(12-15-2014 04:44 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(12-15-2014 04:24 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Now the American left can begin the navel gazing... "What did America do to cause this man to act this way?"

I don't know about this guy in particular, but in general religious zealots almost always resort to violence to force their beliefs on others when they aren't put into check by a secular system. We have our religious zealots in check in the West, and I like it that way. Now we just need to get our Neocons and military-industrial complex in check so they will stop killing so many people in our name.

I'm a Lutheran. We're not actively planning a government takeover.

(12-15-2014 04:44 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(12-15-2014 04:24 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Now the American left can begin the navel gazing... "What did America do to cause this man to act this way?"

I don't know about this guy in particular, but in general religious zealots almost always resort to violence to force their beliefs on others when they aren't put into check by a secular system.

You mean like Robespierre, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc?

(12-15-2014 05:05 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(12-15-2014 04:44 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(12-15-2014 04:24 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Now the American left can begin the navel gazing... "What did America do to cause this man to act this way?"

I don't know about this guy in particular, but in general religious zealots almost always resort to violence to force their beliefs on others when they aren't put into check by a secular system. We have our religious zealots in check in the West, and I like it that way. Now we just need to get our Neocons and military-industrial complex in check so they will stop killing so many people in our name.

I'm a Lutheran. We're not actively planning a government takeover.

Good for you.

(12-15-2014 04:44 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(12-15-2014 04:24 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Now the American left can begin the navel gazing... "What did America do to cause this man to act this way?"

I don't know about this guy in particular, but in general religious zealots almost always resort to violence to force their beliefs on others when they aren't put into check by a secular system. We have our religious zealots in check in the West, and I like it that way. Now we just need to get our Neocons and military-industrial complex in check so they will stop killing so many people in our name.

We don't have murderous religious zealots of any measurable number in America...Now. We are no longer savages.

Although you are engaging in hyperbole...I also agree we need to reign in the NeoCons and stop letting the "tail wag the dog" in regard to the IMC. Ike warned us of what is going on in his farewell address.

(12-15-2014 05:18 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-15-2014 04:44 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(12-15-2014 04:24 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Now the American left can begin the navel gazing... "What did America do to cause this man to act this way?"

I don't know about this guy in particular, but in general religious zealots almost always resort to violence to force their beliefs on others when they aren't put into check by a secular system.

You mean like Robespierre, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc?

Grad again engaging in hyperbole. Yes...a Pope once fcked up and decided to kill some Muslims. That was a long time ago.

(12-15-2014 03:12 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Iran has been cracking down on non-Shia sects for several years now. They consider non-Shia sects to be enemies of the state.

Thanks for the post. I am well aware of persecution of Bahai under the Mullahs and Zoroastrians for generations. I had thought that - at least in pre-Mullah Iran - Christians, Jews, (and I guessed Sunnis et al) were treated pretty well. I guess it's not surprising that things have turned progressively for the worse under the Mullahs. I recall from the mid-1980s that certain ethnic groups were treated very badly - I think they were Kurds, but may have been Balochs - but I knew very little of the ethnic makeup of the region, nor the religious differences.

(12-15-2014 09:04 AM)VA49er Wrote:  This "attacker" is an incompetent boob. I mean, who the hell takes people hostage and then demands a flag? Also, the dude is obviously untrained as several hostages have already escaped on their own. I imagine real terrorist are laughing at this dude. He's a lone wolf that has already had over 40 Islamic organizations condemn his actions.

At the same time, the muslim guy - the "attacker" - was probably shaking his head at the stupidity of people not being able to figure out what his flag meant and why he chose to hold hostages across the street from a tv station.

The Sydney Gunman’s Failed Message | World Affairs Journal

http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/...ed-message Wrote:When the Australian gunman forced his hostages to hold that flag up to the glass, he was identifying himself as a Salafist. But no one in media seemed to know what that flag is. Reporters just described it as “a flag with some Arabic writing on it,” as if it’s just some random flag from anywhere that could have meant anything.

The guman sent a message, but it wasn’t received. And we know he was monitoring the news in real time. He was directly across the street from an Australian news channel. He wanted attention, but he was not getting the attention he wanted. Reporters couldn’t even figure out who he was when he clearly identified himself and his ideology.

Hours into the standoff, he demanded an ISIS flag in return for the release of one of the hostages. CNN anchors wondered aloud why, if he wanted an ISIS flag, he didn’t just bring one with him in the first place. But he did bring a Salafist flag. He must assumed that at least somebody would recognize it and explain it to the audience. I recognize it because I’ve been working in the Middle East for ten years, but news anchors are generally not experts in anything in particular except presenting information on television. They’re generalists.

(12-15-2014 11:41 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(12-15-2014 09:04 AM)VA49er Wrote:  This "attacker" is an incompetent boob. I mean, who the hell takes people hostage and then demands a flag? Also, the dude is obviously untrained as several hostages have already escaped on their own. I imagine real terrorist are laughing at this dude. He's a lone wolf that has already had over 40 Islamic organizations condemn his actions.

At the same time, the muslim guy - the "attacker" - was probably shaking his head at the stupidity of people not being able to figure out what his flag meant and why he chose to hold hostages across the street from a tv station.

The Sydney Gunman’s Failed Message | World Affairs Journal

http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/...ed-message Wrote:When the Australian gunman forced his hostages to hold that flag up to the glass, he was identifying himself as a Salafist. But no one in media seemed to know what that flag is. Reporters just described it as “a flag with some Arabic writing on it,” as if it’s just some random flag from anywhere that could have meant anything.

The guman sent a message, but it wasn’t received. And we know he was monitoring the news in real time. He was directly across the street from an Australian news channel. He wanted attention, but he was not getting the attention he wanted. Reporters couldn’t even figure out who he was when he clearly identified himself and his ideology.

Hours into the standoff, he demanded an ISIS flag in return for the release of one of the hostages. CNN anchors wondered aloud why, if he wanted an ISIS flag, he didn’t just bring one with him in the first place. But he did bring a Salafist flag. He must assumed that at least somebody would recognize it and explain it to the audience. I recognize it because I’ve been working in the Middle East for ten years, but news anchors are generally not experts in anything in particular except presenting information on television. They’re generalists.

I was right in that the guy was an idiot. I mean, he was a "self proclaimed" cleric that no islamic organization recognized, had mental issues, had been arrested numerous times before, and was involved somehow in the murder of his exwife. Question is why was this dude on the streets? He's been denounced by many islamic organizations as well. Lone wolf wacko.

(12-16-2014 09:06 AM)VA49er Wrote:  I was right in that the guy was an idiot. I mean, he was a "self proclaimed" cleric that no islamic organization recognized, had mental issues, had been arrested numerous times before, and was involved somehow in the murder of his exwife. Question is why was this dude on the streets? He's been denounced by many islamic organizations as well. Lone wolf wacko.

Oh, he's a certified loon and probable sociopath. His problems extend way beyond the worldview that encouraged and/or permitted him to murder his wife and innocent hostages (and possibly the string of sexual assaults). But, that doesn't mean it was part of the problem. That said, it's not his fault that people didn't "get" that he initially identified as a Salafist and people didn't get that this was a driving factor in his actions. I heard some discussion initially that the flag was not an ISIS official flag and was one used by other terrorist groups in Syria. But, Totten is the first one that I've seen identify this as a distinguishing feature of the Salafist movement, which has far broader appeal in the Middle East (and, unlike ISIS, appeals to more mainstream Muslims in the region as opposed to Western wannabes).