It's worth noting as well that while the word "completely" sets up an impossible strawman, we actually have a pretty good idea about the major groups in those three countries. In Libya, for example,
AAS (they are currently, of course, busy with
General Haftar) is perhaps the most active, and they fall under
AQIM, who fall under
AQSL, meaning that they back the
ANF,
not ISIL, who fights with ANF as well as the FSA, and generally proves as willing to attack fellow rebels as they are the Syrian regime (infighting among the rebels is one of the regimes' greatest assets in this fight).
ISIL, on the other hand, has been led by
Abubakr al-Baghdadi since the death of
Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, who picked up leadership of ISIL after the death of
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. At each point they were lead by Islamists who were affiliated with the AQ brand - although Zarqawi was home grown and Abubakr al-Baghdadi later rejected Zawahiri's Emirship. At no point has this organization ever been led by Baathists or those who seek representative government, such as the two men your source tried to claim were ISIL leadership, as they consider both to be apostate and anathema.
eace
