Shhhhh......Islam is not responsible as it is the religion of peace! :lol:

Of course it does. Although most Muslims are law abiding and peaceful we have seen how the actions of a few can bring a country to its knees. We are also seeing democratic countries being silenced and too afraid to confront the issues for fear of pissing off more Muslims and converting them to radical Islam. Like that chap Zaky Mallah said on Q&A, when Ciobo made that comment apparently it was going to create a legion of terrorists in Australia, because apparently its comments that create terrorists and nothing to do with Islam.

The question is why France? Why not us?

Why not yet you mean? It could also have something to do with the work of our security agencies such as ASIO and the feds.

Still, it's a matter of time.

4 to 5 million Muslims live in France. This community is increasingly becomming more radical. They live in ghettos and on the fringes and have pretty much excluded themselves with little attempt to integrate.

In Australia, there are only 500,000 Muslims so far, but numbers are on the rise. If and when we get to France's levels, and this community doesn't integrate well (they won't), then chances are that it is only a matter of time before we have a terrorist event in Australia which will kill 100 or so Aussies.

But of course, they will do it peacefully, moderately and with humility so it just needs to be brushed undeer the carpet like all other terrorist events. Nothing to see here of course! :^o

Without the full details being known about this particular attack, France has had a long-term issue regarding north African immigration and lack of integration dating back to their colonisation of Algeria, and later the war of Algerian independence.

Without going so far as to say there are "no go" neighbourhoods as Fox News likes to claim, undoubtedly they have vast highrise ghettoes not dissimilar to "the projects" you see in the USA.

Now am I saying architecture causes terrorism? No. What I am saying is that there are a bunch of different issues coming together in France right now.

No matter how good our Security Agencies are, it will not prevent a well planned terrorist event. We have just been lucky so far that most would be terrorists in Australia are amateurs and use the internet and mobile phones. The successful terrorists are those who go completely off the grid, and don't even have a VISA card.

France has superb Security Agencies, as do many European countries. America also has great Security ASgencies, but they are pretty much at the terrorists mercy.

Geez you are full of it!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/jul/14/nice-bastille-day-france-attack-promenade-des-anglais-vehicle

A French parliamentary investigation into last year’s terrorist attacks on Paris last week identified multiple failings by France’s intelligence agencies.

The parliamentary commission was set up to assess the failure to prevent a series of attacks that killed a total of 147 people in 2015 – from January’s gun attacks on the Charlie Hebdo offices and a kosher grocery store to the coordinated gun and bomb attacks on 13 November outside the national sports stadium, at bars and restaurants and at a rock gig at the Bataclan concert hall.

The commission highlighted a “global failure” of French intelligence and recommended a total overhaul of the intelligence services and the creation of a single, US-style national counter-terrorism agency.

“Our country was not ready; now we must get ready,” said Georges Fenech, head of the commission.

France has six intelligence units answering variously to the interior, defence and economy ministries.

Fenech said the multi-layered, cumbersome intelligence apparatus was like an army of soldiers wearing lead boots.

The French interior minister Bernard Cazeneuve this week rejected the idea of a total overhaul of intelligence services. He said some of the report’s other recommendations were already being put in place.

Can we acknowledge the root cause of terrorism is Islam? There are many disenfranchised groups in the world who don't retort by detonating bombs or mowing crowds down in lorries. Unless you a sufficiently brainwashed by a specific ideology which promises great reward for committing these heinous acts then they would not happen.


Edited by rusty: 15/7/2016 10:25:51 AM

France is NOT dissimilar to Australia. It's just our Muslim community is still relatively small compared to their's.

But, like France, we also have ghettos (on a smaller scale) as they tend to live and congregate among themselves in certain areas of our Capital Cities.

As their community expands, the ghettos will get bigger, and as unemployment increases, more disenfranchised males seeking meaning through Islam and open to radicalization. Rich pickings.

My personal opinion is that acts of terrorism are so rare, and the population of people who identify as muslim are so big, that it is just too broad a brush to paint one group within society.

Do I agree that the recent terrorist attacks are religiously motivated by people who are muslim? Of course. Everyone knows that.

But saying islam is the CAUSE of terrorism is like saying "cats drink milk, I drink milk, therefore I am a cat".

Don't forget that the largest victims of groups like ISIS is other muslims. This is a problem within islam, not of islam.

I am an atheist, and I am critical of all religions to the extent that they require faith (believing in something without evidence) and therefore promote magical thinking, irrationalism, and "truth by revelation".

But I think religions are conditioned by the societies they exist in. Therefore, in stable western countries, Christianity "plays nice" because they have their authority taken from them. But even then, look at what was done behind closed doors, when religious people were given authority.

The particular fundamentalist, jihadist version of islam, in my opinion, is largely contributed to by Saudi Arabia, and their funding and promotion of extreme teachings throughout the middle east (at least within areas where sunni islam is dominant).

There has been a blind eye turned to this for so long because of the strategic importance of their relationship with the west. The Al-Saud's have maintained their rule over the country through their tolerance of extreme wahhabist ideology.

They have created a Frankenstein which is now tearing the middle east apart, as well as creating fear in the west.

Aside from the appropriate security measures, I don't think there is much that can be done. The price for living in a free society is that we risk these things. To make ourselves completely safe would require living in a police state.

This is not historically unprecedented either. Just look at the terrorism in the 1970s by groups like the Red Brigades in Italy.

The most accurate historical comparison I have found is with the anarchist terrorism in the late 1800s. The only way it eventually stopped was that their ideas lost potency:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_of_the_deed

Edited by AzzaMarch: 15/7/2016 10:43:29 AM

You are full of it my friend.

There were failings in the Lindt Cafe siege in Sydney. There were also failings with America's CIA just prior to September 11.

Whenever there is a terrorist event like this, there will ALWAYS be inquests, and investigations as to why the Security Agencies failed in their duty.

It however, is certainly no indication as to the professionalism of the NSW Police during the Lindt Cafe siege, the CIA prior to September 11, or the French Security Agencies.

I would agree that some countries like Belgium have inadequate security, This is Europe's soft underbelly.

But the French Security Agencies are very good, and probably better than Australia's ASIO and ASIC.

You also can't say that ASIO and ASIC are good just because we have had no real terrorist event so far. We have been so arsy lucky in that regard it's not funny, but there will be a time when our luck will run out. Not saying ASIO or ASIC are not good, but let's not overstate how good they actually are, because they certainly are nowhere near as good as Frances Security Apparatus!

I suggest you grow up!

Edited by Aikhme: 15/7/2016 10:42:28 AM

Went to France in 2011. These no-go neighbourhoods aren't too much of a stretch. I felt very uncomfortable in Marsille.

Bringing this back to our own refugee/boat people issues, doesn't it seem like we could potentially bring these sorts of issues upon ourselves (creating 'projects') so to speak? How can we avoid it? Spread these incoming people out? How do we stop people becoming 'disenfranchised' and angry with the world and resorting to extremism?

Our governments lack of planning on how to help refugees step into normal life in Australia is bad. I have not seen any kind of article on how our government actually supports these people other than paying them.

They don't "pay them". They are subject to the same entitlements/system as everyone else.

The numbers are much smaller, I think we do actually have good programs to help people adjust to life in a new society.

We have half the level of unemployment France has.

The people committing terror in France are often born in Europe - have had generational issues of unemployment, lack of education etc.

We are also much more multicultural than any country in Europe, with lower levels of racism. I'm not saying racism is to blame for terrorism. Just that lower levels of racism makes it easier for foreigners to get jobs, participate in society etc.

We still have problems, every country does. But we are far different to France.

You can't prevent disenfranchised people. That is the unfortunate truth.

Racism always prevails. Everyone is racist whether they admit it or not.

Think about it. How many times would a Muslim be rejected for even an interview when applying for a job? It is far more common than some of us care to admit.

There are some very qualified Muslims out their in society who have far diminished chances of landing a job in their chosen fields, and resort to taxi driving. This leads to disenfranchisement which then of course could lead to other things.

The only way to not find ourselves in Frances predicament, is to carefully select migrants coming to Australia, and not bring many Muslims unless they have huge qualifications in Cancer Research or such like.

But that is a conversation, not many are prepared to have. Which means in a decade or 2, we will be in France's boat too!

It's not my opinion - it was the opinion of the French parliamentary committee set up to investigate the issue!

For once I am in agreement with you. We have had a lot of muslim/Arabic men apply to work for us. Some of them are far more qualified than they need to be.

Call it racist all you want but we very rarely hire people who have bad English speaking skills because it annoys our clients. That's just how it is. We can't send a bloke who can hardly speak English to a construction site or we'll lose the job and money.

We have a Bosnian who works for us Davor who is very very good at his job. He couldn't get a job for years because of his accent. His English is pretty good but even now certain clients won't deal with him because they can't understand him.

The reality is though, why hire people who have less than ideal English communication skills if you can hire someone with better communication skills? It's not racist, it's just business. Client's have to come before political correctness.

It is a nonsense statement too. The kind of thing you would expect from a democratic country.

They did the same thing with the Lindt cafe inquest, which just about finger pointed the blame against the Police for the loss of 2 innocent lives. The CIA as well for September 11 and there are many more examples.

The point is, this is by no means ANY indication as to how good the Security Agencies really are, which in Frances case are among the best on the planet.

Security Agencies will always be behind the eight ball when trying to counter a perfectly or well organised terrorist cell.

Basically, they got next to buckley's chance of preventing terrorist attacks. That is the cold harsh reality of it.

In addition, France shares Intelligence with a number of other countries including the USA and UK. The CIA, NSA and MI5 had even less clue because if that is not the case, they would have shared the information with France.

Edited by Aikhme: 15/7/2016 11:21:53 AM

Not sure I agree with you that acts of terrorism are so "rare". Look at ISIS sweeping across the ME, they basically destroyed the Iraq army in some cities, and various other terrorist groups who continue to expand. Then look at the Islamic population sentiment towards these terrorist groups, which varies between country and organisation but still command significant support from Muslims globally including the West, even if they are a minority. The minority seem to be more vocal and aggressive than the peaceful majority who seem passive reluctant to get involved. Then there are the actions of entire countries like Saudi Arabia such as you raised. There is also the weak condemnation of terrorist atrocities from Islamic leaders, often qualified with accusations blaming the West.

My point is that the problem of Islam cant be swept under the rug by comparing the # terrorism deaths and the global population. Although that particular metric might be small, I believe there is a broader disconnect and possible fundamental incompatibility between Islam and the West that needs to be brought to light and publicly debated, to help shape our immigration and humanitarian policies and ensure peaceful existence between religious minorities and Australians generally.

I would draw a distinction between what is happening within Iraq, and acts of terror in the West.

Iraq (and Syria) is basically undergoing a civil war. This war has little to do with Islam per se, and is more about a battle for dominance of the Middle East between the Iranian-led Shias, the Saudi-led Sunnis, and the ISIS-led Sunnis.

Prior to the Iraq War there was a basic balance of power between the 2 regional heavyweights. The Iraq War, then the Arab Spring has pushed the region into chaos as there is a massive power vacuum in Iraq.

It's linked to religion in that it is predominantly Shias vs Sunnis, but that is like saying the irish troubles were because of Christianity. Obviously it was protestant v catholic, but it was a multi-layered issue that wasn't really about religious faith itself.

The acts of terror in the West are actually rare in terms of the dangers faced compared with any other things that cause death. But they are committed in a way to maximise media attention.

But I think it is critical to remember that the goal of these attacks is precisely to create discord between muslims and non-muslims in western societies. They want crackdowns to occur, as they believe this is what will push more muslims to turn to ISIS.

So every time we in western societies react to these events in an (entirely understandable) but unhelpful way, we are actually doing exactly what ISIS wants.

I would dispute this, if you are talking in terms of muslim leadership within western countries. It is a bit of an urban myth in my opinion. They are always quick to condemn. Its just that anytime someone says something slightly not right, the media jump all over it and ignore everything else.

Also, islam is not hierarchical in the same way the catholic church is. You can always find an imam who says something bigoted if you look hard enough.

But this is coming from ANIC, not some loony hate preacher .

"These recent incidents highlight the fact that current strategies to deal with the threat of
terrorism are not working. It is therefore imperative that all causative factors such as
racism, Islamophobia, curtailing freedoms through securitisation, duplicitous foreign
policies and military intervention must be comprehensively addressed."

I dont think there is anything "urban myth" about this at all. Condemnation of terrorism should be unqualified and not seek to appropriate blame other than on those responsible.

Do you really think a religion would admit that it's sacred texts are at least part of the problem we have here?

No, it's a case of deflection with all religions.

Problem with this way of thinking is that it neglects to address the real cause of conflict between Sunni and Shia Muslims.

Muslims will always bear the brunt, but to these radicals, non Muslims are infidels and hence in the eyes of Allah, it is justifiable in killing the non believer as it is to kill other sects of the very same religion.

Everyone is deluded to think they will address this phenomena easily.

The only way is securitization and to restrict our immigration policies to favour Nations with similar ideals and values as our own.

No it won't.

Even the so called moderate Muslims believe that non Muslims are infidels. That is the harsh reality of it. They might not kill non believers, but to them, they are still inferior and dirty infidels.

They just won't admit to it that's all.

Edited by Aikhme: 15/7/2016 12:39:59 PM

I really find this unbelievably asinine. The idea that the media ought to not report terrorist attacks and that we shouldn't seek to do anything that might offend Muslims for fear they will be radicalised is handing total control of our immigration, security and foreign policy to terrorists. It will just give them free reign to do whatever they want, to recruit and preach their poison wherever they want, to plan attacks whenever they want, to plant their operatives in any country all without fear of reprisal because the somehow the west doing something to counter these measures will play into their propaganda war.

This "hands off" approach, that if we do nothing except smile and play nice the problem will magically go away is the absolute apex of cowardice and naivety. If there's a fire burning you have to put it out.

You can't put the fire out in any meaningful way. If Saudi Arabia can't stop radical muslim terrorist attacks, and they're a virtual police state, what the fuck hope has Australia got.

None.

It's only a matter of time before we cop it.

I am not talking about a hands-off approach. I am not even necessarily judging what happens at present.

I am just pointing out what the strategy of ISIS is. It is not a secret, they proclaim it loudly.

Their openly stated strategy is:
- Keep attacking targets in the West where there is a muslim population, try to goad the govt into a heavy handed backlash against muslims
- Make the attacks as spectacular as possible to drive the tabloid media to stoke fears about muslims etc

The purpose is to ensure muslim populations in western countries are as ostracised as possible, and to push them into the arms of ISIS, in order that they can continue to recruit to their cause.

All I am saying is that the broader the crackdown, the more generalised the anger is against muslims as a group, the more that is doing what ISIS is counting on.

That's not being PC, not being soft or naïve. That is just the basic facts of their strategy.

Edited by AzzaMarch: 15/7/2016 03:06:48 PM

The Saudis have been funding the spread of extremism for years. They haven't been trying to stamp it out prior to ISIS coming along.

Even now they are still funding hate preachers. The Al-Saud monarchy's legitimacy lies with the pact they made with the Wahhabi fundamentalists when Saudi Arabia was created in the 1920s.

They are not committed at all to stopping terrorism. All they are trying to do is keep it under their control and focussed against Shias.

You evidently know more about it than me which is fairly obvious.

My point was there was a terrorist attack in Saudi a week or 2 back and if they can't stop it, in what is in effect a virtual police state, then what hope has Australia got?