French Attacks Megathread

[Ganos Lao]

Religious sectarianism is a severe problem in Iraq. Under Saddam, Sunnis were privileged and Shiites were discriminated against. Under Maliki, it quickly became the other way around. That's where ISIS gained so many of its recruit from, and that's why a large chunk of the Sunni Iraqi soldiers didn't have the motivation to put up a proper fight against them.

It wasn't solely religious sectarianism, however, at least in Iraq.

Iraqi leaders have always tried to portray the Persians the same way the Nazis portrayed the Jews. In fact, Saddam's uncle, Khairallah Talfah, famously wrote the tract, "Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies," in 1940. It was mass published in 1981 as the war with Iran took off. Saddam Hussein had the book's title phrase etched into a plaque he kept on his desk.

In 1920, the Iraqi Ministry of Education ordered the appointment of Muhammad Al-Jawahiri as a teacher in a Baghdad school. A short excerpt of the interview with the teacher is revealing:

"Husri: First, I want to know your nationality.
Jawahiri: I am an Iranian.
Husri: In that case we cannot appoint you."

The Shiite/Sunni divide only intensifies the Arab/Persian feuding, which has adopted some racialist characteristics from the former over the years elsewhere, not just Iraq.

[Ganos Lao]

The Dalai Lama weighs in on the Paris attacks.

[Baltenstein]

Religious sectarianism is a severe problem in Iraq. Under Saddam, Sunnis were privileged and Shiites were discriminated against. Under Maliki, it quickly became the other way around. That's where ISIS gained so many of its recruit from, and that's why a large chunk of the Sunni Iraqi soldiers didn't have the motivation to put up a proper fight against them.

It wasn't solely religious sectarianism, however, at least in Iraq.

Iraqi leaders have always tried to portray the Persians the same way the Nazis portrayed the Jews. In fact, Saddam's uncle, Khairallah Talfah, famously wrote the tract, "Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies," in 1940. It was mass published in 1981 as the war with Iran took off. Saddam Hussein had the book's title phrase etched into a plaque he kept on his desk.

In 1920, the Iraqi Ministry of Education ordered the appointment of Muhammad Al-Jawahiri as a teacher in a Baghdad school. A short excerpt of the interview with the teacher is revealing:

"Husri: First, I want to know your nationality.
Jawahiri: I am an Iranian.
Husri: In that case we cannot appoint you."

The Shiite/Sunni divide only intensifies the Arab/Persian feuding, which has adopted some racialist characteristics from the former over the years elsewhere, not just Iraq.

The overwhelming majority of Shiites in Iraq are ethnic Arabs though.
And of course, Iranians absolutely loathe Arabs as well - what with seeing themselves as the descendants of the greatest empire of Antiquity and the Arabs as a bunch of backwater camel sheperds.

[TomKirk]

Faisal Saeed Al Mutar
November 15 at 7:27pm ·
It must be incredibly frustrating as an Islamic terrorist not to have your views and motives taken seriously by the societies you terrorize, even after you have explicitly and repeatedly stated them. Even worse, those on the regressive left, in their endless capacity for masochism and self-loathing, have attempted to shift blame inwardly on themselves, denying the terrorists even the satisfaction of claiming responsibility.

It's like a bad Monty Python sketch:

"We did this because our holy texts exhort us to to do it."

"No you didn't."

"Wait, what? Yes we did..."

"No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using religion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons."

"WHAT!? Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade against pagans, blasphemers, and disbelievers."

"No, this is definitely not a Muslim thing. You guys are not true Muslims, and you defame a great religion by saying so."

"Huh!? Who are you to tell us we're not true Muslims!? Islam is literally at the core of everything we do, and we have implemented the truest most literal and honest interpretation of its founding texts. It is our very reason for being."

"Nope. We created you. We installed a social and economic system that alienates and disenfranchises you, and that's why you did this. We're sorry."

"What? Why are you apologizing? We just slaughtered you mercilessly in the streets. We targeted unwitting civilians - disenfranchisement doesn't even enter into it!"

"Listen, it's our fault. We don't blame you for feeling unwelcome and lashing out."

"Seriously, stop taking credit for this! We worked really hard to pull this off, and we're not going to let you take it away from us."

"No, we nourished your extremism. We accept full blame."

"OMG, how many people do we have to kill around here to finally get our message across?"

[Ganos Lao]

The overwhelming majority of Shiites in Iraq are ethnic Arabs though.

It's just how it is over there. If you're a Shiite, your loyalty is no doubt seen as to Tehran, not to the capital of your kin.

[Scanzian Freehold]

Faisal Saeed Al Mutar
November 15 at 7:27pm ·
It must be incredibly frustrating as an Islamic terrorist not to have your views and motives taken seriously by the societies you terrorize, even after you have explicitly and repeatedly stated them. Even worse, those on the regressive left, in their endless capacity for masochism and self-loathing, have attempted to shift blame inwardly on themselves, denying the terrorists even the satisfaction of claiming responsibility.

It's like a bad Monty Python sketch:

"We did this because our holy texts exhort us to to do it."

"No you didn't."

"Wait, what? Yes we did..."

"No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using religion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons."

"WHAT!? Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade against pagans, blasphemers, and disbelievers."

"No, this is definitely not a Muslim thing. You guys are not true Muslims, and you defame a great religion by saying so."

"Huh!? Who are you to tell us we're not true Muslims!? Islam is literally at the core of everything we do, and we have implemented the truest most literal and honest interpretation of its founding texts. It is our very reason for being."

"Nope. We created you. We installed a social and economic system that alienates and disenfranchises you, and that's why you did this. We're sorry."

"What? Why are you apologizing? We just slaughtered you mercilessly in the streets. We targeted unwitting civilians - disenfranchisement doesn't even enter into it!"

"Listen, it's our fault. We don't blame you for feeling unwelcome and lashing out."

"Seriously, stop taking credit for this! We worked really hard to pull this off, and we're not going to let you take it away from us."

"No, we nourished your extremism. We accept full blame."

"OMG, how many people do we have to kill around here to finally get our message across?"

Cute Story, but given the speaker is an outspoken anti-theist, his motivations in implying strongly that Islam is the root of the problem should be held suspect.

[Alyakia]

Faisal Saeed Al Mutar
November 15 at 7:27pm ·
It must be incredibly frustrating as an Islamic terrorist not to have your views and motives taken seriously by the societies you terrorize, even after you have explicitly and repeatedly stated them. Even worse, those on the regressive left, in their endless capacity for masochism and self-loathing, have attempted to shift blame inwardly on themselves, denying the terrorists even the satisfaction of claiming responsibility.

It's like a bad Monty Python sketch:

"We did this because our holy texts exhort us to to do it."

"No you didn't."

"Wait, what? Yes we did..."

"No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using religion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons."

"WHAT!? Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade against pagans, blasphemers, and disbelievers."

"No, this is definitely not a Muslim thing. You guys are not true Muslims, and you defame a great religion by saying so."

"Huh!? Who are you to tell us we're not true Muslims!? Islam is literally at the core of everything we do, and we have implemented the truest most literal and honest interpretation of its founding texts. It is our very reason for being."

"Nope. We created you. We installed a social and economic system that alienates and disenfranchises you, and that's why you did this. We're sorry."

"What? Why are you apologizing? We just slaughtered you mercilessly in the streets. We targeted unwitting civilians - disenfranchisement doesn't even enter into it!"

"Listen, it's our fault. We don't blame you for feeling unwelcome and lashing out."

"Seriously, stop taking credit for this! We worked really hard to pull this off, and we're not going to let you take it away from us."

"No, we nourished your extremism. We accept full blame."

"OMG, how many people do we have to kill around here to finally get our message across?"

pretty nobody at the top level of any religion or religious movement above a certain threshold actually believes it. sorry to have to be the one to break this to ya. from that, nobody cares what they said because they will say what best suits them at the time. MI5 interrogations also showed the most extreme terrorists they captured and most of the people going off to fight had no idea what the scriptures really said, only what people told them they said. again, hate to get all marx on you here, but everyone knows what the gig is.

imo the problem of people misinterpreting was already predicted centuries ago and we need to go back to only letting priests read the bible in latin mass.

[Atlanticatia]

The French defence minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, has made a formal request for help from his country’s EU partners, the first time the mutual assistance article in the European Union’s treaty has been invoked.

“In Brussels, I have just invoked Article 42.7,” he tweeted at the EU defence ministers meeting.

[The Nihilistic view]

The French defence minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, has made a formal request for help from his country’s EU partners, the first time the mutual assistance article in the European Union’s treaty has been invoked.

“In Brussels, I have just invoked Article 42.7,” he tweeted at the EU defence ministers meeting.

Not sure what the point is. It does not really change anything in anyway in response to terrorism of a non state sponsored nature. The NATO article would have been a better idea if they actually wanted some concrete action.

[West Aurelia]

A man has been arrested in Serbia carrying the exact same passport as the one found near the Paris attacker. More evidence that it was faked, although we still have to wait for the official investigation.

[Alvecia]

The French defence minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, has made a formal request for help from his country’s EU partners, the first time the mutual assistance article in the European Union’s treaty has been invoked.

“In Brussels, I have just invoked Article 42.7,” he tweeted at the EU defence ministers meeting.

Can someone point me to the wording of that article, I can't find it for the life of me on google

[The Nihilistic view]

The French defence minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, has made a formal request for help from his country’s EU partners, the first time the mutual assistance article in the European Union’s treaty has been invoked.

“In Brussels, I have just invoked Article 42.7,” he tweeted at the EU defence ministers meeting.

Can someone point me to the wording of that article, I can't find it for the life of me on google

That is a good question, it has it on their site http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-li ... le-42.html

However I could not find it in the actual treaty text for Lisbon or Maastricht. Nor in the Greek ascension treaty since they were the ones who apparently wanted it added. Maybe I just missed it but at the moment it's like it just came out of nowhere.

What it does highlight is how terrible the EU legislation site is when you can't even find something you know the article number for and the treaty it was supposed to be in. Which is slightly concerning if ordinary citizens can't easily find something. But maybe I am just used to the excellent UK legislation site and unreasonably think all legislation online repositories should be up to the same standard.

[Alvecia]

Can someone point me to the wording of that article, I can't find it for the life of me on google

That is a good question, it has it on their site http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-li ... le-42.html

However I could not find it in the actual treaty text for Lisbon or Maastricht. Nor in the Greek ascension treaty since they were the ones who apparently wanted it added. Maybe I just missed it but at the moment it's like it just came out of nowhere.

What it does highlight is how terrible the EU legislation site is when you can't even find something you know the article number for and the treaty it was supposed to be in. Which is slightly concerning if ordinary citizens can't easily find something. But maybe I am just used to the excellent UK legislation site and unreasonably think all legislation online repositories should be up to the same standard.

This is the same experience I had. Trying to find the actual article, or even a specific treaty on that site is a bitch. There wasn't anything in the news articles I looked at either. Perhaps they had the same issue I had...

[Napkiraly]

The French defence minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, has made a formal request for help from his country’s EU partners, the first time the mutual assistance article in the European Union’s treaty has been invoked.

“In Brussels, I have just invoked Article 42.7,” he tweeted at the EU defence ministers meeting.

Not sure what the point is. It does not really change anything in anyway in response to terrorism of a non state sponsored nature. The NATO article would have been a better idea if they actually wanted some concrete action.

On one hand, invoking the EU article gives you slightly more people to join in, on the other NATO gives you the biggest guy there is. Invoking both would be alright, but I'll be surprised if Article 5 isn't invoked. At the least, Article 4.

[Esternial]

A man has been arrested in Serbia carrying the exact same passport as the one found near the Paris attacker. More evidence that it was faked, although we still have to wait for the official investigation.

Apparently that password was there to coax European countries into closing its borders for Syrians by "proving" the refugees are all potential dangers to EU citizens.

IS can paint it off as anti-muslim hate. Describe it as the EU instigating a crusade against the islam. What's actually undermining them most is the fact that Europe HAS such an open society, which is toxic for the hateful rhetoric they cling to.

All of this whining about "ooh see the left caused this" and "dirty muslims" is what IS wants. IS is spreading videos telling Syrians not to go to Europe, telling them Europe will abuse them. Telling them the Caliphate is a safe haven. But so far it's not really working, because their words do not corresponds with Europe's actions and reality.

Actually, Europe's best approach to dealing with IS is not to block Syrians from entering Europe, but to block IS propaganda and let IS sizzle out like a malfunctioning cherry bomb.

[Napkiraly]

Interesting take on why France hasn't, and may not, invoke Article 5.

[Washington Resistance Army]

A man has been arrested in Serbia carrying the exact same passport as the one found near the Paris attacker. More evidence that it was faked, although we still have to wait for the official investigation.

Actually, Europe's best approach to dealing with IS is not to block Syrians from entering Europe, but to block IS propaganda and let IS sizzle out like a malfunctioning cherry bomb.

How exactly would they do that?

[Esternial]

Actually, Europe's best approach to dealing with IS is not to block Syrians from entering Europe, but to block IS propaganda and let IS sizzle out like a malfunctioning cherry bomb.

How exactly would they do that?

Haven't the foggiest, but it's not an unrealistic idea.

[Alvecia]

Interesting take on why France hasn't, and may not, invoke Article 5.

Not sure they'd need to after using Article 42.7 of the Treaty of Lisbon.

[Esternial]

Apparently there might be another attack on the 22nd, according to some hackers that discovered and are looking into a post by what seems to be a Daesh-sympathiser.

https://www.instagram.com/shahriyar_a13/

[New Zepuha]

Apparently there might be another attack on the 22nd, according to some hackers that discovered and are looking into a post by what seems to be a Daesh-sympathiser.

https://www.instagram.com/shahriyar_a13/

Oh boy. Perhaps the rumors of attacks planned against Rome and such are valid after all? They did also promise more attacks against France, and now the two are exchanging blows, this will only get worse.

[Kelinfort]

I am so fucking sick and tired of people not checking their mother fucking privileges, bro. It's really fucking pissing me off. I get people are unhappy, angry, scared and mad. But two fucking things a). there are other countries where even more people have died and b). just because you're a Syrian refugee does not make you a terrorist.

Like wtf, do you know how fucking dumb it sounds? "Oh lets ban all the Syrian refugees cuz they're Muslim and brown and the bad guys are also Muslim and brown." It's honestly as fucking dumb as going "hey, lets intern Japanese Americans cuz derr Pearl Harbor."

Its not the goal of the terrorists to make us destroy our values. It's just a fucking dumb thing to do. At least to the extent some xenophobic a-holes want to push it.


/Rant

I get your points, but what does privilege, if you're being serious, have to do with this? To me, it looks like a classical example of nationalists exploiting any incident to be exclusionary and protectionist.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

A man has been arrested in Serbia carrying the exact same passport as the one found near the Paris attacker. More evidence that it was faked, although we still have to wait for the official investigation.

Apparently that password was there to coax European countries into closing its borders for Syrians by "proving" the refugees are all potential dangers to EU citizens.

IS can paint it off as anti-muslim hate. Describe it as the EU instigating a crusade against the islam. What's actually undermining them most is the fact that Europe HAS such an open society, which is toxic for the hateful rhetoric they cling to.

All of this whining about "ooh see the left caused this" and "dirty muslims" is what IS wants. IS is spreading videos telling Syrians not to go to Europe, telling them Europe will abuse them. Telling them the Caliphate is a safe haven. But so far it's not really working, because their words do not corresponds with Europe's actions and reality.

Actually, Europe's best approach to dealing with IS is not to block Syrians from entering Europe, but to block IS propaganda and let IS sizzle out like a malfunctioning cherry bomb.

Everyone jumps to the conspiracy theory.

It's much more reasonable and plausible that the ISIS manufacturered fake passports to get their guys past the security checks. They used the same details changing the photos because they're lazy, not some half hearted attempt to get them to close boarders.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Actually, Europe's best approach to dealing with IS is not to block Syrians from entering Europe, but to block IS propaganda and let IS sizzle out like a malfunctioning cherry bomb.

How exactly would they do that?

For one, stop promoting the propaganda that makes people discriminate against Muslims, and foster an environment where they can feel welcome.

[Baltenstein]

How exactly would they do that?

For one, stop promoting the propaganda that makes people discriminate against Muslims, and foster an environment where they can feel welcome.

Generic and unspecific to the point of meaninglessness.