The Islamic state
- Thread starter brogdale
- Start date
A fair bit aye. Many Saudis have what looks to Western eyes like a split personality, at once hedonistic and puritanical, capitalist and Muslim. They don't experience these as contradictory, on account of their religion.
yes there would.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2015/02/04/the-burn-video-why-isis-did-it/
The burn video: why ISIS did it
The Burn Video: Why ISIS Did It
Early U.S. reaction to the gruesome video of a Jordanian military pilot being burned to death that the ISIS jihadist group released Tuesday has been predictably emotional. Most news outlets have focused on the barbarity of the immolation, and declined to air any portion of the video for fear of traumatizing viewers or aiding the terrorists. The dominant tenor of commentary has been that the militants are insanely extreme in their beliefs, and that the video will backfire by provoking widespread revulsion in the Middle East.
The problem with reporting the threat posed by ISIS in this way is that it makes the group’s successes in recruiting, raising money, and occupying vast expanses of territory almost inexplicable. The unstated assumption is that if ISIS is led by crazy people, then the millions of sympathizers it has attracted in the region and the thousands of Westerners who have flocked to its banner must also be crazy — or perhaps simply coerced by the terrorists. This approach doesn’t help much in defeating the organization, and may provoke its opponents into committing similar atrocities.
So let’s try to stand back from the horrific imagery of a young man deliberately burned to death while ISIS foot soldiers look on, and try to understand the larger meaning of the video. The fiery death of pilot Muadh al-Kasasbeh is the relatively brief climax in a 22-minute film narrative that imitates the production values of documentaries aired on outlets like the History Channel. It is crafted as a morality play featuring an extended monologue by the captured pilot in which he details how the coalition of Western countries and local Arab states wages its air war against ISIS. After describing the military systems being used and the bases from which they originate, the video shows searing images of civilians who allegedly have been killed or injured by coalition bombs — many of them children.
Against this backdrop, the immolation of a pilot who was captured while participating in one such strike is presented as just retribution for his acts. He is forced to survey the damage that coalition military operations have caused before receiving his punishment, and the video then concludes by flashing pictures of other Jordanian pilots involved in the air campaign, complete with identifying information and overhead imagery of the neighborhoods in which they live. The message is continuously repeated that these military personnel are aiding modern-day “Crusaders” intent on suppressing righteous Muslims, even if it means slaughtering innocents. A reward is offered to anyone who assassinates the identified pilots.
The burn video: why ISIS did it
The Burn Video: Why ISIS Did It
Early U.S. reaction to the gruesome video of a Jordanian military pilot being burned to death that the ISIS jihadist group released Tuesday has been predictably emotional. Most news outlets have focused on the barbarity of the immolation, and declined to air any portion of the video for fear of traumatizing viewers or aiding the terrorists. The dominant tenor of commentary has been that the militants are insanely extreme in their beliefs, and that the video will backfire by provoking widespread revulsion in the Middle East.
The problem with reporting the threat posed by ISIS in this way is that it makes the group’s successes in recruiting, raising money, and occupying vast expanses of territory almost inexplicable. The unstated assumption is that if ISIS is led by crazy people, then the millions of sympathizers it has attracted in the region and the thousands of Westerners who have flocked to its banner must also be crazy — or perhaps simply coerced by the terrorists. This approach doesn’t help much in defeating the organization, and may provoke its opponents into committing similar atrocities.
So let’s try to stand back from the horrific imagery of a young man deliberately burned to death while ISIS foot soldiers look on, and try to understand the larger meaning of the video. The fiery death of pilot Muadh al-Kasasbeh is the relatively brief climax in a 22-minute film narrative that imitates the production values of documentaries aired on outlets like the History Channel. It is crafted as a morality play featuring an extended monologue by the captured pilot in which he details how the coalition of Western countries and local Arab states wages its air war against ISIS. After describing the military systems being used and the bases from which they originate, the video shows searing images of civilians who allegedly have been killed or injured by coalition bombs — many of them children.
Against this backdrop, the immolation of a pilot who was captured while participating in one such strike is presented as just retribution for his acts. He is forced to survey the damage that coalition military operations have caused before receiving his punishment, and the video then concludes by flashing pictures of other Jordanian pilots involved in the air campaign, complete with identifying information and overhead imagery of the neighborhoods in which they live. The message is continuously repeated that these military personnel are aiding modern-day “Crusaders” intent on suppressing righteous Muslims, even if it means slaughtering innocents. A reward is offered to anyone who assassinates the identified pilots.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
Deliberate immolation really is unusual though, even in the Middle East (although it has a long history in the West, from the punishing of witches to the firebombing of Dresden). The video seeks to confer some special religious significance on the manner of the pilot’s death, but the subtext is that any action in defense of the one true interpretation of Islam is justifiable if it helps deter an implacable foe from subverting the faith. Ironically, many ISIS soldiers see themselves in much the same way that the Crusaders did — as soldiers of God whose excesses are necessary to cleanse the Holy Land of unbelievers. This kind of thinking is commonplace among Salafists, also known as Wahhabists, who comprised the original core of both ISIS and al-Qaeda (ISIS was founded in 1999 by a Jordanian Salafist named Abu Musab al-Zarqawi).
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
This is from last year
http://news.siteintelgroup.com/blog...danian-pilot-with-celebration-and-speculation
How the fuck do you respond to such savagery?
http://news.siteintelgroup.com/blog...danian-pilot-with-celebration-and-speculation
How the fuck do you respond to such savagery?
By stopping the bombing.
Johnny Vodka
The Abominable Scotsman
A wee bit of debate in The Guardian about Fox News showing the video on its website. 
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...deos-complict-terrorism-death-hostage-killers
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...deos-complict-terrorism-death-hostage-killers
The stated primary intent of IS is to wipe out the Shia first and foremost.
The fact that we don't see this point explained more often is because it is not attractive (in terms of what concerns you) and that it is overshadowed by a particularly vicious bunch of internal thugs who the Western media seem to fawn over for bizarrely technical reasons - i.e. (or should that be i.s.?) didn't they do a wonderfully brutal job on that one, in terms of cinematography, of course...
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
all those born again 12 step people you encounter on campus i suppose
Last edited:
The pilot got what he deserved. He was dead as soon as he hit the Euphrates really, meanwhile Assad is killing with impunity on a daily basis. I think Daesh seem to be on a back foot, hundreds have been killed by air strikes in Kobane, their twitter feeds are long lists of the martyred these days. Raqqa can't be that great a place to be right now. I wouldn't be surprised if when they're weak enough in the future the locals will massacre them.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
Breakdown of foreign fighters (all groups) in Syria
http://icsr.info/2015/01/foreign-fi...s-20000-surpasses-afghanistan-conflict-1980s/
Huge numbers of Saudis, Tunisians and Russians
http://icsr.info/2015/01/foreign-fi...s-20000-surpasses-afghanistan-conflict-1980s/
Huge numbers of Saudis, Tunisians and Russians
Flavour
hang the bankers
another ISIS apologist. fuck off.
and you dwyer, you're a fucking cunt of the first order. it's all OUR fault is it? it's OUR fault? WE did it? who is WE? you fucking wet-wipe globetrotting liberal twat. fanboy.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
Wtf?
A wee bit of debate in The Guardian about Fox News showing the video on its website.
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...deos-complict-terrorism-death-hostage-killers
Do we think Nesrine Malik approved the headline: "
If you watch Isis’s videos you are complicit in its terrorism"?
It's 4chan/isis isn't it?
ISIS is the product of Western imperialism and would not exist without it.
That fact evidently angers you. This suggests to me that it is true. You have a guilty conscience.
I can't agree with that. He was just following orders. The people who deserve to suffer are the ones who gave him those orders.
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
He's almost certainly using the word 'we' in a careless, self-regarding and mistaken way. I assume by 'we' he means the US, and equates the action of that state with the will of the people.
Found it, but can't see any subtitles. Can anyone?
Flavour
hang the bankers
Jesus Christ where to begin. Did they have no say in the matter then, Al-Zarqawi, Al-Baghdadi and the like? No? Their actions were determined by Western actions? Thus, they are not fully responsible for their actions, what with them having been provoked or, as you put it, "produced" by Western imperialism? That lets them off the hook. That apologises for them... and before you asked me to back up my "despicable" claim that you were an ISIS apologist. You've just provided it again. Thanks.
Yes, it's just shorthand really. I'd have thought it obvious that I don't mean "we" did anything in a literal sense. I mean the US/uk governments, which falsely purport to act in our name.
I wouldn't bother explaining this to Flavour btw, he's not capable of such subtlety.
Similar threads
