On the lone wolf attacks, it channels the recent statement of ISIS public spokesman Adnan al- Adnani. I think the only addition is asking that credit go to ISIS.

Every Muslim should get out of his house, find a crusader, and kill him. It is important that the killing becomes attributed to patrons of the Islamic State who have obeyed its leadership. This can easily be done with anonymity. Otherwise, crusader media makes such attacks appear to be random killings.

I assume that's a reference to the media attributing the Oklahoma beheading to workplace violence rather than ISIS.

The part below was advocated by al-Adnani:

At this point of the crusade against the Islamic State, it is very important that attacks take place in every country that has entered into the alliance against the Islamic State, especially the US, UK, France, Australia, and Germany.

As did al-Adnani, the article tells followers not to overplan or fear failure -- the killing of even one person is a victory that will bring a reward from Allah. It quotes a prophet who said "“A kāfir and his killer will never gather in Hellfire”.

It advises secrecy in planning and execution of the attacks, highlighting stabbing:

One should not complicate the attacks by involving other parties, purchasing complex materials, or communicating with weak-hearted individuals. “Rely upon Allah and stab the crusader” should be the battle cry for all Islamic State patrons.

Moving on to the Yazidis: On pages 13 to 17, ISIS addresses the Yazidis. It relies on the interpretations of religious scholars to justify the enslaving of Yazidi women and providing them to soldiers as concubines (never using the term "rape"). (To my knowledge, this is the first time ISIS has admitted doing either. All I've seen are in the past are its refutations.)

The article claims to have researched whether the Yazidis were a "mushrik" group or Muslims who later apostatized. Mushrik refers to polytheists, and according to some definitions, includes "pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers who associate, invoke or worship" beings other than Allah. ISIS says the two are treated differently under Islam. ISIS has decided the Yazidis are Mushrikin.

Unlike Christians and Jews, it says, Mushrikin are not allowed to pay a penalty (jizyah) to obtain a protected status.

Also, their women could be enslaved unlike female apostates who the majority of the fuqahā’ say cannot be enslaved and can only be given an ultimatum to repent or face the sword.

After capture, the Yazidi women and children were then divided according to the Shariah amongst the fighters of the Islamic State who participated in the Sinjar operations, after one fifth of the slaves were transferred to the Islamic State’s authority to be divided as khums.

The enslaved Yazidi families are now sold by the Islamic State soldiers as the mushrikīn were sold by the Companions (radiyallāhu ‘anhum) before them. Many well-known rulings are observed, including the prohibition of separating a mother from her young children. Many of the mushrik women and children have willingly accepted Islam and now race to practice it with evident sincerity after their exit from the darkness of shirk.

...enslaving the families of the kuffār [disbelievers] and taking their women as concubines is a firmly established aspect of the Sharī’ah that if one were to deny or mock, he would be denying or mocking the verses of the Qur’ān and the narrations of the Prophet... and thereby apostatizing from Islam.

On the concubine aspect, the article quotes "contemporary religious scholars."

Finally, a number of contemporary scholars have mentioned that the desertion of slavery had led to an increase in fāhishah (adultery, fornication, etc.), because the shar’ī alternative to marriage is not available, so a man who cannot afford marriage to a free woman finds himself surrounded by temptation towards sin.

In addition, many Muslim families who have hired maids to work at their homes, face the fitnah of prohibited khalwah (seclusion) and resultant zinā occurring between the man and the maid, whereas if she were his concubine, this relationship would be legal.

On the killing of Steven Sotloff:

[H]is killing was the consequence of US arrogance and transgression which all US citizens are responsible for as they are represented by the government they have elected, approved of, and supported, through votes, polls, and taxes.

It refers to Sotloff being Jewish (even though it has been reported ISIS didn't know he was Jewish at the time it killed him.) It says he was killed in retaliation for the U.S. airstrikes.

In perhaps the lowest blow, it reprints what it claims is a letter Sotloff wrote his mother after the Foley execution. (Perhaps it's been published before, but I haven't seen it.) The letter is typed, not handwritten, so there is no way to determine if Sotloff really wrote it, let alone whether the words are his or a forced script. (It does not seem genuine to me.)

Mom, please don’t let Obama kill me. Do not let him get away with murder again. What doesn’t our government understand? Don’t get involved in the Islamic State’s internal and external affairs. Leave them to fight their own war.

...At the rate that Obama’s administration is going, this could very well be the last you hear from me. Please don’t let that be the case. Fight for me. I love you.

As to other topics: ISIS announces that the leaders and soldiers of “Ansār al-Islam in Iraq” recently pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. It discusses the recent military battles in which it killed a lot of soldiers, and presents pictures of dead bodies.

It says fighting is just one part of its mission, and the other part is creating a state to govern. Thus, after its military successes in each place, many ISIS members remain behind to create administrative offices and provide services to residents. It shows pictures of its good works, which have been published before.

It moves on to the final battle that is coming. And then to Iran and Russia. For Iran, it quotes a statement by Henry Kissinger, using a derogatory term to describe him, to the effect that Iran is more dangerous than ISIS. It disagrees, saying:

Iran will never be “a bigger problem than ISIS” unless the West enters into a truce
with the Islamic State involving the halt of all attacks against the Muslims.

It then quotes "Former CIA Chief of “the Bin Laden Issue Station, Michael Scheuer." It agrees with him on this point:

He expresses a truth that should be reflected over and that is, why does America bother itself in a war between two of its enemies and side with one of them in a manner that only serves its enemy’s interests in the region and no one else’s?

It explains:

Obama now strengthens the Iraqi regime, which is undeniably backed by Iranian intelligence, military, and finances. Iranian Shia militias currently fight to “defend” Baghdad. The Iraqi regime and its Iranian founder have been one of the biggest allies of the Asad regime in Syria. They have sent fighters to the Abul-Fadl al-‘Abbās battalion.

The Asad air force has stopped all airstrikes against the Islamic State in a number of Shāmī wilāyat, probably because it is cheaper for them to benefit from the US airstrikes on their behalf, especially since the Asad regime is collapsing financially and isn’t very good at hitting targets accurately. At the same time, it has managed to “hide” chemical weapons from the West and use them without a deterrent.

On Russia, it criticizes Obama for aiding the "Persian crescent" in the Ukraine.

It next turns its attention to America's proxy war, outlining the various proxies the U.S. is relying on to fight ISIS. It begins with the PKK which it calls "a Marxist, nationalist, Kurdish organization" that is responsible for the majority of the drug trafficking in Europe. It says the PYD is a front for the PKK.

The next proxy is the FSA (Free Syrian Army.) Besides being weak, it says their only ideology is "theft and tobacco." Because they lack a real ideology, fighters keep switching back and forth between the FSA, PKK and "Dhawahiri." In a direct stab at the U.S. plan to arm the FSA as a "moderate rebel group", it says:

They [the FSA] have also repeatedly sold weaponry they received from Western and apostate donors for almost nothing to arms dealers. The Islamic State has bought a lot of this weaponry for appealingly cheap prices. Finally, this army has not yet been trained by the crusaders to fight mujāhidīn.

It moves on to the Peshmerga:

Unlike the Peshmerga of the past, their current fighters are fainthearted mercenaries void of any creed who only wait for their meagre wages.

The final proxy groups mentioned are "the failed Iraqi Awakening Councils, the proposed Iraqi National Guard, which has yet to be formed and trained, and the dying “Islamic” Front."

After some Bush/Obama criticism, ISIS says there is no gray area in this fight:

the world has split into two encampments, one for the people of faith, the other for the people of kufr, all in preparation for the final malhamah.

Another topic: ISIS claims airstrikes on Sept 14 and 15 killed 9 women and 5 children. They were the wives and kids of ISIS fighters who were being moved from one place to another. Some got scared when they realized they were being followed by drones and warplanes, and abandoned the vehicles. They were taken into homes by locals. But some fled the houses when they saw vehicles hit by the strikes, and 14 were killed. It posts photos of their dead bodies.

The remainder of the issue is a new statement of John Cantlie, which as I said at the beginning, I've reprinted in a separate post here.