ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

Gilly · 17 Nov 2015 at 12:58

Just because multiple people are carrying the same passport doesn't mean that's the document they produced at point of travel.

RoboCod · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:03

disregard

Jono · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:16

Gilly said:
Just because multiple people are carrying the same passport doesn't mean that's the document they produced at point of travel.

Jason Bourne, is that you?

SciNeT · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:26

Mynight said:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...with-syrian-passport-matching-paris-attackers

Apparantly someone was arrested using the same passport since. Wonder how many people are in the countries using these passports or other copied ones. Shows the checks are well and truely thorough...

Nobody knows, this is the reason there's a growing list of US Governors protecting their own people by denying refugees entry to their states.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34835353

mid_gen · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:35

How exactly are they going to deny anyone entry into their state? I can see the terrists now cursing their plans are foiled because the Governer said they aren't allowed in!

Hint: there are no internal borders in the US.

dowie · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:43

presumably the refugees need somewhere to live - housing etc.. to be provided

sure they can't prevent them from catching a bus/train and going to visit but they can stop someone with no money/resources who will be reliant on the state from settling there quite easily by simply not providing them with those resources.... it isn't like they just arrive on a plane and are let loose to go and fend for themselves

NexusK · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:45

mid_gen said:
How exactly are they going to deny anyone entry into their state? I can see the terrists now cursing their plans are foiled because the Governer said they aren't allowed in!

Hint: there are no internal borders in the US.

It's not a case of physically stopping them crossing a state line, it's refusing to agree to take them in as refugees meaning some other state will have to house them and whatever else they do.

mid_gen · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:45

Oh they can decide they don't want to take refugees (well, maybe they can)...but the idea they are protecting anyone is laughable. It's a completely empty, meaningless gesture.

Like the idea that stopping refugees coming to Europe is going to stop terrorists attacking us. All borders are porous and if someone wants to get in they can. Not that they need to when once again, the attackers thus far appear to be homegrown.

RoboCod · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:50

Hitman_Leon said:
It's a question of perspective, while my use of JJ was to demonstrate the difference between some western ISIS recruits being as Dowie suggested soft and others being like JJ-probably sociopaths. I agree with Dowie on the point that JJ was not a regular fighter in the front line grunt sense, more a poster boy for recruitment and such. He could also be termed as a 'fighter' being that he was an armed killer, it matters not, lets not argue over such things.

I also agreed with Dowie that JJ was not a front line combatant, I said that above. I disagree that he was merely a PR poster boy though. I know he wasn't just a PR poster boy. JJ fell within the target set of our targeting directive policy - which made him a militant and a fighter for ISIL. You don't have to be a "grunt" to be considered a fighter - we all know this.

Schlong&Stable · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:53

Washout said:
Anything to slow down the investigation and allow time for others connected to it to get out of dodge I should imagine.

Buddy was saying they used fake passports to rile up anti-Muslim sentiments. That makes no sense whatsoever. Perhaps it would make sense if they were riling up anti-refugee sentiments though, because the passport was Syrian. But the anti-Muslim feelings had little to do with the passport.

SciNeT · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:53

mid_gen said:
How exactly are they going to deny anyone entry into their state? I can see the terrists now cursing their plans are foiled because the Governer said they aren't allowed in!

Hint: there are no internal borders in the US.

I don't know, presumably if they can get a majority of the states to not want them then they can slowly push the whole country into that mindset. It's a very encouraging development.

dowie · 17 Nov 2015 at 13:59

RoboCod said:
I also agreed with Dowie that JJ was not a front line combatant, I said that above. I disagree that he was merely a PR poster boy though. I know he wasn't just a PR poster boy. JJ fell within the target set of our targeting directive policy - which made him a militant and a fighter for ISIL. You don't have to be a "grunt" to be considered a fighter - we all know this.

I said:

'he wasn't fighting over there, they didn't want to put him at risk'

which was correct... for some reason you quoted me and said that was incorrect because [insert some convoluted reasoning]. Whether you want to refer to him as a 'militant' or a 'fighter' is irrelevant - point was he wasn't fighting, he was a PR poster boy and they kept him well away from the front line - if you feel this is incorrect then you're welcome to cite examples of him engaging in fighting.

Uther · 17 Nov 2015 at 14:05

OldCoals said:
France has just invoked Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty.

I bet our glorious leader wouldn't do something like that when the UK suffers a similar attack.

Danthus · 17 Nov 2015 at 14:33

Uther said:
I bet our glorious leader wouldn't do something like that when the UK suffers a similar attack.

Do you know what it means?

Skunkworks · 17 Nov 2015 at 14:34

RoboCod said:
I also agreed with Dowie that JJ was not a front line combatant, I said that above. I disagree that he was merely a PR poster boy though. I know he wasn't just a PR poster boy. JJ fell within the target set of our targeting directive policy - which made him a militant and a fighter for ISIL. You don't have to be a "grunt" to be considered a fighter - we all know this.

Do you have sources for this, or is it common knowledge around the MI6 office?

ak22 · 17 Nov 2015 at 14:35

Thompson_NCL said:
Why would the passport matter? There is no doubt these were Islamic terrorists.

It does matter until the investigation is complete as ISIL claim a lot of attacks even if it was not planed or ordered by them. They done before with the Sydney siege & canadian parliament shooting.

Danthus · 17 Nov 2015 at 14:36

ak22 said:
It does matter until the investigation is complete as ISIL claim a lot of attacks even if it was not planed or ordered by them. They done before with the Sydney siege & canadian parliament shooting.

You don't have to be a member of ISIL to be an Islamic terrorist.

ak22 · 17 Nov 2015 at 14:41

OldCoals said:
You don't have to be a member of ISIL to be an Islamic terrorist.

Of course my point is every detail is important until we actually find out who was behind this attack.

NickK · 17 Nov 2015 at 14:41

BBC have indicated that Russian plane downed linked to IS. Russia short of declaring war but definitely hinting. The bomb forensics should be interesting..

Cosimo · 17 Nov 2015 at 14:42

OldCoals said:
You don't have to be a member of ISIL to be an Islamic terrorist.

There plenty of groups:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa.../file/472956/Proscription-update-20151030.pdf