Latest terrorist threat to Australia

[The Nickman]

I think anything that enflames hatred helps the terrorists.

[Manbush]

Nick basically the theory would be the more publications that appear will equal more pissed off Muslims increasing the likelihood of more recruits to their cause.

[The Nickman]

That's what I just said, Hanny old son

[Botman]

Nick basically the theory would be the more publications that appear will equal more pissed off Muslims increasing the likelihood of more recruits to their cause.

I know the basic theory. I was looking for a little bit more tangible than the on paper theory.

[The Nickman]

Ohh, he was talking to that Nick...

[Cranky Old Man]

Charlie Hebdo IS a satirical magazine, but it is a bit more nuanced than that, and far more nuanced than has been (mis)reported in our press since the Paris murders.
Basically, the magazine puts s*** on everyone, and everything in the way of organisations etc, but it is much more likely to stick it to Muslims than to anyone else, and do so much more savagely. One of the many facets of Islam that it criticizes most frequently is it's misogynistic attitude to women, but somewhat hypocritically it is very misogynistic in it's own way of operating.
If it were published in Australia it would cause outrage more than the Chaser boys ever did with its libelous critiques of politicians, celebrities including sportsmen, religion (especially Catholicism) and others. Most of the politicians and journalists here that are lauding the paper since the murders would have a fit if ever they came into the sights of its "journalists" and cartoonists.
Most people and organisations rise significantly in public esteem when they die, especially if they die young or in a notorious fashion. Charlie Hebdo was a small, niche magazine in a society that is a much more voracious consumer of magazines and newspapers than Australia and the Anglosphere. It had died from lack of interest at least once and would probably have done so again soon enough. It was hanging on to life by being outrageously anti Islam, barely balanced by its attitude to other religions. It will enjoy a very shortlived revival in fortunes now, but is highly unlikely to exist in 5 or 6 years.

[Manbush]

Old Man would it more targeting islam at the moment be because it's more in the news lately, say when there was report after report of pedo priests were they still targeting Islam more or going after the pedos that were in the news?

[Botman]

It's not as if France in generally is a place that could be described as "Islamic friendly", so if this newspaper picked on Islam more than other religions, that wouldnt shock me

[The Nickman]

I thought France actually was pretty Islamic friendly, but I really don't know much.

[Botman]

I thought France actually was pretty Islamic friendly, but I really don't know much.

I find it hard to imagine a place that banned the burqa and niqab could be Islamic friendly.
Also anecdotally, from what i experienced there (albeit a very short period of time), and what friends and family have experienced there, it just seemed like there was a lot of people who arent comfortable about Muslims.

[The Nickman]

Ah righto. So they're a bit like Hanbush??

[Manbush]

Ah righto. So they're a bit like Hanbush??

I'm good with the friendly ones mate, get a lot come through work and the ones at the corner store love me enough they offer me goods from their under the counter range.

[Cranky Old Man]

France is a country which has a history of political asylum for a wide range of people of wide ranging political beliefs whilst simultaneously embracing a very broad spectrum of domestic political beliefs. The Ayatollah was living there in asylum prior to returning to rule Iran. The deposed Shah went to France to live for a while.
The extreme right is quite popular there albeit only probably polling about 15%, the extreme left is currently fairly weak but in fairly recent decades was exceptionally strong. The Arrondissements of the north east of the city and the adjacent suburbs were for many years known as the "Ceinture Rouge" (Red Belt) for traditionally returning communists in local and national elections.
But France is a country notorious for it's Revolutions. Everybody has heard of THE revolution, which in fact consisted of a whole series of revolutions and counter revolutions as various factions and regions gained and lost power in often bloody attempts to control events, culminating in Napoleon taking over. But prior to that and subsequently in at least 1815, 1830,1848,1870, 1940/1944 and 1968 there were violent revolutions which changed governments and often the Constitution. So many such violent changes of government and method of government are symptomatic of a nation going through many huge changes in economic fortunes and also reflective of a diverse make up of society and the tensions inherent in that.
The problem with discussing current French society is just how far back you should go in order to explain current events, as every event occurs in response to prior influences.
For over a hundred years, France had an empire to rival that of Britain, especially in Africa where they held more than a quarter of the land mass. They also held Algeria, which they didn't consider as a colony but as an extension of France. Algerians were citizens of France, albeit the peasantry were roughly treated, and the whites (Pieds Noir) often considered themselves somewhat aristocratic. After WW2 Algerians started agitating for independence which was resisted by all the whites in Algeria, some of the algerian natives and the vast majority of France. Civil war broke out. As is always the case with wars, many refugees left, mostly to southern France and especially around Marseilles. This caused conflict because there was a shortage of housing only partly because of the effects of WW2, and also because France was going through an economic slump. The Muslims, being the most visible, took the brunt of the antipathy. Then the Algerian war took a real turn for the worse, massive atrocities committed by both sides, and in both France and Algeria asassinations and bombings were commonplace. DeGaulle was recalled to power, cut Algeria loose, and suffered something of a backlash from the military as a consequence. The OAS (organisation armee secrete) was in open revolt, especially the "elite" formations such as the paratroops (Jean Marie LePen was a para!) and attempted to organise a takeover of government and to assassinate DeGaulle. The army was brought under control only after many of the ringleaders were shot, not all of them legally, and many of the rebels were discharged. There was considerable residual bitterness, a lot of which continues to today.
In the 60s,70s and 80s, many immigrants arrived in France, unfortunately for both sides at a time coinciding with declining menial job prospects. The immigrants were stacked in high rise public housing right across France, but especially on the fringes of industrial towns and cities. They received housing, education and welfare of a mostly first world standard, but almost no politician was going to do anything which might be seen as giving them a job in preference to locals, in fact mostly it was just the opposite. Consequently when the general unemployment rate was about 10%, for "coloureds" it was about 50%. For the muslim component it was probably even worse, causing political and religious ramifications we are seeing now.
For what it is worth, I lived in France for 3 years in the 80s, and have been back many times since including most of the last 5 months of 2014. I think the race situation is rapidly improving, but the economic situation is worsening in parallel, so I don't know what the short term will be like. Many people I have spoken to are very worried that disillusionment with the conservative party, (Sarkozy group) and the leftist party (Hollande) who are considered to have been very ineffectual, might leave a gap for the extreme right (LePen) to take power. Non compulsory voting complicates the situation, and assists the extremists.

[Schifty]

@AFP: #BREAKING Hostages taken in post office in Paris suburb: police"

[DJ89]

Walked past the Lindt Cafe about an hour ago and it's closed down.

[Raider Bell]

As in for good?

[DJ89]

I think it's temporary. Still lots of flowers scattered around the areas.

Very sad.

[Schifty]

#Paris Hostage situation NOT Terror , suspect "protesting a Break Up" with a Klashinkov: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 83040.html …

Ok then....

[The Nickman]

This is what annoys me. That's STILL terror

[Manbush]

Think they reserve the name for acts with political causes.

[Green eyed Mick]

Think they reserve the name for acts committed by Muslims.

Fixed

[Seiffert82]

The whole Charlie Hebdo story is an interesting and tragic case study. Here we have an openly bigoted and controversial publication made to look mainstream by a bunch of absolute lunatics who go on a killing spree that basically validates the existence of such a magazine.

There are no winners out of this situation, just greater hatred and fear. The bigots will get more bigoted and the zealots will be encouraged to commit greater atrocities in response. As a result many innocent people will be caught in the crossfire. Just awful. And ****ing pointless to boot.

[The Nickman]

Think they reserve the name for acts committed by Muslims.

Fixed

Exactly what I was about to say, GeM

[Manbush]

Yeah that's become a more recent definition by the media I guess

[Cranky Old Man]

Old Man would it more targeting islam at the moment be because it's more in the news lately, say when there was report after report of pedo priests were they still targeting Islam more or going after the pedos that were in the news?

Almost undoubtedly this is the case of a sinking fish in a large pool courting cheap controversy in a probably unsuccessful attempt to survive.
France is a nominally Catholic country, but I would hazard an educated guess that less than 10% of Christians attend church service with any regularity. Most only go for baptisms, weddings and funerals. Muslims seem to be a little more regular in observance rates, but I really don't know. The vast majority of Christians would be very unlikely to be enraged by any Charlie Hebdo satire because a) they're fairly comfortable with their place in society and b) they just don't seem to worry about that stuff. Muslims mostly react differently because a) they mostly are not comfortable with their place in society and b) Muslims seem to take satire/criticisms/whatever of their religion much more seriously than most.
I doubt anything would change if new revelations re paedophile priests were to come to light, mainly because I think we have become so accustomed to such revelations that I find it hard to imagine what it would take to shock me further. We become inured to shock in surprisingly short time, which is why groups like IS and Boko Haram have to be innovative in finding ways to keep catching our attention.

[Cranky Old Man]

I thought France actually was pretty Islamic friendly, but I really don't know much.

I find it hard to imagine a place that banned the burqa and niqab could be Islamic friendly.
Also anecdotally, from what i experienced there (albeit a very short period of time), and what friends and family have experienced there, it just seemed like there was a lot of people who arent comfortable about Muslims.

There is no doubt that there is some fearful suspicion of Muslims in France, possibly diminishing somewhat despite the terrorist attacks of recent times. But most of the Whites versus Muslims suspicion in France is like the Whites versus Black tensions in USA, a deep subconscious fear that the old saying "as you sow, so shall you reap", ie, a bit of historic payback may be coming down the line. In France, this fear was particularly prevalent back a generation or so ago as a consequence of the anti colonial wars, especially the Algerian war which was particularly bloody and atrocious.
A lot of the current ill feeling is rooted in the big problem of a lack of employment opportunities for people particularly for those in their teens and twenties. A lot of the more freewheeling economists are prescribing tough love in order to balance the budget, and thus hopefully improve the situation,. Something like a Gallic Thatcher. But the French are not the stolid, loyal British. A dose of Thatcher in France would have the place knee deep in blood and guts, and government members would be high on the list of suppliers of that blood and guts. They are highly unlikely to sign their own death warrants.

Banning the Burqa Niqab, etc (which to my eye seems to be pretty lightly enforced most of the time) is part of the French Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite thing. I think the more strict or fundamentalist believers would have had more success if the men had imposed some clothing restrictions on themselves. It is a bit hard to believe in sexual equality when on a stinking hot and humid day women have to cover themselves from head to toe in heavy black cloth whilst the men swan around in shorts and tee shirts. I am a very strong believer in "live and let live" but I am happy with the headcover ban. If the men take it up, I am prepared to consider changing my mind.

[papabear]

Cranky old man.

If you could structure your posts to be a bit more reader friendly that would be brilliant.

I am against any notion that because a member of your so called race was treated poorly by a member of another race, then future members of that other race, or simply other members of that other race owe you a debt.

You are exactly right when you say you reap what you sow but in my opinion, your opinion has to much looking at things through racial prisms instead of individual prisms. I am not a huge fan of that.

[The Nickman]

Cranky old man.

If you could structure your posts to be a bit more reader friendly that would be brilliant.

I am against any notion that because a member of your so called race was treated poorly by a member of another race, then future members of that other race, or simply other members of that other race owe you a debt.

You are exactly right when you say you reap what you sow but in my opinion, your opinion has to much looking at things through racial prisms instead of individual prisms. I am not a huge fan of that.

[papabear]

debts are owed by the individual entity not by any wishy washy collective and certainly not by any subjective grouping of people that an internet expert determines is a race of people.

Again if you are looking at people by what race they are or discussing issues where the start point is team blue did this to team red (team subbing in for race), you have already started your logic at the wrong starting point so obviously you are going to finish at a point I disagree with.

Look at the actions of the individual and if they are wrong then that individuals action should be up for discussion..

[The Nickman]

debts are owed by the individual entity not by any wishy washy collective and certainly not by any subjective grouping of people that an internet expert determines is a race of people.

Again if you are looking at people by what race they are or discussing issues where the start point is team blue did this to team red (team subbing in for race), you have already started your logic at the wrong starting point so obviously you are going to finish at a point I disagree with.

Look at the actions of the individual and if they are wrong then that individuals action should be up for discussion..

[Green eyed Mick]

This ones for you MB

[Cranky Old Man]

debts are owed by the individual entity not by any wishy washy collective and certainly not by any subjective grouping of people that an internet expert determines is a race of people.

Again if you are looking at people by what race they are or discussing issues where the start point is team blue did this to team red (team subbing in for race), you have already started your logic at the wrong starting point so obviously you are going to finish at a point I disagree with.

Look at the actions of the individual and if they are wrong then that individuals action should be up for discussion..

Thanks for demonstrating what you mean when you asked me to post in a more user friendly manner. Looks good.
I've no idea what you are talking about.

[T_R]

debts are owed by the individual entity not by any wishy washy collective and certainly not by any subjective grouping of people that an internet expert determines is a race of people.

Again if you are looking at people by what race they are or discussing issues where the start point is team blue did this to team red (team subbing in for race), you have already started your logic at the wrong starting point so obviously you are going to finish at a point I disagree with.

Look at the actions of the individual and if they are wrong then that individuals action should be up for discussion..

Thanks for demonstrating what you mean when you asked me to post in a more user friendly manner. Looks good.
I've no idea what you are talking about.

It's one of Papa's most endearing traits. He once called me on a typo, then followed it with three or four posts of tortured syntax and ungrammatical babble.

[Schifty]

Bomb squads sweep Atlanta airport, fighter jets scrambled after threats on Twitter

NORAD fighter jets reportedly escorted two flights to the ground after authorities received separate “credible” bomb threats via Twitter. Bomb squads are sweeping the planes, which landed safely in Atlanta, and passengers are being evacuated.

Hartsfield Jackson International Airport in Atlanta, Georgia, was partly shut down Saturday after Delta flight 1156 and Southwest flight 2492 landed there safely, and bomb squads with canine units were sent to search the planes for explosives.

An airport spokesman was quoted as saying “we believe the threats to be credible.” It was later revealed that the threats in question were made via Twitter.

Read more: http://rt.com/usa/225971-atlanta-bomb-threat-norad/

[Schifty]

The NT Labor president has gone to Syria to fight with the Kurds against ISIS

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-25/n ... te/6045204