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

quote:

---

And while I don't have a major issue what what she said

---

My major beef is really simple. Saying that ISIL is responsible for something that a person does when ISIL had no operational involvement i.e. Planning, funding, mentoring, logistics etc is at best erroneous and at worst dishonest. It's like saying that the Braves are responsible for the fish I caught last weekend because I sympathize with them. We wouldn't apply this logic universally. Most everyone rejects this logic when it appears in civil cases concerning video game violence.

Using her logic, virtually any Muslim terrorist who had viewed an ISIS video can be claimed as an agent of ISIS. This makes them seem far more operationally capable than they are. Seeming more effective than they are is a critical recruiting tool of terrorist organizations and insurgencies. It a doctrinal principle of insurgent and terrorist strategy. She is carrying water for ISIS by using this criteria. Good for clicks tho.

ISIL has made thousands of claims for attacks and actions that are complete or partially fabrications. Even their execution videos contain deliberately misleading content,though they are responsible for the killings. Lying is what they do. They are very good at propaganda and their entire goal is to motivate others to join them. Which means they need to appear effective and terrifying. It's ridiculous that a journalist who thinks herself so knowledgeable of them hasn't stumbled upon the hundreds of obvious examples of exaggeration and deliberately misleading ISIS claims. She's confirming her bias and writing attention grabbing stories in doing so.