Terrorist Attacks

[Carl the Llama]

So apparently the ISIS weirdos believe that if they're killed by a woman they won't get into heaven with their virgins so they're afraid of engaging female forces.

 

A brilliant thought until you take a few seconds to double check and it turns out they don't actually care that much after all - as long as they die in battle they'll still be a martyr and get their virgins.

 

Most of us take solace in the idea that these virgins may be spotty male League of Legends players but again I have to disappoint you all - unfortunately the Quran physically describes them as beautiful women with a specific focus on the beauty of their eyes.  Don't fret though it still stands to backfire on them; unless the terrorists have incredibly niche fetishes they'll probably be freaked out to get to the afterlife and discover their new loyal charges are "transparent to the marrow of their bones".  Wtaf.

[MPH]

Don't worry the nation 'leading the fight' against terrorism has it all organized...

[Rincewind]

She may be replaced anytime soon.

[m4DD0gg]

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/4c7g9j/hey_rall_we_at_the_donald_will_not_bury_our_heads/

[leicsmac]

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/4c7g9j/hey_rall_we_at_the_donald_will_not_bury_our_heads/

 

I love myself some badly-sourced Redpill bullshite.

 

Some truly amazing commentary there.

Edited 8 April 2016 by leicsmac

[m4DD0gg]

I love myself some badly-sourced Redpill bullshite.

 

Some truly amazing commentary there.

 

ok mate

[leicsmac]

ok mate

I'm sorry...was that Reddit post and all the marvellous comments below it meant to be taken seriously, then?

Apologies, it's Friday night, there's been a few drinks and as such I find the internet posts and comments of Redpill fanatics all the more amusing. Especially when half of the links they supply are from sources so biased as to lack any credibility whatsoever. Hell, I was surprised to not see Breitbart in there.

Edited 8 April 2016 by leicsmac

[DJ Barry Hammond]

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/4c7g9j/hey_rall_we_at_the_donald_will_not_bury_our_heads/

A lot of statistics, but what is lacking is any plan on how one might change them into more favourable percentages / tackle the problem being discussed.

There's also a lack of qualification for a lot of those statistics - statistics on their own without looking into the possible reasons / trends being shown offer us nothing, they don't provide us an understanding of why the situation is so.

If anything, looking at those statistics makes me think what we need to do as a society is work harder at bringing our communities together, not segregate, gain a better understanding between us of each other's lives and beliefs structures as that's how society mounds itself into a better position.

The hostile posting you've referenced will only do more harm than good. I would concede, there is a clear problem in this area, but building a wall / isolating is highly unlikely to be any sort of solution.

[Captain...]

Interesting piece on BBC website about religious militias in Iraq forming up to fight ISIS.

 

Not altogether surprising, but the twisting of theology to suit their needs seems somewhat familiar.

 

Anyway

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35998716

 

 

And then, to my surprise, he adds: "Jesus himself told us that if you don't have a sword you should go out and buy one."

I cast my mind back to my schooldays of Bible study but can't remember Jesus telling people to arm themselves.

"Did he really say that?"

"It's in the Bible," Kildani insists.

"Matthew," one man says. "Luke," says another. "Matthew and Luke," they both say. I looked doubtful.

Kildani glances over to one of his assistants who is playing a game on his phone.

"Find it!" he orders.

The young man with the phone walks over to me. He has the verse on his screen in Arabic.

It is Luke chapter 22, verse 36: "If you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one."

Turns out theologians have been arguing about the verse for centuries. Is that a real sword? Or a metaphorical one? Kildani is in no doubt. He says he and his men are out on patrol. And they're armed.

 

 

So are religious militias (Sunni/Shia/Christian) in Iraq a good thing?

[Rincewind]

You would  think that an all powerful loving god that wanted his followers to spread the word would make it a little clearer as to what those words are.

[Bellend Sebastian]

Posting purely because it was interesting.

 

WARNING: It is a 'The Long Read' piece, so those with very short attention spans needn't bother:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/12/reluctant-jihadi-recruit-lost-faith-in-isis

 

In summary: don't join ISIS if you want an admin role, and this bloke should consider himself very fortunate that his wife is so forgiving.

[z-layrex]

Posting purely because it was interesting.

 

WARNING: It is a 'The Long Read' piece, so those with very short attention spans needn't bother:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/12/reluctant-jihadi-recruit-lost-faith-in-isis

 

In summary: don't join ISIS if you want an admin role, and this bloke should consider himself very fortunate that his wife is so forgiving.

 

Good read thanks. Wish he'd ****ing died. Horribly.

[MPH]

Interesting piece on BBC website about religious militias in Iraq forming up to fight ISIS.

 

Not altogether surprising, but the twisting of theology to suit their needs seems somewhat familiar.

 

Anyway

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35998716

 

 

 

So are religious militias (Sunni/Shia/Christian) in Iraq a good thing?

 

 

Inetesting question, really and i suppose it depends on their motives... If its purely to defend IN CASE of there being an attack, i don't see it as a problem, and i dont see it as a comparison to anything familiar... but if its to govern, police or control, then i think it takes on a whole new meaning....

Edited 13 April 2016 by MPH

[Merging Cultures]

You know if this guy was brown or black he'd be dead.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/04/28/suspect-in-custody-after-threatening-to-blow-up-baltimore-fox-tv-station.html?intcmp=hplnws

[DJ Barry Hammond]

You know if this guy was brown or black he'd be dead.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/04/28/suspect-in-custody-after-threatening-to-blow-up-baltimore-fox-tv-station.html?intcmp=hplnws

The panda onesie might have had an impact on this as well mind!

[Merging Cultures]

The panda onesie might have had an impact on this as well mind!

 

Some say it is supposed to be a hedgehog!! Admittedly, neither are particularly terrifying!! Some news agencies are going with 'animal onesie'

 

Apparently, the muppet did get shot a few times, once to the neck, so maybe they did try hard to kill him and were just rubbish shots.

[Rincewind]

Maybe he wanted to be shot.

[Thracian]

A lot of statistics, but what is lacking is any plan on how one might change them into more favourable percentages / tackle the problem being discussed.

There's also a lack of qualification for a lot of those statistics - statistics on their own without looking into the possible reasons / trends being shown offer us nothing, they don't provide us an understanding of why the situation is so.

If anything, looking at those statistics makes me think what we need to do as a society is work harder at bringing our communities together, not segregate, gain a better understanding between us of each other's lives and beliefs structures as that's how society mounds itself into a better position.

The hostile posting you've referenced will only do more harm than good. I would concede, there is a clear problem in this area, but building a wall / isolating is highly unlikely to be any sort of solution.

 

 

 

Why exactly would I wish to bring myself - or anyone else - closer to any community of religious theorists when religion has caused more totally indefensible death, despair and destruction than anything other than natural causes?

 

As a force for good, religion takes the mickey in the hands of men who would claim to be its servants, and has done throughout history and even before Islam was ever heard of. 

 

Communities have been unevenly mixed in even Arab countries but, when the fundamentalists take control, you see exactly how the Christian/Yizardi minorities are treated - or would you like me to post almost any number of links you might like?

 

Of course i understand that there are people who can live consistently (and even sincerely) in peace alongside one another but that doesn't protect the minorities when the zealots take over, any more than it did in Hitler's time.  

 

As far as Christian, Sikh, Hindu, Jewish and other non Islamic religious communities are concerned, the only reason Muslims can work within those communities - or any bodies such as councils/schools/hospitals etc, that serve them -  if they are not run according to Sharia doctrine, is if it can be shown to serve the cause of Islam.

 

In other words, they are duty bound to work towards their own ends first - and the general community only when it either serves their purpose or and/or is not in opposition to Islamic philosophy.

 

I don't see any constructive "moulding" of communities in Syria, Iraq, Turkey, Libya, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen or any number of other countries across the Middle East, Africa, the Far East or anywhere else there are large Islamic communities. But I'm all ears.   

 

Man-made religion, (all of it is nothing more than theory) so easily becomes an excuse for evil when manipulated by opportunist people . Inner faith is quite different and something best expressed privately between the person themselves and the power he or she believes in. That way it may avoid the near-inevitability of communal corruption and actually serve the greater good. 

Edited 29 April 2016 by Thracian

[DJ Barry Hammond]

@@Thracian

I've read your post and I fail to see any solutions.

My point is that if you strip away everything, religon, race, colour, gender, sexual orientation, we are all humans and share a lot more in common than the environment around us can lead us to believe.

Yes it may be blue sky thinking, but my belief is the more common ground that is found between people the more accepting they become of each other and this enables people to unite in a common cause. This is what has brought about many, many positive groups of people in many different forms that is not religon.

Furthermore, if we wish to challenge extreme aspects of religion, we are better placed at doing so if we're closer to it, not further away.

Now naturally I'm not suggesting we import a plane load of terroists, but if we are closer to the communities where people can turn in an unguided direction, we'll have more power to do something against it, the power to win hearts and minds. On the otherhand, if we just ignore it and cast people aside, they're unlikely to change their view and are then free to convince others.

[Lionator]

Barry is correct, the way to prevent is by communicating with the people most at risk.

 

Completely hypothetical, but if you come from an Asian community in a poor area of an inner city, you're unemployed, you have very few support networks and your future looks bleak. A man then comes along, puts his arm around you and preaches to you about how Islam can improve your life. You get sucked in and suddenly the preacher becomes more radical, you believe in this person more and more and bang hey presto, you're radicalised. 

 

I think in this country we do integration a lot better than France for example but obviously it's a battle that may never be completely won. 

[Thracian]

Barry is correct, the way to prevent is by communicating with the people most at risk.

 

Completely hypothetical, but if you come from an Asian community in a poor area of an inner city, you're unemployed, you have very few support networks and your future looks bleak. A man then comes along, puts his arm around you and preaches to you about how Islam can improve your life. You get sucked in and suddenly the preacher becomes more radical, you believe in this person more and more and bang hey presto, you're radicalised. 

 

I think in this country we do integration a lot better than France for example but obviously it's a battle that may never be completely won. 

 

 

I  wish you and Barry were right and certainly understand the seeds of potential radicalisation you mention. Unfortunately the very flaws that allow weak/vulnerable minds to be turned by the strong/manipulative/predatory are the reasons why I see nothing but folly in inviting potential trojan horses to park in camp UK.

 

Even the need for "solutions" wouldn't be nearly so necessary if misguided people didn't create problems that needn't exist out of their own need to impress their views of others for various idealistic, ideological, self-seving, ambitious, blinkered, greedy or power-hungry reasons (among others).

 

And an immediate barrier to those well-meaning ideals is that you can't "strip away" religion, race, gender,  sexual orientation nor any other trait of individualism because many wear their allegiance like a badge of pride".

 

Look honestly and you can see the evidence in virtually every aspect of human life not just now but way back.

 

Integration in the UK? it may be better than in France but is as much imagination as reality and that is plain to see if you get close enough or actually listen to people whose views have been systematically subdued, sometimes for worthy reasons and sometimes for more devious reasons. 

 

There are so many factors which work against genuine integration and the public expression of faith or religion is the greatest, with politics and class perceptions, not far behind.    

[DJ Barry Hammond]

@@Thracian

I guess we come at this from different perspectives. I would suggest your view is akin to the sticking plaster option - possibly because you don't think the problem will ever go away, so you'd prefer to simply keep the problem away from you and this country.

I on the otherhand believe that given the right circumstances, we can beat this, in a similar way that the human race has beaten big problems before. This may be the biggest problem we currently face in the world, but we have certainly overcome much, much, bigger in the not so distant past.

I see integration as key in this battle, because if Muslims can come to this country and succeed within our lifestyle, they will act as role models both at home and abroad and with that preach the best bits they see in our own values to their children, helping building acceptance and a weight of opinion.

If there's no integration, there's no understanding, no challenging of ways of life, no evolving of mind and religion - and religion can evolve, given it wasn't so long ago gays were castigated and women were not allowed to be priests / bishops in our 'modern world religon'.

I do acknowledge one problem with the integration idea, because as a nation we've seem to have created a bigger NIMBY class that means we aren't actually as good and accepting at integration as we once was. Too many people are concerned about what they might not be getting, rather than being happy with what they've got, but still striving for that little bit more. I wonder if that's a result of a deeper, much uglier capitalist culture, but that would be to digress.

The other stark problem with your approach is you assum the terrorist threat has to travel in person - when as we've seen, it can actually travel through wires, we need to be as aware of the threat from within as the one flying in.

So if you consider, if we provide refuge for people genuinely in need from war torn places such as Syria, not only are we doing what's right, something this country has been world renowned for and something that we as people once took great pride in, we will be integrating Muslims that will be grateful for our values and be on our side and therefore much more willing to route out the evil we already hold.

I get that you fear that in doing such a thing, we might accidentally invite a bad apple into this country, but I'd rather trust us to examine each Apple on its merits than see one bad apple from miles away and therefore chuck away the whole barrel so they can fester in a corner miles away, until the compost smell of shit eventually comes and hits anyway (how's that for an anology!)

One final thing - even if a terrorist from outside gets into this country, they still need to acclimatise to the surroundings, gain cover, plan, obtain contacts, materials and much, much more - and so the risk is probably not as great as you envisage.

[Darkon84]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/10/police-simulate-dramatic-terror-attack-at-manchesters-trafford-c/

 

So after Manchester's mock terrorist attack yesterday, they've had to apologise for 'racial stereotyping' as they used someone shouting 'Allahu Akbar'.

 

First of all, I hadn't realised Islam is a race, and secondly, just plain WTF?! Why on Earth should the police have to apologise for making a serious scenario as damn realistic as possible. Only yesterday in Munich there was someone shouting those words and stabbing people. I don't seem to remember any atheists with bomb vests on shouting 'science is great' before detonating and taking innocent people with them.

 

 

Manchester peace activist Dr Erinma Bell criticised the use of a "Muslim terrorist".

She said "a terrorist can be anyone" and "we need to move away from stereotypes".

 

Fvck off Erinma, I wouldn't really say it's a stereotype, more a growing trend since the mid 90's and the norm right now, which can be seen from plain facts and statistics.

 

Fail to prepare, prepare to fail.

[Rincewind]

Not sure about this. The problem is that because of past events and media coverage it is easily accepted that terrorists are thought to be Islamic  The public  are more likely to sit up and take notice if the scenarios portray them as so. I would rather the terrorists be portrayed as nutters but then it would not register within the public's mind.

This is just me attempting to think outside of the box. I can see both  sides.

[Darkon84]

Not sure about this. The problem is that because of past events and media coverage it is easily accepted that terrorists are thought to be Islamic  The public  are more likely to sit up and take notice if the scenarios portray them as so. I would rather the terrorists be portrayed as nutters but then it would not register within the public's mind.

This is just me attempting to think outside of the box. I can see both  sides.

 

Who would the nutter be then? Surely the same logic and offense could be applied to anyone playing the role.....A white guy with a gun....therefore all terrorists are angry white teens......A black guy..... therefore all terrorists are black, African and so on. Why does it need to be about the media portraying something to us. It was a police training drill, not a TV show. The only people using an angle here, are the ones claiming it as racist and islamophobia etc.

What's not to be sure on? The fact of the matter is that over our recent history, since the mid 90's, this type of event has become more and more frequent and has become the norm for terrorist attacks in Europe. Surely it has to be seen that if the police are to be prepared properly, they need to prepare in the sort of scenarios which are likely to happen.