Keep doing cute "pray for" hash tags after each attack.
Oh almost forgot, keeping stating that "it has nothing to do with Islam" and that the rise of the right and drunk Europeans shouting abuse on trains is the worst part of all of it.
The word "Islamaphobia" to me is an Oxymoron. Phobia is an irrational fear, yet to me, there is nothing irrational about fearing the extreme factions of Islam
I am Islamaphobic in exactly the same way I am Naziphobic. They both disgust me and I will never refrain from expressing that disgust because one is a World religion followed by 1.6 billion misguided fools.
I have been saying for years that we need to develop renewable energy sources. Not just because they are green but because the countries where we buy our gas, oil and even coal supplies are different degrees of evil.
From Saudi and the Middle East through some of North Africa and up into Russia and the former Soviet Union states and then on to China and Venezuela. What one of those countries isn't corrupt? Which one has democracy or even a benign dictatorship? Which of them are known for their equal treatment of women and LGBT? Which of them have a free justice system or a free press?
Successive governments Tory, New Labour and Coalition have continued to turn a blind eye by trading with regimes that routinely do things that our electorate find abhorrent, it is now (predictably) turning round and biting us on the arse. If they can do shit to their own people they sure as hell can do it to us.
By buying their stuff we are backing their regimes, a start would be to stop funding them ourselves.
If you took fossil fuels out of the equation, we would never be seen trading and supporting those regimes. Unfortunately, they literally make our lives go around in the West.
I've been busting my balls for the last 48 hours working on a proposal for a firm that's work is heavily based around Iranian Oil production; and during our initial conversations I was given what was essentially a crash-course in Iran's oil production, historic sanctions and the current situation. I'd never really paid much attention to it until this week, and I've been left a bit stunned at just how low our "civilised" countries will go in their quests for oil, all under the guise of "diplomacy" and "trade".
We may have blood on our hands in Iraq, but we have blood on our hands in many more places thanks to our need for Oil.
Indeed, if you take a look at Iran (odious though many in the hierarchy of that country may be) they have more reason than most to distrust the West; but, because they are mostly Shia, we may actually come to rely on them more.
There are some Middle Eastern countries that are mostly or even partly democratic, or ruled by monarchs/dictators who are not utterly odious, but not many (Lebanon, Tunisia, Morocco, I would almost say Iran, because it has a democracy of sorts, but the Mullahs have too much power). And I am not suggesting for one instant that they are not in some way corrupt.
However, in many ways, we are reaping what we have sown. In our support, for reasons of geopolitics and need for oil, of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and their ilk, we have encouraged the rise of fundamentalist Wahhabist Sunni Islam. The House of Saud depends entirely on Wahhabism, and so strengthens it within Saudia Arabia and exports it worldwide - look at mosques and schools built and preachers trained (across the world) with Saudi money, and ask yourself how likely are they to produce liberally minded individuals. Was it surprising that, when Merkel and Germany offered to welcome Syrian refugees, the only Saudi offer was to build mosques? Look at the disasters that have befallen Afghanistan/Pakistan, where the Saudi influence met its perfect match in the equally austere Deobandi tradition.
100 years ago, the Wahhabists were the fringe of Sunni Islam, easily outmatched by others (such as Sufis) that we would dearly wish to have in power across the Middle East today. But now it is the fundamentalist, literal interpretation of Wahhabism that dominates the online and satellite television fora across the Arabic/Islamist world.
The disaffected youth, whether in the Middle East or in Europe, who fall under its spell, and become radicalised are often not good Muslims, in that they may have dabbled in drugs, alcohol and petty crime. Look even at the wealthy young men involved in the attacks on 9/11, were they conspicuously abiding by the teachings of their religion? Most reports indicate that they then find, in a twisted version of Islam, a certainty and a purpose that the rest of their lives cannot provide - the rise of fascism in the 1920s and 1930s would suggest that the allure of a simplistic, if hate filled, world view is not limited only to young Muslim men.
Anyway, we have supported utterly appalling regimes across the Middle East for generations, for reasons that do little to support our notions of having some sort of superior moral compass. Most tragically, we allowed the Arab Spring, when the youth of the Arab world rose up against such regimes, to be whittled away, either by looking in the other direction, or by actively supporting repression (as in Bahrain and Egypt). Where we (as in the West) did intervene against a regime, we did just enough to encourage a descent into chaos, but nowhere near enough to help bring about any kind of reasonable solution.
If we really want to address the rise of violent and nihilistic fundamentalist Islam, we must be pepared for a long haul, of supporting moderate voices, and moving away from our traditional backing for the corrupt, venal elites. We should look to the countries that have the greatest chance of becoming what we would like them to be (assuming we mean liberal democracies) and support them. Let us help Tunisia, Lebanon, et al, be successful economically and socially and that will provide our most potent weapon in the Middle East. In the banlieues of France and across Europe, we need to find ways of giving young people hope and increase their feeling of belonging, and, yes, we need to educate, but we also need to find ways to support moderate voices in Muslim communities as well.
None of this is cheap, it's certainly more expensive than dropping bombs, and could well take many years. Dealing with the root causes requires a long term plan and a willingness to follow Robin Cook's idea of an ethical foreign policy. I won't hold my breath.
Sorry, it's a bit of a rant and, in all honesty, I'm not really sure that there is an easy solution - because we can destroy ISIS, but something else will rise up in its place (like Al Shabaab grew out of the Islamic Courts in Somalia).
See Saudi "investment" in Bosnia too and salafist attacks on the rise. Re
Interesting article. The point that leaps out at me is that the French only started really recruiting spies/informants from within the Muslim communities in late 2014. In the UK many attacks have been prevented because MI5 have been running paid informants within all the Muslim communities in the country for many years now. It always amazes me the number of times it emerges that MI5 tried to recruit a terrorist suspect sometime in the past. One of the people involved in the Woolwich attack had been approched in the past by MI5. I am convinced we have literally thousands of these informants and they are a significant factor in why so many attacks have been prevented in the last 10 years.
How about people inform on their neighbours because they are a threat to the wider community and not because the informant gets paid? How about parents that would rather their sons and daughters got a career than killed? As unpalatable as it seems to many the only way to defeat an ideology is to offer an alternative. As for the clown who would prevent history being taught. Consider this if you will. History is the most political of subjects, hence the many attempts to prescribe a curriculum. I grew up absorbing history from film and magazines like Look and Learn plus the simple stories from school. I knew we were the goodies in every situation because our enemies were always in the wrong. Study and travel introduced me to the novel and uncomfortable experience that others regarded us as the black hats. Understanding that there are many histories is key. A mature nation should be able to openly own the positive and negative aspects of its past thus we admit and teach that we have caused harm in the world for our own ends and have derived great and enduring wealth from it. We should also teach of our positive role in the world for example the many creative and scientific contributions to knowledge that our wealth has given us opportunity to make. If we can manage both along with the ethical stance that Cook( Robin rather than Capt.) advocated then we deny groups like Daesh the opportunity to indoctrinate through a rhetoric that is easily written and related about Britain being one of the most oppressive nations ever to exist. To that end the great men and battles history that Gove once advocated and that those calling for Trafalgar day hanker for is just about the most harmful route we could take. Looking at the mess that was Indian partition for example and owning the cosequences of misrule and bad planning and also teaching about the behaviour of Pakistani troops in (East Pakistan) Bangladesh during Operation Searchlight illustrates perfectly no identity group, religious, ethnic or national has claim to an unblemished past and therefore can claim no moral authority for violence in the present. This defeats a key part of Daesh's "humanitarian" call to arms. There are not many histories that do not include a part played by Britain. If we educate our young to that effect we can discuss the philosophy and ethics of our society to produce citizens that value what we have and are less likely to be persuaded to attack it.
Another way of not letting Isis/Daesh win is not to let their strategy work. Daesh think that they are waging an end of times of war for Islam against Christianity. They commit murderous, senseless atrocities to prompt a reaction against moderate Muslims from the west / Christians. The aim of this is to drive the moderate Muslims into their camp so that they can continue to wage a bigger war, where they believe their ultra conversative and very harsh version of Islam wins.
The vast majority of Muslims dislike Isis/Daesh and the harsh and divisive abominisation / interpretation of Islam. In Iraq, the Sunni awakening drove Alqaeda out for a time. Daesh kill and ill treat significantly more Muslims then Christians.
A way to not let Isis / Daesh win is not fall into their trap of treating all Muslims as though they are members of Isis. That is exactly the trap what Daesh wants people to fall into. If that happens then they win.
Keep doing cute "pray for" hash tags after each attack.
Oh almost forgot, keeping stating that "it has nothing to do with Islam" and that the rise of the right and drunk Europeans shouting abuse on trains is the worst part of all of it.
Ffs...name calling or killing people
Mate it's 2016, name calling is much worse and well worth making hours documentary over on BBC.
Another way of not letting Isis/Daesh win is not to let their strategy work. Daesh think that they are waging an end of times of war for Islam against Christianity. They commit murderous, senseless atrocities to prompt a reaction against moderate Muslims from the west / Christians. The aim of this is to drive the moderate Muslims into their camp so that they can continue to wage a bigger war, where they believe their ultra conversative and very harsh version of Islam wins.
The vast majority of Muslims dislike Isis/Daesh and the harsh and divisive abominisation / interpretation of Islam. In Iraq, the Sunni awakening drove Alqaeda out for a time. Daesh kill and ill treat significantly more Muslims then Christians.
A way to not let Isis / Daesh win is not fall into their trap of treating all Muslims as though they are members of Isis. That is exactly the trap what Daesh wants people to fall into. If that happens then they win.
You can’t disrupt a network that was barely a network to begin with and you can’t break up a conspiracy of one. There will never be enough police to stop every runaway truck or every gunman in an airport, or nightclub, or stadium.
Thought I'd revive this thread on such a dreary subject to post about a bit of good news:
First and foremost, Mosul has been liberated from ISIS, with only a few remaining fighters holding down a few blocks as of a couple days ago. This just gives a high level overview, but apparently this was a nasty, bloody, and incredibly difficult fight. I heard a report the other day that, at times, every yard was fought for.
There is now, and presumably will be for some time, an important effort for the international community to help maintain stability in Iraq and to help strengthen its central government in any way possible. It's obviously so important so that the country does not fall to another sectarian civil war or allow the likes of ISIS to reform, or another extremist group to form.
Also, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is reporting that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has been killed. Back in June the Russian Defense Ministry claimed that they had killed him in an air raid in I believe May. The US has said they cannot confirm this, and he has been reported to have been killed before. So, take it with a grain of salt, but this seems to be a claim from a major organization on the ground.
There are very few people whom I wish death upon. He would fall on that list. The concern is that his death will cause him to be treated as a martyr, and that, if he is dead, there is a risk of retaliatory attacks. Hopefully this isn't the case.
Slowly but surely these cretins are losing the vast amounts of territory they once controlled. I believe an attempt to take Raqqa is either under way or about to start.
I think it's worth noting just how many Arab and Kurdish fighters and civilians have died at the hands of these monsters, and to try to remember them, and not just those attacks closer to home, when, hopefully one day, we look back on ISIS as a thing of the past.
Whilst it is great news that ISIS is being defeated, and we have known they are for quite a while. It does not mean we will be safer - if anything it puts us more at risk of terrorist attacks. In the short term at least.
I believe Turkey's abolition of the caliphate has done great things for them (ignoring the recent political climate); they have a lot to be thankful of Ataturk for; but it has allowed corruption, dictatorships and extremism to wreak havoc on large parts of the rest Middle East.
I think the solution lies in proper governance, but that can't come from western interference.
A polity needs to exist, and it needs to come from the people of the Middle East, with a leader who speak for them. After all, the majority of Muslim's in the region would like to see the return of the Caliph as a political figurehead.
It needn't be strictly territorial. Political associations need to be made to create a confederation of democratic states. Something that follows the concept of an international order based more on coexisting communities than on territoriality-based nation states. Sounds familiar?
Well for everything you may oppose the European Union for, and I don't want to get into a Brexit discussion here, if you look at where Europe was 70 years ago, and where it stands now it would be hard to disagree that it hasn't bought peace to a region that had been political unstable for the best part of a millennium.
I have no idea about the accuracy of this chart but I bumped into it while adding my 2p worth to the holiday in Turkey thread. I thought it merited wider consideration. Despite everything, it seems Jihadist terrorism has some way to go before it catches up with the murderous activity of other terrorist groups in Western Europe in the recent past. (I think we can all have a guess as to the identity of the groups responsible for the majority of those deaths.) Hopefully, with the power base being pulverised, we can see a gradual decline in attacks.
I have no idea about the accuracy of this chart but I bumped into it while adding my 2p worth to the holiday in Turkey thread. I thought it merited wider consideration. Despite everything, it seems Jihadist terrorism has some way to go before it catches up with the murderous activity of other terrorist groups in Western Europe in the recent past. (I think we can all have a guess as to the identity of the groups responsible for the majority of those deaths.) Hopefully, with the power base being pulverised, we can see a gradual decline in attacks.
Well when it says 'based on wikipedia' you start to get a bit of a clue.
Whilst it is great news that ISIS is being defeated, and we have known they are for quite a while. It does not mean we will be safer - if anything it puts us more at risk of terrorist attacks. In the short term at least.
Why do you say that, Muttley? My gut instinct was that flushing them out of Mosul, would make them seem more like a bunch of losers and make it harder for them to recruit. As I say though, that's just a gut reaction and I'm not (consciously, at least) basing it on anything in particular. I'd be interested to know why you think the opposite.
I have no idea about the accuracy of this chart but I bumped into it while adding my 2p worth to the holiday in Turkey thread. I thought it merited wider consideration. Despite everything, it seems Jihadist terrorism has some way to go before it catches up with the murderous activity of other terrorist groups in Western Europe in the recent past. (I think we can all have a guess as to the identity of the groups responsible for the majority of those deaths.) Hopefully, with the power base being pulverised, we can see a gradual decline in attacks.
Well when it says 'based on wikipedia' you start to get a bit of a clue.
It's the ideology that needs to be tackled at the very source. If it's actually an incorrect interpretation of Islam, then this needs to be coming from the very top, and by this I don't mean the Muslim council of Britain.
It's the ideology that needs to be tackled at the very source. If it's actually an incorrect interpretation of Islam, then this needs to be coming from the very top, and by this I don't mean the Muslim council of Britain.
Whilst it is great news that ISIS is being defeated, and we have known they are for quite a while. It does not mean we will be safer - if anything it puts us more at risk of terrorist attacks. In the short term at least.
Why do you say that, Muttley? My gut instinct was that flushing them out of Mosul, would make them seem more like a bunch of losers and make it harder for them to recruit. As I say though, that's just a gut reaction and I'm not (consciously, at least) basing it on anything in particular. I'd be interested to know why you think the opposite.
Because you have misguided but idealistic idiots who are more likely to seek revenge and less likely to leave for the Islamic State as it isn't there. They are not going to be happy about that! I personally think and have said as much in previous threads that the recent surge in terrorist attacks is linked to ISIS being defeated - like the cornered dog.
I did get a sense from some people responding to my posts at the time, that they thought the attacks showed that ISIS were not being defeated when the opposite was true.
Whilst it is great news that ISIS is being defeated, and we have known they are for quite a while. It does not mean we will be safer - if anything it puts us more at risk of terrorist attacks. In the short term at least.
Why do you say that, Muttley? My gut instinct was that flushing them out of Mosul, would make them seem more like a bunch of losers and make it harder for them to recruit. As I say though, that's just a gut reaction and I'm not (consciously, at least) basing it on anything in particular. I'd be interested to know why you think the opposite.
Because you have misguided but idealistic idiots who are more likely to seek revenge and less likely to leave for the Islamic State as it isn't there. They are not going to be happy about that! I personally think and have said as much in previous threads that the recent surge in terrorist attacks is linked to ISIS being defeated - like the cornered dog.
I did get a sense from some people responding to my posts at the time, that they thought the attacks showed that ISIS were not being defeated when the opposite was true.
Whilst it is great news that ISIS is being defeated, and we have known they are for quite a while. It does not mean we will be safer - if anything it puts us more at risk of terrorist attacks. In the short term at least.
Why do you say that, Muttley? My gut instinct was that flushing them out of Mosul, would make them seem more like a bunch of losers and make it harder for them to recruit. As I say though, that's just a gut reaction and I'm not (consciously, at least) basing it on anything in particular. I'd be interested to know why you think the opposite.
Because you have misguided but idealistic idiots who are more likely to seek revenge and less likely to leave for the Islamic State as it isn't there. They are not going to be happy about that! I personally think and have said as much in previous threads that the recent surge in terrorist attacks is linked to ISIS being defeated - like the cornered dog.
I did get a sense from some people responding to my posts at the time, that they thought the attacks showed that ISIS were not being defeated when the opposite was true.
You're also going to get a lot of battle hardened ISIS fighters crawling away from Iraq and Syria and back to their countries of origin. If they want to continue the Jihad in Europe they'll find plenty of easy targets.
Comments
Ffs...name calling or killing people
Re
As unpalatable as it seems to many the only way to defeat an ideology is to offer an alternative.
As for the clown who would prevent history being taught. Consider this if you will. History is the most political of subjects, hence the many attempts to prescribe a curriculum. I grew up absorbing history from film and magazines like Look and Learn plus the simple stories from school. I knew we were the goodies in every situation because our enemies were always in the wrong.
Study and travel introduced me to the novel and uncomfortable experience that others regarded us as the black hats. Understanding that there are many histories is key. A mature nation should be able to openly own the positive and negative aspects of its past thus we admit and teach that we have caused harm in the world for our own ends and have derived great and enduring wealth from it. We should also teach of our positive role in the world for example the many creative and scientific contributions to knowledge that our wealth has given us opportunity to make. If we can manage both along with the ethical stance that Cook( Robin rather than Capt.) advocated then we deny groups like Daesh the opportunity to indoctrinate through a rhetoric that is easily written and related about Britain being one of the most oppressive nations ever to exist.
To that end the great men and battles history that Gove once advocated and that those calling for Trafalgar day hanker for is just about the most harmful route we could take.
Looking at the mess that was Indian partition for example and owning the cosequences of misrule and bad planning and also teaching about the behaviour of Pakistani troops in (East Pakistan) Bangladesh during Operation Searchlight illustrates perfectly no identity group, religious, ethnic or national has claim to an unblemished past and therefore can claim no moral authority for violence in the present. This defeats a key part of Daesh's "humanitarian" call to arms.
There are not many histories that do not include a part played by Britain. If we educate our young to that effect we can discuss the philosophy and ethics of our society to produce citizens that value what we have and are less likely to be persuaded to attack it.
The vast majority of Muslims dislike Isis/Daesh and the harsh and divisive abominisation / interpretation of Islam. In Iraq, the Sunni awakening drove Alqaeda out for a time. Daesh kill and ill treat significantly more Muslims then Christians.
A way to not let Isis / Daesh win is not fall into their trap of treating all Muslims as though they are members of Isis. That is exactly the trap what Daesh wants people to fall into. If that happens then they win.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/15/please-stop-staying-the-nice-attacks-arent-about-islam/
Including the paragraph...
You can’t disrupt a network that was barely a network to begin with and you can’t break up a conspiracy of one. There will never be enough police to stop every runaway truck or every gunman in an airport, or nightclub, or stadium.
" We can see you, we can see you,
We can see you kneeling down ..."
First and foremost, Mosul has been liberated from ISIS, with only a few remaining fighters holding down a few blocks as of a couple days ago. This just gives a high level overview, but apparently this was a nasty, bloody, and incredibly difficult fight. I heard a report the other day that, at times, every yard was fought for.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/07/09/536307429/mosul-has-been-liberated-from-isis-control-iraqs-prime-minister-says
There is now, and presumably will be for some time, an important effort for the international community to help maintain stability in Iraq and to help strengthen its central government in any way possible. It's obviously so important so that the country does not fall to another sectarian civil war or allow the likes of ISIS to reform, or another extremist group to form.
Also, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is reporting that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has been killed. Back in June the Russian Defense Ministry claimed that they had killed him in an air raid in I believe May. The US has said they cannot confirm this, and he has been reported to have been killed before. So, take it with a grain of salt, but this seems to be a claim from a major organization on the ground.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-baghdadi-idUSKBN19W1AW?il=0&utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social
There are very few people whom I wish death upon. He would fall on that list. The concern is that his death will cause him to be treated as a martyr, and that, if he is dead, there is a risk of retaliatory attacks. Hopefully this isn't the case.
Slowly but surely these cretins are losing the vast amounts of territory they once controlled. I believe an attempt to take Raqqa is either under way or about to start.
I think it's worth noting just how many Arab and Kurdish fighters and civilians have died at the hands of these monsters, and to try to remember them, and not just those attacks closer to home, when, hopefully one day, we look back on ISIS as a thing of the past.
I think the solution lies in proper governance, but that can't come from western interference.
A polity needs to exist, and it needs to come from the people of the Middle East, with a leader who speak for them. After all, the majority of Muslim's in the region would like to see the return of the Caliph as a political figurehead.
It needn't be strictly territorial. Political associations need to be made to create a confederation of democratic states. Something that follows the concept of an international order based more on coexisting communities than on territoriality-based nation states. Sounds familiar?
Well for everything you may oppose the European Union for, and I don't want to get into a Brexit discussion here, if you look at where Europe was 70 years ago, and where it stands now it would be hard to disagree that it hasn't bought peace to a region that had been political unstable for the best part of a millennium.
I did get a sense from some people responding to my posts at the time, that they thought the attacks showed that ISIS were not being defeated when the opposite was true.
The Cornish republican Army and their suicide bomber.
I haven't just made that up.