Slashdot Mirror
Australian Police Arrest 15, Charge 2, For Alleged Islamic State Beheading Plot
The Washington Post reports (building on a short AP report they're also carrying) that "[Australian] police have arrested 15 people allegedly linked to the Islamic State, some who plotted a public beheading." According to the Sydney Morning Herald, of the arrestees, only two have been charged. From the Washington Post story: “Police said the planned attack was to be “random.” The killers were to behead a victim and then drape the body in the black Islamic State flag, according to the Sydney Morning Herald. ... Direct exhortations were coming from an Australian who is apparently quite senior in [the Islamic State] to networks of support back in Australia to conduct demonstration killings here in this country,” Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott said at a press conference, as the BBC reported. “So this is not just suspicion, this is intent and that’s why the police and security agencies decided to act in the way they have.”
Gotta do more than an insane passenger on a Greyhound bus does to another passenger to really shock me at this point.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
While the IS stuff is rather a hot news item, I do not agree that slashdot is really the place for it. One of the reasons I look at Slashdot is to get a nice newsfeed without 5 items per day about wild muslims.
Of course the poor polls, the terrible budget, the scandals, the deaths in custody, the lies of the Abbott government have absolutely nothing to do with the Prime Sinister's current attempts to take us to war.
Nothing at all. Nope. Nu uh.
Oh look, a shiny!
Conspiracy to commit a crime has been illegal for a very long time.
let's have a massive disproportionate reaction!! you know.. lots of fear mongering and maybe we can invite more surveillance!!
just remember.. we need to reserve these blissful over-reactions for only 'threats' that involve the terrorist-boogey-man... if we reacted this way to comparable threat-per-capita non-terrorist criminals, we would run out of resources in about a week. (plus, the whole surveillance thing would be harder to jam down the masses throats)
I doubt very many would-be martyrs have been deterred by death penalties.
The US had NOTHING to do with the formation of Israel. Absolutely nothing. Yes we recognized them AFTER they gained control but we even had an arms embargo against them up until that point. Israels creation and almost all of the worlds problems can be traced to EUROPEAN colonialism and direct action by the British and French.
I have a couple of issues with your post - firstly you seem to think that there was never a communist threat. As a Western European I am quite glad that communism never came further west than it managed. Secondly, what you call "controversial" in your last paragraph I call stupid, and not too dissimilar to appeasement or Dane-Geld: (The following is not Kipling's best but the idea is important.)
It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say: --
"We invaded you last night--we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."
And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
And then you'll get rid of the Dane!
It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say: --
"Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away."
And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.
It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say: --
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost!"
Context:
It's a quote from the brother of one of the arrested men:
Raban Alou said police were targeting his brother Kawa because he hung around a "bunch of hotheads" who were being investigated by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation.
He said police were searching for any material that could link his family to al-Qaeda or Islamic State.
"I dunno, I got a lot of anger," he said. "It's a war on Islam just because we grow our beards. They want to label us as a terrorist, or supporters of IS, whatever, that's up to you."
I'm not sure it's all that insightful, though.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
When the colonists rebelled against British rule in 1776, American ships lost British Royal Navy protection. A Revolutionary-War era alliance with France offered French protection to US ships, but it expired in 1783. Immediately US ships came under attack and in October 1784 the American trader “Betsey” was taken by Moroccan forces. This was followed with Algerians and Libyans (Tripolitans) capturing two more US ships in 1785.
Lacking the ability to project US naval force in the Mediterranean, America tried appeasement. In 1784, Congress agreed to fund tributes and ransoms in order to rescue US ships and buy the freedom of enslaved US sailors.
In 1786 Thomas Jefferson, then US ambassador to France, and John Adams, then US Ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Dey’s ambassador to Britain, in an attempt to negotiate a peace treaty based on Congress’ vote of funding. The two future Presidents asked Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja for the reason for the Muslims’ hostility towards America, a nation with which they had no previous contacts. They reported that Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja responsed “that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
Sound familiar?
But that would play straight to their hand. "Islamic State" is doing things like this because they're trying to tell a story: that they're a Caliphate straight from the dark ages. Treat their agents any differently than a common crazy murderer, and you're saying that you agree they are different, thus putting them a little bit closer towards having their story commonly accepted.
Here, let Littlefinger explain it.
So, what we must do is counter their story with our own: that they're nothing more than a bunch of brutal criminals. And we do that by treating them exactly like any other criminal. Counter the fantasy with banality, don't let them draw us into it. That's the mistake we did with Al-Qaeda: we allowed them to define themselves as "terrorists" rather than "murderers".
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Not only is this incorrect, but you topped it off with a bigoted assault on religion. "Palestine" was administered by the UK, not the USA, and American Jews voluntarily moved to it mostly after the 1948 independence. At the time of independence, it had nearly indefensible borders after suffering additional partitions beyond what the UK had promised. See "Transjordan" had already been partitioned for settlement by Palestinian Arabs. The West Bank, Gaza strip, and some other small areas were snipped off after WWII. Israel mostly lived with what they were given until they were attacked, repeatedly, by the Arabs who hated them. Regardless, even if you don't think Israel should have occupied any territory gained in 1948 or 1967, you can't blame it on the USA.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Like we don't do to common criminals? Gee, you must be thinking of them as something else then, such as a legitimate if hostile power.
An example that the Islamic State can point to and say: "See, even our enemies agree that we're not just another gang and are afraid of us!"
"Our brave fighters are willing to face not only death but humiliation and torture before it! Truly, they shall be blessed and rewarded in Heaven!"
Seriously, stop helping the Islamic State. Stop supporting their story. Every time you suggest a "clever" punishment for them you're supporting their claim of being a Caliphate rather than a criminal gang, thus bringing them closer to victory.
You win a war like this by deciding on what view of reality you want to be commonly accepted, then behaving consistently as if it was. By doing this you're constantly telling a story to everyone you interact with, some of whom will accept it and start repeating it in turn. As the number of converts increases, it eventually reaches the tipping point and becomes the new "default" consensus reality, sweeping even those who originally rejected it in. That's what classic nation-building is about: storytelling. Islamic State is trying to short-circuit the process by baiting foreign powers into lashing out against them, effectively recruiting their enemies to testify for them. Such impatience is a serious weakness, since those foreign powers can as well deny the story. However, given how clumsily Al-Qaeda was handled, they probably thought the risk was worth it.
You know, this kind of basic mechanism should really be covered in elementary education. All our technological and economic might won't help us any more than their muscles and armor helped the dinosaurs if our situational awareness continues being that of a brain the size of a peanut.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.