Comment: This is about as believable as British security services having no idea which Britons are fighting with ISIS in Syria.

Comment: At this point it looks unlikely that the coalition will take Mosul in time for the U.S. election. If that was the plan, it looks like they may have miscalculated. The Islamic State's structure is more complex than the mainstream and alternative give it credit for. It is neither a collection of pro-American mercenaries doing the Empire's work for it (although there are surely some such individuals who have "infiltrated" its ranks, even at the top who guide its actions in that direction), nor a strictly anti-American organ of global jihadism (although plenty of its members embody that view).

There are several levels of ideology and involvement, ranging from forced conscripts and mercenaries to brainwashed fanatics, spellbinders, and psychopathic agents of influence. Just like the individuals and groups that came to be known as al-Qaeda, its hardcore leadership is more than willing to make secret deals with the Americans. But from their perspective, it's a marriage of convenience - there's no love lost between them. The U.S. and its allies send weapons and supplies, and IS avoids certain targets, or goes after certain targets that are convenient for both sides. But not everyone is aware of such deals, nor would they support them if they were.

In the case of Mosul, these complexities seem to be manifesting. Probably a good portion of IS got the message and fled Mosul for Syria before the battle or in its first 2 weeks (prior to the Shia militias cutting off the western corridor). But others are refusing to budge and executing those trying to escape. That's the problem: the U.S. has created a monster it cannot fully control. As Lobaczewski wrote in Political Ponerology:

Psychological warfare strategists must decide rather early on which ideology would be most efficient in a particular country because of its adaptability to said nation's traditions. [SOTT: In this case, the use of Wahhabi-Salafi-Takfiri ideology.] After all, the appropriately adapted ideology must perform the function of a Trojan horse, transporting pathocracy into the country. These various ideologies are then gradually conformed to one's own original master plan. Finally, off comes the mask. [SOTT: We saw this with the transition from "peaceful protesters" to "Free Syrian Army" to "Nusra Front" to "Islamic State", where the mask came off completely.]

At the right time, local partisans are organized and armed, with recruits picked from dissatisfied localities; leadership is provided by trained officers familiar with the secret idea as well as the operative idea concocted for propagation in the country in question. Assistance must then be given so groups of conspirators adhering to the concocted ideology can stage a coup d'état, whereupon an iron-fisted government is installed. [SOTT: That has the plan for Syria, as the DIA knew in 2012: to establish a "Salafist Principality".] Once this has been brought about, the diversionary partisans' activities are stymied - they are made out to be patsies - so that the new authorities can take credit for bringing about internal peace. Any hoodlum who cannot or will not submit to the new decrees is "gently" invited before his former leader and shot in the back of the head. This is the new reality.
...
People acting in the name of pathocracy's interests may effect their activities in parallel, under the banner of some traditional or other ideology, or even with the assistance of a contradictory ideology battling the traditional one. [SOTT: I.e., "anti-American global jihadism".] In these latter cases, the service must be performed by individuals whose response to the call of the pathocracy is sufficiently vehement so as to prevent the self-suggestive activities of the other ideology they are using from weakening the links with their actual hopes for power.

The "self-suggestive activities of the other ideology" can just as easily swing the movement as a whole to adopt that ideology wholeheartedly to the point where its members act on its own, without approval of the "center".

Comment: And with more WikiLeaks coming out could reveal some more unsettling truths: