Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Easter Sunday Sri Lanka Church and Hotel bombings.

No, it is beyond my understanding of human nature.

I simply haven't experienced people who hate others as much as would be needed to carry out attacks like these. And how are the suicide bombers motivated?
 
No, it is beyond my understanding of human nature.

I simply haven't experienced people who hate others as much as would be needed to carry out attacks like these. And how are the suicide bombers motivated?

your incomprehension, That, my friend, is what we call political privilege.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
pretty standard in middle east. you get used to it. sometimes even in the area you're living in. sometimes even scare alarms at work.

Anyway, I'm going to unwatch this thread, we can have this discussion elsewhere.
 
I know the game you're trying to play here. It's been a distressing trajectory on the left, but entirely unsurprising.

But this is how the British falsify history, not as the fascists would have it by inventing things, but by brandishing moral superiority over anyone who dares to disagree. In fact this is fascist metapolitics in action. I'll leave you to it.


deleted, not the place for it,

would ask why this thread is so sparse though.
 
Wonder which islamist fresh back from Syria managad to get away with planning all this.

Not like Sri Lanka is a country that's soft on opposition groups or threats to security. Must have been some pretty crazy failings somewhere.
 
Fascists will pick up on all sorts of issues to smuggle in their agenda. Does that mean we should ignore any issue that is open to exploitation by the far right?

Apologies for necroing this but I think it's important...

To answer the first part of your question. fascists will not pick up on all sorts of things to smuggle in their agenda. they have a distinct and worked out praxis and most times they actually don't need to sneak in anything as they just take the prevailing ruling sentiments to their logical conclusion. something that sometimes gets missed on these forums when people start bashing identitarian commentariat without realising they are also engaging in a form of identity politics.

Secondly I shall leave you with this quote:

"Some years ago, a loose group of scholars in which the English philosopher
Martin Barker was especially influential began, in recognition of
changed patterns in the way the discourse of racial difference was employed
in politics, to speak about the emergence of what they called a New
Racism. This racism was defined by its strong culturalist and nationalist
inclinations. Whereas in the past raciology had been arrogant in its imperial
certainty that biology was both destiny and hierarchy, this persuasive
new variant was openly uncomfortable with the idea that "race" could be
biologically based. Consciousness of "race" was seen instead as closely
linked to the idea of nationality. Authentic, historic nations had discrete
cultural fillings. Their precious homogeneity endowed them with great
strength and prestige. Where large "indigestible" chunks of alien settlement
had taken place, all manner of dangers were apparent. Conflict was
visible, above all, along cultural lines. Of course, these regrettably transplanted
aliens were not identified as inferior, less worthy, or less admirable
than their "hosts." They may not have been infrahuman, but they were
certainly out of place. The social, economic, and political problems that
had followed their mistaken importation could only be solved by restoring
the symmetry and stability that flowed from putting them back where they
belonged. Nature, history, and geopolitics dictated that people should
cleave to their own kind and be most comfortable in the environments that
matched their distinctive cultural and therefore national modes ofbeing in
the world. Mythic versions of cultural ecology were invented to rationalize
the lives of these discrete national and racial identities. The Germans became
a people in their forests, whereas the British were a nation whose
seafaring activity shaped their essential inner character. In all cases, fragments
of self-evident truth nourished the fantasies of blood and belonging,28
which in turn demanded an elaborate geopolitical cartography of
nationality. 29"

Paul Gilroy - Against race: Imagining political culture beyond the colour line.

*note fragments of self-evident truth*

Again, apologies to all involved for the derail.
 
Apologies for necroing this but I think it's important...

To answer the first part of your question. fascists will not pick up on all sorts of things to smuggle in their agenda. they have a distinct and worked out praxis and most times they actually don't need to sneak in anything as they just take the prevailing ruling sentiments to their logical conclusion. something that sometimes gets missed on these forums when people start bashing identitarian commentariat without realising they are also engaging in a form of identity politics.

Secondly I shall leave you with this quote:



Paul Gilroy - Against race: Imagining political culture beyond the colour line.

*note fragments of self-evident truth*

Again, apologies to all involved for the derail.

I won't continue the derail.
 
I have the greatest problem understanding terrorists of this sort.
They kill, maim, and injure; they cause death and misery, and make everyone hate the silly bastards that do these incredibly moronic acts of mass murder.
They also encourage hate of their fellow Muslims, creating a lot of mistrust, hate against innocent people, and even attacks against innocent Muslims that have absolutely nothing to do with them. They make a lot of people think their religion is a shit stinking pile of shit that isn't worth a shit.
I'm unsure what they hope to gain.

Silly bastards - At least the bombers died, pity they didn't take their whole idiot network with them
 
Wrt to the intelligence and who told who this has been reworded since I last saw it and goes some way to explaining what went wrong:

...An intelligence note detailing the names, targets and whereabouts of possible attackers was circulated in parts of the government but is understood not to have reached the cabinet nor the prime minister. It is unclear whether the country’s security council also considered the warnings.

Sri Lanka’s government has been divided into factions since a constitutional crisis late last year, when the prime minister and his allies stopped being invited to meetings of the country’s top security officials....

So internal rivalries/infighting led to the information not being shared which led to a lot of people getting killed. :(

From here
 
The article says intelligence people passed warnings on which is very different to your suggestion they suppressed them


I quote the same article directly.
:thumbs: so...I didn't actually suggest anything.
Read through it and you'll find the quote. Its half way through the article.
 
Last edited:
Foreign intelligence warned the Sri Lankan authorities of a possible attack. However the police had been slow or failed to decipher the unverifiable details of targets, where and when, claimed to have been furnished by the international intelligence sources; and in a slumber of relative peace and tranquillity, did not expect anything of this scale. It is a coordinated attack incredible even in Sri Lanka. It is a proxy attack instigated by an international terror network that have been active in other parts of the world; because a small Sri Lankan homegrown jihadi group has no motive or objective to carry out this attack.
 
Back
Top Bottom