Paris Attack 11/13/2015

CS, you just ignored what I wrote and continued on with exactly the same stuff that you have come up with before. You will never find answers unless you open your mind and learn about what is actually happening. What we have done before is not working. So, you can either keep doing exactly what ISIS wants and be part of the problem or you can open yourself up to ideas that are different and perhaps be part of the solution (apologies for the use of that horrible cliche).

All you are doing is attacking. Whilst I disagree with CR a lot he is coming up with solutions. So what is your plan, apart from being an ISIS pawn?

__________________
Top 133 Favourite Films

Asia/Pacific Top 100

Have you seen/read Christian history? Not just Christian, of course, they've all done it. It's what cults do.

Again, go back centuries and you'll see plenty of it. Because they believe it and it's real to them, they take it more seriously. Not only was it the truth, it was fact.

I think a lot of it is because the countries where much/most of those people are most influenced are the most socially 'advanced' for want of a better word. In terms of education and standards of living they're way ahead.

It appears that Islam, unlike other religions, has been mostly left in the middle ages in terms of its worldview. The aim for us is to bring them/it into the modern world. For the most part, that's exactly what's happened, but it only takes a few. By few, I do mean a small percentage.

If we take the refugees as a threatening group. There's up to 1.5m of them and rising. If a tenth of one percent of them are radical (whether they do something or not) that's 1,500 people. In percentage terms it's barely worth mentioning, but 1,500 terrorists would do a huge amount of damage and spread a huge amount of fear, as well as making it feel as if 'they're everywhere' If we arbitrarily take ten terrorists per attack, that'd be 150 attacks in Europe. A year of a new attack pretty much every other day would feel like an apocalypse and yet I don't think anyone would say 1,500 people out of 1.5m is a representative group.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

Rules - along that line - back after 9/11, I called for a "propaganda war."
Now, this sounds very distasteful as most people think propaganda is false information, and it certainly can be. But it can also be true information. It's really just any type of information used to support an agenda.

So what I was suggesting was a tell-the-truth-about-Radical-Islam and rally-to-promote-peaceful-Islam campaign. Basically, a disclosure or exposure on entirely factual information. It would put much focus on the Muslim victims of Islamic Terror and be distributed to both the entire world and the Muslim community worldwide in hopes of garnering support from more moderate Muslim factions and letting those too intimidated to fight back against Radical Islam know that the world recognizes their plight and is behind them, and that people who truly want peace, must all ban together to stop terrorism.
(Unfortunately, getting "the world" to actually unite to get behind anyone to fight Radical Islamic Terrorism has proved to be a fantasy despite a lot of rhetoric.)

Instead, what we get in the real world is the PC media attempting to sweep most Islamic Terrorism under the rug (who remembers or is still talking about the Tunisia Beach Massacre from just a few months ago? Or the Bardo Museum Massacre in Tunis this past March? Or the Garissa University Collage Massacre in Kenya from this past April where Islamic Terrorists murdered 148 students and staff? And the only reason people are remembering & talking about the Charlie Hebdo attack right now - that happened this past January - is because of this past Friday the 13th massacre in Paris.)

All these ideas of preventing, slowing or stopping Islamic Terrorism will always be fantasy until the world wakes up and starts acknowledging what is, rather than wallowing in the PC delusion that if we try not to offend anyone by telling the truth, then everyone will start to like us and will get along.

The biggest threat to mankind right now is not Radical Islamic Terrorism, it is the PC mindset that has allowed and enabled terrorism to get to the levels where it is today and continues to enable & promote it in a thousand different ways.

What Political Correctness refuses to understand is that true respect can only be earned, it can't be coaxed through denial of facts, kowtowing, appeasement, capitulation or flattery.

Let me understand - saying "Radical Islam" is what ISIS wants us to do because then they'll get more recruits? Many peaceful Muslims who don't currently hear the words will suddenly run to join ISIS if they hear them? So anyone who doesn't want to be part of the problem of growing Islamic Terrorism should not say any words relating to Islamic Terrorism?

Obama, Democrats, Liberals and entire camps of PC thinkers won't say the words, yet tens of thousands of Muslims have gone to join ISIS. Should we assume that if Obama uttered the dreaded non-PC words than tens of millions of peaceful Muslims would suddenly want to become murderers and run to join ISIS? According to the FBI over 250 American Muslims have joined ISIS - without their President ever uttering the words "Radical Islam."

How, without these oh-so-inflammatory words coming from their President, did so many Americans just suddenly turn their back on their religion that teaches only peace, in the richest country in the world? Did they one day just overhear a FOX News broadcast and it triggered them to go from watching cute kitten videos on YouTube and the compassionate peace of Allah to a burning desire to slaughter little infidel children by the thousands?

The argument is PC ridiculousness.

The concept thinks it can somehow try to manipulate rational Muslims to not turn to terrorism with stupid, child-psychology-level, semantic games that any halfway intelligent person can see right through.

The dangerous aspect of it is that it's an open capitulation and show of appeasement toward the very radicals the PC camp refuses to identify - which only invites more victimization by the terrorists who attack anything they view as weak. (Metaphorically, it's handing over the lunch money to the bully and calling him "Uncle" instead of identifying him as a bully).

And as for not-so-peaceful Muslims - they'll use any words, phrases, drawings, writings, music, art, fashion, religious views, sexual orientations, (even ancient museum artifacts), any excuse at all to become inflamed... or no excuse to become inflamed. They have a standing order from God to kill no matter what anyone says or doesn't say. If the entire West suddenly was struck mute it wouldn't change the fact that we are still infidels that Radical Islamists believe deserve to die.

Again you ignore what I said and just keep saying the same thing. You can't let it go.

And then this ...I give up

It's called debate. You haven't refuted my claim (that there's something inherently wrong in an ideology that promotes genocide - and maybe that's PART of the reason why so many of its adherents are becoming terrorists) or supported how using a certain term will cause peaceful people (and the prevailing claim is that Islam is peaceful) to become terrorist recruits.

This was the reason Obama gave publicly for why it's bad to use the term - because it will cause more Muslims (who we're told are following a doctrine of peace) to want to become terrorists, it will trigger some internal desire for violence or fertile part of their psyche in them that will make them somehow ripe for recruitment to terrorists.

I didn't say this, he did, and he's supported by millions who agree with him.
I'm just asking for someone to explain the logic behind it, if there is any.

Two appreciators of Asian beauty having an argument? Ridiculous! I'm hereby sending my secret Asian beauty agent to mediate and put an end to this conversation.

Don't you think that the issue is as much with the cultural and political ideaology as it is the religious? If not how do you explain the millions of Muslims who don't suscribe to radical Islam? Also, how do you explain the young people they recruit from Western countries who have no prior ties to the Muslim religion?

__________________
Letterboxd

Asians bring peace. Actually Asian women - the men are just warmongers!
(I'm joking! I may be able to point out flaws in political ideologies that couch themselves in religions, but "I am no racialist.")
P.S. That's a quote from a very off-color (some would say offensive) Monty Python sketch, btw.

Let me be perfectly clear (one of my favorite introductory lines from politicians)...

In all seriousness, I acknowledge that many of the points I've been arguing with from Sane and others are valid, at least to an extent.
i.e. I don't disagree with many of the varied explanations for the causes of terrorism.

These causes are certainly part of the problem, but like all explanations, don't account for every facet or the entirety of the problem.
I'm saying something similar - I'm putting out an explanation that may addresses part of the problem, perhaps a big part, but certainly cannot be used for every single individual case.

How I account for the millions of Muslims who don't subscribe to radical Islam is they are not radicals (or any of the synonyms: extremists, fundamentalists, orthodox, zealots, etc.) Their focus is not on the political aspect of Islam and / or they don't take their religion, its teachings, its scriptures, the examples set by their prophet to be followed literally. For some, it may be a degree of apathy toward religion or even a degree of ignorance.

I've known some Catholics who know less about what they are supposed to believe and the history of their sect than I do (and I've never been Catholic).

So there are a lot of people (and this goes for a lot of Muslims) who are more concerned with their daily life, their immediate family needs, their careers, and coping with their society in the modern world for whom "religion" is more of a familial obligation, a heritage or community convention, or traditional trapping that they hang onto for the sake of maintaining their status quo.

I think there is actually something in what you are saying and in my mind it matches up with what Honeykid is saying but I don't think the Middle East is quite the way you think it is. Sure, we see ISIS driving around in trucks wearing rags but they are actually extremely technologically advanced. The internet is their main tool and they are extremely active on social media. The war for the minds of young muslims is so far being won by them thanks to their online presence.

Some hacker groups have recently declared war on ISIS - most notably Anonymous - and from what I have read many in that subculture have said that ISIS is far more skilled in that area than Anonymous.

Western (American) culture has been forced down the throats of the whole world for decades so I'm not sure that there is anything can be done in that regard. My wife is from a communist country where the highest grossing movie was Titanic and they used to watch Friends in English classes

Having said that, my feeling for a while has simply been that Islam has grown out of an area that has always been violent, So, it's not the religion - it's the culture. You can see how the west removing dictators from that area has created huge instability. It was only under an iron fist that the various groups stopped fighting each other. So, we remove Saddam and chaos ensues. Terrorism is just an extension of the fighting that was already there. Take Afghanistan - they have been fighting themselves or someone else for centuries. The Taliban were horrendous but they were strong. That was probably the most united Afghanistan has ever been (except when they were fighting the Russians).

So I agree that history and culture are a big part of the problem. What's done is done now but hopefully we in the west will learn more about the places that we decide need regime change.

I have no idea what the answer is in the middle east - we have played our part in taking a historically volatile area and making it worse. The west's concept of democracy good, dictator bad is a very limited view. What's good (for the world) is stability.

Also, what is very important in regards to finding a solution - the Islamic world has to do it, not us. The west imposing what's good for them on an area has not worked. A Christian cannot stop a Muslim from being radicalised. Only another Muslim can do that. What we need to do is help them in any way possible and not make their job harder.

Yeah I did and for about the fourth time now you ignore it and go on to criticise Obama ... We are getting nowhere.

Yes we are.
(Your turn!)

You posted this while I was taking far too long to write my last post but it sums up part of what I was trying to say really well.

Your last line is a great point and I think there are a lot of answers to be found there. We had a young "atheist" from a Christian background join ISIS and blow himself up. He was 18. The characteristics were remarkably similar to the muslim kids who join ISIS - isolation, loneliness. The desire of human beings to be part of something is very strong - often stronger than their common sense unfortunately.

In response to the whole "why won't Obama tell it like it is" thing:

This article was written after the Charlie Hebdo attacks but it still seems relevant. Not sure if it's accurate about everything, but it at least gives a plausible explanation for why Presidents (both Obama and Bush) temper their rhetoric wrt Islam -- one interesting argument it makes is that "war on terror" is itself euphemistic. You may disagree with the wisdom of the choice (I suspect some will just take it as further proof that it's "us" against "them") but keep in mind that both parties tend to agree that maintaining strong relations with client states such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt is important (as can be seen by criticisms of the Iran deal on the grounds that it was a betrayal of our clients in the Middle East -- Mainly Israel but I believe Saudi Arabia was also frequently mentioned.)

Yeah, everyone brings different baggage to their religious world view and have varying degrees of faithfulness to their religion. Let me be clear by saying I have many problems with the Muslim religion. It is a religion of works which is in direct conflict with my views ad a Christian. However these terrorists are beyond a shadow of a doubt extremists in every sense of the word. So it only stands to reason they are extremists in their religious ideaology as well. Your correct in saying their are many facets, yet most of the debate here only has been focusing on one. I think the language semantics game that both the right and the left seem hell bent on playing right now is beyond counterproductive. I don't think Isis gives a famn if we are calling them Islamic terrorists or Jihadist terrorists. We need to focus on taking out Isis, which I think we are. It will inevitably take a lot of time. Look how long it took to take out Bin Laden, but we did. We need to keep fighting the good fight, stop the infighting, and realize that when this threat is squashed a new one will arise.

I said I was getting out this morning, and I am. I can't allow my mind to get bogged down in this. I will read responses but I have said my piece.

I think this is the best place to post this interview with Syrian president, it was made few months ago. Its very interesting, he talks about everything, mostly terrorism and how ISIS grew. He was surprisingly very open, he mentioned everyone by name.

http://

__________________
“By definition, you have to live until you die. Better to make that life as complete and enjoyable an experience as possible, in case death is shite, which I suspect it will be.”

Thanks for that, Kahn. I'll be giving that a look.

In the meantime, prayers for the victims of the hotel attack in Mali where 21 (current count) were murdered by Islamic Terrorists... oops! I mean "Radical Jihadists."

Hillary explained to us yesterday how Islam has absolutely nothing to do with with Islamic Terrorism whatsoever.
I think, to be safe, we should just take the PC line one step further and say that Islam has absolutely nothing to do with Islam. That way, after the next Islamic Terror attack, we'll have all the bases covered and not have to worry about driving more peaceful Islamists to Islamic State recruitment or offending Islamic Terrorists by identifying them as a derivative aspect of Islam.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/20/africa...ing/index.html

Anyone see the Turkish fans booing the silence? Sort of thing i wont post a link to, sickens me.

England and France are the wests oldest rivals, Englands fans don't have the best reputation, but the deafening silence during that minute and France flags flowing during that friendly almost brought a tear to my eye.

Reminds me of Scotland after 7/7, noone hates the English as much as us but if anyone attacks them they are attacking us. My dad started our street flying Englands flag after that attack.

Yes.

Now, although this was in Turkey, there wasn't a person there who did not understand what a moment of silence for the victims of the Paris attack was supposed to be, or what it represents. In addition to the crowd booing & whistling, instead of observing the moment out of respect for the dead, thousands started a chant of "Allahu Akbar!"
Now, there wasn't a person there who does not know that that exclamation is now the Islamic Terrorist war cry shouted during the slaughter of infidels.

Turkey is a modern & developed Islamic nation and regarded as relatively moderate as far as it's Muslim population is concerned - yet thousands of average Muslims at a sports event used the moment of silence to do a victory scream for another successful attack by Islamic Terrorists.

People don't seem to realize or don't want to face that "moderate" support for Islamic Terrorism (whether overt or covert) is far more prevalent and wide spread than anyone wants to admit. Thousands of "moderate" Muslims in America and the West directly or indirectly support Islamic Terrorist groups or are members of such groups as the Muslim Brotherhood - which has been declared as a terrorist organization by several nations.

On the news today they had interviews with "moderate" French Muslims openly supporting the Paris massacre as a legitimate strike back at infidel oppression - the "oppression" being strikes against ISIS, (failing to acknowledge that nations are striking the Islamic State because ISIS is committing genocide, practicing human trafficking, sex slavery, rape, child molestation, kidnapping, hostage taking for ransom, torture, decapitations, crucifixions, drownings, burning people alive and chopping off limbs of innocent people including children in the name of their religion).

People also fail to remember that on 9/11/2001, Muslims all over the world, including neighborhoods full of "moderate" Muslims throughout the United States, celebrated and danced in the streets when the towers fell and as the body counts increased.

Meanwhile, Turkey arrested 8 ISIS Terrorists posing as refugees heading to Germany!
http://www.breitbart.com/national-se...ansit-germany/