Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Tagged under: , ,

Cubs of the Caliphate

Regular TPQ commenter Daithi O’Donnabhain discusses the IS counter offensive in Mosul, their use of child suicide bombers, and suitable responses from the West to what comes after.

When Islamic States (IS) Caliph decided to split with both its parent organisation Al-Qaeda (AQ), and its Syrian offshoot Jabhat Al-Nusra (JN) early in the Arab Spring, one of the main tactical concerns raised within the group was the ability to hold territory in the event of American intervention.

But IS leaders thought that at a minimum, a generation of Islamic youth bearing witness to the Caliphates birth would be epoch making, and nothing would the same even in the event it was subverted.

To give a clue as to the possible scale of their catchment area for their witnesses to this new old civilisation, they had established indoctrination centres and training camps across the areas in Iraq and Syria under their control: in territory that was estimated to hold 10 million people. We have seen the child graduates of these camps appear in snuff films before, usually executing subdued prisoners away from the front lines of battle. Now from the frequency of images coming out of Mosul and other areas, it appears these ‘cubs’ are being used as suicide bombers on the front lines.
IS suicide bomber Mosul

IS is looking like losing its territory as they war-gamed, but this loss of territory will not extinguish the idea that has been implanted in its youth. Beyond just the shock value of seeing youth so enthusiastically annihilate themselves and others around them, is the question of what happens to the rest of their classmates if their generals go into hiding before they can be despatched on their own missions? People that have had the authority to install fear in and kill (dreaded) adults at a key time in their psychological growth? Who enjoys playing water pistols after firing AK-47’s into adults as a form of deity worship?

The fact these guys look too much like genuine children to be showing up in the Calais Jungle is a small comfort at least. It gives us time to get our own house in order before the next solution to the last solutions problems is excreted on us by the whoever is allowed to be leading us. But maybe some lateral thinking is required before, so we are not repeating the failed whack-a-mole-and-its-family/village approach that appears to feed the problem its purportedly trying to minimize.

A key component of this will be the distance between the ruled and the rulers. Think back to the Paris “solidarity” march after the Charlie Hebdo massacre when 12 employees of a satirical magazine who published blasphemous cartoons were gunned down by theocratic fascists from one particularly energetic sect they had offended.

En Marche!

The world leaders initially appeared to lead the thing, joining arms in the perfect example of fraternité libertaire.


In it together. Fuck yeah!
But the media who of course hold these same powers to account didn’t show us the truest example of what the street looked like. It was completely secure away from the rest of the march, on a closed street. But this was not fake news because it predates 2016 (just go with it).

Giving the terrorists a win?

In fairness to them, they have been vigorously trying to prevent another massacre such as the Charlie Hebdo one. Namely by vigorously enforcing blasphemy laws so they themselves can punish and jail the culprits so groups like the AQ Maghreb branch will not need to commission a response themselves.

Another observation to factor into our thinking is that it is now unusual for a European leader to have any children. For example May, Macron, Merkel, along with Sweden's Luxemburg's, Scotland's and Italy’s leaders are all child free. It leads me to wonder whether this also affects their long term thinking on the type of insecure society they are forcing on us. So we, the public, need to shift their thinking to a shorter term time frame. Perhaps the key obstacle to this is the security our leaders feel in insulating themselves from the consequences of their own decisions. And since they have lauded their citizens for going about normal city living after every terror attack, thankfully it reveals an initial trajectory for us to aim for.

IS suicide bombers that attacked an American base in Kirkuk

I would invite all the Western leaders (by force of law) to share in the stoic bravery of everyday existence with the rest of us by removing all their security details. Armed guards, closing entire traffic grids and bullet proof limos are a signal of their fear, and of course we don’t want to give the impression we are bowing down to fear and giving victory to the terrorists so they all need to go. Immediately. This is not a complete solution; it’s more a first iteration of something we can feasibly do before attempting anything else.
IS Yazidi converts, suicide bombers in Mosul

If the western leaders don’t agree to adjust with us to what we are told by London's Mayor should now be seen as “part and parcel” of city living, they would be doing something analogous to what the older IS operators are instructing the child suicide bombers to do: give their life so that their culture advances, and without giving opportunity for questions like whose culture or whether this culture is worth perpetuating.

127 comments :

DaithiD said...

This was written mostly Saturday, very topical.

larry hughes said...

Interesting timing of your article Daithi D with Manchester in the news again. I wonder have the UK/USA supported and trained ISIS in Syria decided Brit / Loyalist ATAT tactics deployed in 'Ulster' and elsewhere is the way to go?

Steve R

How many atrocities do you recon it will take against the UK public before its support for UK foreign policy of terror wanes?

DaithiD said...

Larry, the response to events such as this is even more predictable. British men have allowed their children to be raped on an industrial scale, so they will do nothing about this either. What annoys me is when people like Bernadette Devlin compare the treatment of Muslims today with Jews in Nazi Germany (as she did in her Guernica piece) whilst in the same peice stating she knows nothing about Islam. Maybe she should read a few things about Islams founder,then she would see the religion is hijacking political problems to advance, rather politics hijacking a religion to advance.

wolfe tone said...

If you pay attention at how the British state acted out in Ireland via its agents within various pseudo gangs in Ireland then Manchester and all the other various farcical bogeyman ISIS attacks in britland will be self explanatory. If one or two 'mad Muslim extremists' can secretly carry out terror attacks then it's no stretch to imagine that British state extremists can fo likewise. Especially with all the resources at their disposal.

larry hughes said...

Diathi D

Bernadette maybe has a part time job with the BBC. I never read her article TBH. One of the BBC news reporters asked with a straight face in a sad voice how could a teenage refugee from Libya end up doing anything like this (Manchester bomb) how could this happen?' It is this pious, phoney, self pity and pretend disconnect from cause and effect that has gone beyond bearable. Carpet bombing half the planet, destroying communities, societies for zero good reason and then a pretence of being unable to understand why so many people hate them? PLEASE, enough already.

I listened to Trump speaking today about the attack calling the bomber a 'loser' and am now convinced I am living in an unreal, satirical/comedy/horror bubble suspended in time and detached from all reality and logic. 'Loser' must the ultimate insult in the USA it seems. An insult which camouflages the near total lack of empathy or social conscience in a country that puts all blame on the said 'loser' in the game of life. At the same time Muslims suffering from shock and horror experiences and who have no respect for western society and culture should not be permitted into western countries. Especially those western countries that are responsible for destroying their own homelands. How could our governments be so stupid you may wonder? Just take a look at Trump and May, that should help. Although the fact they are doing it could add weight to the contention they really don't see any connection between their actions and these attacks. THAT is scary. I prefer the previous theory that they are faking it.

Western political leaders simply seem to deliberately blot out their own actions and crimes. Listening to May and Trump whine about children being attacked living their lives with zero trace of irony is galling. It bodes ill for the future. Attacks like these simply seem to provide cover for western political trash leaders to wrap themselves in justification for their own sordid global agendas. They will have plenty to cry about if the Muslims get hold of a low loader. They will be doing a bit more comparing of Muslim extremists with the IRA attacks then, but for very different reasons.

As long as they don't give in to terrorism, that is the main thing. Stiff upper lip old chap and all that, as they no doubt all book their cheap flights to a Tunisian beach this year again then?

Steve R said...

Larry,

"How many atrocities do you recon it will take against the UK public before its support for UK foreign policy of terror wanes?"

You know as well as I do that foreign policy is dictated by the nameless grey that is the deep state corporatocracy. An acceptable level of violence will be tolerated as long as the masses are drip fed feel-good soundbites and red herring distractions, lies better swallowed when dressed up as altruistic benevolence.

A lone jihadi targeting a bunch of kids solidifies opinion FOR hardened foreign policy, so my question is always, Cui Bono?

Is it the 23 year old kid who blinded by religion murders wantonly in pursuit of intangible glory or the State who now has free hands to 'respond' harshly but in actual fact will just continue their pursuit of the hydrocarbon energy market in far flung fields with more military gusto?

Even me as a dopey hun can see which one is more likely!

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

You think a suicide bomber targeting children at a concert is a legitimate response to western aggression? You emphasis your contempt at BBC reporters supposed "pretence of being unable to understand why so many people hate them? PLEASE, enough already"

I do not share your hatred of "them" and certainly not so much as to justify the slaughter of innocent children. Unlike an air force pilot dropping a bomb from high - in this case the Islamist killer confronted his enemy up close and looked "them" in their trusting and innocent eyes before killing them. It seems only you and the Islamist's hold or understand that level of hatred for "them" to justify the specific targeting of innocent children out enjoying themselves at a concert.

DaithiD said...

Larry, IS would be doing exactly what they are doing regardless of Western imperialism. We could debate the relative sizes of the organisation in each event, but they are following a 1400 year template and expanded this way before an Arab saw a paleface. Is it too much to think they are fighting us because we are non-believers? IS have taken over parts of the Philipines last night,they are lining up decapitated teachers heads as i type this, they have taken over parts of Africa too. The east of the east, and the west of the west as was promised to them.

DaithiD said...

Steve R, when the rape of 1400 young girls in the small-ish town of Rotherham was mentioned on here, someone spouted the conspiracy was to cover up elite rapes, this was now being revealed. Ignoring all evidence that the local council, the national media and the police had fought to keep it hidden, and only by chance some sexual health workers that knew the girls kept records, else it would never of been corroberrated (its being dramatised on BBC- leaving out things like the nailing of young girls tongues to tables of course).
Dont let looking for bigger picture obscure what is infront of your eyes, the two sides (State and IS) are dancing, maybe not to the same music though.

AM said...

DaithiD,

do you not feel that without the West ISIS would not be ISIS as we know it? The West has spawned the Monster.

There are always people who will do bad things for religious reasons. That is why it is so important to separate religion and state power. Think of how cruel and rights-devalued society would be had the Catholic Church state power. What empowers ISIS in my view is not the texts but Western policy.

This is where I think you get it wrong. You don't pay any attention to biblical bollix if it tells you it is all right to mass murder children. But what are the circumstances in which you (or me) might pay attention to it? If it empowers us to push back and lash out at a vicious opponent don't you think?

I have a practicing Christian friend who said to me last night while driving. Manchester - Blair and Bush have a lot to answer for. I can't disagree with him.

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

Don't misquote me ... buffoon

Steve R

Englishmen killing each other in the name of religion.... Thank GOD we IRISH don't do that.

DaithiD said...

AM, ask your friend : what country are they happy in today? What contiguous borders have they never sought to widen in 1400 years? Can Blair be blamed for events before he was born?
Dont forget after 9/11, the refrain from progressives was : they dont attack Canada, they dont attack Germany.Now when even Sweden (Non-NATO member) is attacked, is it not indication some other dynamic is at play than the simplistic occupation/resistance model?
I conceded that numbers might vary had no Western intervention taken place, but its very Western centric to think a civilization movement like IS grew from nothing to what it was in 2014 because of the intervening 11 years.
AM, even at a bare minimum and you are not convinced, is it not worth thinking why my view is not represented in the mainstream media (except to crucify the person making it as an example)?

Niall said...

With some of the comments above Martin Niemöller's poem comes to mind....
Its Western foreign policy that is driving organisations like ISIS....and it's all to do with commercial greed....there are hundreds of millions of Muslims and they are mostly relatively peaceful, just as hundreds of millions of Christians are. When you bomb someones family to pieces, what do you expect will happen?

DaithiD said...

Niall, suicidal lunacy. The ones they are coming for first are the twitter users that criticise the killers and their ideology, not the ones supporting the same ideology. You can fly the ISIS flag outside of Westminster unimpeded by law, but not fly a flag saying "Fuck ISIS" in France (UK Residents questioned for posting the pics online after doing it there). The state acts as Islams facilitator in every unwelcome,intrusive way, the Niemoller poem is not remotely pertinent in this sense.Criticism of Islam leads to terror, but simulaneously Islam also has nothing to do with terror is a fucked up logic for others to worry about. Im pretty much decided on this, others in the UK are getting sick of collective punishment logic too. Why not highlight the asylum this country showed his family as a motif instead?
PS ill need more that just opinion to change my mind,explain how anything ive said is wrong ill concede anything thats proven wrong.

DaithiD said...

Ah sorry to double post, since i put the challenge out there, I need to clarify something first : they dont fight us cause we are non-believers generally (As I said to Larry), we would normally have the option to pay the jizya tax (humiliation tax), to leave their lands, or then to fight them. I should of said they hate us for being non-believers, and IS have already stated this in their Dabiq magazine ( I think the first post-Bataclan one). They said all the Western meddling in the region is a cause to fight, but even absent of it they would be compelled to do wage war anyway since Jizya is not being being paid.

wolfe tone said...

"Is it the 23 year old kid who blinded by religion murders wantonly in pursuit of intangible glory or the State who now has free hands to 'respond' harshly but in actual fact will just continue their pursuit of the hydrocarbon energy market in far flung fields with more military gusto?"

Well if you take in to consideration that the western states are using ISIS to destabilise hostile states on the one hand and on the other hand they are convincing their western audiences that they are simply sending forces to Syria to 'fight ISIS', then the latter of your comment is the mostly likely scenario. Be in no doubt if ISIS took power and overthrew Assad western states would pat themselves on the back and say 'mission accomplished' our overall objective has been achieved I.e Assad has been removed. Btw, in case no one has noticed the US bombed pro Syrian forces(again) last week on their way to fight so called ISIS. Go figure. It reminds me of a time when the British state increased security forces numbers(more troops) in order to 'fight terrorism from both sides of the Northern Ireland community' allthewhile the reality was much different I.e they facilitated and directed one side in order to overthrow their primary enemy(overall objective).

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

"It is this pious, phoney, self pity and pretend disconnect from cause and effect that has gone beyond bearable. Carpet bombing half the planet, destroying communities, societies for zero good reason and then a pretence of being unable to understand why so many people hate them? PLEASE, enough already."

What 'cause and effect' can you possibly claim is excuse for this scumbag to deliberately walk among a crowd of happy kids and kill them all or as many has he could? Had he tried to walk into an army base or something like that then I might agree that you have a point, but you don't, and he did't.

Maybe if you had less hatred for the Brits or Americans you would realise that Islamic scumbags are responsible for their own actions. The Brits and Americans might contribute to the ranks of ISIS but they did not make this guy target a bunch of young girls in retaliation. Your comments in the quote above is just an attempt at rationalising or excusing why Islamist's kill innocent civilians. The Brits and Americans actions in the middle east do not help matters but they are not responsible for Islamist's policies or strategy of targeting as many innocent civilians as they can -in this case they deliberately targeted children.

Suicide bombers like the one in Manchester are not advocating for human or civil rights, they are not fighting for any reasonable or noble cause -they want everyone to convert to Islam or die. Nothing the Brits or Americans have done justifies the direct targeting of innocent kids in Manchester. Nor does your trying to shift blame onto anyone else for the atrocity.

There is nothing more self-righteous, pious and phony than your kind -if its not what the west does in the middle east then whinging about how poor marginalized unemployed Muslims in England are left with no other option but to go out to the middle east to commit genocide and crimes against humanity against people who have nothing to do with their employment prospects in London.


Christy Walsh said...

Daithi

"some other dynamic is at play than the simplistic occupation/resistance model?"

You are bang on with that.

Steve R said...

DaithiD,

"Dont let looking for bigger picture obscure what is infront of your eyes, the two sides (State and IS) are dancing, maybe not to the same music though."

I'm not, I genuinely do not think those that run the State care one iota about dead children in Manchester, raped girls in Rotherham or a lone wolf nutjob on London Bridge. If IS really wanted to get the attention of the State it would be taking a leaf out of the Provisional's handbook and targeting the economic centers. Now that would get their attention.

The State will tolerate jihadi attacks like this as long as it suits their narrative for overseas imperialism. They will tap in to public anger to justify further barbarity in the Middle East.

Islamofascism is a cancer as is all religion unchecked. Trying to differentiate between atrocities is madness. Christianity of late paints itself peaceful, but that is only a very recent evolution for palatability for the public. A lot of what IS does is straight out of the Crusaders handbook. If you brought a Knight's Templar back and showed him what they were doing he would not raise an eyebrow, and they were the ulitmate 'Soldiers of Christ'!

Wolf Tone,

Quite. The so called Islamic State makes no mention of Israel, isn't that just a wee bit odd? Unless of course IS is being manipulated as a puppet to destabilise Israels neighbours which would be nothing more than sound tactical thinking on their part. They used to be called 'The Muslim Brotherhood' when Langley whipped up the Arab Spring, when they failed against Assad they regrouped and rebranded as IS. What makes me laugh is that IS were driving about in US military equipment, wonder where they got that from?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/11211358/US-army-loses-military-equipment-worth-420-million-in-Afghanistan.html

Larry,

God forbid!!

DaithiD said...

Christy,
And I dont mean climate change/drought in Syria, and/or lack of diversity at the BBC !

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

I would say the same 'cause and effect' which motivated loyalists to enter pubs and bookies shops and slaughter the innocents. ANGER and hatred I do believe it is called. The wee lad was of Libyan ethnicity and perhaps you have not noticed but there has been a lot going on there lately. I didn't read any further than that first paragraph of yours to be honest, pointless.

Peter said...

Christy Walsh
You can tell by Larry's posts that he is loving this latest atrocity, such is his hatred of all things "brit". After the Tunisia massacre he came on this website and wrote "beat it up them". Says it all really.

DaithiD said...

Steve R,The crusades! Often mentioned by people who know next to nothing about them, and their relative scale to Islams expansion. Did you know Turkey used to be Christian? Do you think it got 99% Muslim by words alone? Watch Dr Bill Warners animation on this in "Why we are afraid". Its on youtube, runs about 45mins and is free, Id recommend any of his books too.A theoretical physicist that analyses the material and forms opinion thereon in the most unbiased way (I did this degree too btw), purely statistically.
I dont think people are trying as hard at me to shed their biases (Christy apart), they seek the comfort of inoffensive tropes, when has the truth never been dangerous?

AM said...

DaithiD,

I don't think Blair can be blamed for events before he was born.

But he can be blamed for a dishonest and disastrous foreign policy that has fuelled the exponential growth of Islamic State. Much as the Soviet expansion into Afghanistan and the Western response can be blamed for the upsurge in Jihadis.

There are other dynamics at play but for me they don't explain very well what is happening. Qubt, before Nasser hanged him, was developing Ialamic thought in a certain direction which was promoting a deep antipathy towards the West ad Western values. But he was not always a theocrat. He had been a nationalist. I doubt had Britain been in Egypt Qubt would ever have emerged. But despite his intellectual depth and powers of persuasion, there was no ISIS.

I don't think the religious belief of Islamists is a sufficient cause of what we witness today. It has always existed. I try to look for what dynamic that allows it to become a potent force. I doubt it is preaching mullahs, preaching the same crap they preached 1400 years ago.

I conceded that numbers might vary had no Western intervention taken place

Something of an understatement I think.

but its very Western centric to think a civilization movement like IS grew from nothing to what it was in 2014 because of the intervening 11 years.

The Provisional IRA did not mushroom because of traditional republican ideology - Brit intervention caused the massive surge inn Provisional membership and activity. What state was republicanism in pre-1969? For people like me who spent quite a lot of time studying the origins of the Provisional IRA, it seems foolish to abandon everything we have learned about periodization and opt for some timeless and ahistoric explanation of politically violent movements.

I think your view has been made time and time again in the media by people like Douglas Murray and Robert Spencer. It is not the dominant view but neither is it silenced.

Perhaps rather than accuse others of bias you could look at your own anti-Muslim bias which to me seems pronounced. That does not stop you getting you message out here but if people think you are an anti-Muslim bigot (I don't think that) they too must be allowed to say that without you feeling you are being picked on merely because the persuasiveness of you case in the mind of your detractors is tenuous.

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

"the same 'cause and effect' which motivated loyalists" Really??

So take any of the most atrocious Loyalist attacks from McGurks Bar onwards and they were reasonable and understandable acts of Loyalist retaliation for Republican/Nationalist 'Carpet' aggression and provocations?? I have never heard any Nationalist make a claim like that before.

It is notable that Peter, as a unionist, does not agree with your assertion any more than I as a nationalist would agree that IRA atrocities like Teebane or Warrington were reasonable or justified.

Targeting an arena full of young kids at a music concert is in no way an understandable or legitimate response for whatever is going on in the middle east or in Libya and your continued defence shows your thinking to be pretty warped. Claiming not to have read my full post is only a cop-out because your defence or excuses for the Manchgester Child Bomber is weak in the extreme.

Christy Walsh said...

Daithi

Yes I know what you meant by the simplistic occupation/resistance model.

And about the fallacy of the 'Crusades' argument I think I saw the same video a few years ago and was really astonished because I would have previously thought the same way as SteveR.

Christy Walsh said...

AM

You are right about Blair and western foreign policy as a contributing factor in ISIS recruitment/expansion. But even Blair nor the West is responsible for Muslim values and ethics in selecting, targeting and executing their acts of violence in response.

DaithiD said...

AM, If you are talking dynamic parrallels with the North, isnt it ahistoric to start considering Irish resistence by starting with the PIRA campaign? Were PIRA not just the latest manifestation of this resistence dating back to Fenians? PIRA were formed on the point of abstentionism (primarily) as we know anyway, not the British troops entering the North Aug 69. In this sense, my point about an ideology taking advantage of political events rings even truer doesnt it? Depending on where you start your historic clock from, you could fit any sequence of events to form a narrative. Only one narrative explains 1400 years of the same type of conflict. I think you are missing the point about the power and seduction of what Mullahs are preaching, the Sunni / first followers of Mohammed are seen as being the golden era, where God was obeyed and thus granted incredible military victory to the Muslims. And one correction, I need to stress I am not anti-Muslim if my words read that way it because Im not a big typer, I am against an ideology. If those people didnt practice it, I would not care how many times a day they prayed, or what direction their arse faced when they did it. Just as long as its not in my face.(haha)
Well if Douglas Murray is doing the rounds then I guess its close enough to count as my view being represented (on this narrow, specific topic I must stress).

Niall said...

Daithi D,

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/manchester-attack-salman-abedi-salafi-jihadism-wahhabism-isis-al-qaeda-islam-muslim-suicide-bombing-a7754301.html

AM said...

DaithiD,

I came to the conclusion in jail that the conditions for the IRA campaign were contained within the North and not by the absence of a united Ireland. I then developed that in a PhD. It does not make the claim right per se but it did allow me to predict with great accuracy where things would end up: the insurrectionary energy that fuelled PIRA was caused not by the Brits being here but how they behaved while here. For the Brits to bring the IRA campaign to an end they merely had to place the sentiment that produced that dynamic which is what they did and most people are happy with it.

PIRA formed primarily out of a defence impulse, not abstentionism not anti- Communism. The nature of its formation in Belfast and subsequent spreading outwards teaches us quite e lot. The person who is credited with founding the Provisional IRA told me for the PhD that had the British introduced direct rule the day they brought in the troops, PIRA would never have formed. That should tell us something about the facts on the ground. This is where Tim Pat Coogan and Bowyer Bell managed to become experts on PIRA when their knowledge of the IRA was formed before PIRA was formed. They used a tradition driven paradigm which never really explained the Provos. Same as some more modern analysts like MLR Smith. He was so focussed on on a linear view of republican strategic and political thinking dating back to 1921 that he failed to see what was obvious - the Provos were going to capitulate and settle for something far short of that.

In this sense, my point about an ideology taking advantage of political events rings even truer doesnt it?

Turn it upside down and consider event managers taking advantage of ideology.

You come across to me as very anti-Muslim but that is said more as an observation than a criticism. People can be anti wtf they like. You don't seem to express a hatred towards Muslims which is something different.

I think if we want to address the ideological end of the problem we should start (a la Dawkins) with ridiculing mercilessly the dangerous religious concept that death is not the end.

C

AM said...

Christy,

the C at the end of the last comment was an attempt to respond to you - I wasn't calling DaitihD a cunt!

No, Blair is not responsible for who the targets are. But nor is Islam as a practice. Islam did not select the youth of Manchester as a target but political Islam did.

AM said...

Niall,

as ever Cockburn gets to the crux.

DaithiD said...

AM, I feel safer being your side of the arguement in any PIRA discussion, simple stats would show its the correct side over time so I will learn what you have said. But there is legimate scope to disagree on the articles central proposition. As you note there is no hate to a single person, any consideration with respect to ISIS or Islam relates purely to how the West can disengage from this sphere of conflict, I have written on here before how I objected to even Jihadi Johns extrajudical droning, physical coercion is not a factor in any part of my thinking. I think Enlightenment priciples dont need backing up with arms, so superior are they to the alternative world view of theocratic fascists.

Niall said...

AM,
Between Fisk and Cockburn, the reader gets a much more realistic appraisal of the situation in the Middle-East.....of course both get continually slammed as heretics by the Rule Britannia brigade!

Steve R,
Totally agree with your comment about the hydrocarbons and who will benefit....isn't it odd that not one of the 'natural resources', even those that once fell under the control of the caliphate, or even those under the control of Assad's regime, are ever irreparably damaged...odd that isn't it! I suppose there are times when the potential for revenue far outweighs even Allah!!!!!!!!

Oh, 'dopey hun'! Very harsh on yourself there Steve, I wouldn't even address you as a 'hun'....wee joke!

AM said...

DaithiD,

my view on PIRA origins is not beyond criticism and it is always a matter of what we pick out from the evidence to make our case and that can often be subjective. The ease with which the supposedly die hard anti-reformists rolled over indicates to me that it could not be the accumulated outcome of some individual character flaw: there had to be something much more systemic about it.

Like yourself I think Enlightenment principles are worthwhile promoting and don't need pushed through weaponry although there are times when they need to be defended with weapons.

I have only disdain for the theocratic fascists. I think the regressive left as it is called has abandoned its existential vocation by pandering to this fascism. I remember Brendan Hughes commenting to me in Hyde Park that the Nation of Islam speakers we stopped to listen to were fascists. It was a far cry from High Gate Cemetery and the grave of Karl Marx which I had visited on a different occasion.

Nevertheless, I think Cockburn in the piece linked my Niall gets to it. We would not be calling these people theocratic fascists if they were not strongly motivated by some religion. In this case the religion is Islam so there is a link. But the link is not a simple one and there are layers of complexity and filtering that have to be taken into consideration.

Does Islam cause Manchester? In my view no. Is Islam wholly separate from Manchester. In my view no. That then requires a closer look at the myriad of factors and motivations involved in the whole sorry mix.

DaithiD said...

Naill, the Fisk speech at UCD last year (is online) is a travesty. He held a strip of destroyed artwork taken from an ancient site pillaged by IS in Iraq and noted how straight the cuts were, how mechanised and unemotional its destruction appeared. He never noted the reason for this is because they were not acting on their own will, but following what the religion mandates. The Cockburn piece a bit more reasoned.Thanks for the link.
AM, you are not beyond error, but like you have said about Tommy McKearney, where you disagree with him, you should read and re-read again. Ive remarked about the Brendan Hughes observation before, I found it heartening. Dont crush me by saying he would of opposed everything I stand for were he here !

AM said...

DaithiD,

it's a waste of time trying to put thoughts or words in the minds and mouths of the dead. It is not then about what they think but what we think and we just want their thumb on the scale so to speak.

We may as well say if that lamppost had have been alive and had done some time in the H Blocks it would oppose everything you say!!

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh


'It is notable that Peter, as a unionist, does not agree with your assertion any more than I as a nationalist would agree that IRA atrocities like Teebane or Warrington were reasonable or justified'.

You should be working for MSM. Pathetic. Where did I say that?

Peter UDR PETE... whoever

Just you keep on trying not to do a 'dirty one'. Though you never explained what represented a 'clean one'.

I don't condone any of those attacks, but for Brits to think they can obliterate globally for fun and profit but cry like babies when someone hits back, however misguided simply holds no water. I think you hypocrites are enjoying the attack and the false bleating and self pity and propaganda opportunity much more than I. I find it difficult to care.

Like I say I don't condone it, but those on the receiving end have their own governments endless criminality globally to blame. I don't expect it to get any better any time soon. Nor would I be surprised if the British security services had prior knowledge and permitted it to happen regardless. It's what they do.

Why don't you two get a wee cheap flight to Tunisia, knock yerselves out lol

DaithiD said...

AM, I said it in lighthearted way. It would crush me if you said it, but I agree it proves nothing.

AM said...

Larry,

we should never reach the state of mind where we don't care about children being butchered. Why allow British hypocrisy and double standards to dictate what you think? Some of those who died were not even of the age to vote. They cannot be held responsible for the actions of their government.

DaithiD said...

Larry, the Irish dont have a good record either when it comes to supporting dictators in conflict with England. This guys family were given asylum from Gaddaffi before he saw any conflict that actually enabled his fathers parent group to control Tripoli. So the West were bombing in favour of this guys agenda in the Libyan instance. Its shameful murals to a murderous dictator adorned nationalist wall in the North. The English (excluding the State) are a fundamentally decent people, were they not so, their government and media would not need to invest in such consistent lies to manipulate them.

larry hughes said...

Mackers

I said I find it 'hard' to care. Maybe you should read it again?

Like I said regarding Tunisia at the time, benefits street slobs drunk and topless on a Muslim beach refusing to 'give in to terrorism' after what was done in Libya and across N. Africa was too funny to let pass. I refuse to be switched on and off like a light by the MSN and their criminally complicit reporting. I see only a few of the fatalities were school kids, most of those identified were well into their thirties and forties. What school were they attending then? Reminds me of the Bombing of the Army band at Deal Barracks in Kent where it was reported they were all children killed and after days of media frenzy it was revealed they were all adult military personnel.

To play the media game like Peter and Christy is tacit support / condolence for UK foreign policy. That is their right. They know what they are doing.

larry hughes said...

I feel equally sorry for the wee lad who felt angry enough to go to that extreme. But of course, there was no reason behind it. Was there.

larry hughes said...

Daithi D

So you recon the regime change strategy is a good one. Libya hasn't looked so well in centuries right enough. This has been an illuminating thread.

AM said...

Larry,

if I say I find it hard to care it is a softer way of saying I don't care. If you mean something different, fine.

What is a Muslim beach or a Catholic beach for that matter? A beach is a beach. The slobs are slobs but hardly because they are on benefits.

But you are switched on and off like a light. You seem to allow the hypocrisy and double standards of the British media and political establishment to incite you.

Even were they well into their 30s and 40s they have the same right not to be slaughtered as those who marched on Bloody Sunday. But the combined age of three of the victims does not even reach 40.

There was a reason behind it. But the grievance of a cause does not follow through to the means used to tackle it.

I feel for the attacker much as I did for the Israelis who targeted the children on the beach in Gaza.

In any society child murder has to be a no no.

larry hughes said...

The media has the same effect on this type of news for me as their commentators do with their football team. 'It's coming home' was correct after all.

AM said...

Larry,

the media is invariably ethnocentric.

That is why we have the old saw about "Englishman injured in earthquake in Italy; 300 Italians dead."

It isn't coming home at all. It never came home to the policy makers or the military strategists. It came to the innocent and vulnerable.


larry hughes said...

Mackers

Don't be bullying me with big words like ethnothingymabob, I only suffered 1 years PHD before dumping the notion. I can't even be bothered 'goggling' the definition.

'It' has been coming home for a while now and 'it' is unlikely to cease any time soon. Pretending there is no cause, reason or rationale behind it is like Big Bird with its head up its arse. Seriously not my problem. I don't find it 'hard' to care about those choosing to live in splendid fantasy island isolation, I simply DON'T CARE about their self delusion and complicity in media support and assisting with UK Government propaganda.

That is not a dig at you either, Big Bird is way more attractive than you ever were.

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

Mumbo Jumbo Voodoo made the bomber do it and he was old enough to make up his own mind. If you cannot see any moral imperative in not directly targeting children then that is scary. That says as much as I care to know about you.

DaithiD said...

Larry, thats not implied in anything I have said, I oppose both protagonists.
The problem with the English as i see it , is they are overly deferential to their armed forces, and will support them in any wrong doing. But when you see Kieran Nugent called 'river rat' and left to obliterate himself next to a canal everyday, when Brendan Hughes has to time leaving a pub to avoid street hoods, and you freind 'Jap' McKinley left to poverty after jail, the Irish need to go someways towards this tendency, perhaps in mitigating the post-conflict trauma of ex-vols.

AM said...

Larry,

it just means people who focus on themselves. People with rings in their ears laugh at people with rings in their noses sort of thing.

People don't pretend there is no cause. They don't subscribe to the notion that the cause is what we think it is. The general argument presented in these pages is that the grievance, whether theocratic or political, does not always justify the actions taken to redress it.


Simon said...

"the Irish need to go someways towards this tendency, perhaps in mitigating the post-conflict trauma of ex-vols."

There is much to be said about this sentiment. I have voiced concern on this very matter myself on the Quill. With conflict comes trauma in whatever shape or form. Republican combatants have been excluded by design from post-combat care, rather than by chance.

Squaddies get much support but Republicans are left to their own devices with possible imprisonment if they go for help. Is it any wonder there are cases of, for example, domestic violence which although inexcusable can still possibly be explained. As a community we need to mitigate against PTSD and care for people who the Nationalist community used to care for, at least more than they cared for the squaddies. I am not against the British helping their own soldiers but the lack of care for Republican and Loyalist ex-combatants will only lead to an unenviable situation for those men and women who are now more forgotten than ever.

Steve R said...

DaithiD,

"Steve R,The crusades! Often mentioned by people who know next to nothing about them, and their relative scale to Islams expansion. Did you know Turkey used to be Christian? Do you think it got 99% Muslim by words alone? "

Not quite sure this touched a nerve with you. I know quite a lot about the Crusades and the expansion of religion in general. Do you think Christianity conquered the pagan world via Rome with flowers and chocolates? Of course not and you know better. What I am saying is there is no hierarchy or benchmark that you can say x religion is better than y religion when ALL religions, even the Buddhists have been utter c*nts at various times in their existence.

Manchester was a cold blooded massacre of the most vulnerable in society, and as disgusted as I am by it I am well aware of the West fueling the fires that drive young people to jihad. Simply saying it is just inherent in their interpretation of Islam specifically the Wahhabi school doesn't completely account for it. Why would Wahhabi Saudi Arabia supply the heathen West with oil for decades? Surely a strict interpretation of the Koran dictates their enemies must be destroyed? These things are seldom linear and never straight-forward.

Niall,

"isn't it odd that not one of the 'natural resources', even those that once fell under the control of the caliphate, or even those under the control of Assad's regime, are ever irreparably damaged...odd that isn't it! I suppose there are times when the potential for revenue far outweighs even Allah!!!!!!!!"

Indeed, check out this read for the real reason behind the so called 'Arab-Spring'..

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-secret-stupid-saudi-us-deal-on-syria/5410130

I'm a blackmouth hun by descent with a bit of papist thrown in for good measure, though I find organised religion distasteful! lol

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

Your desperate attempts to portray me as an advocate of such attacks has worn threadbare. You are pathetic. If someone keeps burning other peoples houses down and ends up having a chip pan catch fire in their own they can hardly expect empathy on too grand a scale. The victims are innocent, it was an ugly act. It did not happen in splendid isolation. It matters not to me how angry or insulting you attempt at being. I will not join in with you and Peter UDR hero, playing the MSM game. Latest poll shows Labour just 5 points behind the Tories so maybe you are lagging behind here in wising up. Or maybe you're a Tory like UDR hero parade Pete?

Daithi D

Excellent points. The British are educated about the virtues of Empire at a very early age in school. I know because I was educated with them until 9 years old. It actually gave me my interest in history and English language which I retain to this day. The Irish are educated / brainwashed similarly only by the RC church about the evils done to the saintly Irish by said Empire. We have all been played like the fools we are.

I knew wee Jap in the Crum in the early 80s. Great wee spud. Saw him again in Newcastle when I was going through a few binge drinking escapades down there. He looked happy and cool with his partner. In a much better place than I was then. I was delighted to see that. Thankfully I managed to climb out of the bottle eventually. I took an Irish history BA MA and English teaching TESOL route. So, I have the Vatican bile for certificates and the English Empire and global language for my playground. Could be worse, I could be a touting bastard MLA/TD.

The Irish are no better than the English were here. Look at how they have continually destroyed the place with a population of less than 5 million. Houses we rent here are seemingly with the receivers and we have no idea who exactly we should be paying rent to. Only certainty is once the receivers gain legal hold our rent will be increasing from the contract at present by 170 euro a month. Some Dublin crowd O'Dwyers sent letters recently to 'occupier' and threatening to change locks. Out of the blue. Neighbours and ourselves totally confused. So thank God for the English language and Empire I am not the first to say it is my only escape route from the gombeen bastards here. Meanwhile Sean Fitzpatrick walks laughing from court. Sick little country. God help any fool died, hungered or murdered for such filth to profit.

Mackers

Ear rings and nose rings indeed or Leprosy (UK Government and media) slating someone with a wart and mental condition, the insane lone wolf bomber.

larry hughes said...

Welcome Home Parade Pete and Christy Walsh

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/raf-crew-writes-apos-love-172300541.html

We won't be bleating about the victims of THAT will we?

Niall said...

Daithi D,
Are trying to tell me that Fisk avoided mentioning the reason for the destroyed artwork because of their religion! I think you’ll find that Fisk is more enamoured to the Shia Muslim and not the Sunni Wahhabist Muslim who's benefactors he often derogatorily refers to as the ‘head-choppers’. He has alluded to the destruction of artwork by ISIS and their companions as being directed by Wahhabism and also for monetary gains....much of the artwork was removed and sold to fund all sorts of activities....that is what he was hinting at, not the obvious destruction by its removal but the care at its removal and why.....as I said in an earlier post, sometimes the potential for revenue outstrips even Allah.

Niall said...

Steve R,
Once again totally agree with your take on Manchester. I would add though that there are just as many Christians who violently interpret the bible also but there isn't near as much clamour about Christianity as there is about Islam......Blair and Bush being the perfect examples.

Oh, there you go with the Papist ingredient and muddling the waters even more......for goodness sake is there no such thing as a true 'blue nose' anymore that we Taigs can loathe.....thanks for the link. You should look up Fisk and Cockburn for their take on the Arab-Spring which I think you'll find very interesting....

AM said...

Larry,

a weakness of your argument is that it fails to convey any real sense of differentiation between the policy makers and the people who are hurt as a consequence of the policies made. It is hard to have any sympathy for a bully getting their comeuppance. But if his kids get burned because he left the chip pan on too long one evening, that hardly amounts to him getting his comeuppance.

Empathy and sympathy, like courage and patience, are finite resources. In constant use fatigue soon sets in. They work best when the tank is not drained dry. I oppose the use of capital punishment but I would not be emotionally outraged if Ian Brady had been hanged last week rather than died peacefully. Sympathy is too precious to waste it on people like that. But had he children who were made to the pay the price - completely different matter.

Niall said...

Daithi D,
Have a read at this

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/manchester-attack-muslim-islam-true-meaning-a7754901.html

larry hughes said...

Mackers

Children? You too wilfully promote the MSN agenda. Do you all think it is in vogue to play along? It doesn't seem to be in the UK where the security overkill is ridiculous and likely to backfire come the 8th June. At least the up to date polls suggest as much if to be believed. Considering they convey a surge in anti MSM agenda I'm inclined to believe they may be under stated.

British people on Muslim beaches telling the world they won't give in to terrorism is the same as triumphalist Orange parades in Irish native areas. You are pushing the provo line of legitimate target in response to mass genocide. I think that policy failed.

Are you advocating the UK governmet be recipients of suicide bombers? Or that Muslims just suck it up?

The people at the concert were innocent, did not deserve that. Was it a surprise? NO! Corbyn has stated UK foreign policy fuels terror at home. Logic personified.

AM said...

Larry,

wilfully promoting the MSM agenda?

So, the media fabricated that among the victims there were a 8 year old, two 14 year olds, a 15 year old, a 17 year old.

Are those people not children?

I think it would be easier to make the case that your argument is wilfully promoting the theocrat agenda. But I am not interested in trying to depict your argument as anything other than it is and trying to understand it better. But you seem all over the place.

As for the vogue of playing along - the facts seem indisputable and I guess playing along with the facts is what we should be doing. If you can show us a single shred of evidence that children were neither murdered nor targeted I'll concede the point.

I have no doubt about the triumphalism - much like when their soccer hooligans travel abroad. But a beach is a beach, not a Catholic beach or a Protestant beach. But I do see the point you seek to make. Yet why let their behaviour determine your attitude towards the blameless victims of murder?

I am pushing the just line rather than the Provo line - do not target the innocent and the non combatant.

Are you advocating the UK government be recipients of suicide bombers?

Not sure what that means. But if you are asking me should suicide bombers be massacring civilian populations, my response is an unequivocal no.

Should Muslims suck it up?

No one should suck up the type of behaviour that the West have inflicted. Should they murder the innocent as a response? Most definitely not. The right not to be murdered seems infinitely greater than any right to murder. And if we can't defend the rights of the civilians and children of Manchester not to be murdered we are in no position to defend the rights of Muslims not to be murdered in Syria or elsewhere. Unless, we are racist and think that some people are more deserving of human rights than others. But that just reduces us to thinking there are sub humans who should not have the same rights as other humans.

Was it a surprise? No. But it will not be a surprise if later this year some nut job in the States walks into a school and massacres the children because he had access to guns. Not being a surprise does not make it justified. If we build dangerously deficient aircraft and they crash we will not be surprised. We just don't blame the passengers.

larry hughes said...

Mackers

You are ABSOLUTELY playing along with and PROMOTING the MSM agenda and propaganda. The attack victims were not ALL children. THAT IS A LIE. But a convenient focus. You go for it, you'll be winning awards in no time for the Quill.

You can all continue to portray me as a supporter of this act as much as you like, it is good fun watching you do it. I will continue to agree with Jeremy Corbyn. GB foreign policy fuels terrorism. As with Bloody Sunday and internment (something being advocated against Muslims in the UK just now) led to 30 years of madness in the wee 6. DELIBERATELY done to do exactly that I believe.

I ask again, if the suicide bomb (which was wrong and evil) being directed at innocents and not at those responsible in your opinion (correct BTW) are you advocating or saying a Brighton Bomb type attack would have been more acceptable?

The only people who are allover the place are yourself Peter the punt UDR man who I have zero doubt gloated back in the day at RC slaughter by his loyalists friends and the Christy fella. Hypocritical hand-wringing to fit in with the MSM narrative and a despicable attempt to gain acceptance and gratuities from the same.

I will stick with Corbyn on most bar nukes, he would have our grand kids talking Russian in no time.

larry hughes said...

DUNBLANE and SANDYHOOK were attacks on children. Spare me the crass Brit hypocrisy.

AM said...

Larry,

nobody here has said that the only victims were children. The MSM have not said the only victims were children. Many who died were there to collect their kids. People in their forties died. If the MSM did claim that it would be a lie. Just as it would be a lie to claim that the MSM stated that only children were killed when they did not state that.

If we consider the profile of the audiences Ariana Grande performs for and for which she developed a reputation (it was not an opera audience or classical music one where we could anticipate the audience profile to be older) "popular with the subteenies and teenies", then it seems pretty certain that the bomber knew he would be killing children. Or do you disagree? Do you regard 8, 14, 15, 17 years of age as something that can reasonable be described as age profiles for children? These are not difficult questions to answer.

I have not portrayed you as a supporter of these acts. Can you cite where I have done this? You have criticised the act, said it was wrong. You try to contextualise the act but I think your attempt is exceedingly weak. That is what you are being challenged on. Nothing whatsoever to do with you supporting it.

Corbyn is not wrong to say Foreign policy has fuelled this type of act. Apart from DaithiD, I don't see anybody else challenging that.

Brighton Bomb - had the Manchester killer instead walked into say Sandhurst, that would have been seen as an act of war rather than a war crime.

As to who is all over the place, as always the readership, not you or I, will be the judge of that.





AM said...

Larry,

you are right. Dunblane was an attack on children even though Gwen Mayor, the dead teacher was 45.

You are right about Sandy Hook too: it was an attack on children even though the teachers killed were aged 27, 29, 30, 47, 52, 56.

Why not extend your logic to Manchester?

larry hughes said...

A primary school was 'logic' if it was against kids. I think he followed Paris lead and targeted a concert. SIMPLES. Again I refuse to peddle Brit propaganda.

The cries and howls from the media remind me of the difference between RC slaughter in the North and media coverage of Kingsmill. Muslims would be best to hit the mute button on the BBC or they could end up in Stormont.

Peter said...

Aren't the comments section of the Quill a fascinating insight into people's lives and thinking? It seems we were all deeply affected by the Troubles and have tried in our own ways to make sense of our senseless past. HJ and AM in particular apply a logic to their thinking which is almost always informative and interesting to read. Larry, as noted here, is all over the place in his thinking and lets his spite betray his character. I did my fair share of gloating back in the day at which I am not proud but I have never gloated over the murder of innocents.

larry hughes said...

By your calculations the GB government are sending child soldiers abroad to commit murder and genocide. I agree. The big focus is on child victims. I have a tv too. Is your straight jacket feeling tight over there in Drogheda? lol

AM said...

Larry,

he might have followed the example of Paris. But it seems most unlikely that he did not know who was playing and the type of audience there. He had also seen the people he was detonating the bomb in the middle of. It was an act of mass murder in which kids were considered as fair game and slaughtered. He so thought that the act of killing children was so terrible he would kill some himself.

larry hughes said...

Peter
You were a member of a fascist sectarian militia that had many members jailed for murdering innocents. You knowingly rubbed shoulders with them as a living. Just be honest and admit you are a comical hypocrite. ATAT who the fuck wasn't guilty in your eyes..? You people were the Irish equivalent of ISIS government trained armed and funded and your targets were EVERYONE CATHOLIC. Ring any bells?

AM said...

Peter,

unlike you, I did gloat over the killing of innocents, taking the view fuck them. Kingsmill, for example. Youth has little time for empathy and plenty for vengeance.

Over the years I have set my face against such things. The volte face does not excuse the original position, merely helps explain it.

AM said...

Larry,

if there are British troops abroad aged 17, 15, 14 and 8, yes they are being sent over to commit atrocities. Can you show us which ones?

larry hughes said...

Mackers

why would he think like that? The BBC says it is 'controversial' for Corbyn to link GB foreign policy to attacks in the UK.. trying to keep people brainwashed. Important for people to know WHY these awful things are happening. The BBC doesn't want to 'go-there.' I understand the likes of UDR/ISIS Pete peddling the BBC line, not the Quill. To focus solely on the act and deliberately exclude all mention of the cause, is pro Brit.

AM said...

Larry,

why would the focus not be on child victims? It is the most appalling crime. What we remember from the Israeli war on Gaza more than anything else was the slaughter of the children. Netanyahu hated the images of dead Palestinian children, moaned about the photpgenic dead children of Palestinian PR ... because they conveyed a truth.

larry hughes said...

16 and 17 year olds did you not mention? Horrendous when they're murdered in UK, but heroes deserving of a welcome home parade when committing murder abroad. Peter was in a terror gang many of which members were murdering fellow UK subjects because of their religion. I say it again UDR/ISIS hypocrite.

larry hughes said...

The focus concentrates on the youngest to heighten impact that the Brit propaganda you are happy to promote.

larry hughes said...

Mackers

Our difference here is not about victims, or their innocence, but our willingness or not to fall into line and be party to GB propaganda.

Peter said...

Larry
Ring any bells? No, that's not a discription I can agree with. My company was 20% catholic, my OC was called Paddy O'Reilly for fuck's sake. Did we conspire to kill him? No, we worshipped him. Top bloke, top top soldier. My father in law is a catholic too, my wife is half-a-taig and I grew up around catholic friends and neighbours. Don't judge people you don't know by your own low standards. You said "beat it up" the victims in Tunisia and that you found it "hard to care" for the victims in Manchester. You clearly have anger and alcohol problems, I hope you can overcome them some day, in the meantime stop making a cunt of yourself on a public forum.

AM said...

Larry,

one of our differences is very much about victims: it is whether we describe them accurately or inaccurately. I think most of us are long enough on the tooth not to be played by Brit propaganda.

I will make it simple for us all. Did the bomber set out to kill anybody at the concert including children? If not what actions did he take to ensure children were not murdered?

The focus might be for the reason you say it is. But Netanyahu was not that persuasive when he made a similar argument. It might also be because people have a emotive attachment to the young that is less strong towards adults. Virtually all societies find child murder particularly vile, more so than adult murder.

What 16 and 17 years olds have come back from committing mass murder abroad? I am not aware of any but that does not mean it does not happen. I might be wrong but I had thought that soldiers had to be 18 to serve abroad, courtesy of the IRA having killed a 17 year old in 1971 along with his 18 year old brother and a 23 year old colleague at Ligoneil. This is something you should write a piece on and back it up with detail, otherwise it will just be dismissed as anti-British propaganda rather than anti-British truth. You could also dispute what Forces Watch Brief says:

Although members of the armed forces cannot legally be deployed on the frontline until they turn 18

The Quill does not focus on the act because the Quill allows all sorts of voices who differ so there is no single focus on anything. I focus on the act of mass murder and make the point that context is alibi on the basis that nothing justifies it. You yourself have said it was unjustified. By focussing on everything but the act we obscure the moral agency of the actor. And why should we do that? It would be strange to see you fall for political correctness and claim we are all victims of circumstances and the big bad world and have neither agency nor responsibility.


Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

You are the only one making excuses for the ISIS attack in Manchester and not Peter.

I have lot of respect for Corbyn and even where I might not agree with him I know he comes from a good place. What you claim is not consistent with him.

Re:cause and effect. An unattended chip pan might cause my kitchen to catch fire but if my TV simultaneously combusts in my sitting room the 2 incidents might be wholly unrelated separate events.

In Manchester a member of ISIS carried out the type of attack that those scumbags take pride in. He selected a target that had greater appeal to teenage girls than adults. The adults percent were incidental by way of accompanying or collecting the teenage girls to or from the event.

your consistent defence of the ISIS bomber has made others question you and not anything I said. Unlike you I do not see members of ISIS as victims and I wish somebody could have shot him before he did what he did. The brits Americans kurds Russians or French are not killing enough of ISIS in the middle east or anywhere else. I think there is NO place for scumbags like ISIS in this universe.



larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

All over the place? Again, I am not condoning or praising the bomber. I am simply refusing to condemn the attack without context. Your point on ISIS would be valid were it not for the fact US Air Force obliterated Syrian Army troops last week because they got too close to a camp where UK/USA special forces were training them. Why don't you just pre-fix yer posts with
Hello this is the BBC CALLING lol

Peter UDR/RAMBO

Any RCs in your unit were no better than the bomber's dad. Traitors to their own.

larry hughes said...

Peter

My drink problem is killing me, minding a 14 month old son, the love of my life, so I can't get any drink all week. BUT!! 5pm is drawing near and it's Friday... Alla hu Ach-BAR!!

ye goin fer a pint Peter?
https://youtu.be/i8iBmQtwGR4

larry hughes said...

Peter

'cheers' for the laugh about Judas O'Reilly being a top top soldier in the UDR. That must put him right up there with Colonel H Jones of the Paras in your book. Noel Bell of the UDR 4, remember those heroes who changed into civies in their UDR Land Rover and murdered a totally innocent RC while on patrol in Armagh? He smoked that much dope he must have had his own coffee shop in Amsterdam.
Here he is when told there were no drugs smuggled into him on the visits that week.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4539972/Moment-dog-realises-owners-abandoned-her.html

First Guinness is on YOU

AM said...

Larry,

often the purpose of context is to mitigate rather than explain.

I see no mitigation for child murder.

Here is much of the context: British foreign policy fuels a violent Islamicist response. The person who carried out the massacre in Manchester was a member of a theocratic fascist group that believes in global imperialism through the establishment of a Caliphate. It believes people not of their Islamic faith can be butchered including other Muslims. ISIS is not the expression of an liberationist impulse but an authoritarian one. It does not want to free or avenge Muslims but to murder and dominate them.

It is up to you to manage your own narrative so that it does not come across as the opposite of what you claim it actually is.

Peter said...

Larry
Yes it was an absolute pleasure to serve with Paddy. Men like that are inspirational much as it must have been for the old Provos serving with Darkie. These men were born to lead and a joy to follow. You assert that all UDR men were complicit in murder and gloated over the murder of innocents. Does that mean that all Shinners who rubbed shoulders with Provos were complicit in murder? You are either lying here to vent your anger or you are incapable of objective thinking, either way wise yourself up.

larry hughes said...

Mackers

All I see here are a few people trying to place my comments in the context of ISIS advocate. Simply not the case. I have no interest in the intentions of ISIS or its agenda/rationale. Neither will I gulp down unquestioningly the BBC line. That 8 year old child is being cynically used for evil propaganda ends abroad by the BBC. Reminds me of the hacking of that wee dead girls phone by the press. No wonder journalism is in the gutter today.

larry hughes said...

Peter

I would say during the troubles shinners would have generally admired and held in great esteem top operators in the Provos. The lesser mortals, like yourself in the UDR, hoped to emulate them. Now today we know they were mostly informing on them lol The shinners of the present generation may as well be in the Green Party they are that clueless.
Why did you and O'Reilly join the UDR? Why not join the Royal Marines - Paras - Household Cavalry? Anything but that fucking militia. Had we not come home to the sectarian hatred in Armagh in 73 I expect I would have applied to the Marines or RAF. NEVER NEVER NEVER the UDR.

larry hughes said...

I see those Coptic Christians are stirring up more trouble in Egypt.

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

You make excuses for the ISIS bomber and show your hatred of the brits has blinded you to reality. As I have said previously had the bomber attacked a military installation or Air Base then there might be merit in what you say but he didn't -he targeted predominantly teenage girls and triggered his device when he saw the whites of their eyes so to speak. There is no room for mistake about what he intended to do, nor, who his targets were. We know these scum will kill or maim girls for simply attending school or not covering their heads in the middle east so its not like they don't have a track record of directly targeting children as a legitimate enemy in their own right.

Your excuses to explain or justify a barbaric act by ISIS are inexcusable. You then resorted to name calling -such as- Peter and I, and whoever else are all involved in one big conspiracy of some sort.

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

Who are training and arming ISIS? Are cluster bombs and air strikes causing mass murder legitimate to you? YOU condone mass murder and attempt to facilitate it like the BBC by deception by omission. You are a terror advocate, not I.

DaithiD said...

Larry, a dead child being used for propaganda like Aylan al-Kurdi, who was killed by everyone who had reservations about the level of immigration to Europe. I did a more in depth look at the medias talking points about the attack (after hearing Douglas Murray was making appearences) and I was taken aback by hardenning of the tone. Especially someone like Andrew Neil on the BBC, everyone is demanding action of some kind, Richard Kemp was arguing for any terror suspect to be deported without a trial. A SAS guy on Sky was calling for them to be executed on sight. Something appears to have changed, but IS now know the best targets for propaganda value now : kids. Its not unimaginable some Beslan type event is now in the planning.

Niall said...

The Belfast Telegraph carried a front page story today on how easy it was to plant a bomb in busy populated areas of the town like shopping centres....I thought that it was a terrible action and story to print and it only served to heighten people's fears....some innocent person who simply set down a bag and forgot about it and happen to walk off, and worst of all looking middle eastern potentially could have been set up and severely beaten...the story was totally unnecessary....the continental market at city hall even had security personnel checking bags as people entered....totally bloody ridiculous and only served to heighten fears

larry hughes said...

Niall

You can get 7 rounds in the head for having a tan on the tube in London. Latino's beware!

larry hughes said...

Peter

just for you
my dad was a radar technician in the RAF he used to slate the IRA for being a load of home made wasters...he wired a house up one time and when you hit the switch in the hall the bathroom light went on, when you hit another switch something else somewhere else went on.. until everything blew...all I can say is thank FUCK he wasn't wiring up van bombs.

https://youtu.be/dGY2_KyHpHg treble - ing in me booties

DaithiD said...

Niall, i think based on these articles, and whats being put across in the media, Im firmly in the center ground on this issue. ps Fisk also remarked that none of the Arab spring banners were calling for democracy in a western sense, they were calling for dignity etc. Then he remarked the biggest insult to IS is that these people fled to the West instead of their lands. He should of pondered why are they coming here, if he already acknowledges the calls for Western style democracy and "freedom" was not a part of their yearnings? If they are so pissed about the Crusades like everyone claims, and claimed pre-Iraq war, are we sure their intentions are benign?

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

SKY NEWS.... RELATIVES of victims blame UK government and warn more people will die because of UK foreign policy.... EAT YOUR BBC HEART OUT ... you TWAT

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

As I have said above the brits contribute to the situation. So what's your point? I have even emphasised to you I could understand attacks on military instalations but not defenseless children ... but you make excuses for the bomber understably targeting children in response to carpet bombing in the middle east.

Whereas if the same families on Sky knew of your views about the ISIS killer being a poor victim they would probably rip your head off. Your blind hatred of the brits appears to make you justify anything. I have never heard anybody who is not a Muslim think of ISIS as anything other than evil monsters.

Steve R said...

Jaysus Larry get a pint down ye asap!! lol

larry hughes said...

Steve R

What is your point exactly?

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

Your attempts atmisquote and twisting my take on things has been proven futile, by relatives of the victims no less. I rest my case.

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

I copied verbatim what you had to say about 'cause and effect'. I said you would have a point if ISIS were attacking military bases etc in retaliation but not for specifically targeting children at a concert. You have repeatedly disagreed with that and continue to do so. You even went on to express your sorrow for the ISIS attacker as a victim. I said good riddance to the scumbag.

Your problem is not that I have misquoted (or even misunderstood) your questionable views. You do not like that I disagree you and your excuses about ISIS targeting strategy. You haven't 'proven' me wrong on anything. What you have done is shown yourself to be blinded to reality out of what I have presumed to be your hatred of the brits.



larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

Simply wide of the mark again. I am beginning to think you not only misquote me you don't even read what I write. I was determined to assert that these attacks are a direct result of UK foreign policy. I have no desire to get involved in an IRA type 'legitimate target' debate. Are you saying Lee Rigby's murder was more acceptable to you tactically? I assert it again, people playing the MSM game of pretending to be blind to the fact these people are insanely angry for a reason. Corbyn has had the deignity and honesty to address the elephant in the room as have some victims relatives. Maybe it is an admission of culpability the UK authorities and population do not want to own up to. There's no possiblity of you accepting that reality, you are so on board with the MSM.

Steve R said...

Larry,

My only point is you appear to be getting hacked aff over comments on a blog, normally by this time you see the humour in the situation and let it go. I don't even think you and Christy are too far away from each other in viewpoint although both of you have got yer backs up and it's a dick waving competition now!

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

"people playing the MSM game of pretending to be blind to the fact these people are insanely angry for a reason."

Who is pretending not see insanely angry Muslims? If the West was at the root of 'insanely angry' Muslims then what explains the genocide of the Yazidi or other sects and Muslims in the middle east? ISIS are what you get when you mix insanity and religion -self induced anger and outrage that does not need a real reason as fuel for its savagery.

The IRA did not invent the legitimate target - just war theory has been around for centuries. ISIS see women and children as legitimate targets to be killed, enslaved and/or sexually abused as they see fit. The ISIS attack on children in Manchester was not inconsistent with what they are doing in the middle east -no matter how you want to dress it up. If you cannot distinguish between children and military targets as a means of retaliation for bombs in the middle east then you are as messed up in the head as ISIS are. If you can reason for Manchester attack as understandable then effectively you legitimize indiscriminate carpet bombing which is the very thing you complained about. If we follow your logic then why shouldn't children in the middle east be legitimate targets?

Maybe you should stop pretending that ISIS are not 'insanely angry' for the reason they say they are -they don't like non-believers and that makes them angry enough to want to kill or convert us -oh yeah, and they want to rule the world too. How about you take them at their word. They communicate their message very clearly so maybe you should stop trying to come up with other excuses for them.

At the end of the day you cannot reason with the unreasonable. ISIS terms of convert or die are not negotiable and if you want to find common ground with them then good luck with that.

larry hughes said...

Steve R

You are wrong.

Christy Walsh

Again you go into detail and depth. I will say it again. I believe the UK MSM policy of deliberately refusing to make a connect between foreign policy and reaction to it is akin to patronisingly telling people here we have no right to be upset at Internment the Dublin Monaghan bombings, Bloody Sunday or anything else done by the UK military here that inflamed the situation. Refusing to give in to terrorists is a red herring deflection. Smarmy patronising superiour minded bastards. So 30 years of wasted lives were a result of Irish nutters with nothing else to do. There was inter clan rivalry and war here pre Brits was there not? Before you lecture on civilian and military fatalities / targets, I don't care about IS or its strategy. They are trying to give the Brits a taste of their own. YOU and the Brits are desperate to deny it.

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

Brit policy will be self serving and if that is ISIS problem then they are morally burdened, as the IRA were, to find a better way of expressing their frustrations than setting out to deliberately bomb a bus or concert hall full of children.

The Brits also killed many children here and the IRA's own support base would have been repulsed if the IRA deliberately targeted children as legitimate targets as ISIS have -look at the response at Warrington Bomb attack even though children were not specifically targeted. The IRA lost support for botched attacks whereas no matter how psycho-depraved and barbaric ISIS are they are winning recruits and support. The moral compass between the IRA and its support base are poles apart from that of ISIS and its supporters.

The less detailed and in-depth response would be you either condemn targeting children or you accept children as legitimate targets -and that is were you and I differ.

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

"The less detailed and in-depth response would be you either condemn targeting children or you accept children as legitimate targets -and that is were you and I differ".

Looking up yer own arse is all you seem capable of.

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes
Yadda, yadda, yaďda, like I said I now know more about you than I cared to know. Hope you didn't miss the scumbags funeral you could fire a volley over the coffin as a last respect to the poor victim.

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

You are by this stage obviously in need of help with critical analysis and direct quotes.

Here ya go.. USA version just for you

https://youtu.be/a3qY1d1X4cs

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

I copied verbatim what you wrote and you have had plenty of opportunity to explain what you meant if I was wrong, but you have never done that. You have just reaffirmed yourself or gone on the attack with idiotic insults.

For example, you do not deny that you think the Manchester bomber is a victim. So how am I misquoting you? I find your sympathy for an ISIS mass child killer repugnant. Then I do analyse things and think if you see that ISIS killer as a poor victim then it stands to reason you probably see others or all of them as victims. For instance, jihadi John has a similar UK background so he must be another obvious victim but where does your sympathy for ISIS maniacal fanatics stop or does it?

frankie said...

Christy, I don't understand this line you have said a few times..

"the IRA's own support base would have been repulsed if the IRA deliberately targeted children as legitimate targets..

So being targeted for anti social whatever and getting knee capped. beaten by hurls/base ball bats doesn't count? What about the no warning car bombs and fire bombs the IRA carried out? They didn't care who was killed. As long as their ASU's got back to base in one piece. Wasn't at least one of Jean McConvilles sons targeted shortly after her murder and beaten and told to shut his mouth Then again the IRA never targeted anyone except Brits and Loyalists....

Personally I am bored with the bombing in Manchester. Throw into the mix all the so called experts on terrorism trying to explain to the sheeple how someone could be involved in terrorism. What is the difference with what Paisley and Craig were saying in the 1960's when they called the Pope 'The whore in Rome' and inciting young men to kill and take up arms and a Mad Mullah in a mosque telling young men that it is ok to kill infidels. The only difference I can see is the
Mad Mullah has a better suntan..

Christy Walsh said...

Frankie

That is a fair point and one that crossed my mind. I was trying to avoid 'detailed and in-depth' responses because Larry was having problems reading long sentences. The reason I distinguished was the current topic was about having premeditated intent to kill children from the outset and not injure or punish them.

I did however, refer to the Warrington bomb as an example where they did kill children -that attack was reckless and at random by design thus catching anyone in the vicinity but not specifically designed to catch children. It is common knowledge that when the IRA botched attacks people stopped allowing them to use their houses or cars whereas the opposite was true when they wouldn't carry out punishment beatings -then people stopped providing support.

I am not sure about who you mean by the pope was inciting to kill in the 60s? But I dont recall the Catholic church in my lifetime advocating for people to be killed as Muslim clerics do -including gays or apostates never-mind a holy war.

DaithiD said...

frankie, its quite clear children were not the focus the IRA campaign. If they could of conducted without harming a single one, the would of. If IS could kill every child in Britian, the would. Thats the difference. Someone like Janet Reno (under Clinton) thinking 500k dead children in Iraq were worth the sanctions, along with the dead kids at Waco and Ruby Ridge would be a more interesting comparison.
The torture videos the Iraqi police/Shia militias are putting out now, exacting their 'revenge' on Sunni civilians indicate this situation is likely to get worse still for the region, it was this sort of behaviour that made the Sunnis take a chance with IS in the first place. I dont know how a society pieces itself back together when the worst atrocities in history have been commited to film by your neighbours, and will be accessible for future generations.Imagine if the Shankill butchers had social media back then to advertise their works,I wonder what trajectory the conflict would have taken.

larry hughes said...

Frankie

Christy Walsh said
" I am not sure about who you mean by the pope was inciting to kill in the 60s? But I dont recall the Catholic church in my lifetime advocating for people to be killed as Muslim clerics do"
I still cannot figure out if the man is phik as phuk or cleverly trying to act Mr Bean. Don't waste yer time. As for Daithi D he should be ashamed of himself, the Manchester attack came completely out of the blue, for no reason or possible justification. Tow the MSM/ BBC line or how can old Blighty possibly be expecting the unquestioning support of the Great British Public for invasion number 52 or 54 when it happens?

frankie said...

Christy,

Sorry for the lost in translation. I don't see the difference between Paisley calling the Pope "The whore of Rome" and inciting young protestants to defend Ulster for God and who ever and a Mad Mullah in a mosque saying "Kill all infidels by any means" except for the sun tan..

On the Warrington bomb that killed Johnathan Ball and Tim Parry, how many remember Damien Walsh. He died the same day as Tim.


Daithi..

I have no idea of what books you read or what version of the conflict you dismiss. Personally I am still trying to figure it out (the conflict). But for you to say

"frankie, its quite clear children were not the focus the IRA campaign."

Read this. They shoot children, don’t they?


Part reads like this...

“He only turned 14 in July”
“They never said what he had done wrong. They just dragged Eamon from the bed, threw him all the way down the stairs, lay him on his back and beat him with sticks embedded with huge nails while my parents pleaded with them to leave him alone because of his age. He only turned 14 in July.”

Don't tell me the Provisionals, UVF,UDA or who ever didn't target kids. It falls on deaf ears. Take off the rose tinted..


On a side note people who thinks there will be a concert in Afghan next week for the 90+ people slaughtered yesterday? If there is will it be called Rock the Kasbah?

Steve R said...

DaithiD,

Small point but the Butchers were hated amongst their own as well. Vile, disgusting psychopaths.

Though I do find it weird that Basher Bates and The Dark were friends?

DaithiD said...

frankie,

"Don't tell me the Provisionals, UVF,UDA or who ever didn't target kids. It falls on deaf ears."

I didnt, and dont confuse stupidity with deafness. There is an amazing amount of 'misunderstandings' on this thread that coincidentally reduce your opponents argument to nonsense and/or put them in the worst light.

DaithiD said...

steve r, those types of killings (along with the Pitchfork Murders) represented the abyss. A warning to communities rather than a template to follow, I dont doubt that Unionists viewed them this way too.

Christy Walsh said...

Frankie
As funny as it might sound but I never actually saw Paisley as a bone fide religious or spiritual leader. I viewed his remarks in the same way as I would have heard US senators or generals refer to god in their speeches. It was just a rant they made for their political objectives. I remember when I was young realising that Paisley and his loyalist followers only wanted to kill Irish Catholics and not actually all Catholics. So I grew up only looking at religion as way to identify the political allegiances of people in the north. On the other hand the Pope is a bit of a whore so I didn't disagree with Paisley on that and so that never caused me any alarm or offence. It was all theatrics with Paisley, yes he was a very dangerous man but I never took him seriously as a man of God so to speak. He was careful enough to not practice what he preached while inciting other others to kill and that is the plastic distinction between the loyalist/unionist conundrum which is a farce.

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes
In light of my last comments addressed to you you leave me in no doubt about your character. I have reflected on how many former IRA men fought and died fighting fascism in Spain, so too did IRA men have allegiances with the Nazis. It is not language I use lightly but I can only think of you in terms of being a real scumbag.

larry hughes said...

Christy Walsh

I can count on you for a reference then?

DaithiD said...

steve r, in the interest of fairness, I could include scaps interrogation sheds in S.Armagh. He used to threaten people to wake up upside down in one if they didnt answer his questions (in Belfast for example) and have him peel their skin off until their confessed. When IS filmed themselves doing the same, killing people upside down in an animal slaughterhouse it really hit home. As an aside, I often wonder if this was why some bodies were dissappeared, to hide the torture inflicted on them. (Obviously not all cases, McKee was a family reasons, McConville was for optics etc, but Nairacs body wasnt turned over for this reason it is alleged).

larry hughes said...

Daithi D

You are trying way to hard in your 'interests of fairness'. As somewone who gives not a single fuck about the IRA past present or future they at no time to my recollection butchered people as the Shankill gang took such great pleasure in doing.The closest I can think of is Free Staters taking former comrades in the anti treaty ranks from their cells and tying them to land mines and blowing them to bits. Honestly, you are getting close to being an apologist for the butchers. Be careful Mr Walsh will be on you like a clague.

larry hughes said...

Daithi D

Think it tiz spelt clegg..... my first mistake since 2009... not bad huh?

DaithiD said...

Sure Larry, The worst ideas in the best punctuation is your niche!

larry hughes said...

Daiti D

You have lost me again. Are you on that D4 vino, the 13.5% 1960 atzyfartzy vintage? lol

Christy Walsh said...

Larry Hughes

Daithi does not think the Shankill Butchers are victims whereas you think ISIS are victims even when they intentionally target children.

Hanging someone upside down on a meat hook before killing them does evoke comparison with the Shankill Butchers.