| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
 |
|
You're not supposed to acknowledge and then brush past 'careful igoral', that's rather the point, but anyway
| There are a few lefties in Greece still blowing things up, but it is clearly not the norm. |
Terrorism is never 'the norm' but you are incorrect anyway. There were some bombs only this week in London from left-wing Irish terrorists. There are also low-level insurgencies that use terror and are (at least theoretically) left wing in the Philippines, Indonesia, Myanmar, India, Peru, Russia, China. Probably more if you really wanted to delve though I agree 'a few' and 'still blowing things up' are the state they've reached. In so far as they are acknowledged at all. Unlike, as you say
| When the bombs go off it's a case of is it an Islamic Group, or a Right Winger. |
Let's not forget that Palestinian terrorism was always solidly left wing and it is a mark of success that present Islamist terrorists have managed to shake off the left-right tag completely. Anti-Islamist terrorists though have been, thus far, solidly right-wing.
| Unless you believe it is a Security Services conspiracy. In which case your starting point is always... Is it the State again? |
No, the starting point is you telling us when it happened before. Your sources must be better than mine.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | | You're not supposed to acknowledge and then brush past 'careful igoral', that's rather the point, but anyway |
I always brush past ignorals at the start. Maybe I am wrong to do so.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
Are you going to brush past these conspiracies of yours too?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
N R Scott
In: Middlesbrough
|
|
|
|
| Wile E. Coyote wrote: | There are only two types of terrorism "right wing" and "Islamic".
It is no longer a left/right thing. |
Unless you look at the victims, who are always left wing.
If there's an Islamic terrorist attack the victims are always liberal - i.e. they publicly reaffirm their faith in open borders, multiculturalism, etc. It's quite odd really, given the number of people who are anti-immigration in general, that there are never any relatives of dead victims publicly blaming immigration and Islam for these tragedies.
Likewise if Muslims get gunned down they're always the good Muslims who believe in multiculturalism. Never the angry ones who don't.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
| N R Scott wrote: |
Unless you look at the victims, who are always left wing.
If there's an Islamic terrorist attack the victims are always liberal - i.e. they publicly reaffirm their faith in open borders, multiculturalism, etc. It's quite odd really, given the number of people who are anti-immigration in general, that there are never any relatives of dead victims publicly blaming immigration and Islam for these tragedies.
Likewise if Muslims get gunned down they're always the good Muslims who believe in multiculturalism. Never the angry ones who don't. |
Great Scott.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
|
Weren't victims of the Twin Tower attack the epitome of global (multicultural) capitalism? It's the most 'successful', most widely viewed, Islamist attack to date.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
N R Scott
In: Middlesbrough
|
|
|
|
| Hatty wrote: | | Weren't victims of the Twin Tower attack the epitome of global (multicultural) capitalism? |
That's a good counter example. Though I don't really remember the victims and families in the media too well, I'm guessing they represented a wider cross section of society and the political spectrum in general. So definitely not all left wing.
I'm more focusing on recent times though. There are plenty of people to the right of the argument on issues like immigration. You can see these people ranting about immigration on Facebook, Twitter and in everyday life constantly. When there's an Islamist attack you'll see or hear them saying things like "why do we let these people in the country?", "We should send them all back", etc. Now if these people are angry now imagine how angry they'd be if they had a family member actually killed by a Muslim terrorist.
People with these views make up a huge chunk of the demographic. As per Trump, Brexit, and so forth. Yet even though we have a major terrorist event every three or four months we never see these people represented amongst the demographics of the people killed. And amongst their families.
For instance, the recent Strasbourg attack. I have an Italian friend who told me the Italian victim, who was plastered all over the Italian media at the time, was a pro-EU, pro-open borders advocate. Of course, in of itself it's perfectly plausible that someone with these views would be killed in a random terror attack. However, over the last five or six years the victims always fit this demographic. It's like tossing a coin and always getting heads.
The law of averages states that there should be plenty of Trump supporting, or anti-EU victims of terror, but they seem not to exist. It's almost like being a nationalist, or being pro the 2nd Amendment, has some sort of talismanic effect that stops you and your family from falling victim to terror attacks.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | | There were some bombs only this week in London from left-wing Irish terrorists |
At other times, maybe other places, this would have led to fox-in-henhouse syndrome. Instead, it received the journalistic equivalent of a yawn. Whether this will lead to the new-new-new-IRA giving up the tactic or upping its game remains to be seen, but it was a clear victory for the good guys (that's us on this occasion).
Christchurch is not even terrorism. It's a nutter. Now either we can reward the nutter, and encourage other nutters, by being hens in hen houses and for example putting armed guards on mosques, or we can treat it with the journalistic equivalent of a yawn. That'll mean we're all charged with everything from heartlessness to Islamophobia but it would be for the best, especially for Muslims. At present. We don't know yet about the future.
Two parallel situations, one trivial and one serious, also occurred in recent weeks. But not necessarily having parallel lessons.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
The trivial one was a sudden rash (two? three?) cases of spectators running onto the pitch and getting slightly physical with the players. Cue handwringing, why-oh-why, we must bring back fencing, the birch etc. Or we wait, we shrug, we watch, we decide it was one nutter given a bit of publicity [the current policy is for the cameras to cut away] and another nutter emulating the first. 'Do nothing' should always be the policy of first resort in case that makes the problem go away. It's already too late if you insist on doing something.
The second was the Ethiopian air crash. Everyone -- and I mean everyone -- could see that it either was or it might be the same cause as the previous crash of the same brand new plane. Except the people who built the brand new plane. I watched open-mouthed as American aviation safety experts expatiated on the safety record of the Boeing 737, of which this was a variant, and it was much too early for a general recall. We will examine the black boxes etc etc. "You jizzocks!" I screamed at the screen. "The exemplary safety record is precisely why it must be or it might be the variation." 'Do nothing' was the first resort of people who were hoping there wasn't a problem.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
On the safety record of the Boeing 737- it appears that Boeing have painted themselves into a corner, in a big way.
According to friends with wings:
Firstly they told all the certification people that the new 737 Max had no significant design changes to the previous versions. And forgot to mention the shiny new anti-stall devices.
Then when they started delivering the new 737 Max to the airlines, they didn't change the content of the training/conversion programme for pilots new to the type (as they would all be) or even mention the shiny new anti-stall devices. Most pilots were unaware that they even exist, or what to do with them.
Then comes the major design flaw.
It's a rule-of-thumb with safety critical systems that you don't have just one. You don't have just two either, you have three. So that when one goes wrong, the pilots aren't left dangling in mid-air, scratching their heads, wondering which one's gone wrong. The odds are only one has gone, and you vote with the majority, the two that are still working. But if the more-unlikely event happens and two have failed, you are also likely to have something much more serious happening as well. Like someone has just detonated an explosive device and parts of plane and passengers are already falling off.
Designing-in three units for safety is colloquially known as the Meatloaf Design Law (two out of three ain't bad). Except this time Boeing only put two units in. What could possibly go wrong?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
I disagree with this analysis. It would seem clear from your
| for pilots new to the type (as they would all be) or even mention the shiny new anti-stall devices |
that Boeing regarded it as an autonomous fail-safe feature that operated independently of the pilot. If you like, it would be positively dangerous to train pilots in its operation, lest they try to interfere. I predict it will turn out to be a software error that forces the nose down and to stay down, and which operates intermittently or in certain circumstances and overrides the fail-safe fail-safe. There is nothing the pilot would be able to do about it, trained or not, aware or not. I think it will turn out to be a Chinook rerun.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
It turns out that Tarrant might not have been "Right Wing". His manifesto states his views most closely align with those of the People’s Republic of China. Of course how you describe the People's Republic is another issue.
Still, Wiley can't help thinking that the growth in right wing terrorism is in part based on labelling anyone as fascist, islamaphobic, racist or just plain nasty as right wing.
It also enables some folks to blame Chelsea Clinton for stoking right wing terror by inspiring the shooter.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/44750/chelsea-clinton-harassed-vigil-over-past-comments-ashe-schow
It is reassuring that most folks are reasonable, ie noble savages or law abiding globalists.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| Chelsea Clinton tweeted against anti-Semitism in response to Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) comments regarding Jews. Omar has repeatedly suggested American Jews hold “dual loyalty†to Israel, even after being told this was a blatant anti-Semitic trope. |
I am amazed that this is even a matter for serious debate. Everybody in the whole wide world holds 'dual loyalties' if only at the most basic level between their family and their government. America is actually founded on the dual loyalty of every citizen to their state and to their country. It's not so much how you handle such dilemmas but how acute the dilemma gets at any one time. But ya gotta know it's there! As I am always pointing out to Jews (I picket a different synagogue every Sunday -- attendance seems to be even more woeful than at church!) you are storing up troubles for yourselves by assuming that Israel's interests are compatible with your country's interest. Unless you're an Israeli, that is. Unless you're a Jewish Israeli, that is. It might be, it might not be, but you're crazy to a) kid yourself that it is right now and b) kid your country that it always is.
Denouncing your opponents as being anti-Semitic is a different question. It can be a good tactic but strategically it's definitely a bad idea. Save that one for the real thing. You may need it one day.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
Israel's interests are compatible with your country's interest - *if* your country accepts the Seven Laws of Noah (the Noahide Laws). That might be what's upsetting Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN)
| According to the Jewish law, non-Jews (Gentiles) are not obligated to convert to Judaism, but they are required to observe the Seven Laws of Noah to be assured of a place in the World to Come (Olam Ha-Ba), the final reward of the righteous |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noahidism
Rabbi Meir Kahane organized one of the first Noahide conferences in the 1980s.] In 1990, Kahane was the keynote speaker at the First International Conference of the Descendants of Noah in Fort Worth, Texas.
The Chabad-Lubavitch movement has been the most active in Noahide outreach, believing that there is spiritual and societal value for non-Jews in at least simply acknowledging the seven laws, and even more so if they accept or observe them. In 1991, they had a reference to these laws enshrined in a Congressional proclamation: Presidential Proclamation 5956, signed by then-President George H. W. Bush. Recalling Joint House Resolution 173, and recalling that the ethical and moral principles of all civilizations come in part from the Seven Noahide Laws, it proclaimed March 26, 1991 as "Education Day, U.S.A." Subsequently, Public Law 102-14 formally designated the Lubavitcher Rebbe's 90th birthday as "Education Day, U.S.A.," with Congress recalling that "without these ethical values and principles, the edifice of civilization stands in serious peril of returning to chaos," and that "society is profoundly concerned with the recent weakening of these principles, that has resulted in crises that beleaguer and threaten the fabric of civilized society." |
Not just in the USA either...
| In March, 2007, Chabad-Lubavitch gathered ambassadors from six countries to take part in a gathering to declare, in the name of the states they represent, their support of the universal teachings of Noahide Laws. They represented Poland, Latvia, Mexico, Panama, Ghana, and Japan. |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noahidism
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
