Not all programmers are on here: ISIS content.

It is very rare for an advanced mammal to kill a member of their own species. Violence and harm towards another member of their species is far more common but death if it occurs is usually accidental.

Would that not be more to do with the fact that “advanced mammals” (I take it you’re talking about apes?) are all pretty endangered and have low population densities? I bet if there were a vast number of them competing for limited resources there would be a lot more rucks.

To play devil’s advocate I would suggest that animals and humans forming warring tribal groups is totally natural and that it’s actually those of us who strive to co-exist peacefully who are acting unnaturally,

It’s emerging as well as being generally harassed as a Muslim tourist, and I can tell you some of them do have to put up with an awful lot of shit, he was detained in Tangier and being ‘persuaded’ to be an informant for MI5. This all on the lunchtime news. Threats of further harassment if he didn’t comply.

None of which is entitlement to go beheading innocents, but as always there are two sides to every story and inevitably some dirty tricks on behalf of western ‘agencies’

Not sure if everyone commenting has seen Bitter Lake, but it’s well worth a watch…

One of the basic overall conclusions is the strange alliance between the West and Saudi Arabia, who have been active in exporting wahhabism that forms the root of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

Given the extensive Arms trade with Saudi Arabia, not to mention long standing collusion between MI6, CIA and Saudi intelligence, it seems at odds with the peace that our leaders so readily preach.

Factor in Saudi Arabia’s well documented links to 9/11

and you have to wonder why:

flags were at half mast for the Death of King Abdullah…

yet flags weren’t flown half mast for the Death of Princess Diana…

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

because the Queen said they shouldn’t: Diana was divorced from the future king and therefore not part of the ‘official’ royal family.

Next.

@derek the security services where doing their job, he was being “harassed” based upon his behaviour in previously trying to join Islamist groups in Somalia and the fact the UK did not want him to travel and other countries didn’t want him. He was denied work in Saudi by the Saudis

because the Queen said they shouldn’t because she was divorced from the future king and therefore not part of the ‘official’ royal family.

Does that mean King Abdullah was part of the ‘official’ royal family?

Does that mean King Abdullah was part of the ‘official’ royal family?

*an* official one, certainly.

Whereas Diana wasn’t part of *any* Royal Family.

If you’re going to do the whole ‘THE MAN’s RULING THE WORLD AND IT’s ALL A CONSPIRACY HERE’s 5 LINKS NO ONE WILL EVER FOLLOW TO PROVE IT’ thing you really ought to get the basic premise so that there’s at least some doubt as to what happened and why.

I’m all over the basic premise:

the strange alliance between the West and Saudi Arabia, who have been active in exporting wahhabism that forms the root of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

the strange alliance between the West and Saudi Arabia

what’s strange about the West courting one of the world’s largest oil producers?

It is very rare for an advanced mammal to kill a member of their own species.

Name me a point in human history when people weren’t being killed by other people.

the strange alliance between the West and Saudi Arabia, who have been active in exporting wahhabism that forms the root of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

what’s strange about the West courting one of the world’s largest oil producers?

Why aren’t the same pleasantries extended to Iran then?

Why aren’t the same pleasantries extended to Iran then?

they were when it had a Royal Family.

There was a religious revolution though and the government there was very anti-western. You may have read about it?

Yes, a “royal family” was the link to the proposition.

JHJ in “unable to follow a simple argument” shocka…

Why aren’t the same pleasantries extended to Iran then?

they were when it had a Royal Family.

Are you quite sure of that?

I wouldn’t consider a coup by MI6 and the CIA as particularly friendly

Strangely, the MI6 documents still remain secret and the CIA only admitted involvement in 2013, 60 years after they destabilized Iran…

Strangely, the MI6 documents still remain secret

is it really strange? Like really?

Our secret services release as little information as they can about anything they do. It’s hardly ‘strange’ that even if they were involved they’d not release details of it, more ‘par for the course’.

So what were relationships like between 1953 and 1970whateveritwas when the Shah was forced out?

Yeah. Whatever.

Anyway – mash it.

‘Jihadi John’ hoping ISIS okay with people being unmasked

Is there some level of membership where I can agree to look at ads for Tudor watches in exchange for not seeing bizarre conspiracy theories?

Our secret services release as little information as they can about anything they do

So what are they up to these days?

So what are they up to these days?

No idea due to;

Our secret services release as little information as they can about anything they do

and it’s no good you pretending to know either. because you don’t – you’re just prepared to give credibility to other people’s guesses and assume that if it’s on a web page somewhere it must be ‘the truth’.

I promised myself I wouldn’t get drawn into these conversations any more. Can I blame some shadowy figure ‘in authority’ for not sticking to it?

Saw on the news last night, an interview with an ex-ISIS knerbhead who is now in Turkey. Apparently, he’s living in fear of getting offed (bless) because although he agrees with everything being done to “unbelievers”, he says the “foreign” “fighters” are hurting Muslims and he realises this after watching a FOURTEEN YEAR OLD GIRL being beheaded.

Apart from the fact that Muslims have been killing each other for not being the right sort of muslim for hundreds of years and he doesn’t seem to know this, he actually seemed to think that someone should feel sorry for him.

Perhaps the internal ISIS cracks are beginning to emerge. Hopefully, we’ll be able to just sit back and watch them eat each other. 😀

wwaswas – Member
Jihadi John has been named as Mohammed Emwazi, a computer programmer from West London.

What sort of internal journey does someone go on to get where he is today?

A gift for maths and a love of logical puzzles?

assume that if it’s on a web page somewhere it must be ‘the truth’

I’d always thought the Guardian was pretty good at getting to the truth… after all, they were deeply involved in the Snowden revelations.

Of course, you are right to question the media, after all, Allen Dulles, one of the key players in the coup of Iran was behind Operation MockingBird, where the CIA infiltrated the media, not only domestically, but internationally:

Among other dodgy dealings, Dulles also helped the Nazi’s rise to power with his Brother John Foster Dulles and Prescott Bush, George W and Jeb Bush’s Grandad.

They then laundered Nazi money after WW2 through dutch banks.

I wonder why these parts of history aren’t taught in schools?

@JHJ – I watched Bitter Lake and whilst it was interminably dull in parts it did show some great ironing. But could have done so in ½the time.

However, in conclusion and at odd with the main thrust of the film, I don’t believe there was any great conspiracy just a case of Western and Arab attitudes being very different but occasionally they worked together, whether progress was made or not is unproven. There exists a degree of trust but it is not, never has been and is unlikely to ever be complete trust in each other motives.

Hopefully, we’ll be able to just sit back and watch them eat each other

That would be cool, but you just know that some idiot would come up with a smart scheme that involves supporting one gang of nutjobs against the other gangs of nutjobs, and the cycle recommences.

I think there is a lot of truth in the assertion, people can become extremely violent especially if they feel their life/livelihood is threatened or they wish to extract revenge for something they feel has been done to them directly or indirectly.

Not when it comes to killing other human beings :

“Only 15 to 20 percent of the American riflemen in combat during World War II would fire at the enemy. Those who would not fire did not run or hide—in many cases they were willing to risk greater danger to rescue comrades, get ammunition, or run messages. They simply would not fire their weapons at the enemy, even when faced with repeated waves of banzai charges”.

http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/hope_on_the_battlefield

There is a reason why they put a mask on someone who is about to be executed by firing squad, and it isn’t for the condemned person’s benefit – most humans find it very difficult to look into someone’s eyes and kill them, even if they feel that they “deserve” it, it just isn’t natural.

“advanced mammals” (I take it you’re talking about apes?)

Not at all. I’m talking about most mammals including carnivores such as felidae and canidae species. It’s rare for them to kill members of their own species, it does happen but usually unintentionally, it very rarely happens intentionally. That rule can generally be applied to birds and most cold blooded animals too.

Hey, jhj.

Have you noticed that, over many different threads, you keep getting the same sort of replies to your posts, pointing out the logical fallacies and highlighting the fact that your sources are nothing more than conjecture-driven suppositions from others such as yourself, rather than anything objectively credible?

I was wondering if you know that to keep doing the same thing yet expect a different result, is a definition of insanity.

Just a thought you might want to consider…

I imagine it started with him being annoyed by pop-up ads on internet forums.

Well played, I reckon one of the mods might join due to excessive thread closing on the topic.

Anyway, here’s something to cheer us up.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/isis-suffers-heaviest-defeat-iraq-101500786.html

Hey Woppit,

I guess you don’t know much about the intelligence services influence on world history…

The Dulles Brothers are a good starting point

I’m a bit confused how you came to the conclusion that my sources are based on conjecture~ it all traces back to well documented history.

well documented history.

=

“look here’s a web page it must be true”

Yes. I’m interested to know why jhj doesn’t seem to understand the difference between conjecture and supportive evidence.

Could you show me which of the links it is you’re suggesting is mere conjecture?

As an example:

Look, here’s an article from a newspaper which presumably goes through all the same procedures as the rest of the news to verify it’s truth.

I apologize if it’s straying off topic slightly, but it verifies this link already provided which appears a touch more obscure.

Back on topic, have ISIS made any threats on Israel?

If not, why not?

Quite an in depth chat about him now on BBC news by the director of “Cage”. Talks about what a lovely guy and a beautiful young man he was before he joined ISIS.

Mentions repeated harassment by MI5 as the reason he joined IS but he really doesn’t come across as convincing at all and more of an apologist excusing the inexcusable . If the kind of harassment he describes was enough to turn him into a killer it’s a strange kind of miracle that every catholic male in Northern Ireland didn’t join the IRA.

If not, why not?

I’ll be honest; I really don’t care enough to try and find out.

I care about whet ISIS are doing but primarily it’s the motivations of the individuals concerned that concerns me – not any theory about the overarching political aims of their organisations.

Why do people do these things? Because they think they’re right. Really is that simple. Some people carpetbag companies, some people carpetbomb countries, some people become terrorists, some become politicians, some just rant on forums but it’s all basically teh same thing, “rightness” above reason.

I rather favour binner’s “It’s all about power and control” hypothesis.

Remember, 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

They never can seem to make their minds up:

Wonder if the instability caused by the rapid rise of ISIS from nowhere will help conquer Assad?

Yeah, he probably sang “God Save the Queen” before every execution, huh?

Like the Saudi’s you mean?

Why do people do these things? Because they think they’re right. Really is that simple. Some people carpetbag companies, some people carpetbomb countries, some people become terrorists, some become politicians, some just rant on forums but it’s all basically teh same thing, “rightness” above reason.

Youre wrong there………….