re: NYT's ISIS expert: ISIS likely behind LV attack.

quote:

---

I haven't followed too close.. is that their claim?

Originally they were saying "it was us" and that he converted to Islam 6 months ago.

---

They stated that he converted and that he was a "soldier of the Islamic state" who was acting on the order to attack westerners domestically.

That claim in and if itself is weak AF. They didn't make a string claim of responsibility. The western press is making a stronger claim than they did, actually. They almost always do.

The issue here is that ISIS operational capabilities are being overstated. That matters a lot.

quote:

---

But if (and I stress "if") he converted and talked to some ISIS guy and said "hey, I'm Muslim now. Death to America, brothers. You were my models", them claiming some responsibility isn't that far-fetched

---

I disagree here. If I called the fight club film crew and said "message received, I'm gonna burn a smiley face in a skyscraper" it wouldn't reflect any responsibility or culpability on their part. Even If they secretly wanted me to do that.

But the biggest issue here is that it's being portrayed that ISIL makes legit claims about their involvement in attacks. Usually, they have no involvement at all. These are mostly spontaneous actors with no links to the established ISIL organization.