That "crap" poetry said something to me. It said this is Manchester, we are Manchester, we are here today in our thousands despite your attempt to dominate our minds and our lives. You want us on our knees, wailing and unable to function cowering in our own homes and thrashing out at anyone who looks, smells and talks the way you do. Well, we are here so fuck you and all who think like you.
Well I'm sure the majority of level headed non Muslims realise this and Im sure the Majority of level headed Muslims understand this also.Sorry, I'm a fan of a strategy game called "Crusader Kings 2" and one of the memes coming out of that is a Deus Vult meme that I enjoy posting and always brightens my day. I meant no serious point by it.
But in terms of ISIS, yeah he's pretty close. Really whacking the ISIS belief system on the head is difficult because ISIS doesn't really exist as we think of it. There's hundreds of small terror groups across different regions and different countries that have flocked under the ISIS flag. It's better described as an idea like Communism - although there's a ground zero and a small force behind it, the idea that everybody who flew the hammer and sickle was all affiliated, shared the exact same beliefs or had a decent Command and Control structure is somewhat far fetched. With ISIS it's absolutely ludicrous.
However, what can be said is that they're an offshoot of Salafist Jihadism which is an offshoot Salafism which is a sort of offshoot of Wahhabism which is an offshoot of Conservative Sunni which is an offshoot of Sunni which is a sect of Islam.
They belief that Islam was in its most perfect form when it was first conceived and that everything that has happened to reform it since then has been done due to corruption by the infidels. So yes, the Crusades does play a big part in that as do many other events. This is also why they smash up historical sites - they think that they stand as monuments to the corruption of the purest form.
Their goal is to create a war between themselves and a coalition of more than 80 countries. That number is important, 79 is not enough. They then will take over, in order, Dabiq (a northern Syrian town), Damascus, then Jerusalem then Rome. This will then lead the countries to fight against them in a battle that they will lose but during the loss they will set off a chain of events that will bring about the end of the world.
This is why they suicide bomb. Their goal is to create anger towards Muslims who they hope will then join them, and to encourage the countries to start bombing them to get that coalition moving.
This is also why I'm pretty irritated by people playing directly into their hands on this thread and elsewhere.
I think we really do need to move away from the idea that you're a massive lefty or part of the PC brigade if you don't subscribe to the idea that anyone being under suspicion of being an ISIS sympathiser should be locked up indefinitely. It's more a case of wanting a course of action that actually works. I really couldn't care less what happens to any individual that supports the mass slaughter of innocent people and I really wouldn't lose sleep over the idea of somebody that supports ISIS or their viewpoint being locked up in a prison for the rest of their lives. The problem I have is that I don't think it would work and it would actually lead to further radicalisation of more people, something I think we all agree should be avoided. I think that in the vast majority of cases it would be nigh on impossible to identify who an actual supporter of ISIS is and innocent people would end up in prison. Now some people think a few innocents being locked up is an acceptable level of collateral damage if it prevents further atrocities (I agree, it probably would be the lesser of two evils). The problem is if you think locking up innocent people plays into the hands of terrorists and would lead to further radicalisation, then it doesn't make you a bleeding heart liberal to be against what he's suggesting, it's just common sense.
Embarrassing toe curling claptrap, ISIS will be quaking in their boots, ooohhh look, a gritty Northern poet spouting crap, we had better stay away from Manchester their poets are better than our propaganda
Without quoting the rest of the post, this is absolutely the key point. They want a war between Muslims and the West and the best reaction is not to help them achieve that because then they've failed. Of course the security services have to do their bit and they're saying they currently have the resources to do it. But the best way to defeat this, as geoff clipp says, is to take the long view rather than being sucked into knee-jerk reactions that serve a perceived short term need but screw things up for the long-term, such as internment in Northern Ireland or Guantanamo Bay. It may be slow, progress almost imperceptible, have little PR value and may not even be 100% effective but the only thing that would possibly be effective is a totalitarian society and I'm sure not many of us want that. It's bad enough now when you can be arrested and imprisoned for simply looking at the wrong websites, without any intention of doing anything.This is why they suicide bomb. Their goal is to create anger towards Muslims who they hope will then join them, and to encourage the countries to start bombing them to get that coalition moving.
This is also why I'm pretty irritated by people playing directly into their hands on this thread and elsewhere.
He's as much as an extremist as they are, who would imprison or kill people who don't look or think the same way he and his ilk do.If we are going to save our civilisation the first people we must go after are the media, politicians, academics, police chiefs.
The building is Granby House, not granby row but is next to Granby Row. Granby House is closer to Princess Street
I hardly ever read long posts because I can't be arsed, but I read all of that and found it extremely interesting and enlightening: Thanks for taking the time to post it.
But let me ask you this: Since we in the west rarely, if ever these days, carry out acts of terrorism in the name of Christianity, we've clearly grown out of and away from the literal interpretations in the Bible. It seems pretty logical to me (as a 100% devout atheist) that this should have come to pass because with every advance in technology and our understanding of the earth and indeed the universe, it becomes more compellingly clear that the ancient writings in the Bible are a load of old cobblers. Mumbo jumbo from an ancient time that serves no purpose in a modern scientific era. We've been told porkies for centuries, and been gullible enough to believe it. But now, believing that God created the heavens and the earth in 6 days, is the view only of loonies few and far between. Thankfully also, loonies not motivated to use violence to further their views.
So how do we over time, persuade people that these literal interpretations of the Quran are similarly flawed? It would seem to me that Isis and others are not much different to how we were 500 years ago, and that enlightenment will occur naturally in time. The question is, how do we accelerate the process?
Why do people assume it would lead to more radicalisation? What's a course of action that works? It's all well and good saying "educate" but that will take generations to see
"course of action that actually works". What action is this? Allowing extremists who obviously support isis to walk the streets? No, tighten the laws and remove them from society. Police shouldn't need a library full of evidence to lock a piece of scum up.
Long term solutions to stop radicalisation are all well and good...but what about short term? Do we just accept that this is a part of life now and hope it doesn't directly affect us or our close ones? Pretty bleak outlook...