Charlie Hebdo: Gun attack on French magazine kills 11

I don't really believe they killed those people in the Bataclan for being 'sinners' though tbh.

"Eight brothers carrying explosive belts and guns targeted areas in the heart of the French capital that were specifically chosen in advance: the Stade de France during a match against Germany which that imbecile François Hollande was attending; the Bataclan where hundreds of idolaters were together in a party of perversity as well as other targets in the 10th, 11th and 18th arrondissement," say ISIS.

I have read it, Mordy.

so i don't understand - do you think they're lying about their motivations?

I think they're putting an 'Islamic' spin on it, there's more going on than 'let's kill some sinners', don't you think?

i can't think of any reason why they'd kill young mostly left-wing anti-war concert goers beyond what they said - that they're perverse idolaters.

Assuming concert goers are mostly left wing and anti war is a bit of a leap, and I'm ISIS couldn't care less either way. I can't really believe you think killing idolaters was the sole reason for the attack on the Bataclan.

and I'm ISIS

i knew it

Tom Daesh

i don't know about sole reason but i believe that ISIS' entire raison d'etre is to promote a fundamentalist reading of Islam and rid the world of idolaters. they committed genocide against the yazidi explicitly bc they considered them idolators. i don't know why you'd think that in this scenario that wouldn't also be the explanation.

I agree w Mordy. Treating ISIS as an organization with rational, overarching strategic goals is a bit of a mistake imo, these guys don't operate like a normal political movement - their bonkers ideology is really what drives their actions. I mean, think for a minute about how plausible their purported end-goal of a new caliphate is, these guys are insane and their rationale is insane.

like yes there are probably smaller, logistical reasons for these particular attacks, but the underlying motive is "kill heretics"

fwiw the Bataclan had been threatened by a lot of radical Islamic groups in the last ten years or so. the ex-owner (he just sold it on 11 September) had regularly several Jewish events (cf. http://www.lefigaro.fr/musique/2015/11/14/03006-20151114ARTFIG00090-le-bataclan-deja-vise-plusieurs-fois-par-des-attentats.php); and there's a weekly gay night (cf. https://www.facebook.com/la.nuit.des.follivores.crazyvores).

Terror plays a large part, don't you think? I don't think we're actually disagreeing here btw.

Yes, but terror to what end? Terrorize people into stop sinning maybe.

I'm not disagreeing about their overall aims.

But I'll have to leave it there 'cuz there's some birthday cake waiting for me (not mine).

Tom Daesh

lolz lj

pretty sure it has to do w the west constantly blowing up muslim countries but maybe john kerry is right and we should just pretend it was a 100% senseless act therefore absolving the aggressive US campaigns of any responsibility.

as if the US waging a $1.7 trillion war against you and accidentally blowing up hospitals has nothing to do w this. they hated rock shows. how do we know? cos they said so. oh, cos terrorists are trustworthy people. gtfo

the west constantly blowing up muslim countries

superficially sure, but sunni fundie insanity goes back way farther than that

and the nazis massacred the jews because of the unfair treaty conditions imposed on germany at versailles and not anything to do w/ an ideology, dumbass

like do u think they commit genocide against middle eastern minorities bc of the west too? do you have any thoughts that aren't just half-baked chomsky regurgitations?

no i dont!

im not saying there is no ideology at all maybe u misread me.

btw gotta go chomsky is making me a sandwhich brb

pretty sure John Kerry, and most of these reacting politicians, is not a terrorist mind reader, is my main point.

i think that you can take them at their word that this is about their religious belief - an argument that will also help explain phenomena like genocide against the yazidi, or why they're bombing non-western countries like nigeria and lebanon, or why they're bombing other muslims + mosques. or you can give the westerncentric explanation in which they are only reacting to the west's actions. which is not to say the west doesn't bare any responsibility at all for ISIS' existence - we obv are responsible for deposing sadaam and creating the power vacuum that ISIS has so effectively occupied. but to say that they kill infidels, rape + enslave women, bomb religious sites and market places, blow up airplanes because they're angry that the west bombed muslim countries is to blind yrself to reality imho.

blinding yourself to reality would be pretending the west bombing muslim countries and being heavily involved military wise for generations now has no impact on the environment all this takes place in.

obv it isn't just one factor that is contributing to this landscape. pretending it is solely religious and that regional instability has no bearing is just as bind-sided.

region's been unstable since before the fall of the ottoman empire fyi

i largely agree w u here, is the thing.

i don't think you do. i'm not sure you understand that the history of political islam in the middle east and africa (and once upon a time in europe too) has not been a peaceful endeavor that only became radicalized with the involvement of the west. there have always been movements willing to commit genocide, or enslave, non-muslim (frequently black african) populations to further their theological agenda. as long as sadaam or gaddafi was willing to murder any challenge to their rule they were able to keep something of a lid on it, and by removing those (fyi fascist violent) dictators we let the genie out of the bottle. but the west did not radicalize islam. islam radicalized islam.

you can take them at their word that this is about their religious belief

as reported to me by the same US news media who helped pushed us into the iraq war. why would they ever lie....

have you read the graeme wood article? in addition to that ISIS has released a significant amount of material in English that describes their motivations and goals. you can hear it right from the horse's mouth. you don't have to touch a single piece of US news media.

there are links to every issue of their english language online magazine Dabiq here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dabiq_(magazine)#Covers

i will have to read that thanks.

Yeah you can literally read their magazine online, watch their videos with subtitles, or even follow their tweets, direct from the source, unfiltered by US media -- or at least you could fairly recently, don't know to what extent that's still true.

of course now i am considering googling those things and maybe i dont want to be on a no-fly list

I went through a brief ISIS obsession some time last year. The videos are quite grim and incredibly well produced, some of the most "effective" propaganda I have ever seen.

it looks like wiki removed the links while i was posting that but they're all collected here as well:
http://www.clarionproject.org/news/islamic-state-isis-isil-propaganda-magazine-dabiq#

i'm sure i just got on a watchlist by pulling a pdf but holy shit at the "prisoner for sale" want ads at the back of Dabiq
how can you look at that and not condemn this level of insanity

and to hurting's point, the layout is slick and well arranged; don't know if that makes it more or less frightening

I wouldn't really recommend watching the videos, btw, because they're basically snuff films, like they literally show ISIS fighters gunning down civilians on the road (afaikt real, but who knows), setting up people for executions, etc. But at the same time I felt like I really understood what was going on better by seeing them. There's a lot of rhetoric about ending western imperialism and influence in the region, but the intent is very clearly to replace it with an empire governed by their particular extreme brand of Islam, in which not only other religions but Muslims of other brands will be subject to death or (maybe?) forced conversion or some kind of slavery. Sections are devoted to the specific reasons why Shia is heresy and to executions of Shia. Other targets shown appear to be Iraqi govt collaborators.

Guys its obvious what's happening on this thread, and I know that Mordy's links are to Wikipedia and an anti-extremist website, but nonetheless can you be very very careful about linking directly to ISIL propaganda here? Preferably not posting any other links at all? I know this stuff is all over the internet but still...

yeah i won't post anything else - all of this stuff is easily locatable w/ very minimal googling

yeah, i am never knowingly gonna watch anyone being killed, that shit is appalling and does not require eyes on. The magazine is not so gonzo but the moments when it leaps fully into the abyss are that much more depressing. they seem to have a good handle on message delivery.

"and the nazis massacred the jews because of the unfair treaty conditions imposed on germany at versailles and not anything to do w/ an ideology"

This is not an either/or thing. Outside forces influence a rise in radicalism; the shape the the radicalism takes has to do with the culture it takes place in. There would have been genocidal racists in Germany and Austria anyway -- it's not clear there would have been a Third Reich without Versailles.

see i want to read that stuff to have an educated view but i have read KSM's statement. propaganda is a key word too. a main point of propaganda is manipulation, lying or distorting in order to achieve an effect. this stuff could be created by the NSA or CIA or ISIL for all we know. it does not matter, in the end it was produced to make people think a certain way.

this is a violent and bad way of thinking so im going to not even give it that respect. they have already made their statement for me, and it is violent, and no justification would be enough.

and maybe the mossad was responsible for the paris attacks. i think we can assume these weren't written by the NSA or CIA.