A very informative article on UK’s terrorists. I’m speechless, folks.
I don’t know how to post a tweet here, but the most apt comment I’ve seen was (at twitter.com/SamWhiteTky):
“jihadis are cleverly evading the authorities by appearing in documentaries about jihadis with the word jihadi in the title”
The two possibilities (neither is very comforting).
The police are just hopeless at monitoring these people and/or hamstrung by out of date and/or irrelevant regulations
2 There are so many of these people and the level of chatter is so high that there’s no way to monitor them
The emerging consensus among liberal Brit opinionmakers and policy makers is that the best defense is to “refuse to be terrorized”. Silly girls at the concert, if they’d “refused to be terrorized” the bomb wouldn’t have hurt them.
This is reminding me of late stage communism where decades of economic stagnation were met with new slogans, each more pathetic and useless than the last.
cliff, I am sure your second explanation is the correct one – the police are OK, but there are too many people to monitor.
I suppose whoever downvoted your comment disagreed with your description of “refuse to be terrorized” out of fear that challenging the rhetoric would hurt civil liberties, values of liberalism, etc. Living in a country which “refuses to be terrorized,” I know both worth and “worth” of those slogans.
I was shocked those people were not arrested; some of them are still permitted to continue handing out Islamist leaflets on the streets (!). What especially stood out to me was the following:
\ Shamsuddin was radicalised at university by a meeting with the hate preacher Omar Bakri. He claims to have suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome since the age of 18 and so lives on state benefits. There is nothing fatigued about his fervour.
Why are hate preachers allowed into universities? Everybody knows the state of modern Islam, why aren’t Islamic preachers checked before being allowed entry into universities with many young people still unsure of their identity and feeling anxiously vulnerable at this stage of their lives? To please all “racism” people, UK could officially institute checks for everybody.
Also, forcing Shamsuddin to start working would limit his free time dedicated to promoting radicalism. He looks like somebody badly needing trying to work once in his life as another hobby.
Clarissa described liberal thought as being “all about seeing people as individuals” and learning “to see past group affiliations.”
I think both democracy and liberalism are truly great; however, they are not idols and their most extreme interpretation cannot be applied at all times.
I agree with every person having a basic human dignity, but “seeing past” must not be changed into “ignoring” group affiliations, when those affiliations endanger my (way of) life and make somebody an enemy.
“\ Shamsuddin was radicalised at university by a meeting with the hate preacher Omar Bakri. He claims to have suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome since the age of 18 and so lives on state benefits. There is nothing fatigued about his fervour.”
Just a note that chronic fatigue syndrome is not necessarily a non-existent ailment. My husband has suffered from it since contracting an unusual form of mono 18 months ago and, please believe me, it is very real and very distressing for us.
I didn’t say it wasn’t real or distressing, did I? I said it shouldn’t be used as basis to exclude people from productive life.
I assumed that by using the term “nonexistent ailment” you meant that cfs doesn’t really exist and is just something made up by people who are actually healthy (you also used the phrase “healthy young people” in your comment, in reference to someone reported to have cfs). I may be oversensitive about this because there are many people out there who do indeed believe that people with cfs are just making it up. I am glad to know that you are not actually one of those people. And yes, I absolutely agree that it should not be used to exclude people from a productive life: we found out yesterday that, despite some delays due to his illness, my husband just got tenure 🙂
I think we’d all prefer if the extremist guy in the documentary had found a place in academia or in the workplace instead of in a hate group.
There is a third explanation, which is that this is Daily Mail, which is one of the most right wing hate inducing newspapers in UK, so you should take this not only with a grain of salt, but with a bucket of salt.
\ There is a third explanation, which is that this is Daily Mail, which is one of the most right wing hate inducing newspapers in UK, so you should take this not only with a grain of salt, but with a bucket of salt.
Can you point at any untrue statements of facts in the article?
One would think that in today’s political-social climate in EU, many Muslims and Leftists (a large part of population) would jump at the opportunity to expose anti-Muslim lies in a famous paper. Where are their voices and proof of vicious misrepresentation?
If they are silent despite being ready to shout against prejudice at every corner, I will trust the paper. So far, we have two terror attacks committed by people from the documentary which supports the paper’s narrative.
Also, I know from Israeli press that both right and left wing sources can be very biased. However, I can differenciate between opinions and facts. This Daily Mail article seemed to be mainly composed of facts, and unlike opinions, the former can be (dis)proved.
I’m sorry, I don’t understand about the hate-inducing part. What else could it be inducing towards terrorists? Love?
As for salt, it’s hard to imagine that they would have invented the documentary they are retelling but if they did, I’m sure somebody would have noticed.
\ it’s hard to imagine that they would have invented the documentary they are retelling but if they did, I’m sure somebody would have noticed.
\ Channel 4 have requested that this documentary is removed from Netflix. It has been on there for months, but this morning was pulled off. Why would they do that other than censorship?
I wonder why. It’s a pity since quite a few people might want to watch it after reading the article.
I would be horrified to live near one of people from the documentary.
Yes, it’s been taken down from Netflix but what’s the point? It’s on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z6YDMcd_Jo
And if YouTube removes it, Russians will find a place to host it.
About the empty slogans, here is an article on the subject: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/06/democrats-london-terrorist-attack/529125/?utm_source=feed
I so agree with it. This smug sloganeering is beyond off-putting. What kind of politician is so dumb that he doesn’t get it?
Now I am waiting for an article about French terrorists:
“Paris police say a suspect was shot and wounded on Tuesday after attacking an officer outside Notre Dame cathedral with a hammer. Prosecutors said they had opened an anti-terrorism probe into the incident. Police took to Twitter to urge people to stay away from Notre Dame and the island located in central Paris known as Île de la Cité.”
In other news, would love to understand what’s going on in Iran, but unfortunately most news will be fabricated to suit the regime:
“Twin attacks at Iranian parliament, Khomeini mausoleum
Assailants carry out shooting at legislature and shooting and bombing at shrine to leader of Islamic revolution, reportedly killing 7 at the parliament and one at the mausoleum; news agency reports 4 taken hostage at parliament.”
Last piece of news:
“Netanyahu doubles down on settlements
The prime minister promises to protect the settlement enterprise and build in all parts of the West Bank, both inside settlements and outside; comments come as minister of housing and construction proposes plan for 67,000 apartments in West Bank to combat high prices in the Tel Aviv metropolitan area.”
Yesterday brought terror attacks by refugees in Paris and Australia. I’m observing woth great interest what the people will say whose favorite mantra is that refugees don’t commit acts of terror.
Refugees are severely traumatized people, it’s a given. Again, these are not toys. These are human beings who are as complex and easily messed up as anybody on this blog.
This wasn’t a failure of the British police being overwhelmed by “too many people to monitor.” It was a failure of the government’s willingness to allow the police to act until the obvious desire to do harm, as shown in the video, had been demonstratively formed into a specific plan of action.
To act at the “obvious desire to do harm stage” would be labelled by the PC left as both being intolerant of free speech and Islamophobic. The question now is whether the UK government under Theresa May is willing to start taking effective steps at the earlier stage, or is just engaging in tough talk about keeping offensive material off Facebook and the Internet. (Hint: Blocking offensive Internet material without criminalizing the posters of that material isn’t going to help much.)
The time has come for aggressive racial profiling based on expressions of hostile intent, and broad dragnets that sweep up the legitimately suspicious and keep them under very close observation, and in some cases even detention, until /unless it can be very CLEARLY demonstrated that the suspects are harmless. (If the government can’t prove specific harmful intent sufficient to jail them, but has strong suspicions, such persons should be deported.)
The French and German governments need to adopt similar measures, and so do other governments within the EU, although most still haven’t felt the pressure to do so at this point.
Concerning el’s posts on Israel:
The situation in Israel is entirely different than in Europe, and much more stringent action by the IDF is required to eliminate the not-quite-existential but definitely time-to-terminate Palestinian problem forever. Unfortunately, this will have to be the subject of a separate post.
Unfortunately, at this stage, the police can do nothing about it. The number of people who are known to be radicalized is so large that you’d need to triple the UK’s police force and have it do nothing else just to maintain 24-hour surveillance. In the meanwhile, some young kid will get radicalized online.
It’s a fantasy that this can be controlled by police measures.
How then? Or can it be at all?
If it were up to me, I’d let everybody who is eager to go to Syria just do it. Why retain people against their will? I’d deport the 30,000 on the “known as radicalized” list. And I’d reform the welfare to direct money to education and away from “invisible disabilities” and especially away from childbirth awards. In the UK specifically, I’d definitely close all immigration until housing, medical and schooling systems can catch up and service effectively at least the existing residents.
\ If it were up to me, I’d let everybody who is eager to go to Syria just do it. Why retain people against their will?
It’s an ethical problem to let your citizens become ISIS willing executioners as long as it’s “not in your backyard.” (There is a book “Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust”)
\ I’d deport the 30,000 on the “known as radicalized” list.
Agreed, but again: you deport them today, they murder innocent people in the Middle East tomorrow. To be honest, I am for deporting them anyway, but the former must be acknowledged.
\ \ In the UK specifically, I’d definitely close all immigration
Aren’t most scholars studying fluidity claiming the great migration to Europe cannot be stopped?
“Aren’t most scholars studying fluidity claiming the great migration to Europe cannot be stopped?”
Fluidity cannot predict that kind of thing. Given certain modern realities, the migration cannot be stopped, but changing certain variables would end it…. but no one wants to realize that is possible. A lot of fluidity seems to much like learned helplessness to be useful.
“Given certain modern realities, the migration cannot be stopped, but changing certain variables would end it….”
“It’s an ethical problem to let your citizens become ISIS willing executioners as long as it’s “not in your backyard.” ”
” I’m sure there is some logic behind it but I fail to see what it is”
It’s called “weakening the nation state by bringing people who can be counted on to not assimilate and who will be perpetual source of tension and division (but who are notably unuccessful in challenging bad governments)”
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 1,253 other followers