Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Islamic state

Isn't it weird how this story doesn't appear to have any sources other than this fake news awd news site? It's even worse than al masdar, at least he has some contacts in the regime army. This one just takes stories from salon, the mail etc and runs them. The sprinkles it with dodgy stuff like this, it's basically iranian propganda. I wonder why no other states or media sources thought to comment on something like Erdogan's key ally calling for recognition for ISIS and suggesting they have an embassy in Turkey. because it's made up bollocks for people like you to swallow and then circulate without question.

Well I'm not really impressed by the whole "none of the established mainstream media clique said anything about this so it must be bollocks" approach, but I do think you have a point regarding the veracity of the article.
I guess I posted it up for urban75's consideration in light of yesterdays events merely because it felt credible... probably due to this sort of thing: Research Paper: ISIS-Turkey List
 
I don't know who or what to trust anymore - even the video pointed out earlier has people saying stuff like there was no ideology in our revolution and then you see segregated classes and all-hijabed classes of only young girls in those opposition-run areas.

Thats really interesting, thanks. Doesnt surprise me that they are better at governing in some areas than disorganised rebel groups and the regime, if you obey their laws and are a sunni you will probably be mostly ok, if you're not life would be hell :(
 
On that shitty fake article camo linked to:

Statement from Anadolu Agency

We hereby state that the recent stories on some foreign media outlets claiming that Anadolu Agency did an interview with Turkish National Intelligence Organization (MIT) Undersecretary Hakan Fidan and published it are totally false.

It is known that the MIT has no such practice of speaking to media.
 
I don't know who or what to trust anymore - even the video pointed out earlier has people saying stuff like there was no ideology in our revolution and then you see segregated classes and all-hijabed classes of only young girls in those opposition-run areas.
Thanks for posting that, its very interesting.

Something struck me at the beginning of that piece, when he talks about people no longer "wasting time in cafes" - is that because people are no longer able to socialise in public places or because cafes are seen as sinful? - in which case he seems to be glossing over some of the negative aspects of life under Daesh.

He writes that people are safer and women are not being assaulted (in comparison to when FSA or Al-Nusra were in the area). In many warzones, or where male fighters are stationed, whatever side they are on or cause they are fighting for, you will find brothels springing up and/or reports of women being raped. Daesh seems to have used the whole "Jihadi brides" thing and the support they give fighters, and the Yazidi women and children (and others?) enslaved by Daesh, to control this aspect of war. Their fighters maintain discipline - the more family-orientated know that they have a wife and home nearby, so keep on the straight and narrow - the more depraved are given a wife and one or more slaves to rape, but are warned off visiting brothels or assaulting local women. Its all grim.

The stuff he says about stability makes sense - they impose stricter laws, but in return respect land rights, keep the flow of water and oil etc - and so internal resistance is quelled to a certain extent - and that is the only way they can control such a large area.
 
Thanks for posting that, its very interesting.

Something struck me at the beginning of that piece, when he talks about people no longer "wasting time in cafes" - is that because people are no longer able to socialise in public places or because cafes are seen as sinful? - in which case he seems to be glossing over some of the negative aspects of life under Daesh.

He writes that people are safer and women are not being assaulted (in comparison to when FSA or Al-Nusra were in the area). In many warzones, or where male fighters are stationed, whatever side they are on or cause they are fighting for, you will find brothels springing up and/or reports of women being raped. Daesh seems to have used the whole "Jihadi brides" thing and the support they give fighters, and the Yazidi women and children (and others?) enslaved by Daesh, to control this aspect of war. Their fighters maintain discipline - the more family-orientated know that they have a wife and home nearby, so keep on the straight and narrow - the more depraved are given a wife and one or more slaves to rape, but are warned off visiting brothels or assaulting local women. Its all grim.

The stuff he says about stability makes sense - they impose stricter laws, but in return respect land rights, keep the flow of water and oil etc - and so internal resistance is quelled to a certain extent - and that is the only way they can control such a large area.

I thought initially, that the piece read a bit like a "defence" of Daesh but I don't think it is on reflection, because quite frankly we need to read stuff like this to understand their appeal. The majority of Daesh propaganda is nothing to do with violence and beheadings, the majority of it is all to do with the social services they're providing in the caliphate.

We will never understand this group properly let alone try to tackle it if we have a caricatured idea (which is the idea Daesh wants us to have given most of the violence/beheading type propaganda they put out is in English) of what their appeal is and why people support them
 
It's like the Nazis (not an exact analogy but you know) although many Germans resisted them a huge number didn't and many of those wouldn't have been particularly entranced by Nazi ideology. After the war neo-nazism remained (and still does) a significant problem in germany, and many Germans who remembered that period still have fairly positive views of the period. because they WERE good at providing social services etc. and unless you were Jewish or adamantly opposed to the regime or actively involved in communism etc, things could be shit but they wouldn't be THAT shit if you shut up and did what you were supposed to do.

and daesh are going to want to do a fair bit to compensate for the total lack of personal freedom etc so that people don't rise up against them. the nazis did things like pay for workers to go on cruises and free holidays etc, i'm sure Daesh will be doing similar things with whatever resources they have at their disposal.

recognising this is not apologism, it's trying to have an honest view of what's actually going on here rather than thinking that the only reason someone might be attracted to the law and order that daesh provides is because they're an evil cunt who agrees with 100% of it
 
It's like the Nazis (not an exact analogy but you know) although many Germans resisted them a huge number didn't and many of those wouldn't have been particularly entranced by Nazi ideology. After the war neo-nazism remained (and still does) a significant problem in germany, and many Germans who remembered that period still have fairly positive views of the period. because they WERE good at providing social services etc. and unless you were Jewish or adamantly opposed to the regime or actively involved in communism etc, things could be shit but they wouldn't be THAT shit if you shut up and did what you were supposed to do.

and daesh are going to want to do a fair bit to compensate for the total lack of personal freedom etc so that people don't rise up against them. the nazis did things like pay for workers to go on cruises and free holidays etc, i'm sure Daesh will be doing similar things with whatever resources they have at their disposal.

recognising this is not apologism, it's trying to have an honest view of what's actually going on here rather than thinking that the only reason someone might be attracted to the law and order that daesh provides is because they're an evil cunt who agrees with 100% of it
not sure there's much scope for cruises in those parts they control.
 
it's like north korea, you can recognise that the kims are complete shits, but also recognise why someone might if not support them, not hate them enough to want them to be overthrown. i think studies have shown that the majority of daesh fighters in iraq are actually iraqi, and about half in syria are syrian. that's not an insignificant amount, even if a large percentage of those are in daesh for economic reasons or because they think that they are the best/most effective group at fighting or whatever.

if you're a sunni man in a daesh area who is (or can pretend to be) religious and doesn't have a documented history of hating daesh, then you're probably going to be fine, if you're not sunni, you're fucked, but many/most of the non-sunnis have probably left by now anyway.

if daesh (or some other extreme reactionary type movement) took over the UK, a lot of people would be upset or scared at first, but there are huge numbers of people who would quickly adapt and get used to it and just ignore the parts they didn't like, especially if they didn't have to see the results every day and weren't directly affected by them. i reckon lots of people would just try to get on with stuff and ignore the fact that daesh were in charge if they didnt know anyone personally who had been killed by them.

its like people ask well why don't the israelis "do anything", why dont we do anything etc. very few people actually would, unless they had a personal reason to that was more important than the hassle they would avoid if they didn't do anything
 
if daesh (or some other extreme reactionary type movement) took over the UK, a lot of people would be upset or scared at first, but there are huge numbers of people who would quickly adapt and get used to it and just ignore the parts they didn't like, especially if they didn't have to see the results every day and weren't directly affected by them. i reckon lots of people would just try to get on with stuff and ignore the fact that daesh were in charge if they didnt know anyone personally who had been killed by them.

I agree with this. You can see that with the very muted response to the treatment of the disabled since May 2010, I sometimes wonder how much it would take in order to provoke any serious civil disobedience in response, we are way past the point that I would expect it.
 
Everyone thinks they would be a hero but they probably wouldn't would they? And if Daesh are in charge and nothing much has changed except there's less crime and the streets are cleaner and there aren't armed gangs roving about you'll put up with the stupid dress code and ignore the fact that your Shia neighbours have disappeared
 
Do read also the piece about The Fedayeen Saddam who were chopping off womens heads and throwing gay people from high rise in Baghdad well before ISIS appeared and now are within ISIS. Odd what these hardcore secularist presidents can get behind when they feel threatened isn't it?





(Of course read these with Orton's wider views on Iraq in mind)
I've read 3 or 4 articles by Orton on this this afternoon and the Saddam stuff was interesting. He seemed to be very pro-US and an article I read of his on Iran after after was almost Neo-con propaganda.
Eta - I missed what you put in brackets perhaps that's what you were alluding too.
 
Seeing as how they're rather obsessed with their own media image I don't think this is going to go down too well :D

The internet has decided to photoshop Isis fighters as rubber ducks

24893-1gfu9qh.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom