Many dead in coordinated Paris shootings and explosions

[Pickman's model]

Found the piece in question:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/13/opinion/sunday/seth-stephens-davidowitz-the-data-of-hate.html

it's more than a few months auld

 

[Idris2002]

it's more than a few months auld

I might say the same myself.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Well of course that is the obvious answer. And ironic that money paid for that oil is siphoned off to fund attacks on those buying the oil. But this is a decades-long thing now. The folly is extraordinary, and ongoing.

That folly is the price that the US (and other resource-thirsty states) are willing to pay. To those states, a hundred or even a thousand Parises are "a price worth paying" to keep the oil flowing. Human cost is a secondary consideration when set against facilitating the continuation of capitalism.

 

[bluescreen]

You missed my point completely. Malik didn't mention Breivik in his list. I would, and I think it's important to include him.

It was only a short article. Malik doesn't let Breivik off the hook in this one:

Thirty years ago multiculturalism was widely seen as the answer to many of Europe’s social problems. Today it is seen, by growing numbers of people, not as the solution to, but as the cause of, Europe’s myriad social ills. That perception has been fuel for the success of far-right parties and populist politicians across Europe from Geert Wilders in Holland to Marine Le Pen in France, from the True Finns to the UK Independence Party. It even provided fuel for the obscene, homicidal rampage last year of Anders Behring Breivik in Oslo and Utøya, which in his eyes were the first shots in a war defending Europe against multiculturalism.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH MULTICULTURALISM? [PART 1]

 

[Pickman's model]

That folly is the price that the US (and other resource-thirsty states) are willing to pay. To those states, a hundred or even a thousand Parises are "a price worth paying" to keep the oil flowing. Human cost is a secondary consideration when set against facilitating the continuation of capitalism.

acceptable level of violence

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It was only a short article. Malik doesn't let Breivik off the hook in this one:

I didn't think he would, tbh. I wasn't really intending a criticism of Malik, more making an addition. We're already hearing from Hollande about how they will 'mercilessly' hunt down those responsible for Friday's attacks, and no doubt that will include extending the hunt for the sources of radicalisation, but I would like to see the same standards applied to the far right. I would like to see that link made between Islamist terrorists and Breivik as often as possible.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Atrocities of the scale of Paris are happening in Iraq and Syria on a weekly basis, yet they rarely produce threads like these!

And you haven't got the intellectual wherewithal to work out why?

 

[Pickman's model]

I didn't think he would, tbh. I wasn't really intending a criticism of Malik, more making an addition. We're already hearing from Hollande about how they will 'mercilessly' hunt down those responsible for Friday's attacks, and no doubt that will include extending the hunt for the sources of radicalisation, but I would like to see the same standards applied to the far right. I would like to see that link made between Islamist terrorists and Breivik as often as possible.

our own fascist terror loons not i see as "sexy" as a blond norwegian. there have been a load of aryan strike force and bnp sent down for terrorist offences, and one national action. they not interedting enough i suppose.

 

[frogwoman]

Tbf the link between islamist terrorists and breivik is one he'd be all to happy to make himself.

 

[Pickman's model]

And you haven't got the intellectual wherewithal to work out why?

he does not.

 

[Pickman's model]

Tbf the link between islamist terrorists and breivik is one he'd be all to happy to make himself.

doesn't need to now lbj his cheerleader.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Tbf the link between islamist terrorists and breivik is one he'd be all to happy to make himself.

You think? Maybe. Not that it matters what he thinks, but I would have thought he'd probably be pissed off by the idea of people lumping him together with Islamists on the same list.

I guess the point I'm clumsily trying to make is that the likes of Breivik tend to be classified as serial killers/mass murderers whose act is isolated, while other attacks are called terrorism or even as with Friday an act of war.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Honestly I'm amazed posters say still say this. Few posters on this forum have visited Iraq or Syria. Few posters have friends and family there. Paris is a short train journey away for most Urbans. Of course a terrorist attack in Paris will generate more interest.

Human psychology is such that you worry about events based on the level of potential threat to you. While you may be intellectually concerned about events in the Middle East, you're unlikely to have the sort of visceral concern about threat that the events in Paris generate. If weltweit can't see that, then that's his problem.

 

[frogwoman]

You think? Maybe. Not that it matters what he thinks, but I would have thought he'd probably be pissed off by the idea of people lumping him together with Islamists on the same list.

Yes i do. He planned to cut peoples heads off on camera, iirc he explicitly said inspired by what was then al qaeda in Iraq (and became daesh). The whole thing these guys believe is 'the counter jihad' movement, they believe that jihadism is international and a similar 'force' needed to stop it.

 

[DotCommunist]

I think he'd identify as they do, the 'war of civilisations' and he on the other team to the islamist terrrorists. Soldiers in a war.

 

[frogwoman]

Yep he definitely believed he was a soldier in a war and that similar tactics were needed to the islamists.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yes i do. He planned to cut peoples heads off on camera, iirc he explicitly said inspired by what was then al qaeda in Iraq (and became daesh). The whole thing these guys believe is 'the counter jihad' movement, they believe that jihadism is international and a similar 'force' needed to stop it.

And yet they attack the same targets and for much the same reason. They are on the same side, effectively.

That's the bit I doubt Breivik would be happy about - the idea that he and the jihadists are different aspects of the same enemy.

 

[1805]

so cynicism in one so young

I have nothing to look forward to with hope.

 

[Idris2002]

I have nothing to look forward to with hope.

Don't be a dick.

 

[frogwoman]

I cant remember the thing i read now but ive read stuff arguing that the international appeal of 'counter jihadism'/breivikism and its ability to appeal to many disparate groups such as anti muslim african militias, hindu nationalists, zionists and survivalist gun nuts make it potentially a fairly serious threat.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I heard ordinary people (not raving right wingers) express concern about terrorists using the refugee routes to infiltrate and perpetrate attacks in europe. Now it seems, the inevitable scenario has happened. On one side the right wing press are trumpeting it for their own agenda, and on the other end of the political spectrum the only response seems to be deny or avoid. Knee-jerking really.

It is now a key issue, not because the right wing are using it but because ordinary people will be concerned about it.

Is the left capable of addressing this specific issue without tying itself in knots? It doesn't do to just feel uncomfortable with the theme.

Chicken or egg issue. In Germany there was little or no concern about infiltration until the right-wing press started generating some, and the rightist politicians jumped on board. In the space of a week or so, the refugee issue became (in the media) about terrorists pretending to be refugees.
The truth is that the issue, whether an actual or (mostly) imagined one, will be used across the political spectrum to make political capital, and the only error "the left" are making politically, is allowing the right to set the agenda, rather than demanding evidence that supports the right's claims.

 

[frogwoman]

It was a book i couldnt afford to buy Idris2002

To an extent i think the pointing out of ETA, IRA etc terrorism as a reason not to be overly concerned about jihadism is missing the point a bit. It might be true that dissident republicans, animal rights terrorists etc, have had more unexploded devices, bomb plots etc, but jihadis are far better organised and have killed far far more people.

Jihadis kill 5000 people a month worldwide on average which is something that animal rights nutters and even the far right are not currently doing. Therefore there is more of a reason to be worried about jihadism more than other types of terrorism (not that these other types couldnt become as big a threat in the future, especially with the large numbers of eg far righters going to ukraine and gaining military experience). But the hindu/jewish extremists' actions are fairly localised eg mobs of hindu nationalists killing people for eating beef in india but not here, jewish settlers attacking palestinians in the west bank but no jews attacking palestinians in terror attacks here.

Whereas jihadism has a global appeal, thats been part of its success, and the global neo nazi far right has made similar adaptations to globalisation (eg the whole idea of 'white pride worldwide' which hitler would have hated). Breivikism has a similar such appeal although where its likely to fall down is that a hindu nationalist eg is going to have very different targets on their 'hate list' than someone wanting to defend 'judeo christian civilisation'.

 

[camouflage]

M of A - What Preceded The Islamic State Attacks In France - Some Links (Updated)

 

[SpineyNorman]

No you prat, the two people that you quoted were saying that the author of the cartoon (a cartoon that you had posted without comment and have refused to explain why for some hours now) had used classic anti-Semitic tropes. You have this so wrong.

And one of them is a Jew herself!

 

[frogwoman]

I get slightliy annoyed with the whole 'ETA, IRA etc have launched more terrorist attacks in the last two years'

Well ok but how many people have they killed? And sorry but ETA arent recruting radicalised people from across the world to move to the basque homeland. They aren't killing tens of thousands of people every year etc. There is more of a reason to be worried about jihadis than other types of terrorism although i suspect with the issue of returning foreign fighters from ukraine etc the far right could come to pose a similar threat, although its not going to be a global one, white nationalists arent going to be joining insurgencies in india for eg

 

[machine cat]

It was a book i couldnt afford to buy Idris2002

To an extent i think the pointing out of ETA, IRA etc terrorism as a reason not to be overly concerned about jihadism is missing the point a bit. It might be true that dissident republicans, animal rights terrorists etc, have had more unexploded devices, bomb plots etc, but jihadis are far better organised and have killed far far more people.

Jihadis kill 5000 people a month worldwide on average which is something that animal rights nutters and even the far right are not currently doing. Therefore there is more of a reason to be worried about jihadism more than other types of terrorism (not that these other types couldnt become as big a threat in the future, especially with the large numbers of eg far righters going to ukraine and gaining military experience). But the hindu/jewish extremists' actions are fairly localised eg mobs of hindu nationalists killing people for eating beef in india but not here, jewish settlers attacking palestinians in the west bank but no jews attacking palestinians in terror attacks here.

Whereas jihadism has a global appeal, thats been part of its success, and the global neo nazi far right has made similar adaptations to globalisation (eg the whole idea of 'white pride worldwide' which hitler would have hated). Breivikism has a similar such appeal although where its likely to fall down is that a hindu nationalist eg is going to have very different targets on their 'hate list' than someone wanting to defend 'judeo christian civilisation'.

The main difficulty the IRA / ETA had was not carrying out an attack, but getting away with it without being caught. Jihadis don't have that problem.

 

[existentialist]

The main difficulty the IRA / ETA had was not carrying out an attack, but getting away with it without being caught. Jihadis don't have that problem.

Yeah. The suicide bomber thing makes for a bit of a paradigm shift.

 

[frogwoman]

The main difficulty the IRA / ETA had was not carrying out an attack, but getting away with it without being caught. Jihadis don't have that problem.

Some far righters also have the similar ideology of the 'glorious death' though. 'See you in Valhalla' etc

I was reading an interesting fb discussion recently that compared the ideology thats motivated many American school shooters, a sort of mishmash of MRAism and conspiracy theories, with jihadism and concluded the two were very similar.

 

[Idris2002]

Some far righters also have the similar ideology of the 'glorious death' though. 'See you in Valhalla' etc

I was reading an interesting fb discussion recently that compared the ideology thats motivated many American school shooters, a sort of mishmash of MRAism and conspiracy theories, with jihadism and concluded the two were very similar.

I think they're very similar indeed, almost identical. The only big difference being that the Daesh loons have an organization.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The main difficulty the IRA / ETA had was not carrying out an attack, but getting away with it without being caught. Jihadis don't have that problem.

This is true but the nature of an ETA target is also very different. They do target people they consider to be legitimate - Guardia Civil or politicians/businesspeople they don't like. Also, they often plant bombs and issue warnings - destroying buildings but trying not to kill people.

By contrast, the ISIS jihadis consider every single person in Europe, more or less, to be a legitimate target. There is no innocent death. The way they dehumanise their targets is scary imo. Scares me.