It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Obvious Strategy of The Islamic State Is Working, You’re All Being Stupid
page: 8share:
a reply to: SkepticOverlord
The vast majority of Muslims are good people.
The vast majority of non-Muslims are good people.
Islam has it's extremists. Non-Islam has it's extremists.
You saying there are far too many people that are Islamophobic is the exact same as saying there are far too many Islamic terrorists. Both statements are true.
The vast majority of Muslims are good people.
The vast majority of non-Muslims are good people.
Islam has it's extremists. Non-Islam has it's extremists.
You saying there are far too many people that are Islamophobic is the exact same as saying there are far too many Islamic terrorists. Both statements are true.
a reply to: bastion
Good article
This is why some of us argue against the extremists, isn't it?? Every time someone calls for genocide, or tars one and a half billion people with the same brush, they invite more and more boundaries. They lay the groundwork for 'security barriers' and put all of us in conflict for the misdeeds of minorities.
If a four-and-a-half year hostage calls for reason, maybe people should listen?
Good article
Independent link
“What do we need to do about this? In a global dimension, we all have to take some responsibility for this. My own thoughts – after four and a half years in captivity – is that the dispossession and the anger has to be acknowledged. These people have to be offered something more than revenge or Holy War or even this perverse Islamic apocalypse. I’ve seen too many times the map of the Middle East changing – many borders are irrelevant now.
“What worries me is that as these old borders and ‘international zones’ disappear, ‘security barriers’ become the new borders. We’ve seen this in the Middle East and they are rapidly being erected across Europe. These worry me more than the term ‘terrorism’. They create these kinds of conceptual contours – it’s not just a wall, it’s a wall that defines a lot of cultural beliefs and misbeliefs. We are damaging ourselves with these walls – we are damaging our ability to think, our ability to be creative.”
This is why some of us argue against the extremists, isn't it?? Every time someone calls for genocide, or tars one and a half billion people with the same brush, they invite more and more boundaries. They lay the groundwork for 'security barriers' and put all of us in conflict for the misdeeds of minorities.
If a four-and-a-half year hostage calls for reason, maybe people should listen?
The issue about these religious terrorists is they aren't just concentrated in one army in one specific area. Isis is everywhere.
Isis is everywhere pissed off Muslims are. That is their biggest threat. They don't need to travel across seas, their message travels for them into the minds of every mistreated Muslim since 9/11.
Its not their firepower which is dangerous, its what they represent which is what you need to pay attention to.
Isis is everywhere pissed off Muslims are. That is their biggest threat. They don't need to travel across seas, their message travels for them into the minds of every mistreated Muslim since 9/11.
Its not their firepower which is dangerous, its what they represent which is what you need to pay attention to.
a reply to: Asktheanimals
Every political system has their useful idiots.
At least here in the west. We shoot insults. Instead of shooting bullets,strapping on bombs on ourselves, and go around burning people alive, and cutting off the heads of people we don't like.
Islamic terrorism all about politics. Where the end justifies the means.
When you think about it it's only a mere handful of people who run the show and few thousand perhaps stupid enough to blow themselves up for their cause.
Every political system has their useful idiots.
At least here in the west. We shoot insults. Instead of shooting bullets,strapping on bombs on ourselves, and go around burning people alive, and cutting off the heads of people we don't like.
Islamic terrorism all about politics. Where the end justifies the means.
a reply to: neo96
I think the west needsto assess our relationship with the Saudi regime. Both their defence contracts and oil are vital to western economies, so the question is can we afford to or not to change this relationship, so we are no longer cosying up to the biggest exporters and supporters of Muslim extremism on the planet. Spreading their version of militant Islam around the globe, which we don't tackle or object to because of the relationship we in the west have agreed to. Until this relationship can be changed, things will not improve. It's just whether our western economies can afford not to keep supporting Saudi Arabia and as a condition their Wahhabist religion that sounds like a starting point? It's a tough decision that our western nations need to make. We made a deal to dance with the devil and we are paying for it. www.ameu.org...
en.m.wikipedia.org...(CA-71)#The_Quincy_Agreement
I think the west needsto assess our relationship with the Saudi regime. Both their defence contracts and oil are vital to western economies, so the question is can we afford to or not to change this relationship, so we are no longer cosying up to the biggest exporters and supporters of Muslim extremism on the planet. Spreading their version of militant Islam around the globe, which we don't tackle or object to because of the relationship we in the west have agreed to. Until this relationship can be changed, things will not improve. It's just whether our western economies can afford not to keep supporting Saudi Arabia and as a condition their Wahhabist religion that sounds like a starting point? It's a tough decision that our western nations need to make. We made a deal to dance with the devil and we are paying for it. www.ameu.org...
en.m.wikipedia.org...(CA-71)#The_Quincy_Agreement
edit on 16-11-2015 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)
a reply to: SkepticOverlord
I have to disagree. When it can be shown historically that large numbers of a certain group bring violence, and when large numbers of that group, mostly fighting age men, are being pushed into other countries, against the wishes of the people of those countries, and when violence follows, I don't think people are "stupid" because they see a problem. There is a very real problem. Part of the problem is the violence. Another part of the problem is that many who aren't actively participating in the violence don't speak out against it. Now, to be fair, some do. I remember the case of Muslims trying to protect tourists at a beach resort, I think it was. I also [have read that some have denounced these Paris attacks. That's frankly amazing! For a long time, we never heard such claims, or saw such actions. We should. Every single Muslim not involved should be loudly protesting this sort of action, every time it happens. We should not see people dancing and cheering in the street as we did after 9/11. When people see that, they aren't "stupid" because it makes them angry. Attacking people, then claiming that their response to the attack justifies more attacks, isn't valid. Anyone who allows themselves to be radicalized by a reaction to terrorism is, in my opinion, being "stupid".
I do get what you are saying, but it's somewhat a matter of placing the blame on the targets, instead of on the attackers. Yes, some people go too far, and that's not a good thing, however, I don't believe most do. What I have seen is people stating that these refugees aren't likely real refugees most of the time, and that none should be allowed in unless completely vetted, and unless there is actual space for them, and enough resources. When I read that Germans are being forced from their homes, and that the government there wanted to search homes to look for space (not confirmed, for that one), that's a real problem. When I hear of violence in train stations, with people afraid to travel, because of the violence of these "refugees", that's a real problem.
I do see a global battle, but I don't see it as one to "provoke stupidity". I see it as one to take over, which is part of the ideology of those acting in these attacks. That some might react poorly to this doesn't mean that's the actual goal of the attackers. They do have an ideology, and it's one hostile to most everyone else. Just because some are actually stupid in their reactions, that doesn't change the plan.
In the case of these refugees, and these attacks, what I would call logical steps aren't complicated:
1. Screen all people entering a nation from from any nation from where these terrorist come. At this point, that's much of the Middle East. Anyone wishing to leave should be cleared of any connections to terrorist groups. Governments cannot be allowed to place large numbers of un-screened people secretly.
2. Refugees need to be screened to be sure they are actual refugees. People have been denied asylum from other places, and this shouldn't be handled as though we aren't allowed to check. I have no tolerance for not applying common sense, just to avoid a perception of "bias". When police are searching for a suspect, and have a description, it isn't bias to check out those that fit the description. When there is a lot of terrorism with ties to a certain religion, it isn't wrong to display some caution, either.
3. Any national government that wants to bring in refugees should have the approval of the people living where those refugees are intended to go. People have a right to some say in large changes in their communities, and to also know that those being brought in are cleared. Once #1 above is done, then people can see that, and it's a matter of deciding of the community can handle the influx.
4. When any such refugee commits an act of violence, they should be immediately removed, and blacklisted. No exceptions, save clear cut self defense. Attacking people in train stations, or at gatherings set up to welcome them, cannot be tolerated.
I do agree on one thing; acting in violence against someone who has done nothing is flat out wrong. If a person isn't threatening, and isn't acting in violence themselves, attacking them for simply being part of this or that group is wrong. We are seeing this now in colleges, where the BLM students attacked other students in a library, for simply being white, and/or for not participating in their "protests". That's wrong. It is wrong to attack a black guy because some other black guy committed a crime. It's wrong to attack cops because a couple did something wrong. That sort of reaction is worse than stupid.
So, I don't agree about the goal of the radicals, but I do agree with the reaction to people not involved being wrong.
I have to disagree. When it can be shown historically that large numbers of a certain group bring violence, and when large numbers of that group, mostly fighting age men, are being pushed into other countries, against the wishes of the people of those countries, and when violence follows, I don't think people are "stupid" because they see a problem. There is a very real problem. Part of the problem is the violence. Another part of the problem is that many who aren't actively participating in the violence don't speak out against it. Now, to be fair, some do. I remember the case of Muslims trying to protect tourists at a beach resort, I think it was. I also [have read that some have denounced these Paris attacks. That's frankly amazing! For a long time, we never heard such claims, or saw such actions. We should. Every single Muslim not involved should be loudly protesting this sort of action, every time it happens. We should not see people dancing and cheering in the street as we did after 9/11. When people see that, they aren't "stupid" because it makes them angry. Attacking people, then claiming that their response to the attack justifies more attacks, isn't valid. Anyone who allows themselves to be radicalized by a reaction to terrorism is, in my opinion, being "stupid".
I do get what you are saying, but it's somewhat a matter of placing the blame on the targets, instead of on the attackers. Yes, some people go too far, and that's not a good thing, however, I don't believe most do. What I have seen is people stating that these refugees aren't likely real refugees most of the time, and that none should be allowed in unless completely vetted, and unless there is actual space for them, and enough resources. When I read that Germans are being forced from their homes, and that the government there wanted to search homes to look for space (not confirmed, for that one), that's a real problem. When I hear of violence in train stations, with people afraid to travel, because of the violence of these "refugees", that's a real problem.
I do see a global battle, but I don't see it as one to "provoke stupidity". I see it as one to take over, which is part of the ideology of those acting in these attacks. That some might react poorly to this doesn't mean that's the actual goal of the attackers. They do have an ideology, and it's one hostile to most everyone else. Just because some are actually stupid in their reactions, that doesn't change the plan.
In the case of these refugees, and these attacks, what I would call logical steps aren't complicated:
1. Screen all people entering a nation from from any nation from where these terrorist come. At this point, that's much of the Middle East. Anyone wishing to leave should be cleared of any connections to terrorist groups. Governments cannot be allowed to place large numbers of un-screened people secretly.
2. Refugees need to be screened to be sure they are actual refugees. People have been denied asylum from other places, and this shouldn't be handled as though we aren't allowed to check. I have no tolerance for not applying common sense, just to avoid a perception of "bias". When police are searching for a suspect, and have a description, it isn't bias to check out those that fit the description. When there is a lot of terrorism with ties to a certain religion, it isn't wrong to display some caution, either.
3. Any national government that wants to bring in refugees should have the approval of the people living where those refugees are intended to go. People have a right to some say in large changes in their communities, and to also know that those being brought in are cleared. Once #1 above is done, then people can see that, and it's a matter of deciding of the community can handle the influx.
4. When any such refugee commits an act of violence, they should be immediately removed, and blacklisted. No exceptions, save clear cut self defense. Attacking people in train stations, or at gatherings set up to welcome them, cannot be tolerated.
I do agree on one thing; acting in violence against someone who has done nothing is flat out wrong. If a person isn't threatening, and isn't acting in violence themselves, attacking them for simply being part of this or that group is wrong. We are seeing this now in colleges, where the BLM students attacked other students in a library, for simply being white, and/or for not participating in their "protests". That's wrong. It is wrong to attack a black guy because some other black guy committed a crime. It's wrong to attack cops because a couple did something wrong. That sort of reaction is worse than stupid.
So, I don't agree about the goal of the radicals, but I do agree with the reaction to people not involved being wrong.
a reply to: woodwardjnr
I don't have a problem with that.
Freeze their assets here in the US, and the rest of the west.
Add them to the state sponsors of terrorism.
Sanction them, and every other so called arab 'ally'.
Put Iran back on the state sponsors of terrorism.
Ban the entire middle easts oil.
Fill the void with fracking,
We don't need any 'friends' in the middle east.
Because there are none.
I think the west needsto assess our relationship with the Saudi regime. B
I don't have a problem with that.
Freeze their assets here in the US, and the rest of the west.
Add them to the state sponsors of terrorism.
Sanction them, and every other so called arab 'ally'.
Put Iran back on the state sponsors of terrorism.
Ban the entire middle easts oil.
Fill the void with fracking,
We don't need any 'friends' in the middle east.
Because there are none.
a reply to: SkepticOverlord
And there nothing in my post about weaponising Muslims. I asked what would YOU do in this situation, ie, only letting refugee families have asylum, profiling???? Both of these are controversial methods but as I mentioned on another post, which you say is not correct, IT IS a Muslim problem and it will only be resolved when Muslims themseves sort the radicals out. No matter how you want to twist the evidence They ARE Muslims that have hijacked their religion, they have them in their midst, they shout injustice if ANYONE goes among them to sort it out.
As for your other reply, well "stupid is as stupid does". If you are that ignorant not to see that out of all these immigrant communities in western countries it's only the Muslim community that is producing these terrorists.
And I ask again (and I don't mean arming anyone) what would you do to resolve the situation. The Muslims must know if THEY don't sort it out they WILL get tarred with the same brush.
And there nothing in my post about weaponising Muslims. I asked what would YOU do in this situation, ie, only letting refugee families have asylum, profiling???? Both of these are controversial methods but as I mentioned on another post, which you say is not correct, IT IS a Muslim problem and it will only be resolved when Muslims themseves sort the radicals out. No matter how you want to twist the evidence They ARE Muslims that have hijacked their religion, they have them in their midst, they shout injustice if ANYONE goes among them to sort it out.
As for your other reply, well "stupid is as stupid does". If you are that ignorant not to see that out of all these immigrant communities in western countries it's only the Muslim community that is producing these terrorists.
And I ask again (and I don't mean arming anyone) what would you do to resolve the situation. The Muslims must know if THEY don't sort it out they WILL get tarred with the same brush.
originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: neo96
I think the west needsto assess our relationship with the Saudi regime. Both their defence contracts and oil are vital to western economies, so the question is can we afford to or not to change this relationship, so we are no longer cosyingup to the biggest exporters of Muslim extremism on the planet. Spreading their version of militant Islam around the globe, whi we don't tackle or object to because of the relationship we in the west have agreed to. Until this relationship can be changed, things will not improve. It's just whether our western economies can afford not to keep supporting Saudi Arabia and as a condition their Wahhabist religion that sounds like a starting point?
MASSIVELY WELL SAID WWJR!
We are allied to those who are the biggest supporters of the degenerate extremists...
WHY?
The deal that was made after WW2 to allow them to propagate their insane version of Islam ,untouched as long as we get the oil contracts.
Its time we changed our attitudes to that place IMO.
They fund the very people who kill innocents in the name of islam,and we cosy up to them.
SICK.
And we see them condemning ISIS on the news recently---Well,stop forking paying them you low lifes...
Its horrible we go along with this.
This is part of the machine I was speaking of earlier.
People need to realise how deep it goes.
Read history FFS people.
edit on 16/11/2015 by Silcone Synapse because: yes i know
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
The global battle that you refer to is about 10,000 some odd people living in Muslim nations that are trying to provoke moderate westerners into being as extreme as them. Its a "burn the house down" approach. And it results from the West spending the last couple of generations doing their level best to cover the entire middle east in the fecal matter of western business interests.
The global battle that you refer to is about 10,000 some odd people living in Muslim nations that are trying to provoke moderate westerners into being as extreme as them. Its a "burn the house down" approach. And it results from the West spending the last couple of generations doing their level best to cover the entire middle east in the fecal matter of western business interests.
a reply to: BrokedownChevy
You're a smart guy; I've read a few of your posts.
You're smart enough to recognise the difference between criticising Islamic State and calling for all Muslims to wear crescent moon patches, be interned or be genocided.
What you're using is rhetoric to distract from the actual points made in the OP. 'The moderators' are simply reiterating the same old T&Cs that 'hate speech' isn't acceptable around here.
ATS isn't saying intolerance won't be tolerated. It won't be a platform for genocidal bigots, overt racists or racial supremacists of any skin colour.
If that's your thing, there must be dozens of forums out there where you can say what you like about whatever.
The moderators are basically saying intolerance will not be tolerated. In America hate groups are still protected under the law. We're supposed to protect liberty no matter what and the OP goes against liberty. Granted, ATS isn't America, but there's a lot left to be understood by the "tolerant" ones.
You're a smart guy; I've read a few of your posts.
You're smart enough to recognise the difference between criticising Islamic State and calling for all Muslims to wear crescent moon patches, be interned or be genocided.
What you're using is rhetoric to distract from the actual points made in the OP. 'The moderators' are simply reiterating the same old T&Cs that 'hate speech' isn't acceptable around here.
ATS isn't saying intolerance won't be tolerated. It won't be a platform for genocidal bigots, overt racists or racial supremacists of any skin colour.
If that's your thing, there must be dozens of forums out there where you can say what you like about whatever.
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
So what was the excuse back in the days of the Barbary Pirates? We hadn't even hardly begun to exist as a nation and all we were doing was sending ships to trade with other nations, but they attacked and enslaved our sailors even then and used their religion as the excuse.
So what was the excuse back in the days of the Barbary Pirates? We hadn't even hardly begun to exist as a nation and all we were doing was sending ships to trade with other nations, but they attacked and enslaved our sailors even then and used their religion as the excuse.
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
That's been going on since the Sunni/Shia split.
en.wikipedia.org...
And that crap has been going on long before the west ever got involved.
And it results from the West spending the last couple of generations doing their level best to cover the entire middle east in the fecal matter of western business interest
That's been going on since the Sunni/Shia split.
en.wikipedia.org...
And that crap has been going on long before the west ever got involved.
edit on 16-11-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
So what was the excuse back in the days of the Barbary Pirates? We hadn't even hardly begun to exist as a nation and all we were doing was sending ships to trade with other nations, but they attacked and enslaved our sailors even then and used their religion as the excuse.
Yeah, well Christians haven't been so nice to each other, either. Along with every other single religion on this planet. So what you seem to describe is a human flaw, not a religious flaw. How many Indians were killed by Europeans, who justified their actions with the Bible?
Barbary Pirates are bordering on being completely irrelevant to the topic.
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
And it results from the West spending the last couple of generations doing their level best to cover the entire middle east in the fecal matter of western business interest
That's been going on since the Sunni/Shia split.
en.wikipedia.org...
And that crap has been going on long before the west ever got involved.
The Sunni/Shia split caused the nations of Islam to kill each other. It didn't cause them to mass migrate out of their nations to seek refuge in Europe.
And it certainly didn't destabilize Mexico, which seems to have several parallels to the Muslam Migration of 2015. Were Syria bursting with jobs and people feeling safe in their homes, they likely wouldn't be dying trying to get into Europe.
a reply to: StargateSG7
Man oh man, point that vitriol somewhere else. You talk about standing up for your position. Well, hiding it in a reply to me is just that. Hiding it. I made one little point which you, for your own reasons, chose to use as a spring board to vent your own frustrations with everything in the world. Well, seems to me that you are the one being a coward here. Don't just blow this stuff at me, direct it at Overlord as a reply. Take it right to the top. Or better yet, vent it into a new thread. And if that one is taken down, post another, and another and another. Fight for what you espouse instead of bashing it across the head of a little nobody like me.
Man oh man, point that vitriol somewhere else. You talk about standing up for your position. Well, hiding it in a reply to me is just that. Hiding it. I made one little point which you, for your own reasons, chose to use as a spring board to vent your own frustrations with everything in the world. Well, seems to me that you are the one being a coward here. Don't just blow this stuff at me, direct it at Overlord as a reply. Take it right to the top. Or better yet, vent it into a new thread. And if that one is taken down, post another, and another and another. Fight for what you espouse instead of bashing it across the head of a little nobody like me.
I was about to ask why the moderators and owners were allowing such hate filled threads. It's good to see that something is being done.
Tired of these scared ignorant idiots trying to fill ATS with such stupid propaganda.
Even in this thread about denying them their ignorant voices they still continue to spread it.
If you cannot understand how idiotic it is to blame an entire people or religion for the acts of a few and refuse to use critical thought processes than there is no helping you. Continue to live in fear of imagined scenarios.
Tired of these scared ignorant idiots trying to fill ATS with such stupid propaganda.
Even in this thread about denying them their ignorant voices they still continue to spread it.
If you cannot understand how idiotic it is to blame an entire people or religion for the acts of a few and refuse to use critical thought processes than there is no helping you. Continue to live in fear of imagined scenarios.
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
That is what they are doing right now.
In Iraq,Afghanistan,Yemen,Somalia, Egypt, Palestine, and Syria.
What is currently going on is a civil war between the BOTH sides.
Nafta did that.
The biggest parallel I see is that we have a front row seat to one day Mexicans just might want their own country in the US.
Pretty much like unchecked immigration by muslims, after centuries of conquest lead to the whole Israel/Palestine 'argument'.
The Sunni/Shia split caused the nations of Islam to kill each other.
That is what they are doing right now.
In Iraq,Afghanistan,Yemen,Somalia, Egypt, Palestine, and Syria.
What is currently going on is a civil war between the BOTH sides.
And it certainly didn't destabilize Mexico,
Nafta did that.
which seems to have several parallels to the Muslam Migration of 2015.
The biggest parallel I see is that we have a front row seat to one day Mexicans just might want their own country in the US.
Pretty much like unchecked immigration by muslims, after centuries of conquest lead to the whole Israel/Palestine 'argument'.
new topics
-
To become president, Zelensky had to learn Ukrainian
Political Conspiracies: 1 hours ago -
Green Grapes
General Chit Chat: 5 hours ago -
Those Great Fresh Pet Commercials
Television: 10 hours ago
top topics
-
Joe meant what he said about Hunter's pardon....
US Political Madness: 14 hours ago, 12 flags -
S.C. Jack Smith's Final Report Says Trump Leads a Major Conspiratorial Criminal Organization!.
Political Conspiracies: 12 hours ago, 11 flags -
Advice for any young Adult .
General Chit Chat: 13 hours ago, 10 flags -
Green Grapes
General Chit Chat: 5 hours ago, 5 flags -
It’s Falling…
Philosophy and Metaphysics: 16 hours ago, 4 flags -
Regent Street in #London has been evacuated due to a “bomb threat.”
Other Current Events: 14 hours ago, 3 flags -
Those Great Fresh Pet Commercials
Television: 10 hours ago, 3 flags -
To become president, Zelensky had to learn Ukrainian
Political Conspiracies: 1 hours ago, 3 flags
active topics
-
Los Angeles brush fires latest: 2 blazes threaten structures, prompt evacuations
Mainstream News • 115 • : WeMustCare -
What Comes After January 20th
Mainstream News • 34 • : charlest2 -
Some sausage, some chicken, some sauce, some onions and some garlic...and some peppers!
Food and Cooking • 4 • : putnam6 -
S.C. Jack Smith's Final Report Says Trump Leads a Major Conspiratorial Criminal Organization!.
Political Conspiracies • 42 • : WeMustCare -
House Passes Laken Riley Act
Mainstream News • 22 • : KrustyKrab -
To become president, Zelensky had to learn Ukrainian
Political Conspiracies • 0 • : Imhere -
Russia Ukraine Update Thread - part 3
World War Three • 6904 • : Imhere -
Steering the Titantic from the Drydock.
Rant • 43 • : charlest2 -
President Carter has passed
Mainstream News • 44 • : WeMustCare -
Those stupid GRAVITE commercials
Rant • 13 • : GENERAL EYES