ISIS
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
I actually presumed it was true when I clicked on the link, even though I could see it was a Herald Sun article. But having read the story closely, there's actually no mention of whether he was revealing information from US secret services or just some US version of Jacqui Lambie repeating a third-hand anecdote on TV. Jury's out until we can find out more information.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
 |
Jezza 
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: | |
|
A man has been charged with conspiring to commit attacks on Australian civilians relating to this plot.
I think it's fair to say that there's enough evidence to suggest that an attack may have occurred in the near future if it wasn't halted, but whether he's convicted or not is another story all together and I'm sure will be revealed in due course.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | | David wrote: | | think positive wrote: | | David wrote: | | I definitely don't think it's wholly justified, but I don't think it's wholly unjustified, either. You've got to remember that the resentment isn't just about US foreign policy decisions, but the long history of European colonisation and partitions. If you understand how a lot of Aborigines feel about white Australia, you'll understand at least some of the resentment felt by Middle Eastern Muslims about the West in general. |
Well they could always get the **** out of the west, and stay in their oppressed little heaven! Just tell me one thing about their lifestyle compared to ours that's a positive? |
Who are we talking about here, Muslim Australians or people with anti-Western sentiments living in the Middle East? I was referring to the latter.
One presumes that people who actually move here would generally hold a slightly more positive view of Western societies. |
You mean like the ^&*^*% who was hopefully really killed this week, the one from oz getting all the kids all enthused to go get themselves killed for a war in the oppressed land that their parents left for "a better life?" |
Yes that IS fighter you're discussing from Australia died recently. He was alleged to have been the ringleader behind a plot to kill an Australian civilian on the streets of a major city (presumably in Sydney).
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/29/mohammad-ali-baryalei-australia-alleged-senior-isis-recruiter-killed
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | Or maybe it's as simple as the fact that western society has been seeing images of atrocities committed by terrorists and fucktards in the name of Islam for over a decade now, so people are starting to automatically associate Islam with bad stuff, even though they might get on fine with their Muslim neighbor. |
You're right, content exposure through the media most definitely acts as a primer. But that can be controlled for in smart experimental design to distinguish it from other factors.
The irony is, of course, is people not being able to imagine the inverse happening elsewhere in the world.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | Or maybe it's as simple as the fact that western society has been seeing images of atrocities committed by terrorists and fucktards in the name of Islam for over a decade now, so people are starting to automatically associate Islam with bad stuff, even though they might get on fine with their Muslim neighbor. |
You're right, content exposure through the media most definitely acts as a primer. But that can be controlled for in smart experimental design to distinguish it from other factors.
The irony is, of course, is people not being able to imagine the inverse happening elsewhere in the world. |
I don't think anyone's overlooking the US' involvement in foreign lands in recent times such as Iraq ten years ago, but let's not get caught up in the idea that the US or its allies is supposedly 100% the reason why such atrocities that we're seeing from ISIS for example is occurring.
I'd say it's more likely that much of Iraq and Syria's problems are internal more than anything else such as the ongoing sectarian tensions which have existed in these nations for many years beyond that of US involvement. The US may be a catalyst or perpetuated such conflicts but they haven't directly caused them either.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | PTID's point, I think, is that prejudice against "Islam" is simply a cover for subconscious racial prejudice. While there's probably at least some truth to that, I suspect a lot of anti-Islamic prejudice is not really so sub-rational.
My view is that it's much more often a form of xenophobia than it is an intellectual rejection of a religious faith (as some of the new atheists might claim); on the other hand, I would also point out that xenophobia is not racist per se (though still, it must be stressed, a dangerous and unpleasant phenomenon in its own right). Suffice it to say PTID and I have different definitions of racism.  |
Actually the majority of people have little racial prejudice. They will, however, react with rational fear and suspicion when a significant number of adherents of a particular religion randomly and indisciminately murder innocent civilians for their "race" (ie cultural origin) over an inflated/imaginary grievance. It's not irrational at all to look at the religion and its adherents with a jaundiced eye, under those conditions. What is irrational is to try to ban discussion of the problem within Islam with words like "Islamophobia".
The term "Islamophobia" is an artifice-term designed to suggest "phobic" weakness and irrational fear. It's an ideologically defensive language developed by the fellow-travellers. I suggest yawning, rolling over and turning out the light when it's used.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Jezza wrote: | | pietillidie wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | Or maybe it's as simple as the fact that western society has been seeing images of atrocities committed by terrorists and fucktards in the name of Islam for over a decade now, so people are starting to automatically associate Islam with bad stuff, even though they might get on fine with their Muslim neighbor. |
You're right, content exposure through the media most definitely acts as a primer. But that can be controlled for in smart experimental design to distinguish it from other factors.
The irony is, of course, is people not being able to imagine the inverse happening elsewhere in the world. |
I don't think anyone's overlooking the US' involvement in foreign lands in recent times such as Iraq ten years ago, but let's not get caught up in the idea that the US or its allies is supposedly 100% the reason why such atrocities that we're seeing from ISIS for example is occurring.
I'd say it's more likely that much of Iraq and Syria's problems are internal more than anything else such as the ongoing sectarian tensions which have existed in these nations for many years beyond that of US involvement. The US may be a catalyst or perpetuated such conflicts but they haven't directly caused them either. |
Agreed, Jezza, but I don't think anyone thinks that. That's just a rhetorical trap, where people make stronger and stronger differentiating claims to distinguish their point (a sort of rhetorical arms race).
My view on that is found in bits and pieces such as these:
On understanding those who sign up for apocalyptic activities:
| pietillidie wrote: |
There is a simple way of combining the two without resorting to Hitchensian denial.
It's the same psychiatry as with any apocalyptic group; extreme environmental stress creates extreme dysfunction, while extreme dysfunction attracts people who are dysfunctional for all manner of other reasons.
No need to get all caught up in silly arguments. |
On "nations" - any "nation", but even more so those with massive power and less checks, obviously:
| pietillidie wrote: | Yes, you're right, "no serious state with interests is ever blameless". Hence, there's no reason at all to defend the US except against obvious falsehood; centres of power are intrinsically violent, thuggish and destructive; the task is to curtail them, not to justify them, and even worse, identify with them.
Not being able to divorce oneself from silly "my nation is better than yours" arguments is hardly something to aspire to, I would've thought. Nations are dumb, mindless entities which are themselves centres of destructive and violent power at at least some level; and that includes the nation/s we hold citizenship in or identify with. |
On violent, destructive thugs and our reaction to them:
| pietillidie wrote: | | And don't hide behind complexity; anyone with wafer of grey matter knows destructive scumbags can be found everywhere, and usually more so in the midst of less stable environments. But if you interfere and you stoop to their level, particularly from a position of much greater stability and facility, you bear the moral consequences. You take risks with other people's lives, you bear the moral consequences. You profiteer from other people's resources, you bear the moral consequences. You spend taxpayer money for negative return, you bear the moral consequences. |
And now, let me add you're definitely right about the complicated local context involving Syria and way beyond now.
As a curious aside, I still remember studying the Iran-Iraq War and associated sectarianism in Year 10 in high school in the context of the Cold War as clear as day 
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Jezza wrote: |
I don't think anyone's overlooking the US' involvement in foreign lands in recent times such as Iraq ten years ago, but let's not get caught up in the idea that the US or its allies is supposedly 100% the reason why such atrocities that we're seeing from ISIS for example is occurring.
I'd say it's more likely that much of Iraq and Syria's problems are internal more than anything else such as the ongoing sectarian tensions which have existed in these nations for many years beyond that of US involvement. The US may be a catalyst or perpetuated such conflicts but they haven't directly caused them either. |
Yes, indeed. This is mostly a political fight in the Arab world, and the West is used as a proxy for that conflict. and in Iraq, most of the deaths were caused by the sectarians and islamists, just as it is in Syria where we played no role. we were foolish to destabilise Iraq without a plan for post-invasion security and control, but the Western boys that died and lost limbs mostly did so trying to protect the civilian poulation from the hellish forces we now see emanating from Syria.
_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | Jezza wrote: |
I don't think anyone's overlooking the US' involvement in foreign lands in recent times such as Iraq ten years ago, but let's not get caught up in the idea that the US or its allies is supposedly 100% the reason why such atrocities that we're seeing from ISIS for example is occurring.
I'd say it's more likely that much of Iraq and Syria's problems are internal more than anything else such as the ongoing sectarian tensions which have existed in these nations for many years beyond that of US involvement. The US may be a catalyst or perpetuated such conflicts but they haven't directly caused them either. |
Yes, indeed. This is mostly a political fight in the Arab world, and the West is used as a proxy for that conflict. and in Iraq, most of the deaths were caused by the sectarians and islamists, just s it is in Syria where we played no role. we were foolish to destabilise Iraq without a plan for post-invasion security and control, but the Western boys that does and lost limbs mostly did so trying to protect the civilian poulation from the hellish forces we now see emanating from Syria. |
That is just utter partial post-fact, religious glorification rubbish. Anglo-America and friends are up to their necks in the conflict at their own behest.
An utterly corrupt and beholden US leadership and its sponsoring oil mafioso elite led a smash and grab for contracts without so much as adequately preparing their soldiers and providing them with protective equipment, preparing basic sufficient resources for getting things done such as translators and cultural experts, preparing to contain the bleedingly obvious risk of sectarian violence and a refugee crisis, accounting for the real cost of trillions not hundreds of millions, accounting for the real time of a decade plus, not "months", and on and on with lies and utter BS.
It doesn't matter how many sincere-looking folk got caught up in it because they weren't driving the entire affair, so don't use them as human shields for the utterly beholden, corrupt and contemptuous bastards who drove that war, profiteered off the suffering of others, and unleashed hell for everyone else in the process.
When someone you identify with is utterly vile, you believe their millions of dollars in PR agency fees and pressed suits, and deem them "foolish". When someone you don't identify with is utterly vile, gap-toothed and unshaven, you invoke Godwin's Law.
You surely have to separate yourself from the personal implications of speaking frankly and maintain some degree of independent intellectual rigour.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
call me crazy, but its like some people here don't actually like anglo Saxons!!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Okay, you're crazy.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | | call me crazy, but its like some people here don't actually like anglo Saxons!! |
Yep, crazy!
When you're used to being part of a dominant group, efforts which try to treat all humans as equal and worthwhile, and try to acknowledge our own self-congratulating and very limited human thought space and experience, can feel quite confronting.
Taking on a more balanced and removed view is a sort of discipline, like meditation or guided imagery or such; logically, it's obvious we're all very limited creatures, but it takes a lot of conscious effort and self control to deal with that at the gut level because our cognitive-emotional system uses our delusions of superiority to drive and motivate us.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
mate im not the one with "delusions of superiority" here!!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: |
That is just utter partial post-fact, religious glorification rubbish. Anglo-America and friends are up to their necks in the conflict at their own behest.
An utterly corrupt and beholden US leadership and its sponsoring oil mafioso elite
|
Hmm... The last time I heard someone hyperventilatingly use the word "utter" twice in two sentences was Rick in The Young Ones.
Your image of an oil-soaked Blofeld sitting somewhere pulling strings in the Pentagon is at best a narrative interpretation of facts into which you (like myself) have very limited concrete insight ; at worst it's a paranoid fantasy. We've been round this before. The Iraq War was a bad, slightly deranged response to 9/11, premised on the fact that Saddam hated the West, and 9/11 showed that there were people who would commit genocide against us without limit - if they could get their hands on the right weapons. If the US wanted cheap oil, they could have lobbied to lift the UN sanctions on Iraq, at minimal cost. The "its' all about oil" argument is way too simplistic, though I donlt doubt that oil played a role in the decision.
It was a wrong decision, in hindsight, and the product of a lousy and rather weak US Republican President with bad judgement - but having 3000 innocents murdered in your major city does that to you, I suppose.
The US/Uk et al had no business initiating an aggressive war in Iraq, without stronger direct provocation from Iraq. It was an historic error. But it was a response to a signal of genocidal intent by Islamists, not the cause.
_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:37 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | It was a wrong decision, in hindsight, and the product of a lousy and rather weak US Republican President with bad judgement - but having 3000 innocents murdered in your major city does that to you, I suppose.
The US/Uk et al had no business initiating an aggressive war in Iraq, without stronger direct provocation from Iraq. It was an historic error. But it was a response to a signal of genocidal intent by Islamists, not the cause. |
By a certain faction of fundamentalist Muslims hated by many other Muslims, you mean.
There is no conspiracy about the Bush administration's conflict of interest with the oil industry; it's explicit, open, documented fact which would not be tolerated under any other professional circumstances. You may wish to review the open, known facts again and see how astonishing they really are. (I have as much time for conspiracies as I do imperialism, but denial is just as menacing).
Once again, if no one has any critique of this view, I will repeat it for you as a way of understanding the phenomenon going on in these unstable environments. I am drawing here on a lot of prior study on apocalyptic communities to offer a more organic explanation of the phenomenon:
It's the same psychiatry as with any apocalyptic group; extreme environmental stress creates extreme dysfunction, while extreme dysfunction attracts people who are dysfunctional for all manner of other reasons.
The divorced group then starts taking on a culture of its own, much like any cult. Once you have a separate culture, it sustains its own identity with all of the usual deceptions, aetiologies, tales and taboos that cultures use to sustain themselves.
The Iraq War contributed heavily to that environmental stress, and as such has forced a significant degree of ownership of the ensuing dysfunctional, now pan-regional subculture upon itself. Once these things get started, they're hard to reel in, and before you know it you have another entrenched, insoluble situation.
Only an emotionally-divorced realism which backs something as courageous and encompassing as eliminating dependence on the dysfunctional thug economy of oil revenues will fix a problem as entrenched as this now. All the undisciplined finger pointing and cultural disgust in the world will only further fuel it.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
