Terrorism: Paris, Syria, Turkey, Belgium, Florida......

[pharmaboy]

Direct quote.

"What we don't know yet is if the attack was planned, ordered or funded by ISIL's leaders in Syria because the problem is, this is what ISIL do. They take credit for any act of terrorism on Western soil so they appear bigger and tougher than they actually are."

Like I said, the part about them taking credit for everything is very true, but eluding that ISIL might not have been responsible is optimistic. Even if not ISIL, possibly another branch or equivalent with the same ideaology. I have no idea about the size of ISIL or other terrorist organisations, but to pull this off, I'd say it is a mistake to underestimate them as Waleed did. This is a real threat and although it is essential in the fight against, unfortunately unity alone is not going to fix it. It's just scoring free public brownie points. No one has a real solution otherwise we wouldn't have this problem.

Waleed Aly looks for an excuse anywhere he can find it - in this instance, it's that we should call a spade a rake, because the spade is proud to be called a spade.

That's just delusional - he makes the argument that if you reject them as the instigators it will some how disempower them. What? These guys are nutbags, they are just as likely to put more effort into making the next attack even worse and making sure they take responsibility early on.

He further argues that getting angry is what they want so you shouldn't, and that they want to widen the war and get you to react so you shouldn't ?

Think about the last one again - that naturally progresses to the only proper action is no action , ie the ultimate in passivity. so they either grow bored and stop, or they win - not really good options

 

[franco cozzo]

Incorrect

Lone Wolf's

Lone wolves is an internal inconsistency, lone wolf's implies multiple singular actors



Bring it on pedants....

no you dont need the apostrophe there, it doesnt 'belong to' the Lone Wolfs...you mean

'Lone Wolfs'

...which still looks/sounds wrong

 

[Calvin27]

Waleed Aly looks for an excuse anywhere he can find it - in this instance, it's that we should call a spade a rake, because the spade is proud to be called a spade.

I actually find his viewpoints good, but on this occassion I think he has responded emotively based on his religion. If he wanted to do the line 'not all muslims' then he should have just said it instead of pretending that:
1. The threat is insignificant and weak.
2. That we can actually fix the problem with hugs and kisses.

The amount of likes this gets on my fb feed is ridiculous. People are so dumb. But obviously it has been a hit for him publicity wise.

 

[Knuckles]

no you dont need the apostrophe there, it doesnt 'belong to' the Lone Wolfs...you mean

'Lone Wolfs'

...which still looks/sounds wrong

Because it is. Lone wolves is correct in Her Majesty's English.

 

[DeBloot]

The amount of likes this gets on my fb feed is ridiculous. People are so dumb. But obviously it has been a hit for him publicity wise.

Some people agree with what he has said and express that with a like or a share
I don't see how that is any more 'dumb' than those that don't agree

I think what he is saying is that to target people of a Muslim religion with hatred just alienates (mostly) young and impressionable people and drives them to the extremes
I think there is some merit in that idea, but there is no one answer to this
The fact seems though that IS is able to influence people who are marginilised, and these 'disciples' have great power in their ruthlessness and desire to die (or at least no fear of it)

 

[Calvin27]

Some people agree with what he has said and express that with a like or a share
I don't see how that is any more 'dumb' than those that don't agree

I think what he is saying is that to target people of a Muslim religion with hatred just alienates (mostly) young and impressionable people and drives them to the extremes

The issue myself and other commentators have with his view, is that extremism is a fringe force and insignificant. Quite the opposite. they have demonstrated that they can successfully coordinate and carry out a planned strike. To think otherwise is basically letting your guard down.

I prefer David Camerons realist approach:

1. Our PC-ness is basically being exploited.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-extremism-allowed-flourish-says-Cameron.html

2. Muslims can't just keep pointing the finger to 'extremists'. Many of these guys are home grown, which means they were educated and raised with the ideals of the so called 'moderate muslims'.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...preachers-to-be-treated-like-paedophiles.html
http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...am-Muslim-religion-peace-Paris-terror-attacks

*Edit - for the grammar Nazis (probably still some errors lol)

 

[John U]

The issue myself and other commentators have with his view, is that extremism is a fringe force and insignificant. Quite the opposite. they have demonstrated that they can successfully coordinate and carry out a planned strike. To think otherwise is basically letting your guard down.

I prefer David Camerons realist approach:

1. Our PC-ness is basically being exploited.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-extremism-allowed-flourish-says-Cameron.html

2. Muslims can't just keep pointing the finger to 'extremists'. Many of these guys are home grown, which means they were educated and raised with the ideals of the so called 'moderate muslims'.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...preachers-to-be-treated-like-paedophiles.html
http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...am-Muslim-religion-peace-Paris-terror-attacks

*Edit - for the grammar Nazis (probably still some errors lol)

Are you saying that the the co-ordinated acts of a few cowards is the fault of all Muslims?

 

[DJninja]

Are you saying that the the co-ordinated acts of a few cowards is the fault of all Muslims?

Yes all Muslims are terrorists until proven otherwise.

 

[ajay]

Are you saying that the the co-ordinated acts of a few cowards is the fault of all Muslims?

It's not the fault of Muslims as a people, but if these terrorists (or whatever you'd like to call them) identify with a particular faith, that can't be ignored. The very idea at the heart of every belief system is it's something you choose to believe/follow or don't, therefore creating a divide. Some ignore the divide, others emphasise it, and a small minority leverage their hatred from it. Whether the masses of peaceful Muslims are just that - peaceful - is irrelevant.

 

[Knuckles]

Are you saying that the the co-ordinated acts of a few cowards is the fault of all Muslims?

Pretty much.

The fact remains that marginalising minorities only makes the job of indoctrination that much easier. Disenfranchised Islamic youths are looking for acceptance, and if they can't get it from the "mainstream" population, they'll be pushed towards these extremist groups who are only too happy to take them under their wing and exploit their feelings of persecution and add another weapon to the arsenal.

As for co-ordinated attacks, they're not conducting sophisticated paramilitary operations, most of them don't seem to be fussed about making it home. Any fuckwit with a phone and a social media group can do it. Look at those flash mobs that were so fucking popular a few years ago.

And the actual leadership group aren't putting their assessment on the line. Most of them are either anonymous or in secret safe houses or both.

 

[rednightmare]

Are you saying that the the co-ordinated acts of a few cowards is the fault of all Muslims?

Of course terrorist attacks are not the fault of all Muslims but it cannot be denied that there is a lot of tacit support for the more extreme fringes. Case in point: Saudi Islamic Theologian Mohamed Alarefe, who's been banned from UK and Switzerland for holding extreme views, has 13.3 M followers on Twitter...

Clearly, Islam as a religion has some major issues (free trip to paradise when you die in a suicide attack; sharia law etc.) but the right are often too bigoted and racist to be taken seriously and the left are too PC and worried about offending people to have the serious discussion that needs to be had. Ultimately, the Koran is in need of massive re-interpretation by Muslims to put their beliefs in step with the rest of the world with regards to gender equality, sexuality, the separation of church and state, and basic human rights. Not holding my breath though.

 

[Jesterarts]

I normally think that muppet on the project is a wanker and the crap that comes out his mouth is pure stupidity.

But his comments the other day I agreed with.

If there is backlash against the entire muslim community, this will create more opportunities for radicalisation.

Lets look at other instances that lead people to massacre innocents.

Pick any of the recent High school shootings in the US.

None of those cowards where popular, they where alienated from the wider social group, bullied and pushed away which drove them to extremism.

There is also an element of mental health, but if you push and abuse someone who is potentially prone to crack, they will and the result in extreme cases is what we have seen in Paris, what we see daily in Africa and what we see regularly in the US.

The key difference is that in the case of the US massacres, the individual has to be driven to the act themselves.

In the case of the acts in Paris and the regular atrocities in African and the Middle East, these individuals only go a part of the way to these acts. Then they are identified and manipulated into the acts by these organisations.

There is a balancing act. The strategy on 'home' soil should be different to that when it comes to battling ISIS and the other organisations.

On the home front, don't spread hate that will drive people towards these organisations.

On the actual front, annihilate these groups.

 

[redbruce]

Direct quote.

"What we don't know yet is if the attack was planned, ordered or funded by ISIL's leaders in Syria because the problem is, this is what ISIL do. They take credit for any act of terrorism on Western soil so they appear bigger and tougher than they actually are."

Like I said, the part about them taking credit for everything is very true, but eluding that ISIL might not have been responsible is optimistic. Even if not ISIL, possibly another branch or equivalent with the same ideaology. I have no idea about the size of ISIL or other terrorist organisations, but to pull this off, I'd say it is a mistake to underestimate them as Waleed did. This is a real threat and although it is essential in the fight against, unfortunately unity alone is not going to fix it. It's just scoring free public brownie points. No one has a real solution otherwise we wouldn't have this problem.

Not sure how the statement: "What we don't know yet is if the attack was planned, ordered or funded by ISIL's leaders in Syria because the problem is, this is what ISIL do." is alluding "that ISIL might not have been responsible".

Could be optimistic, but equally could simply be waiting for facts rather than resorting to conjecture. Even you admit: " the part about them taking credit for everything is very true". Aly even provides evidence support his claim.

"No one has a real solution otherwise we wouldn't have this problem." Every problem has that point, at a point.

Doesn't mean it can't or wont be solved either.

The solution may not be obvious (a wicked problem) but dismissing other's views one doesn't like or agree with. Even Madame Hanson is a contribution to the discussion albeit not my view and hopefully not too many others.

Waleed Aly looks for an excuse anywhere he can find it - in this instance, it's that we should call a spade a rake, because the spade is proud to be called a spade.

That's just delusional - he makes the argument that if you reject them as the instigators it will some how disempower them. What? These guys are nutbags, they are just as likely to put more effort into making the next attack even worse and making sure they take responsibility early on.

He further argues that getting angry is what they want so you shouldn't, and that they want to widen the war and get you to react so you shouldn't ?

Think about the last one again - that naturally progresses to the only proper action is no action , ie the ultimate in passivity. so they either grow bored and stop, or they win - not really good options

That's not what he inferred. It is well documented (eg http://www.vox.com/2015/11/14/9734794/isis-claim-paris-statement) that a strategy of such groups is to claim responsibility for everything to infer greater power and influence (and not limited to terrorist groups).

He didn't reject them outright as instigators (at this point in time) just questioned validity of conjecture at that point, nor did he advocate doing nothing, just cautioning against emotive reaction to an issue that needs a rationale response.

Food for thought (Islamic terrorism):

http://www.smh.com.au/national/pari...-vulnerable-to-terrorism-20151116-gl01a8.html

contrast with:

http://chersonandmolschky.com/2015/04/13/islamic-terrorism-japan/

 

[Calvin27]

Are you saying that the the co-ordinated acts of a few cowards is the fault of all Muslims?

No. But there are a few problems with the 'not all muslims' approach.

The first is this.

Of course terrorist attacks are not the fault of all Muslims but it cannot be denied that there is a lot of tacit support for the more extreme fringes.

Which can be evidenced by this: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...s-terror-attacks/story-fni0cx12-1227611449776

This is a problem. When Australian born and bred muslims still hold extreme views, then perhaps more work needs to be done with local muslims. This is basically what Cameron is saying. The problem is only partially immigration, the other half is the religion. The piss poor response from the mufti only highlights this assertion by basically blaming the west for intervention (this I actually agree with) and avoids condemning the actions of the perpetrators. Interestingly Waleed was lite-on in this respect, instead choosing to focus on 'stop the hate' instead. This guy (Mufti) basically represents the so called 'moderate muslims'. This is not a good sign.

The second problem is we can see the various integration problems of different cultures throughout Australian history. Italians, Greeks, Chinese, Vietnamese, more Chinese, Sudanese etc. Basically aside from local crime which is arguable a defence and coping mechanism, none of these groups have felt compelled to do mass damage simply for ideology. When extremists claim to be carrying out the ideals of a particular religion and are overwhelmingly represented in these types of attacks, then perhaps we should dig a little deeper and understand what the common cause is irrespective of political correctedness.

 

[redbruce]

The second problem is we can see the various integration problems of different cultures throughout Australian history. Italians, Greeks, Chinese, Vietnamese, more Chinese, Sudanese etc. Basically aside from local crime which is arguable a defence and coping mechanism, none of these groups have felt compelled to do mass damage simply for ideology. When extremists claim to be carrying out the ideals of a particular religion and are overwhelmingly represented in these types of attacks, then perhaps we should dig a little deeper and understand what the common cause is irrespective of political correctedness.

I think the nub of the broader problem (there will always be fringe attitudes).

However terrorism can also be reduced to "arguable a defence and coping mechanism".

Mis representation/interpretation of any community value system as justification for unacceptable behaviour applies equally.

 

[golden path]

Waleed Aly looks for an excuse anywhere he can find it - in this instance, it's that we should call a spade a rake, because the spade is proud to be called a spade.

That's just delusional - he makes the argument that if you reject them as the instigators it will some how disempower them. What? These guys are nutbags, they are just as likely to put more effort into making the next attack even worse and making sure they take responsibility early on.

He further argues that getting angry is what they want so you shouldn't, and that they want to widen the war and get you to react so you shouldn't ?

Think about the last one again - that naturally progresses to the only proper action is no action , ie the ultimate in passivity. so they either grow bored and stop, or they win - not really good options

They went 100% out of their way during that segment to NOT say the words "Muslim" or "Islam."

For all the shit that gets talked pretending that Islam ISN'T to blame for these things, the fact remains that every Muslim follows the same holy book that the extremists get their inspiration from.

The Koran says what it says and I don't for a second buy this shit about "Oh the translation's wrong."

Frogshit. Does nobody proof read these things?

Further, no matter how you slice it, religion is a CHOICE. People CHOOSE to believe in these things the way I choose to believe Star Wars is cooler than Star Trek.

People can opt out and live free if they want....

 

[redbruce]

For all the shit that gets talked pretending that Islam ISN'T to blame for these things, the fact remains that every Muslim follows the same holy book that the extremists get their inspiration from.

The Koran says what it says and I don't for a second buy this shit about "Oh the translation's wrong."

Frogshit. Does nobody proof read these things?

Further, no matter how you slice it, religion is a CHOICE. People CHOOSE to believe in these things the way I choose to believe Star Wars is cooler than Star Trek.

People can opt out and live free if they want....

"For all the shit that gets talked pretending that Islam ISN'T to blame for these things, the fact remains that every Muslim follows the same holy book that the extremists get their inspiration from.

The Koran says what it says and I don't for a second buy this shit about "Oh the translation's wrong.""

It's not translation, it's interpretation. Just like fundamentalists of any persuasion (or lawyers about law) argue.

Whether you like it or not, it's not a black and white argument. After all who could forget the Crusades: http://www.history.com/topics/crusades

Who is right and who is wrong is as old as time: http://theconversation.com/paris-at...ity-are-twin-religions-of-war-and-peace-50747

"Does nobody proof read these things?" Serious?

"Further, no matter how you slice it, religion is a CHOICE. People CHOOSE to believe in these things the way I choose to believe Star Wars is cooler than Star Trek. People can opt out and live free if they want..." Tell that to a lifelong Collingwood supporter.

Belief systems are complex along with the behaviour they drive.

Something Pauline Hanson, Tony Abbott and far too many others seem unable to grasp.

 

[John U]

They went 100% out of their way during that segment to NOT say the words "Muslim" or "Islam."

For all the shit that gets talked pretending that Islam ISN'T to blame for these things, the fact remains that every Muslim follows the same holy book that the extremists get their inspiration from.

The Koran says what it says and I don't for a second buy this shit about "Oh the translation's wrong."

Frogshit. Does nobody proof read these things?

Further, no matter how you slice it, religion is a CHOICE. People CHOOSE to believe in these things the way I choose to believe Star Wars is cooler than Star Trek.

People can opt out and live free if they want....

The book, as with anything, can be interpreted in many different ways. If what you state above was correct then every Muslim would be a gun toting maniac. The massive majority aren't.

 

[golden path]

The Crusades, yes.

Just a little while ago, those....

"Interpretation"

Seems to me that some of what's in the Koran about non-believers is pretty clear.

But folks can choose to be wilfully blind, same as they can choose to believe in Sky Friends who will grant them an afterlife for doing certain things here on earth.

 

[Calvin27]

However terrorism can also be reduced to "arguable a defence and coping mechanism".

Mis representation/interpretation of any community value system as justification for unacceptable behaviour applies equally.

Look I totally agree. There is no defense for unacceptable behavior. I guess the two points from this are:

1. Previous integrations (other nationalities) have not yielded the nature and extent of threats that we experience today.

2. We need to stop overlooking/ignoring the obvious correlation of specific terror attacks (including those foiled) with attribution to a religious ideology.