What’s driving teen girls to jihad?

2015/03/10 Leave a comment

Michael Petrou trying to find explanations where there may be no satisfactory ones: why some are attracted to joining a cult-like organization and others not:

It may be true that anger about proposed polices regarding religious dress in Quebec, or what is perceived to be Canada’s insufficient support for Palestinians or Muslims elsewhere, contributed in some way to the decision of young Canadian women to join a genocidal death cult in Syria. But they seem like inadequate explanations.

Islamic State’s most notable characteristics, after all, are not vestmental liberty or practical support for Palestinians, but filmed decapitations, sexual slavery and mass murder. These elements of Islamic State’s approach to governance are all well-publicized, mostly by Islamic State itself. And they make the Canadian woman’s assertion that her sister—“the sweetest, most innocent, timid person I know”—joined Islamic State because she wanted to do something about the injustice in the world sound hollow.

They also ignore aspects of Islamic State’s attraction that we seem comparatively more ready to accept when it draws in men: the group’s Islamic supremacism, and its fetish for gore and extreme violence. “So many beheadings at the same time. Allahu Akbar [God is great], this video is beautiful,” tweeted one Western woman cited by ISD. Another, also cited by ISD, writes: “I was happy to see the beheading of that kaffir [unbeliever]. I just rewinded to the cutting part. Allahu akbar! I wonder what he was thinking b4 the cut.”

According to Jayne Huckerby, an associate professor of law at Duke University who has advised the United Nations on women in conflict, gender stereotypes distort popular conceptions of why Western women might join Islamic State. “We do still very much operate in a world where the idea that women don’t have agency—that they must be tricked or under the influence or brainwashed or they only joined to become jihadi brides—is very much still a dominant frame.”

There may be an element of brainwashing at work, something William McCants, a Brookings Institution fellow and author of a forthcoming book about Islamic State, describes as the group’s “cult-like pull.” It also appears that skilled recruiters can strongly influence young minds. But these are forces that affect men and women. And yet it is women whom we are more likely to describe as “lost” to Islamic State, rather than as willing partisans. This is comforting, but it is also illusionary.

No Western woman with access to the Internet or daily news can claim ignorance about Islamic State’s horrors, including those it inflicts on women it has captured. But young girls from Canada and across the West are joining the group by the hundreds just the same. “Many of them are going over joyously, with eyes wide open,” says McCants, “absolutely and completely understanding what awaits them there.”

What’s driving teen girls to jihad?.

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with , ,

Iconoclasm and Islamic State: Destroying history’s treasures

2015/03/10 Leave a comment

More on ISIS and other destruction of history and heritage:

Although its actions are abhorrent, IS poses a dilemma for Muslims. Many of the group’s beliefs are not disconnected from Islam, as some claim, but rather the product of an extreme interpretation of the faith. IS supporters justify their actions with verses taken from the Koran or examples from the life of the Prophet Muhammad. In Mosul the militants said they were shattering “idols”, the worship of which is forbidden in Islam. Muhammad himself cleared idolatrous statues from the Kaaba, the centrepiece of Mecca’s Sacred Mosque. This was in keeping with the tradition of Abraham, another prophet (sacred to several faiths) who destroyed the wooden gods being worshipped by his people.

Idolatry is taboo in many faiths, so the history of iconoclasm is multi-denominational. King Hezekiah purged idols from Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem, according to the Old Testament. Protestant reformers destroyed religious images in the 16th century. But the most ardent recent iconoclasts have been Muslims. In 2001 the Taliban, then rulers of Afghanistan, blew up two giant Buddha statues in Bamiyan that dated from the 6th century. The Saudi government has destroyed historic sites in Mecca, ostensibly to pursue development but also to prevent idolatry, say some. Abdel Moneim el-Shahat, a prominent Salafist in Egypt, has suggested covering the heads of ancient statues in wax.

Most Muslims find the destruction absurd. Islam says nothing about smashing statues that are not harming anyone, says Ahmed Hassan, a 33-year-old Cairene. This opinion is shared by Islamic scholars, and even some of the Taliban. Unlike the statues destroyed by Muhammad, the artefacts destroyed by IS “are nothing but stone and no one believes they are gods,” says Abbas Shouman, under-secretary of the influential al-Azhar University in Egypt. Mullah Muhammad Omar, the Taliban leader, said much the same about the Bamiyan Buddhas, which he once favoured preserving, since there were no Buddhists left in Afghanistan.

Iconoclasm and Islamic State: Destroying history’s treasures | The Economist.

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

ISIS Vandals Destroy Works of Art That Challenge Their Take on Islam

2015/03/05 Leave a comment

On the latest nihilism of ISIS and denial of the richness of civilization, Islamic and otherwise:

The enemies of modernity and tolerance and civility and liberty, and all the other values that classical liberals hold dear, believe that destroying the products of the arts and humanities will further their goals. They think the statues they are smashing to splinters and the words they are burning are important and influential enough to warrant their destruction.

This is not, it is worth noting, a radical innovation by ISIS. There is a long history of fundamentalist Islamic groups destroying cultural treasures. The Buddhas of Bamiyan. The “end of the world” gate in the ancient city of Timbuktu. Over 95 percent of ancient Mecca. Countless thousands of ancient manuscripts. Groups from ISIS to the Taliban to Wahabist Saudi clerics have made it clear: Everything must be obliterated.

They claim, of course, that these things must be destroyed because they are idolatrous in themselves or might inspire idolatrous thinking in others. But I think it is far more likely that ISIS wants them destroyed because these objects prove the falseness of their version of history.

From the 8th to the 14th centuries, the flourishing, trading, creative, scientific, philosophic, artistic and intellectual marvel that was the Islamic Golden Age produced a ringing argument against the ISIS narrative that their way—the way of extremism and the sword—is the only path to success.

Golden Age science, mathematics and medicine were the envy of the world. The tolerance and intellectual curiosity modeled by thinkers like Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi and Ibn Rushd created a civilization where, more than anywhere else, Muslims, Jews and Christians were able to study, trade and live in unprecedented peace and productivity.

And this Golden Age died when people who would have been very much at home in ISIS began to gain power.

For ISIS to continue to spread their evil, they must destroy the history that gives evidence against them—by destroying the museums and libraries that protect it—just as they must destroy the living humans who fight them.

Are the arts and humanities important? Do they accomplish anything we should care about?

Look at those who want to destroy them. Consider what their ends are. Then tell me.

ISIS Vandals Destroy Works of Art That Challenge Their Take on Islam.

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with , ,

Why Obama invoked the Crusades — and what it says about how he views terrorism – and Related Commentary

2015/02/09 Leave a comment

Carefully thought out strategy:

Obama, though, is not budging. And his comments on the Crusades and the Inquisition represent the latest ratcheting up in his quest to change how people talk about terrorism. He views Islamist terrorists as exploiting their religion; his opponents believe there is something about Islam that creates fanatics who are willing to carry out terrorist attacks.

For what it’s worth, Americans used to sympathize more with Obama. But the rise of the Islamic State appears to be pushing things in the opposite direction. A Pew poll in September showed, for the first time, that 50 percent of Americans viewed Islam as more likely to encourage violence than other religions. Another 39 percent said it was not more likely to encourage violence.

This could be part of the reason Obama is upping the rhetoric. Words matter, and the way this issue is framed is going to go a long way toward determining how the “war on terror” will be waged. Moreover, the rise of the Islamic State — along with the lesser-publicized Boko Haram — has ramped up the debate over terrorism and its roots to the highest point since perhaps after Sept. 11, 2001. This is a key moment in defining the terms of the debate. Both Republicans and Obama recognize that.

Obama’s critics believe he’s being Pollyannaish about the nature of the threat and how it is inherently tied to Islam. Without recognizing the seeds of terrorism, they reason, how can you combat it?

Obama disagrees wholeheartedly with that characterization and thinks attributing violence to Islam is unfair and damaging to relations between Christians and the broader Muslim population.

It’s perhaps the defining semantics debate of his presidency.

Why Obama invoked the Crusades — and what it says about how he views terrorism – The Washington Post.

Commentary from Richard LeBaron, a former U.S. ambassador (ret.) and the founding coordinator of the U.S. Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications Strategy:

The United States and its allies are in a conflict with certain groups that would like to convince the world that they are the true representatives of Islam.

We will succeed in that war only if we stay focused on the key element of counterterrorism strategy: excellent intelligence gained through maintenance of a first-rate intelligence community and sharing of intelligence with others; the ability to project deadly force when needed against specific groups and targets who wish us harm; and enlistment of Muslim and non-Muslim countries and communities around the world to do their fair share in combating terrorism and addressing its root causes—be those poor governance, weak states, religious incitement, or psychologically marginalized individuals looking for outlets for their rage.

Preventing the attraction to terrorism, as opposed to attacking known terrorists, is a long-term project that requires a serious approach. The contrived debate about labeling terrorism is both counterproductive and at odds with an American value system that separates religious belief from political considerations.

Those actually doing the fighting against terrorists deserve better than bumper sticker slogans to guide their actions. They should not be asked to fight a dimly understood religious war.

Declaring War on Radical Islam Is Not a Counterterrorism Strategy

The Globe Editorial on the Canadian government response is along similar lines:

Canada’s small number of terrorists thus far have been mostly self-radicalized. Think of the St-Jean-sur-Richelieu murderer Martin Couture-Rouleau or parliamentary shooter Michael Zehaf-Bibeau. Both were deeply troubled men who at some point grabbed onto ideas floating about on the Internet, and decided that the purifying appeal of violence was the answer for what ailed them. They weren’t sent here by ISIS; it would be more accurate to say that they caught a virus, albeit one that the intellectual immune system of the overwhelming majority of Canadians of all faiths is thus far resistant to.

They were also self-Islamicized. Their made-up religion of endless war had little to do with the Islam encountered in Canada’s mainstream mosques. Otherwise, this country might be overrun with Couture-Rouleaus and Zehaf-Bibeaus. It is not.

On the day of the Parliament Hill shooting, this newspaper editorialized “against exaggeration, hysteria and despair” and “in favour of calming the hell down.”

Over the past few weeks, the Prime Minister has seemed intent on riling people up and making the most of the terrorist threat. He has exaggerated the danger of ISIS and its connection to possible terrorism in Canada. That’s wrong. At a time like this, the PM should be the chief minister in charge of deflating hyperbole, putting things in perspective – and reminding Canadians that we must continue as we always have, on guard but free.

 A ‘war on terrorism’? No thanks. There are smarter ways to meet the threat 

Lastly, shallow commentary by Rex Murphy:

There have been many sins committed by many faiths, and there are tragedies even now underway. But it is a very displaced analysis that seeks to offer corrections to Christianity during a period of Islamic turmoil, and seeks out forgotten sins to ignore those so very close to mind.

He forgets history provides context and cautions us not to jump on bandwagons and the meme of the day.

Rex Murphy: In Obama’s impulse to absolve Islam, he offers a rebuke to Christianity

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with , , , ,

ICYMI: Getting information on the ground on the Islamic State

2014/11/12 Leave a comment

Fascinating reporting in the Globe of some of the efforts to collect information on war crimes and other human rights violations:

There are risks, however, that come with sending investigators into a combat zone with armed opposition groups. Some outside observers worry about the reliability of the embedded investigators, in part because there is always a risk they could become involved in wartime atrocities themselves.

Documentation collected now could be dismissed by a future war crimes tribunal for multiple reasons. Questions about the investigators’ methods, issues with the way witnesses are interrogated, and errors in tracking custody of documents that are retrieved are all issues that could be picked apart by a defence team.

But many observers seem to believe the benefits of running an investigation now – rather than waiting until the conflict is over – far outweigh the risks.

Independent groups like the one investigating Islamic State also have a higher tolerance for risk than the more formal investigation by the United Nations commission of inquiry on Syria, which has produced reports on atrocities but is not focused on linking specific crimes to the individuals who may have ordered them.

“There is going to be an immense security challenge once the conflict ends,” one investigator said. “If the Syrians don’t want to endure a decade or more of terrorism, as experienced by Iraq, they’re going to need a security foundation, and that foundation will be built on information derived from investigations now.”

Getting information on the ground on the Islamic State – The Globe and Mail.

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with , , ,

Fowler: Half measures in fight against Islamic State will only make matters worse

2014/10/06 Leave a comment

Former Canadian Ambassador to the UN,  foreign policy advisor to Canadian prime ministers,  and kidnapping victim of an al-Qaeda offshoot in Mali, Robert Fowler essentially answers the question he poses at the end of his long and thoughtful commentary in the Globe.

Well worth reading:

Were we, though, to seriously seek to excise the jihadi malignancy – to stop those who are so clearly bent on destroying the underpinnings of our civilization – we would have to engage far more thoroughly than we seem willing to do. We would have to convince our so-called friends in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States to stop – really stop – financing jihadi preaching and terror networks throughout the world. At home, we would need to make very clear that we will not abide jihadi teaching, jihadi recruiting, or the dissemination of jihadi propaganda.

Should we seriously seek to damage the barbarous IS, we would have to prepare for and then commit to a long and ugly war against an implacable enemy who is genuinely anxious to die in battle with us. In addition, we would have to abandon the inane restrictions we have so hurriedly and complacently put in place arbitrary time frames, no-boots-on-the-ground, and accept that it will take some up-close and personal combat to get the job done and that there will be casualties, among them a full share of innocents.

Finally, and however improbably in today’s politically correct context, we would have to “maintain the aim” – the removal of an existential threat to our way of life through the crippling degradation of al-Qaeda and its clones – and make it abundantly clear that until that mission were truly accomplished, such a struggle would not be about those nice, distracting things politicians would much rather talk about when they talk about such engagements: development, jobs, democracy, corruption, individual rights, gender equality, faith.

We would also have to accept that, to achieve such an objective, it would take vast budgets and clear-eyed focus over the long haul to convince Muslims in the West and throughout the world that such an engagement had nothing to do with jihadi allegations about crusades; indeed, little to do with religion of any stripe, but rather that global jihad was simply inimical to a peaceful world. Once such a mission were truly accomplished, then and only then could we turn our attention to reconstruction and development.

Short of all this, it’s not worth attempting, and we should walk away, right now: A flaccid attempt, such as that upon which we now seem to be embarked, will undoubtedly make matters worse.

Half measures in fight against Islamic State will only make matters worse – The Globe and Mail.

Filed under foreign policy, Radicalization Tagged with , , , ,

Roger Cohen Sees Hitler In The Desert « The Dish

2014/10/03 Leave a comment

The debate between Andrew Sullivan and Roger Cohen, starting with Sullivan:

Well, we all see mirages, I guess. But it says something about the hysteria about the latest incarnation of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq that we’re suddenly comparing them to Nazis and to non-humans. Even as Cohen himself acknowledges that “the Nazi death machine was unique. Facile invocation of it is too frequent, belittling the phenomenon and its victims.

”So why break Godwin’s Law so egregiously? Cohen wants us to believe, channeling Martin Amis and Primo Levi, that there was no “why” in the unconscionable unique act of the Holocaust.

And yet, mountains of evidence explain exactly why: it was a function of a vile racism that regarded the Jewish people as vermin that needed to be exterminated in order to allow the master race to flourish. It was not some random act of mass murder; it had a grotesque but clear and constantly trumpeted rationale. Then Cohen seems to endorse the idea that the Nazis were somehow unhumans or “counter-humans”, in Levi’s words. But that too, it seems to me, lets them off the hook. The Holocaust was a deeply human act – a function of humankind’s capacity, revealed throughout history, of extraordinary levels of hatred and violence, brought to new and unfathomable evil in the age of the industrialized state.

And equally, it is absurd to argue that “there is no why to the barbarism of ISIS.”This is after Cohen actually produces a long litany of reasons for ISIS’s brutality and evil, mind you, none of which he deems sufficient to explain the ISIS propaganda beheadings he watched on video. But why should we not take the Islamists’ word for it? They are committing slaughter and rape and attempted genocide for one core reason: because God demands that they slaughter infidels. Their mandate is beyond any human one but results in so-very-human evil.

Roger Cohen Sees Hitler In The Desert « The Dish.

From Cohen:

It is human to seek for reasons. Perhaps the rise of ISIS may be seen as the culmination of decades of Arab resentment at perceived Western domination, drawing support from the same anger as the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda before it; or as an expression of the abject failure of Arab societies; or as an armed Sunni response to the Shia-bolstering American invasion of Iraq; or as brutal payback for Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo (where, it must be said, there was scant “why” for prisoners detained for years and guilty of no crime); or as a well-funded offshoot of Saudi Wahhabism interpreted in its most literal form; or as a heady alternative for disaffected young Muslims to the moral void of Western civilization; or as evidence of the crisis of Islam and the inevitable Thirty Years War of its Sunni and Shia branches; or simply as a call to arms to drive out the United States the way the infidel Crusaders were ousted from the Levant.

Yet, in the end, there is no why to the barbarism of ISIS. There is no why in Raqqa. Evil may adduce reasons; they fall short. The Nazi death machine was unique. Facile invocation of it is too frequent, belittling the phenomenon and its victims. But I was given pause by Martin Amis’ afterword to his powerful new novel, The Zone of Interest, where he probes the “why” of Hitler and quotes both the icicle passage and another from Levi:

“Perhaps one cannot, what is more one must not, understand what happened, because to understand is almost to justify. Let me explain: ‘Understanding’ a proposal or human behavior means to ‘contain’ it, contain its author, put oneself in his place, identify with him.” Levi, referring to Hitler, Himmler and the rest, goes on: “Perhaps it is desirable that their words (and also, unfortunately, their deeds) cannot be comprehensible to us. They are non-human words and deeds, really counter-human.”

Roger Cohen: For ISIS, slaughter is an end in itself

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with , , , , ,

Extremist ‘foreign fighters’ may threaten Canada: U.S. top official | Ottawa Citizen

2014/10/02 Leave a comment

Short reference to outreach programs during the visit of the head of Homeland Secruity,  Jeh Johnson:

Johnson said that in addition to a military mission to crush ISIL in the Middle East, and an intelligence strategy to track foreign fighters, the U.S. is conducting an “outreach” program in U.S. Islamic communities. That program is designed to prevent people from being fooled into recruitment by ISIL’s “slick” propaganda.

“ISIL is a stateless group of depraved criminals —rapists, kidnappers, killers and terrorists who control a territory,” he said. “There is no religion, including Islam and there is no God, including Allah, that would condone ISIL’s violent tactics.”

Extremist ‘foreign fighters’ may threaten Canada: U.S. top official | Ottawa Citizen.

Lorne Gunter, true to form in the Toronto Sun, rails against political correctness in describing ISIS as not Islamic, and implicitly casting a slur on all Muslims as well as political leaders:

Western civilization won’t be defeated by economic collapse or government debt, by an external military force or even its own internal decadence. But it could well be done in by political correctness.

It’s bad enough that U.S. President Barack Obama could stand bare-faced in front of his nation two weeks ago and insist the Islamic State terror group “is not Islamic.”

Huh!? Islam is in their name and behind every murderous, brutal, barbarous act ISIS commits.

There are imams and Muslim scholars who would argue that ISIS is, in fact, the very epitome of Islamic faith put into action. It is possible to debate that those Muslim leaders and ISIS itself are wrong in their interpretation of Islam.

But to insist to the world that ISIS “is not Islamic” is the equivalent of standing in front of a red wall and insisting it is green. It is contrary to what is plainly, clearly, obviously true.

Not sure what I am missing but there seems to be a lot, understandably, talk about Islam-inspired extremism and fanaticism these days.

Why can’t we talk about Muslim fanatics?

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with , , ,

In the Fight Against ISIS, Islam Is Part of the Solution – The Daily Beast

2014/10/01 Leave a comment

Dean Obeidallah on anti-ISIS strategies that engage Islamic leaders and precepts to counter the ISIS narrative and acts:

Will this work? It is addressing ISIS’s very sales pitch, as documented in its online magazine, that invokes Islamic principles to lure people to join. And I can tell you this—it’s a much better approach than the State Department’s recently released video designed to dissuade Muslims from joining ISIS. That video simply showed images of violence, but its fatal flaw is that it didn’t use Islamic values to counter ISIS.

I’m sure some are asking: Why didn’t we see Muslim scholars do this before? Bedier responded that the Muslim community has become better organized in recent years and can now respond in a more united way. Plus there’s an understanding by Muslim leaders that many people of other faiths see only negative images of Muslims in the media, thus, making it important to not allow the extremists to define the faith.

I also believe there’s another reason why we are seeing this and why some Muslim nations have joined the military campaign versus ISIS. While ISIS potentially poses a threat to the United States, to many Muslims living in the Middle East, ISIS is a clear, present, and immediate threat. ISIS’s philosophy is in reality not “submit to Islam or die”; after all the group is slaughtering Muslims daily. It’s “submit to ISIS or die.” Nothing is a greater motivator than self-preservation.

The fight against groups like ISIS will likely be with us for years. No doubt that a military component must be part of this approach. But to really cut off ISISs pipeline of recruits and financial support from Muslims, it requires that we not view Islam as the problem, but actually as a big part of the solution.

In the Fight Against ISIS, Islam Is Part of the Solution – The Daily Beast.

Sheema Khan takes a similar bent, drawing upon the history of a 7th century fanatical Islamic-inspired cult, the Khawarij:

Today, theologians are warning Muslims about the dangers of the Islamic State by pointing to the movement’s similar theological underpinnings. Don’t be fooled by the flowery language, the invocation of God and the Koran, the readiness for martyrdom or the call to sharia – this is a fanatical cult that has deviated from the path of Islam, and its actions belie its adherents’ professed faith.

As with the Khawarij, the Islamic State has attracted misguided youth with “foolish dreams.” The Khawarij declared those with theological differences as “disbelievers” warranting death; the Islamic State has killed thousands of Muslims – Sunni and Shia – during its takeover of villages in Iraq and Syria. The Khawarij demanded the enslavement of women and children during the battle of Siffin (the Caliph Ali refused); the Islamic State has carried out this abominable practice. Both groups are willing to die in a heartbeat for their “beliefs.” Like the Khawarij, Islamic State members believe they are the only “true Muslims” while the rest are disbelievers, worthy of death. It has threatened all opponents, including Muslim theologians warning against its fanatical ways. Their self-professed piety is built on a foundation of arrogance.

If history is any lesson, this fight will not be for the faint of heart. Nonetheless, for Muslims, it will be a necessary battle for the very soul of their faith.

 Another battle with Islam’s ‘true believers’ 

David Motadel provides a useful history of previous Islamic-inspired revivalist rebel movements and state-builders:

At the same time, Islam was at the center of these movements. Their leaders were religious authorities, most of them assuming the title “commander of the faithful”; their states were theocratically organized. Islam helped unite fractured tribal societies and served as a source of absolute, divine authority to enhance social discipline and political order, and to legitimize war. They all preached militant Islamic revivalism, calling for the purification of their faith, while denouncing traditional Islamic society, with its more heterodox forms of Islam, as superstitious, corrupt and backward.

Today’s jihadist states share many of these features. They emerged at a time of crisis, and ruthlessly confront internal and external enemies. They oppress women. Despite the groups’ ferocity, they have all succeeded in using Islam to build broad coalitions with local tribes and communities. They provide social services and run strict Shariah courts; they use advanced propaganda methods.

If anything, they differ from the 19th-century states in that they are more radical and sophisticated. The Islamic State is perhaps the most elaborate and militant jihad polity in modern history. It uses modern state structures, including a hierarchically organized bureaucracy, a judicial system, madrasas, a vast propaganda apparatus and a financial network that allows it to sell oil on the black market. It uses violence — mass executions, kidnapping and looting, following a rationale of suppression and wealth accumulation — to an extent unknown in previous Islamic polities. And unlike its antecedents, its leaders have global aspirations, fantasizing about overrunning St. Peter’s in Rome.

And yet those differences are a matter of degree, rather than kind. Islamic rebel states are overall strikingly similar. They should be seen as one phenomenon; and this phenomenon has a history.

Created under wartime conditions, and operating in a constant atmosphere of internal and external pressure, these states have been unstable and never fully functional. Forming a state makes Islamists vulnerable: While jihadist networks or guerrilla groups are difficult to fight, a state, which can be invaded, is far easier to confront. And once there is a theocratic state, it often becomes clear that its rulers are incapable of providing sufficient social and political solutions, gradually alienating its subjects.

David Motadel: Why Islamic rebel states always fail

Filed under Radicalization, Religion Tagged with , , , ,

Islamic States call to kill westerners has terrorism experts divided | World news | theguardian.com

2014/09/25 Leave a comment

One of the better commentators putting the latest ISIS/ISIL threats into context:

Rodger Shanahan, non-resident fellow at the Lowy Institute for International Policy and a former army officer, told Guardian Australia the video was “not earth shattering”, as Al-Adnani has been saying this sort of thing for years, but the specific mention of Australia had caught the media’s eye.

“My view is that if you give these people oxygen it encourages them to do it more often, that’s the whole point,” said Shanahan.

“It’s a pretty good debate to have: if this had not been widely reported, would it really have amounted to anything other than security agencies noting Australia being mentioned specifically by the IS spokesperson?”

“But if you go back over the last couple of speeches there are general references to the west, the Europeans, the Christians. There’s no change of direction at all. It’s just a continuation of what he’s put out there, but nobody has paid particular attention to it in the past.”

Shanahan said that while security agencies have to take it seriously, anyone who might pay attention to the message in the video is already thinking that way.

“The utility of it in terms of attracting more recruits, I don’t think it’s of utility at all. In terms of interest because it mentions us and Canada and France, yes, it’s interesting, but it’s not an earth shattering thing.”

Islamic States call to kill westerners has terrorism experts divided | World news | theguardian.com.

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →