such hatred but what do you expect from and adherent to a borderline fascist party.
Paris Attacked: Dozens Dead and Hostages Taken
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
Except that isn't the issue PJ...oops.
Oh, and where is your evidence to support that one PJ? I thought you were supposed to be "fact" based.
Just as with the right wing nuts you like to wail about, you are entitled to your beliefs, but you are not entitled to your own facts. The unfortunate fact for you is Jihadi John was killed by an American drone with an American missile under the ownership and command of the US government. The Brits provided intelligence assistance and have been very public about their involvement, but France had nothing to do with the killing of Jihadi John.https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...58595c-89df-11e5-be39-0034bb576eee_story.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...laim-British-ISIS-fanatic-targeted-Raqqa.html
The fact remains. France had nothing to do with the killing of Jihadi John. If this were retribution for Jihadi John it doesn't make sense to attack a country (i.e. France) which had absolutely nothing to do with the killing of Jihadi John and has never claimed such as an act of retribution for his death. If ISIS had a "sleeper cell" in France, they could have very easily crossed the channel and attacked a country which has publicly proclaimed its involvement in Jihadi John's death as opposed to a country which had no involvement and unlike the UK never made claims of involvement in Jihadi John's death. It's not like the UK is on the other side of the world. It's just a few miles away.
If what you assert were true, that would mean ISIS has some of the laziest religious fanatics on the surface of the planet.
Hey, they are willing to kill themselves but crossing 20 miles of water, well that's just too much work.
Last edited:
Well maybe that deserves a separate thread, because I would like us to concentrate on the case of France in particular -- and to aspects of that country, and to Paris especially, that are not widely appreciated in US, UK, etc. (And so maybe I should have refrained from mentioning Germany.)
Let me tell you something. On 7 July 2005 I was not at home in London when the bus bomb went off within sight of my front door. But I was in London two weeks later when a repeat performance of bombings failed for reasons of chemistry. On 21 July we knew something was going on; there were alarming rumours and everyone expected more deaths. There was more actual fear, and a sense of desperation, on that second date, and London’s tube train drivers took it into their own hands to close the system down. Well, we had a narrow escape and further repeat attempts have been intercepted by the intelligence services.
If the events of Friday 13 were a one-off then Paris will get over it sooner than it expects. But if there are continuing deadly suicide missions France will be changed forever and the sense of shock that is felt today will be replaced by something infinitely and despairingly worse. I am not sure France possesses the ruthlessness necessary to sufficiently lock down or to deport its internal enemies. The banlieues have long been out of control, and the accounts you read in the liberal press (like the New Yorker, Guardian, Economist, etc) are less alarming that what you may hear in the personal accounts of Parisians.
Yazata
Valued Senior Member
Just a few months ago, there was a lot of concern in Europe about young European Muslims being radicalized, traveling to Syria to fight for ISIS, learning military skills, and then returning home to do things like we saw yesterday in Paris.
But today we are seeing hundreds of thousands of 'migrants' flooding into Europe each month. Most of them appear to be young Sunni males. Nobody is vetting them or performing background checks on them. Nobody knows who among them is an Islamist or who has military training. The fears of a few months ago have been totally overtaken by events.
Europe is setting itself up for generations of deep ethnic division and conflict. Even assuming that most of the 'migrants' aren't terrorists, as they take over more and more districts in large European cities they will create a turbulent, angry and unassimilated sea in which radical clerics and their terrorist followers can flourish.
It will be instructive to learn who these recent Paris terrorists were. Were they recent 'migrants'? (One of the stadium suicide bombers was reported to be carrying a Syrian passport.) Were they home-grown Muslim radicals? (One of the rock-concert shooters reportedly was a French Muslim on the security services' radar.) The Paris prosecutor just announced that the cars the Paris terrorists used were rented by a Brussels resident who was apprehended by a Belgian police raid this morning. Who was he? What was on these people's cell-phones and computers? Who were their associates and who had they been communicating with?
The prosecutor said that they all had suicide vests containing high-explosives and identical detonators. Witnesses report that they all had AKs, as did the Carlie Hebdo shooters, the Kosher market shooters, and the guy on the train that the American heroes subdued. Those aren't things that people can buy at any gun-store in France. So pretty clearly there's an underground arms network operating in the radical French Muslim community.
But today we are seeing hundreds of thousands of 'migrants' flooding into Europe each month. Most of them appear to be young Sunni males. Nobody is vetting them or performing background checks on them. Nobody knows who among them is an Islamist or who has military training. The fears of a few months ago have been totally overtaken by events.
Europe is setting itself up for generations of deep ethnic division and conflict. Even assuming that most of the 'migrants' aren't terrorists, as they take over more and more districts in large European cities they will create a turbulent, angry and unassimilated sea in which radical clerics and their terrorist followers can flourish.
It will be instructive to learn who these recent Paris terrorists were. Were they recent 'migrants'? (One of the stadium suicide bombers was reported to be carrying a Syrian passport.) Were they home-grown Muslim radicals? (One of the rock-concert shooters reportedly was a French Muslim on the security services' radar.) The Paris prosecutor just announced that the cars the Paris terrorists used were rented by a Brussels resident who was apprehended by a Belgian police raid this morning. Who was he? What was on these people's cell-phones and computers? Who were their associates and who had they been communicating with?
The prosecutor said that they all had suicide vests containing high-explosives and identical detonators. Witnesses report that they all had AKs, as did the Carlie Hebdo shooters, the Kosher market shooters, and the guy on the train that the American heroes subdued. Those aren't things that people can buy at any gun-store in France. So pretty clearly there's an underground arms network operating in the radical French Muslim community.
you know for some one with very little relationship with facts your a rather arrogant little bugger. you were the one who brought into question the time table which wouldn't matter if it was preplanned.
you mean other than the british drone involved? do you think repeating information i've acknowledge means something? I read some where france was involved if i'm mistaken i'm sorry but at least i'm not lying about facts like you enjoy doing. and again most reports i've seen don't say which drone was the one that hit him. given the washington posts rabid right wing biased i'm loathe to accept there claim it is known that one of the US drones fired the shot that wounded him. and given your own instistence on demanding your own facts do not lecture me on that. I'm getting really tired of refusing to own your claims and than acting as if you have some sort of intellectual high groundOh, and where is your evidence to support that one PJ? I thought you were supposed to be "fact" based.
you don't really understand the mind set of these people do you. as far as ISIS is concerned there is no difference between the US UK and france for them. and its not about laziness its about effectiveness. france is already uneasy due to previous attack they get more bang for their buck going in france. its all about biggest return on investment. it also should be noted no where did i claim i thought it was retribution strike. i was just pointing your argument against it was sloppy and poor.The fact remains. France had nothing to do with the killing of Jihadi John. If this were retribution for Jihadi John it doesn't make sense to attack a country (i.e. France) which had absolutely nothing to do with the killing of Jihadi John and has never claimed such as an act of retribution for his death. If ISIS had a "sleeper cell" in France, they could have very easily crossed the channel and attacked a country which has publicly proclaimed its involvement in Jihadi John's death as opposed to a country which had no involvement and unlike the UK never made claims of involvement in Jihadi John's death. It's not like the UK is on the other side of the world. It's just a few miles away.
If what you assert were true, that would mean ISIS has some of the laziest religious fanatics on the surface of the planet.
France has some very strict gun controls as is the case with most European countries. They are getting those weapons somewhere and it's a neighborhood store.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
To put IS on power in whole Syria too?
What does that mean? It doesn't make sense.
Maybe, or maybe it's because France is the antithesis of ISIS. There are many reasons why ISIS might choose to attack France, but Jihadi John isn't one of them.
All I wrote was that it was possible.. are you saying it is impossible? If you are not saying it is impossible then my post is founded.. it is possible that the attack was a preplanned response by Jihad John's little extremist sub group ( and he would have had a following of ultra extremists) if he were to go down.
It is possible yes?
Dead man trigger is not hard to imagine..
Also the place where the attack killed the most was at a rock concert with a USA rock band at center stage. ( ISIL just loves sending messages)
Eagle of Death Metal is such a loaded USA title for a rock band.
And I might add you have failed to address the main issue of my post and that is that suicidal terrorists who have no intention of surviving their assault are almost impossible to prevent of guard against in any "free" society...
Last edited:
Only in the sense that "anything is possible". As I have pointed out it doesn't make sense for all the reasons previously explained.
I'm not sure how this is relevant or how it makes sense. A dead-man trigger is only useful if someone other than the one who possess the dead-man trigger knows it exists and threatens to use it. If you are insinuating this terrorist group was some sort of dead-man trigger, that doesn't make sense either because only the terrorists knew it existed until after they pulled the trigger.
Do they now, ISIL loves attention. As previously pointed out, if nationality was so important there are many other places they could have attacked which would have sent a clearer anti-American message if that is what you are contending (e.g. American embassies, consulates, military installations, etc.). If killing Americans was their goal, the picked some piss poor choices. Only one of the confirmed casualties was an American. Now that may change over time, but the vast bulk of their victims were not Americans. Most Americans don't travel to France to attend American rock concerts. And most Americans prefer American football to soccer.
And thus far, according to witnesses and survivors terrorists didn't question people about their nationality before shooting them. So thus far there is no evidence nationality of their victims played any roll in the attacks.
Except I did address it when I wrote, "Well, it would stop the funding and organized attacks like this one. By all accounts these attackers were well trained, supplied and organized. This isn't the lone wolf disorganized attack to which we have become accustomed. Well organized packs are far more deadly than a few disorganized lone wolves. And that's why this is different and disturbing."
This wasn't a single lone wolf terrorist to which you allude. This was a well organized, well supplied, well funded and well trained terrorist group. And while we will not be able to weed out and stop every kook. We can certainly reduce if not eliminate the well organized, well funded and well trained wolf packs who attacked France yesterday. Just because you cannot cure every illness, it doesn't mean you shouldn't treat every illness and attempt to cure every illness. Taking out ISIS, taking away their safe haven in Syria, can certainly adversely impact the ability of ISIS to fund and train these terrorists operations.
France will need to devote more resources, Europe will need to devote more resources to tracking radicalized individuals. That's the bottom line. Ironically, because an American citizen was killed, the American FBI is now has legal authority in this case and is fully committed to tracking down these scumbags and will actively track these scumbags down where ever they may flee and under any rock in which they may hide.
This should be a clarion call. Syria needs to be fixed. Those who argue against NATO intervention in Syria on the grounds NATO countries will become terrorists targets, well, I think these attacks answer that argument rather clearly. NATO nations are already terrorists targets. NATO nations are already bogged down in the quagmire that is Syria.
Obviously, ISIS leaders never attended the How to Win Friends and Influence People Dale Carnegie Class. I'm pretty sure bombing in flight airliners and attacking and murdering hundreds of innocent people isn't how you win friends and influence people.
Last edited:
Actually the idea of this being a response to Jihad Johns demise is not mine but was something commented upon in the American media immediately after the Paris situation became known. ( and no I can not give you a link as it was in passing)
The target decisions may have been deliberately short timed to avoid security forces detection.
The group (possibly a group of "lone wolfs") may have been primed and ready just waiting for a justification to happen along.
The 3 bombs outside the soccer match apparently was quite large yet low casualties (1) were reported. This indicates that the bombing was not as thoroughly planned as you are suggesting.
"PARIS—At least one of the attackers outside France’s national soccer stadium had a ticket to the game and attempted to enter the 80,000-person venue, according to a Stade de France security guard who was on duty and French police.
The guard—who asked to be identified only by his first name, Zouheir—said the attacker was discovered wearing an explosives vest when he was frisked at the entrance to the stadium about 15 minutes into the game. France was playing an exhibition against Germany inside.
While attempting to back away from security, Zouheir said, the attacker detonated the vest, which was loaded with explosives and bolts, according to Paris prosecutor François Molins. Zouheir, who was stationed by the players’ tunnel, said he was briefed on the sequence by the security frisking team at the gate.
A police officer confirmed the sequence, adding that police suspect the attacker aimed to detonate his vest inside the stadium in order to provoke a deadly stampede.
Around three minutes later, a second person also blew himself up outside the stadium. A third suicide attacker detonated explosives at a nearby McDonald’s, police said. One civilian died in the attacks, police said."
src: http://www.wsj.com/articles/attacker-tried-to-enter-paris-stadium-but-was-turned-away-1447520571
So one could surmise that 3 suicidal terrorists died for very little return ( 3 terrorists and only one victim fatality)
I am unsure how one could consider the obvious failure of most of the terrorists as being "well planned". Sure they were well equipped but to have three suicide bombers only manage one victim is pretty telling IMO.
this is simply because it appears none of the ISIL intends to survive their Jihad. They all have a martyrdom fixation.
This has been a problem for the West from the outset. ISIL is not a typical terrorist organization. They worship death for GOD higher than living for GOD. They seem quite happy to destroy God's creation under the delusion that they are doing it for GOD. This is a religious war not one that is typical of terrorists generally.
Once the Free world finally understands this sort of suicidal conviction it may find a way to manage it. Until then it is fighting the wrong enemy.
Contra note:
It appears that ISIL has had to change due to the apparent unconfirmed loss of it's spiritual leader the self proclaimed Mahdi, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and will IMO change to a more conventional terrorist group over time
Actually, that isn't true, ISIL leaders survive and they are the folks who plan and order these attacks. The suicide guys are just tools of the real terrorists - their leaders.
Yes, the jihadis die carrying out these dastardly deeds, but their leaders, the guys ordering these attacks, they always live. Their leaders may not value the lives of their followers but they sure the hell value their own asses. That's why they are always in hiding.
The world understands suicidal maniacs. The US and United Kingdom dealt with Kamikaze's during WWII where Japanese warriors died in service of their God, the emperor. So suicide killers aren't new. We have also had a number of religious wars. The medieval Nizari Ismailis practiced terrorism under the guise of religion back in the 11th century. This isn't something new and mysterious. And as far as I can see Baghdadi is alive and well.
It was reported in the press prior to your presenting it in this forum. But when you first introduced it, you represented it as your own by not crediting the press.
Just because it didn't go as planned doesn't mean it wasn't well planned. They successfully hit six targets.
No one knows at this point why things evolved they way the did. But that doesn't mean, by any means it wasn't well planned. They injured almost 400 people and killed 128 at last count. And they did it without being detected. That's pretty well planned.
Yes the wise old man create war and the stupid young man trust the old wise man and puts his life as a sacrifice . I remember during WV11 They drafted my bruther 15 years old he wanted to go to defend the Fatherland, but my father discouraged him and did some fennegeling they left my brother home and he survived.Actually, that isn't true, ISIL leaders survive and they are the folks who plan and order these attacks. The suicide guys are just tools of the real terrorists - their leaders.
Yes, the jihadis die carrying out these dastardly deeds, but their leaders, the guys ordering these attacks, they always live. Their leaders may not value the lives of their followers but they sure the hell value their own asses. That's why they are always in hiding.
And as far as I can see Baghdadi is alive and well.
It is the same here They send the young man to defend the freedom . The young man (except pacific war with Japan.) go to fight for freedom . How many time America was invaded ? who attacking attacking us ?
But the good young man puts his life , Is there much difference us going to Viet Nam , Nazi germany Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia , Eritrea, now Ukraine, Syria ete.
If he is he has been very quiet and not ranting much lately.
When was his last public announcement ( known to be alive and not just a recording) do you know?
That doesn't mean he's dead. How many public announcements has he made in person? His modus operandi is to stay hidden all the time.
Last edited:
I think Paris stadium security deserve a pat on the back because if those three bombers got into the stadium and detonated there could have been thousands die in the resultant panic.
In other words the outcome of these attacks could have been considerably worse. IMO