Manhattan terror Attack

[Fairy In Boots]

6 dead so far being treated as Terrorism 

[Smiley Culture]

FIB in there like Tommy Robinson 

Horrendous, when will it end?

[Fairy In Boots]

It won’t end that’s the problem.

7 dead attack outside the World Trade Center a van used to run people down

[Guest Cannabis]

John Smith at it again.

[SirBalon]

Well it won't take much to rile Mr Orange.

Let's see what occurs now...

RIP

[Spike]

Ran over cyclists in the bicycle lane.

[Berserker]

There's one or 2 compatriots between the death, R.I.P.

[Berserker]

Actually no, 5 of the 8 victims were Argentines, while another one was wounded.

[Fairy In Boots]

London, Barcelona, Nice, Paris, Berlin, Stockholm & New York  all nice cities and all now have had people ran down in name of the religion of piss.

The West is absolutely paralysed by fear of being branded ignorant to tackle this mess, it will get worse. 

[Harry]

1 hour ago, Fairy In Boots said:

London, Barcelona, Nice, Paris, Berlin, Stockholm & New York  all nice cities and all now have had people ran down in name of the religion of piss.

The West is absolutely paralysed by fear of being branded ignorant to tackle this mess, it will get worse. 

Tackling the mess is a sure fire way to make it worse.

A big high publicity political movement to peacefully evict followers of the religion of piss from all western countries and dump them on some north African desert plain... would be interesting to see how much better things get. 

[Fairy In Boots]

1 minute ago, Harry said:

Tackling the mess is a sure fire way to make it worse.

A big high publicity political movement to peacefully evict followers of the religion of piss from all western countries and dump them on some north African desert plain... would be interesting to see how much better things get. 

Oh this is going to be good, please do tell the thought process behind the bit in bold. It’s served us so well so far

[Honey Honey]

Surely the bit after the bold did explain it 

[Stan]

Quote

 

Mr Saipov, born in February 1988, is believed to have lived in Ohio, Florida and New Jersey since obtaining a green card that enabled him to work in the US.

US-based Uzbek religious activist and blogger Mirrakhmat Muminov told the BBC that Mr Saipov - who is married with three children - became an aggressive person after being radicalised on the internet once he had arrived in the US.

The pair met in Ohio soon after Mr Saipov moved to the US.

"He was not well educated and had no knowledge of the Koran before arriving in the US," he said. "At the beginning of his time here he was a normal sort of person."

But Mr Muminov said that Mr Saipov became depressed, separated from his community and more resentful and angry after failing to find work as a driver.

"Because of his radical views he frequently used to argue with other Uzbeks and moved to Florida," Mr Muminov said.

 

hmm.

 

Anyway, this is what he looks like:

and all I see is this dude from Four Lions

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

What the fuck, he got radicalised in the west? Didn't even care about their holy book before coming to the USA?

I've got doubts about that, but if true that highlights how the internet is a breeding ground for extremism and social media needs to be actually policed, rather than letting Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc sort it out themselves. Because they don't care if people die as long as they still make money.

It's certainly a better idea than rounding up all Muslims and putting them in camps or deporting them to Madagascar, or whatever a brown shirt/red cap/white robed cunt would like us to do.

[Panna King]

33 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

What the fuck, he got radicalised in the west? Didn't even care about their holy book before coming to the USA?

I've got doubts about that, but if true that highlights how the internet is a breeding ground for extremism and social media needs to be actually policed, rather than letting Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc sort it out themselves. Because they don't care if people die as long as they still make money.

It's certainly a better idea than rounding up all Muslims and putting them in camps or deporting them to Madagascar, or whatever a brown shirt/red cap/white robed cunt would like us to do.

The problem is, they are always Radicalised in the West at Mosques and Jails mainly by the preachers who are the cowards who brainwash individuals due to the fact why Muslims have had to leave their homelands due the wars with the West etc from the early 2000s.     

[Dr. Gonzo]

9 minutes ago, VanPaddy said:

The problem is, they are always Radicalised in the West at Mosques and Jails mainly by the preachers who are the cowards who brainwash individuals due to the fact why Muslims have had to leave their homelands due the wars with the West etc from the early 2000s.     

A lot of their recruitment is done online nowadays. The internet also allows for a more constant stream of propaganda. And it's effective at radicalising western Muslim kids. Social media using weaponised disinformation has been hugely effective. Something should have been done about it years ago, but here we are.

[Spike]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

What the fuck, he got radicalised in the west? Didn't even care about their holy book before coming to the USA?

I've got doubts about that, but if true that highlights how the internet is a breeding ground for extremism and social media needs to be actually policed, rather than letting Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc sort it out themselves. Because they don't care if people die as long as they still make money.

It's certainly a better idea than rounding up all Muslims and putting them in camps or deporting them to Madagascar, or whatever a brown shirt/red cap/white robed cunt would like us to do.

That is what happened to those brothers that bombed Boston.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Just now, Spike said:

That is what happened to those brothers that bombed Boston.

They were radicalised before they ever left Russia though. The US government was warned about the older brother.

[Panna King]

Its mostly vulnerable people lost in society or people feel who have been let down by a system seem to be the ones that are the targets to these preachers. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

13 minutes ago, VanPaddy said:

Its mostly vulnerable people lost in society or people feel who have been let down by a system seem to be the ones that are the targets to these preachers. 

They also shape this "us v. them" mentality to help build the radicalisation. They point to things like the continual involvement & wars in the Middle East to help shape this narrative - much like how some point to these attacks to shape the narrative that there is in fact an "us v. them" mentality.

This of course means that young people are ignoring the fact that in most cases their parents moved their families away from that region to escape the sectarian bullshit and constant turmoil of their homelands. Let's not forget who ISIS largest group of victims is Muslims that don't agree with them & secular people from the region or living in the west are probably the most hated "infidels" to them - because in their insane worldview, those people are traitors to them. Or in the case of this Uzbek shithead, they may not have even fled anything or had any strange religious extremist views until they came to the West and were exposed to this bullshit propaganda. And this propaganda is prevalent and targeting certain people to shape their worldview to agree with this nonsense - and look at the countries where it is mostly consumed.

Domestically radicalised terror is going to be the hardest to combat because it requires vigilance in fighting against targeted propaganda - which can be online or in person at mosques with radical imams. That means actively regulating and policing what the fuck is posted by accounts that are known to be spouting this shit (there are a lot of known ISIS propagandists on twitter, for example) - and data collection has shown to be ineffective. Simply "tracking" these fuckers may be stopping some attacks and we're just not hearing about it, but the frequency has been so high nobody can reasonably say it's been effective. These accounts should be banned, new accounts should be actively looked for and banned - if we cut off the mouthpiece for the spread of misinformation we stop a lot of misinformation.

With policing radical clerics, I imagine there would need to be more undercover work done by our spies and cops. Radical imams need to be identified and then imprisoned for inciting terror.

It's interesting to note again that authorities were aware this guy was potentially a threat - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-new-york-attack/uzbek-man-planned-deadly-new-york-truck-attack-for-weeks-police-idUSKBN1D02QU this article states that "The New York Times said Saipov had come to the attention of law enforcement in the past. It cited three officials as saying federal authorities knew of Saipov from an unrelated probe, although it was unclear whether that was because he had ties to someone who was under scrutiny or because he was the target of an investigation."

It's clear something needs to be done, because it's a complicated problem. Widespread backlash against Islam in general gives terrorists more propaganda - and we know their propaganda has been effective. We don't want to do something that creates even more terror. And with the US's religious right wanting to engage in a holy war & these terrorists also hoping for a holy war - with both groups of idiots thinking this will bring about the return of Jesus (yes, Jesus is in Islam too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam#Second_coming - he's not the messiah, but he's supposed to return during a holy war to help bring about the messiah or some other silly nonsense) - I think it'd be best to avoid war. Generally, it's best to avoid war in any circumstances. But here we've got people who really won't give a fuck if they live or die and have no concern for the consequences of how brutal a war can be... because their end goal is to bring about the apocalypse. And indiscriminate bombing campaigns might kill leaders, but civilian deaths will likely be used as effective propaganda as well.

The only way I can see this getting any better without getting significantly worse is if we take active measures against their online propaganda and identifying the individuals in the west who promote this ideology. That means cutting off their actual propaganda... and it probably wouldn't be a bad idea to make fake accounts that have counter propaganda. It also probably wouldn't hurt to have some misinformation of our own, and organise fake plots and meetings between known radicals - so we can lead would be terrorists into traps and stay a step ahead of them.

[Fairy In Boots]

8 hours ago, Kitchen Sales said:

Surely the bit after the bold did explain it 

I read that as him scorning the second part of his post, which nobody here has suggested. Hence my question about the first bit. @Harry have I got that wrong?

6 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

What the fuck, he got radicalised in the west? Didn't even care about their holy book before coming to the USA?

I've got doubts about that, but if true that highlights how the internet is a breeding ground for extremism and social media needs to be actually policed, rather than letting Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc sort it out themselves. Because they don't care if people die as long as they still make money.

It's certainly a better idea than rounding up all Muslims and putting them in camps or deporting them to Madagascar, or whatever a brown shirt/red cap/white robed cunt would like us to do.

The problem there is once you start closing down and policing thought and speech it’s a slippery slope to state based control & authoritarianism. What’s different from that and Sharia? 

You have to let these nutters have their say and shout them down. Mainly because it stops them feeling victimised as you close avenues of thought people naturally go to the extreme (far right does this also, denying them an outlet pushes them more to the extreme) and they identify themselves as nutters by being outspoken. I detest hate preachers but they have a rite to say it, we need to empower those who challenge them. 

Also the problem is the peaceful ones still insist on a sharia based society due to religious calling and they breed & migrate in huge numbers so even if your successfully intergrating them they’ll revert to type and eventually overhaul native populations.  Not to dehumanisize them but it’s something akin to the religious & political equivalent of a plague of locusts, Pedo Mo designed it as such. 

 Afghanistan is a great example not even Alexander with all his might nor Russia or The UN can subdue that place but Islam does it with ease. You all just think I’m a islamophobe and I am I’m not scared of individual Muslims I’m terrified of that ideology. We’re already ideological at war with it, I just don’t view it as a war that will conclude within my lifetime or as one with pitched battles at least not yet. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Just now, Fairy In Boots said:

I read that as him scorning the second part of his post, which nobody here has suggested. Hence my question about the first bit. @Harry have I got that wrong?

The problem there is once you start closing down and policing thought and speech it’s a slippery slope to state based control & authoritarianism. What’s different from that and Sharia? 

You have to let these nutters have their say and shout them down. Mainly because it stops them feeling victimised as you close avenues of thought people naturally go to the extreme (far right does this also, denying them an outlet pushes them more to the extreme) and they identify themselves as nutters by being outspoken. I detest hate preachers but they have a rite to say it, we need to empower those who challenge them. 

Also the problem is the peaceful ones still insist on a sharia based society due to religious calling and they breed & migrate in huge numbers so even if your successfully intergrating them they’ll revert to type and eventually overhaul native populations.  Not to dehumanisize them but it’s something akin to the religious & political equivalent of a plague of locusts, Pedo Mo designed it as such. 

 Afghanistan is a great example not even Alexander with all his might nor Russia or The UN can subdue that place but Islam does it with ease. You all just think I’m a islamophobe and I am I’m not scared of individual Muslims I’m terrified of that ideology. We’re already ideological at war with it, I just don’t view it as a war that will conclude within my lifetime or as one with pitched battles at least not yet. 

Having limitations free speech and having sharia law are totally different. Sharia law is using a religious text as the basis for all laws. The danger of allowing unfettered social media bullshit chatter is that our social media channels are used as a weapon against us and our society. Should we let pedophiles share child porn online? Or should we crack down on pedo forums and shut them down after arrests have been made?

We already have limits on free speech in the UK. You can already be imprisoned for hate speech. And there's no free speech on speech that incites violence. And let's be real - that is what ISIS propaganda is. It's hateful speech intended to incite acts of terror

That third paragraph is fucking outrageous. You don't see Sadiq Khan implementing the quoran as the official rule of law in London. "Not to dehumanise them, but they're basically insects" what the fuck.

And Afghanistan hasn't been subdued by Islam either. The Taliban taking control of Afghanistan was marked with horrific violence and instability. Neither of those characteristics. Afghanistan is a country who's history is marked with foreign occupation, in the last few centuries they've had about a quarter a century of being a stable and independent country. And it wasn't even that stable because that government was overthrown by a coup and shortly after the USSR went in. The ONLY thing that can be said to unify the people of Afghanistan is not religion - it's wanting to rid themselves of foreign occupiers.

I'd also take a look at what Afghanistan was like before the Russian invasion, and the US's subsequent funding of the Mujahedeen (which ultimately led to a Taliban controlled Afghanistan). Because in that period of relative stability for Afghanistan, it was pretty fucking moderate - much like pre-revolution Iran. But foreign meddling created a much shittier situation for the people of Afghanistan, the region, and ultimately the world once backwards theocratic scumbags took power.

I'm not scared of Christians, but I'm scared of the US evangelical right wing. I'm not scared of Muslims, but I'm scared of shitheads like ISIS and the sad wannabes who do this shit. Religion is cancer, but not all religious people are bad people who are dangerous to the world. And if you ask me, World War 3 has already started and it's not just these shithead terrorists we're fighting against. And cyberwarfare is a new element to warfare generally, and on the digital front I think the west is losing and sitting on it's hands doing nothing to protect itself.

For as long as countries refuse to protect themselves against weaponised propaganda and misinformation on social media, they will be victims to it. And that's us being the victims - it's us getting blown up or shot at concerts, getting run over when we're on the pavement, our soldiers will be sent to foreign countries to fight and die in the holy war they think their fairy tales have promised them... as we sit by idly and don't demand that social media companies or our governments do something. And when our enemies see how effective it is as a recruitment tool and a way to shape how groups of our populations think... why the fuck wouldn't they?

The thing that surprises me the most is the western homegrown terrorists, who've got parents that have fled war torn shitholes in hopes of a better life. It's not as though they're in the same boat as goat herders from Afghanistan who don't have any real formal education and you'd expect to be easily swayed by bullshit propaganda. But I guess it shows how easy it is to foster an "us v. them" mentality in minority groups, to foster extremism, and then let it grow. But you'd think they'd at least appreciate the stance of their parents, rather than return to situations that their families initially fled... or by trying to recreate those situations in the U.S. I'd have an easier time believing that an uneducated goat herder in some village in Afghanistan or Iraq would believe some stupid bullshit than some kid growing up the UK or US - and maybe they just use different propaganda based on the target (that would be the smart thing to do when weaponising propaganda).

Either way, I think that sitting on our hands and doing nothing in the face of our social media platforms being used against us is fucking retarded. I don't agree that limiting free speech necessarily creates a slippery slope to authoritarian rule, because we've already got some limitations on free speech that go almost hand in hand with what I'm demanding - preventing hate speech and inciting violence - and we're not in Sharia rule right now.

 

[Devil-Dick Willie]

[Honey Honey]

It's not the Quran you want to be worried about, it's Macbeth. 

The CIA have released this entry from Osama Bin Laden's teenage diary after he went on a trip to Shakespeare's house in Warwickshire 

Quote

'I got the impression that they were a loose people, and my age didn't allow me to form a complete picture of life there.

'We went every Sunday to visit Shakespeare's house. 

'I was not impressed and I saw that they were a society different from ours and that they were a morally loose society.'

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Bin Laden also had Final Fantasy 7 and Charlie Bit My Finger on his computer.