Local Coordinator Background Check Release Form: Fill & Download for Free

First, some background:Originally, IP (v4) addresses were broken into “classes.” The upper bits of the first octet indicated the network class, which implied how a specific address should be split into a network and host portion. These bits dictated how the address should be interpreted by routers.There were three classes of networks, A, B, and C, which were “blocks” of addresses to accommodate networks of different sizes (see footnotes).Every single IP address has to be globally unique across the whole Internet. This means that only one of each address can exist on the whole network. As a result, address “blocks” had to be assigned to end user networks to be locally managed. These days, IP address space for the public internet gets handed out by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, but in Ye Olde Days, Jon Postel personally managed the address space allocations.So, how did certain special use addresses come about?Loopback interfaces were created on hosts to assure that there was a place for IP traffic to go even if all interfaces were down, or to be able to test IP traffic without any worries about hardware or driver issues associated with a network interface. The address assigned was called Localhost, and the address chosen was just the last of the class A networks, 127.0.0.0/8. In retrospect, that was a wasteful choice, but who knew at the time? Since the upper bits were easy to check, convenience ruled the day over long-term vision. So it goes.Stan Hanks digs a little deeper into the history of the loopback interface at Stan Hanks's answer to Who first established 127.0.0.1 as the loopback address, and why?The 10.0.0.0/8 network was originally assigned to MILNET and the Defense Data Network (DDN). A LOT of early Internet devices had 10.x.x.x networks hardcoded into the software. In the mid-1990s, those networks were shut down and moved into other forms, but the 10.x.x.x space was considered “poisoned” since so many non-MILNET/DDN systems had hardcoded configurations that continued to send traffic to those long-defunct networks. To avoid trouble, that network would never be assigned on the public Internet again.As IPv4 address exhaustion took hold, a need for non-routable addresses for private networks arose. At first, people picked random IP address spaces, but then they ran the risk of failing to reach any network that their randomly-chosen space overlapped with. To address the problem, RFC 1597 (and its ultimate successor RFC1918), Address Allocation for Private Internets, proposed reserving a number of specific IP networks for use as private networks. That RFC set aside a Class A, Class B, and Class C space. For Class A, the poisoned 10.0.0.0/8 MILNET/DDN space seemed a natural choice. For class B and Class C, the next available unassigned blocks at the time of the RFC authoring were assigned by Jon Postel. For the Class B networks, the space happened to be the 172.16.0.0/12 block (15 class B blocks, 172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255). For the class C space, that happened to be 192.168.0.0/16 block, (255 class C blocks, 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255). Most consumer router vendors I have seen use 192.168.x.0/24. Many use 192.168.1.x, or 192.168.0.x. I have seen some that use 192.168.123.x, and others that use 192.168.2.x. Personally, I set all of my home routers to 192.168.10.x, so I can use my home network on the WAN side of any home router I am testing with using its default addresses.Some vendors use the 10.x.x.x address space, and a silly minority use the 172.16.x.x address space. After all, if you’re going to use an address space that is too large for your device to handle, go all the way and use 10.x.x.x to let people type less.The 1.x.x.x and 2.x.x.x address space ended up being very problematic, since lots of people had reflexively used that space for testing without coordinating with anyone. It had been left as a reserved space from nearly the beginning of IPv4, for that reason. Geoff Huston researched just how poisoned that space was in his paper Traffic in Network 1.0.0.0/8. Based on that research, some of the 1.0.0.0/8 network was released to be used for real traffic, isolating some of the most poisoned parts of the space. Despite the poisoning, Cloudflare used their extensive content delivery network to set up an Anycast DNS server at 1.1.1.1 (https://1.1.1.1/), serving as both a DNS server and packet sink. Seems to be working for them.You can read more about special Reserved IP addresses.Footnotes:00000000 - Class A.That was 0 - 127. First octet network, the rest host.10000000 - Class B.That was 128 - 191. First two octets network, the rest host.11000000 - Class C.That was 192 -223. First three octets network, the rest host.11100000 - Class D. (Added later)That was 224 - 239. Used for multicasting.11110000 - Class E.That was 240 - 255. Reserved for future use.

Why does gun control not work in the USA?The short answer is because it is A.) not really about guns and B.) gun control is an optional system.A.) Gun Control Isn’t About GunsGun control for most proponents focuses on the availability and restrictions related to acquiring firearms and accessories for law-abiding citizens. When we talk about “gun violence” in an interpersonal context we are actually talking about crime, often involving individuals that can under no circumstances legally purchase, possess, or operate firearms. Guns are one tool used to commit crimes and used by criminal enterprise.We look at Chicago and other cities and see an increase in crime, which also exhibits an increase in gun violence.The question really is, what is different now from 15 years ago in terms of why crime has increased?” said John K. Roman, a criminologist at the University of Chicago. “And the only thing that has changed is the distrust between heavily policed communities and local police. It’s not a coincidence that cities that have crime increases have also had problems between communities and the police. Violent Crime in U.S. Rises for Second Consecutive YearLets look in the other direction. New York City has experienced declines in crime and homicides are at record lows. The reason for this shift has been the move to focusing on addressing “disorder” and not just crime and changing policing overall to include community involvement,Beginning in 1990, the New York City police department returned to a mission that was focused on not only dealing with serious crime, but also began to focus on disorder, which had not been addressed at all in the '70s and '80s, and disorder is described as broken windows, quality of life, minor offenses. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.How Crime Rates In New York City Reached Record LowsWe see in many areas the law enforcement officers are becoming more and more insulated and separated from the communities they police, which creates a mentality of police militarization, an “us against them” scenario. Recent policing successes out of New York City are attributed to the acceptance of community policing,Under the neighborhood policing model, each precinct has two "neighborhood coordination officers" who govern the precinct, plus 12 "sector" officers, O'Neill said. All are assigned to work regularly in the same precinct, rather than shuffling around, so they get to know the people and issues in their own communities."We're giving them back the ability to make decisions," O'Neill said. "No one knows better than the people patrolling those sectors and the people that live there what's actually happening."New York City on pace to record lowest murder tally in decadesThis paints a pretty clear picture that effective law enforcement and community engagement is a major factor in crime and homicide rates.Some would argue it’s the guns that are the problem, but we have examples that would counter this idea. One example comes out of Detroit,The Detroit police chief has called on the law-abiding people of his community to arm themselves.Now, James Craig says his city has seen a drop in crime of 12%, as Detroit moves lower on the list of America's deadliest cities.In 2014, the Detroit police department issued more than 1,100 handgun permits, while more than 8,100 guns were registered in the city.The number of shootings and robberies dropped from 2013. Home invasions are down 17% so far this year, Craig said, following a drop of 38% last year.Craig noted that in a survey of 1,800 felons, the respondents pointed to "armed citizens" as the thing they were most afraid of.Craig said his police officers are doing tremendous work, but said that there are more and more incidents in recent years in which a criminal encounters an armed individual.Detroit Police Chief: Crime Going Down Amid Spike in Legal Gun OwnershipWhat did criminologist think of Detroit’s example? They studied the phenomenon of private, legally owned firearms,According to the study’s abstract, published Nov. 26, 2013, Quinnipiac University’s Mark Gius found that even after adjusting for state- and year-specific trends, passing restrictive concealed weapons laws may actually increase murder rates.“The purpose of the present study is to determine the effects of state-level assault weapons bans and concealed weapons laws on state-level murder rates. Using data for the period 1980 to 2009,” writes Gius, “the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states. It was also found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level.“These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level,” Gius concludes. “The results of this study are consistent with some prior research in this area, most notably Lott and Mustard (1997).”Detroit police chief to citizens: Arm yourselvesWe do have an idea of who is committing these crimes as well. This breakdown looks at the perpetrator of the crime, but we also know these perpetrators commit multiple crimes. For example, we know in New York the average criminal committed between 2 and 3 “gun crimes” before being arrested, so this skews the comparison between perpetrators and cases of crime.Lawful gun owners commit less than a fifth of all gun crimes, according to a novel analysis released this week by the University of Pittsburgh.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/new-evidence-confirms-what-gun-rights-advocates-have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/?utm_term=.b04c87c7ebccThe conclusions we can draw from this data is effective law enforcement focused on the actual criminals makes a difference and that lawful gun owners are not the problem.B.) Gun Control is OptionalThere are many myths employed in the gun debate. One of the most prevalent is that laws stop behaviors we don’t like or create behaviors we do like. This is completely false. Laws simply inform the law-abiding of the social norms they should follow and spell out consequences for breaking those social norms. Whenever the motivation to break the law is greater than the perceived chance of being caught and the consequence people break the law. We all break the law all the time when we go out on the roads by speeding, failing to yield, or running a red light. The perceived benefit outweighs the chance of getting caught. Change the scales to include illicit products and services as a general course of business and the laws broken are considered more severe by most people. In this context guns are simply a tool to conduct “business activities”, and in some cases the consequence (going to prison, also called “Criminal College”) is a career builder. In other scenarios circumstances have tipped the scales so far the individual does not care about the law, or even their own life, any longer.While we don’t have hard data on where criminals obtain firearms,That's not to say we're flying blind. We know that criminals primarily get their guns from corrupt firearm dealers, gangs and social networks, and theft. What we don’t know is how important each of these sources is to the criminal gunSome researchers have suggested that gun retailers divert a relatively low volume of weapons, while others have found them to be a major source. Moreover, the volume of dealer-supplied guns may swing dramatically. One study found that over the course of six years, the share of criminals getting weapons from dealers declined from 21 percent to 14 percent.Gangs and networks of families and friends are a frequently cited source of guns, but research on the scope is unclear. Gangs in particular have actually been found to suppress the gun trade in their neighborhood to preserve their monopoly on violence and to avoid the police attention that comes from gun use. The role of friends and family is even murkier. Research has put their role as a supply source at 30 to 40 percent of crime guns, but little is known about the composition of this nebulous “friends and family” category.Anywhere from 200,000 to 500,000 guns are stolen annually. Some of these will be used in criminal acts, but others will be given to friends, sent abroad, or routed back to the legal market through sales to pawnshops and retail gun dealers. Because of the limitations of ATF tracing data, determining how many crime guns came from theft remains a challenge.How Do Criminals Get Illegal Guns?The ATF does regularly find and arrest criminal gun dealers, which is why the number of dealer-supplied guns can vary.ATF officials say that only about 8% of the nation's 124,000 retail gun dealers sell the majority of handguns that are used in crimes. They conclude that these licensed retailers are part of a block of rogue entrepreneurs tempted by the big profits of gun trafficking.frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns"Some speculate the “rogue FFL dealers” enter the market expressly to supply crime guns, much like gang members joining the military for free training.Here’s where the “optional” portion comes into play. Those “rogue FFL dealers” simply choose not to record sales or record sales fraudulently, which counts for new gun sales and the used gun market, which can be particularly profitable for them.Some researchers assert the largest portion of crime guns come from straw purchases. In these instances “family, friends, and acquaintances” buy guns for restricted individuals. In some of these cases the purchaser, like a girlfriend, may be “coerced” to buy a guns or they buy guns to outfit a criminal enterprise. In every case the straw purchaser must lie on the form 4473, the ATF’s background check form, a felony. There is no way to force people to stop lying, especially if they feel their well-being is in danger or they have a vested interest in lying. We only know of these cases after the fact, that is after the perpetrator is arrested and the gun is traced.Like lying on the form 4473, stealing a gun is also illegal. We can’t do much about this, although most of the stolen guns end up at a pawn shop or fenced for quick cash.With each of the methods criminals use to obtain guns the only way to stop the sale is to get the criminals to subscribe to the system, and the only way to make us safer is to improve and increase enforcement (back to the first point). There is nothing we can do to stop criminals from completely circumventing the system. The “problem with gun control” is that people expect the system of laws to take care of a problem it can never address, and that they expect people that have no intention to follow the law to voluntarily subscribe to the system.C.) Bonus PointAmericans are not receptive to more gun control because they are already safe and private firearm ownership has an overwhelming positive effect.The obvious argument is if criminals steal guns, buy from dealers that look like legal operations from the outside, and use straw sales to get their guns why don’t we just dry up the supply by ending private gun ownership? This thinking only takes one side of the argument into consideration, and we all know unilateral decisions are not necessarily the best. The other side of the argument involves legal self-defense with a firearm, which covers the real risk of death, rape, or grave bodily harm.In 2013 the CDC was given funding by the Obama Administration to conduct research on guns and gun violence. The CDC carried out the best and most well funded research we have to date on the topic. From this research the CDC estimated between 500,000 and 3,000,000 cases of legal self-defense in a year. This estimate outweighs all “gun deaths”, non-fatal accidents, and violent crime with a gun. If you want to look at criminal interpersonal violence guns are used to save lives 50 to 300 times more than to take lives.If we have so many cases of legal self-defense with a firearm why aren’t the “gun death” numbers much higher? The answer is most cases do not end with a fatality. The findings of the CDC research flew directly in the face of the conclusions it had come to in the 1990’s,“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies,” the CDC study, entitled “Priorities For Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” states.The report, which notes that “ violent crimes, including homicides specifically, have declined in the past five years,” also pointed out that “some firearm violence results in death, but most does not.” In fact, the CDC report said, most incidents involving the discharge of firearms do not result in a fatality.CDC Study: Use of Firearms for Self-Defense is ‘Important Crime Deterrent’Personally, I prefer safer with fewer fatalities overall. As shown in the example of Detroit, criminals do fear armed citizens, creating a deterrent effect we can’t measure.Why doesn’t gun control work in the US? Because A.) it’s really about crime control and not the mere presence of guns and therefore most efforts are misguided, B.) gun control laws are actually voluntary, and C.) some measures show it actually is working for the US overall.

This answer may contain sensitive images. Click on an image to unblur it.We've had very well planned assaults happening for a very long time now. People just haven't been paying attention.Consider all the way back to 9/11. You had 19 men who were all deep agents of Al Qaeda. That means that many served as troops with the Islamic Mujahideen of Afghanistan against the Soviets and were elite warfighters of that force. They were all extremely vetted, meaning that they either served directly with the core of Al Qaeda's founders or were family. Furthermore, these were not just poor and ignorant farmers. They were all highly literate, highly educated men of connected backgrounds. For example, Mohamed Atta, one of the ringleaders of the operation, was an architect trained in Cairo and Hamburg. Others also held professional degrees. Logistics were an important factor, as well. For the operation to be a success, the 19 had to all be brought into the United States and housed for several months. They had to be trained, each in their various roles for the operations. They were organized into cells. There was no way they would be left in one 19 man house for fear of detection. So they had to be split up. That would also mean that there needed to be an overwatch for them to make sure that they didn't back out or blow the operation. This meant communication lines had to be created and a bureaucracy of agents supporting the would be suicide bombers. All this, the planning, the coordination, the admin, logistics, and the leadership, required a vast network of handlers and overseers for the operation. It went far beyond 19 men, themselves qualifying easily as special forces, operating for months, implementing a plan years in the making.This had the masterful effect of pulling the Americans into a prolonged war in the Middle East, unsettling the US, but more importantly, throwing the entire region into turmoil and disarray. By bringing in Western intervention, through the manipulation of American sentimentality and reactionary mentality, they destabilized longstanding semi-secular governments of the Middle East, making way for the caliphate that was always their real primary goal.Skip to a while later and you see Madrid. In 2004 Spain was in active support of the American presence in Iraq. On the morning of 11 March 2004 - three days before the general elections in Spain, a series of nearly simultaneous, coordinated bombings against the Cercanías commuter train system of Madrid took place. The explosions killed 191 people and wounded 1,800. This also involved a massive and sophisticated planning method where Madrid's security system had to have been compromised completely for months. The result was the nation's complete turnaround in the elections, pulling favor away from the Iraq War and isolating the United States from European support.Al Qaeda is not, in the least, unsophisticated in their attacks. Every major operation they make is implemented by the best and most vetted troops able to be recruited from among various jihadi forces. Their attacks are planned and coordinated with the intent to manipulate Western sentiments to their favor toward destabilizing the Middle East. They further increase their leverage by using this propaganda to build a death cult of fanatics willing to sacrifice themselves in the realization of a grand dream of the new Caliphate, as the "heroes" of 9/11 did.The raid on Charlie HebdoOne eye witness account, that of Corinne Rey, a designer known as Coco, has told L’Humanité said that she was forced to let the attackers into the Charlie Hebdo building. She said:I had gone to pick up my daughter from daycare. Arriving at the door of the newspaper building, two hooded and armed men brutally threatened us.They wanted to enter, go up. I typed the code. They shot Wolinski, Cabu ... it lasted five minutes ... I had taken refuge under a desk ...They spoke French perfectly ... claiming to be Al-Qaida.Other reports have stated that the men knew the individuals whom they were targeting precisely. In one account I've seen, attackers called for the editors and cartoonists by name, recognized them and shot them on the spot while ignoring many others. The fact that they did this doesn't mean it was an inside job by any means, but means that they most likely had very large intelligence profiles on these men. These files were no doubt collected and groomed prior to the operation and delivered to the two. This also indicates a larger network of administrators and intelligence gatherers, perhaps even utilizing known connections with intelligence services of many Islamic nations, a practice seen in the past. I say it wasn't inside because of a few mistakes made, namely the two first went into the wrong building, two buildings down from Charlie Hebdo. They demanded from a local delivery person to be directed to the right building, where they encountered Corinne Rey, who they needed to open the door.In a video of the incident taken by an onlooker in the wrong place at the right time that was shared on the Guardian, two gunmen can be seen exiting a car presumably near the Charlie Hebdo building. This can be speculated because a news van can be seen near where the shooters brutally gunned down a police officer, himself a fellow Muslim.From what we can see plainly, the two shooters are well armed, both carrying what appear to be AK-47's, as well as well armored with additional gear. He is wearing what appears to be either some form of load bearing vest, which the military uses to carry additional ammunition, or a bullet proof vest of desert coloring. The truth is, probably both. At the very least, he has lots of ammunition easily available.More concerning than his equipment, which could be bought and given to any suicidal maniac, is his tactical carry and use of the weapon. The shooter nearest the camera concerns me. As a former US Marine Corps marksmanship instructor I see many things that speak of advanced military style tactical discipline. Both shooters seem to wield the Russian made AK-47 adeptly. These weapons are readily available by many avenues, and abundant in the Middle Eastern conflict, but the ability to fire it well is in less supply. The weapon is capable of automatic fire and fires a larger round than the US made M-16. This means that the weapon has extremely deadly potential, but also requires greater skill to use well in delivering accurate fire. The two assassins demonstrate a knowledge of the weapon's use, obvious by the casualty count, but also displayed in their carry. Note how the nearer shooter holds his weapon with elbows inward pressed against his body. He also has his body firmly behind the weapon to absorb recoil and raises the weapon to eye level as he is sighted-in while searching around corners for his victim. This shows some degree of military style training and discipline in weapons use.In reading a profile of the two suspects put together by CNN, this is exactly the type of attack they would have been prepared for.Both brothers [Cherif Kouachi and Said Kouachi] were in the U.S. database of known or suspected international terrorists, known as TIDE, and also had been on the no-fly list for years, a U.S. law enforcement official said. BFMTV reported that like his brother [Cherif], Said Kouachi was born in Paris and was known to police.The younger of the two brothers [Said] has spent time in jail for links to terrorism. He was arrested in January 2005, at age 22, when he and another man were about to set off for Syria en route to Iraq. He was sentenced to three years in prison in 2008 for being part of a jihadist recruitment ring in Paris that sent fighters to join the conflict in Iraq. Kouachi didn't actually go to prison after the trial because half his three-year sentence was suspended and he had already spent enough time in pretrial detention, Bloomberg reported. He was released from custody before the trial. In 2010, Kouachi was charged in connection with a foiled plot to aid the escape of Smain Ait Ali Belkacem, an Algerian Islamist imprisoned for bombing a Paris commuter rail station in 1995. But public prosecutors later dropped the charges, according to Le Monde.Of the older brother, Cherif, little is known. He kept a much lower profile than his younger brother.A U.S. official says the United States was given information from the French intelligence agency that Said Kouachi traveled to Yemen as late as 2011 on behalf of the al Qaeda affiliate there. Once in Yemen, the older brother received a variety of weapons training from al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) -- the affiliate in Yemen -- the official said, including on how to fire weapons.Mohammed Benali, who runs the mosque in Gennevilliers, the suburb where Cherif Kouachi's apartment is, said the two brothers used to come to Friday prayers there "not assiduously but regularly." He told Le Figaro that he knew Said Kouachi better, but that he hadn't seen either of the brothers at the mosque in at least two years.Charlie Hebdo shooting: Who are the suspects? - CNN.comThe question remains, though now seems obvious, about the location of the two during the last two years. Various reports differ on speculating between one or both of the brothers recently visited Yemen. A French source close to the French security services told CNN that investigators have evidence to suggest one of the brothers -- it is unclear which -- traveled to Syria sometime in the past year. USA Today reported that they both returned from Syria in the summer. I say obvious, because wherever these two men were, they were very close to terrorist networks which provided them with ample ability to transform from none-to-special ordinary Parisians to fantasized jihadists.Other images also showcase the extent of their capabilities.In shooting circles a "tight group" refers to a shooter's ability to place a collection of rounds near to the same central aiming point. As shown by the damage to this police vehicle, the shooter was able to deliver two very good groups with only a few strays. This is impressive shooting for shoulder fired, automatic weapons with such large calibers.Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, their plan was so complete, they have yet to be caught. (Update: they got the bastards.) The fact that so much time has gone by, probably means that the men are already safe and sound in the Middle East. (So happy to be wrong! Vive la Liberté!) The gunmen were seen escaping into a black vehicle and going to the Paris suburbs where they abandoned their car and jumped into another. Tactically speaking, the whole event exists to spell out a very clear message to many: Islamic terrorists have the power to create an extremely complex and sophisticated raid and assassination against any Western soft targets, in any cities they want and they could do it again.Why?The big question, at least the big question to me, is "Why?" I understand the obvious answer, they wanted to avenge the blasphemous portrayal of their prophet. Having two homegrown Parisian jihadists just arrive on the scene may have simply been too good of an opportunity to let go. Perhaps, all they really did want was to send a message to the West, as well as their own people. Disrespect of their prophet or their organization won't be tolerated, and retribution will be too grand not to be showcased. Perhaps they wanted to raise tensions in France, the nation with the largest Islamic population in Europe. France has a full 10% Muslim population which, if properly motivated by revenge and retribution attacks by overzealous Frenchmen, could produce many new converts for jihad. Observe what was done with two. Imagine twenty.Al Qaeda, though, doesn't ever just do something for the "obvious" reason. They are very nuanced and their planning is many layers deep. As with 9/11 being used to generate rage in Americans to destabilize the entire Middle East, and Madrid being used to encourage Spain to vote against a government which would support the Iraq war, Al Qaeda has shown that they have mastered the art of manipulating Western mentalities to greater, yet less obvious purposes. What I wonder is, what are these purposes?I'm free to speculate, as it is asked by the OP. Charles Stuart Forstall also brings to the table a theory that is very valid so I will start there.You have to keep in mind that the primary audience for the terrorists is on their home turf and they are seeking whatever advantage they can gain with those whom they might woo either to their cause or to their support. I am of the mind, though I know this is a somewhat contentious idea, that the attack was meant to provide the terrorists with western provided media items, memes, that they can use to grow their support base.Westerners outside of France seem to have a hard enough time grasping the proper context of the cartoons and I think that this is also part of the strategy. The images will circulate in places where people don't have access to the internet or to "fact checking" methods like we do. In the end all that matters will be the image and not the unintelligible speech bubbles.Another theory, lending itself to Charles', is that the attacks may have been used to encourage additional funding and support from Arab patrons, the long time financiers of global Islamic terrorism. In recent months we have seen drastic changes in the Arabian Peninsula in two forms; one the reduction of the price of oil has upset many of the economies in the oil dependent region and frozen expendable funds for terrorist donations, and two being that these donations have finally been outlawed by the Saudi Arabian monarch. I haven't done the research to see how successful that initiative has been, but the fact of the matter is that the two mean dangerous times for jihadists abroad if they don't adapt soon.Lastly, there is one more motive I would like to pose. From its inception the group known in the West as ISIS has been a force for great destruction and havoc in the region of Iraq and Syria. It was actually born of Al Qaeda in Iraq before breaking off to take part in the Syrian Civil War where it evolved. During that time they reinvented themselves as the "Islamic State" a modern day Caliphate. Al Qaeda, Arabic for "the base" disagreed with this. They felt that the creation of a true Islamic State was premature and should be held off. At that point, the two were at odds with one another. Recently, however, there has been news that the two groups have reconciled. In another answer I said that it should be noted that the attack took place seemingly in response to the unexpected boldness of French bombing offensives in Syria and Iraq over the last few months. There, the allied bombing campaign has had tremendous effect in breaking key points of the battlespace and opening the way for advances by Kurdish Peshmerga and the Iraqi Army. For the French to decide to back off, would very much relieve front line fighters in Syria and Iraq. All I'm saying is that we haven't heard a great deal from Al Qaeda in quite a while, so why such a bold move? Why now? Why France?As I have said, everything is speculation at this point. What Western readers need to understand, though, is that this raid on Charlie Hebdo was not just some rogue terrorists who got lucky. It was not the act of some "lone gunmen". It was an advanced and well planned, well supported military raid. Not only this, but it isn't the first. It is the continuation of a very long history of these raids. What might be scary though, as many have feared, insurgents trained and blooded in combat in Syria and Iraq are returning home to Europe and the West. This probably won't be the last time we see a story like this. This time though, they are good enough to get away, rather than just blowing themselves to pieces.Thanks for reading!For more answers like this check out On War by Jon Davis and follow my blog War Elephant for more new content. Everything I write is completely independent research and is supported by fan and follower pledges. Please consider showing your support directly by visiting my Patreon support page here: Jon Davis on Patreon: Help support in writing Military Novels, Articles, and Essays.