Not wealthy individuals. Are you saying they're completely independent of any state actors?
I don't mean conspiracy shit, just everyone appears to have an interest in the region: Europe; Saudi; Iran; Russia; The U.S. etc etc.
Not wealthy individuals. Are you saying they're completely independent of any state actors?
Because anything that helps force the end times along, anything that helps exacerbate 'you're either with us or against us' is good....and even more important why would Daesh want to use refugees - and make sure we know that they do?
More to the immediate point...
...how many of the jihadis operating in the EU came in as refugees? and how many are home grown?
...and even more important why would Daesh want to use refugees - and make sure we know that they do?
a lot came in when the uk govt (eg) said we're happy for you to live here but pls don't bomb us (covenant of security): so, many more 'home grown'.More to the immediate point...
...how many of the jihadis operating in the EU came in as refugees? and how many are home grown?
...and even more important why would Daesh want to use refugees - and make sure we know that they do?
cue final countdownNot sure that is to the point. My point was that it's obvious that Daesh could use people posing as refugees, but that this shouldn't be an excuse not to offer refuge.
In terms of why they'd want to: one reason could be to stir up exactly the kind of response many on the right would prefer i.e. to pit Europe v Islam.
The states that people (including you?) think are funding them (Qatar Kuwait and Saudi) are actually funding the FSA and islamist group who have been at war with ISIS for longer than most people have even been aware of the existence of ISIS. ISIS clearly receive some small scale logistical help from elements of the turkish state and military in a few limited areas of northern syria where they wish to undermine the rojava experiment but that has clearly failed as a project and i expect is being quietly wound up (except in possibly within turkey itself worryingly). It's really easy to fall into a conspiracy mindset here (see that shitty cartoon above) but that's really no substitute for wading through the relevant material rather than relying on old tropes and analysis stuck 20 or 30 years in the past. That why lies anti-imperialism of fools.Not wealthy individuals. Are you saying they're completely independent of any state actors?
Jesus, bring back ninja in place of that shit.
edit: interesting lot of sites that's appeared on btw - anti-semitic, racist anti-imperialist filth usually.
a lot came in when the uk govt (eg) said we're happy for you to live here but pls don't bomb us (covenant of security): so, many more 'home grown'.
The states that people (including you?) think are funding them (Qatar and Saudi) are actually funding the FSA and islamist group who have been at war with ISIS for longer than most people have even been aware of the existence of ISIS. ISIS clearly receive some small scale logistical help from elements of the turkish state and military in a few limited areas of northern syria where they wish to undermine the rojava experiment but that has clearly failed as a project and i expect is being quietly wound up (except in possibly within turkey itself worryingly). It's really easy to fall into a conspiracy mindset here (see that shitty cartoon above) but that's really no substitute for wading through the relevant material rather than relying on old tropes and analysis stuck 20 or 30 years in the past. That why lies anti-imperialism of fools.
For a bit of added confusion, have a look at how Al Quaeda (remember them?) are now regarded as moderates & potential allies in Syria.I've seen people claiming they serve Russia's interests and that Russia released Chechnya prisoners into the region for those ends. Tbh it just confuses the fuck out of me.
if anything, Russia is serving their interests right now - in concentrating their air raids on the anti-ISIS FSA and islamist groups that have had great success against them. But no, there's ISIS/Russia connection really.I've seen people claiming they serve Russia's interests and that Russia released Chechnya prisoners into the region for those ends. Tbh it just confuses the fuck out of me.
Is it me or does the daesh guy in that cartoon look like a jew?
It's obvious that mass immigration (e.g. the recent Syrian refugee crisis) could be used to facilitate atrocities like that of recent days. But we need someone with the bottle to say that assuming that risk is a price we should pay for doing the right thing.
They're not - that's just pro-assad hyperbole put about in order to suggest all rebel groups are really al qaeda and so to justify attacks on them.For a bit of added confusion, have a look at how Al Quaeda (remember them?) are now regarded as moderates & potential allies in Syria.
tbh if the last fifteen years haven't had that effect on many british muslims i would be utterly astonished. the govt has always said 'we value british muslims' while giving a rather different message with their actions. hmg show no real signs of giving a fuck about refugees either.What better way to cultivate 'homegrown' disaffection than to give the message that muslims are unwanted becuase they're a threat, albeit that we're stuck with the ones that are already here?
shite
Someone on this thread was there at the time and said it was a candle falling over.It's a difficult one though as it's not really something people will feel comfortable voicing in case it's misunderstood. The thought definitely occured to me that the refugee crisis would be a good way of shifting in a few sleepers. It's a shitty thought but there it is. I'm dreading similar actions here.
Any further news on the early reports of revenge attacks in Calais? Seems that it disappeared from the early reports and I never fully established if it was just a hoax as people on twitter seem to be live updates from people there.
I think it's genuinely a bit more complicated than that. See 'the rise of isis' book if you have time, or just Should US Ally with Al Qaeda in Syria? | ConsortiumnewsThey're not - that's just pro-assad hyperbole put about in order to suggest all rebel groups are really al qaeda and so to justify attacks on them.
I've seen stuff that basically says that one thing that would hit Daesh hard economically would be to bomb the oil infrastructure in the areas under their occupation. Have you come across that one at all, in your reading? If so, does it seem like a viable proposal?The states that people (including you?) think are funding them (Qatar and Saudi) are actually funding the FSA and islamist group who have been at war with ISIS for longer than most people have even been aware of the existence of ISIS. ISIS clearly receive some small scale logistical help from elements of the turkish state and military in a few limited areas of northern syria where they wish to undermine the rojava experiment but that has clearly failed as a project and i expect is being quietly wound up (except in possibly within turkey itself worryingly). It's really easy to fall into a conspiracy mindset here (see that shitty cartoon above) but that's really no substitute for wading through the relevant material rather than relying on old tropes and analysis stuck 20 or 30 years in the past. That why lies anti-imperialism of fools.
Someone on this thread was there at the time and said it was a candle falling over.
Read it months ago - Cockburn is a pro-assad goon - someone who only a few months agao was pretending the FSA doesn't exist. (You might want to have a look at the various long-running threads on Syria on here btw.)I think it's genuinely a bit more complicated than that. See 'the rise of isis' book if you have time, or just Should US Ally with Al Qaeda in Syria? | Consortiumnews
Certainly have - creeping to top of possible US agenda recently. Reluctance to carry it out due to national turmoil and hardship it would cause, believe it or not a number of the gas/oil complexes are jointly run by the regime and ISIS. Keeping those services going seen as being important at this phase by the planners.I've seen stuff that basically says that one thing that would hit Daesh hard economically would be to bomb the oil infrastructure in the areas under their occupation. Have you come across that one at all, in your reading? If so, does it seem like a viable proposal?
Demonstrably, it has.tbh if the last fifteen years haven't had that effect on many british muslims i would be utterly astonished.
Possibly. No point claiming otherwise or trying to downplay it. But it's not inevitable and it's not zero sum, as demonstrated in recent history and recent days. I think your analysis of the intent is spot on, about playing people off against each other and fostering radicalism, but it requires that people don't resist that process. On the evidence of the last year the French at least seem like they have the capacity for that.weighs rather light imo compared to the escalating war in the middle east and instability in eastern europe. these events will increase the chance of a general war. 13/11 will mean attacks on refugees across europe. people giving blood may become a common sight.
i think people can. i have less faith in govts.Possibly. No point claiming otherwise or trying to downplay it. But it's not inevitable and it's not zero sum, as demonstrated in recent history and recent days. I think your analysis of the intent is spot on, about playing people off against each other and fostering radicalism, but it requires that people don't resist that process. On the evidence of the last year the French at least seem like they have the capacity for that.
It's a difficult one though as it's not really something people will feel comfortable voicing in case it's misunderstood. The thought definitely occured to me that the refugee crisis would be a good way of shifting in a few sleepers. It's a shitty thought but there it is. I'm dreading similar actions here.
Any further news on the early reports of revenge attacks in Calais? Seems that it disappeared from the early reports and I never fully established if it was just a hoax as people on twitter seem to be live updates from people there.
Possibly. No point claiming otherwise or trying to downplay it. But it's not inevitable and it's not zero sum, as demonstrated in recent history and recent days. I think your analysis of the intent is spot on, about playing people off against each other and fostering radicalism, but it requires that people don't resist that process. On the evidence of the last year the French at least seem like they have the capacity for that.
The ban on the veil is more complicated and intertwined with the concept of nationhood, like the idea of multiculturalism, and not necessarily a symptom or reaction.Some indications of that. But some of the counterposition e.g. FN, ghettoisation, bans on the veil, etc. Though an important distinction between people and state needs to be unpicked there, of course.
The ban on the veil is more complicated and intertwined with the concept of nationhood, like the idea of multiculturalism, and not necessarily a symptom or reaction.