German Market . . . .

This is what that darling of the Tory Party, Boris Johnson, had to say concerning whether Osama Bin Laden should be shot on sight or put on trial – basically exactly the same point as Jeremy Corbyn made several years later.

Indeed.

A capable politician was able to make the point without choosing words that made him look like an utter loon. Corbyn did his usual trick of choosing words that can easily be deliberately or genuinely misinterpreted.

Same with his call for triggering article 50. I watched that live and after a couple of seconds reflection I realized he probably meant ‘In due course’ rather than ‘immediately’. It was far from clear.

He’s a liability. Boris isn’t the shrewdest politician about and even he can get a point across more clearly that Corbyn.

Not sure what this has to do with this thread, mind ewe.

This is what that darling of the Tory Party, Boris Johnson, had to say concerning whether Osama Bin Laden should be shot on sight or put on trial – basically exactly the same point as Jeremy Corbyn made several years later.

So Jezza is basically like Boris, but less eloquent 😀

(Edit, great minds and all that OOB)

outofbreath – Member

Not sure what this has to do with this thread, mind ewe.

Absolutely nothing. Can’t you put your drivel about Jeremy Corbyn on the thread which exists for that ?

Well done to the Italian policeman who got that Berlin murderer but not before he shot one of the policeman in the shoulder.

1, stop promoting inciting and supplying weapons and wars into the Middle East
2. create safe and legal forms of entry into Europe
3. set public policy around understanding and acceptance of immigration.

Because it those won’t solve anything, arms will always find a way into the middle east – either from Russia, China or homemade munitions and weapons. AK47s and RPG’s can be manufactured in villages in Pakistan. The second two points won’t solve the underlying issues that this researcher talks about, something I have posted about before – and something that ties in with how other post colonial countries have moved on in a healthier manner than the middle east – a point that I see Ernie is quick to dismiss before bothering to think about it. As usual, I might add.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2015/s4327230.htm

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2015/s4327230.htm

EMMA ALBERICI, PRESENTER: Forensic detectives and sniffer dogs are tonight continuing to search properties targeted during dawn raids in Western Sydney connected with last week’s fatal shooting of police accountant Curtis Cheng outside Parramatta police station.

200 officers were this morning involved and they arrested four males aged between 16 and 22 in the raids in four suburbs.

Three of the four males arrested were also the target of last year’s Operation Appleby, the country’s biggest counter-terrorism raids.

Among those taken into custody was a 16-year-old boy who was in the same year at Arthur Phillip High School as Farhad Jabar Khalil Mohammad, the 15-year-old who shot Mr Cheng.

The high school in Sydney’s west was also the scene of a dramatic arrest yesterday in relation to the Parramatta police shooting. A 17-year-old student who allegedly threatened a Sydney police station on his Facebook page was arrested on his way to the school attended by the teenager who shot dead Mr Cheng. Police said the student was detained and questioned and he then threatened and intimidated them. He was arrested and charged on several counts, including harassing and intimidating police.

New South Wales Police Force Deputy Commissioner Catherine Burn said officers were investigating whether any of the men arrested in today’s raids were involved in supplying the gun used to kill Mr Cheng.

CATHERINE BURN, NSW DEPUTY POLICE COMMISSIONER: It’s a very, very serious concern that in the heart of our community, there is attack planning that is under way and that may have led to what we saw on Friday.

EMMA ALBERICI: New South Wales Premier Mike Baird said it was clear to him that Sydney had a problem with Islamic radicalisation.

MIKE BAIRD, NSW PREMIER: We need to understand that we are in a new world. The risks that are emerging are new. We have to adapt to them. We have to respond and we will. But certainly, my strong assurance to the people of NSW is that our schools are safe.

EMMA ALBERICI: My guest tonight is Hussain Nadim, a counter-radicalisation academic. He’s studied at Cambridge and Oxford and is adjunct fellow at International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation at King’s College in London. He’s in Australia pursuing a PhD in government and public policy at the University of Sydney.

Welcome to Lateline.

HUSSAIN NADIM, COUNTER-RADICALISATION RESEARCHER: Thank you for having me on.

EMMA ALBERICI: What is it that drives young people to become radicalised?

HUSSAIN NADIM: Radicalisation itself is a very vast subject. The problem starts when we try to simplify it for policy making or, for that matter, mass consumption. And to distinguish radicalisation is a very important thing which we haven’t been able to do over here in Australia or for that matter in the UK and in the US as well. And radicalisation itself is not bad. This is one of the things that we need to understand.

EMMA ALBERICI: Is not bad?

HUSSAIN NADIM: Is not bad. The reason because, radicalisation itself is only a process, and that process is the one which triggers an individual to act in a particular way. Now that action could be positive or that action could be negative. So radicalisation really itself could be either positive radicalisation or negative radicalisation.

EMMA ALBERICI: Well let me rephrase the question and ask you: what drives people to get involved in violent extremism?

HUSSAIN NADIM: In violent extremism. That’s important. The reason why I distinguish between positive and negative radicalisation is very important because when we talk about violent extremism, that’s where we often slip into the radicalisation element where we somehow (inaudible) a lot of concepts, which tends to trigger the community into a defensive mode. And which is why we see a lot of Muslims who might not be radical enough, but they start feeling the us versus – against the other divide and which drives a lot of Muslims towards radicalisation. But radicalisation, really when we speak about in the context of today world, is more about how the Muslims are looking at the world itself. There are certain ideological underpinnings that a lot of Muslims go through during their childhood, especially when their parents teach them certain things when they’re living in the Western world which kind of secludes them from the rest of the society. And once that thing starts happening and I’ve been an advocate of this idea that radicalisation has really nothing to do with religion. I mean, there has been a study by (inaudible) University in London which completely details that radicalisation has not much to do with religion. It doesn’t have much to do either with poverty or social status. A lot of people tend to believe, specifically in the Muslim community, that it’s social status that drives radicalisation. Well that’s not true at all. Radicalisation is really about the identity crisis and how that triggers a lot of these kids into questioning why they are here, what they want to do.

EMMA ALBERICI: So you’re saying they don’t feel like they fit in to the Western society in which they live?

HUSSAIN NADIM: And it’s very hard for them to fit in. I mean, look at what the basic problem with the Muslim community over here is. The parents want to teach their children to stay away from certain evils of what they see as the Western society – stay away from alcohol, stay away from dating. That’s not what they see as a Muslim culture. So they – in order to attempt to that, the Muslim parents convert – teach these kids very ultra-conservative ideology of Islam. Now, when they grow up and they go to the universities or schools, that’s where they see their ideology and their teachings coming head-on with the Australian culture. And then they question their parents, that they were taught about this certain thing, but this is not how it is. And then they look for answers and the way they find their answers is not through parents. They look for the answers on social media and that social media has a monopoly of the religious radicals as well.

EMMA ALBERICI: So, let me ask you – I mean, governments in Australia, in the US and the UK have poured millions of dollars over the past decade into counter-radicalisation programs. Do they work?

HUSSAIN NADIM: So far, the problem is: how do you measure radicalisation? The Government has been spending millions and billions of dollars on radicalisation without any monitoring or evaluations. If you ask the Government over here, what the results are, they don’t know because they haven’t done the monitoring and evaluation. And how do you gauge? For instance, the Government spends a lot of money on trying to moderate – modernise and moderate Muslims who are at risk. How do you define who is at risk?

EMMA ALBERICI: How do you define who’s at risk?

HUSSAIN NADIM: I mean, it’s impossible to define it. I mean, anybody could be harbouring any sort of support for ISIS in Iraq, but he hasn’t been acting. How do you define that person as a threat to the national security of Australia so that it becomes problematic?

EMMA ALBERICI: You recently wrote in the Lowy Interpreter that Muslim community leaders are not experts on the subject of radicalisation. Yet aren’t they in the main the people governments go to for advice, and if not them, who?

HUSSAIN NADIM: I’ve severely criticised openly and I’ve gotten a backlash on that as well. I don’t think Muslim community leaders represent the Muslims over here, specifically the youth. They don’t connect. The youth has changed, the technology has changed and a lot of times these Muslim community leaders, who the Government use to understand radicalisation, they’re not subject experts. Now radicalisation itself is a huge subject. You can’t understand that just because you represent – you think you represent a few people, you become the voice of those people. They could be the voice, but subject experts and representing them and understanding radicalisation, I don’t think Muslim community (inaudible) …

EMMA ALBERICI: Are you saying there’s a generational gap there?

HUSSAIN NADIM: There is a generational gap. There is a huge technology gap, the generation gap. A lot of Muslim community leaders tend to think that radicalisation is occurring because somehow their issues are (inaudible) in the ’70s, the economic – less opportunity and etc. as they (inaudible) the new class. If you look at the patterns of radicalisation all across Europe, US and also in Australia, it’s not because these kids have any lack of opportunity. A 16-year-old kid who did what he did in Parramatta wasn’t doing it because he thought, “I wouldn’t get a job.” He was just 16 years, still in school.

EMMA ALBERICI: So why did he do it yet?

HUSSAIN NADIM: That’s because of ideology.

EMMA ALBERICI: I mean, we don’t know yet, but is it attached to a religious belief?

HUSSAIN NADIM: No. I don’t think religion – religious (inaudible), because frankly I don’t think in a 16-year-old kid is that religiously inclined that he would act on behalf of religion.

EMMA ALBERICI: So what is the ideology that makes him commit such a heinous act?

HUSSAIN NADIM: The current project that I’m doing is specifically on this subject, on understanding the Muslim world view and that is at the centre of understanding radicalisation. There are certain themes that Muslims have grown up, in fact my own self, we were grown up believing certain things. One of the themes was that there would be a clash of civilisation eventually. There will be a resurgence of Islam, partly because of the entire colonisation period, Muslims have been mobilised by communities, there will come have a time when we will have our glory back. So that idea has kind of, like, travelled down to today where Muslims are looking at resurgence of Islam in a sort of global khilafah. The second idea is that Muslims generally feel that Islam is under attack. Now that has something which has very, very strong, not religiously, but politically and socially, that has a very strong value that somehow we are being under attack and the events globally might not be related to religion, but they are proving them to be right. I mean, 9/11 happened. After that there was Afghanistan. A lost Muslims said that that makes sense because 9/11 happened. But then when the US went into Iraq and then when Iran was being threatened, then Syria and all these places – I mean, look at – ask Muslims over here in Australia: who is sponsoring ISIS? And the answer you will get is that it’s the US. Now that’s something very disturbing because that’s not really true. But the Muslims are looking at this problem as something which is driven by the US foreign policy and hence they are looking at this as a very political way which they want to counter.

EMMA ALBERICI: So, what role can families play in helping to counter radicalisation?

HUSSAIN NADIM: Families are at the core of this radicalisation issue. When we were dealing with deradicalisation projects in Pakistan, we realised that the first and the foremost focal point of deradicalisation strategy has to come from the family. Now problem is that a lot of times, parenting over here is a problem. And I’ve been to this – talking about this to the Australian Government for a while now, that you cannot deal with deradicalisation of the subject. For instance, if the kid is deradicalisised, you can’t just focus on deradicalising that kid. What you need to also focus is on the parenting issue, what the parents are teaching their children. What sort of ideology they are filtering into their children. And that is what really defines whether the kids will fit into Australian society or whether they’re gonna get seclude and then go online and realise that, “Oh, this is what really Islam is.”

EMMA ALBERICI: So to an extent it’s integrating the parents as much as the children into Western society?

HUSSAIN NADIM: I think parents have to be at the core of it, more so, parents need to be deradicalise themselves or teach – taught in …

EMMA ALBERICI: Better integrated.

HUSSAIN NADIM: Better integrated.

EMMA ALBERICI: Well we’ve run out of time. Hussain Nadim, thank you very much for coming in.

HUSSAIN NADIM: Thank you so much.

Just to add to that, I think this point by Hitchens ties in nicely as well.

This is from an interview with a Muslim Physicist by Der Spiegel.

Pakistani nuclear physicist: “Islamic Societies Have Collectively Failed”

There is a growing unrest in Islamic lands, and religious forces are gaining ground after the Arab revolution. The Pakistani nuclear physicist Pervez Hoodbhoy sees a “collective failure” of Muslim societies. He clarified his thesis during an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE.

Students frolic around Pervez Hoodbhoy. They wear tunics and doctoral caps. The young women have simply put the caps on their headscarves. They have just learned that they have passed the examinations. Now they want to take a group photo of themselves with Hoodbhoy, their famous teacher.

Pervez Hoodbhoy, 62, is a nuclear physicist at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan. He has been teaching here since the ‘70s. He has studied and taught at renowned universities in USA and Europe. He has received awards for his scientific activities, and he has engaged in political issues through physics.

For example, he criticized the nuclear upgrading of Pakistan, which is a nuclear power, and the advance of religion in scientific, cultural and political sectors. With this attitude he has earned himself enemies in Pakistan, a country which is very proud of having an atomic bomb. A private university in Lahore has already fired him, and he has been waiting for months to collect his salary for his work in Islamabad.

Despite this, he says he has never thought of leaving Pakistan. Hoodbhoy was born Muslim, in an Ishmaelite family. He is hated by many, but secretly admired by others, and he does not want to be silenced. “I say what I think. And I provide a solid basis for it,” he says in his office, which he still has in the university where he has yet to receive his salary. Pictures of Japan in the aftermath of the dropping of the atomic bomb hang on the walls, and books on physics and politics are piled upon his desk.

Read in the interview why Pervez Hoodbhoy takes such a critical stance towards religion, and what he sees for the future of Islamic societies:

Spiegel: Mr. Hoodbhoy, you regularly warn about the radicalization of Muslims. How exactly do you come to this position?

Hoodbhoy: When I started teaching here at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad in the early ‘70s, there was only a single student in the entire campus wearing a burka. Today around 70 per cent of the women here are fully covered. Only 30 per cent go around normally.

Spiegel: Do your students justify it? Or is that not an issue?

Hoodbhoy: I ask them occasionally, and many of them say Islam requires it of them. Others say they wear a burka or hijab because most women here do. Others say they feel safer like that, because when they’re standing at the bus stop no one bothers them.

Spiegel: So there’s no turning back to God or stricter interpretation of religion?

Hoodbhoy: Yes there is. We are experiencing a huge cultural revolution in the Islamic world, not just in Pakistan, but in more or less every Islamic country. Pakistan is changing, Afghanistan has radicalized, Iran, Iraq, many countries in Africa and the Arabian world, Egypt, Algeria, now Mali. Sooner or later in Syria only veiled women will be seen. But let’s look at the Islamic communities in Europe or the USA — they are infected with the same virus. Why? I think people are noticing that they differ from others. A burka is essentially just a label to distance yourself from others. It says clearly: my identity is Islamic. This identity is closely linked to the feeling of being a victim of history. Deep down, Muslims feel that they have failed. This mix of sensitivities makes me afraid, because it leads to behavior that is very unhealthy.

Spiegel: You view Muslim societies as having collectively failed. What do you mean by that?

Hoodbhoy: There are around 1.5 billion Muslims in the entire world — but they cannot point to a substantial achievement in any field. Not in politics, not socially, not in the sciences or art or literature. The only thing they do with great devotion is fast and pray. But there are no efforts to improve conditions of life in Islamic societies. Unconsciously, people naturally feel this is a collective failure.

Spiegel: Last time there was the so-called Arab Spring, where people — Muslims — fought for better living conditions.

Hoodbhoy: The Arab spring was just an answer to autocratic systems and despotism, that is, to the factors which allowed the Arab world to sink into darkness. But the protests were not aimed at demanding a cultural or scientific renaissance. That is why not many changes are to be expected. A real liberation will only happen when the political changes are followed by cultural ones, and also by a change of attitude. Arab Muslims must get rid of the false but widespread belief that science contains any kind of religious elements. This Insh’allah mentality, according to which Allah is responsible for everything, is the opposite of the scientific way of thinking. Apart from this, the Arab working ethic is a bad one. There are always stops in order to comply with religious duties. In order to remain competitive in the modern world, things like punctuality and compliance with rules dictated by men, and not by Allah, must be dramatically improved.

Spiegel: Do you actually receive threats because of statements like this?

Hoodbhoy: Not threats, but they make life difficult for me. I’ve just been sacked from the Lahore University of Management Sciences, where I taught physics. That’s a very progressive private university, but in this society there are limits to what may be said. Even here in Islamabad life isn’t easy for me. Because I am a tenured professor, they can’t sack me. But I’ve haven’t been paid for months. I’m just sticking to the facts: what significant invention or discovery have Muslims made in the last thousand years? Electricity? Electromagnetic waves? Antibiotics? The combustion engine? Computers? No, nothing, at least nothing that makes for a modern civilization. And it’s the same now. And according to the religious fanatics, that also doesn’t matter. Their way of thinking is still that of the 12th century.

Spiegel: There are really progressive Muslims, such ones who are secular and appreciate the modern world. And the majority of them are also rather moderate from a religious point of view. You are being unfair to them now.

Hoodbhoy: Of course there were attempts by part of Islamic societies to become more modern, in the middle of the 20th century. Pakistan was a very modern idea when it was created in 1947. Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, all these were societies which looked at education and progress as something good. (But) all this is over. And this has many reasons. Arab nationalism failed. The Palestinians were kept down. And the West pursued its interests independently of positive developments in Islamic countries, for example regarding oil. If things go wrong, people turn to God.

Spiegel: You say that this is already enough to ignite a radicalization?

Hoodbhoy: For many Muslims, one question has not been addressed: why has our grandeur faded away? And the answer given to them by mullahs is the following: “Because you are not good Muslims! Pray! Fast! Cover your women! Think again about the interpretation you give to the Quran!” There is no way forward, and we are experiencing the results. In Pakistan, radical Sunnis kill Shi’ites on a daily basis just because they are seen as unbelievers.
Spiegel: And what do you see as the right path in order to stop these developments?

Hoodbhoy: Societies must have their bloody experiences. This is the way in which Europe turned secular. Earlier there were constant battles between Catholics and Protestants, and people came to their senses only after bloodsheds took place long enough. I fear that we are having just these horrendous experiences.

Spiegel: In spite of this, now we must deal with radicals. What is your opinion about talking with the Taliban?

Hoodbhoy: Those who are not ready to talk, but stick to violence, must be eliminated. Let’s look at the Taliban in Pakistan: they have two demands, namely that Pakistan cuts its links with the USA, and that sharia be introduced as the only one applicable law. They want no streets, no schools, and no work. They know no compromises. Of course that one cannot talk with them. We saw this in 2009 in the valley of Swat: the more concessions the Pakistani government made, the more they moved forward. One must tell them clearly: we negotiate with you only if you put down your guns. And because they will not do this, we must fight them. If one talks with the Taliban, this must happen only from a position of strength.

Spiegel: So would the government have the backing of the population if it were to fight the Taliban?

Hoodbhoy: When the question was raised in 2009 whether the army should enter into war with Taliban in Swat Valley, there was intense opposition from part of the population. But in spite of this, the army marched. The situation in Swat Valley with the Taliban is today visibly better than before. I believe that many do not like the army, but they like extremists even less. I am convinced that military actions are possible.

Spiegel: How strong is the level of radicalization inside the Pakistani army, which has at its disposal the fastest growing nuclear arsenal in the world?

Hoodbhoy: Regarding its composition, the army cannot be anything other than the society to which its members belong. Pakistani society has arranged a place for the Islamic agenda, and this is also valid for the army. That is why the military is facing huge problems. There are officials who consider themselves as a part of the Pakistani army. And there are officials who see themselves as part of the army of Islam. The civil sector inside the army views this with concern, but they have no answers to this challenge.

Pakistani nuclear physicist: “Islamic Societies Have Collectively Failed”

There is a growing unrest in Islamic lands, and religious forces are gaining ground after the Arab revolution. The Pakistani nuclear physicist Pervez Hoodbhoy sees a “collective failure” of Muslim societies. He clarified his thesis during an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE.

Students frolic around Pervez Hoodbhoy. They wear tunics and doctoral caps. The young women have simply put the caps on their headscarves. They have just learned that they have passed the examinations. Now they want to take a group photo of themselves with Hoodbhoy, their famous teacher.

Pervez Hoodbhoy, 62, is a nuclear physicist at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan. He has been teaching here since the ‘70s. He has studied and taught at renowned universities in USA and Europe. He has received awards for his scientific activities, and he has engaged in political issues through physics.

For example, he criticized the nuclear upgrading of Pakistan, which is a nuclear power, and the advance of religion in scientific, cultural and political sectors. With this attitude he has earned himself enemies in Pakistan, a country which is very proud of having an atomic bomb. A private university in Lahore has already fired him, and he has been waiting for months to collect his salary for his work in Islamabad.

Despite this, he says he has never thought of leaving Pakistan. Hoodbhoy was born Muslim, in an Ishmaelite family. He is hated by many, but secretly admired by others, and he does not want to be silenced. “I say what I think. And I provide a solid basis for it,” he says in his office, which he still has in the university where he has yet to receive his salary. Pictures of Japan in the aftermath of the dropping of the atomic bomb hang on the walls, and books on physics and politics are piled upon his desk.

Read in the interview why Pervez Hoodbhoy takes such a critical stance towards religion, and what he sees for the future of Islamic societies:

Spiegel: Mr. Hoodbhoy, you regularly warn about the radicalization of Muslims. How exactly do you come to this position?

Hoodbhoy: When I started teaching here at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad in the early ‘70s, there was only a single student in the entire campus wearing a burka. Today around 70 per cent of the women here are fully covered. Only 30 per cent go around normally.

Spiegel: Do your students justify it? Or is that not an issue?

Hoodbhoy: I ask them occasionally, and many of them say Islam requires it of them. Others say they wear a burka or hijab because most women here do. Others say they feel safer like that, because when they’re standing at the bus stop no one bothers them.

Spiegel: So there’s no turning back to God or stricter interpretation of religion?

Hoodbhoy: Yes there is. We are experiencing a huge cultural revolution in the Islamic world, not just in Pakistan, but in more or less every Islamic country. Pakistan is changing, Afghanistan has radicalized, Iran, Iraq, many countries in Africa and the Arabian world, Egypt, Algeria, now Mali. Sooner or later in Syria only veiled women will be seen. But let’s look at the Islamic communities in Europe or the USA — they are infected with the same virus. Why? I think people are noticing that they differ from others. A burka is essentially just a label to distance yourself from others. It says clearly: my identity is Islamic. This identity is closely linked to the feeling of being a victim of history. Deep down, Muslims feel that they have failed. This mix of sensitivities makes me afraid, because it leads to behavior that is very unhealthy.

Spiegel: You view Muslim societies as having collectively failed. What do you mean by that?

Hoodbhoy: There are around 1.5 billion Muslims in the entire world — but they cannot point to a substantial achievement in any field. Not in politics, not socially, not in the sciences or art or literature. The only thing they do with great devotion is fast and pray. But there are no efforts to improve conditions of life in Islamic societies. Unconsciously, people naturally feel this is a collective failure.

Spiegel: Last time there was the so-called Arab Spring, where people — Muslims — fought for better living conditions.

Hoodbhoy: The Arab spring was just an answer to autocratic systems and despotism, that is, to the factors which allowed the Arab world to sink into darkness. But the protests were not aimed at demanding a cultural or scientific renaissance. That is why not many changes are to be expected. A real liberation will only happen when the political changes are followed by cultural ones, and also by a change of attitude. Arab Muslims must get rid of the false but widespread belief that science contains any kind of religious elements. This Insh’allah mentality, according to which Allah is responsible for everything, is the opposite of the scientific way of thinking. Apart from this, the Arab working ethic is a bad one. There are always stops in order to comply with religious duties. In order to remain competitive in the modern world, things like punctuality and compliance with rules dictated by men, and not by Allah, must be dramatically improved.

Spiegel: Do you actually receive threats because of statements like this?

Hoodbhoy: Not threats, but they make life difficult for me. I’ve just been sacked from the Lahore University of Management Sciences, where I taught physics. That’s a very progressive private university, but in this society there are limits to what may be said. Even here in Islamabad life isn’t easy for me. Because I am a tenured professor, they can’t sack me. But I’ve haven’t been paid for months. I’m just sticking to the facts: what significant invention or discovery have Muslims made in the last thousand years? Electricity? Electromagnetic waves? Antibiotics? The combustion engine? Computers? No, nothing, at least nothing that makes for a modern civilization. And it’s the same now. And according to the religious fanatics, that also doesn’t matter. Their way of thinking is still that of the 12th century.

Spiegel: There are really progressive Muslims, such ones who are secular and appreciate the modern world. And the majority of them are also rather moderate from a religious point of view. You are being unfair to them now.

Hoodbhoy: Of course there were attempts by part of Islamic societies to become more modern, in the middle of the 20th century. Pakistan was a very modern idea when it was created in 1947. Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, all these were societies which looked at education and progress as something good. (But) all this is over. And this has many reasons. Arab nationalism failed. The Palestinians were kept down. And the West pursued its interests independently of positive developments in Islamic countries, for example regarding oil. If things go wrong, people turn to God.

Spiegel: You say that this is already enough to ignite a radicalization?

Hoodbhoy: For many Muslims, one question has not been addressed: why has our grandeur faded away? And the answer given to them by mullahs is the following: “Because you are not good Muslims! Pray! Fast! Cover your women! Think again about the interpretation you give to the Quran!” There is no way forward, and we are experiencing the results. In Pakistan, radical Sunnis kill Shi’ites on a daily basis just because they are seen as unbelievers.
Spiegel: And what do you see as the right path in order to stop these developments?

Hoodbhoy: Societies must have their bloody experiences. This is the way in which Europe turned secular. Earlier there were constant battles between Catholics and Protestants, and people came to their senses only after bloodsheds took place long enough. I fear that we are having just these horrendous experiences.

Spiegel: In spite of this, now we must deal with radicals. What is your opinion about talking with the Taliban?

Hoodbhoy: Those who are not ready to talk, but stick to violence, must be eliminated. Let’s look at the Taliban in Pakistan: they have two demands, namely that Pakistan cuts its links with the USA, and that sharia be introduced as the only one applicable law. They want no streets, no schools, and no work. They know no compromises. Of course that one cannot talk with them. We saw this in 2009 in the valley of Swat: the more concessions the Pakistani government made, the more they moved forward. One must tell them clearly: we negotiate with you only if you put down your guns. And because they will not do this, we must fight them. If one talks with the Taliban, this must happen only from a position of strength.

Spiegel: So would the government have the backing of the population if it were to fight the Taliban?

Hoodbhoy: When the question was raised in 2009 whether the army should enter into war with Taliban in Swat Valley, there was intense opposition from part of the population. But in spite of this, the army marched. The situation in Swat Valley with the Taliban is today visibly better than before. I believe that many do not like the army, but they like extremists even less. I am convinced that military actions are possible.

Spiegel: How strong is the level of radicalization inside the Pakistani army, which has at its disposal the fastest growing nuclear arsenal in the world?

Hoodbhoy: Regarding its composition, the army cannot be anything other than the society to which its members belong. Pakistani society has arranged a place for the Islamic agenda, and this is also valid for the army. That is why the military is facing huge problems. There are officials who consider themselves as a part of the Pakistani army. And there are officials who see themselves as part of the army of Islam. The civil sector inside the army views this with concern, but they have no answers to this challenge.

In other news, a local vicar advises governmant on nuclear policy.
https://www.premier.org.uk/News/UK/Vicar-accuses-government-of-creating-uncertainty-through-Hinkley-Point-delay

Vicar accuses government of creating ‘uncertainty’ through Hinkley Point delay
Fri 29 Jul 2016
By Aaron James

A vicar who looks after the community where the new Hinkley Point nuclear power station could be built has said the government’s created more uncertainty for local people after delaying the decision on whether to allow it.

Revd Alison Waters, from St Mary’s Church in Stockland, has been speaking to Premier after the government announced it wouldn’t be giving the final go-ahead on the new station until autumn – on the day they were due to sign contracts with French energy company EDF.

EDF is footing most of the £18bn bill to build Hinkley Point C, with Chinese investors providing around £6bn. Britain then buys back the power generated from them.

Supporters of Hinkley Point C say it will create thousands of jobs and provide 7% of all the electricity Britain needs – amounting to around 5.8 million homes.

However critics say nuclear is an inherently dangerous energy source, are concerned that foreign investors and not the UK government will own the plant, and fear Britain will have to pay too much for the electricity it produces.

Some have also said EDF are not up to the task of building Hinkley Point C; two senior executives recently resigned over fears they could not see the project through and the company recently had to raise £3.4bn from investors.

Commissioning for Hinkley Point began several years before Theresa May became Prime Minister and it’s possible the delay on a final decision until autumn is intended to give her an opportunity to review the contract details and prices struck by her predecessor David Cameron’s government before going ahead with them.

Speaking on Premier’s News Hour, Revd Alison Waters said: “I think everyone’s quite shocked really.

“It’s just yet another delay – more uncertainty for this community.

“Whilst it’s disappointing for the local area because the expectation was that it would be agreed this week, nonetheless everyone wants it to be successful, and therefore if that means looking at it again… then let’s get on and do it.

“Just having this long, long period of uncertainty causes difficulties.”

Ian Liddell-Grainger, Conservative MP for Bridgwater and West Somerset, said the delay was simply ministers adopting a precautionary approach.

“It was originally intended that the final go-ahead would be jointly announced by both governments once the British and French parliaments were in session again in the autumn so in reality this does not represent any further slippage in the timetable,” he said.

“But I have no doubt that Hinkley Point C will go ahead and that the South West will soon begin to reap the benefits of being home to the largest civil engineering project in Europe.”

captainsasquatch – Member

In other news, a local vicar advises governmant on nuclear policy.

Did someone just commit mass murder in the name of the COE?

Did someone just commit mass murder in the name of the COE?

😆

Arrested and tried maybe. Shot dead, clean simple done.

Tom our Algerian friend doesn’t like going back home as now she is expected to wear a veil (social and religious pressure), something she never did when she was a young woman living there. I listened to a very interesting speech a few days ago. The Bible and it’s interpretation has evolved becoming more liberal and even Judaism which is based on writings 3000+ years ago is more tolerant. Islam is the newest Abrahamic religion (AD 650) but it and it’s interetation is regressive by modern standards and the radical interpretations want to take it backwards not forwards. Trying to incorporate that into a modern Western society is all but impossible.

Shot dead, clean simple done.

yeah **** it, none of that pesky proof nonsense, no trails to actually see if he’s done anything eh?

To be fair he did shoot at the police so they fired back.

next thing you know we will be sending drones to assassinate people without trial in countries that we are not at war with next.

nickc

yeah **** it, none of that pesky proof nonsense, no trails to actually see if he’s done anything eh?

Well, as Drac says he was shooting at the police. He was asked for id, pulled out a gun and shot a police officer. I think that’s proof enough for the wounded officers’ colleague to shoot him, wouldn’t you say?

Death By Cop as the Americans call it. So he doesn’t have to stand up in court and justify his actions of murdering innocent civilians (non-combatants) which is something I understand the Koran forbids.

Yeah, I think having your colleague shot in the shoulder is perfectly reasonable justification for shooting back.

I don’t envy them that situation, I expect they might have a few nightmares over this.

In other news, a local vicar advises governmant on nuclear policy.
https://www.premier.org.uk/News/UK/Vicar-accuses-government-of-creating-uncertainty-through-Hinkley-Point-delay

Why undermine someone who is clearly very clever and also “a prominent activist in particular concerned with promotion of freedom of speech, secularism and education in Pakistan.”

He seems a lot more authorative on the isssue, than Ernie.

Apart from his specialist field of research, Hoodbhoy extensively writes and speaks on topics ranging from science in Islam to education and arms disarmament issues around the world.[32] He is author of Islam and Science: Religious Orthodoxy and the Battle for Rationality, that has been translated into five languages.[33] In this book, Hoodbhoy outlines the history of Pakistan, implications of theocracy and martial law in Pakistan, and the textbook revival in education system of Pakistan. His articles on various issues related to science and social issues are often published in international media. His publications are repeatedly published in both technical and non-technical papers.

Unless you don’t believe in any of his causes, hey? 😀

Well, you could just link to it instead of death by cut and paste…

Because you sods never read or watch any of it – you’ve got no excuses now.

Because you sods never read or watch any of it – you’ve got no excuses now.

What? You think posting several thousand words on the form rather than just quoting the odd paragraph and giving a link will make people read it?

French Defense Minister just gave a press conference to say they had foiled 17 terrorist plots in 2016. He also made the point that Shengen was a problem especially on trains where there are no security checks. I find it desperately depressing politicians need to withess hundreds of murders by terrorists before reacting to the obvious, no border conrrol is a major secuirty flaw.

his actions of murdering innocent civilians (non-combatants) which is something I understand the Koran forbids.

That’s not really true as I understand it. The Quran forbids murdering of innocents, however non-believers are fair game if they don’t pay a tax (Jizra) or convert to Islam also anyone threatening Islam is your enemy. Mohammed spread Islam many ways including via force. That’s the definition of Jihad.

French Defense Minister just gave a press conference to say they had foiled 17 terrorist plots in 2016. He also made the point that Shengen was a problem especially on trains where there are no security checks. I find it desperately depressing politicians need to withess hundreds of murders by terrorists before reacting to the obvious, no border conrrol is a major secuirty flaw.

Obviously it’s much more difficult for terrorists to travel internally in France then? Schengen is only a problem if you think nationally rather than as being European. It’s not a hard concept to grasp, or where do we stop? Inter county border controls?
Jizya? What is that? Could you give a definition, please? I can’t be arse Wikipediaring. Just so you can pick the bits out that show how wrong you are.

Because you sods never read or watch any of it – you’ve got no excuses now.

😯 how many people do you really think will RATS? I certainly just skimmed over it hoping for an exec summary and/or an explanation of the point you’re making. Still waiting…

Well, as Drac says he was shooting at the police. He was asked for id, pulled out a gun and shot a police officer. I think that’s proof enough for the wounded officers’ colleague to shoot him, wouldn’t you say?

Proof enough to shoot back for sure but I would still prefer to see a few of these **** tried and left to rot in prison.

Mohammed spread Islam many ways including via force. That’s the definition of Jihad.

Strangely I don’t find the many young muslims I work with seem to want to slit my throat. Are they not devout enough?

jambalaya – Member

French Defense Minister just gave a press conference to say they had foiled 17 terrorist plots in 2016.

17 terrorist plots in 2016 eh? He should have doubled it, or trebled it, or even quadrupled it, it would have appeared much more impressive and no could have argued with him.

Or perhaps he already did?

If the thread dosnt get off this page we’ve found our thread killer.

jambalaya – Member
French Defense Minister just gave a press conference to say they had foiled 17 terrorist plots in 2016.

Were they all planned by those pesky Muslims?

Drac

Were they all planned by those pesky Muslims?

That’s gross, racist and islamophobic. You can’t say that.

Were they all planned by those pesky Muslims?

Certainly the case that all of the 13 actual attacks in 2016 were. All of them. Let’s face it if you are a security officer there is only one community which is going to be your focus. Since Nice the Army no longer guard just the Synagogues and Jewish schools but patrol the streets constantly.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/23/did-berlin-truck-terrorist-try-get-britain/

Let’s face it if you are a security officer there is only one community which is going to be your focus.

You really do type some awful shite.

Let’s face it if you are a security officer called Jambalaya there is only one community which is going to be your focus, and then spend the rest of your days trying to find spurious data, mis-interpretting information a simply inventing to justify your islamaphobia.

That one’s on me, Happy Christmas.

Can I just say I really appreciated Tom’s monster long posts: The two interviews took a very valid slant on radicalisation that I hadn’t thought about before. Would not have read them if there’d just been a link.

yeah they were pretty good

beyond the usual binary BS

You really do type some awful shite.

Talk me through your strategy then. Take out all the self rightous nonsense and just look at the data. You just have to accept that the West’s security services will be quite correctly concentrating the vast majority of their resources in one area.

Europe has started to get the message but it’s taken very many attacks to spur them into action.

No doubt in my mind we will experience a significant attack in the UK. The security services have done a fantastic job to date but eventually someone and something is going to get through.

@Captain I hope it is a Merry Christmas as ISIS have been calling for attacks on this period and it’s symbols for months. The attack in Berlin was very well flagged and Brirish police have uncovered a plot to attack shopping centres.

jambalaya – Member

Let’s face it if you are a security officer there is only one community which is going to be your focus.

I guess that sort of attitude might help to explain this :

Germany failing to tackle rise in hate crime[/url]

Investigations into the murders of eight men of Turkish descent, one man of Greek descent and a German police officer repeatedly failed to identify and follow up leads pointing to the racist motivation behind the attacks, while relatives of the victims reported feeling victimized by the police.

Of course it’s not terrorism when Muslims are terrorised.

99.9% of Muslims might not be terrorists but 100% of non-Muslims aren’t.

🙄

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-24/aussie-kids-draw-‘welcome’-artwork-for-migrants,-refugees/8145980
Sometimes it’s worth remembering that kids often see things differently and it may offer some more hope for the future.

So Australia is the bastion of multiculturalism? You learn something new every day!

I’m going to go out on a limb say both those pics above were commissioned… 💡