Shootings in Paris - MOD NOTE UPDATED - READ OP

custard gannet · 02-12-2015 10:24PM

Billy86 wrote: »

the poll that received the most complaints by a huge distance that IPSO has encountered since being set up

Record number of crusties report poll for not delivering sunshine and lollipop findings. Who woulda thunk it.

and the poll that YouGov flat out refused to do because what The Sun was proposing to do could never get an accurate sample. That poll. Highly reputable stuff altogether.

So what in your opinion makes one pollster more reputable than another. One that refuses to ask questions you don't like it would seem.

Frank Grimes · 02-12-2015 10:27PM

custard gannet wrote: »

There are over 5000 Europeans fighting with Isis, and a few dozen fighting with the Kurds. If you need to rely on lies, pedantry and conjecture to muddle your point up you deserve everything you get.

I don't think you understand how proper research works.

custard gannet · 02-12-2015 10:31PM

Frank Grimes wrote: »

I don't think you understand how proper research works.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/23/the-sun-jihadi-headline-dangerous-poll-dubious-survey-hate-crimes-muslims

In this case, the poll conducted by Survation does not actually ask whether people have sympathy for Isis or jihadis; it asks whether they have sympathy for those fighting in Syria. This makes a considerable difference as there are many rebel groups fighting against President Assad, some of whom even have the support of western governments.

It worries me how this kind of bull can see the light of day, it really does.

Frank Grimes · 02-12-2015 10:43PM

custard gannet wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/23/the-sun-jihadi-headline-dangerous-poll-dubious-survey-hate-crimes-muslims

In this case, the poll conducted by Survation does not actually ask whether people have sympathy for Isis or jihadis; it asks whether they have sympathy for those fighting in Syria. This makes a considerable difference as there are many rebel groups fighting against President Assad, some of whom even have the support of western governments.

It worries me how this kind of bull can see the light of day, it really does.

The obvious caveat that I have no idea how Vice verified this applies but they do link to the Survation statement - http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/i-conducted-the-muslim-poll-the-sun-jihadi-sympathy

ilkhanid · 02-12-2015 10:46PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Though you might have somewhat a point, were Islam already not seen as the enemy in the UK as early 2001 and not the Irish, right as the Real IRA were on the tail end of their bombing campaign across the UK that had seven separate incidents in under 18 months.

Suspicion of Muslims was growing in British society from the eighties on foot of the Rushdie business..and that itself was a sign of the rise of Identity Politics.

Nodin wrote: »

A lovely segue which rather ignores the fact that they are European and that there was some muslim/Arabic input into the culture of that area, the med and the Iberian peninsula.

Isn't that my point? The Bosnians were becoming more European as time went on, especially since the end of the Ottoman Empire. We are still waiting for a mass-market Islam that can adapt to European ways, but, to repeat, as long as Islam is identified with Arabic and Arabism that's going to be a "big ask".It took Catholicism well over a thousand years to dump (and that isn't identified with one ethnicity) latin and assimilating Islam to Europe will be much more difficult.
As for the Iberian Peninsula,the more strictly and piously Muslim it became, the more alien it became. There was a brief moment of accomodation when the Muslim influence was in a balance with classical and Judaic influences, but the Almoravids and Almohads put an end to that...a breath of the harsh uncompromising faith straight out of the desert.

Billy86 · 02-12-2015 10:51PM

custard gannet wrote: »

So what in your opinion makes one pollster more reputable than another. One that refuses to ask questions you don't like it would seem.

Disregarding your other childish comment, the answer to this is quite simple - those that stick to standards. There is a reason that The Sun went to YouGov first, and only looked at Survation after they were told where to go. And there is a reason that YouGov have a net worth of £15mn, whereas Survation have a net worth of... £50k.

And there is also a reason why Survation have distanced themselves from the poll altogether - http://www.themediablog.co.uk/the-media-blog/2015/11/survation-distances-itself-from-the-sun-.html

Survation wrote:

"Survation do not support or endorse the way in which this poll’s findings have been interpreted".

"Survation categorically objects to the use of any of our findings by any group, as has happened elsewhere on social networks, to incite racial or religious tensions."

So basically the Sun wanted to run a dodgy survey, YouGov don't need the money and told them to feck off, while the much smaller Survation gave in to greed (there's no way they can claim they didn't know what the Sun was getting up to) and is now doing all it can to get as far away from the whole mess as possible.

Why are you not addressing the fact that they didn't even poll Muslims exclusively, just "people with Muslim surnames" ?

kleefarr · 02-12-2015 11:16PM

Uk voting on whether to attack or not..

To block airstrikes:
For: 211
Against: 390

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/4e6d04ee-df49-4789-a54a-42f2c7be53b2

custard gannet · 02-12-2015 11:19PM

Frank Grimes wrote: »

The obvious caveat that I have no idea how Vice verified this applies but they do link to the Survation statement - http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/i-conducted-the-muslim-poll-the-sun-jihadi-sympathy

Then there was the specific question about sympathy for fighters in Syria. (Note: there was no mention of the word 'jihadi' in the script at any point.) One question asked which of the statements the interviewee most agreed with: a) I have a lot of sympathy for young Muslims who leave the UK to join fighters in Syria, b) I have some sympathy for young Muslims who leave the UK to join fighters in Syria, or c) I have no sympathy for young Muslims who leave the UK to join fighters in Syria.

Just to reiterate how clear the question was, cheers Frank. We have reached a stage where you don't even have to pretend to be telling the truth to shout down a result that you plain don't like. God, in the past people would have at least said that The Sun are regular liars who constantly make things up, but they haven't even bothered dressing it up.

custard gannet · 02-12-2015 11:22PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Why are you not addressing the fact that they didn't even poll Muslims exclusively, just "people with Muslim surnames" ?

Several of those who took part in the Paris attacks took part in behavior unbecoming of observant Muslims mere weeks before the attacks, partaking in drug use, drinking, running a bar in one case, frequenting gay bars.

Frank Grimes · 02-12-2015 11:24PM

custard gannet wrote: »

Just to reiterate how clear the question was, cheers Frank.

It doesn't do anything of the sort. Apologies, I thought you were interested in a serious discussion as opposed to the 'but...MUSLIMS' variety of posting that's common in these threads.

Billy86 · 02-12-2015 11:30PM

custard gannet wrote: »

Several of those who took part in the Paris attacks took part in behavior unbecoming of observant Muslims mere weeks before the attacks, partaking in drug use, drinking, running a bar in one case, frequenting gay bars.

Why are you not addressing the fact that they didn't even poll Muslims exclusively, just "people with Muslim surnames" ?

Frank Grimes · 02-12-2015 11:33PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Why are you not addressing the fact that they didn't even poll Muslims exclusively, just "people with Muslim surnames" ?

I can hazard a guess.

kettlehead · 02-12-2015 11:46PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Why are you not addressing the fact that they didn't even poll Muslims exclusively, just "people with Muslim surnames" ?

If anything, that should lower the number of ISIS supporters polled. Non Muslims tend not to support Muslim terrorist organisations that want them dead. Even if they do have a Muslim sounding surname.

Billy86 · 03-12-2015 12:02AM

kettlehead wrote: »

If anything, that should lower the number of ISIS supporters polled. Non Muslims tend not to support Muslim terrorist organisations that want them dead. Even if they do have a Muslim sounding surname.

Why are you not addressing the fact that they didn't even poll Muslims exclusively, just "people with Muslim surnames" ?

It's pretty telling, how desperate you are to avoid answering this question at any and all costs.

beks101 · 03-12-2015 12:40AM

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/672194148074692609/photo/1

Well that's that then. UK will be joining the let's-flatten-Syria party.

One man who will not be happy is former hostage Nicholas Henin, who was held by Jihadi John and escaped when France paid a ransom to IS (though they'll never admit it)

Really interesting interview with him about exactly how he thinks Syria airstrikes would play right into IS's hands.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/02/nicolas-henin-video-isis-syria-strikes?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet

A French journalist held hostage by Islamic State for 10 months, has made an impassioned plea against bombing Syria, saying it was a trap that would only benefit Isis.

Nicolas Hénin, previously held hostage by Mohammed Emwazi, implored the international community to seek a political solution. Engaging with Syrians, not bombing them, was the surest way to bring about the collapse of Isis, he said.

I was held hostage by Isis. They fear our unity more than our airstrikes
Nicolas Hénin
Read more
In a five-minute video said to have been recorded in the past few days in Paris and posted on YouTube by the Syria Campaign, Hénin said: “Strikes on Isis are a trap. The winner of this war will not be the parties that have the newest, most expensive, most sophisticated weaponry, but the party that manages to have the people on its side.”

In his message, apparently timed to coincide with Wednesday’s UK parliament debate on joining Syria airstrikes, he said: “At the moment, with the bombings, we are more likely pushing the people into the hands of Isis. What we have to do, and this is really key, we have to engage the local people.

“As soon as the people have hope in the political solution, then Islamic State will just collapse. It will have no ground any more. It will collapse.”

Hénin was released along with other French hostages in April 2014. He had been held captive alongside James Foley, Steven Sotloff, David Haines and Alan Henning, who were all murdered by Emwazi.

“Mohammed Emwazi was one of my captors. He is the one who murdered my friends,” said Hénin. “I can’t prevent myself from thinking for the six murders that he committed, face to camera, murders of westerners, how many Syrians did he kill, and who cares for them?”

Mohammed Emwazi killed my friend, but his own death won't affect the war
Sulome Anderson
Read more
He said the jihadis lived in a parallel world and a “different matrix”. They believed in a “mad prophecy” that there would be a global confrontation between a coalition of “80 armies against an army of Muslims coming from all over the world” and were “a bit out of their mind”.

Hénin said: “Why are we making so many mistakes? Why are people so much misunderstanding the region? We are just fuelling our enemies, and fuelling the misery, the disaster for the local people.”

He said the radicalisation was the result of passivity by the international community, who failed to assist Syrian democrats “as they were yelling for their freedom, and the Syrians were living in total despair”.

He said: “For every single Syrian killed since the beginning of this conflict by Islamic State, between seven and 10 have been killed by the Syrian regime. We have to understand that these two parallel disasters for the Syrian people, they depend one on the other, and one cannot fight one without fighting the other.”

Hénin said the summer refugee crisis had been a propaganda blow to Isis. Images of refugees fleeing the Muslim “dreamland” and being welcomed in the lands of “unbelievers” had given a lie to their message of western hatred towards Muslims, he said. “And that is why they probably tried to manipulate the public during the Paris attack, to make us close our borders, and maybe, even more importantly, to close our minds.”

There was an easy way to make Islamic State “lose ground at high speed” he said. “It would be for the international community to take the decision that all the Syrian regions that are held by the opposition are no-fly zones; no-fly zones for everybody. Not the coalition, not the Russians, not the regime. Nobody. So, actually to provide security to the people would be devastating for Isis and this is what the international community should focus on,” he said.

Mint Aero · 03-12-2015 12:41AM

That Isis would really want to cop on a small bit. If I see them acting the maggot again I'm going to get rightly vexed.

Knex* · 03-12-2015 12:45AM

The Rubberbandits actually penned it fairly accurately on facebook a few minutes ago

Unless Cameron can figure out a way to bomb ideas, then these Syrian airstrikes won't fair out too well for the poor auld Brits.

Nodin · 03-12-2015 12:52AM

ilkhanid wrote: »

Isn't that my point? The Bosnians were becoming more European as time went on, especially since the end of the Ottoman Empire. We are still waiting for a mass-market Islam that can adapt to European ways, ...................

Did it ever occur to you to take a look at how observant the larger muslim populations in Europe are?

kettlehead · 03-12-2015 12:57AM

Really interesting interview with him about exactly how he thinks Syria airstrikes would play right into IS's hands.

In chess there is such a thing as a forced move. They want you to do it, but it's also the best thing and only thing you have left to do.

kettlehead · 03-12-2015 01:20AM

Following news that three mosques have already been closed since the November 13 attacks on the capital, Hassan El Alaoui, who is in charge of nominating regional and local Muslim imams and mediating between the imams and prison officials, told Al Jazeera on Wednesday that more were set to be shuttered.

"According to official figures and our discussions with the interior ministry, between 100 and 160 more mosques will be closed because they are run illegally without proper licenses, they preach hatred, or use takfiri speech," he said.

Takfiris are classified as Muslims who accuse others of the same faith of apostasy, an act which has become a sectarian slur.

"This kind of speech shouldn't even be allowed in Islamic countries, let alone secure countries like France," El Alaoui, who became the first Muslim prison chaplain-general in 2005, said.

The recent mosque closures, he added, were made under "a legal act that the authorities have" and must have happened because "of some illegal things that they found".

A step in the right direction. The radicalised mosques need to be shut. I'd also like to see a ban on Saudi funded mosques throughout the EU.

jackofalltrades · 03-12-2015 02:00AM

Billy86 wrote: »

Would make you wonder why Breivik was so rarely referred to as a Christian terrorist.

Billy86 wrote: »

That's strange, because he did say he was "100% Christian", and that word - Christian - comes up 2,247 times in his manifesto. That's a strange fixation on Christianity from a Christian who was a terrorist but oh-so-definitely-not-a-Christian-terrorist.

"Sincere and patriotic regards,

Andrew Berwick, London, England - 2011
Justiciar Knight Commander for Knights Templar Europe and one of several leaders of the National and pan-European Patriotic Resistance Movement

He described himself as "not an excessively religious man" and a "cultural Christian", even though he say he is "100% Christian".
From his autobiography he talks about being in a cultural war.
And that his definition of a Christian doesn't necessarily mean that you have to have a personal relationship with Jesus or God.
He also rejects "Christian fundamentalist theocracy" and describes the Knights Templar as not a religious organisation but rather a Christian "culturalist" military order.

Describing him as a Christian terrorist would be misleading, he's not doing it to advance Christianity or Christian political goals.
Unlike the Paris attackers who were using the attack to advance Islamist goals.

KomradeBishop · 03-12-2015 03:00AM

Meanwhile, from potential Republican presidential candidate Trump:

Donald Trump said Wednesday that he would kill the families of terrorists in order to win the fight against ISIS.

The billionaire businessman was asked by the hosts of Fox News' "Fox and Friends" how to fight ISIS but also minimize civilian causalities when terrorists often use human shields.

"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families," Trump said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/donald-trump-terrorists-families/index.html

Fúcking scary that anyone would vote for this guy. I don't think this is even the most screwed up thing he's said lately either.

topmanamillion · 03-12-2015 03:21AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Meanwhile, from potential Republican presidential candidate Trump:
Donald Trump said Wednesday that he would kill the families of terrorists in order to win the fight against ISIS.

The billionaire businessman was asked by the hosts of Fox News' "Fox and Friends" how to fight ISIS but also minimize civilian causalities when terrorists often use human shields.

"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families," Trump said.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/donald-trump-terrorists-families/index.html

Fúcking scary that anyone would vote for this guy. I don't think this is even the most screwed up thing he's said lately either.

Ah he's a lunatic. There isn't a hope he'll get nominated. At this stage there are people preaching under tarps who are technically in the American presidential race.

Witchie · 03-12-2015 03:22AM

Knex. wrote: »

The Rubberbandits actually penned it fairly accurately on facebook a few minutes ago

Many years ago I was meeting with Caoimhghin O'Caolain in his office in the Dail when the news started speaking about issues where Unionists were giving out about not enough weapons being decommissioned or some such and Caoimhghin said "When will they realise that it is the minds that need to be decommissioned"

Same applies here. Change the mindset and the terror will end.

MadYaker · 03-12-2015 03:50AM

This could have been posted already but here's a lengthy enough interview with the band who were on stage in the bataclan when the attack happened. It's not an easy watch, they are clearly suffering from PTSD.

BoatMad · 03-12-2015 05:02AM

Same applies here. Change the mindset and the terror will end.

whose mindset ?

as to changing mindsets , what do u suggest, personally I feel several B52s full of HE ordnance is a powerful mindset changer , but others might prefer 250,000 professional troops on the ground, !, to each his own

Wurzelbert · 03-12-2015 10:35AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Meanwhile, from potential Republican presidential candidate Trump:
Donald Trump said Wednesday that he would kill the families of terrorists in order to win the fight against ISIS.

The billionaire businessman was asked by the hosts of Fox News' "Fox and Friends" how to fight ISIS but also minimize civilian causalities when terrorists often use human shields.

"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families," Trump said.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/donald-trump-terrorists-families/index.html

Fúcking scary that anyone would vote for this guy. I don't think this is even the most screwed up thing he's said lately either.

i think what he meant is that they need to be bombed even if they have their families around them, that they use their families as shields and that they need to be bombed anyway, and that avoiding civilian casualties can no longer be the main consideration and limiting factor in the war against isis…and he is right, though his wording may have been a tad off, and i would like to hear him elaborate on the issue…also i am not sure there are that many truly innocent and uninvolved civilians left in any of the isis strongholds anyway, so civilian casualties would not even be an issue…

seanaway · 03-12-2015 11:29AM

Wurzelbert wrote: »

i think what he meant is that they need to be bombed even if they have their families around them, that they use their families as shields and that they need to be bombed anyway, and that avoiding civilian casualties can no longer be the main consideration and limiting factor in the war against isis…and he is right, though his wording may have been a tad off, and i would like to hear him elaborate on the issue…also i am not sure there are that many truly innocent and uninvolved civilians left in any of the isis strongholds anyway, so civilian casualties would not even be an issue…

He clearly stated '...you have to take out their families' i don't think he needs elaborate further. he didn't say 'you may have to' or 'it may happen in the course of..'

opiniated · 03-12-2015 11:31AM

Wurzelbert wrote: »

i think what he meant is that they need to be bombed even if they have their families around them, that they use their families as shields and that they need to be bombed anyway, and that avoiding civilian casualties can no longer be the main consideration and limiting factor in the war against isis…and he is right, though his wording may have been a tad off, and i would like to hear him elaborate on the issue…also i am not sure there are that many truly innocent and uninvolved civilians left in any of the isis strongholds anyway, so civilian casualties would not even be an issue…

? Source?

I'm not being awkward, it just seems to me that
a: There are innocent civilians, who want no part of war, who cannot escape, for various reasons, (money, illness, age, etc.) and,

b: How do civilians work out whether ISIS or Assad's forces are more likely to slaughter them while they are escaping?

It must be absolute hell to be an average Joe who just wants to live in peace in Syria, likely to be slaughtered at any given time by Assad's forces, ISIS, or Western forces.

Jelle1880 · 03-12-2015 11:39AM

Wurzelbert wrote: »

i think what he meant is that they need to be bombed even if they have their families around them, that they use their families as shields and that they need to be bombed anyway, and that avoiding civilian casualties can no longer be the main consideration and limiting factor in the war against isis…and he is right, though his wording may have been a tad off, and i would like to hear him elaborate on the issue…also i am not sure there are that many truly innocent and uninvolved civilians left in any of the isis strongholds anyway, so civilian casualties would not even be an issue…

ISIS controls an area larger than Scotland, I'm pretty sure there's plenty of innocent civilians in that part.

But if the UK (and the rest) focus their bombings on oil refineries, known ISIS military targets,... then i don't see any problem with it.

Question remains how easy that will be.

Shootings in Paris - MOD NOTE UPDATED - READ OP

Comments