Print Page | Close Window

World Terrorism

Printed From: WorldHistoria Forum
Category: DEMILITARIZED ZONE
Forum Name: Current Affairs
Forum Description: Debates on current World Politics.
URL: http://www.worldhistoria.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=129562
Printed Date: 19 Jun 2019 at 16:56
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: World Terrorism
Posted By: toyomotor
Subject: World Terrorism
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2017 at 13:50
Almost daily, somewhere around the world, radical extremists attack innocent civilian populations by using suicide bombers or car bombs. In each case the areas targetted are high traffic areas with no regard to age or gender. Mass murder and carnage are the aims.

Police  and other agencies seem powerless to stop these attacks. Focusing on Europe for a moment, the random attacks have been attributed to radical Islamists, some of who have been "home grown", that is, they're second or third generation nationals of the country they target.

How do authorities identify who may be a radical Islamist from the many thousands of Muslims who have migrated to Europe over the decades following World War 2. Answer: They don't. Unless the individual publicly identifies with a radical organisation or particular individual known to the agencies, or at least suspected, how could they possibly identify them. The same scenario exists around the world, and while not all extremists are Muslim, the ones gaining the most attention for their murderous activities most certainly are.

So what is the answer? I don't know. Is it the prohibition of the residents of certain countries migrating to our country? Is it more extensive overseas checking of intended visitors and migrants? How to we guard against second, third or even later generations becoming radicalised, or ever christians converting to Islam and becoming radicalised.

Perhaps other members have some idea on how to deal with this problem.




-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.



Replies:
Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 06 Jun 2017 at 08:18
The police are not powerless to stop the attacks.  The police are not able to stop all the attacks, but they do stop some, probably the majority of complicated attacks.  They can also do things to minimize the damage of the attacks.  I seem to recall that there were no attacks on US soil after 9/11 during the George W Bush administration.  There were elsewhere.  But the secret prisons and Git-mo worked to some extent.  Barack Obama's administration saw several homegrown terrorist inspired attacks in Boston, and San Bernadino.  But really, we place too much emphasis on terrorism, too much hype.  More people probably die in traffic accidents in a day than die in a year.  We do exactly what the terrorist want us to do, feed into the chicken little sky is falling attitude inspired by the press. 


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 06 Jun 2017 at 10:05
Franciscosan

Tell me please, how can the police stop all of the attacks?

Prevent some, definately.

How can the police identify all who are or may have become radicalised?

Again, some only.

The police and intelligence agencies do not, contrary to many beliefs, have all seeing, all knowing powers. They do not have the ability to tap every telephone in the world, or to intercept every piece of internet traffic. Some, yes.

In this matter, like many who have no law enforcement or intelligence agency background, you simplify what is a very complicated matter and point the finger directly at the police. The finger needs to pointed at each and every one of us to be more vigilant.




-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 07 Jun 2017 at 10:57
You probably have more chance of slipping in your bathtub and dying from that, then you have of dying in a terrorist attack in the first world.  But if you want to go all chicken little, the sky is falling, over attacks, you can.  I recognize the limitations of the police, and as far as a cost/benefit analysis, I recognize that they are not able to stop everything.  But that its just adding to the list of things that they cannot stop, but to some degree manage.  If the media would stop adding oxygen to these various fires, they might burn out more quickly, and hurt less.  But anybody who wants the media to give them eternal fame (infamy) can do so by committing assorted mayhem. No news is good news, which means that the good doesn't sell, whereas if it bleeds it leads.
Why in the h... should I tell you how police can stop all attacks, did you read my previous post?  If you want to ring your hands about how all can be stopped and all radicalized identified, you should join Donald Trump, he thinks it can be done, I don't.  Maximize the good, minimize the bad, hope that it is enough to cut down the use of terrorism (in this case by some radicalized muslims) to a slow trickle.  But terrorists are motivated by the same kind of media attention that serial killer's get.  It is not only a problem with terrorists basking in the sun, but other criminals as well.

If people, when they heard about a terrorist event, would turn off the radio or the TV, which after all is going to go on and on about it ad nauseum for the next day.  If people would turn it off until it calmed down, maybe the media outlets would have less motivation to endlessly regurgitate the report.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 07 Jun 2017 at 12:09
Again, you're simply wrong!
It's not Chicken Little and there's no requirement for a cost/benefit analysis. We're talking about human lives, about whole communities.

I agree to a certain extent that media coverage could be adding fuel to the fire, but in a democracy, you can't ban media reporting.




-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 08 Jun 2017 at 13:54
I am not simply wrong, I may be complexly wrong, but I definitely am not simply wrong.

There always is a cost/benefit analysis.  Either it is overt, or it is tacit. There are limits to everything.  That is what bureaucracies are for.  A police commissioner has to decide where to dedicate resources, and manpower for the purpose of trying to get justice.  If you spend all your money on shoplifting, you might not have enough for serious crimes, but if you don't contribute money to jaywalking, the increasing friction and havoc in society might contribute to more serious crimes.

Did I say "ban media reporting."?  Individuals and the press have rights, but in carrying out those rights, they also have a responsibility.  But unfortunately in pursuing a story, it is not their rights and responsibilities they are concerned with, but the pursuit of the all mighty dollar.  Principles go by the wayside as it is a race to the bottom.  Or rather, they have principles when they want to have principles, which injures the credibility when they should be trusted on matters such as Trump.  They should generally be trusted on Trump.  That is not to say they are not bias, but they are pretty honest, and upfront about their rocky relationship with him.  He is the one who makes it that way, keeping them back on their heels.  But, in any case, their highlight on violence makes it appear to radicals that violence is the answer.


Posted By: carroll090
Date Posted: 06 Aug 2017 at 13:31
Terrorism attacks often broke out in Europe country. I totally agree on your ideas. The most important thing to reduce terrorism attacks is to enact stricker immigration laws.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 07 Aug 2017 at 08:09
Terrorism is a flashy issue that gets people and the media all hot and bothered, but truth is that more people die in car crashes, or falling down stairs, or slipping in the tub in a day, then die every year in terrorism.  1) are you sure that enacting stricter immigration laws is going to cut back on terrorism?  It is more often people already here that are being radicalized and getting into terrorism, 2) it could be that enacting stricter immigration laws is just going to make the immigrant community feel besieged, and radicalize them more.  The exception in the US to that is young men from the Somali community, that become radicalized but go over there to fight.  Not really that much of an exception, because they typically don't do terrorist attacks over here.
Are you sure that terrorism is really the issue that restricting immigration is going to solve?  I think that for some people there is a bit of disingenuousness.  Bad faith proclaiming that immigration is about terrorism, not about other things.  That does not mean that there is not bad faith on the pro-immigration side too, insisting that America is all about taking "your poor huddled masses," etc, etc.  Whereas, America has also had its times of restrictive immigration policy.  I think there are legitimate concerns about how restrictive immigration policy should be.  I am not sure that the boogie man of terrorism has much to do with that.  Or rather, I am sure that the boogie-man of terrorism has a lot to do with that, in that immigration can be used as as scare tactic to frighten women and children, stampede people in a "useful" direction, but to truly solve anything?  I kind of doubt that.  Again, muggings and regular murders result in much higher statistics, even things like gang drivebys, 'accidentally' getting 'civilians.'

What goes "clop, clop, bang, bang, clop, clop, bang, bang."?  Amish driveby shooting. Clap 


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 07 Aug 2017 at 12:00
The problem confronting western countries today is not the laws that are in place but the procedures that are needed to check on the background of the intended migrants.

In Australia we have found that many have arrived with no forms of identification, passports etc, at all, and immigration officials have then to set about investigating their bona fides. It's not easy.

Most of them should be immediately deported to the country of birth, but they claim religeous or other persecution and that their lives are in danger. So, on a humanitarian basis, they are allowed to remain, albeit in refugee camps while their identities are checked.

There is no doubt that some with terrorist ideas slip through the net, both here and overseas.

The fact that road deaths claim more lives than terrorism is cold comfort to Parisians or Londoners who don't know when or where th next bomb will explode, and of course, this is a victory for the terrorists.

And I don't agree with your attempt at humour by picking on the Amish, a simple peace loving people who live by rules which, perhaps, wouldn't hurt the rest of us in many ways.


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 11 Aug 2017 at 14:58
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

The problem confronting western countries today is not the laws that are in place but the procedures that are needed to check on the background of the intended migrants.

In Australia we have found that many have arrived with no forms of identification, passports etc, at all, and immigration officials have then to set about investigating their bona fides. It's not easy.

Most of them should be immediately deported to the country of birth, but they claim religeous or other persecution and that their lives are in danger. So, on a humanitarian basis, they are allowed to remain, albeit in refugee camps while their identities are checked.

There is no doubt that some with terrorist ideas slip through the net, both here and overseas.

The fact that road deaths claim more lives than terrorism is cold comfort to Parisians or Londoners who don't know when or where th next bomb will explode, and of course, this is a victory for the terrorists.

And I don't agree with your attempt at humour by picking on the Amish, a simple peace loving people who live by rules which, perhaps, wouldn't hurt the rest of us in many ways.

Spot on!
We have to know who the migrants or refugees or anyone needs to prove their identity. When it's not possible they should be detained but not punished just as Mexican illegals are. War refugees are different that kind of asylum is overseen by the dept of Homeland Security. 

Can't stomach the civilian murders, yes it has the intended effect on me. This particular crop of terrorists may dominate the middle east for another generation, international agencies will keep chasing them. 

Terrorism and anarchist are going to bring the boot down on our necks. The end of personal liberties bc of crimes resulting in high death tolls seems unavoidable. 


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 15 Aug 2017 at 10:39
Every time a terrorist attack happens the politicians, the people and the press wring their hands, and lament over what could possibly be done to stop it.  Thus giving the terrorists exactly the attention they want.  Same thing with these mass shootings in the United States, except that they are more purely nihilistic than the terrorists.  So, what can we do?  We can do lots of things and we are doing lots of things, but nothing we do has an absolute guarantee, we just need to work on maximizing the positive and minimizing the negative.  "Common sensical," simplistic answers are just that, simplistic.  If you think the answer is obvious, it probably is not.  Of course, having a common sensical answer that doesn't work doesn't change the politicians from initiating it, and then changing the goal posts making retroactively the problem fit the "solution."

So let's say you have traffic deaths, murder deaths and terrorist deaths.  Where do you put your money for solutions?  How many murder deaths do you have to have to equal a terrorist death?  How many traffic deaths do you have to have to equal a terrorist death.  I mean obviously this kind of thinking is artificial.  They don't equate.  & A politician is never going to have to explain to the surviving family of a car crash victim that more money could have been spent on road safety, but the money was all going to enact frivolous measures that don't really effect the incidence of terrorism.  But, we got to realize there is only so much money for the pie, and if you add to something you might have to take away from something else.  Big cities are going to get the American Federal tax dollars, there is always some excuse for them to get it whether it is terrorism or something else, small towns generally don't.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 15 Aug 2017 at 11:43
Franciscosan

Quote Every time a terrorist attack happens the politicians, the people and the press wring their hands, and lament over what could possibly be done to stop it.  Thus giving the terrorists exactly the attention they want.  Same thing with these mass shootings in the United States, except that they are more purely nihilistic than the terrorists.  So, what can we do?  We can do lots of things and we are doing lots of things, but nothing we do has an absolute guarantee, we just need to work on maximizing the positive and minimizing the negative.  "Common sensical," simplistic answers are just that, simplistic.  If you think the answer is obvious, it probably is not.  Of course, having a common sensical answer that doesn't work doesn't change the politicians from initiating it, and then changing the goal posts making retroactively the problem fit the "solution."

Your point being?

Quote So let's say you have traffic deaths, murder deaths and terrorist deaths.  Where do you put your money for solutions?  How many murder deaths do you have to have to equal a terrorist death?  How many traffic deaths do you have to have to equal a terrorist death.  I mean obviously this kind of thinking is artificial.  They don't equate.  & A politician is never going to have to explain to the surviving family of a car crash victim that more money could have been spent on road safety, but the money was all going to enact frivolous measures that don't really effect the incidence of terrorism.  But, we got to realize there is only so much money for the pie, and if you add to something you might have to take away from something else.  Big cities are going to get the American Federal tax dollars, there is always some excuse for them to get it whether it is terrorism or something else, small towns generally don't.

IMO, your entire post sounds like an apology for the world failure to stop terrorism, especially, say, in the west.

In the case of international terrorists crossing our borders, governments can do only so much, which, I believe, they're doing. The other issue is the "home grown" terrorists. Those who have parents or grandparents born in Muslim countries and who themselves follow the faith, or those who have converted to Islam. How many times have we seen TV clips from the UK where shocked neighbours have commented on what "a good quiet boy" an arrested terrorist was?

What you miss Frank, is that the problem is not just one for governments and their agencies, it's a problem for every one of us. Every single citizen who sees, hear or suspects something of this nature should report it to a responsible agency so that it can be investigated. No more of the usual, "None of my business."

Reporting suspicious activity is a responsibility, it goes with the territory of living in the Free World.

It's time for us all to STAND UP AND BE COUNTED!


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 15 Aug 2017 at 13:49
What is the political objective of the jihad? 

If there was some sort of organized political hierarchy then maybe there could be a cease fire. No one terrorist, homegrown or otherwise has the same motivation. 

Doesn't it seem more personal on the part of the killer, to target little girls at a concert ? VS running away to join ISIS? 


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 15 Aug 2017 at 18:19
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

What is the political objective of the jihad? 

If there was some sort of organized political hierarchy then maybe there could be a cease fire. No one terrorist, homegrown or otherwise has the same motivation. 

Doesn't it seem more personal on the part of the killer, to target little girls at a concert ? VS running away to join ISIS? 

1. Not sure that there really is political motivation, more religeous dominance I think;
2. The only political type hierarchy that I know of in the terrorist world is HAMAS, in Palestine, which seeks both political and religeous dominance; and
3. I think that the targetting of obviously innocent civilians is more of an attention seeking exercise rather than hoping to attain some political, or even religeous goal.

In a similar vein, the brutal slaughter of prisoners by hacking off their heads with a knife, recorded and televised, is just a display, a "look at me".

The above response is the opinion of toyomotor alone and is based on his personal observations.


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 18 Aug 2017 at 06:41
Agree, and look at Barcelona now. This is going to increase attacks on civilian Muslims. Not fair but can you see any other trajectory?

-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 18 Aug 2017 at 11:14
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Agree, and look at Barcelona now. This is going to increase attacks on civilian Muslims. Not fair but can you see any other trajectory?

No, not now or in the forseeable future.

As long as the Jihadists launch attacks on innocent civilian populations, including their own, there will be suspicion from other sectors of the community, how could it be otherwise when your enemy could be your neighbour?




-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 23 Aug 2017 at 06:49
That is an interesting question.  How many attacks, in this case by Muslim "Jihadists," (terrorists) are in areas that the perpetrators are familiar with?  Do they attack in their own neighborhood, or is it always or almost always somewhere else?  Of course, "jihad" means struggle, it is not necessarily armed struggle, although I seem to remember there is a great deal of emphasis on the warrior in the Koran.  That is a little ironic considering how poor Arab militaries tend to be.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 23 Aug 2017 at 10:53
The Muslim terrorists/Jihadists apparently aren't too choosey whether it's their own people or others that they maim and kill. 

The battle between Sunni and Shia could be in some ways likened to the wars between Anglican and Catholics-they go on forever at the cost of thousands of lives.

Other attacks of foreign soil are aimed at intimidating residents and tourists, but in fact are having the reverse attack. These are often carried out by home grown terrorists.

So there is no one answer to your question.


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: caldrail
Date Posted: 23 Aug 2017 at 21:24
Quote How can the police identify all who are or may have become radicalised?
By intelligence, observation, and criminal detection. The British intelligence services have admitted in parliamentary hearings that they currently have thirty thousand individuals on their suspect lists but don't have the resources to properly investigate that number of people.
 
Note that after terrorist acts we often hear on the news that the responsible individual was known to the Police.
 


-------------
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 24 Aug 2017 at 09:05
I think it would be rather simple to answer my question.  Do bombers and other terrorists attack in the neighborhoods they live in (in predominantly non-Muslim communities) or not?  It is merely a matter of finding where the caught terrorists lived, and seeing if they lived in the region or area of the city where they acted out their nefarious plans.

So caldrail, how does a suspect go from general suspect to specific person of interest, or whatever it would be called?  What makes the deeds of the suspect actionable?  Not that I would necessarily want a public answer to that question.  But, it does seem that is an important question.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 24 Aug 2017 at 12:46
Originally posted by caldrail caldrail wrote:

Quote How can the police identify all who are or may have become radicalised?
By intelligence, observation, and criminal detection. The British intelligence services have admitted in parliamentary hearings that they currently have thirty thousand individuals on their suspect lists but don't have the resources to properly investigate that number of people.
 
Note that after terrorist acts we often hear on the news that the responsible individual was known to the Police.
 

The point is, as I have said, it's impossible for the police and intelligence agencies to identify all who are or may have become radicalised.

I agree that the acts which you outline are the basis for catching these people, but, as you say, resources are simply not there. And that obviously just doesn't apply to the UK. If, world wide, resources were increased tenfold, detection would increase tenfold, probably, but countries simply haven't got the budgets to do this, they do the best with what they have.

Quote Note that after terrorist acts we often hear on the news that the responsible individual was known to the Police.

Correct, but police knowing that a person is probably a terrorist in the making and proving it in a court of law are two different things. And of course, we go back to the resources again. It's not possible to put surviellance on every suspect 24/7.




-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 25 Aug 2017 at 00:34
In the Barcelon/Cambrils attack, five of those involved had recently returned from Syria. 
They were fighting for ISIS according to The Sun. 

Would there be some strategy at work here? Why let ISIS fighters back into Spain?
If there were an infiltration/undercover operation it would make sense to allow jihadist to return. 

Can't recall hearing of any infiltration success stories.


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 25 Aug 2017 at 13:07
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

In the Barcelon/Cambrils attack, five of those involved had recently returned from Syria. 
They were fighting for ISIS according to The Sun. 

Would there be some strategy at work here? Why let ISIS fighters back into Spain?
If there were an infiltration/undercover operation it would make sense to allow jihadist to return. 

Can't recall hearing of any infiltration success stories.

The fact that they were permitted to re-enter Spain is puzzling, but of course the Mediterranean borders are like sieves. I can only suggest that they re-entered Spain by unlawful means, to think otherwise would be to suggest either supreme incompetence or collusion.

If there were an undercover infiltration operation running, I would have thought that the best course of action would have been to prevent them entering Spain by any means possible!


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 28 Aug 2017 at 06:16
If the jihadist can't move then they can't be followed. Cutting off legal entry and forcing illegal entry through the porous border would make them harder to watch, that's if anyone is watching at all.

-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 28 Aug 2017 at 11:02
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

If the jihadist can't move then they can't be followed. Cutting off legal entry and forcing illegal entry through the porous border would make them harder to watch, that's if anyone is watching at all.

Allowing known/suspected terrorists into your country is fraught with danger. They just add to the number of terrorists within your border that you don't know about, and, in a country as vast as the USA, could easily vanish.

The obvious answer is to stop terrorism-period.

But like everyone else, I have no idea how to achieve that. 

Terrorism seems like a Medusa, cut off it's head in one region, and another sprouts somewhere else. Obviously military efforts are not working, diplomacy wouldn't work either I don't reckon, so what to do?

Give them what they want? Unthinkable!

Bring our troops home and double our border protection seems to me to be a better idea, although probably a selfish one, but I wouldn't support our government committing more to troops to, say, Afghanistan which, I think, is a lost cause.

Of more concern to Australia is the rise of ISIS cells in the Philipines and the activities of Jemaah Islamiyah in Indonesia.





-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 29 Aug 2017 at 09:30
btw, your thinking Hydra, not Medusa.  Different myth.  Theseus killed the Medusa, Heracles with a little assistance killed the Lernean Hydra.
I think it is not an either/or diplomacy can work for limited results, if you can get it to happen.  Military efforts and do certain things, security can do certain things, etc.  I think one wants to wittle away at their capability until it is not worthwhile for them to engage.  One potential problem is whether they splinter or not.  I think of the reaction as a feedback loop.  To get out the loop entirely, you have to be well, not bad.
I sometimes wonder if the US had more in common with the muslims, would there be less think of us as the great Satan.  I mean, some Christian fundamentals would agree, and do we really need to have transexuals in military?  Considering how much rape goes on in the military, I am not sure having women in the military has really worked.  Racial minority men and religious minority men are relatively well integrated, but something needs to change before women are really better integrated, and going beyond that to transexuals or whatever else.  I mean it wins brownie points with the multicultural left, but lets figure out how to integrate those are women, before trying figure out how to integrate those who look like women, but "surprise!' aren't.
I kind of think that the rest of world looks at the US (or Europe), and say, "we could be like that!" but then they look further and they look at how much the tail wags the dog, and they say, "well, then again, maybe not."  Whether the church accepts gay bishops has an impact on how Christians are accepted in Pakistan, and whether Afghans want to go along with an American made plan, we would like to think they are different, but not really.  Now we could say that our culture A wants X, and we should allow culture B to dictate not X, but also our culture A, wants Y with culture B, and decisions regarding X affect B and the achievement of Y.  We have to decide about our priorities, or by default we will decide about them in a different way.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 29 Aug 2017 at 10:52
Franciscosan
Quote btw, your thinking Hydra, not Medusa.  Different myth.
Thanks, the old memory fades a bit sometimes.

Quote  I think one wants to wittle away at their capability until it is not worthwhile for them to engage. 
Why should we do that? Terrorism is a senseless exercise that needs to be stopped, by fair means or foul.

Quote  do we really need to have transexuals in military
Why not? As long as they can peform the duties assigned to them.To do otherwise is discrimination, pure and simple, although I do agree that serving members should not expect the miltary to foot the bill for their operations and allied medical procedures.

Quote  Now we could say that our culture A wants X, and we should allow culture B to dictate not X, but also our culture A, wants Y with culture B, and decisions regarding X affect B and the achievement of Y.  We have to decide about our priorities, or by default we will decide about them in a different way.
Never was any good at algebra! Each country has it's own culture, which should not be influenced or overshadowed by incomers. Those days are over.

IMHO, migrants need to adapt to the language and culture of their new countries. Over and out!


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 29 Aug 2017 at 13:34
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

I kind of think that the rest of world looks at the US (or Europe), and say, "we could be like that!" but then they look further and they look at how much the tail wags the dog, and they say, "well, then again, maybe not."  Whether the church accepts gay bishops has an impact on how Christians are accepted in Pakistan, and whether Afghans want to go along with an American made plan, we would like to think they are different, but not really.  Now we could say that our culture A wants X, and we should allow culture B to dictate not X, but also our culture A, wants Y with culture B, and decisions regarding X affect B and the achievement of Y.  We have to decide about our priorities, or by default we will decide about them in a different way.

fransicosan, see the film "Hornet's Nest" Afghans are maybe not calling themselves homosexuals because they marry and have children. However having your own personal"Chai Boy" to keep as a slave for sex and other service is their way and very acceptable in their society. Even the parents of these boys sell them without hesitation, there is no social stigma.


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 29 Aug 2017 at 15:09
V
Quote fransicosan, see the film "Hornet's Nest" Afghans are maybe not calling themselves homosexuals because they marry and have children. However having your own personal"Chai Boy" to keep as a slave for sex and other service is their way and very acceptable in their society. Even the parents of these boys sell them without hesitation, there is no social stigma.

Quote There are none so blind as those who will not see.(J.Heywood)

Quote I think you're casting pearls before the swine-he won't listen.
(Oxford Dictionary)

Quote Shakespeare Henry IV Part 2 (Act 2, Scene 4)

“His wit’s as thick as a Tewkesbury mustard.”


Wink


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 30 Aug 2017 at 01:59
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

btw, your thinking Hydra, not Medusa.  Different myth.  Theseus killed the Medusa, Heracles with a little assistance killed the Lernean Hydra.
I thought Perseus killed Medusa.

Quote I think it is not an either/or diplomacy can work for limited results, if you can get it to happen.  Military efforts and do certain things, security can do certain things, etc.  I think one wants to wittle away at their capability until it is not worthwhile for them to engage.  One potential problem is whether they splinter or not.  I think of the reaction as a feedback loop.  To get out the loop entirely, you have to be well, not bad.
I sometimes wonder if the US had more in common with the muslims, would there be less think of us as the great Satan.  I mean, some Christian fundamentals would agree, and do we really need to have transexuals in military?  Considering how much rape goes on in the military, I am not sure having women in the military has really worked.  Racial minority men and religious minority men are relatively well integrated, but something needs to change before women are really better integrated, and going beyond that to transexuals or whatever else.  I mean it wins brownie points with the multicultural left, but lets figure out how to integrate those are women, before trying figure out how to integrate those who look like women, but "surprise!' aren't.
You have a serious blindspot on this-men are also sexually assaulted in the military.
 
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

I kind of think that the rest of world looks at the US (or Europe), and say, "we could be like that!" but then they look further and they look at how much the tail wags the dog, and they say, "well, then again, maybe not."  

Right Afghan sheep herder reads Paul Gigot in the WSJ and is suddenly disillusioned? They don't even know what hemisphere they live in.

Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Whether the church accepts gay bishops has an impact on how Christians are accepted in Pakistan, and whether Afghans want to go along with an American made plan, we would like to think they are different, but not really.  Now we could say that our culture A wants X, and we should allow culture B to dictate not X, but also our culture A, wants Y with culture B, and decisions regarding X affect B and the achievement of Y.  We have to decide about our priorities, or by default we will decide about them in a different way.
Would you care to explain why a muslim country that engages in pedophilia  will care whether the Christian Church has a gay bishop?
http://Pakistans%20Hidden%20Shame%20%28Full%20Documentary%29%20-%20Child%20Prostitution%20Of%20Boys%20%282017%29" rel="nofollow - http://Pakistan's Hidden Shame (Full Documentary) - Child Prostitution Of Boys (2017)




-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 04 Sep 2017 at 11:52
You are correct that Perseus killed Medusa, my mistake.

There is something for certain mind set that denies that homosexual behavior is homosexual.  For example, in prisons you have homosexual behavior, but the prisoners in those kind of relationships, deny that they are homosexual.  At the very least, they should be 'defined' as bisexual, but no women are around.  I imagine that it is the same thing in Pakistan, it is not defined as homosexual, it is just defined as being virile, top dog, so to speak.  It is predatory, and if they thought about it, it would be homosexual behavior.  As homosexual behavior it probably _should_ be prohibited by the Koran, and is probably something that radicals could get upset about (I'm not that familiar with the Koran).  Of course, they are probably ready to be offended, but the predatory behavior, whether homosexual or not, is what they really should be offended about.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 04 Sep 2017 at 18:13
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

You are correct that Perseus killed Medusa, my mistake.

There is something for certain mind set that denies that homosexual behavior is homosexual.  For example, in prisons you have homosexual behavior, but the prisoners in those kind of relationships, deny that they are homosexual.  At the very least, they should be 'defined' as bisexual, but no women are around.  I imagine that it is the same thing in Pakistan, it is not defined as homosexual, it is just defined as being virile, top dog, so to speak.  It is predatory, and if they thought about it, it would be homosexual behavior.  As homosexual behavior it probably _should_ be prohibited by the Koran, and is probably something that radicals could get upset about (I'm not that familiar with the Koran).  Of course, they are probably ready to be offended, but the predatory behavior, whether homosexual or not, is what they really should be offended about.

And this has what to do with world terrorism?


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 05 Sep 2017 at 16:16
You don't see a connection with the state of the world, the terrorism, and the conditions that exist in places like Pakistan? 
Why? 
Why? are they running off to fight with ISIS?

The police are too busy looking for terrorists to investigate civilian crime. These men admit that they rape boys bc they believe they have to tell the truth. A woman is not something that can be seen in public so "what are we supposed to do about our desires?" quoting men in the film. 

Entire generations of people are being so screwed up, made so angry and deviant it's like a physic doom cloud over the whole world. 
In WW2 average citizens didn't see US Marines dead until Tarawa 1943. Seeing it changed people.
We see murder and carnage all over the world constantly and its causing global mental illness. 


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: caldrail
Date Posted: 07 Sep 2017 at 19:56
Quote So caldrail, how does a suspect go from general suspect to specific person of interest, or whatever it would be called?  What makes the deeds of the suspect actionable?
it's a matter of security or criminal intelligence. From known active persons the security forces learn who they associate with, where they go, who they communicate with. Until removed from their enquiries, possible suspects are then added to the list of potential enquiries, with follow up investigation begun according to their criteria of perceived risk or importance.
 
I once got annoyed with the idiot across the desk at my local job centre and when he asked about what I needed to get a job, I made an ill advised comment about needing a shotgun. The bloke actually took me seriously and two weeks later another advisor asked me about proceeding with the forms for it. Really? I told her the weapon licensing was not required. Job done. Six months later I had two plain clothes policemen - politely I might add - come to me door and ask firmly about my attempt to obtain weapons. WHAT!!!! Anyway they listened to my explanation and appeared to have accepted it. But - and I say this advisedly - that would not necessarily remove me from a list of possible suspects thus future enquiries might bring up the issue again.
 
In fact, I once received a phone call from the Police asking where Mr Zaqawi was. No-one by that name at this address. Later I discovered Zaqawi was a terrorist who had been killed by the Americans. The reason my name came up was because I had often written on the internet criticising Christianity and thus my name - and eventually, my phone number - had gotten on to someone's computer and quite possibly Mr Zaqawi's, which was recovered by special forces. I doubt I have anything to worry about though it would explain some strange phone calls I received previously. But is my name scrubbed off someone's list? I doubt that too.


-------------
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 07 Sep 2017 at 20:18
Once your details have been entered into the computers at Special Branch, MI5 MI6 etc, you're toast.

If some noseybody in the future calls the police to complain of late night visitors to your home, guess what?

But,what's the old saying, "The price of peace is eternal vigilance"? (Is that correct wording?)


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: caldrail
Date Posted: 16 Sep 2017 at 21:04
Quote Once your details have been entered into the computers at Special Branch, MI5 MI6 etc, you're toast.
Not true. There is an independent organisation that collates data about extremist connections that can hurt your employment opportunities, but Britain's intelligence community are not the stuff of modern Hollywood spy thrillers. They are primarily information gatherers and leave active interdiction of terrorists to more public agencies. If MI5 (MI6 deals with offshore stuff) has your name you would graded according to risk, such as connections, activity, previous records and such, and watched accordingly. There's little to worry about. After all, Britain has 25% of the world's CCTV cameras as it is.


-------------
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 16 Sep 2017 at 23:27
Originally posted by caldrail caldrail wrote:

Quote Once your details have been entered into the computers at Special Branch, MI5 MI6 etc, you're toast.
Not true. There is an independent organisation that collates data about extremist connections that can hurt your employment opportunities, but Britain's intelligence community are not the stuff of modern Hollywood spy thrillers. They are primarily information gatherers and leave active interdiction of terrorists to more public agencies. If MI5 (MI6 deals with offshore stuff) has your name you would graded according to risk, such as connections, activity, previous records and such, and watched accordingly. There's little to worry about. After all, Britain has 25% of the world's CCTV cameras as it is.

It's also had the most terrorist attacks this year, and the police have succeeded in arresting the offenders in most cases.

I know the roles of the various agencies, SIS, MI5 and so on, also that the British police still have very active Special Branch, and other groups with terrorist focus.

If you think for one moment, after you have been identified as a suspect, you're not being watched, you must be kidding.




-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 17 Sep 2017 at 10:02
Depends on what you mean by suspect.  Do you mean person of interest?  I am sure there are more categories than just suspect or non-suspect.  And frankly, they don't have enough manpower to watch everybody.  They have to prioritize, and it seems often they knew who a suspect was before an incident, but they did not have him, or no longer had him under surveillance.   And of course, there is more than one way of surveillance, electronic, wiretap (phone), or visual.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 17 Sep 2017 at 11:11
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Depends on what you mean by suspect.  Do you mean person of interest?  I am sure there are more categories than just suspect or non-suspect.  And frankly, they don't have enough manpower to watch everybody.  They have to prioritize, and it seems often they knew who a suspect was before an incident, but they did not have him, or no longer had him under surveillance.   And of course, there is more than one way of surveillance, electronic, wiretap (phone), or visual.

Yes, "Suspect" = "Person of Interest".

I agree, there are not sufficient resources anywhere to monitor all peosons of interest.

Yes, of course the various agencies must prioritise.

Surviellance, these days, as you would know, ranges from "Optical Viewer Mk 1" (eyeball) through electronics to satellites, and of course people of interest could always be monitored by street cameras, as in the UK.

My comment was indicative, not factual, and a "Person of Interest" falls into that category in many ways-often reports by neighbours of "suspicious" activity.

The various agencies, IMO, do a fantastic job in apprehending as many criminals of this type that they do.



-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: caldrail
Date Posted: 19 Sep 2017 at 23:08
Quote
If you think for one moment, after you have been identified as a suspect, you're not being watched, you must be kidding.
LOL. In Britain you're almost certainly being watched by CCTV somewhere other than the wilds and countryside. That doesn't mean active viewing of course. Footage is mostly archived unless actually required, though some locations will be inherently more important for whatever reason and thus CCTV operators will be watching up to 24hr. As I said, suspects are graded according to security risk and observation is applied accordingly. Note how many times a terrorist causes mayhem only for the news media to report that the culprit was 'known to the Police'.


-------------
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 20 Sep 2017 at 09:49
A suspect is a person of interest, but not all persons of interest are suspects (I suspect), a witness can be a person of interest.  A potential victim could be a person of interest.  There might be other cases where a non-suspect would be a person of interest, again, or so I suspect;)



Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 20 Sep 2017 at 13:06
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

A suspect is a person of interest, but not all persons of interest are suspects (I suspect), a witness can be a person of interest.  A potential victim could be a person of interest.  There might be other cases where a non-suspect would be a person of interest, again, or so I suspect;)


The term "Person of Interest" is police talk for suspect,  or maybe even a known offender.

A witness is called a witness and victims are victims.

It's not all that hard to understand.


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 21 Sep 2017 at 12:45
Then why don't they call it, "suspect"?  Police seem to be very careful about what they say.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 21 Sep 2017 at 13:39
toyomotorI also thought there was a distinction between "person of interest" and "suspect."  As in a person of interest hasn't been fully vetted but a suspect may have a physical connection* to the crime or association with the victim that is known to the police. And I thought only suspects were interrogated in while in police custody.

Must be crime TV- Mis Leading & Mis Information, two recurring roles.


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 21 Sep 2017 at 16:58
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

toyomotorI also thought there was a distinction between "person of interest" and "suspect."  As in a person of interest hasn't been fully vetted but a suspect may have a physical connection* to the crime or association with the victim that is known to the police. And I thought only suspects were interrogated in while in police custody.

Must be crime TV- Mis Leading & Mis Information, two recurring roles.

May be a difference in usage of the term between the two countries.

A Person of Interest is a person to whom the police would like to speak or whom they're investigating in relation to a crime or an offence. They would normally be a suspect, but also could be someone otherwise connected to the crime.

Also, use of the term "interrogate" infers hostile questioning, forceful and formal, while the word "interview" can mean anyone from witnesses to suspects. For example, if you witness a car crash, you could be interviewed by the police.

We don't use the word "interrogate" in Australia, everyone is interviewed and if they are important witnesses or suspects, they're normally interviewed in front of video cameras and recorders. Minor or lesser witnesses would normally be interviewed one on one and a written statement obtained, which the witness signs.

TV programs are made to entertain, and mostly don't show how things are really done. The exception, in my experience, is British crime fiction programs which follow reality very closely.





-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 25 Sep 2017 at 11:16
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

toyomotorI also thought there was a distinction between "person of interest" and "suspect."  As in a person of interest hasn't been fully vetted but a suspect may have a physical connection* to the crime or association with the victim that is known to the police. And I thought only suspects were interrogated in while in police custody.

Must be crime TV- Mis Leading & Mis Information, two recurring roles.

May be a difference in usage of the term between the two countries.

A Person of Interest is a person to whom the police would like to speak or whom they're investigating in relation to a crime or an offence. They would normally be a suspect, but also could be someone otherwise connected to the crime.

Also, use of the term "interrogate" infers hostile questioning, forceful and formal, while the word "interview" can mean anyone from witnesses to suspects. For example, if you witness a car crash, you could be interviewed by the police.

We don't use the word "interrogate" in Australia, everyone is interviewed and if they are important witnesses or suspects, they're normally interviewed in front of video cameras and recorders. Minor or lesser witnesses would normally be interviewed one on one and a written statement obtained, which the witness signs.

TV programs are made to entertain, and mostly don't show how things are really done. The exception, in my experience, is British crime fiction programs which follow reality very closely.




Both US & British Crime stories dig in deep bc they know the viewer is smart. The standard is pretty high in film & TV.

US series Law & Order has been on for about 20 years and similar crime/police shows also have amazing longevity. The society may be a bit obsessed with crime & punishment.



-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 25 Sep 2017 at 17:50
Vanuatu

Quote Both US & British Crime stories dig in deep bc they know the viewer is smart. The standard is pretty high in film & TV.

The thing I like about British crime programs is that the police sometimes lose, as in real life. Characters are displayed, warts'n'all, as is their impact on the investigations.

From my perspective, also, they are more realistic and understandable bc our laws and systems are very similar.

I wish, in real life, we had the CCTV resources that the large British cities have, it would make life so much easier for the police.



-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 26 Sep 2017 at 13:09
Is there Marshal Law in UK?

Is it FAKE News?


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 26 Sep 2017 at 19:17
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Is there Marshal Law in UK?

Is it FAKE News?

Where did this come from? What does it relate to?

England, unlike the USA and Australia, doesn't have states, as such.

Therefore, use of Armed Forces to quell civil disturbances or to assist the civil authority in other circumstances, is quite easy. Northern Ireland could be a case in point.

AFAIK, no Marshall Law has been declared in the UK at this time, all I've seen on TV news is armed police.

FAKE News? where? why? how?



-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 27 Sep 2017 at 01:56
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Is there Marshal Law in UK?

Is it FAKE News?

Where did this come from? What does it relate to?

England, unlike the USA and Australia, doesn't have states, as such.

Therefore, use of Armed Forces to quell civil disturbances or to assist the civil authority in other circumstances, is quite easy. Northern Ireland could be a case in point.

AFAIK, no Marshall Law has been declared in the UK at this time, all I've seen on TV news is armed police.

FAKE News? where? why? how?




http://yournewswire.com/uk-martial-law-isis/" rel="nofollow - http://yournewswire.com/uk-martial-law-isis/

I'm not sure about the source, I saw that UK initiated Marshall Law on Twitter feed @InfoWars
(yes went back to Twitter)
Supposedly started after the Manchester attack. This is the report from the Daily Mail at the time of Manchester shootings.

"Troops are to be deployed onto Britain's streets amid fears a further terror attack 'may be imminent', the Prime Minister has announced.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/theresa_may/index.html" rel="nofollow - Theresa May  revealed the move less than 24 hours after the bomb attack at a teen concert in  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/manchester/index.html" rel="nofollow - Manchester , which left 22 dead and 59 injured.

The Prime Minister confirmed the identity of the Manchester suicide bomber as 22-year-old Salman Abedi, a Mancunian of Libyan descent.

But intelligence agencies fear he may not have acted alone - leaving open the possibility of an active Islamist terror cell on the loose.

Britain's Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre last night raised the terror threat level to 'critical', its highest level. 

The threat level has only been raised to 'critical' twice since the system was introduced on August 1, 2006. "



Read more:  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4535388/PM-says-terror-threat-level-critical.html#ixzz4tnQnIqEF" rel="nofollow - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4535388/PM-says-terror-threat-level-critical.html#ixzz4tnQnIqEF  
Follow us:  http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=MailOnline" rel="nofollow - @MailOnline on Twitter  |  http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail" rel="nofollow - DailyMail on Facebook

This is from an alternative news source that is calling the deployment of 5000 troops in London a false flag event. Basically saying UK and world elites are using terror to reign people in restrict freedom but make it seem like it was the will of the people.

http://yournewswire.com/uk-martial-law-isis/" rel="nofollow - http://yournewswire.com/uk-martial-law-isis/

Prime Minister Theresa May has  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4535388/PM-says-terror-threat-level-critical.html" rel="nofollow - escalated the threat level to critical , and the word on the streets of Westminster is that ISIS have the capacity to launch a devastating dirty bomb, mobile nuclear device, or even a chemical attack on British soil.

The devastating fallout of this next level terror attack will provide the elites with the excuse they need to assume total control of the United Kingdom. Whether the major disaster will be a genuine one or a manufactured one will not matter.

The public will be terrorized and will submit to the control of the central power. They will beg and demand to have their hard-won liberties taken away. They will give up freedom for the false perception of safety.

Listen to this kid from London youtube posted September 16





-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 27 Sep 2017 at 01:58


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 27 Sep 2017 at 11:36
Vanuatu

I read the on-line BBC News on a regular basis and I haven't seen a Declaration of Martial Law.

What has happened is that the Army has been mobilised to assist police on security patrols in various public places where large numbers of people congregate.

I think all the Martial Law hype is just that, media hype. It sells newspapers but does nothing to make the population feel safer.

As I said earlier, having a Federalist government, the UK can utilise it's Armed Forces in this manner quite easily.





-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 27 Sep 2017 at 14:30
Looking at the terrorism problem overall, a prominent Radio Jock in Australia some years ago said, 

Quote "Every terrorist is a Muslim, but not every Muslim is a terrorist." (John Laws)

Well he may not be 100% correct, but he's pretty close to the mark I think.

Sometimes I compare the strict Muslim countries with Europe in about the 1300 to 1500's.

It's all about diffence in religeous opinion, much in the same way as Catholics versus Protestants. Sunni V Sh'ia.

But their tactics to date have earned them nothing more than international condemnation and villification.

Why do they persist?


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 28 Sep 2017 at 10:17
Fareed Zaccaria who has a show on CNN or MSNBC or something, compares what is going on right now in the muslim world to the Reformation, in other words, they are in their Reformation.  I don't know about others, but Timothy McVeigh and the Weather Underground where indigenous American terrorist groups.  In the 1960s-80s, you had the Red Army Faction in Germany, the Red Brigade in Italy, Communist terrorist organizations supported by sympathizers nicknamed the Velvet Underground (fellow travelers, but didn't want to do the dirty work).  One might compare the support of Saudis in America for the 9/11 terrorists to the Velvet Underground.  I think President McKinley was assassinated by an anarchist, which allowed Teddy Roosevelt to assume the Presidency.  Terrorism in one form or another goes back quite a ways in American and European society, I don't know about Australia.  This Muslim twist is just that, a twist on an old theme (and twisted too).  Part of it is oppressive regimes in Muslim countries, people are disenchanted, and religion is the only legitimate response (can't stop people gathering at a mosque), and the regimes try to refocus discontentment externally on the Western world.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 28 Sep 2017 at 12:31
Franciscosan wrote
Quote Terrorism in one form or another goes back quite a ways in American and European society, I don't know about Australia.

By comparison with the US and Europe, we've had only very minor terrorism activity in Australia.

Back in the 60's or 70's, the Ushtasha conducted a number of bombings, the bombing of the Hilton Hotel was attributed to the Hare Krishna, curiously, and the bomber convicted. There have been other incidents, but nothing on the scale of the current European Campaign.

Basically, we're a very laid back society, irreverant and fun loving. Famous for our liking of an occasional cleansing ale (or two).

That people whom we have accepted as refugees, or their children, are now travelling to the Middle East to line up with ISIS is against everything we stand for. The government has introduced laws to prevent these people travelling overseas to join terrorist organisations. Personally, I'd like to see them leave and then immediately tear up their visas or citizenship papers.


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 28 Sep 2017 at 15:00
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Looking at the terrorism problem overall, a prominent Radio Jock in Australia some years ago said, 

Quote "Every terrorist is a Muslim, but not every Muslim is a terrorist." (John Laws)

Well he may not be 100% correct, but he's pretty close to the mark I think.

Sometimes I compare the strict Muslim countries with Europe in about the 1300 to 1500's.

It's all about diffence in religeous opinion, much in the same way as Catholics versus Protestants. Sunni V Sh'ia.

But their tactics to date have earned them nothing more than international condemnation and villification.

Why do they persist?
Exactly, that's why I wonder out loud- what is the political reason behind it? World dominance or mass destruction is what they are hell bent on.

It is like Protestant v Catholic thinking of 15/16 century. Lucky they didn't have nukes.


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 28 Sep 2017 at 19:19
Vanuatu wrote
Quote Exactly, that's why I wonder out loud- what is the political reason behind it? World dominance or mass destruction is what they are hell bent on.

Somehow, I don't think that there is a political goal, at least not a common goal, shared by the various Islamic terrorist groups.

I often think it's more like,"Hey look at me, come and join us and kill some people."

During the Viet Nam War, there was a T Shirt which was emblazoned
Quote Join the Army, travel to distant exotic lands, meet new and exciting people, and kill them!

Change "Army" to "ISIS", and there you have it. 


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2017 at 08:48
They want to re-establish the Caliphate, although I am not sure which version the Sunni or the Shiite, or maybe it is the pre-split Caliphate, the "good ol' days," which admittedly was a golden age especially compared to what was happening in Europe in, about the 800s?  They probably blame the Crusades for things going downhill, but perhaps the energy and initiative had been declining before that.  Oh, and don't forget the "enthusiasm" for Sharia law.  It may have at one time been a step up from the pre-Islamic Arab tribal law, but not so much today.  When problems are pointed out, the fans doubledown in their adolescent fantasies.

For ISIL or Dash or whatever, I think its the combination that everything is someone else's fault, which means anything you do, is justified as a fitting response to Others, the infidel, whatever and there are no limits.  I think part of it is Arabic tribalism, not "my tribe right or wrong," but my tribe without the possibility of being wrong, except now it is Dash or Al Quada, instead of particular tribes.  The world is getting complex, and there is a desire for simpler times of when things where clear, or so they think.

I think it is also a bit of the cult of Assassin, which is heretical for Islam, but part of the adolescent fantasy.  There is a desire to be a warrior, which is funny since Arab armies are generally pretty poor. 


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 30 Sep 2017 at 11:50
Franciscosan

I don't disagree with what you've written, but killing thousands of fellow Muslims is surely not the way to go, and killing innocents abroad, in Europe etc. only strengthens the west's opposition to their policies.

I often wonder if western colonial  powers hadn't interfered with their boundaries 150 odd years ago, would there still be this problem?


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2017 at 09:18
Al Quada and Dash have policies???? Confused  I thought they only had grand standing and whining.

What boundaries are you talking about, I mean the ones that were interfered with?  I think that the Western colonial powers _established_ the boundaries without much reference to territorial areas of influence.  But equally problematic was Woodrow Wilson's advocation of ethnic self-determination which served as the basis for, "we can't live with you anymore, because you are different."  Austrian-Hungary Empire and Ottoman Empire, weren't perfect, but one had diverse ethnic groups living under one mantel, but now everybody is supposed to have their own nation, even though people are often mixed together.  And then one has the ethnic cleansing, so so-and-so can have their god promised homeland.


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 01 Oct 2017 at 12:13
Franciscosan wrote
Quote I think that the Western colonial powers _established_ the boundaries without much reference to territorial areas of influence.

Spot on. Different tribes and customs, even language in many cases. 

Even though lines were made on maps, the age old disputes didn't diminish.

Quote
But equally problematic was Woodrow Wilson's advocation of ethnic self-determination which served as the basis for, "we can't live with you anymore, because you are different."

So it was really a numbers game. We're bigger than you so do as we say.

But one would have thought in this modern age, these issues could be settled amicably-not by car bombs and suicide bombers.



-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 02 Oct 2017 at 01:05
It's not the modern age in most of the middle east. The Saudis just now give women permission to drive cars. I was surprised to hear that they are the last muslim nation to do so.

-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 02 Oct 2017 at 10:51
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

It's not the modern age in most of the middle east. The Saudis just now give women permission to drive cars. I was surprised to hear that they are the last muslim nation to do so.

Funny that. Some of the oldest known civilisations in the world seemed to have come to a stand-still 500 years ago. Why?

Terrorism has not really succeeded anywhere in the world, so why have they not changed tactics?

Does it suit the rulers to have their countries in perpetual turmoil?

Quote The Saudis just now give women permission to drive cars.

What next??? Perhaps they'll be allowed to vote!

Haven't they seen what that's done to the western world? LOL




-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 02 Oct 2017 at 12:06
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

It's not the modern age in most of the middle east. The Saudis just now give women permission to drive cars. I was surprised to hear that they are the last muslim nation to do so.

Funny that. Some of the oldest known civilisations in the world seemed to have come to a stand-still 500 years ago. Why?

Terrorism has not really succeeded anywhere in the world, so why have they not changed tactics?

Does it suit the rulers to have their countries in perpetual turmoil?

Quote The Saudis just now give women permission to drive cars.

What next??? Perhaps they'll be allowed to vote!

Haven't they seen what that's done to the western world? LOL



FYI "Old Men in Hats" are the group identified as causing the most car accidents. Wink 
It's their nutty religion and sadistic cultural hang ups. They want a world of Turbans. 
Someday Old Men in Turbans will cause the most car accidents.



-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti


Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 02 Oct 2017 at 16:09
Quote FYI "Old Men in Hats" are the group identified as causing the most car accidents.

It must be hell driving in  The States.

Quote Someday Old Men in Turbans will cause the most car accidents.

It'll take a lot to beat women who use their indicator handle to hang their hand-bags on, looking backwards all of the time to scream at kids, talking animatedly with a friend seated next to them. LOL


-------------
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.


Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 03 Oct 2017 at 00:34
I saw a woman reading the newspaper while driving. Not kidding. But I have to tell you it was a foreigner, I could tell by all the crap on the dashboard. 

I rolled up real quiet behind her then....
BEEP! LOL she almost jumped out of her headscarf.


-------------
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net