ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

[scorza]

Well, this should be interesting and not at all a list of... reads list... oh well...



What, on earth, does this have to do with fighting extremism?



So.... You think you can fight extremism by instituting religious discrimination in prisons? How does putting all the Muslim prisoners together help? I don't even know what you think you're trying with this.



How does this fight extremism, exactly? Why is limiting personal freedoms a step forward?



More religious discrimination. How does it help fight extremism, exactly?



How, exactly, does this benefit anyone? And how, exactly, does it prevent extremism?

Not one of your "points" will do a single thing to combat extremism and every single one of them will provide an easy recruitment opportunity for elements who wish to radicalise the impressionable. You're playing right into ISIS's "us-vs-them" narrative here.

Do you honestly think that we're adequately preventing radicalisation at the moment? IMO the fundamental problem is that we continually make ourselves look weak while they make themselves look strong - as Osama bin Laden himself said, show a boy a strong horse and a weak, crippled horse and he will naturally gravitate towards the finer beast. I know forum ostriches like yourself like to think if we play nice with others they won't take advantage of us, but that ain't the way the world works. We used to be so smart in this country - we used to know this stuff, it's sad what we've become

The point of separating Muslim inmates in prison is to prevent non-Muslim inmates being incarcerated in prison wings run by extremist jihadi gangs who operate Sharia law.

 

[Josh]

Prisons are a huge breeding ground for numptyism, HMP Belmarsh was particularily bad when I was there and the muslim population were dispersed across the prison, lumping everyone together in one area will just serve to breed more radicalisation.

I don't have the answer, but point No2 above isn't it.

Prison wings generally run by a different set of rules and social norms than outside of the wall.

 

[Chris Wilson]

You're playing right into ISIS's "us-vs-them" narrative here.

Much snipped.

You are in denial of it being an us versus them though, with all this continuing Liberalism! IS clearly state they are operating a holy war, denying that this is what the West are fighting is an ostrich like stance. If an army clearly states the terms of their reasons for engagement, basically calling them misguided liars and putting alternative placatory words and reasons into their manifesto is defeatism in the extreme. If they state they are waging a holy war, and we, the west are engaged in defeating them, we, the West are also engaged in a holy war, surely?. But such words just won't utter from Liberal's mouths... Denial is defeatism. I wonder where some poster's allegiances really lie. As a presumably British citizen, if push came to shove would you accept conscription and fight them, here or overseas?

 

[Skunkworks]

...

Don't tell me, more tolerance is the only way?

 

[Mr Jack]

You are in denial of it being an us versus them though, with all this continuing Liberalism! IS clearly state they are operating a holy war, denying that this is what the West are fighting is an ostrich like stance. If an army clearly states the terms of their reasons for engagement, basically calling them misguided liars and putting alternative placatory words and reasons into their manifesto is defeatism in the extreme. If they state they are waging a holy war, and we, the west are engaged in defeating them, we, the West are also engaged in a holy war, surely?

No, they can claim to be in a holy war as much as they like: it doesn't mean we are. We're engaged in a military conflict with ISIS not with Islam and even there we're hardly exerting our full military might.

ISIS seek to convince the world's Muslims that this is a fight between the Christian West and Muslim world. It isn't; and we shouldn't help their cause by acting as if it is.

As a presumably British citizen, if push came to shove would you accept conscription and fight them, here or overseas?

We are a very, very long way from being involved in any kind of conflict that could possibly necessitate conscription. Don't flatter ISIS by so vastly overstating their capabilities.

 

[Mr Jack]

Do you honestly think that we're adequately preventing radicalisation at the moment?

Just because we aren't adequately preventing radicalisation at the moment does not mean your five points will help the matter.

IMO the fundamental problem is that we continually make ourselves look weak while they make themselves look strong - as Osama bin Laden himself said, show a boy a strong horse and a weak, crippled horse and he will naturally gravitate towards the finer beast.

I think the fundamental problem is human nature; followed by world inequality. It's no surprise that the highest rates of violence and terrorism are in war-torn, poor regions of the world.

I know forum ostriches like yourself like to think if we play nice with others they won't take advantage of us, but that ain't the way the world works.

Yet playing nicely with others has a much greater track record of success than perpetuating the cycle of violence. The terrorist situation in Ireland was brought to an end not by throwing in more soldiers by bringing the parties together round the negotiating table. The peaceful reconstruction of Germany and Japan after WWII brought much greater rewards than the imposition of punitive settlement terms on Germany after WWI.

The point of separating Muslim inmates in prison is to prevent non-Muslim inmates being incarcerated in prison wings run by extremist jihadi gangs who operate Sharia law.

Breitbart, lol.

If there's a problem with Jihadi gangs in prison then I hardly think that rounding up all the non-extremist Muslims in the prison and dumping them in separate accommodation with the extremists is going to help stop them becoming radicalised, do you? The solution, if such a problem actually exists, is to invest more in the management of our prisons and ensure that sure behaviour is better dealt with.

 

[Chris Wilson]

No, they can claim to be in a holy war as much as they like: it doesn't mean we are. We're engaged in a military conflict with ISIS not with Islam and even there we're hardly exerting our full military might.

ISIS seek to convince the world's Muslims that this is a fight between the Christian West and Muslim world. It isn't; and we shouldn't help their cause by acting as if it is.



We are a very, very long way from being involved in any kind of conflict that could possibly necessitate conscription. Don't flatter ISIS by so vastly overstating their capabilities.

It's incredibly rare for me to post a link to a video, but this eloquently shows why I feel your insinuating that most Muslims are peacefully inclined, which they probably are, yet you dangerously fail to accept that they are effectively irrelevant when so many are not:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAoXgZLRee0

Most Germans were peaceful, most Russians, most Chinese, blah blah, yet it didn't stop mass genocide from those that were not, and most occurred because the people took a Liberal stance that the percentage wise few that were not peaceful could not be capable of much harm.

 

[Mr Jack]

It's incredibly rare for me to post a link to a video...

It's rarer still for me to watch and respond to one

I won't argue with a video proxy; make the argument here if you want a response.

 

[scorza]

Just because we aren't adequately preventing radicalisation at the moment does not mean your five points will help the matter.

What will? Because more tolerance, marches of defiance and warning of the risk of non-existant "far-right" reprisals isn't working.

I think the fundamental problem is human nature; followed by world inequality. It's no surprise that the highest rates of violence and terrorism are in war-torn, poor regions of the world.

The UK isn't a war-torn, poor region of the world - why are so many UK citizens joining the Islamic State?

Yet playing nicely with others has a much greater track record of success than perpetuating the cycle of violence. The terrorist situation in Ireland was brought to an end not by throwing in more soldiers by bringing the parties together round the negotiating table. The peaceful reconstruction of Germany and Japan after WWII brought much greater rewards than the imposition of punitive settlement terms on Germany after WWI.

That remains to be seen. Surrendering to the IRA in the Good Friday Agreement hasn't really achieved much - they just renamed themselves as "splinter groups" and concentrated on drug dealing. None of the fundamental issues in Ulster have been addressed and the place seems permanently on edge - it's only a matter of time before serious outbreaks of violence occur there.

The best example of how to defeat terrorism comes from Sri Lanka - they followed the time-proven tactic of rounding them all up and killing them. Nasty - but it worked.

Breitbart, lol.

If there's a problem with Jihadi gangs in prison then I hardly think that rounding up all the non-extremist Muslims in the prison and dumping them in separate accommodation with the extremists is going to help stop them becoming radicalised, do you? The solution, if such a problem actually exists, is to invest more in the management of our prisons and ensure that sure behaviour is better dealt with.

Alright - maybe there's a case for Muslims convicted of non-jihadi crimes to be housed separately from the terrorists. I find it really worrying these reports of any gangs controlling prisons in the UK - in the US there are basically five gangs that control the prisons there, we mustn't allow ourselves to become like that through political correctness.

You can lol all you like but Breitbart often is the only media outlet reporting the truth about this situation instead of pursuing a cultural-marxist agenda e.g. there was an incident at the weekend where a Muslim woman was mown down by a car in Molenbeek, everywhere reported this as a "far-right" attack - then went very quiet about it. Turns out it was a Muslim on Muslim attack. This seems to have caused quite a bit of butthurt in the SJW community.

 

[Skunkworks]

It's rarer still for me to watch and respond to one

I won't argue with a video proxy; make the argument here if you want a response.

The only majority it takes is those who do nothing.

 

[scorza]

Muslim inmate carves Islamic State motto on military veteran's forehead, pours boiling water on him.

This is down under but my question is; still think it's a crazy idea to separate IS inmates from the rest of the population Mr Jack?

 

[Mr Jack]

This is down under but my question is; still think it's a crazy idea to separate IS inmates from the rest of the population Mr Jack?

You didn't say 'IS inmates' you said 'muslim inmates' and, again, if this event happened the solution is to better manage prisons.

 

[scorza]

You didn't say 'IS inmates' you said 'muslim inmates' and, again, if this event happened the solution is to better manage prisons.

My five-point plan is a starting point for the discussion - not set in stone. I've already agreed that it "might" be better to separate the jihadis from the non-jihadi Muslim prisoners.

 

[RoboCod]

A but naive to believe that prisons can be better managed and that sort of thing prevented. I have a few friends who worked as wardens, they'd laugh at that comment.

 

[bitslice]

Yet playing nicely with others has a much greater track record of success than perpetuating the cycle of violence. The terrorist situation in Ireland was brought to an end not by throwing in more soldiers by bringing the parties together round the negotiating table.

So you think that by simply rolling over and allowing a vastly different culture to operate a separate state within the UK, is actually going to bring harmony?

“For a long time, I too thought that Europe’s Muslims would become like previous waves of migrants, gradually abandoning their ancestral ways, wearing their religious and cultural baggage lightly, and gradually blending into Britain’s diverse identity landscape. I should have known better.”

Trevor Phillips, a former Labour MP and head of Britain’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission.

...oh dear...

I'm sure it's great to be the last liberal waving a flag for brotherly love, but throughout history clever people have taken advantage of the naive, and will continue to do so.

 

[KIA]

Trevor Phillips, a former Labour MP and head of Britain’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission.

What British Muslims Really Think

Following the heightened security measures in the aftermath of terror attacks in Paris and Brussels, politicians and Muslim leaders claim that the values of these extremists are shared by only a tiny minority in the UK. To find out if this is the case, a survey was carried out to get a better understanding of the views of British Muslims and to try to comprehend why some young Muslims are being drawn to violence. Writer and former Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission Trevor Phillips analyses and interprets the survey for this documentary, and considers its implications for future relations between Britain's Muslim and non-Muslim communities.

This Wednesday @ 10pm - 11:05pm - Channel 4

 

[Rroff]

Yet playing nicely with others has a much greater track record of success than perpetuating the cycle of violence. The terrorist situation in Ireland was brought to an end not by throwing in more soldiers by bringing the parties together round the negotiating table. The peaceful reconstruction of Germany and Japan after WWII brought much greater rewards than the imposition of punitive settlement terms on Germany after WWI.

Very different situation though compared to a religion that at a fundamental level is incompatible with the Western way of life.

Disagreements on a country on country level rarely 100% preclude the ability to reconcile those differences at a later date.

 

[stewski]

The only majority it takes is those who do nothing.

Well a million people marched on the capital in opposition to IRAQ, but you are right the "majority" did nothing.

 

[Felon]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...se-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law

Interesting poll, the results don't surprise me but they frustrate me a little, because I get the impression that the whole situation is impossible.

One one side you have Muslims who are unhappy at how they're being treated, with relatively common reports of discrimination, hatred and general anti-Islamic rhetoric, which is wrong.

On the other side, more than half of all Muslims apparently think that homosexuality should be illegal, (which would make me illegal) among a whole load of other things, which is also wrong.

It seems as though Islam is almost condemning itself, it moans when it takes flack from people who don't like it - at the same time it has a tendency to speak out and criticise things that are harmless, that 95% of the general non-muslim public are perfectly fine with, I'm not sure what to make of the whole thing, and on top of all that the media are stood busy cranking any handle then possibly can in order to get as many views/whatever as possible.

 

[Caged]

Was there a control group of people who identify themselves as belonging to a specific religion that the questions re: homosexuality were asked to?

Not to excuse the attitudes on display, I just think that some of them will be issues across all people who identify as being of faith, rather than just a Muslim problem.

Edit: Tables http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Mulims-full-suite-data-plus-topline.pdf