Yet another Islamic attack in London...

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Insomnia, Jun 3, 2017.

  1. Insomnia

    Insomnia Needs more strings!

    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    40
    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    Location:
    London
    Take Anjem Choudary, for example. He's a British Imam, who was recently imprisoned for recruiting for ISIS. Before he was imprisoned, he inspired dozens upon dozens of terror attacks, with some estimates upto the 100s.

    The enablers are still a huge threat, because they inspire and teach the attackers, and could easily become attackers themselves.
     
    watson503 and vilk like this.
  2. MaxOfMetal

    MaxOfMetal Likes trem wankery. Super Moderator

    Messages:
    25,912
    Likes Received:
    2,768
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    I'd argue that he falls into the group that has done something.

    Has he fired any actual bullets? No, but he has broken the law on numerous occasions, sometimes violent, for his cause.

    I was referring to those with radical views or sympathy towards them that have done actually nothing.
     
  3. TedEH

    TedEH Cromulent

    Messages:
    3,947
    Likes Received:
    474
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Location:
    Gatineau, Quebec
    Just kind of splitting hairs, but I'd count perpetuating an idea as taking action. Just having an idea is one thing, but spreading it is different. If you look at having an opinion, perpetuating that idea, and taking direct action as three distinct things, then in my mind the perpetuating bit has more in common with taking direct action than it does just holding the idea in the first place.

    I mean that in the sense that I'm maybe 80-90% certain that you could pick any given person and they'll have at least one really horrible opinion of some kind that could be harmful if said person had some influence and used that influence to convince people of that same opinion. Keeping in mind as well that day-to-day life for a lot of people involves a lot of "influencers". Everyone with internet access has the potential to be some sort of influencer if they wanted to. And I think we all know that on some level, which is why we react the way we do to otherwise meaningless online interactions - like people getting fired for tweets and things like that.

    The problem I see is how do you measure the likelihood that someone will act on their "radical" views? Waiting until someone acts defeats the purpose of identifying a "threat", since the whole point of identifying a threat is to call it before the action happens. Once it's happened, it's not a "threat", it's reality.

    To be fair, I haven't been following the whole thread, so if I'm way out of context, just ignore me.
     
    Insomnia likes this.
  4. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    12,980
    Likes Received:
    1,147
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    The trouble is that there are no statistics on how people secret feel about politics. I only really know my own feelings.

    From the outside, we can only measure another person by that person's deeds and public statements.

    ISIS is a huge organization, but there is strong opposition to it. The organization itself seems to encourage dismissal of limits. If the organizational goal was simply to establish a nation in western Mesopotamia, maybe it'd be worth considering their demands, but that's not the case. These folks want to rule the planet or else destroy it trying to take it, and know no boundaries at all, so they simply have to be stopped.

    There are several sides to the story. Peaceful people are fleeing the areas under siege by ISIS. ISIS has some people willing to take advantage of the refugee situation. Say, hypothetically, 999 refugees and one terrorist are trying to gain access to a small town in Europe. The moral dilemma is the choice between a) allowing one terrorist into your community in order to save 999 refugees or b) turn your back on all 1000 people. IRL, it's never clear that there will be one terrorist at all, but the general principle is the unknown.
     
  5. Insomnia

    Insomnia Needs more strings!

    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    40
    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    Location:
    London
    So you mean those with radical views, but that don't preach them, share them, install them...?
     
  6. Insomnia

    Insomnia Needs more strings!

    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    40
    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    Location:
    London
    What I wish we (by 'we', I mean Europe, more specifically, the European Union) had done when the migrant crisis started is use a fairly uninhabited island (there are a number in Greece, for example, or indeed across Europe) to house refugees in. Each EU member donates to a provisional government which manages the island(s). That way, the likelihood of terror attacks in large Western cities from migrants goes down (ISIS can use a terror attack in, say, Paris or London as much more of an ideological 'win' against the West than one against vast majority Muslims who've been recently relocated in the West, which would hardly be good propaganda when trying to recruit people), it also reduces the risk of Cologne and Sweden-style situations, where you see large amounts of sex attacks against Westerners.

    Then, in a few years, when they have been educated about Western society, and whichever language their island is in, they should be allowed to be relocated across the country(s). This allows for assimilation, rather than putting migrants into a very foreign environment indeed, and expecting them to adapt. These few years on the island(s) will also allow for the security services to identify radicals.

    I'm sure there are flaws to this, but it's the best I could come up with right now.
     
  7. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    26,346
    Likes Received:
    1,876
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    What's the difference, though, in practice?

    It's not a crime to think, "man, those Charlie Hebdo guys are assholes, someone should shoot them for what they did."

    It's not a crime to think, when someone gets killed, "eh, they had it coming."

    It IS a crime to kill someone.

    People have the right to believe what they want, no matter how repugnant we might find it. They do NOT, however, have a right to act any way they want. Of the 7.7 million Muslims in France, I'm sure a whole bunch were upset about the cartoons, and I'm sure many weren't totally horrified about what happened. Google suggests that 27% of British Muslims polled had "at least some" sympathy for the motives of the attackers. Similarly, though, when Ted Nugent made comments suggesting he might try to shoot Obama, a whole bunch of republicans cheered him on, and I'll confess that when Johnny Depp just recently asked rhetorically "when's the last time an actor shot a president?" well, I hope to god he's joking, but yeah, I can totally understand where he's coming from. At the end of the day, though, Trump is still alive, Obama is still alive, and only two Muslims in France actually pulled a trigger over the Charlie Hebdo cartoons.

    At the end of the day, thoughts are not criminal. Actions are. And the overwhelming majority of Muslims do not kill people over religion. Given that in the case of the Charlie Hebdo attackers the religion of the shooter had about a 1-in-3.9-million degree of predictive power, I'd say it's pretty reasonable that we might want to explore at least a few other factors that could potentially have convinced the two brothers that killing people was ok.
     
    JohnIce and JoshuaVonFlash like this.
  8. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    26,346
    Likes Received:
    1,876
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Immigrants commit violent crime at a rate signigicantly below native-born citizens, at least here in the States.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/26/us/trump-illegal-immigrants-crime.html

    Also, fencing off undesirables worked SO well the last time youy guys tried it in Europe. :rolleyes:
     
    JoshuaVonFlash likes this.
  9. Insomnia

    Insomnia Needs more strings!

    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    40
    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    Location:
    London
    At this point, we are not talking about crime, we haven't been talking about that for a number of pages on this thread, what on Earth led you to go down that contingent?

    We're talking about the problems we as a society face. The threats we face, how to identify them, and how to recognise who the threats to our fundamental way of life are.

    Your point about Ted Nugent supposedly 'wanting to shoot Obama' (one I was not familiar with until now) is absolutely not comparable to people who actually support the killing of, for example, 'kuffar', or if you want to go down a far-right contingent, the 'degenerates'. His comment was not violent, it was completely in the context of gun rights, and was simply a different way of phrasing 'suck on it', rather than saying, 'If Obama comes for my firearms, I will resist, I will not give up, and I will bring the fight to him!'. I mean, Ted Nugent is still a pretty repugnant character, and I'm surprised I'm defending him, but it simply is not comparable.

    Now, even if it were comparable and Ted Nugent had seriously said the hypothetical comment I wrote above, you know what I would do if 27% of Republicans had 'some sympathy' with someone who shot Obama? I would condemn that aspect of the Republican party!

    You keep harking on this point that 'only 2 Muslims were involved in this attack' when you have to look at the WIDER picture to ascertain threats from the Muslim community, or any community for that matter.
     
  10. Handbanana

    Handbanana SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    76
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2010
    Location:
    Austin, TX.

    Thinking is the difference between manslaughter and murder. Which one is worse? :)
     
  11. tedtan

    tedtan SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,905
    Likes Received:
    488
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Location:
    Never Neverland
    But his point is that 1) sympathizing with something, even terrorism such as we've seen of late, is not illegal in and of itself, and 2) sympathizing is not a reliable variable upon which to predict who will take action. So what is the practical value of focusing on sympathizers?


    Not quite. Thinking before taking action is the difference, not thinking alone - there still has to be action taken.
     
    JohnIce likes this.
  12. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,512
    Likes Received:
    484
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    As compared with what? I mean, surely it's more reliable than not predicting at all, right? I mean, what percent of non-Muslims do you suppose are sympathetic toward Islamist terrorists? I'm guessing right around zero. So you call it "not a reliable variable", and while it is not 100% reliable, certainly you cannot say that it is totally unreliable. I mean, certainly the people who are continuing to carry out Islamist terror attacks are sympathetic towards Islamist terrorists.
     
  13. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    12,980
    Likes Received:
    1,147
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    Phew, this discussion is getting into some minutiae, and it's all a matter of opinion, at this point.

    Sympathy toward the ideas that motivate ISIS, in my mind, is really really dangerous territory. I mean, it'd be one thing to think "you know, if people want a self-governing Islamic state, they should get one," but ISIS's goals don't stop there. It's not far from Nazi Germany - they wanted an independent Germany free of foreign influence, then they wanted to restore German imperial power, then they wanted to genocide the Jews and Roma and slaughter all of the homosexuals and less fortunate, and then take over the world... it's just flat out wrong to sympathize with that at a certain point. What is ISIS going for? Well, they want independence, then they want to spread their political power over the globe, and they want to slaughter the infidels and take over the world. Same MO as the Nazis. If someone sympathizes with the organization knowing those goals, then that someone is just flat wrong.
     
  14. tedtan

    tedtan SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,905
    Likes Received:
    488
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Location:
    Never Neverland
    Well, the percentage of non-Muslims sympathetic to Islamic terrorism is probably zero, as you've noted. But that's not really relevant IMO. (Just as an aside, what percentage of non-Muslims are sympathetic to terrorism of the non-Islamic varieties)?

    As for using variables to predict potential future terroristic behavior, I'm sure there are better variables. For example, if someone participates in discussions on the websites used by the terrorist groups, that's probably a better indicator than mere sympathy for the terrorists/terrorists's goals. If someone has traveled to areas known to be controlled by terrorist groups, or used by terrorist groups for training purposes, that's probably a better indicator of potential future terrorist activities than mere sympathy for the cause. If someone associates with people known to be or suspected of being terrorists, that's probably a better predictor, too.
     
  15. tedtan

    tedtan SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,905
    Likes Received:
    488
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Location:
    Never Neverland
    I see your point, but we need to keep in mind that ISIS' terrorism is a subset of Islamic terrorism. Al Queda and the others,a s bad as they are, haven't gone as far as ISIS in their approach or ideologies.

    And I think the average sympathizer is more along the lines of your quote that "if people want a self governing Islamic state" than an ISIS butcher much as the typical Nazi party member wasn't aware of the doings of the Nazi leaders (most Germans at the time didn't understand what the Nazi were doing).
     
  16. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,512
    Likes Received:
    484
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    Why did you bold Islamic? I wrote Islamist on purpose, because as far as I knew all these terrorists are Islamists. Islamism = Political Islam = ISIS/Al Queda/Taliban/Etc. Isn't that right, or no? I mean, obviously there's different takes on Islamism, just as there are different takes on democracy, but I don't think we can say that any of these terrorists aren't Islamists, right?
     
  17. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    12,980
    Likes Received:
    1,147
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    Hmm.

    ISIS's actions are very much in the public eye, both in their own region and abroad. I don't think the argument that ISIS sympathizers are ignorant to the organization's no-holds-barred tactics involving terrorism, indiscriminate destruction, and widespread killings of innocent people is really grounded.

    I agree that the different groups enact different levels of extremism. Al Qaeda is pretty extreme as well, though, with lofty goals of disrupting life for westerners at any costs. Organisations like the Taliban and Boko Haram are more focused on their own domestic issues, even if they are wildly violent.
     
  18. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,354
    Likes Received:
    934
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    I'm tending to a paella and then running out the door in real life, so forgive rhe brevity of this post.

    Somehow, you again missed the examples of groups like Shining Path, also already given by Max IIRC, while trying to draw lines which allow your narrow definition of terrorism being a Muslim problem, at least as far as I've read.

    I'll respond in more depth when I have time, but so far it looks like you've ignored more things than you've addressed. If you want to spend a little time rereading and seeing if you might pre-emptively respond as to why you ignored them at the time, feel free.
     
  19. JohnIce

    JohnIce Singlecoils = tr00

    Messages:
    4,882
    Likes Received:
    1,674
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Location:
    Sweden
    I leave this thread for a while, and come back to see people talking about thought-crime. Freedom of thought and freedom of speech, they're such simple concepts, why do people not get it? People actually don't see how vetting people based on their probability to sympathize with one specific type of terrorist goes against these basic pillars of democracy and human rights? The law is the law, whether or not someone may or may not sympathize with the Charlie Hebdo killings is not law, it's freedom of thought and we should be damn grateful to that.

    Dude, seriously! You don't live in Sweden, you don't know Sweden, there's NO evidence of any correlation between immigrants and sexual assault/rape in Sweden. I made a lengthy post about this already in response to you. Read it. The vast, vast majority of sexual crime in Sweden is domestic or in close relationships/at dates. Swedish people have worked long and hard to encourage women to come forward and get help out of abusive relationships, that shows an increase in sexual assault charges. The vast, vast majority of sexual offences in Sweden are made by the white guy from high school or Tinder. It's not the muslim immigrant. Seriously dude, don't. You are literally guessing out of your ass and calling it an argument right now. Rise in reported sexual crime is NOT the same as a rise in actual sexual crime. Lastly, Swedish police don't keep records of ethnicity or religion so don't even try to say you have a source on it. You don't.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2017
  20. CapnForsaggio

    CapnForsaggio Cap'n (general)

    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    24
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2016
    Location:
    Albany, OR
    Oh yeah?

    https://ca.news.yahoo.com/asylum-seekers-canada-fled-trump-now-trapped-legal-101501170.html

    It works because it isn't blind and stupid. Every other country on earth is allowed to have a "border" but the US....

    Here's to the new Supreme Court! MAGA!
     

Share This Page