The Islamic state

[Pickman's model]

what, biblicly?

i wouldn't want to constrain Casually Red, whatever he wants to do.

oh - and i think you're thinking of knowing someone in the biblical sense, there's no biblical sharing as a euphemism for fucking.

 

[Casually Red]

perhaps you should share it with him.

Rambling in Raqqa...has a certain ring to it . He's completely bonkers enough to try it .

 

[DotCommunist]

Rambling in Raqqa...has a certain ring to it . He's completely bonkers enough to try it .

it would make a fantastic ending for the biopic- sad violins and maybe even mournful cello as he walks in slow mo, naked as the bullets fly and men scream and shit explodes, then fade toblack and roll credits

 

[Idris2002]

Rambling in Raqqa...has a certain ring to it . He's completely bonkers enough to try it .

"Crusader barbarians unleash new hell weapon".

 

[not-bono-ever]

Anyone heard the chatter sbout the Russians / caucus statelets giving the local proto jihadi kinda free pasage to fuck off out of their manor? the region seems to calmed down this year as a result

The destination is pretty obvious.and I dont suppose many will make it home afterwards

 

[Pickman's model]

Rambling in Raqqa...has a certain ring to it . He's completely bonkers enough to try it .

starkers in syria

 

[DotCommunist]

Anyone heard the chatter sbout the Russians / caucus statelets giving the local proto jihadi kinda free pasage to fuck off out of their manor? the region seems to calmed down this year as a result

The destination is pretty obvious.and I dont suppose many will make it home afterwards

I don't know about the 'free pass' aspect but the ginger bearded fraternity have been in the mix for quite some time, at one point media bods were calling them the IS's special forces

 

[not-bono-ever]

Yup aware of him . Bad puppy.

let me find out more on this and get back

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't know about the 'free pass' aspect but the ginger bearded fraternity have been in the mix for quite some time, at one point media bods were calling them the IS's special forces

interesting, with the russian interest in syria: maybe a roundabout way to get intel on their domestick threat too

 

[butchersapron]

Yup aware of him . Bad puppy.

let me find out more on this and get back

Have a look at the Joanna Paraszczuk stuff - and more here, she's making a good name for herself tracking these people - she's also worth a follow on twitter.

 

[not-bono-ever]

Will do.have other source for the stuff I touched on. Will find out more

 

[not-bono-ever]

interesting, with the russian interest in syria: maybe a roundabout way to get intel on their domestick threat too

This was my reaction also.

 

[frogwoman]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...unter-terror-uk-charter-flights-syria-jihadis


This is one of the stupidest things ive ever heard.

 

[kebabking]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...unter-terror-uk-charter-flights-syria-jihadis


This is one of the stupidest things ive ever heard.

why?

its an answer, and like all answers it has problems - one of its benefits is that we'd have a decent (and much cheaper) understanding of who believes this shit, and that they've be several thousand miles away getting killed.

you can buy a lot a Paveway bombs and Brimstone missiles for the cost of a CTC/Security Service surveilance team watching just a couple of these people...

 

[frogwoman]

why?

its an answer, and like all answers it has problems - one of its benefits is that we'd have a decent (and much cheaper) understanding of who believes this shit, and that they've be several thousand miles away getting killed.

you can buy a lot a Paveway bombs and Brimstone missiles for the cost of a CTC/Security Service surveilance team watching just a couple of these people...

Because they will just end up replenishing it and making it bigger. It kind of also implies we dont givr a shit as long as theyre not in the UK.

 

[kebabking]

Because they will just end up replenishing it and making it bigger. It kind of also implies we dont givr a shit as long as theyre not in the UK.

not sure i agree - even if more do go, firstly they're just a drop in the ocean compared to places like Tunisia, and secondly the UK 'contributions', with a few exeptions, don't seem to have set IS alight with their fighting/leadership skills. they cost IS money, food, weapons and ammunition, and give feck all in return.

i would argue that we are able to have a far greater effect on the number of British jihadis by killing them in Syria/Iraq than we have by attempting to keep them under watch for the next 40 years in Neasden or Blackburn. its an idea with downsides, but so has trying to keep people who don't want to be here under enough surveilance to ensure they can neither leave nor do anything naughty while they're here. the cost of that isn't a problem for me, but hoping that firstly we've get every one, and secondly that we won't miss anything or decide that, mistakenly, that X is a more important target than Y, consistantly for the rest of an 18yo's lifetime is a very big risk.

a balance might be to send anyone suspected of an interest in Jihadi ideas to the South Sandwich islands for the rest of their lives, but that idea has one or two tiny legal issues as well.

 

[not-bono-ever]

Imagine the pr opportunities for IS or any other wankers who are getting prime young battlefield flesh delivered by HMG...

 

[not-bono-ever]

Also - as far as I recall , removal of passport means fuck all - removal of citizenship for a brit born jihadi is virtually impossible if it leaves them stateless (and I agree with this obvs)

 

[Pickman's model]

Because they will just end up replenishing it and making it bigger. It kind of also implies we dont givr a shit as long as theyre not in the UK.

...and wait till some other country sends us a lot of terrorists citing this precedent

 

[sihhi]

not sure i agree - even if more do go, firstly they're just a drop in the ocean compared to places like Tunisia, and secondly the UK 'contributions', with a few exeptions, don't seem to have set IS alight with their fighting/leadership skills. they cost IS money, food, weapons and ammunition, and give feck all in return.

i would argue that we are able to have a far greater effect on the number of British jihadis by killing them in Syria/Iraq than we have by attempting to keep them under watch for the next 40 years in Neasden or Blackburn. its an idea with downsides, but so has trying to keep people who don't want to be here under enough surveilance to ensure they can neither leave nor do anything naughty while they're here.

It's grotesque (and probably arrogant). The people IS are killing in Hasakeh Tel'Abyad not to mention Rakka or Musul are my and our class brothers and sisters. Letting them loose from Britain is essentially to give IS a fresh supply of psychotic, homicidal manpower. It's as wretched as sending off hard right mercenaries to assist Rhodesia or UNITA.

 

[frogwoman]

It's grotesque (and probably arrogant). The people IS are killing in Hasakeh Tel'Abyad not to mention Rakka or Musul are my and our class brothers and sisters. Letting them loose from Britain is essentially to give IS a fresh supply of psychotic, homicidal manpower. It's as wretched as sending off hard right mercenaries to assist Rhodesia or UNITA.

Well said

 

[Pickman's model]

It's grotesque (and probably arrogant). The people IS are killing in Hasakeh Tel'Abyad not to mention Rakka or Musul are my and our class brothers and sisters. Letting them loose from Britain is essentially to give IS a fresh supply of psychotic, homicidal manpower. It's as wretched as sending off hard right mercenaries to assist Rhodesia or UNITA.

can they still fly malaysian?

 

[frogwoman]

How can be be bombing isis on one hand and flying out terrorists to them on the other hand? It makes no sense. It can only strengthen Daesh's position by flying out more jihadis, with fuck all to lose, as well as giving them a form of recognition, ie as well as helping them by flying terrorists there, presumably we will be coordinating where to land with someone from Daesh to stop the planes being shot out of the sky.

 

[frogwoman]

And how does it help the kurds or anyone thats trying to defeat ISIS?

 

[kebabking]

How can be be bombing isis on one hand and flying out terrorists to them on the other hand? It makes no sense. It can only strengthen Daesh's position by flying out more jihadis, with fuck all to lose, as well as giving them a form of recognition, ie as well as helping them by flying terrorists there, presumably we will be coordinating where to land with someone from Daesh to stop the planes being shot out of the sky.

don't take my view as absolute support for every facet of this 'plan' - i'm merely suggesting that attempting to keep them in the UK, usually without trial and conviction, is not reducing the pool of idiots who want to go.

let them go, they can make their own way there, and when they get there let them either die or be disillusioned. while they are there, instead of paying for a 30 strong team of surveilance officers all on £20-40k each to watch each one, spend that money on killing them and their new friends. this helps us in getting rid of 'our' loons, and helps the Syrians/Iraqi's/Kurds by additionally bumping off those they are with.

they are going anyway, the number stopped compared to the number who go is infitesimal - and to be blunt, unless you're going to start banning anyone with a relationship to Islam from leaving the UK under any circumstances thats not going to change - so it seems foolish to waste endless resources on a plan that demonstratably isn't working.

 

[frogwoman]

don't take my view as absolute support for every facet of this 'plan' - i'm merely suggesting that attempting to keep them in the UK, usually without trial and conviction, is not reducing the pool of idiots who want to go.

let them go, they can make their own way there, and when they get there let them either die or be disillusioned. while they are there, instead of paying for a 30 strong team of surveilance officers all on £20-40k each to watch each one, spend that money on killing them and their new friends. this helps us in getting rid of 'our' loons, and helps the Syrians/Iraqi's/Kurds by additionally bumping off those they are with.

they are going anyway, the number stopped compared to the number who go is infitesimal - and to be blunt, unless you're going to start banning anyone with a relationship to Islam from leaving the UK under any circumstances thats not going to change - so it seems foolish to waste endless resources on a plan that demonstratably isn't working.

Thanks for the clarification. Ok i get where you are coming from, and i agree the current strategy definitely needs to change.
Changing our strategy in regards to whether we stop them going isnt the same as paying to fly them there tho is it?

 

[kebabking]

Thanks for the clarification. Ok i get where you are coming from, and i agree the current strategy definitely needs to change.
Changing our strategy in regards to whether we stop them going isnt the same as paying to fly them there tho is it?

its a detail - the big issue is whether we try to stop them or not. the one benefit however of having a weekly fright from Heathrow to Raqqa is that we'd know who got on it, and know for certain that there's only one reason you'd get on it. this then allows us to be more certain about what action to take once they resurface.

one of the problems we have is that we see people getting flight to Turkey, or Jordan, or the Caucases, disappear for 6 months and return. unless they've been stupid on facebook or brought a 'souveneir' back from their travels we don't really know what they've been up to. we might have a pretty shrewd idea, but such things tend not to get past Defence Lawyers in Treason/Terrorism trials, and we might well end up spending several hundred grand a years (and more importantly, waste scarce surveilance teams) following someone who either never went to Syria, or who did - all full of piss and wind - and get immediately dissillusioned with the whole thing.

weekly flights to Raqqa is hyperbole by the way.

 

[TomUS]

Anyone heard the chatter sbout the Russians / caucus statelets giving the local proto jihadi kinda free pasage to fuck off out of their manor? the region seems to calmed down this year as a result

The destination is pretty obvious.and I dont suppose many will make it home afterwards

Doubt it, since Russia is a big supporter of Assad.

 

[kebabking]

Doubt it, since Russia is a big supporter of Assad.

except that Assad and IS don't tend to clash much. this could an accident of respective geographies, of strategies, or a conspiracy theory.

Putin is also far more interested in getting rid of his own loons than he is in ensuring Assad's survival.

 

[frogwoman]

not sure i agree - even if more do go, firstly they're just a drop in the ocean compared to places like Tunisia, and secondly the UK 'contributions', with a few exeptions, don't seem to have set IS alight with their fighting/leadership skills. they cost IS money, food, weapons and ammunition, and give feck all in return.

Even if this is true, I think the english speaking ones are very useful to Daesh in terms of propaganda tbh. People like jihadi john and the ones doing the Al Hayat Media Centre stuff.