Yet another Islamic attack in London...

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Insomnia, Jun 3, 2017.

  1. JohnIce

    JohnIce Singlecoils = tr00

    Messages:
    4,889
    Likes Received:
    1,690
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Location:
    Sweden
    Seems like you completely missed my point. My point was that the immigration system is far from the only thing different between how Canada and the US are run. All countries are a sum of their political and cultural parts. I would argue that the way taxes are spent in Canada makes a much bigger difference to public security, equality and economy than their immigration policies do. Just because there's a lot of refugees at the moment doesn't mean the age old left vs. right debate is suddenly irrelevant. Canada is not as capitalistic nor conservative as the US is, and there are pros and cons to that which have little to nothing to do with immigration.
     
  2. tedtan

    tedtan SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,920
    Likes Received:
    500
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Location:
    Never Neverland
    I wasn't meaning to play semantics games with the word Islam, I was trying to separate terrorism based in some way on Islam from the terrorism not based in some way on Islam (e.g., the IRA as one example).


    Most Christians I've spoken with believe that we must have Armageddon in order to end the world as we know it and bring about the return of Jesus as king. But none of them support nuclear war in order to hasten that process.

    I tend to think the average sympathizer of Islamic terrorism (even many ISIS sympathizers, but to a lesser extent) is similar: they believe certain scriptures and support them, but not the bloodshed and violence required to bring them about (e.g., ISIS' caliphate). But keep in mind, I am not excusing sympathizers, I am saying this in the context of why I think that sympathy for these terrorist groups is a poor predictor of future terrorist actions taken by that sympathizer - I don't believe that the average sympathizer is a supporter of the violence taken by these groups. They sympathize with the ideologies, but not the actions. Having said that, I haven't researched this, so this is just my gut feeling, but I do think that there are much better predictors of future terrorist behavior such as support for the terrorist community (providing financial aid, lodging, munitions or anything else of value), training in terrorist camps, associating with known or suspected terrorists, etc. These all make for better independent variables with which to predict future terrorist actions than does sympathy for a cause/ideology.
     
  3. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    13,210
    Likes Received:
    1,293
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    A sort of worst-case scenario, but still very logically plausible, it may be only a number of years before an organization like ISIS or al Qaeda or Iran or North Korea obtains a nuclear weapon capable of delivery to a large population center in the West, and when that happens, it will bring out the worst dogma in everyone on both sides. Such an event, which has a higher likelihood of happening every year, could potentially spur WWIII, and the odds of such increase infinitesimally, yet continually, as more people grow to hate the West or sympathize with anti-Western sentimentality. It's difficult to see what's going on when you are in the middle of all of this, but the world has never venture far from the verge of widespread nuclear war since the start of the Cold War.

    What none of the anti-anti-Western sympathizers seem to understand is that any active intervention against the ME or wherever simply galvanize the beliefs of those who hate us more and more.

    Nobody seems to recall how the Ottoman Empire was at the center of the start of WWI. The tensions between all sorts of groups who hated each other certainly fueled the fire, but friction between the Ottomans and the Hapsburgs created the environment where a terrorist organization (the Black Hand) was able to fire the shot that launched the entire world into war with itself.
     
  4. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    26,463
    Likes Received:
    1,938
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Have we not been talking about Islamic terrorism all along? In a thread called "Yet another Islamic attack in London?"

    Since last I checked terrorism IS a crime, as are most ACTUAL "threats to our fundamental way of life," I have no idea what the fuck your point is here, except for maybe dodging another question you don't want to answer.

    Maybe we could put a giant gate on your island, and hang a sign on it that says, "Abandon all hope ye who enter here." Wouldn't that be novel, fresh, and definitely-not-something-the-Nazis-have-done-before?
     
  5. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    26,463
    Likes Received:
    1,938
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Actually, intent is the difference between manslaughter and murder. Both kill you just as well, but one requires rational intent whereas the other does not. Good try though. :)
     
  6. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    13,210
    Likes Received:
    1,293
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    Ok. Actually, there is a crime "Conspiracy to commit murder," which might be a more appropriate comparison. Manslaughter is killing a person due to negligence rather than intending to kill them. We aren't talking about people accidentally flying planes into skyscrapers or accidentally blowing themselves up in crowded areas, nor are we talking about anyone accidentally shooting up magazine offices nor accidentally stabbing police officers whilst accidentally yelling "Almat ila alkufar! Alahu Akbar!" over and over.

    But, even with the attempted comparison with conspiracy, sympathizing with a murderer is not conspiracy. Planning out a murder is. Just like planning out a terrorist attack is conspiracy to commit terror acts, which is also a crime. Sympathy for a murderer is not a crime.

    And, well, that's not to say that the people who sympathize with terrorist groups are not dangerous or that we shouldn't be concerned about what they are doing. But you can't just go rounding people up based on their superstitions nor beliefs. You can't block a religious group from travelling to and fro, without taking a lot of justified flack from human rights groups and lawyers. And you can't prove a person's sympathies nor deep seated beliefs in a court of law, unless that person acts upon his or her beliefs.
     
  7. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    26,463
    Likes Received:
    1,938
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    You know, I was going to let this one slide, because don't feed the trolls and all of that, but I'll take the bait.

    I don't think this is nearly as much of a victory for Trump as he believes.

    The Court ruled 9-0 to allow parts of the immigration ban to go ahead, provided that foreign nationals with a "bona fide relationship" to a person or entity in the States were exempted, and indicated they would hear the case in October. Let that sink in for a few.

    One, the Court's ruling was unanimous. That's extremely rare, and means that noted uber-nationalistic opponents to immigration such as Sotomeyer ruled to let it go ahead. That should be cause for concern, if you're Donald J. Trump.

    Two, a "bona fide relationship" is surprisingly vague guidance. The Times discusses it here, but legal groups are predicting a new round of lawsuits and arguing that it's likely that having a relationship with a refugee nonprofit likely passes this test. If that interpretation is upheld or a temporary judicial stay is issued while the courts rule, then this ban isn't actually going to accomplish much, between now and September.

    Three, Trump has already issued an executive order that the clock starts ticking on his 90-day review only after the Supreme court rules on the executive order. 90 days from the ruling is September 24th, only a few days before the start of the month of October.

    To me, that looks an awful lot like the Court just called Trump's bluff.
     
  8. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    26,463
    Likes Received:
    1,938
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Put another way, part of democracy and liberty and freedom of belief and rule of law and all these other uniquely American qualities we hod dear is living side-by-side with people who hate you, and being ok with that.
     
  9. Insomnia

    Insomnia Needs more strings!

    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    41
    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    Location:
    London
    We're talking about how many Muslims hold 'dangerous' (yes, I know it's subjective...) views, not 'should it be legal for them to have such views?'
     
  10. tedtan

    tedtan SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,920
    Likes Received:
    500
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Location:
    Never Neverland
    Many people, not just Muslim extremists, hold dangerous views, but we can't do anything about those people (except possibly monitor them) until they take action based on their views. Playing thought police doesn't work in a free society.
     
    thraxil likes this.
  11. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    26,463
    Likes Received:
    1,938
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Yes, and as I already explained to you, it's not a crime to hold views you consider dangerous.
    What you're proposing is government regulation of thought. That's a step towards totalitarianism that NO believer in democracy should be willing to advocate.

    Seriously, you're either not reading what I'm writing, having VERY selective memory, or are intentionally trying to move the goalposts to justify your views.

    EDIT - in fact, I'll take this a step further; the level of thought control you're proposing is broadly consistent with what ISIS is actually doing, and anytime defeating an enemy means becoming them, you've lost that fight from day zero.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2017
  12. Insomnia

    Insomnia Needs more strings!

    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    41
    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    Location:
    London
    Drew, you don't realise the context of the discussion at the time when I was talking about PRC polls. I believe it was you who said 'Challenge!' when I said there were at the very least tens of millions of Muslim radicals on Earth. I'm trying to prove to you that the threat is bigger than you thought it was. That's it.

    If that's a step towards totalitarianism, it's a step I'm willing to take. Also, I'm not proposing mass execution or torture or rape of my opponents, so don't equate me with ISIS.
     
  13. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,563
    Likes Received:
    541
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    Do we consider European nations with laws prohibiting Nazism to be totalitarian?
     
  14. JohnIce

    JohnIce Singlecoils = tr00

    Messages:
    4,889
    Likes Received:
    1,690
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Location:
    Sweden
    If the prohibition was against mere sympathies with nazism, we probably would. I don't know of any such countries though. Making a nazi salute or having a swastika flag hanging from your porch might be seen as hate crime if it seems the intent was to actively promote the ideologies of the third reich. Collecting Nazi memorabilia and reading Mein Kampf in your living room however is, to my knowledge, not illegal anywhere. Neither is thinking your pale fat ass and lack of hair makes you ├╝bermensch, you do you etc., the laws are there to protect the rest of us if you can't keep it to yourself.
     
  15. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,563
    Likes Received:
    541
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    I hadn't realized it was so lax. I thought in Germany you actually could get in trouble for collecting Nazi memorabilia and reading Mein Kampf in your living room. I thought you could get thrown in jail just for saying that the holocaust didn't happen... though I suppose that isn't technically related to being a Nazi...
     
  16. JohnIce

    JohnIce Singlecoils = tr00

    Messages:
    4,889
    Likes Received:
    1,690
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Location:
    Sweden
    Europe in general is quite lax. I do know that Germany and Austria are the most particular about it, but Germany still sent a representative of the National Democrats to the EU parliament last election so for all their efforts I don't think Nazi sympathy is all that regulated even in Germany. It goes back to what we've been at already in this thread, thought-policing isn't an alternative so while many countries work to minimize the spread of extremism, a democratic society can only go so far if it wants to remain democratic.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2017
  17. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,563
    Likes Received:
    541
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    Sometimes I forget that USA is just prison-crazy and that not every country in the business of fabricating laws as a means to throw away their citizens for profit.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------

    OK, time to switch gears, because I just read something, a point that someone else made on a different website, that got me thinking about a point that we've talked a lot about in this thread.

    Thus far we've brought up a few times that violent Islamism is a response to Western intervention. But if that's true, then how do we explain Boko Haram in Nigeria, or more recently Islamist radicals wreaking havoc in the Philippines? I'm sure there are plenty more examples that I'm not aware of, probably especially in India, but like how do we tie that into our theory that radical Islamism is a reaction to Western intervention?
     
  18. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    13,210
    Likes Received:
    1,293
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    @vilk : "Bokom Haram" literally means "Western influence is sin."
     
  19. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,563
    Likes Received:
    541
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    I know. I can call my new radical group "Bon Jovi is sin", but it doesn't mean Bon Jovi ever did anything to me.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2017
  20. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    13,210
    Likes Received:
    1,293
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    Right, but if your radical group was from a country that was under Bon Jovi's colonial rule from 1900-1960, then had Bon Jovi set up a government shortly after independence that ended up being very corrupt and being ousted, only to have Richie Sambora set up the next governmental dictatorship for you after that, then it'd be more pertinent of a name.
     
    vilk likes this.

Share This Page