1. Communicate
2. Partner
3. Educate
4. Engage
5. Mentor
6. Support

Seriously??

Maybe they can start an "adopt a jihadist" program. Oh right we can't mention Islam.

According to obama and his mouth-pieces, the solution is economic development, a jobs program and understanding and addressing the terrorist grievances.

When asked what exactly the terrorists " grievances" are, no one from the administration could answer.

“"adopt a jihadist" program”? It’s a concept.

Of course Americans need economic development and jobs too.

So typical of you doughron to twist his comment into "can't" mention Islam, as if he imposed some law against it. What is your opinion of his explanation? That to associate ISIL with a religion gives them more credit than what they really are?

I shake my head at some of the reporting. They'll be showing a film clip of some complex and, "Here is _____________, a known stronghold of terror activity....."

What's it doing still standing?

So typical of you doughron to twist his comment into "can't" mention Islam, as if he imposed some law against it. What is your opinion of his explanation? That to associate ISIL with a religion gives them more credit than what they really are?

I can never tell if you are serious or a parody of am Obama cookl aid drinker. Right. Why would we associate the Islamic State with Islam? Especially when there are crusaders to attack.

So typical of you doughron to twist his comment into "can't" mention Islam, as if he imposed some law against it. What is your opinion of his explanation? That to associate ISIL with a religion gives them more credit than what they really are?

I can never tell if you are serious or a parody of am Obama cookl aid drinker. Right. Why would we associate the Islamic State with Islam? Especially when there are crusaders to attack.

_________________________________________________________________

The Islamic Extremeist Terrorists say it themselves when they scream “Allahu Akbar” has they explode a bomb, behead a non-believer or rape a 10 year old girl.

Obama simply will not call the enemy what they really are because he won't offend his Muslim brothers.

I can never tell if you are serious or a parody of am Obama cookl aid drinker. Right. Why would we associate the Islamic State with Islam? Especially when there are crusaders to attack.

ISIL, Al-Queda, Westboro Baptist Church....they are all lost, delusional, miserable thugs who use violence to cope with their lives, and they use their religion as the excuse. I happen to agree with the point that to call them "The Islamic State" or to describe them as Islamic terrorists just because they say they are, gives them more respect and credibility than they deserve. They are animals....not a sophisticated establishment with a noble religious cause.

So typical of you doughron to twist his comment into "can't" mention Islam, as if he imposed some law against it. What is your opinion of his explanation? That to associate ISIL with a religion gives them more credit than what they really are?

I can never tell if you are serious or a parody of am Obama cookl aid drinker. Right. Why would we associate the Islamic State with Islam? Especially when there are crusaders to attack.

_________________________________________________________________

The Islamic Extremeist Terrorists say it themselves when they scream “Allahu Akbar” has they explode a bomb, behead a non-believer or rape a 10 year old girl.

When Major Hassan was mowing people down at Ft. Hood he was screaming, "Jobs, jobs, jobs." You didn't know?

ISIL, Al-Queda, Westboro Baptist Church

Bazooka, Uzi, toy pop-gun......

You miss the point. Just because they say they kill in the name of Islam, doesn't mean Islam is the actual cause for the fight. They are misguided animals, and religion has nothing to do with their actions, no different than Christianity and Westboro.

You miss the point. Just because they say they kill in the name of Islam, doesn't mean Islam is the actual cause for the fight. They are misguided animals, and religion has nothing to do with their actions, no different than Christianity and Westboro.

Well...I kind of thonk you are wrong on both counts. First who are you to say what is and is not Islam. Or Christianity? Both ISIS and Al Quaeda and all the other jihadist groups certainly do act in the name of Islam as they believe and understand it and they find support and justification in the Koran. The same is true for the Westboro Church which is very much a Christian entity. While the jihadists do not represent ALL of Islam they represent a not insiignificant chunk of it. Besides their core soldiers who seem to number in the tens of thousands, they have many hundreds of thousands if not millions more who are at the least sympathetic with their aims which is more or less to ultimately take over the entire world and subject it to Shariah law.

The Westboro Baptist Church has what a hundred adherents? So the comparison is really meaningless. But I would never suggest that the Westboro Chuch was not acting in the name of Christianity and if there were millions who agreed with and supported them I would say Christians would have a serious problem just as Islam does.

While I realize this statement seems radical to you it is nothing more or less than the truth.

You miss the point. Just because they say they kill in the name of Islam, doesn't mean Islam is the actual cause for the fight. They are misguided animals, and religion has nothing to do with their actions, no different than Christianity and Westboro.

I've always thought it was their perverted interpretation of their faith that differentiated them.

An Islamist extremest even if they believe differently than all others of the Muslim religion are still Islamist, just as the kooks from Westboro are still part of Christianity.

So my comparison is meaningless and wrong, and your post is "more or less the truth". LOL, Got it.

Well...I kind of thonk you are wrong on both counts. First who are you to say what is and is not Islam. Or Christianity?

I'm not claiming anything about the religion. I'm making claims about the terrorists. And it's an opinion shared by many, including a couple Muslims I work with...that they are thugs who use the region as an excuse.

Both ISIS and Al Quaeda and all the other jihadist groups certainly do act in the name of Islam as they believe and understand it and they find support and justification in the Koran. The same is true for the Westboro Church which is very much a Christian entity.

I get that they say and believe they are acting in the name of their religion, but neither religion suggests violence, and if they interpret some passages as a call for violence, then it's a delusional thought, stemming from a dysfunctional personality, and is no different than a Rorsach test.

I guess we must agree to disagree about labeling Westboro a Christian entity.

While the jihadists do not represent ALL of Islam they represent a not insiignificant chunk of it. Besides their core soldiers who seem to number in the tens of thousands, they have many hundreds of thousands if not millions more who are at the least sympathetic with their aims which is more or less to ultimately take over the entire world and subject it to Shariah law.

Fair point, but how sure are we about the number of Christians sympathetic to Westboro and their cause? There are definitely plenty of homophobic Christians here in the U.S. who oppose gay rights in the name of God (Santorum). If there are millions, and I think that's a fair assumption, should we label this as Christian bigotry? Or just bigotry in general?

While the jihadists do not represent ALL of Islam they represent a not insiignificant chunk of it. Besides their core soldiers who seem to number in the tens of thousands, they have many hundreds of thousands if not millions more who are at the least sympathetic with their aims which is more or less to ultimately take over the entire world and subject it to Shariah law.

Fair point, but how sure are we about the number of Christians sympathetic to Westboro and their cause? There are definitely plenty of homophobic Christians here in the U.S. who oppose gay rights in the name of God (Santorum). If there are millions, and I think that's a fair assumption, should we label this as Christian bigotry? Or just bigotry in general?

While there are Christians here in the US who opposed to gay marriage, the majority acknowledge that there are many times a difference between what is legal and what they consider immoral.
Islamist extremists (terrorist factions) don't care about legal ramifications, just religious law.

Not sure I agree with you on that one Jerry. I believe the majority of anti-gay rights people are simply bigoted towards homosexuals for whatever reason, and use Christianity as the excuse.

Not sure I agree with you on that one Jerry. I believe the majority of anti-gay rights people are simply bigoted towards homosexuals for whatever reason, and use Christianity as the excuse.

Well, we will agree to disagree, since I think you are wrong.

You miss the point. Just because they say they kill in the name of Islam, doesn't mean Islam is the actual cause for the fight. They are misguided animals, and religion has nothing to do with their actions, no different than Christianity and Westboro.

I've always thought it was their perverted interpretation of their faith that differentiated them.

An Islamist extremest even if they believe differently than all others of the Muslim religion are still Islamist, just as the kooks from Westboro are still part of Christianity.

Interesting isn't it how Muslims are not permitted to decide whether their practice is Islamic (Obama gets to decide it) while at the same time Christians are not able to suggest that Obama is not really a believing or practicing Christian (because after all Obama gets to decide it.) Which is it?

So my comparison is meaningless and wrong, and your post is "more or less the truth". LOL, Got it.

Well...I kind of thonk you are wrong on both counts. First who are you to say what is and is not Islam. Or Christianity?

I'm not claiming anything about the religion. I'm making claims about the terrorists. And it's an opinion shared by many, including a couple Muslims I work with...that they are thugs who use the region as an excuse.

Both ISIS and Al Quaeda and all the other jihadist groups certainly do act in the name of Islam as they believe and understand it and they find support and justification in the Koran. The same is true for the Westboro Church which is very much a Christian entity.

I get that they say and believe they are acting in the name of their religion, but neither religion suggests violence, and if they interpret some passages as a call for violence, then it's a delusional thought, stemming from a dysfunctional personality, and is no different than a Rorsach test.

I guess we must agree to disagree about labeling Westboro a Christian entity.

While the jihadists do not represent ALL of Islam they represent a not insiignificant chunk of it. Besides their core soldiers who seem to number in the tens of thousands, they have many hundreds of thousands if not millions more who are at the least sympathetic with their aims which is more or less to ultimately take over the entire world and subject it to Shariah law.

Fair point, but how sure are we about the number of Christians sympathetic to Westboro and their cause? There are definitely plenty of homophobic Christians here in the U.S. who oppose gay rights in the name of God (Santorum). If there are millions, and I think that's a fair assumption, should we label this as Christian bigotry? Or just bigotry in general?

Look let's call a spade a spade here. Many thousands of innocent people the world over (not just us) are under serious threat from these jihadists. The same threat is simply not there from even the most horrible and awful of Christians today. If we can't agree on that then there is no point in discussing it further. It's simply ludicrous to say as Obama did that just as groups acting under the banner of Islam pose a threat so do groups acting under the banner of other faiths. It's like comparing the threat of being mugged on the subway to the threat of anihilation in a nuclear war.

The state department spokeswomen say today, again on the obama theme:
“We need to understand their (terrorists) motivations. Why do they pickup an AK-47 instead of starting a business?”

Or while, also today, James Clapper, obama’s National Security advisor testifying that 2014 was “the deadliest year ever for terrorism”
While John Kerry also said today that “America and The World is safer today more than ever”.

The obama administration shows daily it hasn’t a clue.

Of course the terrorists are real dangers to the entire world, versus Christians not being a threat at all. I agree 100%. The comparison is not about the threat level - it's about both mistakingly attributing religion as their cause.

Of course the terrorists are real dangers to the entire world, versus Christians not being a threat at all. I agree 100%. The comparison is not about the threat level - it's about both mistakingly attributing religion as their cause.

_______________________________________________________________

Then why do the terrorists all scream "Allahu Akbar" as they kill the infidels?

You miss the point. Just because they say they kill in the name of Islam, doesn't mean Islam is the actual cause for the fight. They are misguided animals, and religion has nothing to do with their actions, no different than Christianity and Westboro.

I've always thought it was their perverted interpretation of their faith that differentiated them.

An Islamist extremest even if they believe differently than all others of the Muslim religion are still Islamist, just as the kooks from Westboro are still part of Christianity.

Nobody will admit that. They cannot see the parallels. People get scared of the ISIS videos of prisoners in orange jumpsuits in cages, but we do that to the prisoners in Guantanamo and nobody has made the connection yet. Of course there are some differences, our prisoners are not beheaded, or killed quickly, they just remain there being tortured or isolated from the rest of the world.

While the jihadists do not represent ALL of Islam they represent a not insiignificant chunk of it. Besides their core soldiers who seem to number in the tens of thousands, they have many hundreds of thousands if not millions more who are at the least sympathetic with their aims which is more or less to ultimately take over the entire world and subject it to Shariah law.

Fair point, but how sure are we about the number of Christians sympathetic to Westboro and their cause? There are definitely plenty of homophobic Christians here in the U.S. who oppose gay rights in the name of God (Santorum). If there are millions, and I think that's a fair assumption, should we label this as Christian bigotry? Or just bigotry in general?

While there are Christians here in the US who opposed to gay marriage, the majority acknowledge that there are many times a difference between what is legal and what they consider immoral.
Islamist extremists (terrorist factions) don't care about legal ramifications, just religious law.

When Jesus returns to the earth, he will not be a supporter of secular law.

"Anytime you're presented with a choice between tyrants and terrorists know that this is a trap and that you should reject both." - a brother from UAE, now relocated.

"Terrorists aren't the lesser evil vs tyrants
neither are tyrants the lesser evil vs terrorists. They're the same evil in two manifestations." - from the same brother.

[Edited on 2/27/2015 by gina]

Of course the terrorists are real dangers to the entire world, versus Christians not being a threat at all. I agree 100%. The comparison is not about the threat level - it's about both mistakingly attributing religion as their cause.

But it's NOT a mistake. Of course the particular Christians you loathe are motivated by their religion just as the Jihadists are motivated by Islam. We must acknowledge it. Without understanding them we can never begin to win the fight against them.

This thread has taken splitting hairs to the next several levels. 😛

This thread has taken splitting hairs to the next several levels. 😛

Obama is right.

1. Communicate
2. Partner
3. Educate
4. Engage
5. Mentor
6. Support

I have been saying it for years that people need to communicate and understand opposing points of view, then educate people, including the ones you disagree with about your points. I said that since 2001, and certain groups thought about it, and put out videos and messages to tell us about their point of view and why they were fighting us. The west got terrified oh no people may agree with this other side, but if there was diaglogue peace could be possible. It was negotiated in the Paskistani tribal areas several times, only to end with US drones killing people like Nek Mohammed, and Baitullah and Hakimullah Mehsud. What do you have there now? One group went with Isis, one group remains loyal to Mullah Omar. DRONES ENDED the PEACE that the tribes negotiated among themselves. Some group decided WAR was better than communicating and waging peace.

Now what I am saying is different than what Obama is saying because he is referring to locally in your community and I am referring globally. But it all starts with communication, you have to educate and engage your adversaries, unless you want to live out the strategy that Abdullah Azam brought to the fighters, 'there is no discussion, there is jihad and there is your rifle', with the drone attacks we are doing the same thing, 'there is no discussion, there is our jihad and there is our drone'. SAME tactics. Both result in endless war.

WANT PEACE? Stop Shooting and bombing.

WANT TO EFFECTIVELY DEAL WITH ISIS? LEARN ABOUT THE CORRECT ISLAM, AND EDUCATE OTHERS, WHO CAN PRESENT IT TO THEM. YOU THINK THEY WILL NOT CONSIDER IT, BUT NONE HAS TRIED SO FAR.

This thread has taken splitting hairs to the next several levels. 😛

Obama is right.

1. Communicate
2. Partner
3. Educate
4. Engage
5. Mentor
6. Support

I have been saying it for years that people need to communicate and understand opposing points of view, then educate people, including the ones you disagree with about your points. I said that since 2001, and certain groups thought about it, and put out videos and messages to tell us about their point of view and why they were fighting us. The west got terrified oh no people may agree with this other side, but if there was diaglogue peace could be possible. It was negotiated in the Paskistani tribal areas several times, only to end with US drones killing people like Nek Mohammed, and Baitullah and Hakimullah Mehsud. What do you have there now? One group went with Isis, one group remains loyal to Mullah Omar. DRONES ENDED the PEACE that the tribes negotiated among themselves. Some group decided WAR was better than communicating and waging peace.

Now what I am saying is different than what Obama is saying because he is referring to locally in your community and I am referring globally. But it all starts with communication, you have to educate and engage your adversaries, unless you want to live out the strategy that Abdullah Azam brought to the fighters, 'there is no discussion, there is jihad and there is your rifle', with the drone attacks we are doing the same thing, 'there is no discussion, there is our jihad and there is our drone'. SAME tactics. Both result in endless war.

WANT PEACE? Stop Shooting and bombing.

WANT TO EFFECTIVELY DEAL WITH ISIS? LEARN ABOUT THE CORRECT ISLAM, AND EDUCATE OTHERS, WHO CAN PRESENT IT TO THEM. YOU THINK THEY WILL NOT CONSIDER IT, BUT NONE HAS TRIED SO FAR.

I agree 100% with this approach. With the exception of say.....Conservatives, Tea Partiers,
Christians, ect. Not them. They don't deserve a hearing like a terrorist does, so we'll send the
IRS in to communicate with those types!!

In campaign against terrorism, U.S. enters period of pessimism and gloom

The Washington Post
Greg Miller
9 hrs ago
U.S. counterterrorism officials and experts, never known for their sunny dispositions, have entered a period of particular gloom.

In congressional testimony recently, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. went beyond the usual litany of threats to say that terrorism trend lines were worse “than at any other point in history.”

Maj. Gen. Michael Nagata, commander of U.S. Special Operations forces in the Middle East, told participants on a counter­terrorism strategy call that he regarded the Islamic State as a greater menace than al-Qaeda ever was.

Speaking at a New York police terrorism conference, Michael Morell, former deputy director of the CIA, said he had come to doubt that he would live to see the end of al-Qaeda and its spawn. “This is long term,” he said. “My children’s generation and my grandchildren’s generation will still be fighting this fight.”

The assessments reflect a pessimism that has descended on the U.S. counterterrorism community over the past year amid a series of discouraging developments. Among them are the growth of the Islamic State, the ongoing influx of foreign fighters into Syria, the collapse of the U.S.-backed government in Yemen and the downward spiral of Libya’s security situation. The latest complication came Saturday, when the terrorist group Boko Haram in Nigeria carried out a series of suicide bombings and reportedly declared its allegiance to the Islamic State.

[Nigeria’s Boko Haram pledges allegiance to Islamic State]

Unlike the waves of anxiety that accompanied the emergence of new terrorist plots over the past decade, the latest shift in mood seems more deep-seated. U.S. officials depict a bewildering landscape in which al-Qaeda and the brand of Islamist militancy it inspired have not only survived 14 years of intense counterterrorism operations but have also spread.

Officials emphasize that their campaign has accomplished critical goals. In particular, most officials and experts now see the risk of a Sept. 11-scale attack as infinitesimal, beyond the reach of al-Qaeda and its scattered affiliates.

Still, the adjusted outlook contrasts sharply with the surge of optimism that followed the killing of Osama bin Laden in 2011 and the dawn of the Arab Spring, which was initially seen as a political awakening across the Middle East that might render al-Qaeda and its archaic ideology irrelevant.

Within months of bin Laden’s death, then-Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said he was convinced “that we’re within reach of strategically defeating al-Qaeda.” President Obama echoed that view in subsequent years by saying that al-Qaeda was on “a path to defeat” and, more recently, that the then-nascent Islamic State was analogous to a junior varsity sports team.

Such upbeat characterizations have all but evaporated.

By its nature, counterterrorism work is an enterprise that induces pessimism, one that is focused on fending off catastrophe and involves dwelling on worst-case scenarios. There are prominent dissenting voices who argue that the level of alarm now is out of proportion to the threat — as misplaced as the spike in confidence that preceded it.

Their case hinges on the degraded capabilities of al-Qaeda and the limited agenda of the Islamic State, which has been far more focused on securing territory in the Middle East than launching transnational plots.

“There are people who are alarmed and bewildered. There are also a lot of experts who don’t think this is the end of the world,” said Daniel Benjamin, a Dartmouth College professor who formerly served as the top counter­terrorism official at the State Department. “More people have thrown in their lot with the extremists than has been the case before. But the numbers are relatively small, and our own security is much less imperiled than has been claimed.”

Paul Pillar, the former deputy director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center, argued in articles last year that concern over Syria and Iraq had reached a state of panic that had more to do with the psychological scars of 9/11 and the wars that followed than any truly existential danger.

“Everyone should take a deep breath,” Pillar wrote.

Still, other veteran analysts known for their equanimity sound increasingly grim. Even if the near-term prospect of a major attack in the United States or Europe is slim, they argue, elements of risk are accumulating rapidly.

“You’ve got a much bigger counterterrorism problem than you had a few years ago,” said John McLaughlin, a former deputy director of the CIA. Terrorist groups “have never had territory of this magnitude. Never had this much money. Never this much access to Western passport holders. Never had the narrative they have now.”

In this case, “narrative” is a broad term for the appeal of the Islamic State. The group, which broke off from al-Qaeda, has exploited the civil war in Syria to amass territory and declare itself a new caliphate. At the same time, its battlefield success and abundant presence on social media have helped it challenge if not eclipse al-Qaeda as a brand.

Even months of U.S.-led airstrikes have failed to diminish the flow of fighters into Syria. Clapper testified last month that more than 20,000 foreign fighters have entered Syria, including at least 3,400 from the West — “a pool of operatives who potentially have access to the United States.”

Many counterterrorism officials are equally worried about those who embrace the Islamic State’s ideology without leaving for the war. Attacks in Boston, Paris and elsewhere in recent years underscore the extraordinary difficulty of detecting plots with no active links to groups overseas.

Some also see significant cause for continued concern about al-Qaeda, even in its diminished state. A decade of drone strikes has depleted its upper ranks and deprived it of the resources and space that most experts believe are needed for it to orchestrate the sort of sophisticated, multi-stage, mass-casualty attack that was its signature. But smaller-bore plots may still be within reach.

At the New York terrorism conference, Morell said that while “no terrorist group currently has the capability to conduct a 9/11-style attack,” there are at least three al-Qaeda nodes that could stage attacks that could kill hundreds of people. Among them are al-Qaeda’s core in Pakistan, its affiliate in Yemen and a more recently formed satellite in Syria known as the Khorasan Group.

“I would not be surprised if one of these groups were able to bring down an airliner in the U.S. tomorrow,” Morell said, emphasizing that the terrorist entity that has drawn the most attention — the Islamic State — “is not one of these groups.”

Al-Qaeda’s franchise in Yemen is still seen as the group’s most dangerous affiliate. The danger had seemed increasingly dormant, but the recent overthrow of the Yemeni government forced the CIA to withdraw many of its operatives and derailed a counterterrorism partnership that Obama had described as a model.

In congressional testimony last month, Clapper ranked terrorism third on his list of security threats — behind cyber and counterintelligence — although he indicated that the order could change if the Islamic State turned its focus against the United States.

At one point, Clapper was asked whether he stood by his assertion that the country was beset by more crises and threats that at any other time in his 50-year career. “Yes, sir,” he said, “and if I’m here next year, I’ll probably say it again.”

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in-campaign-against-terrorism-us-enters-period-of-pessimism-and-gloom/ar-AA9vyll

Boko Haram declares allegiance to Isis
The Guardian
Daniel Boffey and agencies
14 hrs ago

Nigeria’s militant Islamist group Boko Haram has pledged allegiance to Islamic State, which rules a self-declared caliphate in parts of Iraq and Syria, according to a video posted online on Saturday.

“We announce our allegiance to the Caliph ... and will hear and obey in times of difficulty and prosperity,” read an English-language translation of the video broadcast in Arabic that purported to be from the Nigerian militant group. The pledge of allegiance was attributed to Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau.

The video script identified the Caliph as Ibrahim ibn Awad ibn Ibrahim al-Awad al-Qurashi, who is better known as Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of Islamic State and self-proclaimed caliph of the Muslim world. Baghdadi has already accepted pledges of allegiance from other jihadist groups in the Middle East, Afghanistan, Pakistan and north Africa.

Boko Haram has been waging a six-year military campaign to carve out an Islamic state in northern Nigeria.

Earlier on Saturday, four bomb blasts killed at least 50 people in the northeastern Nigerian city of Maiduguri in the worst attacks there since Boko Haram militants tried to seize the town in two major assaults earlier this year. Female suicide bombers believed to be acting for the group launched a series of attacks in markets, while another detonation was reported at a bus station.

In a fifth incident, a car bomb exploded at a military checkpoint 75km outside the city, wounding a soldier and two members of a civilian defence unit. The attacker in this incident had wanted to reach Maiduguri, a police officer at the scene said. In total, it is believed 58 people have been killed in the incidents and 143 wounded, but both figures were expected to rise.

Maiduguri was once the base of the Islamist group, which has been conducting a campaign of violence pushing for Islamic rule in Nigeria. At least 13,000 people have so far been killed in the campaign. After being pushed from the city last year, the militants retreated to the nearby Sambisa forest, from where they launched attacks on villages and towns in the region, taking over swaths of territory.

Last month experts warned Boko Haram was likely to increase its attacks on civilian targets in response to the successful campaign by government forces to retake several of the group’s former strongholds.

The first attack on Saturday occurred at the city’s Baga fish market at around 11.20am, according to Abubakar Gamandi, head of the fisherman’s union in Borno state. “A female suicide bomber exploded as soon as she stepped out of a motorised rickshaw,” said Gamandi, who was at the scene. “Eighteen people were killed.” A market trader, Idi Idrisa, said: “I saw many bodies and several badly injured”.

About an hour later a second explosion rocked the Post Office shopping area near the market, leaving many casualties. A further series of bombs then rocked what is known locally as the Monday market, the biggest in Maiduguri, killing at least 15.

A trader there told the BBC that two other female bombers seemed to have targeted the market. One had a bomb strapped to her body that detonated as she was being scanned at the entrance gate, he said. Another woman was said to have exploded a bomb she was carrying in a bag a few feet away.

A fourth bombing came shortly after 1 pm at the nearby busy Borno Express bus terminal, where witnesses said about 12 people were left either dead or injured. A survivor of the first blast said it occurred when a boy aged about 16 moved into a crowd by the gates holding what looked like a remote control. Security officials were about to stop the teenager when there was a blast. The witness said he was blown over by the impact and when he came to he saw at least six bodies.

A vigilante leader in Borno, Danlami Ajaokuta, whose civilian fighters have been working with the military in the region to fight Boko Haram, said security forces had ordered the closure of all businesses in the city given the apparently coordinated nature of the bombings and the fear there could be more. The state’s justice commissioner, Kaka Shehu, confirmed the attacks but declined to discuss casualties.

Last week, President Goodluck Jonathan said the tide has “definitely turned” against militant Islamists as Nigerian troops and their regional allies recapture territory.

Boko Haram has recently launched attacks on villages in Cameroon and Niger, as Nigeria’s neighbours are forming a multinational force to confront the spreading Islamist uprising.

Chad’s President Idris Déby last week said his forces knew the whereabouts of Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau and warned him to surrender or face death. Shekau’s fighters are massing at a headquarters in the northeastern town of Gwoza, in apparent preparation for a showdown with multinational forces, according to witnesses who escaped the town. An intelligence officer told Associated Press that they were aware of the movement, but that the military is acting with care as many civilians are still trapped in the town and Boko Haram is laying land mines around it.

Nigeria’s presidential and parliamentary elections have now been postponed by six week to 28 March to give troops time to push back the militants. Shekau has vowed to disrupt the vote and widespread unrest, especially near polling stations, could prove disastrous. Hundreds of thousands of people displaced by the conflict are living in Maiduguri, swelling the city’s population to well over two million.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/boko-haram-declares-allegiance-to-isis/ar-AA9v7oe