What is behind ISIL's attacks?

We ask a former head of counterterrorism at MI6, and speak to Sheikh Hamza Yusuf about the roots of radicalisation.

After ISIL's deadly attacks on Paris, Beirut and a Russian airliner over Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, has the group changed its strategy?

On this episode of UpFront, Mehdi Hasan asks the former head of counterterrorism for British intelligence and one of the founders of the UN's Counter Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF) about ISIL's tactics and game plan.
We also examine the myth of the Sunni-Shia war, and speak to the leading Muslim scholar Sheikh Hamza Yusuf about the roots of radicalisation.

Headliner: Former head of counterterrorism at MI6 Richard Barrett


Over the past month, ISIL has claimed responsibility for bringing down a Russian airliner over Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, suicide blasts in Beirut and attacks in Paris.

Both Russia and France have responded by intensifying air strikes against ISIL targets in Syria. Across the West, heightened concerns have prompted officials to bolster security measures, with ISIL vowing to strike again.

So, what's behind the group's recent string of attacks? Is ISIL changing its strategy to bring about a confrontation with the West or is it trying to deter further military attacks on its so-called caliphate?

In this week's Headliner, Mehdi Hasan asks Richard Barrett, the former head of counterterrorism at MI6, about ISIL's motivation.

Reality Check: The myth of a Sunni-Shia war


What is driving the current violence and chaos in the Middle East? Many say it's the "age-old" sectarian conflict between Sunnis and Shia, but a look at the facts shows something different.

In this week's Reality Check, Mehdi Hasan highlights the myth of the so-called Sunni-Shia war.

Special: Sheikh Hamza Yusuf


Leading US Muslim scholar Sheikh Hamza Yusuf has been at the forefront of efforts to counter the narrative of ISIL.

As the cofounder of the only Muslim liberal arts college in the US, Yusuf has worked to stop young Muslims in the West from going to fight for ISIL.

In an interview recorded before the recent attacks in Paris, Beirut and Baghdad, Mehdi Hasan asks Yusuf what is behind the allure of the group for some people and why they join it.

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/upfront/2015/11/isil-attacks-paris-151120132834566.html


Very interesting videos on the link with people who really know what they are talking about.

More apologist drivel trying to deflet away from the real causes.

Wow, you listened to those three video's really quickly and obviously took it all in - not.  You really don't like people who know what they are talking about do you.  You'd rather listen to pundits who make it up as they go along.

No need to listen when I get the apologist gist from the article thanks and if its Medhi, well enough said, he is one of the worst apologists

Really enjoyed the information from the first speaker (that's the only part I watched lol)

His views were fair, impartial and held some real answers IMO

On this episode of UpFront, Mehdi Hasan asks the former head of counterterrorism for British intelligence and one of the founders of the UN's Counter Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF)

Mehdi an apologist?  State where and when.

eddie wrote:Really enjoyed the information from the first speaker (that's the only part I watched lol)

His views were fair, impartial and held some real answers IMO

I thought so too, nice to listen to someone who has the facts.

sassy wrote:

eddie wrote:Really enjoyed the information from the first speaker (that's the only part I watched lol)

His views were fair, impartial and held some real answers IMO

I thought so too, nice to listen to someone who has the facts.

p


Did you catch what he said, in the last couple of minutes about America?

Didge wrote:No need to listen when I get the apologist gist from the article thanks and if its Medhi, well enough said, he is one of the worst apologists

Didge you never seem to listen to, or watch, other people's videos.
The first speaker was actually really fair.
Have a listen.

sassy wrote:On this episode of UpFront, Mehdi Hasan asks the former head of counterterrorism for British intelligence and one of the founders of the UN's Counter Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF)

Mehdi an apologist?  State where and when.

On many occasions I have read, I used to respect him but not annymore.,
Again you will have mulitple views of intelligence which to me the best on the world is the Israeli's
I take thier expert intelligence over any other.
Again it is the view of one Scholar and great he is doing work but again it is limited to one area.

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:No need to listen when I get the apologist gist from the article thanks and if its Medhi, well enough said, he is one of the worst apologists

Didge you never seem to listen to, or watch, other people's videos.
The first speaker was actually really fair.
Have a listen.

Yes I do Eddie, when I want to, but when people ignore many other Facts, then I tend to lose interest espcially when posted by Sassy, the worst apologist going.
If you had opf posted this, then maybe, but she even makes excuses for terrorism, so she is the least I would listen to on terrorism.

eddie wrote:

sassy wrote:

I thought so too, nice to listen to someone who has the facts.

p


Did you catch what he said, in the last couple of minutes about America?

About how Iraq/Afghanistan didn't help and how all the members of the coalition have different reasons for stopping IS?

I watched it earlier in the day,

sassy wrote:

eddie wrote:

sassy wrote:

I thought so too, nice to listen to someone who has the facts.

p


Did you catch what he said, in the last couple of minutes about America?

About how Iraq/Afghanistan didn't help and how all the members of the coalition have different reasons for stopping IS?

I watched it earlier in the day,

Yes. The USA has some pretty secret reasons, I'd say.

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:No need to listen when I get the apologist gist from the article thanks and if its Medhi, well enough said, he is one of the worst apologists

Didge you never seem to listen to, or watch, other people's videos.
The first speaker was actually really fair.
Have a listen.

Yes I do Eddie, when I want to, but when people ignore many other Facts, then I tend to lose interest espcially when posted by Sassy, the worst apologist going.
If you had opf posted this, then maybe, but she even makes excuses for terrorism, so she is the least I would listen to on terrorism.

The first speaker wasn't an apologist. He was actually quite fair I'd say.

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:


Yes I do Eddie, when I want to, but when people ignore many other Facts, then I tend to lose interest espcially when posted by Sassy, the worst apologist going.
If you had opf posted this, then maybe, but she even makes excuses for terrorism, so she is the least I would listen to on terrorism.

The first speaker wasn't an apologist. He was actually quite fair I'd say.

Wasn't likely to be anything else, being the former Head of Counter Terrorism lol

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:


Yes I do Eddie, when I want to, but when people ignore many other Facts, then I tend to lose interest espcially when posted by Sassy, the worst apologist going.
If you had opf posted this, then maybe, but she even makes excuses for terrorism, so she is the least I would listen to on terrorism.

The first speaker wasn't an apologist. He was actually quite fair I'd say.

I will be the judge of that and watch when I have time, but sorry Eddie, when you believe any conspiracy and think  this is some all New World Order behind this, I doubt your reason to be fair on such an issue
Sorry but that is how you now make me view your stance on such issues

He wasn't saying anything like that actually.

And that isn't my "stance" didge, it's a view I look in to.

eddie wrote:He wasn't saying anything like that actually.

And that isn't my "stance" didge, it's a view I look in to.

I never said he did, I stated because of how you easily fall for some very daft conspiracies, it makes me doubt your ability to view something as fair.
That is the point I am making.

eddie wrote:He wasn't saying anything like that actually.

And that isn't my "stance" didge, it's a view I look in to.

He certainly wasn't lol

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:He wasn't saying anything like that actually.

And that isn't my "stance" didge, it's a view I look in to.

I never said he did, I stated because of how you easily fall for some very daft conspiracies, it makes me doubt your ability to view something as fair.
That is the point I am making.

How bloody patronising is that!

sassy wrote:

Didge wrote:


I never said he did, I stated because of how you easily fall for some very daft conspiracies, it makes me doubt your ability to view something as fair.
That is the point I am making.

How bloody patronising is that!

Its called being honest to Eddie, which I would rather she knew my position, where as unlike you I do not try and suck up to her. It does not make me like her any less, just that I an skeptical of her ability to be fair when she is led by conspiracy theories
Take that or leave it but you just love a drama to shout your famous massive gob off to lol

Didge wrote:

sassy wrote:

How bloody patronising is that!

Its called being honest to Eddie, which I would rather she knew my position, where as unlike you I do not try and suck up to her. It does not make me like her any less, just that I an skeptical of her ability to be fair when she is led by conspiracy theories
Take that or leave it but you just love a drama to shout your famous massive gob off to lol

That's not being honest, it's being patronising, and I'm honestly telling you that your ego is so massive you think you have the right to judge any ability she might have, and that's patronising in the extreme.  As for sucking up, I have never in my life sucked up to anyone, unlike you I don't need to.  Now go and howl at the moon, it's full tonight so you are probably turning into wolfman as I write.

sassy wrote:

Didge wrote:


Its called being honest to Eddie, which I would rather she knew my position, where as unlike you I do not try and suck up to her. It does not make me like her any less, just that I an skeptical of her ability to be fair when she is led by conspiracy theories
Take that or leave it but you just love a drama to shout your famous massive gob off to lol

That's not being honest, it's being patronising, and I'm honestly telling you that your ego is so massive you think you have the right to judge any ability she might have, and that's patronising in the extreme.  As for sucking up, I have never in my life sucked up to anyone, unlike you I don't need to.  Now go and howl at the moon, it's full tonight so you are probably turning into wolfman as I write.

Any excuse to shout off again with your immature little tanturms and be again abusive lol

Again it is because I respect Eddie and see her as someone who is intelligent that I actually cringe when she posts conspiracy theories which are so wackadoodle, I just am shocked she believes them. If it was Tommy no problem, I expect that, but I do not expect this from Eddie. So that is why on some topics I lose credability in Eddie on the matter. Now again that is being honest, as I would rather say how I feel than hide behind bullshit as you do sassy

So get it into your head, your pathetic childish insults are just comical as much as you are by your posts

I'm not the one that has tantrums, that's you.  I'm always icy cold when talking to the illiterate and uniformed with an over inflated sense of their own importance, the group you are in.

sassy wrote:I'm not the one that has tantrums, that's you.  I'm always icy cold when talking to the illiterate and uniformed with an over inflated sense of their own importance, the group you are in.

I think all can see for themselves that your claim is in fact an utter lie lol

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t12489-nearly-three-times-as-many-voters-think-that-jeremy-corbyn-is-more-honest-than-david-cameron?highlight=cameron

Mehdi Hasan wrote an atricle on this some time back for the Huff Post.

What the Jihadists Who Bought 'Islam For Dummies' on Amazon Tell Us About Radicalisation

Can you guess which books the wannabe jihadists Yusuf Sarwar and Mohammed Ahmed ordered online from Amazon before they set out from Birmingham to fight in Syria last May? A copy of Milestones by the Egyptian Islamist Sayyid Qutb? No. How about Messages to the World: the Statements of Osama Bin Laden? Guess again. Wait, The Anarchist Cookbook, right? Wrong.

Sarwar and Ahmed, both of whom pleaded guilty to terrorism offences last month, purchased Islam for Dummies and The Koran for Dummies. You could not ask for better evidence to bolster the argument that the 1,400-year-old Islamic faith has little to do with the modern jihadist movement. The swivel-eyed young men who take sadistic pleasure in bombings and beheadings may try to justify their violence with recourse to religious rhetoric - think the killers of Lee Rigby screaming "Allahu Akbar" at their trial; think of Islamic State beheading the photojournalist James Foley as part of its "holy war" - but religious fervour isn't what motivates most of them.

In 2008, a classified briefing note on radicalisation, prepared by MI5's behavioural science unit, was leaked to the Guardian. It revealed that, "far from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could . . . be regarded as religious novices." The analysts concluded that "a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation", the newspaper said.



You can read the rest here...

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/jihadist-radicalisation-islam-for-dummies_b_5697160.html

Islam for Dummies - some zealots that lot were.

Did they actually know if they were Sunni or Shia lol

Didge wrote:No need to listen when I get the apologist gist from the article thanks and if its Medhi, well enough said, he is one of the worst apologists

Funny dodge... the last time I posted about medhi hussein being a wrong'un, you bent over backwards to defend him!!!!


Most amusing!!!


In fact... much of what you post lately is the same sort of stuff that you would be defending against when being posted by myself and others... along with your usual accusations of racism and islamaphobia etc...