5 ms·

Is this insight based on your sound science-backed research?

reitanqild 9y ago
It is more or less obvious: everyone of these criminals belong to a very specific subset of people. The probability of me or any of my relatives going out and blow people up is 0.0 <lots of zeroes> x. The probability of someone in that subset doing the same is small but absolutely non-zero. I feel sorry for friendly Muslims.
- wayn3 9y ago
  a comparable to "muslims" would be "all the christians". if you want some examples of christians blowing up the shit out of each other, try ireland. I dont think that relatives of Eric Harris would have ever said "oh yea, that kids trouble. going to shoot up a school some day". pretty lame argument youve got. there are clearly more radicalized general idiots out there than there are radicalized muslims.
  - freedomintruth 9y ago
    >> there are clearly more radicalized general idiots out there than there are radicalized muslims. It's not the Christians in Belgium, France, Middle East, Philippines, England, US and Egypt who are blowing people up and killing people. The violent conflict of the Middle East has spread to all these other places, and it coincides with the migration of Muslims together with the rise of Al Qaeda and ISIS. The IRA were not on the scale of Islamic terrorism we have seen in the past 10 years, and which can even become more significant. The pattern of the Irish Catholic-Protestant conflict was more limited in scope. What we are seeing with Islamic terrorism is much larger and more bloody to EVERYONE, not just between Sunni-Shiite, but extends to Jews, Kurds, Yazidis, Christians. So no, Islamic terrorism is not comparable to "all Christians". To do so is either blindness or pernicious propaganda on your part. Check out "ISIS Enshrines a Theology of Rape" at New York Times on the rape of Yazidis.[1] They are praying before they rape and after they rape. If this story is true, it indicates that ISIS is not a mere political movement, but is also bound to its theology. The BBC reported on the recent bridge attack of a witness who said the attackers said "This is for Allah."[2] edits: added links, fixed typo. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-enshrines-a-theology-of-rape.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-ens... [2] http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40148737 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40148737
    - jimnotgym 9y ago
      >The IRA were not on the scale of Islamic terrorism... Seriously? When I was a child the Northern Ireland troubles were in the news every single day! At times it was a constant stream of bombings and executions. There were roadblocks in the street run by paramilitaries. Whole communities were controlled by these organisations and their fundraisers. The scope may have been restricted to England and the island of Ireland, but in these areas it was all out. The scale of Islamic terrorism in the UK does not even come close
      - reitanqild 9y ago
        Not wanting to defend IRA but often they warned in advance before attacking purely civilan targets, didn't they?
        jimnotgym 9y ago
        Yes a lot of the time. I also deliberately didn't mention the IRA by name, as there were a number of groups involved on both sides. A counter example would be the 'Real IRA' and the Omagh bombing where it appears the telephone warning was designed to move more people into the path of a bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing
        reitanqild 9y ago
        Thanks for sharing. And thanks for being thoughtful in the way you present it.
      - freedomintruth 9y ago
        >> in the UK ... I did mention England, Belgium, France, Middle East, Philippines, USA, Egypt: so scale geographically ISIS wins. I didn't mention Canada, Sweden, Africa, Turkey. For if it's about numbers, would you say IRA has killed more people than ISIS? Did the IRA use sex slaves like ISIS did with Yazidi prisoners as in the New York Times piece I linked? These guys are targeting all different sorts of groups in almost all continents. And if nations security apparatus were not fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda, do you think there would be less or more violence? In other words, are they satisfied with sovereignty in some limited geographical area, or would they try to do as much damager wherever they could?
- dorfsmay 9y ago
  Being Muslim is not a necessary pre-condition. A lot of Europeans and north-American joining ISIS are not of Muslim background. Trying to understand what leads human beings to kill and die for fuzzy causes might help. I suspect a perfect storm of mental issues, undesirable social status and support from the wrong people at the right time. I also suspect we don't want all the answers, because we wouldn't want to expose how we convince our own young military not to walk out when sent to unjustified wars.
  - reitanqild 9y ago
    Being Muslim is not a necessary pre-condition. A lot of Europeans and north-American joining ISIS are not of Muslim background. Do we have proofs that any of the violent ones had not converted at the time when they attacked?
    - dorfsmay 9y ago
      They convert as they join, but a lot of them did not grow up as Muslim. Being Muslim (as per ISIS definition of what muslim means) is part of the ISIS rhetoric, and people convert to be part of ISIS. OP says that only people part of "a subset of people" can be part of ISIS and propagate terror. implying that only people who grew up as muslim can become terrorists.
  - freedomintruth 9y ago
    >>Being Muslim is not a necessary pre-condition Since these attacks are aligned with ISIS and ISIS exists within the framework of Islam, then Islam is a pre-condition for these attacks. So even if the attackers may not have been Muslim previously in their life, Islamic fundamentalism remains a constant factor in all these attacks. At the end of the day, whether these people are sane/insane/confused/rich/poor, it's all done within the context and framework of Islamic fundamentalism. And the model for these attacks is in the Middle East where suicide bombing has been a feature of life there in the past 20 years. In case you think it's only poor and mentally ill, consider the attackers in the Dkaka, Indonesia cafe. These guys were educated in university and came from well-off families.
  - 9y ago
- narrowrail 9y ago
  While not religious, the reasons look similar to gangs in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangs_in_the_United_States#Reasons_for_joining https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangs_in_the_United_States#Rea...
philipov 9y ago
The name of the person you are replying to is "ad_hominem." Take that as you will.
ad_hominem 9y ago
The burden of proof doesn't lie on the voice of skepticism. I think it's condescending to Islamic terrorists to pretend that their attacks are an illness rather than a calculated move to further the goals of their thoughtful interpretation of Islamic scripture: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-is... It's also hurtful to the real mentally ill people, who overwhelmingly are a danger to themselves, to lump them in with murderers.
- snarfy 9y ago
  You are getting off track. The point I was trying to make is there are other routes besides legislative. Maybe it's not mental illness. Maybe it's Peace Corp. Maybe its less bombing of Muslim countries. Whatever it is, it's probably not wiretapping the internet.
  - reitanqild 9y ago
    Ok. Just say that right away then.
dang 9y ago
On HN, please don't take arguments in snarky directions or generic ones. Snarky generic ones still less. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14481299 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14481299 and marked it off-topic.

It is more or less obvious: everyone of these criminals belong to a very specific subset of people. The probability of me or any of my relatives going out and blow people up is 0.0 <lots of zeroes> x. The probability of someone in that subset doing the same is small but absolutely non-zero. I feel sorry for friendly Muslims.

wayn3 9y ago
a comparable to "muslims" would be "all the christians". if you want some examples of christians blowing up the shit out of each other, try ireland. I dont think that relatives of Eric Harris would have ever said "oh yea, that kids trouble. going to shoot up a school some day". pretty lame argument youve got. there are clearly more radicalized general idiots out there than there are radicalized muslims.
- freedomintruth 9y ago
  >> there are clearly more radicalized general idiots out there than there are radicalized muslims. It's not the Christians in Belgium, France, Middle East, Philippines, England, US and Egypt who are blowing people up and killing people. The violent conflict of the Middle East has spread to all these other places, and it coincides with the migration of Muslims together with the rise of Al Qaeda and ISIS. The IRA were not on the scale of Islamic terrorism we have seen in the past 10 years, and which can even become more significant. The pattern of the Irish Catholic-Protestant conflict was more limited in scope. What we are seeing with Islamic terrorism is much larger and more bloody to EVERYONE, not just between Sunni-Shiite, but extends to Jews, Kurds, Yazidis, Christians. So no, Islamic terrorism is not comparable to "all Christians". To do so is either blindness or pernicious propaganda on your part. Check out "ISIS Enshrines a Theology of Rape" at New York Times on the rape of Yazidis.[1] They are praying before they rape and after they rape. If this story is true, it indicates that ISIS is not a mere political movement, but is also bound to its theology. The BBC reported on the recent bridge attack of a witness who said the attackers said "This is for Allah."[2] edits: added links, fixed typo. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-enshrines-a-theology-of-rape.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-ens... [2] http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40148737 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40148737
  - jimnotgym 9y ago
    >The IRA were not on the scale of Islamic terrorism... Seriously? When I was a child the Northern Ireland troubles were in the news every single day! At times it was a constant stream of bombings and executions. There were roadblocks in the street run by paramilitaries. Whole communities were controlled by these organisations and their fundraisers. The scope may have been restricted to England and the island of Ireland, but in these areas it was all out. The scale of Islamic terrorism in the UK does not even come close
    - reitanqild 9y ago
      Not wanting to defend IRA but often they warned in advance before attacking purely civilan targets, didn't they?
      - jimnotgym 9y ago
        Yes a lot of the time. I also deliberately didn't mention the IRA by name, as there were a number of groups involved on both sides. A counter example would be the 'Real IRA' and the Omagh bombing where it appears the telephone warning was designed to move more people into the path of a bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing
        reitanqild 9y ago
        Thanks for sharing. And thanks for being thoughtful in the way you present it.
    - freedomintruth 9y ago
      >> in the UK ... I did mention England, Belgium, France, Middle East, Philippines, USA, Egypt: so scale geographically ISIS wins. I didn't mention Canada, Sweden, Africa, Turkey. For if it's about numbers, would you say IRA has killed more people than ISIS? Did the IRA use sex slaves like ISIS did with Yazidi prisoners as in the New York Times piece I linked? These guys are targeting all different sorts of groups in almost all continents. And if nations security apparatus were not fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda, do you think there would be less or more violence? In other words, are they satisfied with sovereignty in some limited geographical area, or would they try to do as much damager wherever they could?
dorfsmay 9y ago
Being Muslim is not a necessary pre-condition. A lot of Europeans and north-American joining ISIS are not of Muslim background. Trying to understand what leads human beings to kill and die for fuzzy causes might help. I suspect a perfect storm of mental issues, undesirable social status and support from the wrong people at the right time. I also suspect we don't want all the answers, because we wouldn't want to expose how we convince our own young military not to walk out when sent to unjustified wars.
- reitanqild 9y ago
  Being Muslim is not a necessary pre-condition. A lot of Europeans and north-American joining ISIS are not of Muslim background. Do we have proofs that any of the violent ones had not converted at the time when they attacked?
  - dorfsmay 9y ago
    They convert as they join, but a lot of them did not grow up as Muslim. Being Muslim (as per ISIS definition of what muslim means) is part of the ISIS rhetoric, and people convert to be part of ISIS. OP says that only people part of "a subset of people" can be part of ISIS and propagate terror. implying that only people who grew up as muslim can become terrorists.
- freedomintruth 9y ago
  >>Being Muslim is not a necessary pre-condition Since these attacks are aligned with ISIS and ISIS exists within the framework of Islam, then Islam is a pre-condition for these attacks. So even if the attackers may not have been Muslim previously in their life, Islamic fundamentalism remains a constant factor in all these attacks. At the end of the day, whether these people are sane/insane/confused/rich/poor, it's all done within the context and framework of Islamic fundamentalism. And the model for these attacks is in the Middle East where suicide bombing has been a feature of life there in the past 20 years. In case you think it's only poor and mentally ill, consider the attackers in the Dkaka, Indonesia cafe. These guys were educated in university and came from well-off families.
- 9y ago
narrowrail 9y ago
While not religious, the reasons look similar to gangs in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangs_in_the_United_States#Reasons_for_joining https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangs_in_the_United_States#Rea...

philipov 9y ago

The name of the person you are replying to is "ad_hominem." Take that as you will.

ad_hominem 9y ago

The burden of proof doesn't lie on the voice of skepticism. I think it's condescending to Islamic terrorists to pretend that their attacks are an illness rather than a calculated move to further the goals of their thoughtful interpretation of Islamic scripture: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-is... It's also hurtful to the real mentally ill people, who overwhelmingly are a danger to themselves, to lump them in with murderers.

snarfy 9y ago
You are getting off track. The point I was trying to make is there are other routes besides legislative. Maybe it's not mental illness. Maybe it's Peace Corp. Maybe its less bombing of Muslim countries. Whatever it is, it's probably not wiretapping the internet.
- reitanqild 9y ago
  Ok. Just say that right away then.

dang 9y ago

On HN, please don't take arguments in snarky directions or generic ones. Snarky generic ones still less. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14481299 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14481299 and marked it off-topic.