projects power beyond its own borders? Save Iran, there is none. Iran has absolutely zero incentive to do anything save ensure its own borders are secure at this point.

Military power alone will not change the future of Islam

 

We can use air power and Special Operations Forces and intelligence assets to delay ISIS from taking more ground. We cannot win a war via a delaying action. ISIS fighters are estimated at 17,000. Based on the past growth rate of extremism we calculated earlier, extremists are created at the rate of about 60,000 per year, which is certainly an adequate recruitment pool. ISIS is clearly benefiting from its new position as the dominant player in the extremist world and as such we can expect it to grow quickly.

We can probably keep a lid on it for a while, but air power is indiscriminate and every civilian casualty and non-combatant we kill increases the growth rate. SOF, air power and intelligence assets are not going to eliminate ISIS. If ISIS is a cancer, Muslims are militarily incapable of carving out the cancer themselves. From a practical perspective, western military power is the only force capable of performing the excision.

The excision of ISIS is not the issue. Like every Muslim army on the planet they are simply no match for U.S. military power. The problem is military power does not deal with the cultural elements in Islam that creates the extremists. If we are unwilling to go to war with the Salafist culture and the society’s it infects, then we should not go to war. We should in fact waste no more U. S. resources on fighting the symptoms and ISIS is only a symptom of the greater disease. The disease is not rooted in the Quran, or in a specific country. The disease is rooted in the culture surrounding a segment of the Islamic religion.

If America fails to clearly identify the root of the problem and create and lead the coalition to effect change, then ISIS is the future of Islam

 

As a country we currently lack the will to fight the protracted war in the Middle East against a significant potion of the Islamic religion. That is what it would take to eradicate extremist Islam. I am not sure how many beheaded Americans, bombed and attacked embassies, and terrorist acts on U. S. soil it will take to generate the will. What we do know is the Muslim world cannot independently solve the problem we created for them.

Under the Obama administration, ISIS has been handed the future of Islam, and until America generates the leadership and the will to fight extremism at is root causes, we will change nothing. Effecting change requires both the commitment of forces necessary and the strategic mission of eradicating the portion of Islam that is incompatible with the rest of humanity. Extremist Islam has been at war with America for quite some time. We have yet to declare war on it…

About Author

 

Patrick Henry - President & Firearms Instructor at Aegis Academy

 

Patrick Henry received his operational training and experience from the U. S. Government, 22 years of which were spent in the Marine Corps where he served in the Reconnaissance, Infantry and Intelligence fields. During his active service, he spent more then seven years deployed overseas in combat, operational and training assignments. After the military, Pat worked as a contractor and as the Director of Operations at a private paramilitary company, specializing in training special operations forces and providing protective services to select private clients. His education consists of an MBA from the University of Southern California (USC), and a BS from San Diego State University with an emphasis in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology and a minor in Psychology. He holds an extensive list of security and training related certifications from a variety of government and nationally recognized entities. He currently sits on the advisory committee at USC’s Master of Veterans Business Program, and is an active member of Infraguard and the American Society of Industrial Security (ASIS). He has been a guest speaker at ASIS, the San Diego Industrial Security Awareness Council and other private organizations on physical security, travel security, and competitive intelligence collection counter-measures.

First Published at Aegis Academy