[Closed] Not all programmers are on here: ISIS content.

[url= http://order-order.com/2015/02/26/cage-spokesman-at-extremist-rally-support-the-jihad-of-our-brothers/ ]Asim Quereshi of CAGE[/url]

Just seen him on TV. Not often I feel like throwing things at the TV.

That article - apologies, haven't quite worked out links on my phone:

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/?utm_source=SFFB

Basically, it's pretty coherent long form journalism about ISIL and how it's an end of days cult. The kind of thing that takes the apocrypha literally and is looking for the end of the world because it's predicted in the holy book. Westborough baptist version of islam but better armed. The thing is, those sorts of cults draw people into their logic and get people to do things they would have thought unthinkable in their previous lives. I don't think you have to be mad, just malleable and needing the kind of structure, purpose and belief they give you.

The point I'm not getting today is that the security services have known his name for ages but kept it quiet for supposed operational reasons, yet the Washington Post and BBC decided to run with the story?

Unless the security services wanted it released now?

Presumably a D Notice would have kept the BBC quiet if necessary?

jivehoneyjive - Member
You want my opinion?

No.

Yet flags weren't flown half mast for the Death of Princess Diana~ why is that?

It's Royal protocol not to fly flags at half mast as that is seen as a sign of weakness.

So why were they flown at half mast for the Saudi King, who exported the wahhabist faith that is the basis of ISIS and Al-Qaeda's beliefs?

JHJ.

Can you please stop saying things are "very strange"

Just say what you think.

JHJ - can you tell me what year the Taliban were founded and if someone had met them in 1983 would it indicate that time machines have been invented and are being kept from the people ?

Can you then also provide details from a reliable website that describes the meeting between John McCain and "Al Qaeda". Can you then explain why a group dedicated to disliking Americans didn't kidnap or kill him ?

Remember, use a reliable source of information - "don't get fooled again"!

I don't know where the OP got that idea - just because we're not posting doesn't mean we're not lurking.

100

I think the leaders of Islamic State are Salafis rather than Wahabis.

can you tell me what year the Taliban were founded and if someone had met them in 1983 would it indicate that time machines have been invented and are being kept from the people ?

Can you tell me the origins of the [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban ]Taliban[/url] (and Al-Qaeda)?

The Taliban movement traces its origin to the ****stani-trained mujahideen in northern ****stan, during the Soviet war in Afghanistan.

Bear in mind the ****stani forces training the mujahideen were funded, armed and supported by MI6, CIA and Saudi intelligence services under [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone ]Operation Cyclone[/url]...

Sorry to have to keep going over this ground in various threads, but events back then have a direct link to the current situation (Obama's appearance in the video is testament to that, though links go far deeper)

Can you then also provide details from a reliable website that describes the meeting between John McCain and "Al Qaeda"

[url= http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/09/18/alleged-isis-photo-controversy-engulfs-sen-john-mccain/ ]

Ta-da[/url]

Free Syrian Army brigade commander as saying he is working with the “Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda’s official Syrian affiliate — both U.S.-designated terrorist organizations

Can you then explain why a group dedicated to disliking Americans didn't kidnap or kill him ?

Just because a group is designated as a terrorist organization (by what is arguably a commercially profitable terrorist organization) doesn't mean they automatically go on the rampage the moment they see a westerner, especially if he is giving them weapons or other support.

I think the leaders of Islamic State are Salafis rather than Wahabis.

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_movement ]Observers differ over whether Salafi are the same as Wahhabis or not[/url]

Sorry to have to keep going over this ground in various threads

jivehoneyjive

Sorry to have to keep going over this ground in various threads, but events back then have a direct link to the current situation (Obama's appearance in the video is testament to that, though links go far deeper)

Believe it or not some of us know. Perhaps a lot of us know. I've been banging on about the whys of IS and the various Iraq and Afghan wars on numerous threads. Granted, there do appear to be a handful of people who frequent the forum who come out with Fox news-esque "bomb them all bullshit" but most people realise IS didn't come up the Tigris in a bubble.

Any point you attempt to make is completely lost in a web of conspiratorial nonsense.

In this instance I'm more interested in how "jihadi john" came to do what he's doing, as opposed to another debate about IS which has been covered in about five threads going into dozens of pages very recently.

American reporter on newsnight claims Emwazi was obsessed with Al-Shabaab and showed their videos to his hostages. Makes a mockery of what the spokesman from CAGE said in the press conference.

I think the leaders of Islamic State are Salafis rather than Wahabis.

Is there a difference ?

the later is way more points in Scrabble

Believe it or not some of us know.

Glad to hear that jimjam, though the constant challenges I receive suggest many disbelieve the less publicized elements of the situation.

In this instance I'm more interested in how "jihadi john" came to do what he's doing

Obviously details are still emerging regarding Jihadi John, but as is almost always the case, he's had prior contact with the intelligence services, who tried to recruit him

However you look at it, this is an important factor when trying to get to the truth, especially since:

when Jihadi John went to fight in Syria in 2012, he was on the same side in the conflict as the UK + U.S. Establishments

jivehoneyjive

However you look at it, this is an important factor when trying to get to the truth, especially since:

Yeah but as I said I'm not really so interested in the geopolitical landscape shifting around him, as I said I'd be more curious how he can do the things that he's done.

I'm not really so interested in the geopolitical landscape shifting around him

The UK government, in line with many other western governments, shows an absolutely staggering level of hypocrisy when it comes to foreign policy.

The UK government did not previously consider ISIS to be an illegal terrorist organisation even though it was clearly engaged in appalling atrocities such as the beheading of captured Syrian soldiers.

Then as their strength grew ISIS crossed the boarder into Iraq a started committing exactly the same appalling atrocities there, but because they were now threatening Western interests the UK had no hesitation in declaring them an illegal terrorist organisation.

ISIS only became unlawful last June :

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27865849 ]UK outlaws Isis, the militant group behind Iraqi attacks[/url]

How does the UK government get away with this clearly breathtaking level of hypocrisy ? Well I think the clue lies in the above quote - widespread public indifference. People just don't care. They only ask questions when it all goes spectacularly wrong and English speaking people start to die - who cares about the appalling mess that Libya is in now (and we very much helped to create) as long as the media doesn't report the death of English speakers? Let's be honest, very few people, despite the daily slaughter.

Even when questions are eventually asked because it is obvious that things have gone horribly wrong the wider public completely absolves our governments - mostly because they are told to.

And so driven by greed, short-termism, and an unshatterable faith by former colonial powers that military might and superiority is the only real solution, the mistakes are repeated again and again, only to come back to haunt us again and again. Having learnt nothing from the past we prop up brutal totalitarian regimes in the Gulf and fan the flames of war in Syria, for example. And still the wider public is "not really so interested in the geopolitical landscape". Until they see horrible newspaper headlines concerning people who speak the same language as themselves.

CAGE. So Qureshi not surprisingly from @cranberry's link was on a pro-Jihadist rally. He was on Newsnight a while ago as the representative of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights with just the same "its all the West's fault" rhetoric. His colleague Cerie Bullivent (who stomped off after Sky news told him to "get over yourself") has been the subject of a Detention Order, ie locked up as a potential terrorist.

The whole Tanzanian Safari episode, Emwazi was IMO clearly trying to enter Somalia to fight with Jihadists so no wonder he was turned back. Whilst he was born in Kuwait he had no passport or right to reside there, he was denied entry by the Kuwaiti's. Kuwait of course borders Iraq, easy entry there to join the Jihadists.

On reflection I am happy these people where given airtime as it shows the threats we face from within the UK.

I agree with Ernie. Although the hypocrisy doesn't surprise me. 'Twas ever thus. Everywhere.

Qureshi was on Ch 4 news last night making a fool of himself, avoiding condemning "the lovely man" Emwazi, and accusing Jon Snow of only asking him to do so because he is a Muslim. Really, just nuke the f*ckers from orbit.

ernie_lynch

The UK government, in line with many other western governments, shows an absolutely staggering level of hypocrisy when it comes to foreign policy.

I agree but that's been debated ad nauseum on several other very long threads very recently. I'm not asking you to shut up, I was just asking jivehoneyjive to stop muddying the waters and taking the thread of at another tangent and trying to explain to him that some of us do actually understand the historical context behind what is going on.

jambalaya

The whole Tanzanian Safari episode, Emwazi was IMO clearly trying to enter Somalia to fight with Jihadists so no wonder he was turned back. Whilst he was born in Kuwait he had no passport or right to reside there, he was denied entry by the Kuwaiti's. Kuwait of course borders Iraq, easy entry there to join the Jihadists.

Well according to the journalist who broke the story this is absolutely the case, Qureshi is full of it. Sounds to me like MI5 had the right man and were acting entirely reasonably.

To paraphrase the entertaining weevil Omar Bakri Mohammed re: the Spice Girls -

Who is this "Qureshi"? He should be arrested immediately.

For crimes against facial hair.

Qureshi was on Ch 4 news last night making a fool of himself, avoiding condemning "the lovely man" Emwazi, and accusing Jon Snow of only asking him to do so because he is a Muslim. Really, just nuke the f*ckers from orbit.

There was an interesting exchange on the BBC with a Muslim leader from Birmingham who was arguing that people like Anjem Choudary should not be allowed to walk around on the streets spreading his hate message. Another commentator (British woman Islam convert ?) who was trying the same line as Qureshi about the radicalisation being due to UK foreign policy. He called her naive. Quite refreshing.

@jimjam - yes indeed I saw the interview with the WSJ guy. It hadn't occurred to me at first but its obvious when you look at the map.

Another commentator (British woman Islam convert ?) who was trying the same line as Qureshi about the radicalisation being due to UK foreign policy. He called her naive. Quite refreshing.

Someone interviewed yesterday on BBC news said that these guys are getting radicalised because they are getting sucked into a powerful narrative from IS, and that there needs to be an equally powerful counter narrative.

How F***ing long has it taken people to figure this out???

there needs to be an equally powerful counter narrative.

There's no such thing as god.

Works for me. 😉 😀

If you haven't read it, you really ought to read "[url= http://http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/?utm_source=SFFB ]"What Isis really wants"[/url]

Most illuminating.

If an individual wants to join a millennial end of days cult - and believes that there will be a final battle in Syria against the armies of Rome (I kid you not) - where 5000 Isis followers will be saved by the second coming of Christ and lead into heaven, or whatever......... I'm not sure a 'really powerful narrative' is going to cut it against this kind of bonkers thinking!!!

@futon, I doubt ISIS think they are going to be saved by Christ ! That link was posted yesterday FYI

here needs to be an equally powerful counter narrative.

The argument that UK foreign policy has radicalised these people is nonsense, ISIS is killing far more Muslims than any Western military intervention ever did. Also we see Jihadists radicalised from countries like Denmark, Sweden and Belgium. Countries with no real involvement int he Middle East.

The back story on Emza is ineresting, with co-operation from Tanzania and Kuwait he was prevented from entering Somalia and Iraq. I wonder whether MI5 got the same help from Turkey ?

@ernie, I for one have been very worried about what has been happening in Syria for 4 years. I was in favour of airstrikes on Assad to prevent the slaughter of civilians in Aleppo, there is a large Palestinain refugee community there who were being barrel bombed along with the Syrians. Then you have the use of chemical weapons. The fact is the UK parliament voted against intervention. Western people (and to an extent their governments) where weary after Afghanistan and Iraq and tried to step back, ISIS knew this and moved into the vacuum choosing to focus their attacks on the Free Syrian Army rather than Assad's troops. When the slaughter of other Muslims was extended into Iraq and they threatened Bhagdad the populations of the West realised action must be taken. So the politicians had the popular support they needed.

futon river crossing - Member

If an individual wants to join a millennial end of days cult - and believes that there will be a final battle in Syria against the armies of Rome (I kid you not) - where 5000 Isis followers will be saved by the second coming of Christ and lead into heaven, or whatever......... I'm not sure a 'really powerful narrative' is going to cut it against this kind of bonkers thinking!!!

Well here's the thing. Lets assume he's as intelligent as you or I. Do you think he believes that, or is that a justification for what he's doing... It seems fairly obvious that he wanted to join Al-Shabaab first, who are essentially a self styled sharia court who fought against a secular government in Somalia, they are not a death cult. So it seems the more far out beliefs of IS are not what drew him, rather the desire to join a militia, fight and kill. Seemingly regardless of where in the world that would be.

The argument that UK foreign policy has radicalised these people is nonsense, ISIS is killing far more Muslims than any Western military intervention ever did. Also we see Jihadists radicalised from countries like Denmark, Sweden and Belgium. Countries with no real involvement int he Middle East.

C'mon, don't make me go all jivehoneyjive here. UK and US foreign policy created these guys. And western intervention has killed many times the number of muslims IS have.

First part I agree @jimjam although he wanted to go to Kuwait/Iraq also (pre IS so probably Al-Q)

And western intervention has killed many times the number of muslims IS have.

don't agree. The vast majority of deaths in Iraq have been due to sectarian violence Sunni v Shia in suicide bombings etc. You may argue that the West created the instability by deposing Sadam but the population could have chosen another path. If the Iraqi army had stood it's ground IS would not have made the gains they did.

Will we just agree to disagree?, because that's a never ending chicken and egg argument going back to ww2 (at least).

Imagine if there was some way to keep the lid on all this crap in Iraq, with ISIS being put back in their dungeons, maybe we'd be happy to support someone who could bring that off. Someone like ... Saddam Hussein?

DrJ - Member

Imagine if there was some way to keep the lid on all this crap in Iraq, with ISIS being put back in their dungeons, maybe we'd be happy to support someone who could bring that off. Someone like ... Saddam Hussein?

Well, he's dead. So you'd need to travel back in time and arm him to the teeth with billions of pounds worth of western weapons and just hope that he wouldn't do anything silly.

I actually CBA getting involved as he is always 100% right but the numbers dont add up to support the view that the west is not worse than ISIS

If I read this right, you're saying that "the west" is at least equal to, or worse than, ISIS in it's level of debased violence?

Reckon Junky has a point:

Whether it's birth defects linked to Depleted Uranium used by allied forces in Iraq:

([url= ]warning, very disturbing image, hence linked not posted[/url])

Or the wars following 9/11 (not forgetting Al-Qaeda wouldn't exist in it's current form if not for Operation Cyclone):

[img] :large[/img]

JY, selective quoting there, you well know that I said "in this instance". Middle East is far far more complex than our other discussions. Much more subjective.

The West did not want to / be seen to be supporting Assad by attacking his enemies which conflicted them for some time and you had Russia openly supporting Assad.

@Mr Whoppit, that's certainly the view of Cage/Qureshi as per the interviews and there are those here that seem sympathetic to that line of argument.

Big row in France after 4 MPs met with Assad (yesterday ?), mixture of left and right. Story on Vice News.

Finally if anyone is interested here is the interview with Cage where Sky News reporter tells him to get over himself and he stomps off. The CAGE guy was subject to a Terrorist Control Order when we had those. BTW anyone who calls an idiotic Yes campaigner a knob is worth watching 😉

The world order eh?
In the process of trying to look like they're doing some good (but actually just trying to **** Iran and Russia over), they nurture a monster which immediately turns on them, partially resulting from other opportunities to rearrange the world order, where they nurtured a monster.........
The shocking thing is nobody ever seems to learn! Same mistakes over and over and it makes even me believe that there may be some credence to JHJ's conspiracy theories as nobody can be that stupid right? right?
TJ was right on this one, the west should have kept it's nose firmly out.

TJ was right on this one, the west should have kept it's nose firmly out.

If you read "Against all Enemies" Sadam's card was marked as following the Kuwaiti invasion and war he tried to blow up Bush senior. That was only ever going to end badly for him.

I think Kay Burley lost on that interview - summed up by her stupid grin when he walked off.

Until Iraq and Iran really did have chemical and nuclear weapons deployed by long range missiles like North Korea ?