Paris Terror Attack(s)

I think we might be coming towards a closure of the open borders. It started even before this after all. We will still have the problems of migrants trying to come across the closed borders though. They are taking boats to Greece or coming in via Turkey and short of building a manned wall across European borders they will find a way in.

Also ISIS would like nothing better than to see the West cause an even greater humanitarian crisis at it's borders so we need to think carefully how we would actually stop being coming in. Excessive force or letting people drown would not only be unconscionable to most people but it would also help foster resentment and bolster ISIS.

This is the same problem that I wrote about in the other thread. No one really knows the answer to this. It's logistically, politically and morally difficult to come up with an answer and most of the ones suggested would fall down if put into practise.

I saw yesterday, and now I cannot find a link, that a plan for a post-Assad Syrian administration was agreed by parties including the US and Russia. I still think that making Syria stable again and confronting (wiping out) ISIS is the best course of action.

---------- Post added at 12:28 ---------- Previous post was at 12:22 ----------

PS I like this article although it does slightly contradict what I said before: http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/201...rested-in-you/

There will be many sage, chin-stroking, warnings against an ‘over-reaction’ to this atrocity. Of course. And yet it is not possible to avoid reacting to this act of war. Obliterating Islamic State, wherever it is to be found, is not liable to be a sufficient response but it is a necessary part of any response. Because if we did not know before now – and if we did not, it was because we were wilfully denying a grimly observable reality – we know now. There is no compromise that can be struck with the mindset behind these murders.

[Ramrod]

Two more excellent articles from the spectator. I urge everyone to subscribe to it.
https://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/20...do-with-islam/

In France, Britain, Germany, America and nearly every other country in the world it remains government policy to say that any and all attacks carried out in the name of Mohammed have ‘nothing to do with Islam’. It was said by George W. Bush after 9/11, Tony Blair after 7/7 and Tony Abbott after the Sydney attack last month. It is what David Cameron said after two British extremists cut off the head of Drummer Lee Rigby in London, when ‘Jihadi John’ cut off the head of aid worker Alan Henning in the ‘Islamic State’ and when Islamic extremists attacked a Kenyan mall, separated the Muslims from the Christians and shot the latter in the head. It was what President François Hollande said after the massacre of journalists and Jews in Paris in January. And it is all that most politicians will be able to come out with again after the latest atrocities in Paris.

All these leaders are wrong. In private, they and their senior advisers often concede that they are telling a lie. The most sympathetic explanation is that they are telling a ‘noble lie’, provoked by a fear that we — the general public — are a lynch mob in waiting. ‘Noble’ or not, this lie is a mistake. First, because the general public do not rely on politicians for their information and can perfectly well read articles and books about Islam for themselves. Secondly, because the lie helps no one understand the threat we face. Thirdly, because it takes any heat off Muslims to deal with the bad traditions in their own religion. And fourthly, because unless mainstream politicians address these matters then one day perhaps the public will overtake their politicians to a truly alarming extent.

https://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/20...-islam-itself/

This is the moment for the Islamic world to expose Islamism — but loosening its hold upon our faith falls upon those Muslims who value pluralism and pursue a civilised, enlightened Islam. The reformation many are calling for isn’t needed of Islam, but rather of Muslims — and specifically of Muslim leadership.

So we must name the beast, and do so with conviction. This is not just about weeding out a jihadi menace from Birmingham schools, but about giving millions of Muslims the chance for a peaceful coexistence with the rest of humanity. And it’s about persuading non-Muslims that the Islamists are wrong — that such coexistence is possible.

[Derek]

Looks like at least one of the attackers didn't want to meet his virgins straight away and is on the run.

Worryingly the car used was abandoned with guns and ammunition inside which would suggest there is an easy way for him to replenish his weapons eithout too much hassle.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Two more excellent articles from the spectator. I urge everyone to subscribe to it.

Everyone knows that it's all to do with Islam.
the only ones who say otherwise are the ones who offer cups of tea and a biscuit. and shout don't shoot it's nothing to do with me!

---------- Post added at 19:20 ---------- Previous post was at 19:18 ----------

Originally Posted by Derek

Looks like at least one of the attackers didn't want to meet his virgins straight away and is on the run.

I expect the coward will be dealt with accordingly.

Worryingly the car used was abandoned with guns and ammunition inside which would suggest there is an easy way for him to replenish his weapons eithout too much hassle.

Not really. just means he didn't want the car and didn't want to lug all the ammo around with him.

he'll go back to working in a shop or something now. he doesn't want to die. he's a coward.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Derek

Looks like at least one of the attackers didn't want to meet his virgins straight away and is on the run.

Worryingly the car used was abandoned with guns and ammunition inside which would suggest there is an easy way for him to replenish his weapons eithout too much hassle.

I'd say he is doing exactly what a decent terrorist should do, keeping the terror threat in the news and fear in peoples minds as long as possible.

---------- Post added at 19:50 ---------- Previous post was at 19:47 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

I expect the coward will be dealt with accordingly.



Not really. just means he didn't want the car and didn't want to lug all the ammo around with him.

he'll go back to working in a shop or something now. he doesn't want to die. he's a coward.

I don't think it's cowardly to know you are going to die because of your actions, whilst it isn't particularly brave to shoot unarmed people it isn't cowardly to know at the end of the day you'll be dead because of it to. It's a shame bravery isn't reserved for good people, it'd make things a lot easier.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I'd say he is doing exactly what a decent terrorist should do, keeping the terror threat in the news and fear in peoples minds as long as possible.

I don't think so.

I don't think it's cowardly to know you are going to die because of your actions, whilst it isn't particularly brave to shoot unarmed people it isn't cowardly to know at the end of the day you'll be dead because of it to.

They went out to do what they did and expected to die.
Is he the one that never blew himself up?
too scared to die.
coward.

[RichardCoulter]

I think that the found passport thing could be propaganda though, seems odd that a terrorist would carry their passport and that it would be recovered fully unscathed after a terrorist attack.

Possible, but unlikely IMO.

[techguyone]

not really, in France you have to carry ID, last thing you'd want on the job is to be pulled on the way, and stopped for no ID & rumbled before you could do your deed.

And once you've done the job and are in 'paradise' no matter if your ID is known really.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Two more excellent articles from the spectator. I urge everyone to subscribe to it.
https://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/20...do-with-islam/


https://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/20...-islam-itself/

I've been expressing this point of view for years.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Derek

Worryingly the car used was abandoned with guns and ammunition inside which would suggest there is an easy way for him to replenish his weapons eithout too much hassle.

This is well known. Thanks to the wonders of Schengen once you smuggle weapons into the bloc via the pretty porous borders of the nations on its eastern frontier you're all good.

Hand grenades especially are a real problem apparently. Ask Sweden.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by techguyone

not really, in France you have to carry ID,

I guess that could explain it. I did initially think it sounded a bit too much like the passport of the 9/11 pilot having survived the fuel fire and rubble of 2 skyscrapers collapsing. A helpful guide as to which country would feel the wrath of revenge.

Originally Posted by Russ

I guess that could explain it. I did initially think it sounded a bit too much like the passport of the 9/11 pilot having survived the fuel fire and rubble of 2 skyscrapers collapsing. A helpful guide as to which country would feel the wrath of revenge.

Quite a lot of passports and paper survived from the 9/11 planes. The passport of the pilot wasn't atypical.

---------- Post added at 08:57 ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

I've been expressing this point of view for years.

I don't think anyone thinks there isn't a problem with it but rather who we refer to when talking of Islam. Islam seems even more branched than Christianity with two major paths, Sunni and Shia, then further divided into other branches of which one of them, Salafism, is the ideology that drives these people:

The Salafi movement or Salafist movement is an ultra-conservative orthodox movement within Sunni Islam that references the doctrine known as Salafism. The doctrine can be summed up as taking "a fundamentalist approach to Islam, emulating the Prophet Muhammad and his earliest followers—al-salaf al-salih, the 'pious forefathers'...They reject religious innovation, or bida, and support the implementation of sharia (Islamic law)." The movement is often divided into three categories: the largest group are the purists (or quietists), who avoid politics; the second largest group are the activists, who get involved in politics; the smallest group are the jihadists, who form a tiny (yet infamous) minority.

The Salafi movement is often described as being synonymous with Wahhabism, but Salafists consider the term "Wahhabi" derogatory.At other times, Salafism has been described as a hybrid of Wahhabism and other post-1960s movements. Salafism has become associated with literalist, strict and puritanical approaches to Islam and – particularly in the West – with the Salafi jihadists, who espouse offensive jihad as a legitimate expression of Islam against those they deem to be enemies of Islam.

At least that's my rather limited understanding of it. I don't many people in the West really understand the religion or the various groups within it. I would worry about trying to have any serious opinions on something I don't understand.

[Ignitionnet]

Not helped by the fact that we in the West tend to be sycophantic towards Wahhabism, we seem to adore Saudi Arabia and give them a free pass despite their actively promoting their extreme views both home and abroad.

I should rephrase that our politicians adore Saudi Arabia. I think most of the population was repulsed seeing politicians lining up to kiss Saudi Arabia's arse when their previous king died.

[ianch99]

Sam Harris has a good perspective on what we are up against:

Still Sleepwalking Toward Armageddon

[Derek]

Police chiefs confirmed to the Guardian that the National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC) was put on standby on Saturday morning. The coordination centre would have found extra officers from around Britain, for example from county forces in mainly rural areas, to rush to sites in London and other big cities.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...-paris-attacks

Just as well there are loads of firearms teams in the counties doing nothing, I mean they were onto some old bloke with two rifles in Cumbria in no time. Oh...
Plus if every cop allowed to carry firearms is rushed to London what level of cover is left for the rest of the country?