ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 19th October 2017, 11:07 AM   #1
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,714
Risk of returning ISIS volunteers

"Around 850 Britons are thought to have travelled to Syria since 2011. Around 120 are believed dead fighting for groups including Islamic State and around half those remaining are thought to have already returned home. Police and security leaders have in the past warned of the prospect of battle-hardened jihadists returning to continue their struggle by carrying out attacks on the streets of Britain."

Current Head of MI5:
“Andrew Parker said the country was now facing an intense threat from violent Islamist extremists who were devising plots at a tempo he had not seen before in his 34-year-career.”

Former MI6 bloke:
“Richard Barrett, a former director of global counter-terrorism at MI6, said Britons had gone to Syria for “highly individual” reasons.
He said: “Many of them went to join something, join something new, something that looked bright and attractive and satisfied some of the needs in their lives and probably found that didn’t exist out there and so came back highly disillusioned.
“Also someone going off to join the Islamic state is not likely initially to be somebody going off to be a domestic terrorist, they seem to me to be two different motivations.””

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...ot-prosecuted/


It rather seems that it is a good thing that Richard Barrett is a former counter-terrorism director, his comment “someone going off to join the Islamic state is not likely initially to be somebody going off to be a domestic terrorist, they seem to me to be two different motivations.” Seems ludicrous… unless you define “different motivations” as “whether you prefer to murder people at home or abroad”. It’s all jihad, only the postcode differs.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 02:31 PM   #2
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,567
God knows I don't like Islamophobes, but, unless you are a journalist or a humantirain aid worker I have to question anybody's motives for travelling to Syria...
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 08:27 PM   #3
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 6,622
Don't let them back in.

If it is known who they are, confiscate their passports at the border, hold them in a military prison until you get a C-130 load and fly them back to Syria.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 08:41 PM   #4
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,202
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
It rather seems that it is a good thing that Richard Barrett is a former counter-terrorism director, his comment “someone going off to join the Islamic state is not likely initially to be somebody going off to be a domestic terrorist, they seem to me to be two different motivations.” Seems ludicrous… unless you define “different motivations” as “whether you prefer to murder people at home or abroad”. It’s all jihad, only the postcode differs.
You're thinking with a narrow mindset. You assume that because you think that ISIS are terrorists and Jihadists that everyone must think the same thing, so anyone joining them would know them to be terrorists, jihadists and murderers, and so want to be one as well. However, not everyone on the planet thinks the same way you do, in fact the odds are that of the nearly 8 billion people on planet Earth, those that think exactly the same way you do, is a subset of one, and the same for everyone else on the planet. We all view things and base our beliefs and thoughts on our experiences and understanding of the world.

Consider if you were a young muslim man in a western country. You see a number of politicians becoming more anti Muslim and the people not only supporting those views, but expressing them as well. You are finding it hard to get a job, and people tell you it's because you are a muslim and westerners don't want you working for them because they are scared of you. You see the news at night, but are also being told by your friends and those around you that the New is fake, and that the Media is lying about Syria and the war there. You go on line and see webpages exposing how wonderful the ISIS Caliphate is, and how it is god's paradise on Earth, that all you need to do is head there and be a devout Muslim and you'll have a privileged place in the wonderful Islamic Society that they are building there. Hmmm, what could motivate such a person into travelling there? Because they want to becomes a terrorist, jihadist and murderer? Or maybe because they have been fooled into believing that what they see on TV is a lie, and that they can have a better life there, one where they are surrounded by peers that respect them and their religion, and where they can have a status worthy of them? Do you think that such a person on arriving would not be disheartened and disillusioned? Do you think they would automatically be a danger after escaping the true conditions they found there? Do you think they should be punished further and actually hardened against Western Countries by the treatment they receive on returning?

Now I'm not saying that they should be ignored and just allowed to do whatever they want willy nilly, but to assume that everyone that goes to Syria to join ISIS does so because they are wanting to be terrorists, jihadists and murderers is extremely narrow thinking.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.

Last edited by PhantomWolf; 19th October 2017 at 08:47 PM.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 08:52 PM   #5
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 6,622
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Consider if you were a young muslim man in a western country. You see a number of politicians becoming more anti Muslim and the people not only supporting those views, but expressing them as well. You are finding it hard to get a job, and people tell you it's because you are a muslim and westerners don't want you working for them because they are scared of you. You see the news at night, but are also being told by your friends and those around you that the New is fake, and that the Media is lying about Syria and the war there. You go on line and see webpages exposing how wonderful the ISIS Caliphate is, and how it is god's paradise on Earth, that all you need to do is head there and be a devout Muslim and you'll have a privileged place in the wonderful Islamic Society that they are building there. Hmmm, what could motivate such a person into travelling there? Because they want to becomes a terrorist, jihadist and murderer? Or maybe because they have been fooled into believing that what they see on TV is a lie, and that they can have a better life there, one where they are surrounded by peers that respect them and their religion, and where they can have a status worthy of them?
Anyone with that level of stupid needs to be removed from the country's gene pool at the earliest opportunity. At the very least, going and fighting as a mercenary against the soldiers of your own country’s army is treason.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 09:54 PM   #6
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,202
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Anyone with that level of stupid needs to be removed from the country's gene pool at the earliest opportunity. At the very least, going and fighting as a mercenary against the soldiers of your own country’s army is treason.
Again, you're being narrow-minded. You assume that people that don't believe things are the way you believe them to be are stupid. This isn't true. Different people place different amounts of trust in different sources for different reasons.

A lot of people no longer trust the Media, and for good reason, they have been caught out lying and fabricating things themselves, and often air stories given to them by third parties that turn out to be lies or fabrications. Heck various parties in the Middle East and Palestine are brilliant at Media manipulation and fabricating stories, both pro and anti Muslim (or one sect vs the other.) I'd say that anyone that believes everything the media dishes up is as misinformed as those that refuse to trust them at all.

When you have different sources that you trust, then you get to see the world in a very different light. Consider the world views of a person that only ever watches FOX News to one that only ever watches CNN! Their different view don't mean one is stupid and the other isn't, it just means they have different experiences and those experiences have trained then to see and trust sources differently to the point that the way they view the world can be radically different to each other.

(For a similar experience in NZ, watch both 3 News and One News and compare them with each other and to how the same stories are told by the local paper and NewsTalk ZB)

(I'd also point out that officially there are no western soldiers fighting on the ground in Syria)
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.

Last edited by PhantomWolf; 19th October 2017 at 10:00 PM.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 11:10 PM   #7
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,874
The only "upside" I can see is that at least these returning people can be identified and can be kept under the appropriate level of surveillance.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2017, 11:18 PM   #8
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 6,622
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Again, you're being narrow-minded. You assume that people that don't believe things are the way you believe them to be are stupid. This isn't true. Different people place different amounts of trust in different sources for different reasons.

A lot of people no longer trust the Media, and for good reason, they have been caught out lying and fabricating things themselves, and often air stories given to them by third parties that turn out to be lies or fabrications. Heck various parties in the Middle East and Palestine are brilliant at Media manipulation and fabricating stories, both pro and anti Muslim (or one sect vs the other.) I'd say that anyone that believes everything the media dishes up is as misinformed as those that refuse to trust them at all.

When you have different sources that you trust, then you get to see the world in a very different light. Consider the world views of a person that only ever watches FOX News to one that only ever watches CNN! Their different view don't mean one is stupid and the other isn't, it just means they have different experiences and those experiences have trained then to see and trust sources differently to the point that the way they view the world can be radically different to each other.

(For a similar experience in NZ, watch both 3 News and One News and compare them with each other and to how the same stories are told by the local paper and NewsTalk ZB)

(I'd also point out that officially there are no western soldiers fighting on the ground in Syria)
Anyone who thought that Syria and The Levant was some kind of Paradise is living in cloud-cuckoo land, but I guess there is no accounting for the delusional.

As for News sources, I generally have no reason not to trust what what I see on NZ television news sources and sources like stuff.co.nz. Anything I find suspicious, I confirm or deny on fact-checking sites such as

http://www.factcheck.org/
https://www.snopes.com/
http://www.politifact.com/
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/

and I don't believe just one.

ETA: Oh and your last point about no western troops on the ground?...

Official story, true.

Reality, not true.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.

Last edited by smartcooky; 19th October 2017 at 11:21 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 12:12 AM   #9
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,202
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Anyone who thought that Syria and The Levant was some kind of Paradise is living in cloud-cuckoo land, but I guess there is no accounting for the delusional.
Being deceived doesn't make one delusional or "living in cloud-cuckoo land"

This is what I am trying to get through to you, not everyone thinks the same way you do!

Quote:
As for News sources, I generally have no reason not to trust what what I see on NZ television news sources and sources like stuff.co.nz. Anything I find suspicious, I confirm or deny on fact-checking sites such as

http://www.factcheck.org/
https://www.snopes.com/
http://www.politifact.com/
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/

and I don't believe just one.

ETA: Oh and your last point about no western troops on the ground?...

Official story, true.

Reality, not true.
You do this because you have a good grounding Skeptical Thought, not everyone does. If you watched the new sources I suggest, you'll find that often they each have their own spin on things, one might leave out something that changes the context of the story, or include something that changes it to better fit their way of showing the world. It's an interesting exercise, even here in New Zealand.

Humans have a thing about believing things that already fit our ideas and beliefs. Convincing someone of something that they want to believe is pretty easy. Ask a few conservatives on this board if Hillary and Bill have had people killed off for instance. Governments and the Media have lied to us so much in the past that many don't believe them any more, and that allows them to get their world view from sources that are less than reputable and can manipulate and deceive them very easily. Look at what Russia was doing during the US Elections!
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 12:21 AM   #10
mikado
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,556
Returning volunteers, if handled with sense and sensibility, could in fact be used as the ultimate deterrent of other locals joining and committing ISIS inspired atrocities.
Many way well have awful stories of just how different ISIS behave compared to their propaganda.
The issue however, is the likelihood of any government having the sense to do so.
__________________
member formally known as Renmarkable.
mikado is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:30 AM   #11
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,952
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Don't let them back in.

If it is known who they are, confiscate their passports at the border, hold them in a military prison until you get a C-130 load and fly them back to Syria.
What if they are citizens of the Western country they are returning to?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 03:16 AM   #12
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 6,622
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
What if they are citizens of the Western country they are returning to?
Revoke their citizenship

http://eudo-citizenship.eu/news/citi...ship-in-the-uk

"The Immigration Act 2014, which received the Royal Assent on 14 May 2014, permits the UK government to remove citizenship from British nationals in some cases where the result will be statelessness. The powers it contains are now part of UK law but will not be implemented until ordered by the Secretary of State.

The British Nationality Act 1981, S.40(2) already permits the Secretary of State to deprive a person of citizenship if she is satisfied that deprivation is conducive to the public good. Although this power was granted in 2006, it was rarely used until 2010 but, since that time, has been used at least 37 times, including against British citizens by birth. Deprivation orders are almost always served while the individual is outside the UK and take immediate effect so that the affected person cannot return to the UK to argue their appeal. Two people whose citizenship was removed in this way were later killed in US drone strikes while another was rendered to the US. An appeal, which is usually heard partly in secret by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, was likely to succeed only on grounds that deprivation would make the individual stateless, a prohibition contained in s. 40(4) of the 1981 Act. In 2013, the UK’s Supreme Court ruled in Al-Jedda that deprivation could not take place if dual nationality did not exist at the moment of deprivation even it were open to the person to apply for citizenship of another state and this would be granted.

Section 66 of the 2014 Act removes this protection from some groups of citizens. It inserts a new provision permitting the removal of citizenship acquired by naturalisation if the Secretary of State is satisfied that it would be conducive to the public good because the person has acted in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the UK"
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 03:41 AM   #13
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,952
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Revoke their citizenship

http://eudo-citizenship.eu/news/citi...ship-in-the-uk

"The Immigration Act 2014, which received the Royal Assent on 14 May 2014, permits the UK government to remove citizenship from British nationals in some cases where the result will be statelessness. The powers it contains are now part of UK law but will not be implemented until ordered by the Secretary of State.

The British Nationality Act 1981, S.40(2) already permits the Secretary of State to deprive a person of citizenship if she is satisfied that deprivation is conducive to the public good. Although this power was granted in 2006, it was rarely used until 2010 but, since that time, has been used at least 37 times, including against British citizens by birth. Deprivation orders are almost always served while the individual is outside the UK and take immediate effect so that the affected person cannot return to the UK to argue their appeal. Two people whose citizenship was removed in this way were later killed in US drone strikes while another was rendered to the US. An appeal, which is usually heard partly in secret by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, was likely to succeed only on grounds that deprivation would make the individual stateless, a prohibition contained in s. 40(4) of the 1981 Act. In 2013, the UK’s Supreme Court ruled in Al-Jedda that deprivation could not take place if dual nationality did not exist at the moment of deprivation even it were open to the person to apply for citizenship of another state and this would be granted.

Section 66 of the 2014 Act removes this protection from some groups of citizens. It inserts a new provision permitting the removal of citizenship acquired by naturalisation if the Secretary of State is satisfied that it would be conducive to the public good because the person has acted in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the UK"
Two points:

1. This doesn't seem to apply to second generation immigrants, but only "naturalized citizens".

2. What do you do with the stateless people you wind up with? Where do you send them? They have no state.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 04:15 AM   #14
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,874
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
...snip...

2. What do you do with the stateless people you wind up with? Where do you send them? They have no state.
Wouldn't it be that they would not be allowed back into the UK rather than being deported from the UK?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 04:22 AM   #15
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,363
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Again, you're being narrow-minded. You assume that people that don't believe things are the way you believe them to be are stupid.
From his post, I got the impression that he assumed people who concluded what you suggested were stupid.

Quote:
Being deceived doesn't make one delusional or "living in cloud-cuckoo land"
Being deceived by such a blatant and easy-to-verify lie kinda does, though.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 04:51 AM   #16
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,952
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Wouldn't it be that they would not be allowed back into the UK rather than being deported from the UK?
Sure, but we're discussing returnees, aren't we? We can certainly (attempt to) prevent people from returning as long as their citizenship is removed while they are still in the Levant, but once they are at Heathrow it's harder, even more so later on.

Personally, I would support a voidance of citizenship, but it needs to be done on an individual basis, and it needs to be done by courts after a hearing.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

Last edited by uke2se; 20th October 2017 at 04:53 AM.
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 04:55 AM   #17
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,107
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Wouldn't it be that they would not be allowed back into the UK rather than being deported from the UK?
I can see that causing a rather knotty legal problem if they get deported from Syria, which would be a fairly reasonable thing for Syria to want to do in at least a subset of cases.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 05:48 AM   #18
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 55,461
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
"Around 850 Britons are thought to have travelled to Syria since 2011. Around 120 are believed dead fighting for groups including Islamic State and around half those remaining are thought to have already returned home. Police and security leaders have in the past warned of the prospect of battle-hardened jihadists returning to continue their struggle by carrying out attacks on the streets of Britain."

Current Head of MI5:
“Andrew Parker said the country was now facing an intense threat from violent Islamist extremists who were devising plots at a tempo he had not seen before in his 34-year-career.”

Former MI6 bloke:
“Richard Barrett, a former director of global counter-terrorism at MI6, said Britons had gone to Syria for “highly individual” reasons.
He said: “Many of them went to join something, join something new, something that looked bright and attractive and satisfied some of the needs in their lives and probably found that didn’t exist out there and so came back highly disillusioned.
“Also someone going off to join the Islamic state is not likely initially to be somebody going off to be a domestic terrorist, they seem to me to be two different motivations.””

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...ot-prosecuted/


It rather seems that it is a good thing that Richard Barrett is a former counter-terrorism director, his comment “someone going off to join the Islamic state is not likely initially to be somebody going off to be a domestic terrorist, they seem to me to be two different motivations.” Seems ludicrous… unless you define “different motivations” as “whether you prefer to murder people at home or abroad”. It’s all jihad, only the postcode differs.
I strongly suggest that as you locate the ones who want to go back to likely join isis that you send them over to the middle east appropriate areas and drop them (parachuteless of course) off from a height of a few thousand feet over ISIS territories. For fecals and giggles!!!!!!
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 06:42 AM   #19
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 6,423
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
"Around 850 Britons are thought to have travelled to Syria since 2011. Around 120 are believed dead fighting for groups including Islamic State and around half those remaining are thought to have already returned home. Police and security leaders have in the past warned of the prospect of battle-hardened jihadists returning to continue their struggle by carrying out attacks on the streets of Britain."
The 850 figure clearly includes everyone who went to Syria, regardless of their eventual affiliation.

The Telegraph: First British female fighter to battle Isil accuses MI5 of targeting her family by taking away their laptops and phones

The Guardian: Man who joined Kurdish militia to fight Isis in Syria arrested in UK
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 07:32 AM   #20
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 22,562
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
You see the news at night, but are also being told by your friends and those around you that the New is fake, and that the Media is lying about Syria and the war there. You go on line and see webpages exposing how wonderful the ISIS Caliphate is, and how it is god's paradise on Earth, that all you need to do is head there and be a devout Muslim and you'll have a privileged place in the wonderful Islamic Society that they are building there. Hmmm, what could motivate such a person into travelling there? Because they want to becomes a terrorist, jihadist and murderer? Or maybe because they have been fooled into believing that what they see on TV is a lie, and that they can have a better life there, one where they are surrounded by peers that respect them and their religion, and where they can have a status worthy of them?
It's not just the Western media who show video of ISIS members holding up heads of their captives or which tell stories of women being taken into sex slavery...

...it is ISIS videos themselves that do that, and their publications.

One of the main criticisms of the Western media coverage was not that it distorted ISIS, but that it was an all too accurate portrayal of the group and that apparently had an attraction for a lot of (mostly) young men who wanted to go off on a super adventure of rape and murder.

The whole myth of people going there because they were duped is laughable.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 07:35 AM   #21
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,714
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
It's not just the Western media who show video of ISIS members holding up heads of their captives or which tell stories of women being taken into sex slavery...

...it is ISIS videos themselves that do that, and their publications.

One of the main criticisms of the Western media coverage was not that it distorted ISIS, but that it was an all too accurate portrayal of the group and that apparently had an attraction for a lot of (mostly) young men who wanted to go off on a super adventure of rape and murder.

The whole myth of people going there because they were duped is laughable.
QFT
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 07:41 AM   #22
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,714
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
Firstly, those that went to fight ISIS appear to be a tiny minority compared to those who went to join ISIS.

Secondly, this raises an interesting point… where morality isn’t as clear cut. Are they the equivalent of the international brigades? Or, as this time the Western democracies were taking a role against ISIS, is that not a valid comparison and these people should be treated as vigilantes (if they wanted to stop ISIS, they should have donated money/engaged in politics/joined the armed forces/humanitarian organisations)? Or is that a bit restrictive and we say that sometimes vigilantism is acceptable as long as the target is bad enough (i.e. Cable Street?).
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 07:44 AM   #23
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,363
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
One of the main criticisms of the Western media coverage was not that it distorted ISIS, but that it was an all too accurate portrayal of the group and that apparently had an attraction for a lot of (mostly) young men who wanted to go off on a super adventure of rape and murder.
Not that I disagree, but I just can't wrap my head around the idea that someone would ever want to go on such an "adventure".
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 07:50 AM   #24
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,714
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Not that I disagree, but I just can't wrap my head around the idea that someone would ever want to go on such an "adventure".
Personally, I agree. However, world history tends to imply that it's a persistently popular 'thing'.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 08:03 AM   #25
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,363
Maybe identifying people like that at an early age would help. I don't know.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 08:56 AM   #26
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,229
What to do with the returnees is an interesting question. I don't agree with smartcooky that they should all be turned away. Nor do I buy the pollyanna notion that they can all be converted to anti-islamist propaganda mouthpieces. Nor am I particularly enthused about Darat's vision of putting them all under "appropriate surveillance".

But all of this overlooks the original point: It was foolish to think that radicalized young men, with a command of the language and customs, and having proven their willingness to fight for the cause, would not be recruited by terrorist leadership to bring that fight back to the UK. In Syria, they can be evaluated, indoctrinated, and trained. Especially now that ISIS is on the run, the question of how to best use these "assimilated" jihadis must loom large in the eyes of the militant commanders.

Richard Barrett seems such an obvious ass that I have to assume he's doing it on purpose.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 11:44 AM   #27
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 6,423
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Firstly, those that went to fight ISIS appear to be a tiny minority compared to those who went to join ISIS.
I'm not aware of any more detailed statistics that can confirm or deny that. I think we tend to hear about the Europeans who have gone to fight with the Kurds against ISIS because they are an exception, we don't hear about ethnic Kurds living in Britain who do the same. One could say the same about UK-based Syrians who go to fight both for or against Assad, for that matter.

Quote:
Secondly, this raises an interesting point… where morality isn’t as clear cut. Are they the equivalent of the international brigades? Or, as this time the Western democracies were taking a role against ISIS, is that not a valid comparison and these people should be treated as vigilantes (if they wanted to stop ISIS, they should have donated money/engaged in politics/joined the armed forces/humanitarian organisations)? Or is that a bit restrictive and we say that sometimes vigilantism is acceptable as long as the target is bad enough (i.e. Cable Street?).
The UK government attitude seems to be that there's no differentiation, and that anyone going out to fight for any of the several "sides" is equally breaking the law. Where that starts to look hypocritical is that the West is supporting the Kurds specifically.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2017, 02:19 PM   #28
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 23,103
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
It's not just the Western media who show video of ISIS members holding up heads of their captives or which tell stories of women being taken into sex slavery...

...it is ISIS videos themselves that do that, and their publications.

One of the main criticisms of the Western media coverage was not that it distorted ISIS, but that it was an all too accurate portrayal of the group and that apparently had an attraction for a lot of (mostly) young men who wanted to go off on a super adventure of rape and murder.

The whole myth of people going there because they were duped is laughable.
I would suggest at the very least that anyone returning be stopped from having children. I do not think it is a good idea to have children brought up by people who think that rape and murder is ok under any conditions.

Refusing to allow these people back in is not a real answer. They can always go back to being a terrorist.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2017, 05:37 PM   #29
Dabop
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Oz
Posts: 417
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What to do with the returnees is an interesting question. I don't agree with smartcooky that they should all be turned away. Nor do I buy the pollyanna notion that they can all be converted to anti-islamist propaganda mouthpieces. Nor am I particularly enthused about Darat's vision of putting them all under "appropriate surveillance".

But all of this overlooks the original point: It was foolish to think that radicalized young men, with a command of the language and customs, and having proven their willingness to fight for the cause, would not be recruited by terrorist leadership to bring that fight back to the UK. In Syria, they can be evaluated, indoctrinated, and trained. Especially now that ISIS is on the run, the question of how to best use these "assimilated" jihadis must loom large in the eyes of the militant commanders.

Richard Barrett seems such an obvious ass that I have to assume he's doing it on purpose.
There was a discussion on one of our local radio stations recently about this, and it was claimed (I have no proof one way or the other) that at least here, most of the ones that went were actually born in Oz ie 2nd gen, hence revoking their passports is about all that could be done, returning them to 'their' country was in fact bringing them back here....
Many were indeed disillusioned (to put it mildly) by their treatment, despite being natural born citizens, they were often treated as second class citizens, told to 'go back home' (one quipping- what Sydney?) and often finding it hard to find jobs and constantly being harassed by what I personally would call redneck bogans
The end result was they indeed became insular, joining together and creating their own little enclaves in various suburbs, forming 'gangs' often for self protection against radical rednecks- then of course the police started taking notice of them- its a self perpetuating cycle after that
__________________
It's a kind of a strawman thing in that it's exactly a strawman thing. Loss Leader
Dabop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 04:10 AM   #30
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,874
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What to do with the returnees is an interesting question. I don't agree with smartcooky that they should all be turned away. Nor do I buy the pollyanna notion that they can all be converted to anti-islamist propaganda mouthpieces. Nor am I particularly enthused about Darat's vision of putting them all under "appropriate surveillance".

But all of this overlooks the original point: It was foolish to think that radicalized young men, with a command of the language and customs, and having proven their willingness to fight for the cause, would not be recruited by terrorist leadership to bring that fight back to the UK. In Syria, they can be evaluated, indoctrinated, and trained. Especially now that ISIS is on the run, the question of how to best use these "assimilated" jihadis must loom large in the eyes of the militant commanders.

Richard Barrett seems such an obvious ass that I have to assume he's doing it on purpose.
1) Why shouldn't they be under surveillance?
2) That was trying to find anything "positive" in them returning.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 04:23 AM   #31
fagin
Illuminator
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 4,851
Returnees, can be arrested and charged with aiding a terrorist organisation.

That's the theory anyway.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/808...hters-arrested

Quote:
But, bizarrely, despite being suspected of leaving to aid the world's deadliest terror organisation in places where be-headings and brutal executions are commonplace, our security services do not routinely detain or question them.

And powers introduced by former Prime Minister David Cameron two years ago that can temporarily prevent them returning have only been used ONCE.
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 07:53 AM   #32
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 22,562
Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
I would suggest at the very least that anyone returning be stopped from having children. I do not think it is a good idea to have children brought up by people who think that rape and murder is ok under any conditions.

Refusing to allow these people back in is not a real answer. They can always go back to being a terrorist.
I don't see how that is possible in any way that will be accepted. The only ways it can really happen is long-term incarceration or medical procedures which would be considered barbaric these days.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 08:02 AM   #33
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,714
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I don't see how that is possible in any way that will be accepted. The only ways it can really happen is long-term incarceration or medical procedures which would be considered barbaric these days.
Yeah, if the state can't justify locking then up. .. then I can't see how it can justify eugenics.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 08:03 AM   #34
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,514
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
God knows I don't like Islamophobes, but, unless you are a journalist or a humantirain aid worker I have to question anybody's motives for travelling to Syria...
Syrian food is delicious.

Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Being deceived by such a blatant and easy-to-verify lie kinda does, though.
Many of them would be very young too. Someone in their teens or early 20's doesn't have a lot of life experience.

Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
I would suggest at the very least that anyone returning be stopped from having children. I do not think it is a good idea to have children brought up by people who think that rape and murder is ok under any conditions.
Have then neutered or spayed?

Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Not that I disagree, but I just can't wrap my head around the idea that someone would ever want to go on such an "adventure".
That might not be how they would characterize it. They might see it as more like George Orwell going to fight in the Spanish Civil War.
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 08:07 AM   #35
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 22,562
Originally Posted by Dabop View Post
There was a discussion on one of our local radio stations recently about this, and it was claimed (I have no proof one way or the other) that at least here, most of the ones that went were actually born in Oz ie 2nd gen, hence revoking their passports is about all that could be done, returning them to 'their' country was in fact bringing them back here....
Many were indeed disillusioned (to put it mildly) by their treatment, despite being natural born citizens, they were often treated as second class citizens, told to 'go back home' (one quipping- what Sydney?) and often finding it hard to find jobs and constantly being harassed by what I personally would call redneck bogans
The end result was they indeed became insular, joining together and creating their own little enclaves in various suburbs, forming 'gangs' often for self protection against radical rednecks- then of course the police started taking notice of them- its a self perpetuating cycle after that
Sure, there is no doubt that many of them were born and raised in Australia, just as many British were born and raised in quite often middle class families in comfortable suburbs in England. But sometimes the appeal of the rubber dinghy rapids is just too great.

As for coming back and being ostracized by the community they vowed to destroy, this isn't really that surprising is it? I mean, if you knew that your co-workers had been "disillusioned" by their stint in a neo-Nazi organization ("It wasn't as great as I thought it would be!", "Some of the leaders turned out to be quite horrible!") and had returned as a matter of self-interest, then would you also not be that keen to hang out with them much?

It reminds me a little bit of a Sun headline I read about twenty years ago about the Curse of the Great Train Robbery. Yeah, it turned out that some guys who had robbed a train in the 60s were "cursed", because thirty years later some of them were old and infirm, some of them were living abroad as fugitives and some of them found it hard to get jobs. Well, guess what. It sucks to be a criminal, people mistrust you if you are. And that's what these ISIS recruits are going to have to live with because they joined a hateful organization to perpetrate hateful acts. It isn't only "redneck bogans" who rightfully despise them.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 08:10 AM   #36
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 22,562
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
They might see it as more like George Orwell going to fight in the Spanish Civil War.
If they were joining the Kurds, then fine. Otherwise it is more like Eoin Duffy's Blueshirts going off to fight alongside Franco.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 08:19 AM   #37
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,714
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post

Many of them would be very young too. Someone in their teens or early 20's doesn't have a lot of life experience.



That might not be how they would characterize it. They might see it as more like George Orwell going to fight in the Spanish Civil War.
That seems rather generous. I would think that someone in their early twenties would understand that torture, rape and murder are wrong, even in the service of "their" ideology.

For instance, would you give this guy a break, he was in his early twenties when he did his bad stuff:

"Reinhold Hanning was sentenced on Friday to five years in prison for his role in facilitating the slaughter at the Auschwitz death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland, although he will remain free pending appeal."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...aust-auschwitz
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 10:13 AM   #38
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,514
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
That seems rather generous. I would think that someone in their early twenties would understand that torture, rape and murder are wrong, even in the service of "their" ideology.
It is rather generous and partly I'm playing devil's advocate here. At the same time, an idealist could imagine himself "fixing" a movement that has become corrupted. He knows about the torture, rape and murder, but thinks his influence will help stop the corrupted elements that do that while preserving the elements that are beautiful (to him) and good.

Originally Posted by Giz View Post
For instance, would you give this guy a break, he was in his early twenties when he did his bad stuff:

"Reinhold Hanning was sentenced on Friday to five years in prison for his role in facilitating the slaughter at the Auschwitz death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland, although he will remain free pending appeal."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...aust-auschwitz
Maybe? I'd probably be more inclined to give him a break than I would a returning ISIS jihadi.

A lot depends on your philosophical opinions on the purpose of the criminal/justice system. Does society need to be protected from him? Does he need rehabilitation and can that be accomplished? Is it important to punish him just as a statement on what society collectively believes is unacceptable behavior?

Also the question of how the state should deal with an individual is a separate issue from how that individual sees himself. I understand PhantomWolf's point, but that doesn't mean I think nothing should be done with these returning people.
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 10:21 AM   #39
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,714
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
.

A lot depends on your philosophical opinions on the purpose of the criminal/justice system. Does society need to be protected from him? Does he need rehabilitation and can that be accomplished? Is it important to punish him just as a statement on what society collectively believes is unacceptable behavior?
.
Presumably. Otherwise, Patricide and matricide would not be punished as there would be no risk of recidivism.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2017, 02:17 PM   #40
Dabop
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Oz
Posts: 417
I think many of them see the hypocrisy of the west in starting wars based on lies and deception that created the conditions for Isis to begin, that killed millions, cost billions and continue to this day having what is basically an invasion force in countries where they arent and never were wanted by anyone except the ones doing the invading
__________________
It's a kind of a strawman thing in that it's exactly a strawman thing. Loss Leader
Dabop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:37 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.